Gas tax holiday versus free transit: policy versus politics
Earlier in the week I got into an argument with a friend, a teacher, who made the point that renewal of the child tax credit ("Joe Manchin is choking off one of America’s best anti-poverty programs," Washington Post) would have a lot more impact on people than a gasoline excise tax holiday ("Oil dependence | The US as a Petro-state and gasoholic," "Will Biden's Gas Tax Holiday Make a Difference?," New York Times).
I was pretty spirited, making a couple points:
1. As a "transportation planner" obviously I think a gas tax holiday is a mistake, because it "defunds" transportation improvements, and frankly the federal gas tax should be much higher and indexed to inflation anyway--it hasn't been raised in 30 years ("How the gas tax could help pay for a $1 trillion infrastructure proposal," Washington Post).
2. But that given the President is being blamed for inflation and high gas prices ("Wonking Out: Lies, Damned Lies and Gasoline Prices," NYT), even though the entire world is experiencing inflation and high gas prices in the same way, and the primary reason for high gas prices in the US is not "Biden not approving that pipeline" but reduction in the supply of refinery capacity ("US May Never Build New Refinery Even With Surging Gas Prices, Chevron CEO Says," Bloomberg), he "needs to do something to show he cares and 'feels the pain'" of the average citizen ...
ESPECIALLY AS THE MIDTERM ELECTIONS APPROACH AND VIRTUALLY EVERY PREDICTION IS THAT THE DEMOCRATS WILL LOSE THE HOUSE FOR SURE AND PROBABLY THE SENATE.
3. I explained to her about Senators Sinema and Manchin who are functioning as Republicans and are holding back the achievement of any significant Democratic Party initiatives, and how even if the child tax credit "is more important" Biden can't get it passed without Sinema and Manchin. That's reality.
Not policy purity. So he has to do what he can. And I can be a purist, or I can be pragmatic.
Which is why I find this point by transit advocates, "Suspend transit fares instead of the gas tax, climate advocates tell Biden" as reported by the Washington Post, equally frustrating.
Similarly, it's fair to say that I am a fervent proponent of transit.
BUT THE MIDTERMS ARE COMING.
ALMOST 83% OF TRIPS IN THE UNITED STATES ARE MADE BY CAR.
2.5% OF TRIPS ARE MADE BY TRANSIT.
| Private Vehicle | Transit | Walk | Other* |
|---|---|---|---|
| 82.6% | 2.5% | 10.5% | 4.4% |
* Other includes biking. Source: pages 30/31.
HOW MUCH EFFECT ON PEOPLE'S VOTING DECISIONS ARE WE GOING TO GET FROM FREE TRANSIT, IN A NATION WHERE MOST PEOPLE HAVE ZERO USE OF AND MINIMAL EXPERIENCE WITH TRANSIT?
Sure I think we should have free transit, but the politics of it, in a nation that is so dominated inextricably with automobility and automobile dependence to the point where people aren't even capable of recognizing it, are impossible.
I understand and appreciate the pureness and zealotry of advocacy, but what's more important:
- free transit now versus a gas tax holiday
or
- the Democrats not getting totally destroyed in the midterm elections?
======
.jpg)
I consider myself fortunate to have lived in DC for 32 years, where a dense sustainable mobility network exists--at least in the center city--so that I could experience the reality that it is possible to live without being car dependent.
-- "What
matters isn't "transit oriented development": what really matters is
compact development and integrating transportation and land use," 2011
-- "Further updates to the Sustainable Mobility Platform Framework," 2018
-- "DC is a market leader in Mobility as a Service (MaaS)," 2018
Labels: car culture and automobility, elections and campaigns, electoral politics and influence, gasoline, gasoline excise taxes, transportation planning
posted by Richard Layman @ 9:39 PM&Permanent Link
13 Comments:
https://www.deseret.com/u-s-world/2022/6/25/23179218/gas-boycott-july-2022-will-it-lower-gas-prices-strike-tik-tok
When you're a nation of gasaholics, a boycott of gasoline cannot last very long.
yep! transit advocates are often extremely off-putting on social media as well (ie wmata accountability is non existent but punitive measures against car owners are all the rage... despite massive wmata subsidies people choose cars. wonder why?)
