Could a gas tax revolutionize America?

Will $4.00 make any difference?

A new poll suggests that while $3.00 plus gas hurts, most Americans are getting used to it. And, while $3.00 gas is pushing more to consider more fuel efficient vehicles, it's mostly just causing consideration, not action. Will $4.00 be the magic number to force real change? Will we hit $4.00 this summer?

One thing is for certain. At $4.00 per gallon, there is no question about the cost effectiveness of hybrid cars, which makes me wonder, does this prove a gas tax could revolutionize America?

(Finish: More proof a gax tax could work)

How can Democrats justify gas-gouging talk?

Hillary would like to tax oil company profits

A number of Democrats have loudly attacked Big Oil - probably because many Americans buy into the Republican - Big oil connection, and Americans love cheap gas. Thus, many Democrats have continually raised the issue of gas-gouging and gas-gouging legislation. Yet, the Democratic party is the largest supporter of global warming legislation and action.

Isn't that too ironic?

What if Democrats can make gasoline cheaper through windfall taxes, gouging legislation, etc.? Wouldn't Americans just increase their gasoline consumption, thereby increasing both foreign oil dependency and global warming emissions?

Ultimately and unfortunately, aren't high gas prices a good thing for those whom believe in global warming? Not only can increased gas prices reduce global warming-causing gasoline consumption, but higher prices can make alternative fuels more competitive, while also increasing the cost-effectiveness of clean technologies, such as hybrid cars?

Isn't that a good thing?

Obviously, Republicans didn't achieve any effective legislation towards fighting global warming, or even foreign oil dependency (if you don't believe in global warming) - something which is supposed to be a core Republican value. Sadly, I don't think Democrats can achieve much either if they keep engaging in double-speak.

Politics as usual? Are we, the people, simply incapable of accepting the truth, so we are habitually lied to by politicians whom just tell us what we want to hear? Are the people just too selfish and apathetic to even care about the truth?

(Originally published on Hybridcarsblog.com)

Would Americans support a gas tax?

A fuel tax to fund alternative fuel research?

According to a survey released by the Civil Society Institute "more than half of Americans would support higher gasoline taxes if the money went to research into alternative fuels." (CNN)

I say, what a silly study.

While I favor a gasoline tax, I think the revenues derived from the tax should go only to consumers whom purchase hybrid cars, electric cars, plug-in hybrid cars, clean diesel vehicles, etc. Instead of using a gasoline tax to fund research, simply leave alternative fuels exempt from the tax. Thus, alternative fuels become more price competitive.

Giving tax revenue to fund research sounds too much like pork to me. Give it to 'the people', not to the people whom are owed political favors.

Is a gas tax the only way to ending foreign oil dependency?

So, you're worried about foreign oil dependency? Or, maybe you're more concerned about global warming? But, are you REALLY ready to do something about it? Or, maybe you're all talk and no action?

"Raising taxes in the United States, say, ten cents a year until they reach $2, would stop people from driving their Hummers to get a quart of milk. For those who would be economically impacted, the extra money they pay in gas taxes could be returned to them as a tax rebate."

"But any system so simple and so fair hasn't got a prayer of becoming law in the current political climate, where politicians quake at the thought of asking voters to make sacrifices. And without incentives, consumers will continue to choose cupholders over good citizenship."

Alex Taylor, Fortune Magazine

Is a gas tax the best way to fight foreign oil dependency, and global warming?

Can we expect politicians to ever support the right thing when it means they might not get elected or reelected?

Foreign oil dependence, flex-fuel lies, and hybrid vehicle tax credits: Is Congress failing America?

"A public advocacy group on Thursday said Ford Motor Co. has avoided as much as $135 million in fines by marketing vehicles that are supposed to run on the gas-ethanol mix E85 that don't work and accused the company of running misleading ads." (more)

Moreover, aside from the obvious, the fact is that for years the majority of flex-fuel vehicles sold by both Ford and GM have not ever filled up with E-85. Yet, each company has avoided millions and and millions in fines by selling these vehicles.

"Public Citizen and other environmental advocacy groups have long complained that automakers get credits to meet federal fuel economy regulations by building flexible-fuel vehicles that are hardly ever filled with E85, since it's available at just 900 of the country's 170,000 pumps."

So, Congress gives small business owners huge tax incentives to buy the worst gas-guzzlers, provides huge tax incentives to oil companies, enables the big three to avoid 100's of millions of dollars in fines for violating fuel economy regulations - increasing our foreign oil dependency, and limits tax credits for Toyota hybrid vehicles because they are too successful.

