Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
100 words for 100 days: submit your 100 word essay and get published on AlterNet
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Environment

Why We Can't Afford Cheap Gas

By Andy Kroll, AlterNet. Posted September 29, 2008.


We can't let the talk about alternative energy rise and fall with the cost of gas, or the environment and our economy will pay a mighty price.
Advertisement

With the cost of crude oil again nearing the $100-a-barrel mark (even after last week’s financial meltdown) and this summer’s record gas prices in the rearview mirror, automotive executives and industry analysts are already heralding the return of gas-guzzling trucks and SUVs. Car makers are rolling out new truck models, and even Republican presidential candidate John McCain, in a new Michigan TV spot, promises to "spur truck sales." Never mind that only months earlier, these same analysts, as well as auto executives and consumers alike, insisted that the future of the automotive industry lay in more fuel-efficient models like hybrid and electric cars. Now, however, it seems that many involved are slowly slipping back into the pre-$100-per-barrel mindset that was so popular when pump prices were under $4 a gallon and drivers of SUVs and trucks roared down the roads with clean consciences.

But if history is any indication, this period of relief and a possible shift back to gas-guzzling cars must be met with cold-eyed skepticism. Sure, cheaper gas means much needed short-term financial relief. Looking past the next year or two, however, cheaper oil and a resurgence of gas-guzzling vehicles would be seriously detrimental to the United States, as similar oil crises in the past have shown that the periods immediately after a spike in oil prices -- not the crises themselves -- have arguably inflicted far greater damage on the country. During these relief periods, critical efforts to develop alternative energies and fuel-efficient technologies -- begun under the culture of urgency that an energy crisis instills -- have been squashed, allowing Americans to revert to the same old habits, tendencies and behaviors that got them into trouble in the first place.

Take, for example, the October 1973 U.S. oil embargo. After a group of African and Middle Eastern countries briefly stopped supplying the United States with oil, prices in early 1974 climbed from $3 to $11 per barrel, setting off a nationwide energy panic and resulting in massive lines at gas stations. In response, President Richard Nixon proposed lowering speed limits on federal and state highways and temporarily banning the sale of gasoline on Sundays. Nixon also announced his "Project Independence," a set of energy-related recommendations aimed at achieving the quixotic goal of making the United States energy independent by 1980.

Though Nixon succeeded in lowering speed limits and imposing the Sunday ban for a brief period, Project Independence floundered. As oil prices began to drop after the '73 embargo, Nixon's vision of a United States "that will not be dependent on any other country for the energy we need to provide our jobs, to heat our homes and to keep our transportation moving" was reduced to a flimsy "blueprint" passed on to his successor, Gerald Ford, in late 1974. Time reported that the weakened blueprint would "not be an action program, but rather a listing of options for debate within government and eventual White House decision." Under Ford, Project Independence soon disappeared, and although Ford renewed his predecessor's goal for making the United States energy independent (this time, by 1985), Americans quickly reverted back to good old reliable oil.

In 1979, this same narrative of an oil crisis, a subsequent "commitment" to energy independence and then an immediate scrapping of alternative energies research played out once more. After the Iranian Revolution and the ousting of the Shah of Iran, a worldwide oil panic ensued in which the cost of a barrel of crude oil in April 1980 shot up to a record $39.50, or $103.76 in today's money when adjusted for inflation. Like the '73-'74 crisis, the lines at gas pumps grew, rationing measures were implemented, and hysteria quickly spread throughout the country.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: alternative energy, gasoline

Andy Kroll is a summer intern at the Nation. His writing has appeared at Campus Progress, CBSNews.com, and the Progressive Review. He can be reached at andykroll@gmail.com

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Environment! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
I wouldn't worry much about "cheap gas"
Posted by: Jasonix on Sep 29, 2008 5:11 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's amazing that we've been so conditioned by the oil companies that we're willing to think of $3.45 a gallon gasoline as "cheap." How far could the price of gas fall? Let's suppose it falls as far as $2.50. Every time gas falls, it's a sign that someone else is out of work and can't afford to drive anywhere. If the falling price of gas provides enough financial relief to spur the economy to grow again, then the price of gas will quickly rise, and the economy will resume its slump. We're stuck in a yo-yo right now, with gas being a limiting factor in how much our economy can recover. That scenario has long been predicted by peak oil observers.

