<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:CF139CC0-CE37-499A-B56A-449C9261B9AF@mac.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">
What I expect to see is telecommuting finally come into its own. Many
billions of dollars of productivity are lost commuting not to mention
the waste in fuel and belching nasties into the air.
</pre>
</blockquote>
That will be great. It's happening far too slowly for me. Bosses like
to micromanage and supervise. What will all those supervisors do when
they have no one left to baby-sit? <br>
<blockquote cite="mid:CF139CC0-CE37-499A-B56A-449C9261B9AF@mac.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">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.
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
I used to drive 50 minutes each way to work. I can assure you that
although I love to drive I was not in the least unhappy to no longer
need to take such a commute. The mileage I put on my car fell
drastically. I do love to drive and love my independence of movement
but the vast majority of my driving was commute. I suspect that is
true for a lot of people.
</pre>
</blockquote>
I agree. I think everyone would like to use their cars less. But that
doesn't change the fact that people won;t just willingly give them up
entirely. <br>
<blockquote cite="mid:CF139CC0-CE37-499A-B56A-449C9261B9AF@mac.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap=""></pre>
<pre wrap="">
I think many would jump on really effective telecommuting even
faster. But I did buy a Prius largely because of my former long
commute.
</pre>
</blockquote>
Of course. But that doesn't help all the travel, trips to the store,
movies, entertainment, and everything else people do with their cars.
That's why they won;t give them up. If it was just about getting to
work and back it would be different. <br>
<blockquote cite="mid:CF139CC0-CE37-499A-B56A-449C9261B9AF@mac.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">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.
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
Massive upgrades of electricity production (nuclear, solar, wind,
wave, etc.) and affordable electric cars and conversion kits will do
the trick eventually. If I can pay to convert for less than I spend a
year on gas and pay it over time then I would be a fool not to.
</pre>
</blockquote>
My point exactly. <br>
<blockquote cite="mid:CF139CC0-CE37-499A-B56A-449C9261B9AF@mac.com"
type="cite"><br>
<br>
<pre wrap="">
There is no great bonanza of oil in Alaska.
</pre>
</blockquote>
This makes it even more crucial.<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:CF139CC0-CE37-499A-B56A-449C9261B9AF@mac.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">exactly. We love to drive, and we'll pressure politicians to keep gas
prices under $100 a tank - but if the price raises enough to hurt,
people will be motivated to think in the "right" direction (towards
alternatives)
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!----></pre>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">it wouldn't be worth it to go to work - so an
artificial 50% increase now is just enough pain to adopt hybrid and
electric vehicles so we can tolerate another 300+% increase tomorrow.
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
I doubt there is much "artificial" about the increase. Want to know
how fast the US$ is going down the toilet? Watch the price of oil.
Add to this the unpleasant likelihood that Peak Oil is largely real
and increasing competition for oil from little places like China.
What is artificial and for a limited time only is how little the price
of gas has gone up in response. Fortunately most gas is refined and
stored before the peak driving season every year in the US. So much
of the hike in oil prices did not hit us yet. Wait until next
summer. Also there is some likelihood of the price being
artificially kept down in that the "crack spread" between what oil can
be bought for and refined and what the resulting product brings on the
market is narrowing too much to be very healthy for refiners. This
could be bad in that we are a bit short in the refinery department as
it is and it takes considerable time and expense to bring new ones
online.
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">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.
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
As it is largely not the fault of these car owners that would be
grossly unjust as are most government appropriations.
</pre>
</blockquote>
lol. While I wholeheartedly agree, I don't see any other way to do it.
Anyone who knows me knows that I am just a little less libertarian than
Mike Lorrey (is he still around?). But I am willing to admit that
government at times has to do things that capitalism won't. At the
moment I don't think a taxless society is workable. This may change in
the future but we're talking about the present. That's a whole
different discussion in itself but I do think this is one case where
tax money is necessary to do the job. But hey, here's an idea. Since we
are perfectly willing to go into massive debt for wars and such, why
not just go more into debt and put the full force and finance of the US
government into developing an alternative? Call it a "War on oil". The
goal - spend 1 trillion dollars to develop a new renewable energy
source so we can pull our forces away from the rest of the world and
simply focus on defending our own borders. The return on investment
would be both the sales of the technology abroad and no longer having
to get involved in foreign wars. <br>
<br>
</body>
</html>