That sure sounds like the right path towards achieving energy independence.

Even the President says hybrids are possibly the most important way to change consumer behavior. Yet, Congress hasn't passed proposed legislation to provide small business tax incentives for buying hybrid cars or other fuel efficient vehicles, nor has Congress passed proposed legislation to extend hybrid vehicle tax credits.

Good work, ladies and gentlemen!

We live in a country that blames the President for quite a lot these days. Fair enough. Let's extend at least as much blame to the current - do nothing, partisanship is more important - Congress.

Flex fuel lies, foreign oil dependency and hybrid vehicle tax credits - Congress is failing America.

Rate the stupidity of liberal leaders: Just how stupid are they?

I just read a refreshing article in the Los Angeles Times, Head-in-the-Sand Liberals, which I'm happy to report is one of the most talked about articles printed by the Los Angeles Times. Finally, someone - in a very nice fashion - is challenging the idiotic leadership of the liberal party.

I realized how much I hated liberals one day before the Iraq War. I was walking down Lake St. in Pasadena to go grab some lunch, and protestors were waving "No Blood for oil" signs up and down the street. I thought, well, what you should be saying is, "No blood for gas guzzlers".

Of course, these liberals couldn't say that when many of them drive gas-guzzlers.

Later that day I was driving home and I drove through South Pasadena, a very rich community in the Los Angeles area, and in front of me a brand new Jaguar sported the bumper sticker, "Jesus was a liberal."

I was so angry I wanted to ram into that Jaguar.

Yeah, Jesus would have been a Jaguar-driving liberal living in a multi-million dollar home in South Pasadena. Are liberals really that idiotic, I wondered?

Well, yes they are according to this excellent article by Sam Harris - a self-proclaimed liberal.

"I don't know how many more engineers and architects need to blow themselves up, fly planes into buildings or saw the heads off of journalists before this fantasy will dissipate. The truth is that there is every reason to believe that a terrifying number of the world's Muslims now view all political and moral questions in terms of their affiliation with Islam. This leads them to rally to the cause of other Muslims no matter how sociopathic their behavior. This benighted religious solidarity may be the greatest problem facing civilization and yet it is regularly misconstrued, ignored or obfuscated by liberals."

For example, Muslims are now calling for the death of the Pope and have almost assuredly killed an innocent nun who spent her life helping poor people.

"you and the West are doomed as you can see from the defeat in Iraq, Afghanistan, Chechnya and elsewhere. ... We will break up the cross, spill the liquor and impose head tax, then the only thing acceptable is a conversion (to Islam) or (killed by) the sword." (more)

I think Bush has been a terrible leader, yet I think his boldest and greatest move was attacking Afghanistan and Iraq. We DID take this Jihad back to the Middle East. Yet, Bush has handled Iraq horribly in terms of any sort of long term planning.

Yet the liberal stance is, the war was wrong. America IS evil, and Democrats will fix the problem.

Oh yeah? OK. So now even the Pope is a puppet of Bush, now the Pope and all non-Islamic religions are also puppets of the Bush administration?

Liberals are right in complaining about the Bush handling of Iraq, of 9/11, but they are far more wrong in their beliefs about the state of the world, terrorism, and Islam.

Islamic extremists believe it is O.K. to kill non-Muslims and to die killing non-Muslims. These people are so much better than the Pope, than Tony Blair, than George Bush?

Don't liberals believe in freedom of and FROM religion - even Islam? That's what I believe and sadly I feel more aligned with conservative, red neck, ignorant Republicans than I do with Democrats.

Either Democrats need to wake up and get the neo-facist liberal extremists out of their party leadership, or more Democrats need to vote against both parties.

Many Democrats are right and in claiming Republicans are hurting America, unfortunately, many Democrats are causing just as much or more hurt than the Republican Party.

Blame both political parties for high gas prices

O.K., so Republicans have ties to big oil, that's obvious. But can you really blame high oil prices completely on Republicans, especially when the price of oil is decided in the open markets by traders trading future shares of oil every single second of the business day? How do you manipulate that? Still, Republicans deserve criticism for their close oil ties.

In addition to oil, Democrats ridicule the President's minor CAFE updates, and they are minor. In fact, they are essentially worthless. Yet, less than a year ago, when Congress had a chance to significantly update CAFE, did Democrats make a stand? Heck no. How would Democrats funded by the labor unions that 'protect' autoworkers explain this to the Union leadership, to the workers that would lose their jobs - and to a huge endorsement and source of campaign money?

In reality, when it comes to high gasoline prices, Democrats are very dirty.

