Living Car Free - Out of Control Gas Prices

I just got off of the phone with 2 people in Central Illinois (Bloomington and Pekin, IL) and have heard that gas prices in bloomington jumped over a dollar earlier today to bring gas prices to $4 and change and Pekin's price will jump to $4.27 in the morning. I don't know if this is a localized scare over what's happening in the middle east, so has anyone else heard of similar things where you are? I assume the jumps have something to do with the middle east violence that's beginning to spiral now.

Every time i get wind of prices like this (or just normal prices even of over $3) it makes me want to focus on finding a job once I graduate from college in a town where car-free (or at least very car-lite) is a viable option.

I heard on the news somewhere in utah or something this guy can turn these rocks with some sort of oil substance in them into pure oil. If all the rocks were converted to oil, it would supply the U.S for a century, but it would contribute to a ton of air pollution.

I like the option of a motorcycle because it has higher gas mileage, even though it holds less fuel.

I heard on the news somewhere in utah or something this guy can turn these rocks with some sort of oil substance in them into pure oil. If all the rocks were converted to oil, it would supply the U.S for a century, but it would contribute to a ton of air pollution.

I like the option of a motorcycle because it has higher gas mileage, even though it holds less fuel.

i've got a 4 gallon tank on my xr400...can go 200 hundred miles on the tank under putting around conditions

Damn.... I'm gonna have to fill my truck up soon, too. *sighs* I haven't done that in MONTHS!

Well, hopefully it's a momentary spike from people being stupid. I guess we'll see.

It's called oil shale, and there is a lot of it in western CO and eastern UT, apparently as much potential oil as in the oil sands in Alberta. It's not nearly as good as it sounds, though, because the process of extracting it creates a huge amount of waste and pumps a lot of CO2 into the atmosphere. It also takes more energy to extract than you get out of it, so it's not even worth the trouble: no matter how high the price of oil gets, it will always cost more to get the oil out of the shale. It's better just to leave it in the ground for any number of reasons, and to concentrate on energy alternatives that are actually sane.

BTW, why would military action in Lebanon drive up gas prices in Iowa overnight? No oil supplies are directly threatened by that nasty little war; it's just another example of the greedy opportunism of some business people with no conscience. It's enough to turn me into a Bolshevik.

It's called oil shale, and there is a lot of it in western CO and eastern UT, apparently as much potential oil as in the oil sands in Alberta. It's not nearly as good as it sounds, though, because the process of extracting it creates a huge amount of waste and pumps a lot of CO2 into the atmosphere. It also takes more energy to extract than you get out of it, so it's not even worth the trouble: no matter how high the price of oil gets, it will always cost more to get the oil out of the shale. It's better just to leave it in the ground for any number of reasons, and to concentrate on energy alternatives that are actually sane.

BTW, why would military action in Lebanon drive up gas prices in Iowa overnight? No oil supplies are directly threatened by that nasty little war; it's just another example of the greedy opportunism of some business people with no conscience. It's enough to turn me into a Bolshevik.

Actually... the article I read said that at $75-$80 a barrel for oil, oil shale (and oil sands) does become economical.

they're starting work again on the oil shale in fact. One of the things that made it so expensive was that they dug the shale up, crushed it, then heated it to high temps to get the oil out, the new thing is to sink huge heaters straight into the ground (one test was using solar power for the heaters!) and heat the rock in place.... the oil bubbles up to the surface and they can get at it with a LOT less damage to the environment.

But... it's still oil, and there are plenty of alternatives, cheap oil is still keeping people from spending the cash needed to develop them. *goes looking for that very interesting article he read*

Oil shale may make seem to make sense from an economic perspective if you can sell it for more than it cost to extract it. But when we are talking about energy resources, there is another factor that is important as well: energy return on energy invested or EROEI. If we must expend more than one barrel of oil worth of energy to locate, extract and refine a barrel of oil from the oil shale, then it would have made more sense to just leave the oil shale in the ground. The problem with many of the unconventional oil sources, such as oil shale, tar sands, and deep water deposits, is that they tend to have a very low, and sometimes even a negative EROEI.

It may be related to the Hezbollah declaring open war on Israel and damaging an Israeli ship. As the region becomes more polarized prices will inch up, and since $3+ a gallon isn't a deterent to consumption, various entities may feel a noticable increase is needed to reduce our use, just in case things head south.
Otoh, it could just be rumor and speculation. I may head down and fill up my truck in a bit... But probably not, I'm pretty lazy after all.