also imo measures like this are ineffective and arguably counterproductive (most pedestrian deaths are from MD/VA drivers or DC drivers in smaller cars, not these larger vehicles)
https://www.washingtonpost.com/transportation/2022/06/25/dc-higher-vehicle-registration-fees/
And the DC budget is so massive w/ little noticeable benefit any tax/fee increase should really be revenue neutral ie tied w/ a decrease in sales tax rate
1. Most transit advocates in the US are more about signaling and lifestyle choices. Richard is an exception.
2. Still disagree about the pipeline issue. If Keystone XL has not been canceled again. In ability to move oil/gasoline to CA is the major problem right now.
3. EIA decides the county is certain regions (PADD 1 through 5). I agree there is a enormous lack of strategic thinking on this, and the Biden people are particularly bad.
4. Pad 5 (CA, west coast) is really the problem. Impsosible to build new refinery. Cut off from pipeline. Basically not part of NA energy market.
5. Pad 3 (gulf coast) has gotten a lot of investment and is well positioned.
6. PAd 1 (east coast) has some restrictions, What is killing East Coat is shutdown of Philly refinery because of benzyem rules.
7. I've been investing in refinery stocks for years. Great business but nobody wants to have one around. Naturally limited as a result.
8. In terms of gas tax, incredibly stupid move. the only saving grace is we could use a diesel gas tax reduction. That is where fuel prices will really go crazy (diesel is priced internationally). Basically gasoline is also prices on brent (international) and oil is priced on WTI (domestic). So as long as the international price is higher than the domestic price you mint money.
9. Blocking gasoline exports would also help but be disatatuous to Mexico right now.
10. Cosumers can easily take $7 gas. We'll have that by end of summer if this tax is put through. Business and logistics cannot survive those prices. WFH forever!
Charlie, thanks for drilling down so intricately. I know about the California and Northeast issues wrt refineries but I didn't know about EIA and PADs and I didn't know about pipeline "supply" issues wrt California. Not to mention how difficult it is to get approvals for approvals for oil (Keystone) and natural gas pipelines (eg Virginia) and electricity transmission lines (Maine).
I thought Keystone was supposed to increase supply to the Gulf, not California? Any good cites.
Thx as always!
H st ll -- agreed. But the higher registration fees aren't so much about "fighting reckless driving" but charging bigger cars more given they cause more use of roads, parking spaces, etc.
Now the next move should be to charge more for parking permits based on size, which was proposed in an H Street planning initiative c. 2001. (Not my idea, but I was supportive and still remember the conversation about it.)
Keystone is still around. Originally designed to go to Cushing (Where WWTI is priced) but extended the gulf for export markets.
Keystone XL was the disputed one, larger pipeline, more direct.
We've spent 50 years since 1972 building up a system of strategic oil reserves and making sure we can't have another energy shock. And it largely works. If the world could access Canada oil sand the drops in Russian production could be managed. Even the 10% drop now can be balanced out in a year or two, and we've just got to get there in one piece. Now it is truly trapped oil that has the shipped out by truck or train.
Again if you want a BHAP build a refined pipeline from Texas to California - just as they built the orginial Colonial pipeline in 1942 to stop german u boats from sinking tankers off the east coast.
There's an op-ed in the Salt Lake Tribune from a few months back about the state energy plan and how it's updated every 10 years, and the complaint it's very biased to existing sources and dominated by the existing utilities.
https://www.sltrib.com/opinion/commentary/2022/03/18/aarushi-verma-time/
Plus:
https://www.sltrib.com/news/environment/2022/05/16/coxs-energy-plan-is/
As you know, we go on about these issues and scenario planning.
One of the things for me about transit (and walking and biking) as alternatives is that you are lot more resilient.
And I keep stressing the point that Denmark and the Netherlands refocused planning on transit, walking, biking in response to the 1973 Oil Shock, and they made all their policies congruent to support this. So that they are not dependent on oil/the automobile for mobility.
That's very much different from "building up a system of strategic oil reserves and making sure we can't have another energy shock."
Which merely ensures supply, not resilience, nor is it focused on "price" -- maintaining supply, but not managing price or expectations.