That's what makes the new Harbour Report North America 2006 so darn interesting. The Harbour report studies the efficiency of automobile production in the U.S. Surprise, surprise Japanese automakers, even those in America with American autoworkers, are more efficient than American automakers.

While Detroit is closing the gap, this gap still exists and has existed for decades. Today it takes the most efficient Japanese automaker 7.33 hours less per vehicle in labor hours compared to the least efficient American automaker. Less than 10 years, in 1998, the number was 16.56 hours.

What does this number mean? Ultimately, if you spend less time per vehicle, it is because you have less problems, or better quality. Thus, American workers working for American automakers have been spending far more hours producing vehicles of far less quality than American workers working for Japanese automakers.

Again, this has been going on for DECADES. Is there really any wonder why Detroit has faltered over the years?

Detroits problems are far larger than just currency, or benefits, such as skyrocketing health care costs. For decades American automakers have been producing inferior products while spending a lot more time - thus money - doing it, and labor unions have been a huge part of that problem.

Sure labor unions have helped provide good wages and benefits for American autoworkers, but they have also contributed to creating an uncompetitive, inefficient American auto industry.

According to the Detroit News much of the recent gain in American automaker efficiency has "come as a result of progressive operating agreements the company has negotiated with the United Auto Workers union. The deals limit job classifications and rely on a team-based approach to manufacturing."

Shouldn't this have been handled a decade or two ago?

Consequently, for decades, Democrats have significantly contributed to the trend of gas-guzzling in the USA. Despite their rhetoric, and perhaps unintentionally, Democrats are probably more responsible for the SUV craze in America than Republicans. While American automakers do produce fuel efficient vehicles, most of them are produced outside of the United States. U.S. automakers largely produce ONLY foreign oil gas-guzzling vehicles in the States, and to a large extent, Detroit has had no choice. Only gas-guzzling SUVs provide enough profit to keep the Unions happy and the company afloat.

When it comes to America's foreign oil, gas-guzzling culture, there is plenty of blame to go around.

Even worse, as we head into 2008, little seems likely to change. Recently Hillary Clinton sided herself with Detroit and has skewed her focus more towards oil companies and their lack of E85, rather than the monstrous gas-guzzlers coming out of Detroit.

Ironically, even oil man, President Bush, has told Detroit to build more "relevant" vehicles, such as hybrid cars. Without more fuel efficient vehicles, E85 will be a program that America spends billions of tax payer dollars on, yet it will result in little change.

Well, I guess that sounds about right for big party American politics.

Exxon's $9 billion oil profit: Why is Congress giving tax dollars to oil companies?

From Hybridcarblog.com

Hybrid cars are not the answer to today's oil problems. Sure, everyone could drive a Toyota Prius and America could end foreign oil dependency, but one vehicle isn't going to save America from foreign oil. Even if everyone wanted to drive a Prius it would still take years before that many hybrids could even be produced.

Thus, critics dismiss hybrids as hype, noting that today's hybrid technology costs do not justify the savings in fuel economy. As if investment never leads to cheaper costs and better technology - I mean look at computers, what a wasted investment!

Instead, America would rather rely on big energy, such as Exxon Mobil. That's right, the same Exxon Mobil that "said Thursday high oil and natural-gas prices helped its third-quarter profit surge almost 75 percent to $9.92 billion" according to the AP. The same Exxon Mobil that is going to be given tax payer money to help alleviate the oil shortage in America.

Now, that's a plan!

And we're going to need more oil, a lot more oil, not only in the U.S., but worldwide. Unfortunately, that oil might not exist. According to an extremely interesting NYTIMES article, Doubts Raised on Saudi Vow for More Oil, Saudi Arabia might have far less oil than they have been proclaiming to the world, and a serious oil crunch could be just around the corner.

Don't worry, I'm sure Exxon will use some of its profits and tax payer incentives to help out the average American!

If oil supplies do stagnate, where is the oil going to come from to run all the diesels that are going to save America according to the Detroit News? Nothing like putting all your eggs in one basket.

Why not invest in technology?

Experimental hybrid vehicles have already been built that can achieve more than 100 mpg, some even achieve as much as 250 mpg, and others have claimed that a flex-fuel plug-in hybrid could achieve as much as 500 mpg. Additionally, flex fuel plug-in hybrids could utilize gasoline, diesel, biodiesel, electricity or even hydrogen. Is that too many options?

