Red-Light Cameras Not So Special?
Cubs Combat Casino
PHOTOS: Peaches And Amanda Blank At Metro
The Return of The Chicagoist Reader Meet-Up
County Sales Tax Rollback Vetoed - Here We Go Again
The Chicago Tribune reported on Friday that the 11,000 people who drive taxi cabs in Chicago are considering organizing a union. Based on the organizing model that led to the successful Taxi Workers Alliance in New York City, organizers here are hoping to duplicate those achievements here in Chicago as well.
As the price of gasoline has soared, taxi drivers have been hit hardest on their bottom line - take home income. Cab drivers have already petitioned for a fare increase - something the city hasn't yet taken action on. That's good news for people that take cabs, but bad news for cab drivers. Just driving a vehicle out of the garage leaves you in debt to the cab company you lease from, not counting the cost of filling up. Adding to cab driver woes is the city's requirement that each cab driver answer one call a day from an "underserved" neighborhood, taking them away from area that might yield several, higher-paying fares in the same amount of time.
Overall, the requirements that the Department of Consumer Affairs imposes on cabbies seem fair: a three strikes-and-you're-out rule for poorly maintained cabs, 25 more wheelchair-accessible cabs, a requirement that drivers answer twice as many radio dispatch calls-a-day, and a requirement that GPS systems capable of tracking the speed and location of cabs be installed. But when people are working 14 and 17 hour days and taking home less than minimum wage, the city has an obligation to do something about that as well. The knee-jerk reaction is to stick it to consumers: start hiking fares and tacking on surcharges to cover the difference. Perhaps it's time for the city to reconsider the cost of medallions and the charges that cab companies impose for leasing a vehicle, putting a little more money in the pockets of cab drivers. Chicago may also want to take note of New York Mayor Bloomberg's plan to bring hybrid taxis to town; with all that city driving, fuel economy could be dramatically improved, and it would play well with Daley's plan to make Chicago the greenest city in the nation.
Image via Insomnia Jones J.D.
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
There are currently three hybrid taxis in chicago (it was in the Tribune two weeks or so ago).
That said, I hate cabbies with a passion that knows no bounds. they generally have no idea where they're going and always try to rip you off, thinking you're a tourist (they'll go the long way to tack money onto the meter). There are many great cabbies, however, but they are overshadowed by their shitty counterparts.
Why does everyone assume hybrid taxi equals green taxi? Is there any evidence that hybrids will have the same fuel-saving results when driven as a cab?
What are the facts?
Hybrid taxis are about keeping up appearances and not much more. Hybrids won't save cab companies any money, and the environmental difference they would make can only be marginal. If Daley wants a truly "green" city (whatever that means), he'd put fixing the el at the top of his priorities.
Why would a cab's use of a hybrid be any different than normal city driving estimates for gas mileage in a hybrid?
Julene -- first, the GM/Ford hybrid versions (presumably what would be used for cabs) currently use less advanced technology and don't get a huge boost in gas mileage. I had the opportunity to test drive a Saturn hybrid for a week and I averaged 23 MPG. Not exactly worth getting excited about.
As to your specific question, one reason would be that rapid acceleration significantly reduces gas mileage -- when was the last time you were in a cab where the driver *didn't* have a lead foot?
So you're going to use the belief that all cabbies have a lead foot as your argument that doing anything to use less gas is just not worth it?
I believe the mpg ratings are ridiculous and more should be done to increase those, but I don't believe that conservation should be given up on just because other people use gas or the epa ratings aren't where I think they should be.
Actually the three hybrid cabs in Chicago are Toyota Prius hatchbacks.
"So you're going to use the belief that all cabbies have a lead foot as your argument that doing anything to use less gas is just not worth it?"
Unless it results in a significant increase in MPG, then no, I don't think it's worth it. 11,000 hybrid cabs won't appear by magic, and if taxpayers/customers have to foot the bill (and please, don't pretend they won't) then I want to get a good bang for my buck.
Okay, in a quick google of real-world Prius mpg ratings (going with the above info that the Prius is in use) at 41 mpg rates vs. 23 mpg listed in the above comment for another type of hybrid (not getting into regular vehicle mpg estimates) - how much more than almost double the effective mpg is needed for you to consider that increase significant?
For me, getting good bang for my buck, means when a cab dies to replace it with one that has better efficiency (in fuel usage, as well as wear and tear costs, etc.) instead of one that doesn't get any improvements than the one it is replacing.
When a cab "dies"? Who is going to determine that a cab is beyond repairing? Won't forcing cab companies to purchase a vehicle that costs $10,000 more simply encourage them to repair instead and keep older taxis on the road? What about drivers that own their own cabs? Is the city going to mandate Prius-only cabs? What about the fact that the demand already exceeds the supply? Etc., etc.
Quite the idealized world you live in.
I'm not saying nothing should be done, but priorities need to be set here -- as #3 indicated, providing world-class public transportation and making the city more bike/scooter friendly would go much farther in fuel conservation.
How idealistic of me to believe that when replacing a cab that I would want to have better gas mileage. Sheesh. Wow, I guess you really put me in my place.
I thought the discussion point here was the mandatory replacement of current cabs with hybrids in a set time frame, ala NYC. That has nothing to do with what you would do as an individual cab owner.
According to the Boston Globe, the supply of Prius has met the demand as well as receiving price reductions
(http://www.boston.com/cars/news/articles/2007/02/25/waiting_lists_at_dealers_disappear_as_toyota_prius_supply_meets_demand)
and according to How Stuff Works, the Prius actual mileage ranges at 41.7-45.2 mpg (http://auto.howstuffworks.com/hybrid-car10.htm) when compared side by side with the Ford Crown Victoria Taxi, the the Prius mpg is more then double.
Do a side by side comparison here https://www.fueleconomy.gov
Now with an MSRP of $22,175 for the 2007 Prius (http://www.toyota.com/prius/index.html?s_van=GM_TN_HYBRID_PRIUS) and the MSRP of the 2007 Crown Victoria at $24,620
(http://autos.yahoo.com/ford_crown_victoria/)
I do not know why Taxi companies such as Chicago's Yellow Cab would even bother buying a Crown Victoria over a Prius with reguards to price and gas mileage?
I forgot to mention that the comparison at https://www.fueleconomy.gov of the
2007 Toyota Prius and 2007 Ford Crown Victoria mpg are at 48mpg to 15mpg city. so the Prius can get 3 times more mpg the then Crown Victoria and costs less to purchase.