• 4 minutes Pompeo: Aramco Attacks Are An "Act Of War" By Iran
  • 7 minutes Who Really Benefits From The "Iran Attacked Saudi Arabia" Narrative?
  • 11 minutes Trump Will Win In 2020
  • 15 minutes Experts review Saudi damage photos. Say Said is need to do a lot of explaining.
  • 7 hours Ethanol is the SAVIOR of the Oil Industry, Convenience Store Industry, Automotive Supply Chain Industry and Much More!
  • 1 hour Ethanol, the Perfect Home Remedy for A Saudi Oil Fever
  • 6 hours Instagram Now Banning Photos Of People At Gun Ranges, Claiming They Promote "Violence"
  • 2 hours Let's shut down dissent like The Conversation in Australia
  • 2 hours Pepe Escobar: “How The Houthis Overturned The Chessboard”
  • 12 hours Famous Manufacturer of Anti-Ethanol Additives Proves Ethanol's Safety and Benefits
  • 18 hours Collateral Damage: Saudi Disruption Leaves Canada's Biggest Refinery Vulnerable
  • 1 day Hong Kong protesters appeal to Trump for support.
  • 1 day Saudi State-of-Art Defense System looking the wrong way. MBS must fire Defense Minister. Oh, MBS is Defense Minister. Forget about it.
  • 14 hours Trump Accidentally Discusses Technology Used In The Border Wall
  • 9 hours US and China are already in a full economic war and this battle for global hegemony is a little bit frightening
  • 15 hours One of the fire satellite pictures showed what look like the fire hit outside the main oil complex. Like it hit storage or pipeline facility. Not big deal.
Alt Text

Where Is The World's Safest Source Of Oil?

Alberta Premier Jason Kenney claimed…

Alt Text

Saudi Arabia Pours Cold Water On Oil Rally

After its sudden spike following…

Alt Text

Is It Time To Invest In Offshore Drillers?

Following an “absolutely horrible year,”…

David Gabel

David Gabel

David is a writer at Environmental News Network

More Info

Premium Content

How the US Government can Help Encourage a Reduction in Fuel Consumption

The United States has implemented a variety of policies in the effort to cut back gasoline use. For example, the Obama Administration has invested federal dollars into GM's electric vehicles. The EPA has introduced new fuel economy standards which are to be implemented over time, gradually becoming stricter. The government has also promoted the expansion of biofuels in automobile fuel. However, a new study from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), has shown that these policies are not cost-effective and don’t sufficiently curb fuel usage. What is to be done to reduce fuel use and greenhouse gases from vehicle emissions?

Implementing a gasoline tax, by all measures, would be the most cost-effective way to reduce fuel use. Nothing influences a driver more than the effects on their wallet at the pump. In fact, the researchers found that a moderate tax could elicit the same reduction as all currently implemented policies at a sixth of the cost. Unfortunately, a new gas tax is highly unlikely to be adopted in the United States. It is simply politically unfeasible.

The MIT researchers found that implementing multiple policies to curb fuel use is not cost effective. They found that as the costs of the policies add up, the benefits do not. To come to this conclusion, they created a macroeconomic model which included information on advanced fuels and vehicles, ownership characteristics in different regions, and consumer investment in vehicle and fuel prices. It is an economic model in which advancements in technology is a major component.

The results show that the most politically possible solutions are also the most costly. This creates a great challenge for policy makers who must address this imbalance. It cannot be solved instantly, but instead must be a gradual process. MIT researcher, Valerie Karplus, explains:

"We need to find ways to get past the age-old debate, starting with what is possible today but with an eye to what might be possible tomorrow as today's policies change underlying incentives. Right now, economists push for the most cost-effective measures, and the policy community responds that such measures are politically impossible."

"Policies that are politically feasible now can be designed to maximize their cost-effectiveness, and every policy should include clear timelines for revisiting its impacts and for assessing the feasibility of moving to more cost-effective policies over time. That will help us achieve our critical energy security and climate goals."

The study has been published in the Autumn 2011 edition of the journal, Energy Futures.

By. David A Gabel

Source: Environmental News Network




Download The Free Oilprice App Today

Back to homepage



Leave a comment

Leave a comment




Oilprice - The No. 1 Source for Oil & Energy News
Download on the App Store Get it on Google Play