Glad I didn’t buy that overpriced hybrid. I even modeled how much I’d have to save on gas at $3 to $4 a gallon to cover the insurance cost of buying a Mini (OK, I was looking for an excuse). But now gas is below $2 in New Jersey.
This entry was posted on Thursday, December 1st, 2005 at 7:54 am and was tagged Life.
Also in New Jersey you can put solar panels on your home a receive a 70% “rebate” from the state. Isn’t that great?! Without the 70% off the thing would take 45 years to pay for itself. But with the 70% it all becomes affordable! The state collects the money in the form of a surcharge on energy consumption from “energy ratepayers” (whomever the hell THEY are). And the really good part is that since most of the solar-panel-izers are the suburban affluent it is a way to take “ratepayer surcharge” money from the inner city energy consumer and pass it to the “Progressive” burbs all in the name of ecology!
Well, Damn, Right, I might just go buy me some solar panels! I have seen them sprouting up in the neighborhood like mold after Katrina. Now I know why.
Isn’t it time for our country to seriously consider alternative fuels? We are tied to the Middle East’s oil and it is out own fault.
I may be showing my age, but in the early 70s when we had the oil embargo there was much talk about alterative fuels and electric cars. But as soon as the crisis was over, our country ignored the obvious and we are paying for that right now.
Gas under 2 bucks is no reason to cheer. We need as a county the vision and desire to free us from the Middle East including their oil and this illegal war in Iraq. And we must also consider what we are doing to the earth.
“I may be showing my age, but in the early 70s when we had the oil embargo there was much talk about alterative fuels and electric cars.But as soon as the crisis was over, our country ignored the obvious and we are paying for that right now.”
We have had 25 years of very cheap gasoline. You alarmists were wrong then and will be proven wrong now.
Gas spending is 3-5% of people’s incomes. Compare that to mortgages, healthcare, and taxes.
And when the price moves higher and is sustained the market will develop more resources and alternative choices. Trying to force a market to do something “good” doesn’t work very well. Well, unless we can start sending consumers to the re-education camps, eh?
After all, if solar panels *really* saved money they’d be on every strip mall and costco in New Jersey.
Observation: Any time a commodity spends any appreciable amount of time at a price point substantially higher than a once intolerable price, that once intolerable price becomes not only tolerable, but a reason to rejoice once prices have fallen to that point again.
isn’t it about time for the $.50 ( was it a $1.00) per gallon tax that the “Ecological Jerry Fallwell’s” believe will prevent us from sinning?
Or, perhaps these days, it has morphed into the $5 billion tax some want to apply to the entire industry. As any economics whiz will tell you a universally applied tax on an industry is surely NOT going to get passed on to the consumer.
What alternative fuels? Forget about electric cars for decades, not enough range. I read somewhere that GM spent a BILLION dollars on electric vehicles. It got them nowhere, except closer to bankruptcy. Forget about Hydrogen for decades. You are looking at a massive infrastructure investment to produce and deliver the hydrogen, not very economical at todays gasoline prices. Plus how are you going to produce the hydrogen? It takes lots of electricity, which must be produced by 1) burning more coal (ecos scream NO!), 2) building lots more nuclear powerplants (NIMBY problems and of course ecos scream NO!, 3) natural gas, sorry not permitted to drill and the evil gas companies might make some money, 4) wind turbines (AKA bird shreders and they will take up huge portions of farmland).
If you have an economical viable fuel alternative to petroleum brabc1, I would like to hear it (then easily tear it down).
There are vehicles now operating on veggie oil, which smell like french fries and probably aren’t very fast but you can keep growing veggies at least until global warming turns the world into curly fries, and it beats drilling in ANWR.
Hopefully, Hybrids are becoming more and more competitive. Just because gas is cheap it doesn’t mean it will stay that way. Katrina showed us just how fragile our refinery system is… when one goes down it makes big difference in fuel prices.
Finally, reducing our dependence on foreign fuel is a very important thing. Not to mention increasing the health of the environment.
Hybrids or at least very fuel efficient vehicles are the way to go.
What is the average weight of a sodium hydride system in a car? How much will it cost? How do you produce the hydrogen? If this system is cost effective how come FedEx isn’t using it? Actually make that UPS, FedEx (a once great company) are a bunch of losers now and they might not be using it because the spend all their time explaing how to use their website.
There’s no reason for companies not to pursue alternatives — the company that discovers the engine that runs on old banana peels and stinky socks will not only become fabulously wealthy, but will win the gratitude of an entire world. Until that happens, we need to drill in Anwar, and be realistic about energy policies in general and oil companies in particular.
But leftist tinfoil hatters think that everybody is colluding to protect Big Oil — in hysterics they believe it’s a “drug”, and that we’re all just “addicted” and “dependent”, as if we’re shooting it up or injecting it in our veins, and that politicians protect oil companies because they enjoy being evil. This seems to be the political message of the new movie Syriana.
The underlying issue is not fuel cost, but the transformation of our society in the 20th Century from a clustered one (except for farms) to a dispersed one. Many people commonly travel 30-50 miles each way to work from fringe communities.
