Politics, News & Issues >
Climate Change
Get a Widget for this title
RSS FeedWould higher gas taxes help fight global warming?
Results so far:
| Yes | 31% | 57 votes | Total: 183 votes | |
| No | 69% | 126 votes |
Yes
Write now
Print
Invite a writer™
Add to FavoritesPolicies that result in the use of less gasoline will reduce carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. With the key assumption that the theory of man-made global warming is correct, the logical conclusion must be that a reduction in gasoline useage must result in less global warming, compared to the previous outlook.
Of course, if the theory of man-made global warming is grossly flawed, reducing gasoline consumption will not make a dent in global warming and there would be no need to discuss gas taxes in this context. Therefore, the following discussion is based on an assumption that the theory of man-made global warming is essentially valid.
HOW TO REDUCE GASOLINE CONSUMPTION
One way to reduce gasoline consumption would be to institute laws that take vehicles off the road. The odd-even license plate rule for filling your gas tank, during the 1973 gas crisis, resulted in the use of less gas, although the effectiveness of that policy is debatable. However, the vast majority of drivers would not want such a rationing system to be implemented again, unless we were to experience supply problems again.
As long as supply is not shut off, the most direct, effective way to reduce consumption of gasoline (or any item) is to increase the price.
The demand for gasoline is not directly proportional ("linear") to price changes. When the price is relatively low, a small price increase has very little effect on demand. However, as we have seen in the US recently, a price increase has a much greater effect on demand when the price is already high.
Increasing gasoline taxes has the same basic effect on demand as if the price goes up for any other reason. However, if future car buyers know that gas taxes will increase, and be maintained, they will use that information to buy cars with higher gas mileage. In this way, increasing gas taxes has a stronger effect on gasoline demand than general prices increases, which we know can go back down quickly.
EFFECT ON GLOBAL WARMING
There is a very real possibility that, even with a large reduction in the use of gasoline in the US, we may not see an actual reduction in global warming, compared to current levels. Therefore, for comparison purposes, we need to set a benchmark performance level.
The appropriate benchmark for comparison is the level of global warming that would be reached many years in the future, if higher gas taxes, resulting in lesser gasoline consumption, are not implemented in the very near future.
The result may only be a lesser rise in global temperatures, compared to what would happen if gasoline consumption does not slow down. One major reason of course is that other key countries, such as China, may not reduce their gasoline consumption.
US GASOLINE CONSUMPTION
A Google search for "US gasoline consumption" results in numerous sources of information to obtain the basic facts. As noted below, many of those expressing opinions on this issue have failed to obtain this basic information.
Clearly, US gasoline consumption has declined from the peak in March 2007 as a result of sharply higher gasoline prices.
More information than you could want about energy useage in the US and around the world is provided by the Energy Information Administration (http://www.eia.doe. gov/steo), which notes that total oil consumption is expected to go down by 400,000 barrels per day in 2008.
As reported by the Wall Street Journal (http://online.wsj.c om/article/SB1213926 46391690835.html) and the Future Optimist web site (http://futureoptimi st.wordpress.com/200 8/07/06/the-decline- in-us-gasolene-consu mption/), gasoline consumption has declined significantly since March 2007.
EFFECTS OF REDUCING GASOLINE CONSUMPTION
There surely are other effects to be considered before adopting a policy of increasing gasoline taxes. However, as with any policy debate, those who attempt to deny that increasing gas taxes will be beneficial need to address all the issues before their position can be taken seriously.
If those who claim to believe in man-made global warming have been paying attention at all during the past 10 years, they should agree that the use of gasoline to power automobiles is one of the most significant causes.
Therefore, it is only logical to conclude that those same persons should agree with the proposition that reduction of US gasoline consumption will reduce man-made global warming, unless they believe that; (1) Alternatives to driving cars would increase carbon emissions, or (2) Reduction of gasoline in the US will result in greater use of gasoline in other countries, compared to the current trajectory.
Yet, incredibly, many proponents of the man-made global warming theory avoid admitting this basic logic. This results in a position against higher gasoline taxes that is completely inconsistent with their supposedly true-green "belief" in making hard choices to stop the impending doom of "global warming". Essentially, such inconsistent back-pedaling reveals the true nature of their "debate", which is really much more about a scorched-earth political agenda then protecting the citizens of the blue planet.
