Just In Case Carbon Emission Regulation Doesn't Kill the Economy

Raise the price of gas to $4 – before the next oil crunch

It might not be pretty at first, but a price floor – a government-mandated minimum – on retail gas will buy us the time we need to wean us off the oil.

Oil's prognosis is grim for one reason: When prices are low, oil companies do not invest in new projects. That means we are draining global reserves without replacing spare capacity. From North Dakota to Kuwait, new projects that looked lucrative when every barrel fetched $147 got shelved when prices plunged. Many of these developments will resume when prices rebound but, because it takes years before oil from a new field reaches the market, it will be too late.

Cheap oil has been the engine driving US economic growth for decades; its evil twin is pricey oil and, given time, it will drive our economy over a cliff.

The effects of oil scarcity are by now well understood: soaring food prices, social unrest, geopolitical conflict – euphemisms for hunger, food riots, and war.

So, one supposes, we should accelerate the process now. Makes sense, right?

We're From the Government and We're Here to Reach into Your Wallet

Of course, you'll never hear a government official admit that headline. They're here to help, after all, not just take more of your money. Take the transportation secretary's desire to tax the miles you drive rather than how much gasoline you consume.

Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood says he wants to consider taxing motorists based on how many miles they drive rather than how much gasoline they burn — an idea that has angered drivers in some states where it has been proposed.

Gasoline taxes that for nearly half a century have paid for the federal share of highway and bridge construction can no longer be counted on to raise enough money to keep the nation's transportation system moving, LaHood said in an interview with The Associated Press.

Back last summer when gasoline was $4 per gallon, many Americans switched out their gas-guzzlers for more fuel efficient vehicles. But if Americans weren't using as much gas, that meant the government wasn't getting as much in taxes. That was when I first heard that the government would look at ways to tax mileage as opposed to consumption (Oregon seems to be leading the way).

Rest assured, those clever fools in Washington aren't going to let you get away with paying less in taxes.

UPDATE: President Obama repudiated the idea today, but, given his history of flip-flopping, should we still be concerned?

$500 Per Barrel Oil?

Interesting article on Matt Simmons, the god of the peak oil crowd.

Spasms in the market over the summer has to have given anyone pause, even if you think the U.S. can drill a lot more of its own oil.

I've never understood why the argument over alternative fuels has been either/or. There's simply nothing on earth that compares with the energy we can get from oil, so the talk of completely replacing it seems bogus to me (at least for the foreseeable future). Why is there so little talk of both drilling and researching other technology?

The arguments that we are 10 years away from production if we start drilling now aren't true, while it will take that long or longer for alternatives.

So, what to do till then? From the Fortune article on Matt Simmons:

Hint: Learn to garden, and buy some comfortable walking shoes.

Personally, I'd love to do both, except there aren't any real grocery stores within a five-mile radius of my house. There's a billboard advertising a new Target store is supposed to be built about 1/2-mile from the Ponderosa, but I have to wonder if the downturn in the economy has put those plans on hold. Hey, I wouldn't mind walking 1/2 mile to the store. I used to do it when we lived in the Crackerbox.

My problem with the whole "get a pair of comfortable walking shoes" is this:



I can't walk from Fort Worth to Dallas every day.

NOOOO! What Are They Thinking?!

Leave it to Republicans to find a way to screw their own party.

(L)ast Friday, in stumbled Sens. Lindsey Graham, John Thune, Saxby Chambliss, Bob Corker and Johnny Isakson -- alongside five Senate Democrats. This "Gang of 10" announced a "sweeping" and "bipartisan" energy plan to break Washington's energy "stalemate." What they did was throw every vulnerable Democrat, and Mr. Obama, a life preserver.

That's because the plan is a Democratic giveaway. New production on offshore federal lands is left to state legislatures, and then in only four coastal states. The regulatory hurdles are huge. And the bill bars drilling within 50 miles of the coast -- putting off limits some of the most productive areas. Alaska's oil-rich Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is still a no-go.

Pardon my language, but what the hell are they thinking???? Drilling is the best issue Republicans have had for this dismal election cycle. It, quite possibly, could help win John McCain the White House and prevent a veto-proof Democratic Senate (and stop the bleeding in the House).

Republicans have a history of snatching victory from the jaws of defeat, but this move defies logic. Why on earth, in a year when Republicans have been considered all but dead, would any GOPer help get Democrats off the hook on the one issue we have locked up? /cry

Don't Call Him an Elitist

Just because he calls you stupid for recognizing that watching your tire pressure doesn't help our gasoline woes.

Hugh Hewitt's blog is terrific today.

Please, God, let Obama keep talking about tires from now until November.

