<Tapis Breaks US$115The Oil DrumDrumBeat: April 9, 2008>
<Shell Sponsoring Peak Oil Communication?The Oil Drum: EuropeMcCain wants a gas tax "holiday." It's a no-brainer, right?>

34 comments on Andris Piebalgs' priority number one

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

Jack on April 9, 2008 - 5:48am Permalink | Subthread | Comments top

Actually I think this is far more hollow than the biofuels post. I agree with it more, but think that calls for conservation (decreasing demand) without any means of making it happen is only slightly better than saying we will increase supply.

Either one needs to be followed up with a how and a way of analysing the potential scale, cost and viability of the plan.

At the end of the day, conservation is only accomplished at the barrel of a gun. Just saying people will use less is meaningless.

Conservation will only happen through incentives: either taxes on fuel use, or rewards for better practices. The first is unpopular, the second expensive. But at least one is needed to move from greenwash pipedream to plan or priority.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
LevinK on April 9, 2008 - 9:33am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

My thoughts exactly... I'm afraid I was not as clear as you in my post above. Yes, efficiency is good, but where, how, by how much, at what cost?

Just waving out the "Let's raise efficiency" slogan is reminding me of the good old socialist times. There were similar slogans back then, but not substantiated by anything meaningful... the caravan kept going pretty much like it always did.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Name on April 9, 2008 - 1:38pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Agreed.

I also find the assumption that the double-pane windows would be manufactured locally suspect.

As a US resident, I'd expect the jobs to be created in Mexico or China, were a double-pane mandate issued.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.