Manufactures move factories to the ends of the earth to save on labor costs. This is only effective because the transportation to markets is cheap (or perhaps subsidized). Transportation consumes about 40% of US energy. Adjusting living and working patterns is the ultimate solution.
I know this is a media-focused site, but if you are interested in discussing economic planning policy I offer you my series of essays on the topic: Goals for the 21st Century
This discusses what we should do, objections to change and possible remedies. Overcoming the status quo is where the idealists and critics always become vague.
I’ve been searching for a forum where this kind of policy discussion can take place, but so far most blogs seem mostly concerned with politics and current events.
Robert to some degree the market is providing this eventuality. VPN and home offices will probably do more for reduced smog and fuel consumption than the catalytic converter!
Jeff, I think the consensus is that you should buy that Ford Expedition now, before they stop making that gigantic SUV. You might have missed your chance to take advantage of low oil prices and waste a ton of fuel.
You don’t create societal/economic/market changes by lecturing people, you create those changes by creating engines for change. People didn’t have to be guilt-tripped into switching from vinyl to CDs, while earnest do-gooders were helpless to make Betamax win over VHS through widespread public remonstrations. Even stern finger-waving from “right winger” Bill O’Reilly couldn’t dampen SUV sales, but higher gas prices did.
Going further back into history, I’m pretty sure the Industrial Revolution wasn’t the result of a bunch of busybodies who decided among themselves that it would be a good idea, and we didn’t start cooking stuff until *after* we discovered fire.
There is a place for electric cars. Most people drive less than 40 miles a day. It is a simple and just about perfect solution to a lot of problems. It may take decades but eventually gasoline will be pushed aside for something better.
I don’t know why this is bash hybrids week, but it seems to me that they’ve been a perfectly lovely example of market forces in action. Toyota et al. invested in the technology more or less on their own (yes, some govt prodding, I know). People like me paid a couple of extra grand, maybe, to get a Prius for the gee whiz factor and the potential savings (which, contrary to the people who claim there is no savings, I calaculate at about $750/year for me, so payback in 4 or 5 years). And I get to confound people with a Bush sticker on a Prius (does not compute…) It works for everybody.
The point is that the price of gasoline used for driving does not encapsulate all of the costs of its usage, and therefore is overconsumed. (Same with coal-powered plants.) A model for an individual consumer may, in such a situation, show that purchasing a hybrid (or solar panels) is an economically irrational action. However, it makes sense for the bearer of these externalized costs (usually taxpayers) to minimize them. Minimization of these externalized costs can usually be achieved in an economically (and politically) cheapest manner by reducing demand rather than supply.
It makes sense for taxpayers to minimize their costs by inducing consumers to take action that, in the absence of incentive, would result in an economically inefficient underconsumption of product. Taxpayer incentives therefore can result in efficient consumption, and a lower net tax burden, than would otherwise be achieved in a market ridden with externalities.
It makes sense for taxpayers to minimize their costs by inducing consumers to take action that, in the absence of incentive, would result in an economically inefficient underconsumption of product.
Whoops. I meant “economically inefficient OVERconsumption”
Shhhh! Quit bashing hybrids, let’s encourage other people to buy em. If there were no cost premium to hybrids, of course they’d be great. Either more horsepower per gallon, or more gallons per HP, your choice.
It’ll take some years of learning curve, innovation, and economics of scale for the current cost premium to dissipate. In the mean time, we need some dupes to shell out the money and keep the market growing.
The folks pushing the grossly over expensive hybrids and electrics tend to overlook the ovbvious. Where is the electricity going to come from? It does not spontaneously pour from the little holes in the wall. Most of our power comes from petroleum fired steam plants, about 25% from hydroelectric, which is nearly maxed out, a little from a few nuke plants, most of which are nearing the end of service.
Hybrid owners are in for a nasty hit in about six years when the very expensive batteries in their horribly expensive cars must be replaced, about the time their loans are paid off. And the new answer to all our problems, biodiesel, is proving to be even more expensive than gasoline, as well as an eco-horror. Petroleum is here to stay, folks.
We’re going to run ot of oil eventually, no matter if peak production happens this year or ten years for now. There’s only so much in the ground.
As for biodiesel being more exensive? Right now about 85% of the cost is in the feedstock. Find the right feedstock, and it’ll be cheaper than petrodiesel. Algal oil has the potential to be just that, but we’re still a few years away from commecial production. But if you’re interested, Google “Green Fuel Technologies” (which accelerates algae growth using flue gasses from power plants) and “UNH Biodiesel Group”. Algae has the potential to produce thousands of gallons per acre/year.
Hybrid owners are in for a nasty hit in about six years when the very expensive batteries in their horribly expensive cars must be replaced, about the time their loans are paid off.
Yes, because carbon-fuel burning components don’t ever need expensive replacements over 6 years.
Nor can we expect electric technology to advance or become cheaper over the next 6 years.
