Deseret News | Utahns cut back on driving

Reader comments
Utahns cut back on driving

TommyP | 1:26 a.m. Aug. 14, 2008

If we drive less, don't we tear up the roads less and cause less congestion?

Macy | 1:57 a.m. Aug. 14, 2008

I wonder if since less people are driving the roads will have less ware and tare to repair? In turn wouldn't that mean that the highway guys wouldn't need as much money?

Kidding? | 5:26 a.m. Aug. 14, 2008

Are you kidding me? Americans are finally consuming less gasoline and paying attention to economy because they can't afford to fill their accursed SUVs, and UDOT views that as a negative? The worst thing to happen to traffic is the SUV. EVER. Too big to maneuver, too inefficient, excess capacity that costs a lot of cash to have and run, and brain-dead soccer moms driving way too many short trips. America's insatiable appetite for gas is finally changing and UDOT is worried about declining revenues? What pigs! If people are driving fewer miles, there is less wear-and-tear on the roads. You'd think a government agency would encourage economy.

Comments continue below

Tooele Dave | 6:29 a.m. Aug. 14, 2008

Then maybe the officals need to look into the gas price gouging that is going on. Every day we get different stories as to why the gas prices are so high, maybe the officials ought to be comparing notes at to all of the reasons that the public have been given. They ask us to conserve fuel then complain when their profits are down because of the conservation. Can't have both!

Professional Driver | 6:40 a.m. Aug. 14, 2008

Duh, I wonder why people are driving less. I work as a driver for a major retailer. Loads are being increased in volume and weight and drivers are being taught how to drive more economically. Fuel consumption is way down in an attempt to control fuel cost. BTW have you noticed how much more everything costs today? Well just look to the cost of diesel fuel. Diesel is more highly refined today to eliminate sulfur and other pollutants resulting in a much higher cost for diesel compared to gasoline. Do you think that retail companies are paying the increased cost? Not likely. The consumer will stand the increase every time. Drivers and corporations are doing everything they can to control cost so we can keep the price at the register down but we can't control the outrageous cost of fuel. The cost of fuel in Utah is especially obnoxious. Last week I drove through Wells, NV. and noted unleaded at $3.54 when I got back into Utah the current prices were $4.07! Do you think that there might be some collusion by gasoline retailers in Utah? Look for new taxes to cover the cost of road maintanance.

Professional Driver | 7:14 a.m. Aug. 14, 2008

Much of the road damage comes from trucks. Heaver loads = better cost per ton hauled but more road damage. On the good side, heaver loads = less loads resulting in less damage. It would be interesting to see exactly how the equation balances out. Do less loads offset the damage caused by higher weights? Bottom line, if you buy it trucks haul it. Save road damage by skipping Christmas this year! Wait, then I won't have a job. Sigh.

Doodles | 7:38 a.m. Aug. 14, 2008

Unfortunately, the leaders in the Utah Department of Transportation have nothing to say about how they can change some of their policies and practices to become 20 perfect more efficient, thus delievering a better service for less money. Every family in America is doing it this summer.

Who has not witnessed road repair sites with one man working with a shovel and five more "supervising"? Who has not seen orange vested traffic assistants hanging out during working hours? Extra long lunches? Late crews in the morning?

Every government agency suffers from lack of competition. With a little creativity and effort, I am sure UDOT, the postal service, the armed forces, the IRS, every government agency, could tighten their collective belts and operate on less money than they presently do without cutting any services.

I think it is irresponsible for government agencies to always pretend the only way to deal with less money is to reduce services. Families and businesses do not have that option.

To Kidding | 7:59 a.m. Aug. 14, 2008

"You think a government agency would encourage economy."

The government is always counterintuitive. Government agencies are worried about 1 thing; self preservation. They want to do what ever it takes to make sure their job doesn't become extinct, and to increase the scope of their job if possible. They are always looking for more reason they need additional revenue.

I know. How about not voting for anything else for them to oversee. Regardless of how worthy the cause, remember they will screw it up.

Anonymous | 8:03 a.m. Aug. 14, 2008

UDOT is most concerned that they will not be able to pay their employees leaning on shovels. Every comment is the same...fewer drivers, less wear and tear and congestion. Doesn't that seem like a huge oversight not to have been mentioned in the article?

Dave | 8:01 a.m. Aug. 14, 2008

The Gov. is going to have to come up with a method of taxing electric vehicles. Right now they are enjoying a "free ride".

