Sharing blame for high gas prices
Daniel Howes had an unusually clear column in which he spreads the blame for high gas prices (see the Detroit News, noting Republican tax breaks to oil companies and the Republican response to Democrats’ suggestions that the tax breaks be removed – namely, saying they’ll investigate price gouging, presumably with the same accuracy and vigor with which they investigated torture and the leak of CIA agent Valerie Plame (in other words, they’ll find a low-level scapegoat or two); the insane rhetoric of Iran’s leaders; EPA directives to switch immediately to ethanol; China’s increasing demand for oil; and the destruction of Gulf Coast refineries.
However, Howes missed quite a few accurate targets, first and foremost being the American people for continuing to prefer inefficient vehicles, seemingly whenever they have a choice. We have the majority of SUV owners who would be happier and wealthier in minivans, the majority of pickup drivers doing so to “for the image,” and, for that matter, most BMW owners doing so for the image. We also cannot forget the president, who had many opportunities after 9/11 to tell us to use less fuel and grow up, so that we would stop feeding the lunatic fringe of the Arab world so well. Every now and then, amidst giving more and more tax breaks to wealthy oil companies that don’t need them, he does remember to say something about alternative fuels and what we’ll be doing years from now. Oh, and there’s his other solutions: taking away nuclear-power safeguards and de-regulating oil refineries, so that big oil companies, in addition to making record profits, won’t have to worry about all those worker safety, fire-and-anti-terror safety, and environmental rules when building new refineries. Then there are the timid so-called Democrats who caved in to the Republicans so often on things like getting rid of CAFE exemptions. They have no excuse for their behavior in that brief time when they ruled both White House and Congress. I think even most libertarians would agree that the only thing worse than government regulation is BAD government regulation, and that a good law is better than a bad law, even if you disagree with the idea of having a law in the first place.
So what’s the solution? Well, diesel could be one solution, but clean diesel rules have apparently been postponed, as we predicted. Moving garbage fees from “after you’re done” to “before you start” – that is, disposable-items taxes that fund garbage disposition – would certainly help because people would buy less useless plastic crap, and our overall cost wouldn’t go up; but people who use more disposable plastic crap would pay more of the cost of dumping it (in most areas, even if you pay for waste disposal, part of your taxes goes for dealing with garbage). Making less plastic crap frees up oil for gasoline. Getting more efficient vehicles on the road by making trucks do less damage to cars in truck-car collisions would certainly help – rather than the current system of beefing up cars, which makes them heavier and less efficient (and slower, in case you missed the Caliber’s 0-60 times), we could make trucks heavier and slower, which would drive more people into efficient cars, again freeing up gas. One person driving a Lincoln Navigator uses the same fuel per mile as, I don’t know, a few people driving Corollas, and frankly, having driven both, I’d rather drive the Corolla anyway. There’s a lot more we could do – frankly the BTU tax makes a lot of sense given how much the government has to spend to keep oil prices where they are (and don’t talk to me about gas taxes, how else should roads be funded?). More trains, more buses, more available fuel. And then there’s GM’s cool “change your oil now” system where a computer tracks oil changes. If every car had those, we could cut the number of oil changes people do in half – at least.
High gas prices? It’s not a conspiracy, it’s the law of supply and demand. Demand less, and the cost goes down.
There’s a lot more on this at http://analysis.wordpress.com/
While we are on the subject of Republican energy problems…We could also discuss Democratic blocking of drilling oil anywhere and everywhere in America that would lower the price while Venezula and Cuba are drilling oil off of the Florida coast and Mexico is drilling in the Gulf, the Democratic blocking of building refineries to the point that a new refinery hasn’t been built in 30 years, the Democratic rejection of nuclear energy, the John Kerry/Ted Kennedy rejection of using windmill energy that may infringe on their views off of Cape Cod, John Kerry’s stable of fuel inefficient vehicles (mostly made by Chrysler) and his private jet, Al Gore’s speeding ticket in a Lincoln, etc., etc.
Let’s not forget that a simple reduction in state and federal taxes could give everyone relief until the prices naturally come down.
Finally, the vast majority of oil imported to the US does not come from anywhere in the Middle East. We get most of our oil from Canada, Mexico, and Venezula.
