Advocacy & Safety - Declaration of Energy Independence

I was reading Salon (gasp!) and came across the Declaration of Energy Independence in a sidebar.

http://www.savebiogems.org/declaration.asp?src=S10201

What say you, BikeForums members? Is increased fuel economy for cars a noble goal, or does such a goal simply perpetuate the status quo?

Also, it mentions "enacting tax incentives for hybrid and fuel cell vehicles". Do I get a tax break for riding a hybrid bike?

andy

Originally posted by aturley
What say you, BikeForums members? Is increased fuel economy for cars a noble goal, or does such a goal simply perpetuate the status quo?

I tend to think increased fuel economy for cars would merely encourage people to drive more (the same as the new roads argument somewhere else on this forum). As I've said, they merely need to actually allow the stuff to be priced to reflect both the limited nature of the resource and the actual cost of producing it. Simply stopping subsidies would do that.

Just imagine if fuel subsidy money was instead spent on research to find alternative fuel sources... :eek:

I am not convinced that raising fuel economy will induce more motoring in already-congested areas, but Chris does raise an interesting point. I strongly favor bringing vans and SUVs under the same safety (e.g. rollover), fuel economy, and emissions standards as cars, and then continuing to raise the bar gradually year after year. I agree with Chris that we should halt all of the various hidden subsidies motorists now receive.

There are times that I think Adam Smith does not have the sole answer to every ill that plagues mankind.

If the profit motive is the magic cure to every ill, it certainly has it's shortcomings when it comes to preserving our limited resources for future generations.

The way we use things up and throw them out (as opposed to our grandparents and great-grandparents way of, "use it up, fix it up, wear it out, make it last,") it won't be long before we force our children and grandchildren to return to that frugality.

They will probably look on us as very childish, indeed.

:rolleyes:

I'm feeling pretty independent from energy, I haven't had any all week!

As with all economic models, unless you account for "external costs" you needn'y pay attention to them. Congestion and pollution are both costs which have to be bourne, but not by the individual who benefits from their production.
We all pay for the disposal of household garbage. It would be much cheaper if I could just empty my rubbish in the street, but funnily enough, people object, so we have to have expensive collection and storage facilities.
Whilst objecting to rubbish disposal in the steet is seen as normal and the action of a good citizen, objecting to rubbish disposal in the atmosphere is the action of a subversive.

In the USA, I don't think that present fuel prices influence driving habits much. The average American is wealthy enough and fuel costs are low enough that fuel cost is not a consideration in transportation choices. This is why you have single riders/drivers driving huge fuel-use-intensive SUV automobiles commuting daily to/from distant suburbs.

The daily schedule of bringing kids to various activities are planned with no thought whatsoever as to the amount of fuel it will take.

For this reason, I think that having better fuel efficiency COULD have a positive impact on our environment - especially in the USA. That is, since fuel costs are not restraining people from driving more, better fuel efficiency (i.e. lower costs) will probably not encourage people to drive more either.

Better fuel efficiency would simply mean less fuel used.

I'm all for better fuel efficiency in motor vehicles.

Originally posted by mike
Better fuel efficiency would simply mean less fuel used.

I'm all for better fuel efficiency in motor vehicles.
I just love pulling my bike up behind a MARTA bus labeled with a blue diamond and the letters, "CNG" (Certified Natural Gas.)

Not a stink in a busload.

I don't know if it's more efficient or not, but it sure don't smell!

(This is where someone jumps in and tells me how bad natural gas emissions can be... :D )

Originally posted by MichaelW
It would be much cheaper if I could just empty my rubbish in the street, but funnily enough, people object, so we have to have expensive collection and storage facilities.

Whilst objecting to rubbish disposal in the steet is seen as normal and the action of a good citizen, objecting to rubbish disposal in the atmosphere is the action of a subversive.
(Michael, I want to laugh, and cry.)