Mark Bixby <[log in to unmask]>:
> Nick Demos wrote:
> > What to do?  Possibly:
> >
> > 1.  Conserve (helps, but will not solve the problem).
>
> For starters, the US government auto fleet fuel economy standards could be
> raised by 10%.  These standards were last raised 11 years ago (IIRC), and
I see
> zero chance of them being raised during the next 4 years.
>
> A 10% MPG increase would do more for the long-term oil situation than
drilling
> in the ANWR ever will, but since that will equal less consumption and less
> profit, W's oil industry buddies will ensure no increase happens on his
watch.


Hmmm, let's see, 11 years ago, that was during the previous Bush
administration, and George H. W. Bush was even more of an oil man than W.
Yet he raised the CAFE standards.  No changes during the Clinton
admnistration--I guess he must have oil industry buddies, too.

There are real disadvantages to raising CAFE standards.  As they exist now,
the fuel economy standards are estimated to cost 2,000 to 4,000 lives a year
in the United States.

If the goal is to reduce CO2 emissions, a more sensible idea is the carbon
tax, which would allow people to make choices on what are the best ways to
reduce CO2 compared with other goals.  For some reason, this has been a
non-starter politically.

Ken Hirsch