The fact is that if government wanted to encourage enviromental safety it could. The best solution would be a tax on Co2 on car buyers. The fact is that the government would overtax this because they overestimate the costs of global warming. However all of these biofuels like ethanol are complete smoke-screens. The cost in energy and pollution to make them is higher than the cost of gasoline. It is only there because farmers are concentrated and thus have powerful Senate and Presidential power. Oil running out is no problem because long before oil runs out its cost to consumers will be so high that it is inefficient. Besides at University of Illinois at Champaigne they seem to be generating temperatures high enough for fusion so our energy problems may not be so urgent.
Nobody, what you’re missing is that these are batteries. The things on a fuel-burning car that need replacement are big hunks of steel (or iron), aluminum, and plastic, perhaps oily. The little bit of oil isn’t much of a problem; the metal and plastic can be recycled, and isn’t dangerous.
There are only certain things batteries can be made of. All of the good ones are poisonous, explosive, or both. Blame God, or Providence, or whoever or whatever is in charge of designing chemistry. That’s just the way it is. Most of the good materials are also fairly rare, and thus expensive.
And batteries wear out. I’ll be really surprised if the batteries in the hybrids last six years, being charged and recharged all the time (which is what wears a battery out). I’d expect more like three years, or even two.
The other thing is, what about the old batteries? Those things are dangerous — not as bad as the Greens would have them, but you don’t really want them in your water supply. If there are a lot of hybrids and electrics around, how do we dispose of the old batteries? Recycling, sure, but how long will that last the first time a truck carrying the old batteries back for recycling gets crunched on the Parkway and all that poisonous goop runs out?
I’m going to raise the hydrogen banner here for a bit because there have been a few unfair comments above.
1. Hydrogen isn’t a power source but rather the ultimate middleware. It allows you to take a large number of energy feedstocks/waste streams that would be impractical to create a massive energy system out of and funnel them all into one infrastructure that is getting very close to commercially viable without subsidy (keep an eye on Canadian company Ballard). This has the practical effect of increasing supply as you can reform petroleum into hydrogen as well as many non petroleum sources.
2. It’s quite practical to install a hydrogen reformer in your house and to charge your hydrogen vehicle at home for your daily commute. This takes care of the major use case for most drivers.
3. A national “thin” network of pumps spaced a little under 300 miles apart could be put in place across the interstate highway system for something around $70M dollars (take the mileage on the interstate highway system, divide by 300, multiply by $30k per pump). That would allow you to drive across the country on vacation, the other major use case for car travel.
4. Efficiency on the front end is poorer for hydrogen v. oil refining. Efficiency on the back end is much better as hydrogen fuel cells escape the hard limits that carnot heat engines (including the internal combustion engine) suffer from. This makes total cycle efficiency about a wash with hydrogen being just a smidgen ahead and it seems that hydrogen fuel cells are getting better, faster than traditional internal combustion technology.
In short, hydrogen isn’t there today but it should be viable without subsidy during the next decade, possibly as early as 2011 if Ballard’s technology road map is accurate.
ROC: interesting article, but there is so much unused capacity for growing oil-producing corn, soybeans, etc., that it is silly to point fingers at biofuels. A lot of re-used cooking oil is picked up and processed in the West, and I am familiar with one facility on the Eastern Shore of VA, one in Texas, that reprocess used oils picked up from restaurants. Palm oil may be one item, specifically referred to as European used, but we pay farmers not to farm oil producing veggie matter here. It can be much more economical to produce what we need, and use it, to better our situation in the world and the atmosphere.
ROC: interesting article, but there is so much unused capacity for growing oil-producing corn, soybeans, etc., that it is silly to point fingers at biofuels. A lot of re-used cooking oil is picked up and processed in the West, and I am familiar with one facility on the Eastern Shore of VA, one in Texas, that reprocess used oils picked up from restaurants. Palm oil may be one item, specifically referred to as European used, but we pay farmers not to farm oil producing veggie matter here. It can be much more economical to produce what we need, and use it, to better our situation in the world and the atmosphere.
There are vehicles now operating on veggie oil, which smell like french fries
I can see it now. After lefties have coercively converted the nation’s auto fleet to veggie oil due to their bizarre and irrational hatred of crude oil, they will then discover the ill-health effects of second hand veggie oil smoke. Invariably, the bizarre and irrational hatred of oil will be succeeded by a bizarre and irrational hatred of veggie smoke.
Funny, HA, you see some ritual “bizarre and irrational hatred” motivation for cleaning up the environment instead of having any regard for the air we mutually breathe and the economy we mutually share, for better or for worse. I suggest you look at the results of improving our environment, natural and economic, and try to see ‘bizarre and irrational hatred” in trying to improve it. Would like to hear where you end up if rationally considering the same.
“A lot of re-used cooking oil is picked up and processed in the West, and I am familiar with one facility on the Eastern Shore of VA, one in Texas, that reprocess used oils picked up from restaurants”
US oil consumption is 7.5 BILLION barrels per year. That’s a lot of french fries!
