House OKs taxes on oil companies

[Savaric]

Wow finally some legislation that works for the people. Of course it will never make it through the senate and Bush has already said he'll veto it.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/08/....ap/index.html

I'm also aware that even by some freak incident a 16 billion tax on oil companies went through that it would just get passed onto the consumer anyway.

I would also like to note what pisses me off is how they try to push this through with the alternative energy bill. This will get struck down along with the tax incentives for alternative energy, to the oil companies delight I'm sure. All the while the assholes in our government make it look like it's because of one side or the other, when they are both working together. This country is so far behind on alternative energy it's rediculous. Hmm gee I wonder why...

"There's a war going on against energy from fossil fuels," said Rep. Ralph Hall, R-Texas. "I can't understand the pure venom felt against the oil and gas industry."

I'd like to kick this guy in the balls.

[Gadiantor]

Originally posted by Savaric
Wow finally some legislation that works for the people.

I read the article and have no idea what you mean by this.

The price for oil would go up and the benefits of using renewable fuel would go up. Basically this would encourage people who can afford it to find alternatives to oil, but people who can't afford to buy new cars and install solar panels on their house will pay more for their energy needs. The wealthy will have a choice, spend some money now to save money later...of course the wealthy who care about the environment are already turning to renewable energy.

The part of the bill that I liked was making energy providers produce a higher percentage of power from renewable sources. In this case energy consumers will be able to control how much of the additional cost they feel by where they set their thermostat and turning off lights when not in use.

Overall the bill sounds like it would take a small step towards reducing dependence on oil, but I'd be interested to see some analysis on the cost that would be passed to consumers. I'm not sure the cost would be worth the benefit, or that the cost would have the desired effect. In the end it could just be an oil penalty.

I'll liken our dependency on oil to addiction to tobacco. Higher taxes on cigarettes may get a small percentage of people to quit smoking, but a majority of people will just pay more and sacrifice something else so they can continue to smoke. What we need is some oil gum and the oil patch.

Any alternative energy solution has to give an immediate price advantage to the consumer. The Honda Civic hybrid is a good example. It comes at a cost comparable to other new cars in its class and offers much better fuel efficiency. Anything that has an increased cost at first with cost savings later (installing solar panels, buying a more expensive vehicle to get tax breaks and energy savings later, ect) will keep a vast majority of people from taking advantage of it.

[/rambling]

[Blog]

USA is so far behind who in alternative energy?

Lets start with fixed energy.

Germany and Denmark maybe, but I think that is it, and both of those companies have currently or in the past massive subsidies for wind and solar. Additionally, it is not clear that the subsidies have greatly helped German or Danish RE energy out, which I would argue is the main goal of any subsidy. In this case, I think it is nice that the US sits back and takes gains from other countries subsidies/policies, much like the rest of the world does to our prescription drug spending.

Now for mobile energy.

Despite having fuel costs 3 and 4 times the US average for 20+ years, the EU has no significant advantage in car engine technology. They chose to specialize in diesel, which can be copied and is not readily accepted in the US. Japan currently has an advantage concerning hybrids, but the US automakers are fairly quickly jumping into the market, I would estimate that Japan may have a 5 year lead in hybrid technology. It is hard to judge how much this has effected US automakers. Due to the already rapid decline of US automakers, 99.9% of which has nothing to do with lack of hybrid technology.

In both cases I don't see a serious issue that the US needs to address, I'd be happy sitting back and reaping the benefits that other countries are paying for.

I am all for the elimination of oil company and other subsidies though.

[Savaric]

Originally posted by Gadiantor
I read the article and have no idea what you mean by this.

Bit of a blanket statement that I should have avoided. I'll try to keep it tighter in the future. Take it with a grain of salt.

-Who- are we further behind in alternative energy? I don't think it's a matter of who we're behind. We're just behind. Maybe I'll look up some statistics on how much our government spends on alternative fuels/energy research and how much it gives in tax incentives to big oil companies. Well I don't feel like searching, but I know we don't spend billions on alternative energy or research.

"The bill would repeal for oil companies a tax break given in 2004 to help domestic manufacturers compete against foreign companies, and another tax break pertaining to income from foreign oil production. Critics of the two tax provisions called them loopholes that the industry had taken advantage of."

I don't know how much of this bill is just new tax on oil companies or if larger parts are just repeals on tax breaks given in the past. I would have no problem seeing gas go up to 4 or 5 bucks a gallon, because then arrogant pigs in their gas hog pickups will finally buy a smaller f'n car and start giving a shit for a change. There I let it all out. I feel much better now, lol.

