Archives

Says gas guzzler taxes don't get the job done. (http://blog.wired.com/cars/2008/02/ban-all-cars-wi.html)

http://www.cleanmpg.com/photos/data/501/2007_Chrysler_300C_Hemi_V8.jpgChuck Squatriglia - Wired - Feb 4, 2008

Also see BBC Story (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7225451.stm)

The former head of Royal Dutch Shell (http://www.shell.com/) has gone way out on a limb and urged the European Union to ban all vehicles that get less than 35 mpg, saying it is the only way to significantly address global climate change and force the auto industry to build more efficient vehicles.


"We need a very tough regulation saying that you can't drive or build something less than a certain standard," the Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.jhtml?xml=/earth/2008/02/04/eacars104.xml) quotes him saying. "You would be allowed to drive an Aston Martin - but only if it did 50-60 mpg."

Sir Mark Moody-Stuart (http://www.accenture.com/Global/About_Accenture/Corporate_Governance/Board_of_Directors/SirMarkMoodyStuart.htm), who spent his career working for the giant oil company, says an outright ban is needed because so-called "gas-guzzler" taxes (http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/info.shtml#guzzler) do not work - and aren't fair because they let those with the means to pay them skirt responsibility for reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

"'It is a social thing," he explained. "We mustn't say the wealthy can avoid doing what is needed by society. When we eliminated coal fires in London we didn't say to people in Chelsea you can pay a bit more and toast your crumpets in front of an open fire. We meant nobody, but nobody, could have an open fire."…http://blog.wired.com/cars/2008/02/ban-all-cars-wi.html

What a hero.

I'd like to know what's in Sir Mark Moody-Stuart's garage.

More than likely a Hummer! Or Marcedes. H

The most globally responsible statement I have ever read, bar none. And banning under 35 MPG could definitely work in a free trade society. The trouble with the "gas guzzler tax" is that it does not force those with the means of paying to pay enough to cover the damage that is being done, both to our planet and our economy.

For example, here is a scenario. Each mile per gallon a car falls short of 35 MPG, the buyer would be taxed 1 cent per life mile, on the life miles of the vehicle. Lets say all cars under 35MPG have a total life of 200,000 miles. A buyer of a car that gets 15 MPG would have to pay 20 cents per life mile, or $40,000.00 to buy the vehicle.

Using a tax structure like that, those who have the means to own a car like that could own and responsibly pay for, the right to use it.

The Auto / Oil cartel, however, would never allow that to happen. Special interest groups and lobbying would pay key legislators handsomely. It would never happen.

Well, I take that back. It could happen, but America would have to figure out a way to make our elected officials truly responsible and accountable!!

Now, how do you do that???????

From this article... Interview with: Sir Mark Moody-Stuart (http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2003/jan/11/mbas.highereducation) Terry Macalister: The Guardian, January 11 2003

Sir Mark enjoys breaking the mould, and has been at it for some time. He thinks business books are boring, drives a tiny Toyota Prius car and started his education at a girl's school in Antigua.


It appers he not only talks the talk but walks the walk as well ;)

Heres an article where he talks about buying four-wheel drive vehicles as illogical Shell Oil-Buying Four-Wheel Drives-"Totally illogical" (http://www.solcomhouse.com/shell.htm)

Makes you wonder if oil is like electricty where the best consistant profits exist at something less than capacity. At least it looks like they don't want to pump every drop.

I think I like him.

More on topic, I don't think there is anything wrong with gas-guzzler taxes, but they need to take into account all damages by the car and make the owner overpay based on cost of car. Somehow old cars need to be taxed off the market too, but that needs to be much more gentle except for the beaters that keep the cops at bay by putting down a motor-oil smoke screen. Those rust buckets have got to go.

From this article... Interview with: Sir Mark Moody-Stuart (http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2003/jan/11/mbas.highereducation) Terry Macalister: The Guardian, January 11 2003




It appers he not only talks the talk but walks the walk as well ;)

Heres an article where he talks about buying four-wheel drive vehicles as illogical Shell Oil-Buying Four-Wheel Drives-"Totally illogical" (http://www.solcomhouse.com/shell.htm)

It's funny they refer to the Prius as "tiny." That's ridiculous! It is an incredibly roomy car.

The most globally responsible statement I have ever read, bar none. And banning under 35 MPG could definitely work in a free trade society. The trouble with the "gas guzzler tax" is that it does not force those with the means of paying to pay enough to cover the damage that is being done, both to our planet and our economy.

For example, here is a scenario. Each mile per gallon a car falls short of 35 MPG, the buyer would be taxed 1 cent per life mile, on the life miles of the vehicle. Lets say all cars under 35MPG have a total life of 200,000 miles. A buyer of a car that gets 15 MPG would have to pay 20 cents per life mile, or $40,000.00 to buy the vehicle.

Using a tax structure like that, those who have the means to own a car like that could own and responsibly pay for, the right to use it.

