Forget plug-in tax credits

Killing American fuel economy

Ethanol fans can't talk enough about how ethanol has helped America. Yet, when Congress struck a deal in 1988 to promote ethanol, they devised a tax credit scheme enabling 16 mpg gas guzzlers to have a fuel economy rating of 24 mpg. Thus, through the '90s, US automakers couldn't roll out enough gas-guzzling SUVs.

Yeah, that sure has helped America, not!

So, how are plug-in tax credits similar to flex fuel credits? They are not. Yet, I'd bet the first generation of plug-in vehicles are more about meeting new CAFE requirements than they are about killing the conventional vehicle. And, with billions in free money available both in cash handouts and tax credits, why not use that money to roll out enough plug-ins to attain green marketing cred and to help achieve new CAFE requirements?

Money for nothing and CAFE for free?

I say, enough government regulation. Let's make it easy. Increase oil taxes on gasoline, diesel, or any other petroleum products, and let consumers and innovators decide the winners. The flex fuel credit has proven that the government might have good intentions, but seldom do their intentions achieve intended results.

Forget plug-ins without a gas tax?

Insight: More realistic than plug-ins?

When it comes to buying a car, sticker price is the most important issue for most consumers. Unfortunately, hybrid cars and plug-in vehicles cost more, which makes it harder for manufacturers to turn a profit on such vehicles.

Thus, while GM has hung its green PR hat on the Chevy Volt plug-in vehicle, the Volt isn't going to help GM's bottom line for many years.

"In 10 years are they [at GM] going to solve the technological problems with respect to the Volt? Sure," says Maryann Keller, an automotive analyst and author of a book on GM. "But are they going to be able to stake their survival, which is really more of a now to five-year proposition, on it? I'd say they can't. They have to stake their future on Malibus, the Chevy Cruze, and much more conventional technologies."

Add $2.00 gas and how many consumers are really willing to pay a few thousand extra for a hybrid, or several thousand extra for a plug-in hybrid?

Is a mass conversion to plug-in vehicles possible in the next few decades without significantly higher gas prices? Isn't it time to get serious about a new gas tax?

F Congress: Give automakers the money

Or do I mean F America?

Congress is in a tough spot. The majority of Americans don't want Congress to help the US auto industry, despite the fact that all of the Big 3's competitors receive heavy subsidies from their governments.

I understand. For decades the Big 3 built a lot of crap and, even after 9/11, they still didn't react to fuel economy. Profit was more important than national security.

Nonetheless, Congress has to give automakers the money and, we the people, should accept that because we the people are also responsible for the state of the US auto industry. We bought the gas-guzzlers. We demanded that gas stay cheap. We voted for politicians that made gas taxes and increased fuel economy standards dirty word for decades.

I know. None of that justifies the failures of the Big 3, whom helped brainwash the people into gas-guzzling stupidity. And, I know most Americans want the corporate big wigs of America, including those from Detroit, to suffer. Yet, it will be average Americans - all over America - that will suffer most if Detroit goes under. Now is not the time to seek revenge, it's time to turn a wrong into a right.

Fast Money talks gas tax

Time for a floor on energy prices?

Dylan Ratigan, the host of CNBC's Fast Money, and contributor on other CNBC shows, brought up a gas tax twice today on Fast Money. The first time was in an interview with Dow Chemical CEO Andrew Liveris. Liveris claimed that a bottom on energy prices is much needed to maintain investment in alternative energies. And, if a gas tax was the best way to ensure that happening, Liveris would be a supporter.

Then, on Fast Money, the gang started talking about alternative energy investments, and the crew also doesn't believe that alternative energies are a great investment when gas prices are low. The idea of expensive plug-in hybrids, for instance, just doesn't make much sense when gas prices are cheap, Jeff Macke joked.

Is it time for a gas tax?

Can disincentives get the US off oil?

It's the auto, stupid

I'm a fan of the gas tax as a way to move America off oil, an idea which would push most Americans to call me crazy. Of course, I think most Americans are crazy for not taking foreign oil dependency - and their individual role in that dependency - far more seriously.