You simply will not be able to just conserve your way out of the current situation, the answer is probably both…people who want to conserve do it, but we need more stable supply and the ability to get it to market, which must begin at here at home.
what if all of a sudden, all car companies stopped focusing on gas powered cars…and put all their time and energy into make cars that are as close to the toyota prius as possible, without sacraficing (too much) power.
yeah i love the charger srt-8, and the grand cherokee srt-8, hell even the viper, and the caliber srt-4 (which will still get 25-28 mpgh)…but a charger running on something similar to synergy drive…getting mmm 30 mpg and still pumpin out 400 (or somewher in the high 300) hp?! awesome!what would be cool is if the car kept itself in the electric mode when it didnt need the hp and torque…like just cruising in the city or highway…then it completely switches over to the hemi V8 and puts out the original 425 hp…assuming its a 6.1 L hemi. (325-350hp if its the 5.7)
just a thought
i live in pittsburgh and i dont ever see any of these “ballers” and “players” and pimps gettin rid of their escalades on dubs anytime soon. Although, i did see this one guy get rid of his cadillac coupe deville (late 90′s i think…so i tihnk it would be called the DTS) or something for a calber…funny thing is though, he put the rims he had on the cadi onto the caliber hahahahaha. And he chromed the crap out of the caliber. And it looked sexi
I agree, if Chrysler or anyone else could make more fuel efficient cars that are desirable, I would like it. But the Toyota Prius doesn’t do a thing for me…they are ugly on the highway and they don’t drive like regular cars. Apparently a lot of other people think the same, explaining the slow demand for hybrid cars in general. And I have heard a professor at my univeristy, an expert on the auto industry, say that hybrids are simply not worth the extra purchase price in the gas you would be saving. They cost more to buy and more to maintain.
I don’t know if you can point a finger at lack of building new refineries as a singular source. The latest stock holder report from ExxonMobil brags that it has “increased it’s current refineries capacity every year for the past several years, saving the stock holders money because compliance to get a new facility built is prohibitive, but, the company through internal expansion is well able to more than meet current customer demands.” About 10 % of crude does come from Venezula which wholly owns CITGO. That I did not know. I have since opted to not purchase fuels through their outlets.
Where does the Canadian source of oil originate? I have heard that we do the majority of our imported through them, but I have never located the actual source. I do know that during the so called “oil crisis” of the mid 70′s Canada experienced absolutely no such supply issues, in fact, a whole lot of drivers just went across the border and filled up with no issues whatsoever. They also didn’t turn down their thermostats, and most Canadians looked at you funny if you mentioned something about shortages.
However, you are so right. Politically, there is enough issues on both sides that pointing at one issue from one party is nothing more than that….. finger pointing. Pure polarization of an issue that should have been resolved on the side of energy independence 50 years ago. We have a way to go to get there, and may never arrive unless the people accept and demand that they hold the keys to this issue.
The Canadian oil mainly comes from Alberta….google Alberta’s oil sand fields.
It is not like normal oil extraction from a “cave” under the earth. The oil is literally in sand and they have to “squeeze” out the oil. Not as efficient…but the end product is still the same.
Another player in Canada is Newfoundland. They have found a lot (which of course is a relative term) of oil off of its coast.
And yes, Canada is the number one importer of energy to the US. (which includes oil from Alberta and electricity from Quebec).
Saudi Arabia only accounts for 7% of the total oil consumed by the US…Canada is about 12-14%.
Nigeria is roughly ~5% and Venezuela ~6%.
i totally agree with u matthew about the prius…and most hybrids in general. yeah the civic and camry hybrid are decent looking…but they are expensive…to get that extra 5 mpg on those two…u almost have to pay 5000 more than the base model that gets teh best mpg out of the other trims. so thats like 1k per m? hell that sucks.
the one good thing about the prius and some other electric cars, is that if you are smart, you will replace the battery with a more hightech one….spend alil more out of your pocket, but you could see your mpg go up significantly…or so i’ve heard. im no expert, but it makes sense.
but the prius is ugly and drives like a toy car. no hp, no torque….youre not hauling anything in that.
however, i do like alot of the smart cars.
most americans dont, mostly cause we are greedy bastards that prefer SUVs even in the face of an oil crisis. go figure.