Every time i get wind of prices like this (or just normal prices even of over $3) it makes me want to focus on finding a job once I graduate from college in a town where car-free (or at least very car-lite) is a viable option.

My lightrail monthly pass is $53.00 dollars per month regardless to the price of gas and weekends are free. I wish I could have been car free after graduating from college. I'd have 100K in savings by now.

The gas prices rise 'because they can'. Most oil in the USA comes from Canada or Mexico or Venezuela, not the Middle East.

It may be related to the Hezbollah declaring open war on Israel and damaging an Israeli ship. As the region becomes more polarized prices will inch up, and since $3+ a gallon isn't a deterent to consumption, various entities may feel a noticable increase is needed to reduce our use, just in case things head south.

Do you notice how a lot of blame is focused on Iran? The first bomb to hit Iran, expect gas to go up to $4.00 bucks a gallon in no time. Those of us who are car free and don't have to pay for motor fuel are safe.

Those of us who are car free and don't have to pay for motor fuel are safe.
It just means we don't have to pay the high gas prices directly. We still have to pay higher fuel surcharges for UPS and FedEx deliveries, and if gas prices stay high long, we'll end up paying higher prices for anything that gets delivered by truck.

A quick check of www.gasbuddy.com shows that gas is $2.98 in Pekin IL.
NOT the $4+ claimed.

Have a look here, U.S. National Gas Temperature Map (http://www.gasbuddy.com/gb_gastemperaturemap.aspx).

For you Canadians here, Canada National Gas Temperature Map (http://www.gasbuddy.com/gb_can_gastemperaturemap.aspx).

Zoom in and click on your area to get local prices.

Have a look here, U.S. National Gas Temperature Map (http://www.gasbuddy.com/gb_gastemperaturemap.aspx).

For you Canadians here, Canada National Gas Temperature Map (http://www.gasbuddy.com/gb_can_gastemperaturemap.aspx).

Zoom in and click on your area to get local prices.
+1 Now that's cool!:p I have used GasBuddy before but had not seen that map.

Aaron:)

A quick check of www.gasbuddy.com shows that gas is $2.98 in Pekin IL.
NOT the $4+ claimed.
$2.82 here today.

It could just be an independent place. We have a couple Conoco stations downtown Denver which are always 20-30 cents higher than the big Diamond Shamrock I go by.

Why? Someone said they have regular customers nearby, and always frequent the small stations and simply don't mind.

The night of 9/11 a "Bradley" station on Parker Road and Quincy jacked their prices up to over $4.00, capatalizing on that day's fears that gas would suddenly dry up. Wish I could have taken a picture of the sign put in on a billboard above them :)

Could be as simple as a high-school age attendant forgetting to switch the dollar position in a $3.01 to 2.98 price change.

I just got off of the phone with 2 people in Central Illinois (Bloomington and Pekin, IL) and have heard that gas prices in bloomington jumped over a dollar earlier today to bring gas prices to $4 and change and Pekin's price will jump to $4.27 in the morning. I don't know if this is a localized scare over what's happening in the middle east, so has anyone else heard of similar things where you are? I assume the jumps have something to do with the middle east violence that's beginning to spiral now.

Every time i get wind of prices like this (or just normal prices even of over $3) it makes me want to focus on finding a job once I graduate from college in a town where car-free (or at least very car-lite) is a viable option.


Gas Prices in Little Rock (http://www.littlerockgasprices.com/) says that currently prices are under $3.00 here in Arkansas. Sounds like price gouging and profiteering.

This war has been going on for a couple of thousand years. Not likely much will change in a week or two.

If there is price gouging (sounds like it), then the governor will step in and investigate, because that is illegal. Better for people to contact the Attorney General as well as the governor's office to alert him of the price gouging than to sit around complaining. Other areas of the country haven't seen such a phenomenon, so it's clearly a local problem, not a national one.

Koffee

it'll probably hit $4 in hawaii in the next couple of weeks.

I can understand Hawaii. Everything is imported into Hawaii. But central Illinois? That bogus!

Koffee

I can understand Hawaii. Everything is imported into Hawaii. But central Illinois? That bogus!