But, if a gas tax were utilized intelligently, which is a bit of an impossibility in today's Congress and political world, couldn't it be used to create effective change?

Finish: Can disincentives get the US off oil?

SUV drivers burning their gas guzzlers

Shoulda gotta hybrid

CNBC's HomeFront just ran a story about how insurers are seeing a big increase in insurance fraud regarding SUVs. Owners are abandoning and torching their SUVs in an attempt to offload their gas-guzzlers, since SUV value has gone through the floor. I'm sure some politicians will begin using this fact as proof that a gas tax holiday is needed to save SUVs before they go extinct.

If oil is going to $200, how does a gas tax holiday help?

By summer of 2010 oil prices could be $200?

So, let's say America is able to enjoy a gas tax holiday this summer and we all save $30.00 over the summer. Does that mean that big oil will have learned its lessons, and gas prices will slide back down towards $2.00? Will NOCs decide to give America some especially cheap oil, just for America?

If there is a good chance that oil prices are going to $200 (more), aren't gas prices probably going to go up in the future, not down? If so, shouldn't America be coming up with real solutions for the future? Shouldn't America be taking real action today to prepare for the future?

Instead of a gas tax holiday, why not new tax credits for fuel efficiency for the summer? Give consumers credits for buying smaller vehicles, hybrid cars, etc. Couldn't the auto industry use a little help anyway? Wouldn't that be a proactive way to help the economy, rather than promoting ideas that sound great, but cause more problems than we already have?

Economists SLAM gas tax holiday

Too bad he drives an SUV

“Unless the goal is to temporarily boost profits for petroleum refineries and foreign producers, the proposal makes no sense,” stated Len Burman, director of the Tax Policy Center, regarding the gas tax holiday proposed by John McCain and supported by Hillary Clinton.

When it comes to foreign oil dependency, I'm giving all three candidates a vote of no confidence. Has Ron Paul gone Independent yet? I have to vote for somebody.

China gives US smack down on pollution

LA's smog just can't compete with China's

New studies demonstrate that China is now the world's largest polluter, and the worst is yet to come, as the automobile takes over China. Thus, it's no surprise that emerging Chinese automakers are quickly embracing advanced technologies like hybrid cars.

Still, no worries America. All we need is a John McCain gas tax break to bring down gas prices and we can go right back to number 1, baby!

Is McCain insane?

Off his rocker?

So, Hillary will bail out the US auto industry if needed as President, and John McCain wants to reduce the price of gasoline this summer to help oil the economy.

Isn't this the worst kind of pandering? Cheap gas is threatening American security, the economy - dare I say the health of the world - and McCain wants to make gas cheaper? Am I missing something? And what about all the deteriorating highways and bridges across America that need that tax money?

When politicians pander to the people, rather than deal with reality, what hope is there for the future?

Why is gas so cheap in America?

Is $4.00 gas really expensive?

On Friday, regarding a question on fuel economy and CAFE, Bob Lutz stated, "Nobody knows how to get to 35 mpg with a portfolio of vehicles roughly equivalent to today's without loading in $6,000 to $8,000 of hybrid systems. We are not sure we can 'save' large vehicles."

Yet, if gas cost $6.00 or more per gallon, such as in Europe, $6000.00 worth of hybrid technology could easily be recovered in fuel savings. Then again, at $6.00 per gallon, how many would even want such large vehicles?

While Congress can blame automakers for not building 'relevant' vehicles and oil companies for making ridiculous profits, there is a more important question that must be asked of Congress.

Why is gas so cheap in America if it takes so much American diplomacy, military force - and blood - to secure America's foreign oil dependency? That's all free? And if gas hadn't been so cheap, overall, the last few decades, would America be so foreign oil dependent?

Cupholders: Proof America needs a gas tax?

Cup placement more important than foreign oil dependency

Americans might be worried about foreign oil dependency, but they are still more worried about where they will put their morning cup of coffee on their drive to work according to the latest research. Ultimately, Americans are concerned about fuel economy, but not enough to pay anything extra.