Authors of current (July 22, 2008) Helium articles purporting to deny that higher gas taxes will reduce global warming are from two camps. The most vehement tend to deny that there is any truth to the man-made "global warming" theory. This group shifts the focus to the "fairness" of gas prices in general.
The other, somewhat more thoughtful group claims to believe in man-made "global warming", yet fails to see (or admit) the obvious connection between higher gas prices and lower gas consumption. Authors in this group appear to be very lazy about researching the facts.
A brief evaluation of Helium articles taking the "No" position reinforces the position (taken by this writer) that higher gasoline taxes would reduce global warming, if the man-made global warming theory were correct. The issue of whether or not the man-made "global warming" theory is correct is for another article.
In general, authors taking the "No Gas Tax" position completely avoid any discussion of numbers, such as the current level of gas taxes throughout the US.
NUMBER 1 ARTICLE AGAINST GAS TAXES
In the number 1 article, the author (JM Schell) discusses his reasons for why the theory of man-made global warming should not be accepted. However, he glosses over the issue of whether higher gas taxes might be an effective way to reduce consumption of gasoline in the US.
The initial run-on sentence is very nearly indecipherable.
NUMBER 2 ARTICLE AGAINST GAS TAXES
The article rated number 2 is nothing more than a ranting diatribe against "authority". The issue of global warming is noted only in passing.
In the first sentence, the author notes that "crushing higher taxes" is a "terrible idea". Yet he does not provide any discussion about the current level of gas taxes. He does not explain why any reasonable person should think that increasing gas taxes should be considered "crushing".
Much more amazing (and ridiculous) is that, in the remainder of the article, the author changes the entire focus of his attack to the idea of taxing the oil companies, instead of gasoline taxes at the pump which is supposed to be the topic.
In the only paragraph that does not sound like a venomous rant, the author acknowledges that "our use of oil-based products should be reduced significantly, and as soon as possible." Yet, he offers no solution of how that goal should be accomplished. This position is of course inconsistent with the reduction of gasoline that would occur as a result of higher gasoline taxes.
NUMBER 3 ARTICLE AGAINST GAS TAXES
Author of the number 3-rated article makes the preposterous claim that "most recreational driving has long-since ended" because, apparently, he has not seen many "motor homes" on the road. The ridiculous implication is that higher gas prices, resulting from higher gas taxes, will therefore not reduce gasoline consumption because the American driving public has already reduced driving to the lowest possible level.
The author adds to this nonsense by making the astounding claim that "The government has no business trying to solve real-world problems." One can only conclude that the author believes that total anarchy will somehow result in "free" gasoline for all.
NUMBER 4 ARTICLE AGAINST GAS TAXES
After stating reasons why he does not believe in man-mad "global warming", the author of the number 4-rated article presents a plausible reason why increasing gas taxes may not be a sound idea. He contends that gas taxes will be used to fund "alternative energy" which he believes is not economically viable and therefore not worthy of government subsidies.
Whether one agrees with this position or not, at least the author has presented an argument that can be discussed on the merits.
NUMBER 5, 6 AND 7 ARTICLES AGAINST GAS TAXES
The number 5-rated article, a rambling discussion of tolls in California, is off-topic.
In the number 6-rated article, the author contends that raising gas taxes will not result in any reduction in the consumption of gasoline. He provides no facts about past gas usage or current gas consumption trends to support this hypothesis, which is simply not logical. Gas usage in the US has already been shown to be decreasing this year due to higher gas prices, as noted previously.
In the number 7-rated article, the author, who does not believe in man-made "global warming", decides to address the issue after allowing for the possibility. However, he then demonstrates a glaring lack of basic knowledge by contending that he "would be surprised" if gasoline consumption in the US amounted to more than one-percent of the total use of oil. The fact of course is that the use of oil in the US is almost entirely due to gasoline consumption. The author then makes the same erroneous claim as the article 6 author, without providing any background information, to the effect that higher gas prices will not reduce gasoline consumption.
