"searing gas pain land?"

There's a lot of talk about gas prices lately, and it seems everyone's got an opinion on the best way to manage the situation. The topic came up at a family dinner last night.

My aunt and uncle support the plan endorsed by John McCain and Hillary Clinton to temporarily remove the federal tax on gasoline for the summer, which sounds great on paper, but wouldn't really do anything to help American consumers.

My grandpa is in favor of increased domestic production, which means expanded offshore drilling, and possibly poking into Alaska. This is, of course, a touchy area. More offshore drilling may indeed help lower prices, but will it be worth the cost? Maybe. I have no idea how much it costs to build those big drills under the sea and pipe it to the mainland, so I can't really comment on whether or not it's a viable option.* As far as Alaska goes, let's just say there's a good reason it's gone largely untapped for three decades, despite the best efforts of the drilling interests.

My brother opposes increased domestic production on the grounds that oil companies will find a way to screw us all no matter what, so we may as well not waste taxpayer money on new drilling facilities and pipelines. Instead, he wants a federal cap on the price of gas at the pump. This sounds pretty good, especially if you believe that prices are artificially high (which I do, but not to the extent that Matt does), but there are always problems when the government starts interfering in private enterprise. Not only does it run counter to the ideals upon which our economy, and indeed our government, are based, but this kind of protectionism can actually bring about terrible consequences, which is no good.

The fact is, gas prices are high because demand is high. Yeah, oil executives are swimming around in giant money bins like Scrooge McDuck these days, which is an indication that they are indeed giant assholes who don't mind ruining the economy and forcing me to work two jobs and still have to downsize to a smaller apartment, so they can light their Cubans with hundred dollar bills while drinking their highballs and sleeping with Playboy models down at Hef's place... but... where was I going with this? Oh yeah; they're charging a lot more than they need to for gas, but that only accounts for part of the high price. The fact is, there's a civil war going on in Iraq that's brought instability to the OPEC region; there's an industrial revolution taking place in China and India, which has dramatically increased demand for oil; and China has introduced a ridiculously inexpensive car within the past year, which means literally millions of folks in the region who have historically been unable to buy cars, now have cars. All of these factors are likely influencing the price of oil far more than executive greed is.

If we really want to bring the price of gas down, we need to bring the demand down. Way down. This means adopting more sensible driving habits, traveling less, conserving electricity at home and in industry (yeah, how do you think power plants generate their power?), and if you're financially able to do so, getting more efficient automobiles. And of course it goes without saying, carpool and use mass transit if those are available to you.

There are also some policy choices our elected representatives can take, such as standardizing gasoline formulas, investing more in alternative energy, subsidizing mass transit to make it more accessible**, and, dare I say it, raising taxes on gasoline.

So there you have it -- Caleb's answer to America's energy woes. Now if only I were a member of the Senate, I could propose a bill that would see the floor for six minutes before being shot down by special interest puppets :-P

* The topic of offshore drilling is more complex than meets the eye. Of course we have to consider the cost of infrastructure and all that good stuff, but we also need to consider the benefits of more American jobs created, localized shipping (which creates a smaller carbon footprint, as well as reduces oil demand, which goes hand-in-hand with the whole point of the project anyway), and the impact on the local economy.

** For all I know, mass transit such as Amtrak is already subsidized, and I'm just not aware of it. If that's the case, it needs to be subsidized a heck of a lot more, in order to make it a more economical option for John Q. Public, who currently sees no monetary incentive for taking the train versus driving.