Won't it be impossible for America to end foreign oil dependency without some sort of gas tax? Wouldn't a gas tax be a great way to fund tax credits for hybrid cars, including plug-ins and other clean vehicles?

Romney wants to save US auto industry

Not bashing Detroit

After winning the Michigan primary Mitt Romney said he was going to save the US auto industry by "substantially increasing our investment in basic science and research, particularly in energy technology, fuel technology, automotive and material science technologies" (See the video).

Yet it seems the science and technology is largely available, it's making it happen that's key.

Hybrid cars, plug-in hybrids, electric vehicles, clean diesel, cellulosic ethanol, and lightweight materials are here today, it's making these technologies cost effective that's the problem. In order to do that economies of scale are probably the most critical factor. Unfortunately, Mr. Romney doesn't seem to address this issue.

Of course tax subsides and incentives might work, but it seems a gas tax is the easiest path forward, yet not one candidate running for President will touch such an idea with a 1000 foot pole.

My prediction: It doesn't matter one bit who becomes President, foreign oil dependency is tightening its grip around America's neck and the grip is only going to get tighter, much tighter. Too many Americans and EVERY single candidate for President can't handle the truth of artificially low gas pump prices and foreign oil dependency. So get ready to start choking.

Lithium: The secret weapon of the auto industry?

Bob Lutz stands next to the Volt at its debut at NAIAS

"Lithium battery technology is being husbanded in Japan. It's like a secret weapon," GM's Bob Lutz recently told reporters at a meeting of the Western Automotive Journalists association. Thus, many Japanese companies would not bid on the battery contract for the Chevy Volt.

Mr. Lutz also criticized the U.S. government for not being as aggressive as the the Japanese government with advanced batteries. Of course, maybe the government could criticize GM and US automakers for not being as aggressive as Japanese automakers on hybrid cars.

In addition to slamming the government, Lutz also attacked CAFE, calling a gas tax a more sensible approach to reducing fuel consumption. Also, even though Lutz defended ethanol, he did admit that corn-based ethanol has some problems and he stated that cellulosic ethanol was needed.

The economics of hybrids are taxing

Time for European style fuel taxes in America?

Today there is an article in the WSJ regarding The Economics of Hybrids, which starts, "For most U.S. consumers, they're still a money-losing proposition".

A couple years ago, however, some hybrid vehicles, such as the Toyota Prius were a good deal for most Americans. Of course, the difference between then and now is the $3150.00 clean vehicle tax credit, or the lack thereof.

Today, instead of tax credits for OPEC-dependency fighting hybrids, America will spend about $2 trillion fighting wars largely rooted in foreign oil dependency.

Isn't it time to put together a serious action plan for ending foreign oil dependency? Isn't it time to extend Toyota's tax credits? Isn't it time to consider new tax credits, new gas taxes and new visions of the future, such as the hydrogen highway and/or an electric vehicle infrastructure?

Isn't it time to make ending foreign oil dependency a National Cause?

CAFE versus gas taxes, etc.

The choice for 40 percent of car consumers?

"Applying taxes to consumers is an unpopular and unpleasant solution. But dependency on foreign oil and global warming are unpleasant problems. If other consumer-level, demand-driven tools can be devised, so much the better. If not, then taxes on engine power and fuel may be neccesary. But mandating command economy efficiency standards will not address the problem, no matter what Hudson River water-drinking columnists might fantasize," writes Dan Carney this morning on MSNBC regarding the whole Friedman, NRDC attack on Toyota and CAFE.

Will CAFE fix America's oil problems?

At today's level of foreign oil consumption, 35 mpg across the fleet will not end OPEC dependence, especially when foreign oil consumption increases almost every year. And, based upon past legislation, it can be assumed that there will be numerous loopholes in whatever CAFE legislation is ultimately passed.

While CAFE is getting some people hyped up, its not a real solution. It is, at best, a step in the right direction. On the other hand, making consumers responsible for their purchasing decisions utilizing a gas tax that better reflects the real cost of gasoline could have much quicker and much more dramatic effects than CAFE ever will.

So, won't the real activists please stand up?