Koffee
Well how much oil do you think is drilled in Illinois? Well over half of the oil used in every state is imported. Oil--even domestic oil--is bought and sold on world markets. If the supply from one region goes down, of even if people are afraid the supply might go down, prices all over the world will go up almost instantly. Therefore, even though the US doesn't get a lot of oil directly from the middle east, our prices will go up immediately if the middle east delivers (or might deliver) less oil to the world market.

That, in a nutshell, is why we're fighting in Iraq.

Other areas of the country haven't seen such a phenomenon, so it's clearly a local problem, not a national one.
The problem in this case was the willingness of the OP to believe and pass on without questioning whatever he was told by someone who didn't know what he was talking about. Followed up by some BF members willingness to believe and respond to whatever is posted without questioning the validity of outlandish "out of control" statements.


Hey, I heard that all the supermarkets are going to be out of toilet paper on Monday, better cycle on down there and stock up immediatly. That's what I heard anyway, better pass it on, eh?

Actually... the article I read said that at $75-$80 a barrel for oil, oil shale (and oil sands) does become economical.

they're starting work again on the oil shale in fact. One of the things that made it so expensive was that they dug the shale up, crushed it, then heated it to high temps to get the oil out, the new thing is to sink huge heaters straight into the ground (one test was using solar power for the heaters!) and heat the rock in place.... the oil bubbles up to the surface and they can get at it with a LOT less damage to the environment.

But... it's still oil, and there are plenty of alternatives, cheap oil is still keeping people from spending the cash needed to develop them. *goes looking for that very interesting article he read*

Using solar to extract oil from shale? That would take care of the whole inefficiency argument, wouldn't it? But then, we'd all still be using tons of oil... that would be be pretty ironic.

Do you notice how a lot of blame is focused on Iran? The first bomb to hit Iran, expect gas to go up to $4.00 bucks a gallon in no time. Those of us who are car free and don't have to pay for motor fuel are safe.

No, we're not safe. We buy food and clothing. And things made of plastic. And bikes, whose manufacture, along with everything else, depends on cheap energy. And our jobs depend on the stock market, which doesn't like high fuel prices. Just because you don't drive a car doesn't mean your life doesn't depend on oil. That's naive.

Using solar to extract oil from shale? That would take care of the whole inefficiency argument, wouldn't it? But then, we'd all still be using tons of oil... that would be be pretty ironic.

Yup. An interesting conflict there, huh? But, if you think about it... oil and coal are just stored solar energy. We're running on a huge battery here, without an easy means to recharge it.

My take on the whole 'energy crises' is that it's not nearly as bad as they make it.... Oil isn't going to just dissappear overnight, leaving us all in the lurch. As it becomes harder to find and extract, the price will keep going up, encouraging some to conserve, and encouraging more research into alternatives. Americans have already proven that they're willing to go to pretty insane lengths to keep their cars.
(I know one family that is receiving housing assistance, food stamps, and welfare money, and drives around in a '76 Chevy Suburban... or is that the old Silvarado? Whichever... it makes my '79 Blazer look small!)

I believe the single biggest factor keeping everyone chained to oil thus far has been it's relatively low price. Once that price really starts going up, people will finally start (are already starting to?) jump ship.
Whether that's through conservation or simply moving to another energy source remains to be seen (I personally think it'll be another energy source), and that does nothing for the unknown point in the future where the earth just can't support the human population (or maybe that point will never come... we may be living off solar energy that would go to the rest of the solar system by then....)

Who knows what the future may bring? I only hope that it's better than what some predict.

** edit: I'm not saying any transition is going to be easy by any means, it'll likely be nasty and bloody and all that... but then isn't that the norm for people?

If you only have 800 gallons of gas in storage at your station, (because smart consumer realized that what happens in the middle east affects the world supply of oil and therefore the price of gas and so they filled up last week), why shouldnt the gas station raise the price? If they didnt that station would run out. If stations started running out of gas you would see the mega lines begin to form. Illinois is the terminatinig point for fuel pipe lines comming from NJ the state is not out of gas, but the local station might be.

I dont think that we are dependant on oil / gas for life, just for cheap, high productivity life. Has anyone asked their boss for a raise, because of the price of gas? We will pay more for food that comes from far away, but we should have been paying more for gas all along.

You pays your nickel and you makes your choice.

Start buying local produce now so that when the avereage price of gas goes to 5 bucks, (I predict that it will spike to 5 by the end of August), there will be local produce available. If you live a hundred miles from work you will have to change your life around. Move closer to your work place or rent a place for use during the week.