And this whole E85 deal…sounds good…but where are those stations…? only in cali and i’ve heard new york.
ok…i live in ohio.
that sucks too.
id buy one of those e85 cars…if that engine were put into like the caliber or charger or Wrangler.i like diesel too. diesel in the south is like 50 cents cheaper than up here and is cheaper than the other three or four types and its not hard to find. up here, its more expensive and harder to find (you dont see too many diesel stations in pittsburgh…which is where i attend college.)
anyways…what next?
Ya, I would by an e85 car…but where are the stations????
A hope for change ? : April 27 (Bloomberg) — President George W. Bush’s administration wants authority to raise fuel-economy standards for cars and change the way they are determined, as gasoline pump prices rise above $3 a gallon in some states. Congress by law set the current standard of 27.5 miles per gallon for cars, which hasn’t changed since the mid-1980s.
Not many E85 stations around. Have to be more serious demands to make them competitive, and get away from the control of big oil.
Yes, and I’m _sure_ he’d raise the standards… right. After fighting any real change at all for the past six years. All talk and no action, that’s our president. Except when he can line his own pockets, then we get LOTS of action. First order of business at Homeland Security was to give Microsoft a HUGE and unnecessary payment for software we already had, not to tighten security or borders. Border patrols have reportedly gotten WORSE since 9/11.
As far as the Prius, it’s perfectly competitive with the Camry four-cylinder, Sebring four-cylinder, etc. I drove it for a week, Ryan, how long was your test drive? Other hybrids are generally jokes aside from Escape and Highlander, and frankly those are … well, they get great mileage for what they are. I just met another hybrid owner, and his reason was because if there was a fuel crisis involving unavailability, he wanted to have minimal needs. Odd but owning a turbo PT means not being able to cast stones. When I had a Neon I could be more critical (29/38 EPA figures).
Refineries were shut down in large numbers a few years back because they weren’t earning enough profits, so if they find themselves without enough refineries, it is not, as the oil companies and their flunkies in Congress and the White House like to say, because environmentalists shut them down or are stopping them from opening. And don’t you LOVE the idea of not requiring all those rules and inspections on factories that handle millions of gallons of explosives and toxic waste? No matter what the problem, the White House and Congress always have the same answer: tax cuts for those who need them least, and less government oversight. (Just what the nuclear industry, or what’s left of it, needed!)
Today, the Republican Party made a stand on hydrogen, which is a wonderful solution for them because it’s so impractical it’ll probably never happen to any great extent, and requires a massive infrastructure (unlike, say, biodiesel). They got into their hydrogen powered cars for the cameras…and then the Speaker, after two blocks, swtiched to his Chevy Suburban, gas mileage: 14-15 city, 18-20 highway (optimistic EPA estimate). Isn’t it nice to know Congress isn’t a bunch of Hollywood hypocrites who only drive efficient cars to the Oscars? No, they’re a bunch of Washington hypocrites who only drive efficient cars…for two blocks.
Matthew –
“We could also discuss Democratic blocking of drilling oil anywhere and everywhere in America that would lower the price while Venezula and Cuba are drilling oil off of the Florida coast and Mexico is drilling in the Gulf, the Democratic blocking of building refineries to the point that a new refinery hasn’t been built in 30 years, the Democratic rejection of nuclear energy, the John Kerry/Ted Kennedy rejection of using windmill energy that may infringe on their views off of Cape Cod, John Kerry’s stable of fuel inefficient vehicles (mostly made by Chrysler) and his private jet, Al Gore’s speeding ticket in a Lincoln, etc., etc.”
First – that’s total rubbish and I think you know it. Democrats aren’t blocking refineries, gas companies have been shutting them down. Democrats have rejected the Republican plans to deregulate nuclear power and if you believe in nuclear deregulation, there’s no point in talking. (Power companies rejected nuclear power because it is THE most expensive way to generate electricity right now.) The rejection of Cape Code windmill energy is currently sponsored by REPUBLICANS in the House; I somehow doubt Kerry and Kennedy have enough power to block anything given that neither is in power and both would stop the war in Iraq tomorrow if they could. Democrats also reject drilling in national wildlife refuges becuase they ARE national wildlife refuges, and they oppose GIVING Federal lands to oil companies, as Republicans do – without any cash back to the taxpayers who own the land and have to clean it up afterwards.
