![]() | An Overlooked Detail - Finite Resources Explain the Financial Crisis | The Oil Drum | DrumBeat: November 22, 2008 | ![]() |
187 comments on Cars or Wind Turbines? Time to Choose ?
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
| Show without comments | PDF version
187 comments on Cars or Wind Turbines? Time to Choose ?
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
| Show without comments | PDF version
Search The Oil Drum with Google
Support The Oil Drum
Recently on TOD:World
TOD:Campfire
- Thanksgiving Open Campfire Thread
- How Relocalization Worked
- How to Set Up and Run a Bicycle Repair Company
TOD:Europe
- Unique Times -- and the Future
- Peak Gold, Easier to Model than Peak Oil? - Part I
- Carbon Capture and Storage
TOD:Canada
- In this house, we obey the laws of thermodynamics!
- The Round-Up: October 24, 2008
- Compressed Air Energy Storage - How viable is it?
TOD:Australia/NZ
- The Bullroarer - Friday 27th November 2009
- International Energy Agency calls 'Peak' on OECD Oil Demand
- Australian Senate: Peak Oil motion defeated 31:6
TOD:Net Energy
Blogroll
Energy Sites
- The Coming Global Oil Crisis
- Die Off
- Dry Dipstick
- Energy Bulletin
- From the Wilderness
- Life After the Oil Crash
- Peak Oil Crisis
- Peak Oil News and Message Boards
- Powerswitch
- Rigzone
- Matthew Simmons
- Wolf at the Door
Environment & Sustainability Sites
- The Daily Green
- EcoGeek
- Eco Street
- Green Car Congress
- Green Options
- green.alltop.com
- Gristmill
- RealClimate
- Sustainablog
- Treehugger
- WorldChanging
Blogs
- Casaubon's Book
- Cleantech Blog
- Clusterf
k Nation (Jim Kunstler) - The Cost of Energy
- David Strahan
- Early Warning
- The Energy Blog
- European Tribune
- GraphOilology
- Health After Oil
- jeffvail.net
- Mobjectivist
- Peak Energy (Australia)
- Peak Energy (USA)
- R-Squared
- Resource Insights
Finance & Economics Blogs
- The Big Picture
- Calculated Risk
- The Crash Course
- Ecological Economics
- Econbrowser
- Environmental Economics
- Infectious Greed
- The Mess That Greenspan Made
- Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis
Organizations
Peak Oil Primers
Beware email scams!
Beware email scams claiming to be from this site. We do not have any job openings. If anyone contacts you about a job at The Oil Drum, do not reply to them, and definitely do not give them any personal information or send them money. Read more here.
“Most people spend more time and energy going around problems than in trying to solve them.”
—Henry Ford
User login
Contact
- Content: editors at theoildrum dot com
- Tech support: support at theoildrum dot com
Personnel
- Editors: Nate Hagens, Gail the Actuary, Prof. Goose
- DrumBeat Editor: Leanan
- Contributors: ace, Engineer-Poet, Heading Out, jeffvail, JoulesBurn, Sam Foucher, Robert Rapier
- TOD:Campfire: Glenn, Jason Bradford
- TOD:Europe: Chris Vernon, Euan Mearns, Francois Cellier, Jerome a Paris, Luís de Sousa, Rembrandt, Rune Likvern, Ugo Bardi
- TOD:Canada: benk, Libelle
- TOD:ANZ: Big Gav, Phil Hart, aeldric
- Emeritus: Stuart Staniford
- Technician: Super G
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.










GAIA Host Collective
Motorists pay fossil fuel tax. Wind turbines live off it.
Building the mobile tax-gathering mechanisms is always going to be a bigger industry than spending token amounts of the revenue that is gathered. So we cannot choose only one or only the other; we can only choose between (the car industry and the wind turbine industry) and (just the car industry).
--- G.R.L. Cowan, author of 'How fire can be tamed' --
http://www.eagle.ca/~gcowan
Motorists pay fossil fuel tax. Wind turbines live off it.
Perhaps in your country, but not in the US. Yes, there is a road fuel tax, but that goes for paying for a tiny fraction the road network that they require.
That just means that in the seesaw battle between American governments and the motorist, the motorist is momentarily ahead. City Hall must work more diligently to make so it's ten miles to anywhere, and if you have two errands, the second is ten miles farther on. It must fail to enforce speed limits, and its employees -- employees of all levels of government -- must be seen disregarding them. Mass media reporting of road fatalities must be in a very different style, a much less sensational one, from its reporting of other violent deaths.
(I'm not sure how government can make media outlets behave in this way. Does anyone know? CBC radio, publically owned, reports traffic tie-ups with the frequent unemphatic use of the phrase, "very serious accident". Maybe private media aren't so squeamish/venal. Not so squeanal. How about that, a new word.)
Let's try a thought experiment. An inexpensive retrofit comes along that enables cars and trucks to run on no gasoline and no diesel. Are they from then on forbidden to use public roads, or do we decide that public roads are a public good that should be paid for in the same way as, for instance, libraries and cruise missiles?
It seems to me roads are a public good whose benefits flow to more of society than just those who burn fossil fuel derivatives on them, and these benefits exceed their cost. If, as above said, this in turn exceeds their yield of public fossil fuel revenue, the pretence that that revenue is taken to pay for roads is not just a driver of insane government behaviour, it is simply false. Governments tax fossil-derived motor fuels because they can. If they could not, roads would still get funded. Not only would they get funded, they would work better, because the regulatory emphasis on deniably maximizing fossil fuel sales to their users would be absent.
--- G.R.L. Cowan ('How fire can be tamed')
http://www.eagle.ca/~gcowan