Quit belly aching and be glad that you dont have to walk 20 miles to work each day. The upside is that many second rate countries have decent bike infrastructure.

Everything is unfolding as it should.

My take on the whole 'energy crises' is that it's not nearly as bad as they make it.... Oil isn't going to just dissappear overnight, leaving us all in the lurch. As it becomes harder to find and extract, the price will keep going up, encouraging some to conserve, and encouraging more research into alternatives. Americans have already proven that they're willing to go to pretty insane lengths to keep their cars.
(I know one family that is receiving housing assistance, food stamps, and welfare money, and drives around in a '76 Chevy Suburban... or is that the old Silvarado? Whichever... it makes my '79 Blazer look small!)

** edit: I'm not saying any transition is going to be easy by any means, it'll likely be nasty and bloody and all that... but then isn't that the norm for people?The welfare family you mention probably doesn't own a Suburban because they stupidly believe it's the best vehicle in their situation. More likely, the gas hog was given to them, or they were able to buy it very cheap because nobody else wanted it.

One problem is that the old gas hog SUVs won't suddenly vanish from the roads, even if gas prices make them increasingly uneconomical and unpopular. The rich people will trade in their gas hogs for more efficient vehicles. The poor people will more or less be forced to buy the devalued castoff SUVs, and also forced to buy the expensive fuel to run them. As always, the poor will suffer the most in the "transition" you so blithely predict.

If there is price gouging (sounds like it), then the governor will step in and investigate, because that is illegal. <snip>

I'm so sick of hearing about "price gouging" with respect to gasoline. If I owned a gas station I should be able to sell my gas for any price that I feel like. Why should gas be different that anything else.
I don't hear anything about price gouging because it costs more for a loaf of bread at 7/11 than it does at the grocery store.

I'm so sick of hearing about "price gouging" with respect to gasoline. If I owned a gas station I should be able to sell my gas for any price that I feel like. Why should gas be different that anything else.
I don't hear anything about price gouging because it costs more for a loaf of bread at 7/11 than it does at the grocery store.
But how would you feel about the price of bread going up to $10 after an earthquake or hurricane? People get upset when their neighbors profit on their misery after a disaster. Like gas prices in the midwest going overnight to $8 on 9/12/01.

But I agree that the current price increases don't qualify as gouging. They're more a market response to a threatened supply disruption. Blame Israel, Lebanon, Hezbollah, Bush....whomever. Don't blame your local Citgo or even the oil producers who are profiting from the situation. If people are stupid enough to pay $3 for gas, somebody is going to be smart enough to charge them $3.

I just got off of the phone with 2 people in Central Illinois (Bloomington and Pekin, IL) and have heard that gas prices in bloomington jumped over a dollar earlier today to bring gas prices to $4 and change and Pekin's price will jump to $4.27 in the morning.

What? The good folks of Pekin aren't all tooling around in E-85 flex fuel vehicles taking advantage of their local ADM ethanol plant?

But how would you feel about the price of bread going up to $10 after an earthquake or hurricane? People get upset when their neighbors profit on their misery after a disaster. Like gas prices in the midwest going overnight to $8 on 9/12/01.
<snip>

No matter what happened if I needed bread I would by it at the best price I could. If that's $10 then so be it. I wouldn't then go complain to my congressman to pass a law about a store owner charging too much for his product. If he charges too much, nobody will buy it.

No matter what happened if I needed bread I would by it at the best price I could. If that's $10 then so be it. I wouldn't then go complain to my congressman to pass a law about a store owner charging too much for his product. If he charges too much, nobody will buy it.
No...they'll smash the store window and take it.

I was at work when this rumor started going around, that gas in Springfield had gone to $4.00 a gallon. A huge run on gas in Decatur was the result, and some stations ran out of gas. The interesting thing is, the people I know in those towns that were supposed to be affected, such as Springfield and Bloomington, said the rumor in their towns was "it was going up in the morning." Better run out and panic to try and save maybe $20! On 9-11, when the rumor said there would be no more gas, the lines in the town of 1200 I lived in stretched for nearly a mile. Crack isn't this addictive.

Edit: Here is the lovely link to our Decatur tv station. Click on "Extremely High Gas Prices"
http://www.wandtv.com/ This is a video report from the night it happened, turns out the Clark station rose prices when they were nearly out of gas, and they were the only station in town to go up.

