{"id":545,"date":"2007-04-27T15:38:55","date_gmt":"2007-04-27T20:38:55","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/UnhinderedByTalent.com\/Phi\/?p=545"},"modified":"2007-04-27T22:16:41","modified_gmt":"2007-04-28T03:16:41","slug":"chickens-and-egss-in-energy-policy","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/UnhinderedByTalent.com\/Phi\/archives\/2007\/04\/27\/chickens-and-egss-in-energy-policy\/","title":{"rendered":"Chickens and eggs in energy policy"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"Moving<\/a>
\nIn one of my classes we’ve been discussing energy consumption, and the pros and cons of using tools like large gas taxes to help control consumption. One of my students just posted a link<\/a> to a piece that predicts that we’re looking at $4\/gallon gas<\/a> this summer in the U.S., and also says (without any support) that consumption actually went up<\/em> when gas was over $3\/gallon last year.<\/p>\n

In her post, the student is rightly concerned that such a tax will differentially burden certain people, in significant part because support structures (such as public transport) won’t be in place to provide them with alternatives.<\/p>\n

It seems that there’s a tricky chicken and egg problem here. There are several decades of evidence (at least in the U.S.) that just saying “conservation is good” isn’t significantly changing people’s behavior even if they agree with the claim<\/em>. If we really believe that overconsumption is a serious problem, then it seems that at some point we have to make consumption cost more, or people just aren’t going to change their habits. If we do that, however, it hurts various people (and often, disproportionately the poor as they have the least flexibility and options) because we don’t have reasonable alternatives (public transport, alternative energy sources) in place.<\/p>\n

But we’ll never have those alternatives until there’s money to be made, which means we have to change people’s habits, which probably requires raising prices!<\/p>\n

Damn.<\/p>\n

One option is to phase in change over a period of several years. If everyone knows<\/em> that gas will cost $10\/gallon in 5 years, then people can start estimating demand for, say, public transport, and start building appropriate infrastructure so that the buses, rails, etc., are there as the demand grows. Car companies can start ramping up production of hybrids (which will probably lower their per-unit costs), and increase research into alternatives like fuel cell systems, expecting increased demand for these things will make it all pay off.<\/p>\n

But that arguably requires significant political will (you have to stand up to the lobbies behind SUVs and Big Oil), and voters that will encourage or even demand this kind of change. I think you’re seeing some of that in Europe, but precious little in the U.S. There’s another election coming up in ’08, however…<\/p>\nNo tag for this post.\n\t

Related posts<\/h4>\n\t