The economy is clearly going to get worse, which should sink the price of gas further, but our currency is also going to crash, which should increase it. There is also the fact that Big Oil has lowered the price of gas prior to critical elections in an effort to ease people's minds about the economy, thus giving a boost to the GOP. After November, Big Oil may simply decide to cut production and boost the price.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

the difficulty of all this
Posted by: davescott on Sep 29, 2008 5:13 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"However, the likelihood that Congress would increase gas taxes and establish an oil floor -- a move sure to draw the ire of many, many Americans -- is nonexistent."

Yes, because many of them would no longer be in Congress, and the floor would be repealed after the next election by people we don't want to see back in power. I don't disagree for a moment with your main premise. I am at a loss how we get around the political certainty that "higher gas prices are good for you" is the deadbang loser message of all time. We have to figure out how to get a price on carbon emissions, and we have to do it soon, but no one should underestimate the political difficulty of selling higher energy costs to an easily manipulated and skeptical public.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

We need to think outside the box.
Posted by: JakobFabian01 on Sep 29, 2008 5:15 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This box is the automobile.

Sure, in a few decades, we may have super-efficient cars, maybe even cars that run on fuel cells ultimately powered by windmills.

But that's in a few decades. Who can even say how many decades it will take? We need to reduce petroleum dependency and carbon emissions now.

The way to do that is to rebuild our network of trains and public-transportation networks, which were the envy of the rest of the world before our national policy, about half a century ago, became abandonment and neglect of trains in favor of more "modern," but less efficient modes of transportation: cars and airplanes. Trains save energy by stopping and starting less often than cars and by dramatically reducing the number of vehicles per person. They are also the most efficient means of over-land freight transport, for the same reason. Trains are also far, far more efficient than airplanes, since they never have to lift themselves up off the ground.

Our failure to invest in trains of any kind over the last 50 years, while pouring public money into airports and highways, has narrowed our travel options and made us inefficient compared to Europe and Japan, where trains have been continually modernized, rather than neglected.

Rails are the shortest way to greater energy efficiency, not to mention a great job-creation program.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Europe is Different Posted by: gellero1
Transit inventions
Posted by: PaulK on Sep 29, 2008 7:36 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
First, go see "Flash of Genius".

There is no market whatsoever in the United States for transit inventions. That's exactly why the price of transit hasn't plummeted by a factor of ten, and the convenience and safety of personal rapid transit hasn't risen by a factor of ten at the same time. Remember this when you fill up at the pump, or when you look at part of your car (or yourself) crumpled by a drunk driver, or when you sit in traffic, or when the Wilkins ice shelf finishes disintegrating in a few months.

If you want inventors to work and get things done, pay them. If you want people to pretend to work, pay them imaginary money. Or call FEMA.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

First of all, the price of gas was RIGGED to be artificially "cheap" all these decades.
Posted by: maxpayne on Sep 29, 2008 7:52 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If it weren't for gubbmint oversubsidizing Big Oil/Coal/Gas all the while outlawing hemp for fuel and persecuting people and businesses trying to put solar and hemp to work with zoning laws and tax increases all the while giving tax breaks to gas and energy guzzlers, things would have been a whole lot different and the true costs of fossil fuels would have been acknowledged and people would be more inclined towards conserving and making fuel/energy efficient technologies and giving eco-friendly products a better chance in the market. Unfortunately it is not and I hate to say this again and sound like a mad man but

