How Should the US Reduce Petroleum Consumption?

[Ramo]

And you'd prefer to use the heavy hand of government to allow polluters to put their externalities on the shoulders of several billion people?

So you basically use the heavy hand of government destroy an entire industry that employs more than 250,000 people...

Eh? Who said anything about destroying it? I'm not suggesting any penalty that's rediculous. I simply suggest a minor push in the right direction.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Add to the fact that gasoline taxes hurt the poor much more than the rich, because the price is the same and the poor buy as much as the rich, while their proportion of the income stays the same.

That is the reason I'm against gas taxes, and increased taxes on producers that use gas.

[faded glory]

Originally posted by Ramo
And you'd prefer to use the heavy hand of government to allow polluters to put their externalities on the shoulders of several billion people?

And again. This goes back to the hideous, never ending merry go round. Does Global warming exist? Are Humans to blame? Etc.....but ill end that here. Its not the right thread to debate this in.

Eh? Who said anything about destroying it? I'm not suggesting any penalty that's rediculous. I simply suggest a minor push in the right direction.

Well when we are all using fuel cells or electric cars.Who needs the Mobil Station? Why do would we drill? What about the thousands of truckers? Etc......

Owell..I have to go out to eat with my Girlfriend soon. I have to shower and stuff. So have a nice night!

[Skanky Burns]

Originally posted by faded glory
Well when we are all using fuel cells or electric cars.Who needs the Mobil Station?

Depends on if the fuel cells could be charged in the owners home, or needed special attachments etc that would require an electric version of the Mobil Station.

Why do would we drill?

Obviously not oil

What about the thousands of truckers? Etc......

What about them?? Goods still need to be delivered, truckers are still needed to deliver those goods.
Sure, the trucks and cars would all need to be replaced, but these vehicles aren't meant to last forever, so at some point you would be replacing them anyway. Just replace it with a 'clean fuel' version.

[lord of the mark]

If the problem is security risk from imported oil - tax imported oil - this will encourage all conservation methods, alternative sources, AND encourage more domestic production. Let the market decide the most efficient way

IF problem is CO2, tax carbon in fuels.

Tax breaks for "good" methods of production are problematic. You can give a tax break for a less energy intensive method of making widgets - but that doesnt give me any incentive to use less widgets - which for some goods or services may the best thing. A tax credit for fuel cell cars doesnt encourage me to walk, or take a shorter trip. You can try to devfelop an elaborate set of encouragements for any situation you can think of, but its much simpler to simply tax the "bad" thing, not subsidize the avoidance of the bad thing. And when it comes to govt action, simplicity is a virtue.

Adding a cost to an industry seems like overriding the market - but if that industry is imposing a cost on the rest of us, whether thats climate change or political-military vulnerability, it makes sense.

LOTM

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Add to the fact that gasoline taxes hurt the poor much more than the rich, because the price is the same and the poor buy as much as the rich, while their proportion of the income stays the same.

That is the reason I'm against gas taxes, and increased taxes on producers that use gas.

very simple - increase taxes on gas, and give a flat tax credit to low income people,or to all tax payers, so that the net impact is revenue neutral, and the tax cuts go to the same income class as the payers.

This doesnt solve the problem of equity between poor folks in Montana, who use lots of gas (and heating oil) and will still lose out, and poor folks in Harlem, who will get a windfall. No good way to deal with that, if we really institute economic incentives to use less gas. Only way out is to forget economic incentives, and use govt mandates like requiring more fuel efficient cars, but as mentioned elsewhere that fails to encourage what may be more economically efficient ways to reduce consumption.

LOTM

[Lefty Scaevola]

Re: How Should the US Reduce Petroleum Consumption?

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
The United States uses a whole lot of oil. Per person the rates very high; only Canada compares.

IIRC Ausralia is substatialy above USA & Canada in gasoline per capita, I do not recall a petroleum comparison. Numbers please.

[Imran Siddiqui]

I don't have Aussie numbers on hand, but for US, Canada, and some Eurocom nations... US and Canada use over 50 barrels of oil per capita, while Italy, UK, Belgium, Germany, Norway, Japan have barrels per oil between 20 and 35.

This is from World Statistics in Brief, United Nations Statistical Pocketbook, 14th Edition

[Cairo_East]

How should the US reduce oil consumption? Simple.

Vote in a government that cares for the environment-starting by having more people vote for Gore than for Bush.

Oh wait! We did.

[Imran Siddiqui]

God, I'm glad Gore lost. What a moron. He would have just hiked gas prices 200% and this recession would be a depression, just like that.

[MOBIUS]

Originally posted by child of Thor
Coconuts, they work very well(i voted bananas as it was kinda close to Coconut).
In the war in Bouganville, down near Papua New Guinea(North of Australia). The Rebel fighters of Bouganville facing a complete blockade by the PNG forces resorted to loads of cunning methods to keep up their fight for independence. One of which was refineing the Oil from a Coconut that then could be put straight into the 4x4's left on the Island.Apparantly it worked a treat and while the PNG forces camped on the Island suffered black out's from there faulty diesel generators, the Bouganville people had free Fuel for there car's and power! Very ingienious i think.Oh and apparantly it burns clean(compared to Oil).

Sounds like you watched the same documentary that I saw...

Banning SUV's would be a good start, as apart from seriously wasting fuel your average SUV driver appears to be a complete inconsiderate moron on the road!

[Dis]

force all americans to become like those Amish people. You know- no electricity or motorized transportation.

The only exception would be the military. We wouldn't want to be conquered by Canada.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Banning SUV's would be a good start, as apart from seriously wasting fuel your average SUV driver appears to be a complete inconsiderate moron on the road!

I like SUVs, so they stay .

[child of Thor]

Originally posted by MOBIUS


Sounds like you watched the same documentary that I saw...

Banning SUV's would be a good start, as apart from seriously wasting fuel your average SUV driver appears to be a complete inconsiderate moron on the road!

I was down that way for 8 years so had a bit of first hand, there was a documentary(!), wow that's got to be good - i've got a lot of respect for the Bouganville Islander's. In this world of Corporate Governments(hmmm......America the land of the Free(to exploit anybody)? . Although we're just as bad.), that whole thing was a BIG 'F**KU' to the greedy corporate mining industry. And all because a bunch of local people weren't going to sit by and watch their village and land be dug up without having their say - good on them, we need more people like them

EDIT: p.s I am NOT a 'commie', just don't like Coke or McD's very much. I do like 4x4's though, so back to the point i got nothing against SUV's as such - if a bunch of 'Stone-age' Pacific Islanders can make their vehicle's run on Coconut oil, without any modification to the car's, then why not the Big world powers(WTF???).Oh i know the answer why - Gulf War, Afghanistan......anyone add any more to the list?

[Sikander]

LotM has this issue exactly right. Tax oil imported from OPEC countries.