What is the best way to reshape petroleum use; increased CAFE or increase taxes on each gallon of fuel?
This is my first diary, so please excuse my technical shortcomings as I try to launch this.
I believe that we need to 'kick start' our national efforts to make dramatic improvements in vehicle fuel efficiency. There are few people that I visit with that disagree with that general statement.
I regularly visit other blogs, such AutoblogGreen, that focus on efforts and technology that support the goal of improving FE. What is evident from these many blogs is the exciting new technology being developed that will usher in dramatically improved FE. Additionally, it appears that the USA is dramatically lagging behind almost every other European and Asian country in regard to the availability of vehicles to promote that end.
Fuel efficiency is one of my 'pet' topics. I am an active 'hypermiler' achieving 47+ mpg with a vehicle only EPA rated at 37 mpg. I do this not only to improve the financial impact of commuting, but also to practice good stewardship of a dwindling and essential resource AND to reduce my impact on the enviornment.
My 2001 car is getting tired at 154,000 miles. I need to replace it soon. Why are the current, affordable offerings no better that what they were in 2001? Sure, I could buy a 'hybrid' that offers 51 mpg....but at an additional $10,000 in purchase price. As such, the actual lifetime cost per mile is higher unless fuel were to exceed $8/gal.
To my point. There are currently no available better alternatives. Why?
When I inquire with various vendors and industry 'experts', I am told that there is little or no viable market for inexpensive, small vehicles. Additionally, small vehicles have been stigmitized in the US as 'unsafe', further hurting their appeal.
To address the first point; In a recent poll conducted by the X Prize, 62% of those polled "...expressed a strong interest in purchasing 100 MPG vehicles and more than three quarters (76 percent) of those surveyed thought such a development would be extremely or very important to the United States." I know that I only received my education at a small rural school, but where I come from, 62% means at least a simple majority. I am not sure who these X Prize folks polled, but taken at face value, should be a pretty good indication that there truly is a 'market demand' for a better alternative.
The second point; Safety. Lets take a little stroll into an alternative perspective on safety, shall we? It is a pure fact of simple physical laws that a vehicle that weights 4,400 lbs traveling 60 mph possesses much greater kinetic energy than a vehicle that weighs 2,000 lbs traveling at the same speed. I believe that we all agree on that fact. If they were to collide, the lighter vehicle would demonstrate a porportionatly greater reaction. Ok...so what? Where is this going? As the owner and operator of a small, 'unsafe' vehicle, I have been made feel like I have made a selfish choice by jepordizing my family's safety to save a few bucks. Maybe, or rather, the owners and operators of the 4,400 lb vehicles should take proportionatly greater responsibility for operating a vehicle that has a much greater potential to kill/maim?
I have ventured into the weeds slightly, but to possibly framework my mindset in asking my ultimate questions;
1.) If a majority of the population agree that 'something' needs to be done, what is the best 'something', and why hasn't it already been done? Is it more aggressive CAFE standards? Is it increased taxes on fuel? Is it a 'luxury' type tax on large, inefficient vehicles? Is it a reduction in EPA standards to allow Euro-style diesel vehicles into the US? This is truly an open question, as I would like feedback.
2.) Why did the Democratic leadership withdraw the Markey (HR 1506) amendment that required 35 mpg by 2017? This amendment represented the best hope of moving things forward? What's in the wings? How would supporting stiffer CAFE standards be counter to their mandate?
X Prize