Oil gone crazy - Will America ever change?

$100.00 before $70.00?

Crude oil hit $84.00 per barrel today because a storm building in the Gulf of Mexico shut down a number of platforms, and if the storm actually develops into a rig-destroying hurricane, $100.00 oil could be just around the corner.

Many, such as Boone Pickens, have suggested that $100.00 oil is coming, but most have predicted that such a level would not be achieved until next year's summer driving season at the earliest. The sudden resurgence of hurricane season, however, has changed everything.

One wonders, how long can America's oil craze continue?

Iraq, 9/11, oil-funded terrorism, oil-funded takeovers of iconic American businesses and financial institutions. What will it take for America to declare war on foreign oil dependency? Will we drive the oil crazy train to economic collapse?

Isn't it time for Congress to reinstate Toyota's clean vehicle tax credits for hybrid cars to reward consumers for taking responsibility and to pressure automakers?

Isn't it time to consider a gas tax? Sure it will hurt, but the longer America waits to take serious action, the more it's going to hurt in the future, and it just might be fatal.

Ford chief suggests gas tax for energy security

Hybrids not enough

"The United States should consider imposing a European-style gasoline tax if it hopes to improve energy security and tackle global warming," the head of Ford Motor Co. said Wednesday according to the AFP.

No chance for a "meaningful energy policy" from Congress?

Wouldn't a gas tax be better than dead soldiers?

"The dance that is going on between automakers, Dingell and other members of Congress is disheartening to anyone looking for a meaningful energy policy that will make the U.S. less dependent on foreign energy sources and for the the U.S. to finally act like a world leader when it comes to energy consumption and pollution generation."

Great quote from an interesting article on the BusinessWeek Autobeat.

Here's another, "Without a sustained communications commitment, most Americans just won’t get the fact that we are already paying huge gas taxes to protect the source of Middle East oil. It’s being sucked out of our taxes already to pay for the War in Iraq and other foreign interventions. That is adding to the deficit, and costing thousands of American lives."

How can a gas tax to fund things like hybrid cars and biofuels be bad when were spending 100's of billions in Iraq and sacrificing 1000's of American lives for what - cheap oil to soothe our gas-guzzling egos?

Gas tax: Why America is doomed

Without real action will the American dream go up in flames?

So, you don't like taxes, which makes you hate the idea of a gas tax. Furthermore, for working class Americans, a gas tax could make life extremely difficult, and it just might push the consumer driven American economy into a recession.

Nonetheless, what happens if an oil crisis irreversibly doubles the price of gasoline and other petroleum-based fuels sometime in the next few years?

Recently, I heard a statistic that America will increase its fuel consumption by at least 50 percent in just the next 20 years. At the same time, the IEA is reporting that an oil supply crunch in the next couple of years is going to make the U.S. significantly more dependent upon OPEC.

Well, isn't that great news!

Iraq is a mess that America is literally on the verge of handing over to Iran and Al Qaeda, as Iran develops nuclear weapons. Nigeria continues to unravel towards full scale civil war and Venezuela wants to partner with Iran to destroy American imperialism.

Yet cheaper oil prices are just around the corner?

Yes a gas tax will hurt, but not as bad as an unexpected foreign oil dependent driven catastrophe. So, let's use gas tax money to help Detroit build revolutionary automobiles, to help consumers buy hybrid vehicles and other clean technologies - in addition to more sensible vehicles. Plus, since a gas tax would be based upon the percent of petroleum content, biofuels would also become more cost effective.

America can choose to be proactive or reactive, but the problems caused by the politics of foreign oil dependency are only going to get worse. Will it be too late before America finally acts?

AutoNation's CEO, Mike Jackson, on fuel economy

Bush, and the last 4 Presidents, have accomplished nothing regarding foreign oil dependency

"We've had five presidents in a row who have said our dependence on imported oil is a matter of national security. Actually, on this issue you can pick whether you're motivated by global warming or national security—it doesn't matter. If you look at the issue and want a serious energy policy that's going to make a difference—because in this period with these five presidents we've gone from importing 30 percent of our oil to 60 percent of our oil—so, obviously we don't have a policy that's dealing with this."

