Oil Taxes Are Good  

Dave Roberts at Grist cites a New York Times/CBS poll showing that Americans support a gas tax if revenues go toward energy independence (but not if the funds went to the war on "terror").

If you ask people straight out, "do you favor a gas tax," the answers is overwhelmingly (85%) No. Even if you promise to reduce other taxes --payroll and income -- by the same amount, the answer is still (63%) No.

But if the question is, "would you support a gas tax if it reduced U.S. dependence on foreign oil" or "would you support a gas tax if it cut down on energy consumption and reduced global warming," the results reverse pretty dramatically. The "foreign oil" question gets 55% in favor and the "energy consumption and global warming" question gets 59% in favor.

(Even more intriguing: When the question is, "would you support a gas tax if the proceeds were used to fight the war on terror," 71% still oppose.)

Take-home message: U.S. citizens want to reduce oil use, energy consumption, and global warming. And they're willing to pay for it.

Colin Tudge takes a look at Gaia's revenge and our half gone oil supplies and suggests its time to "Help Ourselves - check it out.

In a world of war, famine and fairly frequent natural disaster, we are bound as sentient citizens to ask: are the powers-that-be who contrive to be in charge actively wicked or merely incompetent? Did they wish this world upon us or did it creep up on them? In truth, there is plenty of evidence for both - lies, plotting, and connivance in the highest places, professionally executed, combined with an inability to assess good advice or take it.

But let's be fair. The world is too big and complicated and the people within it too numerous and varied to be tightly controlled. Despite the best of scholarship and the most powerful computer models, natural disasters remain beyond our understanding. Even the ones that seem to be understood in principle, including earthquakes and global warming, cannot be predicted in detail. We may think we control some aspects of our lives, not least the economy which we did, after all, create ourselves, but that too is largely illusory. As the ancient Greeks emphasised, Hegel pointed out in the early 19th century and game theorists confirmed in the 20th, history and all economies unfold according to their own internal rules. Once they are set up they run their course, despite the best or worst efforts of politicians to stay in charge of them.

So as the third Millennium gets under way, we find ourselves borne on currents of astonishing speed and power which, though largely our own creations, are outside all human control. The world's governments, corporations, and the experts who are advising both could do a lot better - wickedness and incompetence are well in evidence. But it is not at all clear that even with the best will in the world and the best available knowledge, we can now do much more than wait and see. I am now past 60, and I don't anticipate being drowned or starved or bayonetted in the decade or so that I hope is left to me. But I certainly fear for my grandchildren.

If anything useful can be done, it must be done by us.

The Energy Blog has some comments on a recent speech by Lord Browne, BP's Group Chief Executive, called "The changing energy market" oil supplies and global warming. At least he isn't a global warming denier, unlike the Herald's idiotic opinion writer Miranda Devine (I think her purpose in life is to enrage the Herald's readership enough to provoke angry letters to the editor). Maybe she should talk to Lord Browne (or Lord Oxburgh from Shell - I'm sure the toffy titles will impress her shrivelled little reactionary mind) before floating her conspiracy theories - or even the UK Defence Secretary John Reid, who is calling global warming a major security problem.

Adam Porter at Resource Investor also has a detailed look at Lord Browne's speech (noting his firm dismissal of peak oil) and recent declines in OPEC production figures.

(Note that the text below has been edited a lot - Lord Browne had a lot more to say about each fact).

Let me offer you four facts, and one conclusion.

The first and most fundamental fact is that the demand for energy continues to increase, driven by population growth and by the gradual spread of prosperity. Over the last twenty four hours, the world’s population has risen by almost a quarter of million – as it does every day, week in, week out. 10,000 new citizens every hour.

The second fact is that the United States, Europe, Japan and now China and India, are all significant importers - of both oil and natural gas. And in each case the requirement for imports is likely to grow. The forecast for ten years from now is that, worldwide, 70 per cent of total oil consumption and 40 per cent of all natural gas demand will be supplied through trade.

The third fact is that on the other side of that trading relationship are a very limited number of suppliers.

And then there is a fourth fact which represents another longer term reason for insecurity. That is the fact that the emissions of carbon into the atmosphere are growing by 1.5 to 2 per cent a year. The science of climate change is incomplete, but the evidence is mounting. The concentration of carbon in the atmosphere is rising, and moving steadily towards the level at which, on the basis of the best scientific analysis, the balance and sustainability of the climate is at risk.

What then is the practical answer?

I think it’s the same as that expressed by a young British government minister 101 years ago. Winston Churchill, an Elder Brother of this organization, said that the key to security of energy supply lay in diversity.

Past Peak takes a look at how much oil is left, while The Oil Drum summarises the peak oil theory for those new to the idea (prompting an unusually large number of comments - and an analysis by Mobjectivist).

Grist suggests that it is time for the synfuel industry (or as Mobjectivist labelled it, the sin fuel industry) to repent of its evil ways.

REA has a report on a German initiative to recycle silicon for solar PV use.

In Big Brother news, British singer Morrisey has been questioned by the FBI for criticising George Bush.