Your other bullet point does better than CAFE anyway:

"Tax the crap out of fuel-inefficient vehicle purchases and funnel the money into incentives for fuel-efficient vehicle purchases."

If you do that, with maybe a couple grand added to the price of a real guzzler, and a couple hundred given to a Ford Focus buyer, and I think you'd start to see some real changes.

End result: People are encouraged to buy fuel efficient cars regardless of their configuration. If GM can make a Suburban that gets 55mpg, great.

And stop this idiocy about "people need trucks for work." Aren't they capable of buying something that gets better mileage?

A company can sell a 60 mpg Insight-type car, and a 10 mpg SUV, and still average out at your 35 mpg CAFE target.

I'm sorry, but corporate avearges are so last decade.  Scrap it, and concentrate (as David does in that other bullet) on individual cars.

If you want to be more aggressive, work backwards in time, rather than forward as CAFE does.  Start tweaking DMV renewal fees to force early retirement of old gas guzzlers.

Except any idea raising taxes.  What needs to be done is to characterize subsidies as corporate welfare.   Rather than raise taxes, snatch corporate welfare away gtom all fossil and nuclear power, then use that money or a portion of it to fund renewables.

Any call for raising taxes is political suicide.  Cutting welfare, in this case corporate welfare, is political gold.  Since exxon alone made a record 134 billion in profiteering on the Iraq war last year and big oil got 15 billion in corporate welfare.

That's welfare fraud on a titanic scale.  Of course big oil will raise gas prices to cover the lost corporate welfare, but environmentalists will not get the blame this time.  Let 'em raise it to 5 bucks per gallon.  That will bring the voting ire onto the heads of their lobbyists in government, namely the Cheney (bush) administration and it's oily faithfull in congress.

Meanwhile keep it quiet that we want 5 to 10 dollar gas and 20 to 40 cent per kwh electricity from fossil and nuclear power.  Shhhhh.


http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog John Schneider, Northern Wisconsin

Forget about Washington. I (and probably most other Grist readers) are all for the fixes David lists above (or some variants of them), but 1) we're talking to ourselves about them and we're generally pretty far from influencing Washington and 2) they would take a bunch of time to implement and rely on as Bribos says "the people that put us in this position."

What we need to do is help people (especially the poor) think creatively about any and all ways they can increase their MPGPP and flog the press to spread the word.

awesome.

While I agree that SUV's are generally 'a bit' overdone, I think that they are still necessary for many. I'm being sarcastic about the bit part, b/c they are way overdone. They will still be necessary, b/c there are plenty of professions where one cannot put everything into a small car, and definitely not be able to take that car off paved streets. I am obviously in support of hybrid trucks and increased fuel efficiency, but that will not make a huge difference (the hybrid Escape gets better, but not great gas mileage).

And along the lines of someone's previous Gristmill post, one would need a fleet of personal vehicles in order to get different places. First of all, that may be fine for people with enough money, but what about the rest of us? I cannot afford three different vehicles for city, highway and off-road driving. And how does that really benefit the environment? That's increased, not decreased consumption.

I have to disagree that "taxes are political suicide" while "ending corporate welfare" is political gold.

Corporations make HUGE political donations and wield considerable political clout - hence the fact that they get the legislation they want, whether 'we the people' want it or not.  IMO the average politician doesn't really care about the unwashed rabble, er, I mean the voters.

They've taxed the hell out of cigarettes, right?  When I was a kid, I remember cigarettes in the machine (you know, with the pull knobs.. I always used to wish my parents smoked so I could play with the machine) were like 50 cents.  Now what are they, about $5 a pack?  I didn't see anyone committing political suicide over that - perhaps because the healthcare industry and insurance industry have about as much clout as the tobacco industry.

What we need is for the auto industry to want the tax on old gas guzzlers and/or gasoline... hell, it should be good for them, as people will be forced to buy new cars, right?  That will set up the auto industry vs the oil industry, instead of having them be in the same comfy little political pocket, and no one will have to commit political suicide to push the taxes through.

If I were allowed to design a gas guzzler tax I would excempt specfically: spartan, utilitarian, vehicles sold with commercial registration.

I would not exempt a Porsche Cayenne, etc.

Now when you talk about need, what are you talking about, a need to haul the speedboat to the river, a need to carry 2 kids in a Ford Expidition?  Or what?

I would instead make all purchasers of such vehicles pay the upfront tax, and if you have a legitimate business requiring a big car/truck (ie you own a horse farm and need to haul a trailer, or construction, etc) then you get all of that tax back when you file your income taxes.