I drive a corolla so I don't care. Tax oil, give incentives for hybrids and bio-fuels. Think about where most of the oil comes from and then try to buy less of it. "Well it's my American right to drive a huge truck and use up as much gas as I want!" Yea well this country runs on gas and it comes from people who would like nothing more than for America to eat shit and die.

[Darion]

-Who- are we further behind in alternative energy? I don't think it's a matter of who we're behind. We're just behind.

So, is it reasonable to say that's just something you decided on your own? You seem to be missing some context.

[Blog]

Originally posted by Savaric

I drive a corolla so I don't care. Tax oil, give incentives for hybrids and bio-fuels. Think about where most of the oil comes from and then try to buy less of it. "Well it's my American right to drive a huge truck and use up as much gas as I want!" Yea well this country runs on gas and it comes from people who would like nothing more than for America to eat shit and die.

I think if you want to improve energy security, then Congress is going the wrong way. Big Oil can only drill in friendly countries, they've been pretty much kicked out or marginalized in every other oil exporting country because the countries want control of their own oil. Decreasing the subsidies to big oil in fact decreases the amount of oil they drill and increases the amount other nationalized oil companies drill. Its hard to believe, but in terms of helping energy security, big oil are the good guys.

Now if you want to cut down on greenhouse gas emissions, raising the price of oil by cutting subsidies is IMO a good idea. I don't think that subsidizing ethanol is a better idea though. You should read Hansen's thoughts on oil and global warming, a summary of which you can find at: http://europe.theoildrum.com/node/2559
While many people think he goes too far with his GW scare statements, what he says about the fuels we use and their impact are interesting and I can agree with his overall conclusion on what we should be concentrating on, which is currently wrong.

[Aristotle]

This is an example of class-warfare style misguided actions.

I absolutely despise our dependency on oil, but trying to fuck over oil companies is never going to work. It will just raise costs for American consumers, and the poorest people will be the hardest hit.

[Rosuav]

I'm not greatly impressed by governmental "fiddling" (by means of tax breaks vs surcharges) to encourage one thing over another. Putting a special tax on something usually means that it becomes a source of vital income, and therefore will never be killed off (example: in Aus at least, cigarettes bring too much money into the public purse to be legislated away, no matter what the health benefits of making them illegal); giving something a tax break opens a loophole that is invariably going to be abused. Without going into the whole thing of whether it's right/wrong to encourage renewable fuels by taxation, I think it's still safe to say that closing existing loopholes is inherently better than opening more. If you can achieve the desired end by simplifying, not by complicating, then by all means do so.

[Snrrub]

Originally posted by Blog
USA is so far behind who in alternative energy?

Lets start with fixed energy.

Germany and Denmark maybe, but I think that is it, and both of those companies have currently or in the past massive subsidies for wind and solar. Additionally, it is not clear that the subsidies have greatly helped German or Danish RE energy out

The German subsidy has been greatly responsible for the rapid increase in solar energy production in that country; German solar cell production increased 50% during the first year the subsidy was in effect. Germany has since surpasses Japan to become the world's largest producer of photovoltaic energy. The subsidy has also resulted in a boom for German solar panel manufacturers - the country is now the largest producer of solar panels.

Iceland, however, is the world leader in renewable energy. Over 70% of the country's energy needs is supplied by renewables (as it has been for near a decade). Iceland's "hydrogen economy" plan aims to have all Iceland's vehicles run on hydrogen fuel. When complete, Iceland will be 100% enegy-independent.

Also, I don't want to forget Brazil, where ethanol accounts for 30% of automotive fuel.

Originally posted by Blog
In both cases I don't see a serious issue that the US needs to address, I'd be happy sitting back and reaping the benefits that other countries are paying for.

I agree that the United States (and Canada, for that matter) is not behind on renewable energy research - in fact, quite the opposite. Unfortunately, we are behind in implementation, though. What both our countries need is a political party in power that has the will and/or courage to address oil dependency in a serious manner.

[Blog]

Originally posted by Snrrub
The German subsidy has been greatly responsible for the rapid increase in solar energy production in that country; German solar cell production increased 50% during the first year the subsidy was in effect. Germany has since surpasses Japan to become the world's largest producer of photovoltaic energy. The subsidy has also resulted in a boom for German solar panel manufacturers - the country is now the largest producer of solar panels.

Where are you getting this info from? In 2006, I only see 1 German mfg company in the top 10, the top 10 add up to 80% of the market.

http://thefraserdomain.typepad.com/e...installat.html

From the article you can see Germany clearly leads the world in installations though.

I agree that the United States (and Canada, for that matter) is not behind on renewable energy research - in fact, quite the opposite. Unfortunately, we are behind in implementation, though.

I think this is right where you want to be, there is nothing wrong with exporting to countries who think they can get more from solar than we can. Let Germany pay the currently high prices for the technology, we'll get it when the price comes down.