What the hell are we waiting for? Why does America continue to provide tax dollars to the oil industry? Why do we allow automakers, including Toyota, to continue to sell gas-guzzlers? Why not subsidize the cost of a fleet of Ford Escape hybrids and Toyota Highlander hybrids that achieve at least 50 mpg? That technology exists right now, yet instead we give billions to oil companies?

Oil, not technology, is the solution to America's problems, at least if you ask Congress. I guess almost 10 billion in profits provides a lot of favors.

So yeah, 100 mpg hybrids are too expensive and hybrids are just hype, but spending billions and billions on oil companies, oil refineries, the hydrogen highway, and fuel cells is a bargain - at least for Exxon Mobil it is.


Register to Vote!

Flex-fuel-diesel hybrid vehicles or more oil refineries: Which is the better investment

Originally posted on the Hybridcarblog.com

When the Iranian Revolution in 1979 caused massive gas lines in the United States, many Americans turned to small Japanese vehicles. Eventually, however, oil prices stabilized, gas prices dropped, and many Americans returned to gas-guzzling as SUVs became an expression of American freedom.

But the Iranian Revolution wasn't only felt in the U.S., and the problems of oil dependence, particularly foreign-oil dependence, pushed Brazil to do more than just buy a few small Japanese vehicles. By 1985 almost every vehicle produced in Brazil was designed for alcohol as fuel transportation and gasoline stations were updated to handle this new fuel.

So did Brazil kick the oil habit? Not exactly. According to an interesting article, Ethanol: Is it the answer?, a combination of cheap oil and droughts - which caused poor harvests and less ethanol - led Brazilians back to oil.

Today in Brazil, flex-fuel technology has changed everything. Able to run on both gasoline, ethanol, or a mixture of the two, flex fuel vehicles allow Brazilians to take advantage of which ever fuel they choose. Thus, drivers are hedged against either drought, or skyrocketing oil prices.

So should America just focus on flex-fuel vehicles as the solution to America's oil problems?

Absolutely not.

Flex-fuel vehicles definitely are part of the solution, but even Brazil hasn't been able to kick the oil habit. More important Brazil consumes SIGNIFICANTLY less fuel per year than the U.S.. Additionally, Brazil uses sugar to produce its ethanol fuel, the U.S. uses corn, which is far less efficient than sugar.

Of course new grains, etc., might offer better efficiency, but how long will it take to create enough fuel? Brazil produces only about 5 billion gallons of ethanol per year, U.S. demand is around 140 billion gallons per year. And what about drought, or another natural disaster?

The key to Brazil's struggles and successes boil down to one thing, flexibility. Flex-fuel vehicle technology should be the standard in America, but it shouldn't stop there. Hybrid technology, or even better, plug-in hybrid technology, offers even far more flexibility.

Hybrid cars, or better yet, flex-fuel hybrid cars, could significantly improve fuel efficiency, while opening up new fuel possibilities beyond oil. In reality; however, fuel competition alone won't be enough to handle the oil monster, and that's why hybrid technology is so important.

Plug-in flex-fuel advanced diesel hybrid vehicles could offer fuel efficiency of more than 100 mpg with today's technology - even for SUVs. Sure the technology is somewhat expensive today, but it is FAR less expensive than fuel cell technology. Additionally, a national fleet of 100 mpg vehicles would end the need for foreign oil in about 5 years, which I've argued could save America more than a TRILLION dollars (more).

Even better, plug-in power could lead to another revolution in the automotive world, the utilization of solar power. Already solar power is cost-effective to power a home - if you are going to live in that home for at least 15 years - but what if you could also help power your car with your home energy system, with totally clean energy? Even more interesting, garage mechanics have already created plug-in hybrids with solar panels and Mazda is now showing a solar hybrid concept vehicle that includes embedded solar panels in the roof of the vehicle.

Ultimately, the good old days of the U.S. auto industry are over. Constant innovation and the best technology are an absolute requirement, and the best technology requires fuel flexibility, as well as the best possible fuel economy. It isn't just about saving money at the fuel pump, or protecting the environment, it is about protecting the security and welfare of Americans and the American economy.

Neither ethanol, bio-diesel or hybrids alone are going to take the oil monkey off America's back quickly enough, but combined, these alternative choices could radically change America within a decade.

Instead of subsidizing the cost of a foreign-oil-dependency-ending fleet of vehicles, America is going to build more oil refineries, drill in Alaska, and give billions of tax payer dollars to filthy rich oil companies, as GM increases production on the Hummer.

Is that really an investment in the future? Isn't it time to start investing in real American freedom, instead of investing in companies that can profit as much as $23 billion in just one quarter?

I guess it is pretty clear who Congress represents, and it isn't the majority of Americans.