If bio fuels really took off, every impoverished farmer on the planet is going to start raising “oil” crops. It seems obvious.
I am afraid that bio-fuel is just another feel-good-warm-fuzzy that will not accomplish much (Hippies with greasy smelling VW’s notwithstanding).
I am just as concerned with air quality and greenhouse gases as I think you are, but spending time and resources on what amounts to PR-Shtick is a waste, I think.
Politically what it interesting to me is that on the one hand Democrats were screaming the loudest about hig oil prices “SOMETHING MUST BE DONE” when those high prices are *precisely* the most effective means of conservation! As long as the high cost is for the product and not taxes then the market can and will react when the time is right.
With petroleum based fuels, your source material has a very high energy content and is essentially ready to use straight from the ground. With hydrogen and biofuels, your starting materials have a very low energy content and require you to dump a bunch of energy into them (which costs money) before you get something you can usefully burn. This is why, fundamentally, petroleum will always be our primary energy source until it becomes too rare and expensive wrt the hydrogen/biofuels options.
Oh fer fuxake, what is it with all the hybrid bashing.. Have you actually _been_ in a Prius? It’s a wicked cool gizmo! Paying a few extra thou for a cooler gizmo, what’s wrong with that?
Like you’re ever going to take that SUV on the Denali, or even the run up Pike’s Peak.. Parking on the grass at an outdoor wine-tasting and jazz recital more like…
Funny, HA, you see some ritual “bizarre and irrational hatred†motivation for cleaning up the environment
Your problem is that you conflate hatred of oil with environmentalism. Nothing could be further from the truth.
As Kevin points out, oil is a very concentrated source of energy almost perfectly suited for human use in its natural form. These qualities allow us to use it to generate huge quantities of energy very economically that deliver a high standard of living for the maximum number of people with a minimal environmental impact.
No other source of energy combines these qualities. Your feel good veggie oil won’t do it. Neither will nuclear, coal, gas, wind, solar, etc.
Its almost like God knew what he was doing when he placed all that oil under those rocks! Its too bad He didn’t make more of it.
HA: Your words: “I can see it now. After lefties have coercively converted the nation’s auto fleet to veggie oil due to their bizarre and irrational hatred of crude oil, they will then discover the ill-health effects of second hand veggie oil smoke. Invariably, the bizarre and irrational hatred of oil will be succeeded by a bizarre and irrational hatred of veggie smoke.
Now you say: “Your problem is that you conflate hatred of oil with environmentalism.”
It’s your concept of hatred that you’re looking at and evaluating, my comments have not been about anything of the sort.
O’REILLY: I have guys inside the five major oil companies – my father used to work for one of those oil companies by the way – who have told me that in those meetings they look for every way to jack up oil prices after Katrina, every way, when they didn’t have to. They got scared because of my reporting and reporting of some others. They said, “Uh ho.â€
CAVUTO: So wait a minute, you’re not, you’re taking credit for gas prices being down from where they are?
O’REILLY: I said my reporting and some reporting of others. They got scared.
Just a slight disagreement with your ‘diss’ of the Mini. The insurance cost of a Mini is actually pretty reasonable. It has a very good safety rating relative to other non-SUV/truck vehicles, and buying a new Mini actually lowered our insurance bill given it replaced a Mitsubishi deathtrap. Not saying it’s a practical vehicle if you need to transport more than 2-3 people, but the Mini is a wondeful car for those not in that situation…
I don’t understand how oil prices can remain low for long…I mean it’s a no-brainer that we are almost at peak-oil (the point at which the maximum amount of oil is drilled), and certainly in the next decade or so oil prices got to increase…oh, perhaps we will be able to get oil from shale rocks, or from coal, but I think starting off on alternative fuels such as biodiesel and spending more research bucks on producing biodiesel from feedstock such as algae is the way to go
But Jeff,
You would be saving the Earth!!!!!!!!!!
Hybrids are simply about separating fools from their money.
But where will you get your “warm fuzzies?”
Also in New Jersey you can put solar panels on your home a receive a 70% “rebate” from the state. Isn’t that great?! Without the 70% off the thing would take 45 years to pay for itself. But with the 70% it all becomes affordable! The state collects the money in the form of a surcharge on energy consumption from “energy ratepayers” (whomever the hell THEY are). And the really good part is that since most of the solar-panel-izers are the suburban affluent it is a way to take “ratepayer surcharge” money from the inner city energy consumer and pass it to the “Progressive” burbs all in the name of ecology!
What a great country!
Let’s do the same with hybrids.
Well, Damn, Right, I might just go buy me some solar panels! I have seen them sprouting up in the neighborhood like mold after Katrina. Now I know why.
And I’m sure it will stay at 1.99 for the next couple of years too.
Jeff,
Isn’t it time for our country to seriously consider alternative fuels? We are tied to the Middle East’s oil and it is out own fault.
I may be showing my age, but in the early 70s when we had the oil embargo there was much talk about alterative fuels and electric cars. But as soon as the crisis was over, our country ignored the obvious and we are paying for that right now.