Hell, you could even argue that the oil in Alaska is a strategic reserve – if there’s a war, would you rather have used up all the Alaskan oil or have it handy for tanks and ships and planes?
I am sick and tired of the lies the spinners have been telling. I had a plumber tell me the Democrats won’t allow a single oil well to be open anywhere in the US. Well, that makes the tax credit for oil companies to drill in the US silly, doesn’t it? And since when do Democrats make laws in a Republican Congress with a Republican presisdent? Then we have the tales of Sierra Club blocking re-tapping of existing wells. Hey, guess what, there’s a reason wells are capped, and it isn’t the Sierra Club, which is about as powerless as ya get these days – it’s because it doesn’t pay to take the oil out, and it won’t until prices go up more.
Chrysler SHOULD be making a high mileage car or two, and I don’t mean a hybrid, I mean just a high mileage car. Corollas really do get 40 mpg on the freeway (manual transmission) and they don’t sacrifice acceleration much (competitive with Caliber), nor are they expensive or exotic. Likewise Civics get decent mileage albeit without any torque. While the Caliber is indeed popular, imagine those world engines in a nice light Neon chassis for a moment – they’d be demon fast AND get good mileage. They could even do a Honda and make a light sedan for power (Si) and one for gas mileage (HF). Geared appropriately I can see the 1.8 World Engine doing both quite easily in a 2,600 pound body.
Dave–
Apparetnly you don’t understand how Congress works…you have to have 60 votes to get anything controversial through because of Democratic filibusters, hence the lack of oil drilling. The congress passed a bill to drill in Alaska in the 1990s and Bill Clinton vetoed it.
As far as refineries go, it really is a simple math problem. No refineries in the last 30 years, LOTS more drivers=less gas for everyone.
Why don’t you try to strap a windmill to the back of your car and see how far you get on it and stop preaching to other people about what they should drive. I will be powering my car with as much gas as I can find.
I don’t think many people view the Prius, Camry, or Sebring as equally desirable vehicles.
I personally believe that wind energy is stupid anyway and support the Republcian blocking of it, but IT IS A FACT that your crowd in Massachusetts doesn’t want wind energy because it might mess with their view.
Did you see Barbara Boxer(D-CA) yesterday? After trashing the Bush energy policy she was videotaped getting into HER SUV. Good enough for her, good enough for everyone else. Instead of saying my facts are rubbish, try disproving them. You cannot. You simply demonstrated that you don’t know how Congress functions.
About Nuclear energy…here in Virginia we have 2 or three Nuclear power plants and our electricity is less expensive than it is in states without Nuclear power.
What filibusters exactly?
As far as refineries go, it was simple economics. Oil companies were SHUTTING DOWN REFINERIES. Why would they build new ones if STILL PROFITABLE old ones were still around?
MY crowd in Massachussets? You filthy bigot.
Matthew I hate these wide sweeping brush strokes.
And thanks for the update on how congress or the senate works…being a Canadian I even know those numbers and I am sure that Americans know but thanks again for the update.
Back to the brush strokes…give me some dates…when did the dems filibuster?
If I am correct (and I could be wrong) a filibuster has never been used on this topic.
If I am wrong give me a date or an article please.
As for wind power? Why are you against it?
Sounds a bit like you are against gravity…seriously.
Also could you quote me a month or two of your current power bill?
Most companies (nuclear or whatever) work over many states.
They often also sell power to other companies etc.
I don’t see how Virginia could have cheaper electircity then most states…
for example here in NM an average bill during the winter is about 100.00
and the summer it would be about 30.00? Is this compariable to Virgina?
From the New Zealand Herald 12/22/2005:
“WASHINGTON – Senate Democrats succeeded today in blocking, for now, oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, which Republicans sought to add to a massive US$453 billion ($673.10 billion) war-time military spending bill.
The ANWR refuge, which sprawls along Alaska’s northern coast and may hold 10 billion barrels of oil, has been the focus of bitter wrangling in the US Congress for more than two decades.
Most Senate Democrats and some moderate Republicans say the frigid wilderness and its assortment of wildlife, ranging from polar bears to peregrine falcons, should be protected.