And please let Obama keep insulting those who have concluded that tire inflation is not an energy policy.

I think Allen Colmes may have been miffed with me on tonight's show when I said as much, but the contrast between the uber-serious John McCain and the dilettante from Chicago's South Side is never more obvious than when the latter is lecturing America on tire care.

Unless when it is talking about the war against the jihadists, the war McCain wants to win and which Obama is pledged to forfeit.

As Hugh says, voting for a Democrat--any Democrat--is a vote for high gas prices. Nancy Pelosi, who is from a safely moonbatty district out in San Francisco, is willing to take the heat for those supposed Blue Dog Democrats who stole Republican seats in 2006 (and no, I don't mean literally stole like nuts whine that the 2000 election was "stolen."), but don't just blame her. Democrats controlling Congress--even with the help of supposedly conservative Democrats--means higher gas prices. They want the price to stop you using gas because then they can scream we need more wind turbines and you need to ride your bike in 100-degree heat to the bus stop.

Americans like the idea of moving away from fossil fuels, but they also like their cars, plastics, and other petroleum products. In other words, they want it all.

Think Progress does the heavy lifting for Obama, saying that Obama didn't say inflating your tires would achieve energy independence. No, he said something dumber: that inflating your tires would save as much oil as we could drill offshore and in ANWR. Newsbusters spells out why conservatives aren't the ones who don't understand mathematics.

Paris Hilton Has a Better Energy Plan Than Barack Obama

I guess Paris Hilton thinks being in a campaign ad makes her a candidate for president (do all the Secret Service guys get to run now, too?). Here's her ad:

See more funny videos at Funny or Die

Amusingly, Paris has a better energy policy than Barack Obama, since her policy reflects current needs as well as future expectations (those are big words, Paris. Have your mommy look 'em up for you). And despite what liberals will tell you about alternative fuels, we're years (maybe decades) from alternative energy being a realistic alternative to oil. John McCain noted that Paris Hilton has offered a more realistic approach to energy than Barack Obama. Obama, in his typically unhumorous way, responds "Whatever." Has this man no sense of humor at all?

Does the Left Really Not Understand the Stupidity of Obama's Tire Pressure Gaffe?

Ed Morrissey has a post up reviewing why Obama's suggestion that we could save as much oil as could be drilled out of ANWR by just inflating your tires is stupid on its face.

No one doubts that proper tire inflation can help with efficiency, and no one thinks it’s silly to maintain one’s vehicle for a variety of reasons. However, Obama clearly stated that we could get just as much oil from tire inflation and tune-ups as we can get from drilling — a ludicrous statement well deserving of ridicule.

I meant to post on this silliness the day Obama said it, but got sidetracked. Now is as good a time to mock him as any, I suppose.

Inflating my tires and getting tune-ups will save as much oil as we could get from drilling? Are we sure the guys at Iowa Liberal aren't energy consultants for Obama? It makes about as much sense. But maybe Mike can point us to a study that shows inflating your tires will not just save oil but actually get us oil the same way drilling would.

Oh, wait. I guess somebody did the study.

So it would indeed be nice if Americans pumped up their tires sufficiently, and we started seeing some of that 4.9 million to 6.5 million gallons saved per day. But why it has to be an either/or in regards to the 1.6 trillion gallons of gasoline in the OCS (not even getting into ANWR), as Obama insists, is not clear.

But the reason is clear. Because he says so!

I heard a local ad on the radio yesterday that touted not just taking public transportation (a virtual impossibility for most people in the Metroplex) but riding one's bike to the bus stop. Of course, the ad didn't point out that with the temperature yesterday was 104. Maybe that's why you don't see more people on bicycles here.

The Audacity of Flip-Flops

In his boldest flip-flop yet, Barack Obama now says he could back offshore drilling.

U.S. Sen. Barack Obama said today he would be willing to open Florida's coast for more oil drilling if it meant winning approval for broad energy changes.

"My interest is in making sure we've got the kind of comprehensive energy policy that can bring down gas prices," Obama said in an interview with The Palm Beach Post.

"If, in order to get that passed, we have to compromise in terms of a careful, well thought-out drilling strategy that was carefully circumscribed to avoid significant environmental damage - I don't want to be so rigid that we can't get something done," Obama said.

Obama's strategy for the campaign season is becoming crystal clear. He ran to the left throughout the primary season, touting his bona fides as an "agent of change." But now that the general election is here, he wants to blur any distinctions between himself and Republican candidate John McCain.

