« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »
A National Energy Policy - When?
Hillary Clinton is the poster child for our national need to change the way business is being done in Washington.
More than anything else (even a national health care system) we need to hold a rational discussion and reach a national consensus on a responsible national energy policy. For over twenty five years our Presidents and political leaders in Congress have avoided tackling the need to reform our national energy non-policy and its pernicious effects. Our transportation infrastructure quite literally has crumbled; our debt to China and other nations has grown off the charts; our automakers have produced a national fleet of gas guzzlers so large that we can afford neither to operate fleet at today's gas prices nor replace it with fuel-efficient vehicles; our options in conducting a rational foreign policy have been distorted by our need to import oil; and our competition for oil has showered some of the world's most reprehensible regimes with dollars.
We have reached this sorry state as a result of the inability of our political leaders to speak frankly to the American people about the need to curtail oil consumption, support the development of renewable energy sources and adjust to the sacrifices that such a policy would entail.
Hillary has continued the failed approach of the Reagan, Bush, Clinton and Bush-Cheney administrations. She supports anything that would reduce the price at the pump and virtually nothing that would sharply curtail demand at pump. This creates the illusion that we can continue with life as usual and avoid the sacrifices that a sensible energy policy would entail. She can't take McCain to task on the failure of our national energy non-policy because she too advocates its continuation.
Will Obama be able to end the politics that have prevented any rational discussion of a national energy policy? I, for one, hope he will have the opportunity to serve as President and enable us to reach a national consensus.
Comments (3)
A national energy policy is one of our primary needs, for multiple reasons. (So is national health care, which is an entirely separate discussion.)
Energy policy will touch on many other areas, including transportation (we need high speed intercity rail - sooner rather than later, just as one example), urban planning, technological research and development, and national security.
We need to develop an energy infrastructure that is not based on combustion, for the long haul. In the interim, we need to get very clever very quickly. Urban public transit needs to be a priority, along with such things as a uniquely American approach to "congestion pricing" - a surcharge added to monthly parking ramp contracts in urban centers. Dedicate the proceeds to public transit and solve two problems at once.
Use what we currently have to to build our way into a much more self-sufficient electrical future. Wind, solar, and other things can be deployed where useful, including very carefully designed, built, operated, maintained, and inspected nuclear generation to take the place of most coal and possibly natural gas.
High speed intercity rail can displace air travel for distances of up to 5-600 miles, once we factor in the Homeland Security Theater delays and the travel time to the airport. A bonus is that you really can't offshore laying rail, or the other related infrastructural or operating work, so it will create some decent paying American jobs in the bargain.
Given the increased energy efficiencies of the refit over the next 50-100 years or so, we'd likely also see some significant environmental benefits.
These are things off the top of my graying head. I have not given lengthy consideration to them, and I'm sure it's an incomplete picture. There must be strong efforts (of what type?) made to moderate the impact on low-income workers, as simply letting pump prices rise is a highly regressive consumption reducer.
May 27, 2008 3:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for your thoughtful comments. Your suggestions could be a sensible basis for a rational national energy policy.
Up until now, demand for gasoline has proved to be nearly inelastic with respect to price. We finally may be reaching a price level where we will see a noticeable drop in demand if prices increase and hold at prices above $4.00 per gallon.
At this point, I suspect we have lost our opportunity to control prices at the pump (if gas prices at the pump can be contolled at all). The increasing worldwide demand is the primary cause of increasing prices.
Excessive speculation undoubtedly contributes significantly to both crude oil and gas prices. If we can devise money laundering regulation to thwart terrorist and drug dealers, we can devise money laundering regulation to thwart excessive speculation in crude oil and its refined products.
The most effective method of controlling price at the pump is to reduce demand at the pump.
A tax credit for taking gas guzzlers out of service (permanently) would reduce the demand for gasoline.
A progressive excise tax on new vechicles proportional to the vehicles gas consumption (not MPG) would also reduce demand for gas guzzlers.
A tax deduction for commuters using public transportation would have a dramatic impact in those markets in which public transportation is a viable alternative to private vehicles.
Some sacrifice for all will be necessary. We will have to give up the large vehicles we now favor and develop housing dense enough to support public transportation. These are not changes that Americans will welcome. But I believe they are changes we can be persuaded to accept.
May 27, 2008 4:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
1. rail (smartly)
2. nuclear (safely)
3. incentivize fleet turnover while exorbitantly raising CAFE
4. national speed limit: 50 or 55
5. incentivize conservation by outlawing the sale of electricity pro rata; it should become more expensive the more you want to use each billing cycle.
6. redirect at least half of all oil subsidies to developing the clean renewable energy industry; the price at the pump be damned
7. national campaign to make as many cities bike-friendly as possible
...
Those are the most effective and easiest things I can think of, given the current set of technologies and policy choices. It's not a bad start. Clearthinker has blogged extensively on the subject, as many of us are aware. See his blogs for more ideas.
May 27, 2008 7:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Post a Comment