Utah Citizen | 8:04 a.m. Aug. 14, 2008

With the outrageous fuel prices, perhaps UDOT could work with legislators and others WHO HAVE COLLECTIVE INFLUENCE to work on fixing the situation so motorists could drive more. Surely UDOT has more clout than Joe Resident in Anyville, Utah.

Anonymous | 8:31 a.m. Aug. 14, 2008

I don't think UDOT views "less maintenance" as a bad thing.

Chad | 8:39 a.m. Aug. 14, 2008

I don't see the decreased driving in my 3 mph commute to davis county from SLC in the afternoons.

Also, I am still amazed at how many single occupant gigantic SUVs and trucks I see driving 90 mph to SLC each morning. Wow, these guys must be rich to be able to dump $150 + into their trucks every week with the 12 mpg they must be getting (or less driving at those speeds).

I have a hard enough time putting $150 into my prius each month.

Chad | 8:45 a.m. Aug. 14, 2008

Well, the government is doing their part to hinder the use of hybrid vehicles, at least in Utah. Utah is one of the very few states that does not offer any kind of tax incentive to buyers of hybrid vehicles. Kind of like it is implied in this article...the last thing the state wants is less driving and more fuel-efficient vehicles. If their "revenues" drop substantially because we get more efficient or ride out bikes more, will they bump up the state tax on gas to over $2 per gallon to make up the difference? $7.00 gas anyone? Scary.

Red Blood | 8:55 a.m. Aug. 14, 2008

Oh cry me a river...

i am sure they will find another way to get my money, making it harder and harder for me to support my family.

I am curious when my income will increase at the rate of Questar, Rocky MT Power, etc...

dave4197 | 9:00 a.m. Aug. 14, 2008

You all forgot, we are trying to reduce our use of gasoline / deisel fuel for transportation, therefore the reduction in driving miles / fuel purchase / fuel tax revenue is actually a desired outcome.
Stop whining about too many orange shirts, or ways to reduce your personal gas tax. And be thankful we are collectively taking a good step towards global cooling. If you believe in that. It's clear to me that we can do more, there are still suv's with one occupant roaming the freeways and in the grocery parking lot with one bag of groceries, there are still empty seats on trax. We collectively are still stuck too deep in the demand for consumption and convenience mire.

Re: Utah Citizen | 9:05 a.m. Aug. 14, 2008

Fuel prices are not outrageous, you and most of the U.S. just got complacent with the low cost of oil in the 90's. In real terms, gas isn't much higher than it was in the late 70's and early 80's. In terms of disposable income, Americans spend a much smaller percentage of income on gas than we did during the 70's and 80's, and that is with us driving all these beastly SUV's around with just one person in them! Change your behaviour (where you live, the vehicle you drive, how you drive it, where you drive, etc.), and the impact would be modest.

For the wealthy, the impact is even less - a few hundred/thousand bucks a year in fuel is nothing. Just because we can afford a big house, big boat, big cars, doesn't mean we should build them or drive them. The number of massive homes in Utah continues to explode without regard to the impact on others or those at the bottom of the economic ladder. Land prices, pollution, run-off, higher-than-necessary energy costs, urban sprawl, etc. are all a result of an egocentric, selfish, flaunting, I-can-afford-it-so-I'll-consume-it attitude than is harming those who really can't afford it.

re: Chad | 9:12 a.m. Aug. 14, 2008

Why do you drive a Prius that only seems to go 3 mph during your commute while you witness big SUVs that are going 90 mph?

Do you think you exaggerate a little bit?

Believe It | 9:13 a.m. Aug. 14, 2008

Speaking of heavy loads breaking up highways. I have basically worked in the trucking industry most of my life, both as a owner, driver, and in corporate management. Believe me the way we should be going and should have been doing is move more freight by rail. Of course it can't all move by rail but 40 to 50% more could be. Look at the savings in petroleum, and highway abuse alone. We used to move freight this way, but have let our railroads fall in dis-repair. We should crank up the rail system now and use it to everyones advantage. Trains just make sense. Get rid of some of this truck traffic.

Anonymous | 9:20 a.m. Aug. 14, 2008

I see no difference in my 3 mile commute from Orem to Provo.

And my 12 mpg truck is only filled up once every 6 weeks or so if that...

Move to where you work!

Wrong headline | 9:34 a.m. Aug. 14, 2008

"Utahans lower their standard of living"
Yes I cut my driving, I can afford to do it. I have to ride my bike rain or shine from now on unless I am willing to go without a job.
This was the plan in the first place. The Global Warming fruitcakes are loving this.
Pelosi has made it plain that we serfs need to know our place.