This strategy certainly frustrates the nutroots, but, it is equally disingenuous because Democrats don't want offshore drilling no matter how many Americans want it. In short, Obama is lying that he would back offshore drilling because, unlike the Republicans, he will support any cockamamie "energy" policy Democrats want regardless of whether those deals include offshore drilling. This is just another attempt by Obama to lie his way out of a distinction with the GOP.

"It is my contention that drilling offshore will not reduce the price of oil." Part 2

Remember this post where I quoted those "smart" Iowa Liberal guys? Mike had a cow complaining that rescinding the executive ban on offshore drilling couldn't possibly affect current prices because that oil isn't being traded! I was even a gentleman and let him have the last comment, but that wasn't enough.

Well, guess what? Prices are still falling. But I'm sure it's just a coincidence. ;)

Still there are people who don't use cars who think we should keep prices artificially high if it can't happen naturally.

Do We Pay Too Much Attention to Gas Prices?

Dan Ariely has an interesting New York Times op-ed piece in which he argues that we pay too much attention to gas prices and not enough to the rising costs of electricity, food, and health care.

Looking back at my family’s expenses over the past few years, I see big increases in our health care costs and in how much we pay for food. The rise in what we spend on gas is not nearly as extreme as our increases in categories like electricity and telephone. So why does the amount we spend on gasoline feel so enormous? I think it is because of the way we buy gas.

Putting aside, for the moment, that throwing health insurance into the same mix with food is a red herring--you can live without health insurance (I have until recently) but not without food. What world does this man inhabit that he hasn't paid attention to his electric bill or phone bill?

I've lived in all manner of economic circumstances in my adult life, from near poverty to pretty well-off. Yet I've always paid attention to how much things cost and why the prices go up and down. And if Ariely doesn't think his electric or food bills get tied to the price of gasoline, then he really hasn't been paying attention.

I have no idea how much milk was six years ago, how much bread was three years ago or how much yogurt was a week ago. But I suspect that if I stood next to the yogurt case in the supermarket for five minutes every week with nothing to do but stare at the price, I would also know how much it has gone up — and I might become outraged when yogurt passed the $2 mark.

Milk is $3.08 for a gallon of 2%. Cucumbers cost 86 cents. A loaf of bread is $2.08. About four years ago, milk was around 2 bucks and cucumbers were 50 cents each. Bread was about $1.50. Why do I know these things? Because I budget, meaning I make decisions about what I feed to my family. Do we want cucumbers this week? (I love cucumbers, btw). What about bananas? And we buy milk and bread every week.

Maybe those are the sorts of things you know when you pay the bills. My husband does the household bills, so I haven't a clue what the electricity costs every month. But I can tell you how many groceries I can buy with $100 (answer: about a week's worth for four people).

And let's go to the health insurance red herring while we're at it. My husband just got on full-time at a large local company. We now have medical, dental and vision insurance, long-term disability, life insurance and so on. The price is the same as when I was purchasing health insurance for just my children and me (not my uninsurable husband). The problem with health insurance isn't just the price but that insurance companies really don't want to deal with individuals, which is why they will dump you as quickly as possible.

But seriously: our insurance in 2008 is less than it was five years ago when my husband worked for a different large company. This is why when Democrats throw health insurance into the same pot with gasoline and food purchases, it's a red herring. What you pay for health insurance is governed by a lot of other forces.

So, do we pay too much attention to gas prices? I doubt it. Gasoline prices had been fairly stable for most of the last couple of decades. Then the price spiked (and, Mike, the prices are going back down!) and so people noticed. It's not that we pay too much attention to gas prices. It's that most people are too lackadaisical about their other bills.

More on Oil Prices

Lots of reasons for lower oil prices in this article. No studies, though.

"It is my contention that drilling offshore will not reduce the price of oil."

That's the meme from those "smart" guys at Iowa Liberal.

Unfortunately for them, President Bush ends the executive order on offshore drilling and the price of oil drops 7 percent.

Heh.

Darn those pesky facts!

Higher Gas Prices?

One word: Speculators.

There's also the price point.

The price point is $4.

At $3 a gallon, Americans just grin and bear it, suck it up, and — while complaining profusely — keep driving like crazy. At $4, it is a world transformed. Americans become rational creatures. Mass transit ridership is at a 50-year high. Driving is down 4 percent. (Any U.S. decline is something close to a miracle.) Hybrids and compacts are flying off the lots. SUV sales are in free fall.

The wholesale flight from gas guzzlers is stunning in its swiftness, but utterly predictable. Everything has a price point. Remember that “love affair” with SUVs? Love, it seems, has its price too.

It cost me just shy of 50 bucks to fill up my little Ford Focus Wednesday (about 12 gallons). The car gets about 33 mpg on the highway (not much help in the traffic-clogged Metroplex), but filling up more than once a week gives any driver pause.