"When it comes to fuel consumption and fuel economy do not listen to what people tell you they are going to do, look at what they actually do. Take model year '06 with all the discussions about fuel economy and everything else, fuel economy for the cars sold will be basically unchanged. It's the same as the last 25 years."

So, what's Mike Jackon's favorite solution? A gas tax.

(Source: BusinessWeek)

Americans already used to $3.00 gas - proof a gas tax could work?

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?

Say gas stays at $3.50 per gallon. Add an extra $.50 tax to fund clean vehicle tax credits for the consumers of hybrids, etc. America could easily generate billions to subsidize the extra costs of hybrid technology, and the fuel savings would essentially negate the tax for wise consumers.

Oh yeah, and the gas tax would increase the cost-effectiveness of bio-fuels - maybe we could move the massive ethanol subsidies to consumers, rather than profit-driven corporations?

Gas gouging and oil profits: An irony of Democratic proportions?

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?

Half of America supports 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.

Would you support a gas tax to fight foreign oil dependency or global warming?

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?

More gas tax buzz

I was told that a bunch of economists expressed to the Wall Street Journal that a gas tax was probably the best way to increase America's fuel economy. I think the idea is very interesting, however, only if the tax revenue is used only for clean vehicle tax credits for consumers. Thus, those whom buy E85 would only have to pay 15% of the gas tax, but if they drove a flex-fuel hybrid they would also qualify for a tax credit, such as the one in place for hybrid vehicles today.

Jim Cramer calls for gas tax

O.K., I've been talking up the idea of a gas tax for a couple weeks now. Still, I know it's a crazy idea. It's so crazy I was originally against the idea, but I'm starting to feel maybe America needs to get a little crazy, especially at the consumer level. Then, as I'm flipping through TV stations, I catch Jim Cramer on Scarborough Country calling for a gas tax. "If you believe in national security, then we need oil higher not lower," Cramer told the host. Ultimately, Cramer said if natural forces don't take oil prices higher, then a gas tax is the next best path because only higher oil prices are going to force us to change.

Let's do it. I say we tax gasoline, which would make alternative fuels more competitive, and we can use the gas tax revenue to fund hybrid cars and other clean vehicle technologies.

Shell Chairman wants U.S. to decrease gas use by more than 20 percent

Shell's Chairman claimed Bush's proposed 20 percent reduction in U.S. gasoline consumption isn't enough. "Compared to that, Bush's proposal this week to reduce U.S. fuel consumption by a fifth was terribly feeble and a disappointment. Emissions from traffic are clearly less than half of total emissions," the newspaper quoted him as saying according to Reuters.

I'm not quite sure what the emissions statement means considering that the Chairman is not a proponent of mandatory carbon caps. Sounds like Chairman Jorma Ollila is engaging in some doublespeak?

Perhaps the Chairman would help fund a campaign for a gas tax since he cares so much, and he obviously realizes that the current cost of gas in the U.S. does not cover the environmental damage caused by gasoline consumption.

U.S. will need 50 percent more energy by 2030?

I just watched a commercial claiming that the U.S. will need 50 percent more energy by 2030. Now, this commercial was created by the gas and oil industry, so maybe the numbers were inflated a bit; however, what if they were not? Even if the real number is only 25 percent more that's still a huge number.

I think I'm starting to see the Admiral's perspective that a 20 percent drop in U.S. gasoline consumption in the next decade is nearly impossible. It seems he's right, unless we make drastic, revolutionary changes. In reality, as the Admiral stated, the U.S. will be lucky just to maintain current levels of consumption.

Consequently, I'm really starting to believe that a gas tax is absolutely necessary. Again, that's a gas tax whose revenue goes completely into tax credits for the consumers of hybrid cars and other clean energy technologies. The point is, America's energy habits HAVE to change and it will be far better for Americans if we prepare for the change, rather than wait until we have no choice but to change.

Another scary thing. If U.S. energy consumption is going to skyrocket in the next two decades, imagine what consumption in China and India is going to be like.