But how would you feel about the price of bread going up to $10 after an earthquake or hurricane? People get upset when their neighbors profit on their misery after a disaster. Like gas prices in the midwest going overnight to $8 on 9/12/01.
I would argue that a loaf of bread for $10 might be a sign of a market success. After an earthquake or hurricane, the local production and distribution infrastructure is massively disrupted. The only supplies that are available for days or weeks may be the ones already in the market. The demand will skyrocket, because people want to make sure they have food to eat until the situation improves. This situation forces the prices to go much higher than they would during normal conditions. If you limit "price gouging" in emergency situations, you will instead have massive shortages as people quickly buy up all available supply available at artificially low prices. Allowing the prices to rise naturally will create a market-based rationing of available supplies.


But I agree that the current price increases don't qualify as gouging. They're more a market response to a threatened supply disruption. Blame Israel, Lebanon, Hezbollah, Bush....whomever. Don't blame your local Citgo or even the oil producers who are profiting from the situation. If people are stupid enough to pay $3 for gas, somebody is going to be smart enough to charge them $3.
When gasoline consumers get news of a potential supply disruption, they top off their tanks earlier than they otherwise would have, increasing demand, and driving up prices.

I would argue that a loaf of bread for $10 might be a sign of a market success. After an earthquake or hurricane, the local production and distribution infrastructure is massively disrupted. The only supplies that are available for days or weeks may be the ones already in the market. The demand will skyrocket, because people want to make sure they have food to eat until the situation improves. This situation forces the prices to go much higher than they would during normal conditions. If you limit "price gouging" in emergency situations, you will instead have massive shortages as people quickly buy up all available supply available at artificially low prices. Allowing the prices to rise naturally will create a market-based rationing of available supplies. Of course you'd argue the market has succeeded, for as long as you had enough money to buy your loaf of bread. After y9our money ran out you'd be rioting with the rest of us. I don't think you have any first hand knowledge of inflation, do you?

Also, High prices do not prevent shortages. They are a response to shortages, or to the fear of shortages.



When gasoline consumers get news of a potential supply disruption, they top off their tanks earlier than they otherwise would have, increasing demand, and driving up prices
This could happen, but it's clearly not what's raising prices right now. This is a price rise caused by supply, not demand. Supply in oil is so tight these days that even a small decrease will have big consequences. I don't believe that people are buying more gas than usual, or at least I have not seen this reported.

Oil shale may make seem to make sense from an economic perspective if you can sell it for more than it cost to extract it. But when we are talking about energy resources, there is another factor that is important as well: energy return on energy invested or EROEI. If we must expend more than one barrel of oil worth of energy to locate, extract and refine a barrel of oil from the oil shale, then it would have made more sense to just leave the oil shale in the ground. The problem with many of the unconventional oil sources, such as oil shale, tar sands, and deep water deposits, is that they tend to have a very low, and sometimes even a negative EROEI.
Well first, many forms of energy have a negative EROEI. Any time you convert energy from one form to another, there is some inefficiency and loss. For example, it takes more BTUs of energy (in the form of coal) to produce electricity, than is actually delivered on the power grid. The turbines are not 100 % efficient, and some power is lost in transmission. Nevertheless, electricity makes economic sense because it is a convenient way to store and transport energy. Rather than burning coal in our homes to run little steam-powered blenders, we plug the blender into the wall and voila! Of course we pay a price for this convenience, quite willingly.

It's kind of the same with oil and gas. There is a tremendous expenditure of energy involved in producing and shipping fossil fuels, but we pay that price in return for the convenience of having more fuel for more cars, in a form that can be piped or tanked for thousands of miles to our neighborhood self-serve station. (And of course much of that cost is hidden away in the form of subsidies and concessions to oil producers.)

In the case of the tar sands and shale, the idea is to use natural gas, coal and/or nuclear power to process the product, so that people can continue to have the convenience of private cars--obviously at an increased cost! It really doesn't matter that it takes more BTUs to produce the product than what you get from it. That's just the way it's always been done, and apparently always will be.

Of course you'd argue the market has succeeded, for as long as you had enough money to buy your loaf of bread. After y9our money ran out you'd be rioting with the rest of us.
I'm not saying that $10 for a loaf of bread is a good thing, nor that is the most fair thing. I was merely saying that the market was acting as it should be expected to act in an unusual sitatuion.