The Auto / Oil cartel, however, would never allow that to happen. Special interest groups and lobbying would pay key legislators handsomely. It would never happen.

Well, I take that back. It could happen, but America would have to figure out a way to make our elected officials truly responsible and accountable!!

Now, how do you do that???????

An outright ban is much more liekly to happen in the European Union than the U.S., at least at first.

Now, how do you do that???????

Wait until it is too late, and then panic.

-Gren

Rather than charge them on purchase charge the yearly at registration, that way the hit to the pocket book will happen every year like clock work. Make sure to put on the recipt that the extra money is a gas guzzler tax.

I am in total agreement with a ban. The comparison to safety standards is a good one. Why is this considered so radical? We all know that a stretch Prius could be made with as much room as a large SUV that would easily get 35 mpg. Heck - given a desire to do it - a diesel SUV that could tow 6,000 pounds could get 35 mpg.

Makes sense to start with 2009 model year with a 15 mpg floor - no hummer, no escalade. Then raise it 1.5 mpg per year and at 2023 or so we would be at 35 mpg MINIMUM. Or you could do the truly punitive GGT at about 20x its current rate and for the love of the world - make it apply to SUVs.

I could be wrong, but I think that it is a pipe dream in the US to ban all vehicles old and new to require 35 MPG or higher.

Somewhere reality has a different law in mind.

Rather than charge them on purchase charge the yearly at registration, that way the hit to the pocket book will happen every year like clock work. Make sure to put on the recipt that the extra money is a gas guzzler tax.

Great idea, Koreberg!! I like it!:Banane53::Banane08::Banane41:

I am in total agreement with a ban. The comparison to safety standards is a good one. Why is this considered so radical? We all know that a stretch Prius could be made with as much room as a large SUV that would easily get 35 mpg. Heck - given a desire to do it - a diesel SUV that could tow 6,000 pounds could get 35 mpg.

Makes sense to start with 2009 model year with a 15 mpg floor - no hummer, no escalade. Then raise it 1.5 mpg per year and at 2023 or so we would be at 35 mpg MINIMUM. Or you could do the truly punitive GGT at about 20x its current rate and for the love of the world - make it apply to SUVs.

And I totally agree with you, 300TTto545;69984! We all know that any of the big three could produce high MPG vehicles if the wanted to. High MPG Silverado's? Sure.

The trouble is they don't want to. The kingpins feel, as Koreberg said, that they can make more by getting their return on investment out of what they have, rather than striking out on a new tack. The fly in the ointment that is going to surely catch up with them and turn their master plan into garbage is the speed with which gasoline prices are going up. It is turning around a lot of people quite quickly, because it is hitting them in their pocket book and in their standard of living.

Of course, the cost of gasoline is being fixed by their "buddies", the oil industry.

Now, if they can just convince said "buddies" to take it easy for a few more years, and not raise the cost tooooo quickly, and be satisfied with ooooonly 40 billion in profits,,,, then we could milk them for......................................:eek:

Bob.

Ban? They can pry the keys out of my cold, dead hands after I run out of ammo.

Ban? They can pry the keys out of my cold, dead hands after I run out of ammo.

My comment proven. :p

From this article... Interview with: Sir Mark Moody-Stuart (http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2003/jan/11/mbas.highereducation) Terry Macalister: The Guardian, January 11 2003




It appers he not only talks the talk but walks the walk as well ;)

Heres an article where he talks about buying four-wheel drive vehicles as illogical Shell Oil-Buying Four-Wheel Drives-"Totally illogical" (http://www.solcomhouse.com/shell.htm)


I think it could be said "he drives the drive". :D
That said, I agree with him, with exceptions, though the implementation would be impossible.


--des

Hi Chuck:

___Great find as usual!

___35 mpg ban wouldn’t work here but even that keeps us addicted to the junkie and we will still suck every last drop. We are headed for a train wreck and unfortunately those with their 20 mpg or less rides will still want the good ole days and keep the "pry from my cold dead hands" mentality alive and kicking even when there is no gas left.

___As far as the gas guzzler tax, the last time we calculated it, I think Daimler/Chrysler was spending about $175 per vehicle across the fleet. That is such an insurmountable obstacle you would have to be rich to overcome it! I mean who in their right mind should tell someone that can afford a $60K gas-guzzler that they should pay another $175! Heaven forbid, that kind of fine is an abomination … Reality says we will continue until the last drop of oil has been sucked dry and the last drop of blood has been spilled for it.

___The hope is when gasoline is $15 per or more, those with their cold dead iron that their cold dead hands could not let go of will see all these larger and more comfortable Prius PHEV’s going down the road for the equivalent of $0.75 per gallon and laughing all the way to the bank :)

___Good Luck

___Wayne

Hi Chuck:

___Great find as usual!

___35 mpg ban wouldn’t work here but even that keeps us addicted to the junkie and we will still suck every last drop. We are headed for a train wreck and unfortunately those with their 20 mpg or less rides will still want the good ole days and keep the "pry from my cold dead hands" mentality alive and kicking even when there is no gas left.