Gas under 2 bucks is no reason to cheer. We need as a county the vision and desire to free us from the Middle East including their oil and this illegal war in Iraq. And we must also consider what we are doing to the earth.
Isn’t it time Jeff? I say it is way past time.
There you have it; gas prices are going to be moving down in the future. No worries, problems solved, keep on moving along.
brabc1,
“I may be showing my age, but in the early 70s when we had the oil embargo there was much talk about alterative fuels and electric cars.But as soon as the crisis was over, our country ignored the obvious and we are paying for that right now.”
We have had 25 years of very cheap gasoline. You alarmists were wrong then and will be proven wrong now.
Gas spending is 3-5% of people’s incomes. Compare that to mortgages, healthcare, and taxes.
brabc1
And when the price moves higher and is sustained the market will develop more resources and alternative choices. Trying to force a market to do something “good” doesn’t work very well. Well, unless we can start sending consumers to the re-education camps, eh?
After all, if solar panels *really* saved money they’d be on every strip mall and costco in New Jersey.
Observation: Any time a commodity spends any appreciable amount of time at a price point substantially higher than a once intolerable price, that once intolerable price becomes not only tolerable, but a reason to rejoice once prices have fallen to that point again.
Alan,
That’s the daily devotional prayer of every Real Estate Agent!
Certainly the oil industry doesn’t recieve any subsidies or tax breaks. /sarcasm
isn’t it about time for the $.50 ( was it a $1.00) per gallon tax that the “Ecological Jerry Fallwell’s” believe will prevent us from sinning?
Or, perhaps these days, it has morphed into the $5 billion tax some want to apply to the entire industry. As any economics whiz will tell you a universally applied tax on an industry is surely NOT going to get passed on to the consumer.
brabc1,
What alternative fuels? Forget about electric cars for decades, not enough range. I read somewhere that GM spent a BILLION dollars on electric vehicles. It got them nowhere, except closer to bankruptcy. Forget about Hydrogen for decades. You are looking at a massive infrastructure investment to produce and deliver the hydrogen, not very economical at todays gasoline prices. Plus how are you going to produce the hydrogen? It takes lots of electricity, which must be produced by 1) burning more coal (ecos scream NO!), 2) building lots more nuclear powerplants (NIMBY problems and of course ecos scream NO!, 3) natural gas, sorry not permitted to drill and the evil gas companies might make some money, 4) wind turbines (AKA bird shreders and they will take up huge portions of farmland).
If you have an economical viable fuel alternative to petroleum brabc1, I would like to hear it (then easily tear it down).
There are vehicles now operating on veggie oil, which smell like french fries and probably aren’t very fast but you can keep growing veggies at least until global warming turns the world into curly fries, and it beats drilling in ANWR.
Ruth, what do you have against rainforests?
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=mg18825265.400
Hopefully, Hybrids are becoming more and more competitive. Just because gas is cheap it doesn’t mean it will stay that way. Katrina showed us just how fragile our refinery system is… when one goes down it makes big difference in fuel prices.
Finally, reducing our dependence on foreign fuel is a very important thing. Not to mention increasing the health of the environment.
Hybrids or at least very fuel efficient vehicles are the way to go.
Jeff : Please, tear down using sodium hydrides to convert h20 + NAH —> H2 + NaOH.
Storage wouldn’t be an issue because the hydrogren is kept in a solid state until needed.
“Katrina showed us just how fragile our refinery system is… when one goes down it makes big difference in fuel prices.”
Actually it showed the results of a lack of refining capacity, hurricaines hitting the gulf coast is not a new thing!
Actually what it showed was the efficiency of a well functioning marketplace.
“Hybrids or at least very fuel efficient vehicles are the way to go. ”
Wouldn’t forcing everyone to walk to work have even more far reaching effects?
Tyler,
What is the average weight of a sodium hydride system in a car? How much will it cost? How do you produce the hydrogen? If this system is cost effective how come FedEx isn’t using it? Actually make that UPS, FedEx (a once great company) are a bunch of losers now and they might not be using it because the spend all their time explaing how to use their website.
It’s dropped below 1.99, where I’m at.
There’s no reason for companies not to pursue alternatives — the company that discovers the engine that runs on old banana peels and stinky socks will not only become fabulously wealthy, but will win the gratitude of an entire world. Until that happens, we need to drill in Anwar, and be realistic about energy policies in general and oil companies in particular.
But leftist tinfoil hatters think that everybody is colluding to protect Big Oil — in hysterics they believe it’s a “drug”, and that we’re all just “addicted” and “dependent”, as if we’re shooting it up or injecting it in our veins, and that politicians protect oil companies because they enjoy being evil. This seems to be the political message of the new movie Syriana.
I love my foreign oil dependency. In fact, I idle my Ford Explorer all day in the driveway just to piss off my morally superior Bostonian neighbors.
Pay up for a hybrid? Give me a break.
But I would pay for a button on my SUV that allowed me to shoot a black exhaust cloud on nearby “fuel efficient” vehicles.