Looking for work when there is none to be found is a depressing situation, especially for those without a safety net. Trust me, you don't want your economic engine to stall. Until you experience something like that, you have no idea. A slow, gradual increase in oil prices, (what you might expect from slowly dwindling supplies) would allow time for adjustment. A rapid rise caused by artificial manipulation of the market would cause chaos. You don't want a step function. You want a gentle sloping increase.

Bush's handlers are trying to improve abysmally low ratings and keep his party in office. The "long term" is the last of their worries.


In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Poison Darts--Protecting the biodiversity of our world

More like hauling construction materials, getting anywhere off-road (both forestry and ag), hauling hay for feed, hauling manure for compost, hauling firewood to heat the house, hauling prize cattle in a trailer, borrowing your friend's (or lending it to your friends) truck to move, come up with about a million other uses for trucks that you will not be able to do with a regular car.

Clearly the majority of vehicles of that size do not see more than bags of groceries, but I was just suggesting that they will still be necessary in our current energy-addicted world. I personally cannot wait until they come out with hybrid trucks, and I can actually afford one.

http://joi.ito.com/archives/2004/09/19/trucks.html

What we are looking at here is a cultural thing and not so much a technology issue.

Bascially we subsidize all those large SUVs with a sack of groceries, because the drivers visualize themsleves going off-road, hauling hay, etc.  And they do not visualize themselves doing the same with an efficient little Daihatsu, because ... you know, that would be beneath them.

The political discourse on this topic is simply so devoid of fact, and constructive discourse so buried and out of the mainstream, that we felt we needed to raise a voice of reason. Public officials will continue to misinform and obfuscate if we allow it.

The only solution is to educate the public about the most important problem we face as a generation. We, the citizens of the US and the world, must move our attention to this the issue of energy more than any other. We must hold our representative governments accountable for having an open and honest debate on the subject.

Simply put, we must learn more about where our energy comes from.

Bart Anderson
Energy Bulletin co-editor
http://energybulletin.net

Bart
Energy Bulletin

   There are two problems with the American living model, one is zoning, the other is cultural.

   If the zoning practices that seperate retail, work and housing areas were largely eliminated, you would see more mixed use ares where people don't need a car, or need one less oftern.  When I lived in SF, I purposefully found housing next to retail areas, so all my shopping could be done by foot or bike.  For many people, this is impossible now, but if we allowed people to set up stores in neighborhoods, no one would have to drive 20 miles for carton of milk.

   The other issue is related to how work and housing are seperated.  In Chinese universities (for an example), housing for all the teachers, and all the other workers is provided near the school.  In some cases, housing is provided away from the school, but in communities, so that people live near their workmates.  Then it is easy for buses to bring them all from one place to another.

   Many businesses provide on-site housing for some part of their workforce.  Unfortunately, this trend is battling "modern" "Western" ideas which promote distance commuting.

patrick

(It is pointless to wish for speed limit enforcement as long as motorists are subsidizing government, including traffic police.)

--- G.R.L. Cowan, former hydrogen fan
B: internal combustion, nuclear cachet

Doltish reasons when a purely plant diet supplemented with mcg of b12 will suffice.

Let's say this...how about everybody use less gas.  Let's car pool....  Let's not take the car to the post office, dinner, movies (whatever) that is within 1 mile from our house.  Let's consolidate all of our errands into one trip.  Get the milk, movie, paper and post office all in one trip instead of making 4 trips.  This might not be easy for some people but for the majority of us who live in outlying metropolitan areas, this is easy to do.  Where I live, there is a 5 fast food restaurants, movie theater, post office, music store and every single convenience store all within 1 mile.  I do have small children as well so I found myself driving everywhere when all I had to do was buy a pull wagon (one of the nice ones with seat belts and cup holders for the kids) and take a walk (weather permitting).  It takes a bit longer but it is time well spent.  I also keep my car in top condition... correct air pressure in the tires... change oil and filters as needed and there are also new products on the market that increase gas mileage that actually work!!

All I'm saying is to take control of our own actions and stop blaming others for what we all have done.  We created a market where we are so dependant upon gas and our cars that we would be crippled without them.  Let's use less, save some money, try bettering our environment and maybe we will have some gas for our kids to have when they need it.  If you want more information about some products just let me know.  Just my 2 cents.

Hmmm, interesting perspective on ciggarette taxes. But then again, more gasloine consumers vote than ciggarette consumers.

I guess I am talking about turning it all around on corporatistas with a grass roots movement based on anger over gas prices, oil company war profiteering, and corporate welfare.  Will it work?