For me personally, I thought about biking as making me independent of transit reliability and cost and independent of "needing" a car.
But as you know, the US is not set up that way. We're set up to be dependent on oil. And you can't switch gears on a dime to substitute other forms of mobility when the price goes up.
... although it sure must be a cue for people to consider electric vehicles (although as we know that presents all sorts of other issues in terms of electricity production, the ability to charge cars, especially in cities, the reliability of the grid in both the winter and summer, with increased demand from EVs heightening risk of failure, etc.).
Two weekends ago I rode on part of the Jordan River Parkway Trail for the first time (it's on the west side and I live on the east side, so I have to make a point of it). Next to it is a big facility for "Dominion Resources" (interestingly, here they own the natural gas utility) and they had a self-serve natural gas refueling station. The price for a gallon equivalent was $2.25.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/rllayman/52177630663
If 33.7 kWh = 1 gallon of gas, then the price in Salt Lake is about $4.38 per gallon equivalent.
=====
This is a long winded way of saying that we need a more robust energy policy. But again, our policy, because we are a Petro State nationally, and many states are Petro States at the state scale, is focused on production and consumption, not alternatives, resilience, etc.
Let alone climate change...
https://www.employamerica.org/blog/the-refining-bottleneck-is-not-a-reason-to-ignore-the-fragile-state-of-crude-oil-supplies/
Interesting, because I also was thinking of your "resilience" argument as well.
Absolutely, I am thinking of the IEA, strategic supply, etc, but the basic point the way to manage demand is let the price rise. We can absorb increases every year, but we can't handle shocks.
Your demand I'd argue is more illusory -- it is pushing heavy fossil use to the edge where you don't see it. Much like California has done. Germany is absolutely screwed with natural gas. You can' turn that economy on LNG -- lNG is great for heating but terrible for industry.
You move the industry to where the energy is cheap.
But I think the overall numbers is the EU uses 1/4 gasoline per capita versus the US. Skewed because diesel in the uS is 90% commercial and in the EU was more like 60/40.
We've lost 10% of oil tot he world market. produce 5% more elsewhere and cut 5% ion demand. The system can hold with some mild increases which are actually good.
Natural gas as I said is a very different animal.
1/4 per capita gasoline consumption... holy shit. That's like the Green Manhattan argument about NYC , that the city because it uses fewer energy and other resources is way better environmentally than other forms.
But wow. Even if we could reduce by half, would make a gargantuan difference.
I’ll have to check my numbers in that. Last time it was maybe 10 years ago. But yes the strategic goal again is to link nort America to international price ( as we’ve now done for diesel ) and the higher prices willl naturally push demand down.
Also big read on refiners product pipeline
https://rbnenergy.com/move-it-on-over-replumbing-us-refined-products-pipelines
Philly one closed after fire. And see kinder Morgan map of product to California
Just going back on EU vs US gasoline usage.
Pre pandemic, EU used around 23K petrojules of petroleum energy. The US used around 27.
EU has about 25% more people (440M vs 330M).
My math may be off here, but I am estimating EU petroleum (so including diesel) usage maybe about 30% less than the US, not the 4:1 figure I threw out before -- I think that was just gasoline.
Just wanted to throw out better figures!
Thanks for double checking. One reason for more diesel, not just because of car use, but more even more trucking than the US, which is super high, but the US still has a decent freight railroad mode.
FWIW, my brother is trying to start a trucking business, and he is doing driving to be able to understand the business.
He did a load from Pottstown PA to New Orleans--coffee cans, and it sure seemed to me that loads like that ought to be interdictable for trains. It just doesn't make sense, but of course, it's maybe more predictable and faster.
But if we shifted back to a bit more redundant way of manufacturing, with some inventory as opposed to JIT, it would be more workable.
Between the cost of diesel and personnel, at least in the major interstate corridors, ought we not be able to shift a goodly number of truck trips to rail?
Denver 7 Colorado News: RTD waiving fares in August as part of statewide initiative to reduce ground-level ozone.
https://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/local-news/rtd-waiving-fares-in-august-as-part-of-statewide-initiative-to-reduce-ground-level-ozone
Post a Comment
<< Home