$10 a Gallon

Before the vacation, I suggested in a post, Changing The World, focusing on 10 actions that will make significant and sustainable change in our world.  Here is my first attempt.

I was walking with a friend down a main street in 2005 and asked him whether we would ever have true peace and what it would take. We passed under the price sign for a gas station, which was showing that gas prices had just gone above $2/ gallon and everyone was shocked.

My friend shocked me when he replied that America would only be safe when we begin paying $10/gallon at the pumps. Now you should know three things:

1. My friend is very smart.
2. My friend is an environmentalist.
3. We were much closer to 9/11 than we are now.

I fill a gas tank six times a month: so with prices above four dollars I am not a happy driver. The number on my monthly budget spreadsheet has ballooned. So why am I advocating for $10/gallon?

First, the only reason I am not focusing on public transportation is that for many it is not relevant. We need to get around during our workday. We need to avoid looking disheveled and sweaty – I love the bike-share initiatives popping up all over the place – but they are simply not practical for many. Neither do I have the time to coordinate a car share schedule, much as I admire the idea. So I am stuck with needing a car near me.

I understand when we use certain technologies because there is no alternative. But there is an alternative now. The growth of hybrid cars, the electric car and other alternatives are all becoming common place. One of the most positive outcomes of the reinvention of the American car industry is the move towards gas-efficient cars. The Japanese, we all acknowledge, are years ahead of us.

But what if we truly laid a foundation for electric car by converting gas stations into recharging docks and, instead of one lane for hybrid cars during rush hour, it was the opposite? What if we taxed heavily the import and domestic production of non-electric cars?

And what if we raised gas to $10/gallon?

My motivation is two-fold. I believe much of our foreign policy is designed to protect our domestic energy needs. Wars are fought and countries supported with foreign aid because many are in oil-rich regions. We ignore terrible human rights abuse in these and other oil-rich countries. The connection between global terror and oil are clear and our dependency makes us vulnerable.

The second reason is simply that the earth cannot sustain the effects of our oil dependency. In a sense, it is already taking steps to prevent us destroying it as supply dries up and the environmental impact, both of global warming and regional disasters, become greater.

What makes this so frustrating is that the alternative technologies are out there and I am left with the feeling that they are being held back. Why? Because a lot of people still stand to make a lot of money.

I do not care to prioritize the millionaires of today over the abilities of my children and grandchildren to live in a sustainable and healthy environment.

Government can turn this around with three easy steps:

1) Tax conventional cars (both domestic and imported).

2) Invest in a structure to sustain electric and other energy efficient cars

3) Raise gas prices to $10 – it may well go a long way to financing the change.

—————————————————————————————————–

Alon Shalev writes social justice-themed novels and YA epic fantasy. He swears there is a connection. His latest books include: Unwanted Heroes and the 2013 Eric Hoffer Book Award for YA – At The Walls Of Galbrieth. Alon tweets at @alonshalevsf and @elfwriter. For more about the author, check out his website.

High Speed Rail Funding Arrives. Has the Need Arrived?

Here in California, Governor Brown recently signed the first phase of High Speed Rail into reality. He likes HSR, but he was also in sort of a jam as California voters had previously (and only partially-informedly) approved a bond measure to raise billions of dollars specifically for this project. This money can’t legally be spent on anything else.

As fantasies go, HSR is pretty cool. France and Japan have enviable HSR systems that are really sexy. They look great, they zoom around majestically at impressive speeds, they lend an air of sophistication to their countries and governments, and they transport large numbers of people efficiently.

In addition, HSR would be more fuel efficient than air travel and it would break the strangle hold that the airlines currently have on us all. But is HSR a timely solution to our transportation problems?

Some people want to avoid this…

and this.

While pseudo-intellectuals like George Will rail against rail (especially but not exclusively the high-speed variety) for contrived and ridiculous reasons, there are better reasons – real reasons – that HSR is a solution whose time has not come. This first phase will run 130 miles, from Bakersfield to Madera (the proposed location of the states HSR maintenance facility) at a cost of $8billion.  

What we really need to spend money on is improving and expanding existing public transportation systems. The real jewels of Asian and European rail systems are their frequency, extensiveness, and efficiency – not just from a fuel standpoint, but from a transportation standpoint as well.

In and around Tokyo, for example, there is an extensive train system in addition to subways and buses. The trains take millions (yes millions) of people into the city from outlying communities each day. There are multiple tracks almost everywhere and, unlike the San Francisco Bay Area’s BART system, you can travel in several different directions from almost anywhere.

Tokyo’s passenger train system is almost all electric and very quiet. The trains resemble nice subways more than they do Amtrak trains. One of the best things about having multiple tracks is that it allows for express trains. These trains are the same as the other trains, they are not built for higher speeds. But they are much faster because they have limited stops and just sail right past many stations.

Because of this, these express trains get their passengers to their destinations much sooner. A passenger may have to transfer to another, local train to make it to a final destination, but it’s still much quicker than stopping at every station along the way.

Here’s another issue. Right now, Amtrak (America’s only real large-scale rail system) has large, conspicuous gaps in it’s travel coverage. For example, to travel on Amtrak from Fresno, California’s agriculture center, to Los Angeles requires that passengers get off of the train at Bakersfield and board a bus for the rest of the trip.

In addition, local light rail and bus systems are riddled with inadequacies, many of which are caused by limited funding and some of which are caused by less-than-optimal management. Part of the new funding is to make unspecified improvements in California’s existing rail systems, but the attention and the priority seem to be on HSR.

All of these systems could be improved tremendously for a lower cost than constructing one thin route for high speed rail between various locations. Also, these solutions apply to real problems today. What people need is help with their everyday commutes and business and errand trips. How many people really need to get from Los Angeles to San Francisco in 2 ½ hours? Many, many more people would benefit from the ability to get to work in under one hour.

High speed rail is a later phase in a mature public transportation system. Our system is far from mature and HSR is not the solution we need now.

-Tom Rossi

___________________________________________________________________________

Tom Rossi is a commentator on politics and social issues. He is a Ph.D. student in International Sustainable Development, concentrating in natural resource and economic policy. Tom greatly enjoys a hearty debate, especially over a hearty pint of Guinness.

___________________________________________________________________________