Maybe a few 100 million bumperstickers picturing Bush holding hands with prince saud..er faud, fraud.. whatever that guy in the dashiki that runs saudi land is called.

Put 'em on every gas pump and bumper in america!    

http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog John Schneider, Northern Wisconsin

All I'm saying is to take control of our own actions and stop blaming others for what we all have done.

So much guilt, and before my first cup of coffee!

I don't remember creating our petroleum-addicted society, actually.  With the exception of the last four months I have spent my entire adult life living in cities, walking or taking the subway nearly everywhere I need to go (or bumming a ride, ie "carpooling," with a friend when I had to get somewhere the train didn't go).  I bought my first car three years ago, at the tender age of 35.  Strangely enough, I was living in Manhattan at the time, but working north of the City in Westchester Cty.  I valiantly attempted to take public transportation to my job; a 25-mile one way commute took me 1.5 to 2 hours, each way, every day.  The poor schedule, the expense and the sheer irritation of the subway-train-shuttle bus commute convinced me, against my greener judgement, to buy a car.

Now, following another job, I've moved to the boonies.  There is no market "a mile from home."  The closest stores are about 3 to 4 miles away.. bikable, sure, but I generally just stop on my way home from work.  I'm now attempting to figure out if I can manage to bike to work, even just one day a week... the logistics are an issue, as there are a couple of large highways to get around, and time (as well as fitness!) is an issue, as it is about 19 miles one-way.

My point is, you are preaching to the choir on this list;  I think many if not all of us are already doing the "little" things that we can do to use our energy efficiently and preserve the environment.  I applaud your efforts in walking to the store, kids & wagon in tow;  all I am saying is that I don't think the majority of the people bothering to read this list are out there idling the Suburban at the McDonald's drivethru while at home every light in the house is on and the sprinklers are going full blast at noon.

DrX,

I agree with you that corporate interests have way too much sway in our political system; I simply  don't think we are going to revolutionize that system overnight.  Let's proprose some ideas now that will conserve oil, protect the planet, and not make 90% of the politicians in the country roll their eyes.  Enviros are always being accused of being unrealistic and I think, at times, that is valid.  Like everything in life, we need to strike the appropriate balance - aggressive plans that indicate the seriousness of the problem yet realistic plans that recognize that people, in general, don't like change and deal with it best in small increments.  But even with baby steps, you will eventually walk a mile.

Umm, if you would like to degrade a conversation to lame name-calling, I have only one thing to say to you:

You are a dolt for being a vegan and trying to convince others of doing same.

Add a land tax to your list.

Basically shift taxes off of buildings and onto land. That way, we lower the incentive to invest in land and thereby lower the selling price of land in all areas. This will go a long way in promoting high-density development and natural affordable housing (without subsidies).

Think about it, it makes all the sense in the world. It was also what Thomas Jefferson, Adam Smith, Albert Einstein, Thomas Paine, Winston Churchill, and, more recently, Jim Kunstler advocated. Grist should get behind the Land Value Tax. It's the best way to get the market to work naturally toward green solutions.

The tax would act as a stick driving developers and owners to minimize their ground use (more ground use equals more tax) and thus decreasing the push to sprawl. At the same time, land speculators will lose the economic benefit holding land out of use for future profit and will open up their land for sale on the market. This will act to increase supply and lower land prices - Further helping urban renewal to occur without the political mess of eminent domain.

And more dense developments mean shorter commutes and lower gasoline demand. It makes all the green sense in the world.

Here's a good read on the topic by Jim Kunstler.
http://www.earthrights.net/docs/kunstler.html

I do think that in addition to reducing the amound of automobile dependence by everyone in this country is a good thing, however.  More money should be spent on building more and better public transportation - something Americans could learn from the Europeans.  Also driving smaller cars.  A rancher in Wyoming might need a Ford Expedition, but almost nobody where I live in Boston should need anything that big.  

I just can't beliewve that proposing to raise taxes of any kind on anything can make a party electable.  Ciggarettes are different.  Smokers generally don't vote.

http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog John Schneider, Northern Wisconsin

This may actually cause taxes to decrease on the whole due, in the long run, to less tax money needed to pay for the entire infrastructure that are present building habits demand. Green really is cheaper in terms of a total cost analysis.

http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?section_id=19&article_id=8692&page_number=1

This one has the 5 cylinder aluminum block GM enginer, better than the hummer V-8.  Can a hybrid hummer be far behind?  Hope not, given the fact that hummer sales tripled last year.

Still wish they would produce one the size of the original jeep though.  Maybe electric powered?  Hehey.  Don't hold your breath.

