<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:62c14240712171845l629401edl9b3dcdc8e77a60b6@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap=""><!---->
If we can give up our oil addiction and guilt the world into believing
in the "green" program, we can further raise the price of the dirty
habit for those who can't afford the switch to carbon-free
alternatives. (You know, like charging $4.50 for the same box of
cigarettes that was < $2.00 only ten years ago: the more people quit,
the more they can charge the remaining recalcitrant smokers) </pre>
</blockquote>
Has there been any research that shows that this method actually
reduces the number of smokers? Or do they just alter other parts of
their lives to compensate? Except for myself, everyone I know that
smoked 10 years ago still does. I quit because of my father's
emergency bypass surgery and subsequent coma. (He still smokes). <br>
I know that several years ago when the gas prices spiked for a while, a
lot of people switched to driving smaller vehicled and SUVs took a
beating in the US. Since then it appears on the surface that people
have went back to buying the SUVs despite gas being twice what it was 7
years ago. Instead they have found other ways to deal with it such as
cutting back entertainment, buying cheaper Chinese made products, and
cancelling their gym memberships.<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:62c14240712171845l629401edl9b3dcdc8e77a60b6@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap=""> I have
little doubt the US will tap Alaskan oil fields, but not before the
selling price is five times what it is now. In order to make that
happen, some changes are obviously required. Americans will not pay
that much to drive, </pre>
</blockquote>
Prove it. I think you are wrong. Americans have a love affair with the
independence that driving a car brings. They cannot all afford to go
out and buy a new vehicle. The average commute is 45 minutes meaning
that they can't just walk to work. Most of the working population has a
car payment that goes along with the car and that would still have to
be paid whether or not they were driving the car. The cars they have
now would lose their value and they would not be
able to trade them without incurring a huge additional amount of debt
which is already a severe problem in the US. The problem is on the
manufacturing end. If someone suddenly started releasing cars that were
comfortable, attractive, safe (both real and perceived), that would do
75 mpg - or even 100, they would jump on it. But even then you have the
used car problem to address. Any real alternative to make a difference
will have to include all the used vehicles already out there. <br>
<br>
Also, this still doesn't address the problem. The oil in Alaska, if not
purchased by the US will be bought from us by other countries. It will
be sold to whomever is willing to pay the most. <br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:62c14240712171845l629401edl9b3dcdc8e77a60b6@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">it wouldn't be worth it to go to work - so an
artificial 50% increase now is just enough pain to adopt hybrid and
electric vehicles so we can tolerate another 300+% increase tomorrow.
</pre>
</blockquote>
More money needs to be spent on R&D to make these products
available. I like where you are going with this though. How about a
$1.50 per gallon gas guzzler tax on all passenger vehicles that get
less than 30 mpg and use that money to directly fund alternative
R&D. <br>
<br>
</body>
</html>