But after a large scale emergency, if there are only 1000 loaves of bread, with no possibility of more for many days, what is the best way to equitably distribute them? You could cap the price at the pre-emergency level, with the result being a first-come, first-served run on bread, with the quickest feet getting the most bread. You could "auction" the bread by letting the market set the price, with the bread going to the people with the deepest pockets. You could hold a lottery, so that the luckiest people get the break. Or the government could confiscate all the remaining bread, and ration it out to the survivors, so that everybody gets a little bread.

There is certainly an argument for each of these being the "fairest" means of distribution by some measure of fairness. But which one is best? In my personal opinion, some variation of rationing is the fairest distribution method, but in the immediate aftermath of a large scale emergency, that is very difficult to arrange something like that.


I don't think you have any first hand knowledge of inflation, do you?
I was not an active consumer during the 1970s, if that's what you are asking.


Also, High prices do not prevent shortages. They are a response to shortages, or to the fear of shortages.
If there is no more of certain product to be had, at any price, then shortages are inevitable. But if you cap a price at an atificially low price, then you will induce artificial shortages, because more people will be demanding the product at that price than producers are willing to sell. The OPEC oil embargo of 1973-4 drastically reduced supplies of gasoline. If there had been no price caps, people would have been able to buy as much gasoline as liked at the market price, but the price would have just been very high. Instead, prices were capped, resulting in shortages, as demand oustripped supply at the artificially low price.


This could happen, but it's clearly not what's raising prices right now. This is a price rise caused by supply, not demand. Supply in oil is so tight these days that even a small decrease will have big consequences. I don't believe that people are buying more gas than usual, or at least I have not seen this reported.
I was saying that short term demand changes can result in short-term price spikes immediately following news of a crisis that can affect oil supply in the future. Obviously, the high base price of gasoline is due to the fact that world oil production has not been increasing since late 2004, yet worldwide demand has continued to increase at about 2% per year.

An interesting thought here:

The other day, I was taking the subway to a location that (checked mapquest) was 2.7 miles from me. The subway here is $1.25 each way, so it's a $2.50 round trip. At the current gas prices, it would have cost me $0.60 round trip (assuming 28mpg, at 18mpg it's $0.92). (Yes, I would have rode the bike but my tire was flat and my pump broken, which was the reason I was travelling -- to the bike store to get the pump fixed -- on the subway) Yikes! Driving a car, cheaper?!

I've noticed that public transportation prices continue to rise as they claim financial losses. Even in NYC where they said they had a $300 million deficit, and then it turned out they'd cooked the books just for the price-hike hearing, they STILL raised the prices to $2.00 each ride. Sad to say, but we need to make public transportation more affordable. Maybe we could use a gas tax to supplement public transportation?

The other day, I was taking the subway to a location that (checked mapquest) was 2.7 miles from me. The subway here is $1.25 each way, so it's a $2.50 round trip. At the current gas prices, it would have cost me $0.60 round trip (assuming 28mpg, at 18mpg it's $0.92). (Yes, I would have rode the bike but my tire was flat and my pump broken, which was the reason I was travelling -- to the bike store to get the pump fixed -- on the subway) Yikes! Driving a car, cheaper?!
The pricing structure of automobile transportation encourages this economic reasoning. The direct costs of owning and operating an automobile are quite high, and include depreciation, financing, taxes, registration, licensing, insurance, maintenance, and gasoline. Nearly all of these are fixed costs that change very little regardless of how much or how little you drive. The only really variable cost is gasoline, and it is a small fraction of the total cost of owning and operating a car. If you go the expense of keeping an automobile around at all, then using it is quite cheap. But if you were to consider all the costs associated with owning and operating a car, it's closer to $2/mile.

Practically speaking, that means if you can substitute enough of your automobile usage with public transportation, bicycling, and other transport modes that you can sell one or more of your existing cars or delay the purchase of a replacement car, you will end up saving money in the long run.


Maybe we could use a gas tax to supplement public transportation?
I would certainly be highly supportive of using taxes on automobile use to fund alternatives to private automobile transportation. However, given the overwhelming popularity of car culture, and the calls for repealing existing gas taxes that pay for automobile infrastructure, I find it highly unlikely that a public transit gas tax would be passed any time soon.