CAFE standards and the “Green Dividend”

May 21st, 2009 by Al Lewis (alewis)

I don’t normally post commentary (as opposed to new ideas — and by the way if you have sent in an idea nad it is NOT posted it is because it is not new), but there was a recent request to comment on how CAFE standards affect the “Green Dividend.”

in general, trying to use a means other than price to send signals to the market is suboptimal, and this is no exception.  A higher price of gasoline means less driving, of smaller cars.  My theory is that Obama hasn’t thought of the  Green Dividend and for that reason finds gas taxes to be polticialyl unpalatable.    The Green Dividend has none of the following drawbacks that CAFE standards have:

–They will keep older large cars on the road much longer by raising the price of new large ones

– They won’t do anything to discourage driving once the car has been purchased

–They won’t do anything to discourage driving cars currently on the road (except, as the first point notes, keep them on the road longer)

200-120
210-260
200-310
SY0-401
810-403
300-320
400-101
70-533
N10-006
MB2-707
210-060
400-201
350-018
ADM-201
CISSP
1Z0-060
400-051
300-075
MB2-704
100-101
9L0-012
642-999
300-115
MB5-705
70-461
1V0-601
300-206
352-001
70-486
300-135
NS0-157
PR000041
300-101
70-346
CCA-500
70-480
300-208
70-462
EX200
1Z0-803
EX300
ICBB
1Z0-808
AWS-SYSOPS
1Z0-434
300-070
CAS-002
220-801
SSCP
PMP
642-997
70-410
101-400
ITILFND
AX0-100
2V0-621
102-400
101
1Z0-067
220-802
70-463
C_TAW12_731
70-494
CISM
700-501
NSE4
NSE7
70-483
70-488
Share This Idea:
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Mixx
  • Google

Email

2 Responses to “CAFE standards and the “Green Dividend””

  1. littauergal Says:

    I visit your site to get new ideas, not commentary. Not hard to find sites with commentary

  2. Tooz Says:

    I respectfully take exception, littauergal, the commentary is quite appropriate.
    This issue is typical of many of the current administration’s “solutions” - they don’t think them through.
    For example - universal healthcare - it’s a good idea on the surface, but the cost is too high. Did they consider our current government-run healthcare, which is substandard and filled with fraud? Did they consider socialized medicine in Canada, Great Britain, France, etc. and the problems and costs of those programs? There is a better way!
    Did BHO and company consider cap-and-trade before proposing and pushing it? The cost of EVERYTHING will increase, making the current recession look like a walk in the park in comparison. China leads in production of CO2 and pollution, but will not reduce their emissions. We should do NOTHING until the rest of the world agrees to take the same actions to reduce emissions.
    Did BHO consider anything before ordering Gitmo closed? Like what to do with the terrorists being held there? No, he didn’t… doh! Plain and simple: We are in a war on terror - they are prisoners of war - they should be held right where they are until the war is over.
    Change for the sake of change is wrong. Think things through before implementing changes!
    Paul ‘Tooz’

Leave a Reply