Republicans say ANWR must be unlocked for drilling to stop a steady slide in US crude oil production.
Republican Ted Stevens of Alaska attached the measure to the unrelated defence bill which sets spending for the military and Pentagon weapons programmes in the coming year.”
From the NY Times March 9, 2005:
WASHINGTON, March 8 – After years of watching Democrats block President Bush’s plan to allow oil drilling in an Alaskan wildlife refuge, Senate Republicans say they are planning a legislative maneuver to push it through that would avoid the threat of filibusters, which have killed the measure in the past.
The maneuver, which senators and Congressional aides said would be made public Wednesday as part of the Senate budget resolution, would open the door to drilling with a simple majority of 51 votes, instead of the 60 required to block a filibuster. The same move failed two years ago, but with 55 Republican senators – four more than before – proponents of the drilling say they have fresh hope that Congress will vote this year to open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, a central component of Mr. Bush’s energy policy.
AND
“The debate over drilling centers on 1.5 million acres of coastal plain, part of the larger 19-million-acre Arctic refuge. Proponents of drilling, including Alaskan development interests and the American Petroleum Institute, a trade group representing oil companies, say drilling would reduce dependency on foreign oil. And the oil industry estimates that drilling would be confined to 2,000 acres. Opponents say drilling would threaten caribou and destroy one of the last unspoiled habitats in the United States.”
So we are only talking about 1/19 of the refuge.
And from CNN.com:
“In the last Congress, the House approved drilling in the refuge, but the issue died in the Senate. Democrats, led by presidential aspirants Sens. Joe Lieberman of Connecticut and John Kerry of Massachusetts, vowed to filibuster any drilling proposal, meaning supporters would need 60 votes to get the measure passed.”
“Now that Republicans control the Senate, drilling advocates are maneuvering to include the provision in a budget resolution that is not subject to filibuster. Once in the resolution, it will take drilling opponents 51 votes to get it out. Such a maneuver succeeded in getting the drilling approved by Congress in 1995, but President Clinton vetoed it.”
You want more?
And I realize with people like you, if people don’t agree with you, they are hateful and a bigot, but you really need to buy a dictionary if you think not loving Ted Kennedy is a bigot or most Americans are.
In poll after poll, people want more supply. My univeristy did a poll that showed 64 percent of respondents think we should be drilling and developing more energy in our own country.
Matthew, you’re a bigot because you assume anyone who disagrees with you is from Massachussetts or is closely related.
“With you, if people don’t agree with you, they are hateful and a bigot.” No, if people start whining about Massachussetts liberals and lumping me in with Ted Kennedy, they are hateful bigots. If people start spouting Fox News crap that’s long been discredited, they are hateful bigots.
Bob Sheaves, Curtis Redgap, and I have major disagreements on a bewildering array of topics, but we all find ways to argue rationally and agree where we agree and disagree where we disagree, without me shoving stereotypical labels onto them or vice versa. You, Matthew, do not argue rationally, sensibly, or constructively, and generally speaking I see no point in refuting each of your points (thank you, by the way, CanadianYJ for doing so!), when you don’t seem to operate along rational means anyway and will no doubt find a way to dismiss any real arguments with more stereotypcial liberal-this, liberal-that hatemongering.
“About Nuclear energy…here in Virginia we have 2 or three Nuclear power plants and our electricity is less expensive than it is in states without Nuclear power”
Questions:
1) Did tax money go into paying for them? In New Jersey, taxpayers footed a good part of the bill. I’m sure other states were equally “generous.”
2) How old are they? Have they been paid off?
3) Do you have local energy taxes?
4) What proportion of energy is from nuclear? (For PSE&G, it’s 50%, FWIW.)
5) Which states without nuclear power exactly?
6) Is this true for Virginia or for all states?
I have worked in the power industry. Old-line electric guys have turned white at the very thought of another nuclear plant. They’re hard and scary to run, and tend to turn into cost-overrun boondoggles.
What’s really interesting to me is the cheapest form of power: using less. That’s why utilities often reward you for buying energy efficient appliances – if they don’t have to build another plant, they’re usually happy… sounds strange but it’s always a risk for them and it’s quite expensive with or without regulation.