Oildummy.com

Senators John McCain and Hillary Clinton recently proposed a plan that likely resonates well with many potential voters, but is absolutely terrible.  They announced that they would like a summer-long, from Memorial Day to Labor Day I believe, holiday free from federal gas taxes.  Supposedly eliminating that 18 cent/gallon tax would help consumers at the pump.  It’s a load of crock though!

We are supposed to be slowly weaning ourselves from our enormous thirst for cheap oil, and here are two of our presidential candidates basically saying they are going to help us use more of it.  This reinforces a huge public notion that government can and should do something about the high gas prices.  Truth is, this is just political garbage that they desperately hope will reel in some undecided voters.

Taking away the federal tax would most likely just increase demand to the point where it was with the tax in place (Perhaps McCain and Clinton need macroeconomics 101 again?).  Then we are still at square one, with prices the same and no tax revenues coming in.  When the tax would be reapplied in September, prices would be even higher because of this stupid move.  Besides, our road infrastructure is crappy enough here in the States (Uhh, did they get the memo about the disaster in Minneapolis?).  How many billions of dollars in revenues would we lose that we desperately need to fix our roads?  Here’s a better idea: let’s actually raise the tax, and fund some alternative energy development with the revenues.  What do you think?  Do McCain and Clinton actually ignorant to believe this is a good idea, or is just a political ploy?

For all the attention paid to developing automobiles that will lessen our reliance on fossil fuels, one trend that perplexes me is the continued release of bigger and bigger cars. Ever since the energy shortages of the 70s brought a new generation of small cars, those vehicles have steadily grown since then, even with the recent surge in fuel prices.

I really noticed this when I sold off my 94 Accord for my current 04 Civic. I traded Honda’s midsize sedan for their compact car, yet didn’t give up much car at all. Compared to the new 2008 Accords, which are now considered a full-size sedan, mine was a lightweight (about 9 inches shorter and 400 pounds lighter).

Even in the face of the current issues, it is still apparent that bigger is often better when it comes to our automobiles. It makes some sense though, since the average size of Americans has dramatically increased as well. Still, do we really need our vehicles to be so big?

Thanks increases in engine technology, today’s engines are more efficient than ever. The problem is, those improvements in efficiency are negated as the engines and cars swell in size. I’d like to see what our current car models would get for mileage with smaller engines and bodies. The new models that come out every year don’t lose anything in efficiency, and they often increase it some, but they could be a heck of a lot more efficient if they would lay off on the growth hormone (our cars have gone the way of our baseball :()

Even with this long-term growth spurt we are in the midst of, hope remains. Automakers are rolling out subcompacts that are smaller than anything we’ve seen in a while. This is a good sign, and hopefully the increasing sales of them will send a message to the automakers that there are plenty of Americans who want a smaller car. However, even these models get beefed up for the US market. Whereas foreign Honda Fit’s are offered with 1.2 or 1.3 liter engines, ours comes standard with a 1.5. This is indeed tiny by American standards, but it shows that we still like ‘em bigger here, even our subcompacts.

How bout we see some 1.0’s released, reminiscent to the old Geo Metros and Ford Festivas (a bit more car wouldn’t hurt here though, for obvious safety reasons)? What do you think about this? Will higher and higher gas prices finally reverse this trend soon?

With gas prices at record levels and no end in sight, a common ply from consumers is often to lower gas taxes.  While this would temporarily ease prices some, I think it would be a terrible move. 

If anything, I think we should actually have higher gas taxes.  While this suggestion would never fly with the prices we have now, we should have been considering it long before.  We would be in a lot better position than we are now. 

The problem is that we were so used to cheap oil that we pretty much assumed we had a right to gasoline under $2.00 in America.  That assumption still runs rampant today, with people calling for the heads of politicians and big oil CEOs.  I don’t think these misguided attempts are going to do any good; cheap oil is most likely gone for good.  That said, we should have been preparing for this long ago.

We use taxes in this country to discourage behaviors such as smoking while profiting off of those consume the product anyway.  Why don’t we do the same with gasoline?  We could have prevented millions of Americans from getting too comfy with their behemoth vehicles and wasteful driving habits by simply making it more expensive to drive.  Plus, we could have prepared our entire economy for higher fuel costs gradually, making the transition much more pleasant. 

While Europe’s gas taxes may seem a bit steep to us, we should have followed their lead to some extent.  A British commenter of a recent TreeHugger article further strengthens the argument.  They recently paid the equivalent of $8.60 a gallon for gas, and they pointed out that the average motor size in the UK is between 1-2 liters.  It’s not hard to see the connection.  They can’t afford to drive 6.0 V8’s.  And you know what?  They realize they don’t need them.  Neither do most of us.

Higher gas taxes all along could have done wonders for the future of our transportation.  We could have funded new vehicle technology, alternative fuels, mass-transit systems, all while lowering our dependence on oil.  As it stands though, we are in for a much rougher adjustment to a post-cheap oil world.  What do you think?

Well, it’s (almost) official: America might actually be using less oil.  The Energy Information Administration recently released their estimates for summer demand, and it came out to be slightly less than last summer.  In fact, if they are correct it will be the first time in 17 years that summer demand is less than the previous year.

They are only expecting a slight decline, about 36,000 barrels a day, down to about 9.404 million barrels a day.  This may seem insignificant, but I think it’s a promising sign.  The struggling economy and the high cost of fuel are causing people to cut back. 

The EIA also estimates that the average cost for a gallon of gas will be somewhere near $3.54 across the country, with some places above the $4 mark.  Diesel is predicted to run about $3.73, 88 cents above the average of just one year ago. 

While these are still nothing more than estimated guesses, if they are correct I think it would be a major milestone for America to finally let up even in the slightest on our unquenchable thirst for fossil fuel.  Let’s just hope that this is a sign of permanent changes, because we definitely need to be making long-term changes now.  I think more and more people are realizing the need to live differently, and we are ever so slowly moving in the right direction .  What do you think?

From the Environmental News Network