Green insincerity

Michael Perelman michael at ecst.csuchico.edu
Fri Mar 22 09:41:23 PST 2002


Although it will not help in the short run, one long run strategy for reducing energy needs would be a more rational urban planning system that would reduce the need for long commutes and increase the efficiency of mass transit systems.

On Fri, Mar 22, 2002 at 12:14:23PM -0500, Doug Henwood wrote:
> Gar Lipow wrote:
>
> >Doug
> >
> >>A simple first step would be a sharp increase in the gasoline tax in
> >the U.S. I'm afraid the Hudson will be lapping my ankles before that
> >happens.
> >
> >Suprisingly this probably is NOT the best way to reduce energy consumption.
>
> Hmm, why not? Greenhouse gas emissions are lots lower in Europe and
> Japan than they are in the U.S. Per US$ [PPP basis] of GDP, the U.S.
> emits 0.67 kg of CO2; the Netherlands, 0.47; and Japan, 0.38. Annual
> energy use per capita is 4,035 kg (oil-equivalent) in Japan, 4,738 in
> the Netherlands, and 7,937 in the U.S. Surely energy prices have
> something to do with this. Of course, the U.S. population is much
> more scattered than the Netherlands & Japan, but one reason it's so
> scattered is that energy is absurdly cheap here.
>
> Energy taxes aren't as regressive as some people think. Affluent
> people drive more than poorer ones. And the costs could be offset
> with tax rebates for poorer households.
>
> Doug

-- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929

Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list