Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Blackmoore on Saturday November 08 2014, @05:59AM   Printer-friendly
from the too-depressed-to-care dept.

Drivers across America are rejoicing at falling gasoline prices as pumps across the country dip below $3 a gallon. But according to Sharon E. Burke while it's nice to get the break at the gas pump and the economic benefits of an energy boom at home, the national security price of oil remains high. Burke says that the United States should be doing everything it can to diversify global energy suppliers, and that ultimately the only way to solve our long term energy problem is to make a sustained, long-term investment in alternatives to petroleum. October saw a 52 percent jump in Jeep SUV sales and a 36 percent rise in Ram trucks while some hybrid and electric vehicle sales fell at the same time. “This is like putting a Big Mac in front of people who need to diet or watch their cholesterol,” says Anthony Perl. “Some people might have the willpower to stick with their program, and some people will wait until their first heart attack before committing to a diet—but if we do that at a planetary scale it will be pretty traumatic.”

Nicholas St. Fleur writes at The Atlantic that low oil prices may also undermine the message from the UN’s climate panel. The price drop comes after the UN declared earlier this week that fossil fuel emissions must drop to zero by the end of the century in order to keep global temperatures in check. “I don’t think people will see the urgency of dealing with fossil fuels today,” says Perl. Falling oil prices may also deter businesses from switching to energy-saving technology, as a 2006 study in the Energy Journal suggested. Saving several pennies at the pump, Perl says, may tempt Americans away from actions that can lead to a sustainable, post-carbon future.

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday November 09 2014, @05:40AM

    by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Sunday November 09 2014, @05:40AM (#114214) Journal

    I'm always confused why the world's largest economy must give itself the handicap of cheap gasoline.

    You'll be far less confused if you consider instead why the world's largest economy HAS the ADVANTAGE of the cheapest gasoline in the developed world.

    But I'm very libertarian, and feel that the best regulation is taxation. I don't know why we should have CAFE regulations and cheap gas... such a roundabout way of increasing efficiency.

    Why emphasize efficiency when gasoline is cheap? The very cheapness of gasoline implies the unworthiness of the consideration. And when gasoline becomes expensive, the incentive to conserve gasoline is baked in to the situation.

    Basically, this argument only makes sense, if gasoline has in total, large, negative externalities that come inevitably from consumption of gasoline not from treatable effects like reducing pollution from incomplete combustion of gasoline and air. So that might be subsidies for US-based petroleum consumption or the emission of CO2. At the same time, cheap gasoline, particularly in its role in cheap transportation infrastructure, has positive externalities (like everything being cheaper) which need to be considered as well.

  • (Score: 2) by TheRaven on Sunday November 09 2014, @02:07PM

    by TheRaven (270) on Sunday November 09 2014, @02:07PM (#114266) Journal
    Part of the problem is volatility. The majority of the price of petrol at the pump in the USA is the cost of oil. The majority elsewhere is tax. A change in the price of oil by 20% is a big change to the pump price in the US, but elsewhere it's less than the difference between competing petrol stations. That makes it much harder to budget in the US without buying fuel futures (which, in turn, increase the volatility by encouraging speculation).
    --
    sudo mod me up
    • (Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday November 09 2014, @05:03PM

      by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Sunday November 09 2014, @05:03PM (#114288) Journal

      That makes it much harder to budget in the US without buying fuel futures (which, in turn, increase the volatility by encouraging speculation).

      "Much harder" still isn't particularly hard. And speculation is the cure for itself. Those who can speculate will do so and those who can't will cease, one way or another.

  • (Score: 2) by richtopia on Sunday November 09 2014, @06:16PM

    by richtopia (3160) on Sunday November 09 2014, @06:16PM (#114300) Homepage Journal

    Basically, this argument only makes sense, if gasoline has in total, large, negative externalities that come inevitably from consumption of gasoline not from treatable effects like reducing pollution from incomplete combustion of gasoline and air. So that might be subsidies for US-based petroleum consumption or the emission of CO2. At the same time, cheap gasoline, particularly in its role in cheap transportation infrastructure, has positive externalities (like everything being cheaper) which need to be considered as well.

    I thought it was safe to assume that high gasoline consumption has been deemed undesirable by the general public, given the USA has CAFE laws specifically designed to reduce gasoline consumption. I'm also of the mindset that in the future gasoline will increase in price naturally (open to debate); hence a gradual increase would allow lifestyle changes (smaller car, selecting living with commutes less than 100 miles) without the shock of a sudden spike in gasoline.

    • (Score: 1) by khallow on Monday November 10 2014, @05:29AM

      by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday November 10 2014, @05:29AM (#114415) Journal

      I thought it was safe to assume that high gasoline consumption has been deemed undesirable by the general public

      There are several things wrong with this claim. First, what is high gasoline consumption? Invariably, it's something other people do. I bet there is a far stronger consensus that almost no one considers themselves to be high consumers of gasoline. So we have a problem that has been deemed by the general public to always happen to other people, but not to themselves.

      Second, the only justification you give for this is peoples' opinions. At one time, in the US, the general public would have deemed various ethnic groups to be undesirable, sometimes even to the point of rationalizing slavery or mass murder of members of those groups. Even now, there are plenty of abominable group beliefs and behaviors that one wouldn't want sanctified on the flimsy grounds that a lot of people do that.

      Third, what process has decided that the general public desires such a thing? The fact that in the US, gas is cheap, indicates that the democratic process hasn't conformed to this alleged belief of the general public.