GOD IS SEVERELY PUNISHING THE USA TO ETERNAL DAMNATION FOR WAGING DESPERATE RESOURCE WARS FOR OIL ALL THE WHILE OUTLAWING PEACEFUL PLANTS AND PERSECUTING THE FRUGAL AND THOSE TRYING TO PUT ALTERNATIVE ENVIRONMENTALLY FRIENDLY TECHNOLOGIES FIRST !!!! AND IF YOU THINK GAS PRICES ARE TOO HIGH NOW, JUST YOU WAIT UNTIL AFTER THE ELECTION WHEN GAS IS $5/GALLON AND HIGHER ! TO HELL WITH THOSE GOD DAMN MOTHERFUCKING GAS GUZZLING SUVS AND PICKUP TRUCKS !! EITHER CHANGING YOUR POLS WHO WILL STOP OVERSUBSIDIZING THE FOSSIL FUEL GIANTS OR PREPARE TO FACE MORE BURNING HELL !!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Welcome to /ignore Posted by: EinMD
The Fed is messing with the market!
Posted by: ReallyBearish on Sep 29, 2008 9:07 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The futures market is now totally corrupt. Obviously, oil and gas prices should not be going down-- at least not yet. There are shortages in the South along with gas lines, a clear indication that the price of gas is too low.

What the Fed is doing is buying the short side of futures contracts thru intermediaries, forcing the price of oil and gas down (until after the election). The stupid financial press is attributing this to "world wide economic contraction", without a shred of evidence that demand for oil has actually gone down.

Ultimately, we'll have the Fed fail, making it the 3rd central bank in US history to fail.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

DON'T make synthetic gasoline from coal
Posted by: AsteroidMiner on Sep 29, 2008 10:51 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
See:
How Canada Went from 21st to 2nd in World's Oil Reserves
By Dan Woynillowicz, World Watch. Posted September 17, 2007.
and
Big Coal's Dirty Plans for Our Energy Future (with shocking
photos)
By Antrim Caskey, AlterNet. Posted December 14, 2007.
and
research synfuels.

Synthetic liquid fuel made from coal puts a lot more CO2 into the
air than fuel made from crude oil because the synfuel process is
energy intensive. Putting CO2 into the air is what we have to
stop doing to avoid our own extinction. Synthetic fuel is also bad
for your engine because it contains finely ground rock.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» How about algae or even bugs? Posted by: maxpayne
Brenda(brennie)kay Winters
Posted by: brennie on Sep 30, 2008 9:35 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
RIDE THE BUS PEOPLE-stop complaing-carpool. My grandfather went through the GREAT DEPRESSION-we can survive. HIS only BOOK was the HOLY BIBLE, the book of LIFE. Wht is concerning me is what I heard from a RESERVE ARMY OFFICER about MASS GRAVES from more DEAD in TEXAS from HURRICANE IKE.This concerns me because these people are unknown AMERICANS who are someones Father, Brother Mother and Sister-no grieving what we are not told. And- just when is MONEY more important than LIFE?????

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Ask the Republicans. Posted by: EinMD
Brenda(brennie)kay Winters
Posted by: brennie on Sep 30, 2008 9:36 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Please read and Pray the above comment. America needs help.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

People will never get it.
Posted by: Pirate1 on Oct 3, 2008 6:27 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We can't continue to burn fossil fuels. Period. If we do, sure, the planet will go on but we will lose the conditions necessary for life as we know it to continue( now that means YOU, and ME and all the other life forms we are familiar with, trees, grasses, leafy greens, monkeys, lemurs, elephants, wolves, all your pets, food animals, whales, fish, insects, corals, birds, all wild life in general) We will all die with a wimper along with all other life that never wanted anything more than to just live and that will forever be our legacy as a species.

And of course, most of you'll vote for McCain too because his veep is cute, like the bunch of TV addled twits you are. You all deserve what is coming.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

i agree with that
Posted by: BestUK on Oct 5, 2008 8:14 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
and even Republican presidential candidate John McCain, in a new Michigan TV spot, promises to "spur truck sales." Never mind that only months earlier, these same analysts, as well as auto executives and consumers alike, insisted that the 8600 future of the automotive industry lay in more fuel-efficient models like hybrid and electric cars
i hate all those promise

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Brenda Kay brennie Winters
Posted by: brenniewinters on Oct 13, 2008 3:08 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Today gasoline prices fell again. If I were a pump, I would faint from dizziness with all the media confusion pouring into my idiot box. America has been and always will be resourceful and a Leader amoung Nations. Why? One Nation, under G_d, indivisible with liberty and justice for all. A Government of the people, for the people and by the people-remember the Gettysburg Address?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]