I love how the those that fret over “middle east oil dependency” are also the ones supporting crade-to-grave entitlement dependency.
The underlying issue is not fuel cost, but the transformation of our society in the 20th Century from a clustered one (except for farms) to a dispersed one. Many people commonly travel 30-50 miles each way to work from fringe communities.
Manufactures move factories to the ends of the earth to save on labor costs. This is only effective because the transportation to markets is cheap (or perhaps subsidized). Transportation consumes about 40% of US energy. Adjusting living and working patterns is the ultimate solution.
I know this is a media-focused site, but if you are interested in discussing economic planning policy I offer you my series of essays on the topic:
Goals for the 21st Century
This discusses what we should do, objections to change and possible remedies. Overcoming the status quo is where the idealists and critics always become vague.
I’ve been searching for a forum where this kind of policy discussion can take place, but so far most blogs seem mostly concerned with politics and current events.
Robert to some degree the market is providing this eventuality. VPN and home offices will probably do more for reduced smog and fuel consumption than the catalytic converter!
p.s. when and where have “planned” economies *ever* worked.
But wouldn’t it be great to pay less gas tax?
Gas below $2/gallon? Wake me up when #2 home heating oil gets below $2/gallon because I need to fill the tank.
Jeff, I think the consensus is that you should buy that Ford Expedition now, before they stop making that gigantic SUV. You might have missed your chance to take advantage of low oil prices and waste a ton of fuel.
Right of Center is dead on.
You don’t create societal/economic/market changes by lecturing people, you create those changes by creating engines for change. People didn’t have to be guilt-tripped into switching from vinyl to CDs, while earnest do-gooders were helpless to make Betamax win over VHS through widespread public remonstrations. Even stern finger-waving from “right winger” Bill O’Reilly couldn’t dampen SUV sales, but higher gas prices did.
Going further back into history, I’m pretty sure the Industrial Revolution wasn’t the result of a bunch of busybodies who decided among themselves that it would be a good idea, and we didn’t start cooking stuff until *after* we discovered fire.
There is a place for electric cars. Most people drive less than 40 miles a day. It is a simple and just about perfect solution to a lot of problems. It may take decades but eventually gasoline will be pushed aside for something better.
I don’t know why this is bash hybrids week, but it seems to me that they’ve been a perfectly lovely example of market forces in action. Toyota et al. invested in the technology more or less on their own (yes, some govt prodding, I know). People like me paid a couple of extra grand, maybe, to get a Prius for the gee whiz factor and the potential savings (which, contrary to the people who claim there is no savings, I calaculate at about $750/year for me, so payback in 4 or 5 years). And I get to confound people with a Bush sticker on a Prius (does not compute…) It works for everybody.
The point is that the price of gasoline used for driving does not encapsulate all of the costs of its usage, and therefore is overconsumed. (Same with coal-powered plants.) A model for an individual consumer may, in such a situation, show that purchasing a hybrid (or solar panels) is an economically irrational action. However, it makes sense for the bearer of these externalized costs (usually taxpayers) to minimize them. Minimization of these externalized costs can usually be achieved in an economically (and politically) cheapest manner by reducing demand rather than supply.
It makes sense for taxpayers to minimize their costs by inducing consumers to take action that, in the absence of incentive, would result in an economically inefficient underconsumption of product. Taxpayer incentives therefore can result in efficient consumption, and a lower net tax burden, than would otherwise be achieved in a market ridden with externalities.
It makes sense for taxpayers to minimize their costs by inducing consumers to take action that, in the absence of incentive, would result in an economically inefficient underconsumption of product.
Whoops. I meant “economically inefficient OVERconsumption”
Shhhh! Quit bashing hybrids, let’s encourage other people to buy em. If there were no cost premium to hybrids, of course they’d be great. Either more horsepower per gallon, or more gallons per HP, your choice.
It’ll take some years of learning curve, innovation, and economics of scale for the current cost premium to dissipate. In the mean time, we need some dupes to shell out the money and keep the market growing.
Hybrid: the perfect car for your neighbor.
The folks pushing the grossly over expensive hybrids and electrics tend to overlook the ovbvious. Where is the electricity going to come from? It does not spontaneously pour from the little holes in the wall. Most of our power comes from petroleum fired steam plants, about 25% from hydroelectric, which is nearly maxed out, a little from a few nuke plants, most of which are nearing the end of service.
Hybrid owners are in for a nasty hit in about six years when the very expensive batteries in their horribly expensive cars must be replaced, about the time their loans are paid off. And the new answer to all our problems, biodiesel, is proving to be even more expensive than gasoline, as well as an eco-horror. Petroleum is here to stay, folks.
Gerry:
We’re going to run ot of oil eventually, no matter if peak production happens this year or ten years for now. There’s only so much in the ground.
As for biodiesel being more exensive? Right now about 85% of the cost is in the feedstock. Find the right feedstock, and it’ll be cheaper than petrodiesel. Algal oil has the potential to be just that, but we’re still a few years away from commecial production. But if you’re interested, Google “Green Fuel Technologies” (which accelerates algae growth using flue gasses from power plants) and “UNH Biodiesel Group”. Algae has the potential to produce thousands of gallons per acre/year.