___As far as the gas guzzler tax, the last time we calculated it, I think Daimler/Chrysler was spending about $175 per vehicle across the fleet. That is such an insurmountable obstacle you would have to be rich to overcome it! I mean who in their right mind should tell someone that can afford a $60K gas-guzzler that they should pay another $175! Heaven forbid, that kind of fine is an abomination … Reality says we will continue until the last drop of oil has been sucked dry and the last drop of blood has been spilled for it.

___The hope is when gasoline is $15 per or more, those with their cold dead iron that their cold dead hands could not let go of will see all these larger and more comfortable Prius PHEV’s going down the road for the equivalent of $0.75 per gallon and laughing all the way to the bank :)

___Good Luck

___Wayne

I can see there's a few pointed barbs in there at my comment.

You forget the sentimental value of the car I defend - it's a link back to a time before I knew certain things about my family which have led me to view it in a whole different light. If not for that, I wouldn't be nearly so militant, although with my characteristic libertarian streak, I would still say a ban = no, tax = maybe but probably still no.

If it makes you feel any better, I am searching for a Harley Sportster 883 which among other things should add 5-10mpg over the bike I already ride :)

Ban? They can pry the keys out of my cold, dead hands after I run out of ammo.

Whenever I hear somebody say that, I chuckle, think of the Bug in Men in Black, and want to say "Your proposal is acceptable". :p http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0119654/quotes

But I'm no fan of bans either.

Hi JCP123:

___Yes, I did but I also know you are not driving the FSP show car 15+ K miles a year. Owning one for a summer time ride to the beach or local show is one thing. Driving a 15 mpg hulk because it is our god given right to do so is a problem in this day and age given all the problems they cause :(

___Good Luck

___Wayne

What's FSP?

FSP stands for "Fuel Sucking Pig"

Similar to the UAV which stands for "Urban Assault Vehicle"

;)

Maybe the News Articles I post should have the fine print: The views are not necessarly my own ;)

I agree more often than not, but sometimes I will post something that is provocative, as this one is. I sympathize with the proposal, but by the time banning sub 35mpg vehicles was taken seriously, my Honda Insight might be considered a gas guzzler. :eek:

There would be no way to make this happen to existing cars. JCP, yours would be safe. If they did try something like that, it'd be Bastille day all over again!

The only way I could see this happening would be on new cars, going forward from now. Similar to the current MPG standards - only apply to new cars built, and not to existing ones. In a few years, 99% will be compliant, and the remaining few will be insignificant.

That said, I'd support a heavy tax LONG before an outright ban. Those with the money and the will, will still choose what they want. Most, however, will not. Good enough for me.

I can see there's a few pointed barbs in there at my comment.

You forget the sentimental value of the car I defend - it's a link back to a time before I knew certain things about my family which have led me to view it in a whole different light. If not for that, I wouldn't be nearly so militant, although with my characteristic libertarian streak, I would still say a ban = no, tax = maybe but probably still no.

If it makes you feel any better, I am searching for a Harley Sportster 883 which among other things should add 5-10mpg over the bike I already ride :)

I stand up in defense of jcp123;70213.

I love my 98 4 Runner. Doing everything right in summertime about the best you can hope for is 25 MPG. Now that gasoline is getting more expensive I use it only when it is needed (like yesterday when we had the snow storm from hell) and get 50 MPG using the RRSB Saturn all other times.

As you, I will defenitely be keeping my baby!:Banane59:

BBC Story (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7225451.stm) on this.

FSP stands for "Fuel Sucking Pig"

Similar to the UAV which stands for "Urban Assault Vehicle"

;)

Gotcha. You're right, I probably won't be driving it that much. Right now, I drive about 11k/year total, and I'll probably be driving this one mostly in the winter months, as when the weather's good, I'll be riding my motrcycle most of the time.

After school, I'll be moving up to Chicagoland with the GF. They still engage in the arcahic practice of using road salt up there, so I'll probably have a winter beater (something on the order of a VW TDi, Toyota Tercel/Paseo, 97+ Ford Escort, etc.), and between that and the bike in good weather, I doubt I'll be putting much more than 2-5k miles on it then.

Well, my economics training always leads me to prefer the carrot-and-stick approach to an outright ban. After all, if the penalty is sufficiently big you disincent people enough that very few of them will buy guzzlers and the total damage is minimal.

But my British-born coworker brought up a good point regarding this the other day. He pointed out that in London, very few ordinary people drive very much. As a result it's mostly rich people who drive, and the streets are full of Audis, Jaguars and Benzes. I think his point had more to do with local air pollution than with GHG emissions, but he's adamant that an outright ban is the only way to get places like London to clean up their act.

That is a good point.