This one might save some gas anyway.  But bring prices down?  That will never happen again.

http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog John Schneider, Northern Wisconsin

****

Important! must read!! Make gas 1.79 by summer

We've all seen the emails to not buy gas on a particular day, or to boycott Exxon and Mobile. But, these will not work, because your level of gas consumption will not change, thus causing no overall price shift in the market. But, there's a study being published this summer by two University of Chicago economists showing how if we buy more gas in May we'll have lower prices from June through Septemember, just in time for vacations.

It's based on what they call the "DVD example." In 1998, a DVD player cost about $500, and hardly any were sold. But, from 1999 to 2002 DVD sales went up 78% each year, causing prices to go down to the $35 level they are today. It's a simple economic theory - the more that is bought, the lower prices will go.

By contrast, the idea of boycotting a product in the hopes of reducing its price to the consumer is antiquated and been proven wrong. There are easy examples all around. For instance, the span from 1914 to 1919 in the US saw a rise in the cost of lobster due to many reasons. In protest, parts of the country boycotted lobster ENTIRELY - expressing that the boycott would end when lobster prices came back down. However, the smaller remaining group of lobster eaters had to pay more money to cover the costs of the lobster industry, and lobster prices have never returned to adjusted pre-1914 or even 1919 prices. As a result, lobster is now a delicacy that is enjoyed only by the super rich. Do we want gasoline to become a "luxury" item that working families can't afford?

By applying this to gas today, if everyone bought 25% more gas this May gas prices would fall from the $2.99 level they are now to $1.79 by June 30. Some ways you can do this include filling up any extra vehicles you have, buying some gas cans and filling them up, and even by driving more! But, to make this work everyone needs to do their part to increase our consumption by 25% this May. Please forward this to everyone you know, post on your MySpace account, anything to help spread the word so we can enjoy affordable vacations this summer!

Even if we have money, we still wish that gas was a bit cheaper. We blame the government, the war, taxes etc.

I do not like to pay high oil prices eihter, but I do wish that we could all find more ways to not have to buy so much gasoline.

When I take my kids to school. How many show off parents must drive there only 2 kids to school in a Large SUV? Why do you need an SUV if you have only 2 kids?

We all love to drive big cars, but do realize that in doing so you are only supporting many of those countries who support terrorism.

If we really want to shut them up, we should all try to buy more fuel efficient cars or hybrids. I know they are a bit more expensive, but who would you rather give your money too? You have a choice: (US and Japan) for the cars

or (IRAN, IRAQ etc. for your gas !)

Let face it: this is the best revenge. I would love to see the day when, nobody buys oil from them, and then they would not have money to start wars against us.

That is really our best revenge.

http://wwww.nobodytosomebody

I am sick and tired of all the BS the presidential candidates have been spewing on TV about health care and the war in Iraq. Christ who cares if Obama used a line from someone else. If I see Hilary Clinton cry one more time on TV I swear I'll throw something through the screen. There all liars anyway, When Bill Clinton was elected president Hillary was going to fix health care HA. When the going got tough she gave up. Yeah we need her in office.

We need a real person in office, A working class citizen. Someone that lives in reality, someone that has to fill his or her own gas tank, or grocery shops for there families every week not there maid or butler. I'll tell ya if I were president I would make a lot of changes starting with our over inflated government. I wish Ronald Regan was still alive, boy that was a president. How bout FDR man he could get stuff done.

All these candidates care about is there own self gain. G.W. Bush damn I cringe every time he makes a speech, how in the world did he get elected President let alone two terms WTF. I haven't heard one word from him about the rising gas prices in our country, well hell his oil company is making record profits. GREED, GREED, GREED. We the people have to make a change. Let us the people of these United States of America take our government back.

Why are we policing the world, why is our army over in Iraq? I'll tell you why, Oil plain and simple. Well we don't need there damn oil. We can put a man on the moon, clone a friggin sheep. Why can't we grow our own fuel? We can, but the oil companies and our own damn government won't let us. There are thousands and thousands of square miles of desert land that if supplied with water could grow hybrid crops to fuel our cars, trucks and so on.

Hey we built an oil pipe line from one end of Alaska to the other. I'm sure we could do the same thing but with a water desalination plant and supply the deserts in the western states. Hell we could put all the illegal aliens to work growing the crops, I'm sure they would love to work these fields and make an honest living. These people are good hard working folks, lets not alienate them.

"A wise and frugal government, which shall leave men free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor and bread it has earned - this is the sum of good government"  Thomas Jefferson