HPS | 9:46 a.m. Aug. 14, 2008

OK, let me see if I've got this straight: When we drive too much, we cause global warming. OH NO, the government must raise taxes to keep us from destroying the planet.

Now higher gasoline prices are causing us to drive less. OH NO, the government must raise taxes to replace lost revenue.

Anyone notice a pattern here?

UDOT Insider | 9:57 a.m. Aug. 14, 2008

Doodles & etc. :I am not an employee, however, Let me educate you a little bit on UDOT operations. Half of the people you see on the side of the road with shovels are not eployed by UDOT. They are employed by contractors who are employed by UDOT. If you see them "wasting time", they are wasting company time not UDOT's time.
UDOT has overgone drastic changes by Gov. Huntsman. No longer is UDOT a huge roadbuilding entity that it once was. UDOT has lost over 1000 jobs that are not being filled. It is merely a skeleton crew, who hires many contractors to do the labor that was once done by government employees.
I find it fascinating when the public screams that we pay our government employees so much for doing "so little", but when there is a tragedy such as the bridge collapse in Michigan, they demand better accountibility. You get what you pay for!
My husband is a UDOT employee. He works 60+ hour work weeks at times and could earn a higher salary working elsewhere, but he serves you and me in the public sector to make a difference for all Utahns!

bcampbe5 | 9:59 a.m. Aug. 14, 2008

The State should triple the gas tax. Those burning the fuel should pay for the maintenance on our roads. What may have seemed like an adequate tax, at the time, now appears to be inadequate. They should keep raising that tax until the last barrel of oil is harvested and burned up. The tax on that last gallon of fuel should be in the billions of dollars.
I am a little sarcastic. However, our government does not exhibit much urgency in planning our futures.

CougarKeith | 10:35 a.m. Aug. 14, 2008

Realistically, Our Fuel prices are not that bad compared to the rest of the WORLD! It is called an adjustment, and since we consume so much, we have been charged less, "Volume Buying". As we become more energy independent prices can GO DOWN! As far as the roads, with the coming of the "Hybrid", and future electric cars, I am sure there will be a new revenue specifically for those vehicles. Believe me the Government isn't about to let it go without taxing it some how. You will get a bill based on your mileage and IT WILL BE CHECKED at Inspection and Registration so you can't cheat. So vote Democrat so you can be taxed more! So keep thinking "Obama" is the answer to all your problems, HE IS JUST THE START OF THEM! McCain will bring drilling to ANWAR, Off Shore, and lower prices and taxes IN TIME. Smaller Government is More Personal Freedoms, which equals more money in your pocket, which equals more personal spending which equals more government revenue! It will also bring more money for UDOT! More Taxes ARE RARELY THE ANSWER!

swskafte | 10:34 a.m. Aug. 14, 2008

If we are driving less, stop building new roads. Invest what gas tax revenues we get in mass transit. Cars are expensive, inefficient, dangerous, polluting, and all the roads we've built to accomodate them have made the United States ugly. The whole nation is a drive-through.

Stewart | 10:55 a.m. Aug. 14, 2008

The gas tax is not going to work over the next decade except for big trucks. The reason is not only will personal automobiles become more efficient, but electric hybrids able to go 40 miles using no gasoline or with the flexfuel driven generator 500 hundred miles on ten gallons of gasoline. If drivers recharge at home or work and drive less than 40 miles they will still be using the highways but paying no gasoline tax. I am sure government will figure a way to tax them, but it won't be in a gasoline tax.

By the way this type of vehicle will change personal transportation just as the gasoline engine did. They will require far less maintenance with electricity costing far less per mile and if nuclear power is used no greenhouse gases. Of course they will disjoint much of the personal vehicle transportation industry, but a consumer society soon adjusts and adapts.

Erin | 12:10 p.m. Aug. 14, 2008

Dang. I have been riding my bike a lot more these past two years, so does that mean I can expect some kind of bike tax soon? I hope I pass inspection.

Re: UDOT Insider | 12:11 p.m. Aug. 14, 2008

The bridge collapse was in Minnesota, not Michigan. I know it is all the same to Utah folks but our bridge folks are better here in Michigan! :)

Cure for Death? | 12:31 p.m. Aug. 14, 2008

Forget UDOT, what about local morticians! With less people on the road vehicle deaths are going to finally decrease and coffin sales are going to plummet.

Who's Driving Less? | 6:12 p.m. Aug. 14, 2008

If Utahns are driving less than who are all of these people driving dented cars, with spray painted fenders, big exhausts, and their last names on their rear window. I see more and more of them every day!

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.