Why Did We Do This To Ourselves? GAS!

I agree. As long as we're willing to pay $3.00 or more per gallon, the oil companies will be more than willing to sell it to us. The best way to reduce your costs, and the price of oil, is to use as little as possible.

Market demand is key. We as consumers have the ultimate control. We just need to learn how to use it.

Yes, there are a lot of car enthusiasts out there. That's fine....as long as they take responsibility for their choices. If they are going to pollute the air, cause kids to get asthma, cause the elderly to have more respiratory problems, cause soldiers to die for oil, and increase the rate of global warming--and all the related natural disaster costs--then they should be have to pay for those costs up front, in addition to the gasoline or diesel fuel they buy.

Those costs a real and calculable on large scales. So add those in to the price of fuel and the price of the vehicle, and I'll call it even! It may mean paying an extra $20,000 for a gas guzzler, but that's fine with me.

Ok Scott,

You seem to have a passion and a thought-out opinion but I'm not sure I understand your point.

I agree with your point that a few car nuts who take their babies out periodically or even regularly aren't causing the world's problems. My '52 MG pollutes horribly but the poor thing seldom leaves my garage - and it's the only such classic on the street. It is hardly a big problem to the world.

On the other hand, you mention that car enthusiasts aren't going to give up their beloved big iron. Why can't we respect people's collection and even a few weekend outings yet question or even 'hate' it when people abuse their freedoms and the planet by using pristinely clean cattle haulers and combat vehicles with luxury interiors to carry their briefcases 40 miles to and from work each day?

Of course, my preference would be for the car companies to make efficient vehicles with sufficient capacity and performance to make car enthusiasts appreciate them as well. Fortunately, Tesla Motors seems to be doing that and hopefully others will follow with other classes of efficient yet fun and useful vehicles.

Hey guys: The main point I was trying to make is that folks should have to take responsibility for what they drive, and how much they drive it. The "extra" costs due to burning fossil fuel are real and need to be paid by the person burning the fuel. Which in my mind should fall most heavily on the folks doing the most damage.

That's why I would like to see fees on gasoline (diesel, etc.) as some suggest, as well as on the vehicle, since we consciously choose to buy that SUV, Mustang or hybrid, and the world must live with the amount of fuel it will burn, and the amount of pollution it will generate over its lifetime.

Just to illustrate the point: if the most fuel efficient vehicle had a $1000 fee to help pay these external costs, and the Hummer (or Lamborghini?) had a $20000 fee, other vehicles would fall somewhere in between. Let the people who do the most damage, pay the most to help solve the problem.

Like you say, ex-EV1 driver, the devil is always in the details, e.g., our different approaches.

It IS a shame to penalize someone who just runs the boat to and from the lake a few times a year. The problem is, however, that person is probably the same one driving it daily. Very few can afford a $30,000 behemouth used a few times a year.

Current fuel taxes are basically for roads and bridges and the like. The other costs associated with burning fuel are real, but take years to show up and are then paid by everyone--some more than others. I would just like to see a little ($0.05-0.10/gal) tax on fuel and a comparable tax on vehicles so that these future costs can be reduced. And policies should be put in place to discourage the gas guzzlers and encourage highly fuel efficient vehicles. We don't have to outlaw gas guzzlers and sports cars, just make them pay proportionately more for the damage they will do.

I also think it would be a great idea to take those 'polluter fees' and use that money for tax incentives on the highest mileage vehicles available....may the top 5 or 10. That way the politicians don't have a chance to steal it and it gets used to help folks by the newest technology, which may be more expensive. It also creates a steady demand for these cars so auto companies have a reason to produce them.

Alternatively, we could take away the handouts we give to oil companies for drilling, shipping, etc. and use that money for tax incentives. That way total costs don't change....

(I sold my 1967 GTX with a 440cu in. engine about ten years ago and used the money to invest in oil companies when oil was $10/bbl!!! And when my father decides to sell his 1929 Pontiac, I will try to buy it!)

Actually, many people have big SUV's/Trucks don't drive them everyday (not all, but a good amount of people). A neighbor has an older 5.0L V8 Explorer he uses for boat duty, and has a V6 little nissan for daily driving duty. A buddy of mine has a 77' 350 Chevy pickup he purchased for $2,000 he uses for outdoor sport activities.

I live in California, and love head up to the mountains pretty much year round. I'm looking into purchasing a huge Bronco with a EFI 351 V8. I need something I can take off-road, take in the snow, possible tow, and still be able to seat 5. Mid-90's models with decent milage are in the $3,500-$6,000 range. I also can use it on weekends for trips to Home Depot, ect. Does this mean I'm gonna run errands all day in it at 10-16mpg? Off course not. That makes no sense.

Has anyone ever heard of a battery deposit required when you trade in your hybrid veh. for a new one?

I agree with you the best way of managing things is to use the gas wisely. Gas had become a precious resource now, which cannot be wasted as a lavish item.