Simulated oil meltdown shows need for hybrid vehicles

On the same day that the Senate overwhelmingly rejected increasing fuel economy, a simulation demonstrated the U.S. economy's extreme vulnerability to oil. Unrest in Nigeria, an Al Qaida attack at Alaska's Port of Valdez, or a Saudi insurgency attack on foreign oil workers, could push the price of oil to $150 a barrel and gas prices to $5.74 per gallon. Former CIA chief James Woolsey called these scenarios "relatively mild". (More on the simulations)

Automakers, especially American automakers, didn't push SUVs and large trucks in the 90's because Americans demanded them, automakers pushed such vehicles because the profits margins were as high as $10,000 or more. In my book, that's just greed.

Hybrid cars can meet the needs of increased fuel economy, without taking away America's demand for choice. Instead of better automotive technology, pork-fed politicians would rather give billions of tax dollars to oil companies to solve America's oil problems.

The politics of gas prices and the importance of hybrid cars

This morning oil prices went higher and should push beyond $60.00 per barrel sometime this week. So what should America do? Well, if you are a California Democrat, such as Fabian Nunez, we should lower gas taxes and raise the sale's tax on everything else (more).

Suddenly, Democrats are starting to sound an awful lot like oil-controlled Republicans. The conservationist, environmentalist, anti-war party wants to increase foreign oil dependency so as not to offend consumers at the pump? Pure hypocrisy.

Unfortunately, it isn't just California Democrats, but many Union-controlled Democrats as well. Case in point, raising fuel economy standards in the U.S. While the majority of Republicans are against raising such standards - surprise, surprise - enough voted for change that Democrats could have made it happen, but they didn't.

Instead, Democrats, such as Nancy Pelosi, ridicule and blame the Republican party for every oil ill, when in reality, the Democratic party has conspired with the Republican party to maintain the status quo. The phrase think globally act locally could well be utilized by Democrats. Rather than blaming Republicans, change the turncoats in the Democratic party and make something happen.

Until then, BOTH sides of the aisle stink.

Obviously, Democrats, just as Republicans, care more about re-election than actually standing for something. The Union edict of Buy American or Eat your Import doesn't apply to America's foreign oil dependency - the main driver of pollution, global warming, terrorism, and two wars in Iraq. Isn't that convenient?

Hybrid cars might not be the perfect solution to foreign-oil dependency, but they are a huge step in the right direction. Unfortunately, selfish and ego-centric Americans appear unwilling to change their driving habits towards smaller vehicles, regardless of the costs. Thus, emerging hybrid technology can help create a bridge between larger vehicles and fuel economy.

The United States is a country that has succeeded via technology, and hybrid technology can help begin solving foreign oil dependency today. Instead, American politicians are going to promote cheaper foreign oil dependency. Brilliant!

Gas prices, the Energy Bill, and Congress

Since the Energy Bill passed the House of Representatives, I have scanned the media for a positive assessment of the Energy Bill.

I have been unable to find one.

A majority of Americans, ones that live near the poverty line - the ones you never hear about on the O.C. or on reruns of Beverly Hills 90210 - are coming up shorter and shorter each month because of gas prices. But, who cares about a bunch of hillbilly, disenfranchised Americans that don't vote anyway?

Definitely not Congress. Gas prices are skyrocketing and the blame falls on both Democrats and Republicans alike. The last President to really push fuel efficiency was Jimmy Carter, according to USAToday.

While it seems obvious that Republicans have oil-lined pockets, Democrats are not nearly as innocent as outspoken Nancy Pelosi-(D)California, would have us believe. Instead of blaming Republicans, perhaps she should start by questioning the UAW-controlled-Democrats that are just as complicit in protecting the status quo of the automotive industry.

Even China is raising fuel efficiency standards. Not because scientific evidence suggests a global warming connection, but because pollution is ALREADY affecting their lives and China isn't very interested in America's decades old, inefficient automotive technology.

Save that for the Americans too stupid to value substance over image.

But I don't blame those Americans because we haven't had much choice, thanks to Congress. Experts, including those from the government, tell us this is an issue of National Security, yet neither corporate America, nor Congress, is taking responsible action.

Instead, billions of tax-payer dollars are being given to rich-in-profit energy corporations to 'save' America from the problems the same corporations created.

So, when you are at the pump this summer, pumping $3.00 gallons of gasoline into your vehicle, remember to thank your well-paid Congress-person.

And, if you are interested in buying a new car, don't forget hybrid cars! Send a message to the automotive industry that you want change.