Learn more about this author, John F Mann.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
No
To be honest, the flaws in thinking that increased gas taxes will decrease global warming are so many that it's difficult to decide where to begin. They fall into two basic categories though, misunderstanding of atmospheric nature and misunderstanding of human nature.
The notion that carbon emissions cause global warming is a cart-before-the-hors e error, one that has come to be wide spread thanks to misguidance by the likes of Al Gore. The climate of the Earth fluctuates by natural means, as has been indicated by such fluctuations as the global warmth of the Mesozoic Era - from which no evidence of glaciers has been found - followed later by the infamous Ice Age. As a more moderate instance, the Earth experienced something of a Mini Ice Age during the 1600s AD.
Thus, carbon emissions are not causing the warming. Rather, this is occurring on its own. Carbon emissions are still, of course, troublesome, but their being so is caused by the natural warming rather than vice versa. That is, the warming climate causes them to have a stronger impact on our seas and consequently the atmosphere. Still, reducing these emissions, as with reducing fossil fuel consumption, will do little to stymy the warming of our planet. We just won't be adding as much to an existing problem, even though we're adding relatively little as it is.
This is aside from the fact that the efforts have been against carbon dioxide emissions rather than carbon monoxide emissions. Carbon monoxide is what kills a man who sits in the garage with his car running, waiting for the embrace of death. Carbon dioxide is what we exhale and what plants convert into oxygen. Environmentalists have been trying for years to create a machine that would absorb carbon dioxide emissions while outputting less than they absorb. (Otherwise, what good is it?) Nature already made this machine; it's called a tree. Plant some more and start working on a way to reduce carbon monoxide emissions; those are the bigger problem.
Still, some of the better informed have been making efforts towards absorbing carbon emissions in general, monoxide and dioxide alike. One such effort, as demonstrated on Alan Alda's "Scientific American Frontiers" involves algae pumps wherein the aquatic plant life breaks down the components of the emissions, rendering them harmless and even consumable. Efforts such as these are more what we need to focus our attention upon, if we wish to reduce our contribution to this natural unfortunate phenomenon.
Additionally, the thought that people will use less gas if it's more expensive is flawed as well. Compare gasoline to cigarettes, a far less necessary vice. For those who smoke, how many times have you said something to the effect of "When they hit $3.50 a pack, I'm quitting!"? Those who don't smoke have seen it several times in our lives, and only a small fraction of the people who speak as such actually adhere to their word. They may cut back, but they don't quit.
Now, look at gasoline, a necessary evil as a large percentage of us don't have convenient access to public transportation nor do we live near enough to our usual destinations to travel by bicycle or even electric scooter. Furthermore, these are unfavorable for family travel, especially where small children are involved. That aside, many of us have said such things as "When gas hits $6.00 a gallon, I'm walking to work!" and we never do. Why? Because the time and energy we save is worth more than the money we spend, especially when we don't have the time to spare anyway.
Elevating gas taxes will only serve to increase suspicion regarding Washington's agenda in the Middle East, whether the oil is still coming from there or is being pumped out of Alaska. In the first scenario, people will think the high taxes are being justified by the need to import the oil and is thus the reason we can't drill domestically, since we can't spare the funds for such an undertaking. In the latter, people will suspect that the federal government was keeping more than just the tax money and were perhaps in the oil companies' pockets, indicated by their suddenly demanding more taxes when we stop importing. Of course, a myriad of conspiracy theories will rise either way; these are just one possibility for each scenario. The point is that it will be met with little more than rebellion.
Of course since, once again, most of us can't spare the time and energy to bike to work, we'll end up paying more for the same amount of gas anyway. Thus, all the increased taxes will serve to do is put more money in Washington's pockets and will do nothing to stymy global warming, as consumption will not decrease. The only way it can help is indirectly. That is, if the money is spent strictly and entirely on green energy and carbon absorption research.
Learn more about this author, Erik Setser.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
Difference of opinion? Debate now.
- Climate Change
- Can climate change be confronted without active leadership on the part of the federal government?
- Has Greenland's ice sheet reached a tipping point?
- Is the US doing enough to stop global warming?
- Will global warming result in more earthquakes?
- Should the US ratify the Kyoto Protocol?
- Do you believe that changing policy to fight climate change will increase gas prices?
