On Gasoline Consumption

By: Gustavus
Published On: 5/15/2007 9:12:46 AM

Kenton Ngo recently posted a note on gas consumption, which has now been discussed on on Raising Kaine.  He suggests three things to reduce our "dependence on gasoline":
1. More fuel-efficient vehicles.
2. Effective mass transit.
3.  Smart growth. 
Leaving aside the question of whether progressives even ought to support that goal, I think his suggestions are unlikely to succeed.  For example, more fuel-efficient vehicles may encourage their owners to drive more-i.e., they may adjust their driving to maintain their fuel costs at a constant level, and therefore not reduce consumption at all.  Similar arguments can be made for the other two suggestions.

Basic economics seems to suggest that to reduce consumption of a commodity, one needs to increase the cost of that commodity.  In other words, a nice way to reduce consumption of gas would be to put an additional $1/gallon tax on it.

But you and I won't support that for the obvious reason that this tax will hurt the poor and struggling.  It wouldn't bother Bush to have to pay an additional dollar per gallon when he has his car filled with gas.  But the family which is struggling to make ends meet would find that tax a back-breaker.

Here, as in so many areas, the problem can't be solved in isolation.  If we want to reduce the consumption of gas we need to both raise its cost, and reduce other taxes that the poor and low income folks pay. Taken together, these two changes would reduce consumption, and not hurt those who can least afford it. 


Comments



Fuel efficiency is essential (TheGreenMiles - 5/15/2007 11:14:34 AM)
More fuel-efficient vehicles is far and away the best option for immediately cutting our oil consumption.  The technology is here now, and people wouldn't have to change their driving habits.  If every vehicle in America was a hybrid, we'd cut our oil consumption in half.


I agree that (Eric - 5/15/2007 11:34:55 AM)
better fuel economy wouldn't have much of an impact on consumption.  Our oil has been so cheap for so long that we've built our infrastructure around long distance driving - I really can't see how we could increase our driving significantly (unless people just drove around for the sake of driving). 


I love how the news media hysterically reports (Lowell - 5/15/2007 11:49:38 AM)
that we're at "record high" gasoline prices.  Yeah, that's sort-of, kind-of true, but only in nominal terms, not adjusted for inflation, and certainly not for family income.  The fact is that gasoline is much cheaper in inflation-adjusted terms today, as a share of family income, than it was during the 1970s and early 1980s.  It's also much MUCH cheaper than in every other OECD country.  Just more silliness and hyperbole from the MSM...


Hybrid is just a part of it.... (ericy - 5/17/2007 9:19:41 AM)

some of the automakers are using hybrid technology to improve performance and not improve fuel economy.  Kind of like an electric turbocharger.  Which really defeats the whole point of the exercise, but I guess there are people out there looking for a car that is buzzword compliant and will pay extra for the thing.

Another pet peeve of mine are flex-fuel vehicles - typically big gas guzzlers, but the Federal regs are written in such a way that a flex fuel gas guzzler can get tax credits for the automaker, which explains why GM is pushing that one so hard.  In the end, people need to look a lot more closely at fuel economy of the vehicles.

Reducing vehicle miles traveled can make a big difference.  For example, the next time you move, you might move closer to your work.  Or alternatively, the next time you change jobs, you might try and find something closer to home, or something where commuting by bicycle or metro is possible.



Drive less (VA Breeze - 5/15/2007 11:27:16 AM)
Many, myself included, can't afford a new car now so I still drive my tank that sucks up gas. I am driving much less-I plan my day better. I have changed my behavior so to give less to the oil companies.

Also-I really hate the Shell Oil commercial showing on TV.



That Shell commercial.... (ericy - 5/17/2007 9:10:49 AM)

I kind of see where they are going with it though, but then again, I am probably reading a lot into it.  The "problem" that this guy has isn't ED (snark aside) - it is keeping old oilfields producing, and keeping the oil flowing.

When he is sitting there with the kid, and the kid is cleaning  out the glass with the straw, the "idea" is that they come up with better ways to suck oil out of an oilfield with horizontal drilling or some such.  Too bad that they have been using that idea for years now....

I suppose the implication is that they are working hard to try and think of ideas, but all of the insiders that I have heard from have said that there really aren't any more good ideas out there that haven't been tried already, and we might soon reach the point where the production at old oilfields is just going to start to decline and there won't be anything we can do about it.



Guess what ... (A Siegel - 5/16/2007 12:41:10 AM)
I'll sign up for that gas tax.

How about immediate 30 cent tax ...

And, increase the tax 2 cents / month indefinitely ...



I was at the VW dealer yesterday... (ericy - 5/17/2007 9:34:14 AM)

for routine service on my TDI, and I noticed that they still had a few new 2006 Jetta TDI available (Fairfax VW).  I noticed how the Toureg was marked down about 20%.  Even a gasser golf was marked down about 10%.  No markdowns for the TDI though - you pay full price for those things.

He was telling me stories about people who trade in big SUVs (and oftentimes take a loss on the thing, because they wait until gas prices are high to try and ditch the thing).  There was a doctor who traded in a Hummer - he bought it thinking he would go off-road, and 3 years later he had never done it once.  The nitwit traded into a Toureg though :-(.