Hybrid owners are in for a nasty hit in about six years when the very expensive batteries in their horribly expensive cars must be replaced, about the time their loans are paid off.
Yes, because carbon-fuel burning components don’t ever need expensive replacements over 6 years.
Nor can we expect electric technology to advance or become cheaper over the next 6 years.
I can’t figure out the italics. Pretty silly.
The fact is that if government wanted to encourage enviromental safety it could. The best solution would be a tax on Co2 on car buyers. The fact is that the government would overtax this because they overestimate the costs of global warming. However all of these biofuels like ethanol are complete smoke-screens. The cost in energy and pollution to make them is higher than the cost of gasoline. It is only there because farmers are concentrated and thus have powerful Senate and Presidential power. Oil running out is no problem because long before oil runs out its cost to consumers will be so high that it is inefficient. Besides at University of Illinois at Champaigne they seem to be generating temperatures high enough for fusion so our energy problems may not be so urgent.
Nobody, what you’re missing is that these are batteries. The things on a fuel-burning car that need replacement are big hunks of steel (or iron), aluminum, and plastic, perhaps oily. The little bit of oil isn’t much of a problem; the metal and plastic can be recycled, and isn’t dangerous.
There are only certain things batteries can be made of. All of the good ones are poisonous, explosive, or both. Blame God, or Providence, or whoever or whatever is in charge of designing chemistry. That’s just the way it is. Most of the good materials are also fairly rare, and thus expensive.
And batteries wear out. I’ll be really surprised if the batteries in the hybrids last six years, being charged and recharged all the time (which is what wears a battery out). I’d expect more like three years, or even two.
The other thing is, what about the old batteries? Those things are dangerous — not as bad as the Greens would have them, but you don’t really want them in your water supply. If there are a lot of hybrids and electrics around, how do we dispose of the old batteries? Recycling, sure, but how long will that last the first time a truck carrying the old batteries back for recycling gets crunched on the Parkway and all that poisonous goop runs out?
Like everything else, it ain’t that simple.
Regards,
Ric
I’m going to raise the hydrogen banner here for a bit because there have been a few unfair comments above.
1. Hydrogen isn’t a power source but rather the ultimate middleware. It allows you to take a large number of energy feedstocks/waste streams that would be impractical to create a massive energy system out of and funnel them all into one infrastructure that is getting very close to commercially viable without subsidy (keep an eye on Canadian company Ballard). This has the practical effect of increasing supply as you can reform petroleum into hydrogen as well as many non petroleum sources.
2. It’s quite practical to install a hydrogen reformer in your house and to charge your hydrogen vehicle at home for your daily commute. This takes care of the major use case for most drivers.
3. A national “thin” network of pumps spaced a little under 300 miles apart could be put in place across the interstate highway system for something around $70M dollars (take the mileage on the interstate highway system, divide by 300, multiply by $30k per pump). That would allow you to drive across the country on vacation, the other major use case for car travel.
4. Efficiency on the front end is poorer for hydrogen v. oil refining. Efficiency on the back end is much better as hydrogen fuel cells escape the hard limits that carnot heat engines (including the internal combustion engine) suffer from. This makes total cycle efficiency about a wash with hydrogen being just a smidgen ahead and it seems that hydrogen fuel cells are getting better, faster than traditional internal combustion technology.
In short, hydrogen isn’t there today but it should be viable without subsidy during the next decade, possibly as early as 2011 if Ballard’s technology road map is accurate.
ROC: interesting article, but there is so much unused capacity for growing oil-producing corn, soybeans, etc., that it is silly to point fingers at biofuels. A lot of re-used cooking oil is picked up and processed in the West, and I am familiar with one facility on the Eastern Shore of VA, one in Texas, that reprocess used oils picked up from restaurants. Palm oil may be one item, specifically referred to as European used, but we pay farmers not to farm oil producing veggie matter here. It can be much more economical to produce what we need, and use it, to better our situation in the world and the atmosphere.
David Ignatius writes an intelligent reflection on the subject here; http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/01/AR2005120101174.html
ROC: interesting article, but there is so much unused capacity for growing oil-producing corn, soybeans, etc., that it is silly to point fingers at biofuels. A lot of re-used cooking oil is picked up and processed in the West, and I am familiar with one facility on the Eastern Shore of VA, one in Texas, that reprocess used oils picked up from restaurants. Palm oil may be one item, specifically referred to as European used, but we pay farmers not to farm oil producing veggie matter here. It can be much more economical to produce what we need, and use it, to better our situation in the world and the atmosphere.
David Ignatius writes an intelligent reflection on the subject here; http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/01/AR2005120101174.html
Ruth,
There are vehicles now operating on veggie oil, which smell like french fries
I can see it now. After lefties have coercively converted the nation’s auto fleet to veggie oil due to their bizarre and irrational hatred of crude oil, they will then discover the ill-health effects of second hand veggie oil smoke. Invariably, the bizarre and irrational hatred of oil will be succeeded by a bizarre and irrational hatred of veggie smoke.
