Bumping the cost of petrol through taxes: ... only means that marginal technologies, which are uneconomic otherwise, get a look in. People wont buy them unless they are superior and cheaper to existing petrol engined cars.
US military projects helped produce nuclear power. Maybe the US needs to make energy a military issue and use the 500 billion USD military budget to throw consistent funding toward energy research. As georgeha on HuSi pointed out, the cost of petrol includes the cost of the US military being deployed in the Middle East.
The other alternative is to make the hidden costs of petrol open. Carbon credits, or some other form of market recognition of extra cost. Hummer drivers that go into DC each day should pay more for it. DC is on the verge of losing federal highway funding because the air is so crappy. Carbon credits maybe one way to physically show that cost, and enable those, such as yourself, who have more fuel efficient cars to sell extra credits to hummer drivers.
Taxes dont work. We know they dont go to where they are supposed to. The 40% tax on petrol hasnt gone to energy research in Australia, doubt it has in the US. It just disappears into the warm fuzzy coffers of government.
Petrol is cheap for a reason, it is still plentiful, there is a large logistical infrastructure to support the extraction, refining and transportation of it. Taxing it more isnt going to change that. Maybe we simply need to reflect its true cost.
cam
Comments