The Car for Environmentalists

Here's just the car for all those Pandagonistas arrogantly sneering at SUV drivers: the smart fortwo. Don't laugh.

The promo materials does the best it can at making this car sound attractive: it's zippy. You can parallel park in a snap. Ain't it cute?

Of course, what it's not is family friendly. You aren't getting any car seats in this baby. But then, Amanda Marcotte doesn't want kids and doesn't like you having kids, either.

I wouldn't have minded this little car for my long commute to Dallas when I was doing that, but other than the commute, such a vehicle would be worthless.

The Real Reason for High Gas Prices

Speculators.

Sometimes, Even When They Are Trying Not to Sound Like Jerks, They Do

There's a term for a certain class of commenter who pretends that they are interested in your arguments and are really just trying to educate the blogger and other commenters: concern troll.

I would say it is almost impossible to be a concern troll poster, but this Amanda Marcotte post comes close. Starting out with a sympathetic pout about those poor SUV owners having to spend 100 bucks to fill up, Amanda then launches into the strangest explanation-sneer I've ever read.

On an individual level, it’s easy to feel superior to people who bought SUVs and are paying for it now. But that’s foolish, because we all rationalize our choices like this, so it was inevitable that a high percentage of people would like SUVs not in spite of their low mileage, but because of the low mileage. Instead of wishing human nature to change, then, I’m going to suggest that the people who exploited this rationalization tendency hold the lion’s share of the blame. For people who wanted to engage in wishful thinking about the relationship between oil and environmental problems, right wing pundits, car companies, and oil companies did all the hard psychological rationalizing work for people. They painted critics as effeminate hippies that are just trying to tell you what to do because they’re sanctimonious and nosy. (That some really are sanctimonious only made the situation worse.) They gave people pseudo-scientific explanations they could latch onto.

Pandagon is tiresome to read most of the time because everything--and I mean everything--is political in nature. So, if you are making hamburger tater tot casserole, it isn't because it's a cheap and filling meal your kids like, it's because evil Republicans like George W. Bush and Satanic radio hosts like Rush Limbaugh told you to.

For the record, I own an SUV. I didn't buy it as a status symbol or because I was making a political statement about gasoline. I bought it because I had three kids (two in car seats) and typically hauled a lot of stuff around that wouldn't fit in, say the Honda Fit referenced in Amanda's post (I love this photo because it tries to make the Fit look like it comfortably seats 5. I guess if you're all anorexic contortionists, maybe, but I dare them to try to load three kids--two in carseats!--into that thing and then survive the drive to soccer practice).

I seriously doubt many other people bought SUVs as fashion statements about their belief that oil would last forever. Most people bought SUVs because their families had more than 1 1/2 people and they needed the room. It's sort of the 21st century equivalent of the station wagon.

None of this changes the fact that gasoline prices hurt when you drive a car or truck that doesn't get good mileage. But, honestly, SUV owners are not victims of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy, nor are theyzombies who dragged their rotting limbs into car dealerships to buy gas-guzzlers because a radio show host told them gas would remain 50 centers a gallon forever.

For 20 years, people have talked about the coming high price of gasoline. Well, the price is here and will get worse and guess what? We will all adjust (seems I've made this argument before). We'll drive less, get smaller cars for commutes, use public transportation and/or move closer to jobs we assume we'll have for 10 years. And liberals will still have their snooty noses in the air telling the rest of us how "sorry" they are about high gas prices.

Gas Station Owner Told to Raise Prices

Even if a gas station owner wanted to charge less, somebody will step in to tell them to raise the price.

MERRILL, Wis. - A service station that offered discounted gas to senior citizens and people supporting youth sports has been ordered by the state to raise its prices.

Center City BP owner Raj Bhandari has been offering senior citizens a 2 cent per gallon price break and discount cards that let sports boosters pay 3 cents less per gallon.

But the state Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection says those deals violate Wisconsin's Unfair Sales Act, which requires stations to sell gas for about 9.2 percent more than the wholesale price.

Bhandari said he received a letter from the state auditor last month saying the state would sue him if he did not raise his prices. The state could penalize him for each discounted gallon he sold, with the fine determined by a judge.

Bhandari, who bought the station a year ago, said he worries customers will think he stopped the discounts because he wants to make more money. About 10 percent of his customers had used the discount cards.

Dale Van Camp said he bought a $50 card to support the local youth hockey program. It would have saved him about $100 per year on gas, he said.

There's rumors here in Texas that the state gas tax could be suspended for the three summer months to ease gasoline prices. Of course, the problem with this is when the price of gas jumps 20 cents in the fall.