I see rickshaws in our future.
Funny, HA, you see some ritual “bizarre and irrational hatred” motivation for cleaning up the environment instead of having any regard for the air we mutually breathe and the economy we mutually share, for better or for worse. I suggest you look at the results of improving our environment, natural and economic, and try to see ‘bizarre and irrational hatred” in trying to improve it. Would like to hear where you end up if rationally considering the same.
Ruth,
“A lot of re-used cooking oil is picked up and processed in the West, and I am familiar with one facility on the Eastern Shore of VA, one in Texas, that reprocess used oils picked up from restaurants”
US oil consumption is 7.5 BILLION barrels per year. That’s a lot of french fries!
If bio fuels really took off, every impoverished farmer on the planet is going to start raising “oil” crops. It seems obvious.
I am afraid that bio-fuel is just another feel-good-warm-fuzzy that will not accomplish much (Hippies with greasy smelling VW’s notwithstanding).
I am just as concerned with air quality and greenhouse gases as I think you are, but spending time and resources on what amounts to PR-Shtick is a waste, I think.
Politically what it interesting to me is that on the one hand Democrats were screaming the loudest about hig oil prices “SOMETHING MUST BE DONE” when those high prices are *precisely* the most effective means of conservation! As long as the high cost is for the product and not taxes then the market can and will react when the time is right.
With petroleum based fuels, your source material has a very high energy content and is essentially ready to use straight from the ground. With hydrogen and biofuels, your starting materials have a very low energy content and require you to dump a bunch of energy into them (which costs money) before you get something you can usefully burn. This is why, fundamentally, petroleum will always be our primary energy source until it becomes too rare and expensive wrt the hydrogen/biofuels options.
Oh fer fuxake, what is it with all the hybrid bashing.. Have you actually _been_ in a Prius? It’s a wicked cool gizmo! Paying a few extra thou for a cooler gizmo, what’s wrong with that?
Like you’re ever going to take that SUV on the Denali, or even the run up Pike’s Peak.. Parking on the grass at an outdoor wine-tasting and jazz recital more like…
http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?section_id=27&article_id=10260
Seriously, rationality is hardly the only factor in buying a car…
ps: that lexus rx400h will smoke your gasser.. w00t!
Ruth,
Funny, HA, you see some ritual “bizarre and irrational hatred†motivation for cleaning up the environment
Your problem is that you conflate hatred of oil with environmentalism. Nothing could be further from the truth.
As Kevin points out, oil is a very concentrated source of energy almost perfectly suited for human use in its natural form. These qualities allow us to use it to generate huge quantities of energy very economically that deliver a high standard of living for the maximum number of people with a minimal environmental impact.
No other source of energy combines these qualities. Your feel good veggie oil won’t do it. Neither will nuclear, coal, gas, wind, solar, etc.
Its almost like God knew what he was doing when he placed all that oil under those rocks! Its too bad He didn’t make more of it.
HA: Your words: “I can see it now. After lefties have coercively converted the nation’s auto fleet to veggie oil due to their bizarre and irrational hatred of crude oil, they will then discover the ill-health effects of second hand veggie oil smoke. Invariably, the bizarre and irrational hatred of oil will be succeeded by a bizarre and irrational hatred of veggie smoke.
Now you say: “Your problem is that you conflate hatred of oil with environmentalism.”
It’s your concept of hatred that you’re looking at and evaluating, my comments have not been about anything of the sort.
Credit Bill O’Rilly for lower gas prices:
O’REILLY: I have guys inside the five major oil companies – my father used to work for one of those oil companies by the way – who have told me that in those meetings they look for every way to jack up oil prices after Katrina, every way, when they didn’t have to. They got scared because of my reporting and reporting of some others. They said, “Uh ho.â€
CAVUTO: So wait a minute, you’re not, you’re taking credit for gas prices being down from where they are?
O’REILLY: I said my reporting and some reporting of others. They got scared.
OMFSM what a lunatic!
GerryN you are 30 years off. Almost none (less than 2%) of the electricity in the US is generated from oil anymore.
Just a slight disagreement with your ‘diss’ of the Mini. The insurance cost of a Mini is actually pretty reasonable. It has a very good safety rating relative to other non-SUV/truck vehicles, and buying a new Mini actually lowered our insurance bill given it replaced a Mitsubishi deathtrap. Not saying it’s a practical vehicle if you need to transport more than 2-3 people, but the Mini is a wondeful car for those not in that situation…
I don’t understand how oil prices can remain low for long…I mean it’s a no-brainer that we are almost at peak-oil (the point at which the maximum amount of oil is drilled), and certainly in the next decade or so oil prices got to increase…oh, perhaps we will be able to get oil from shale rocks, or from coal, but I think starting off on alternative fuels such as biodiesel and spending more research bucks on producing biodiesel from feedstock such as algae is the way to go
My 2 cents’ worth…
Ec @ eIT