<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
  xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
  xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
  xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
>

<channel>
  <title>Green Options &#187; gas-tax</title>
  <link>http://greenoptions.com/tag/gas-tax</link>
  <description>Posts tagged 'gas-tax'</description>
  <pubDate>Thu, 05 Jun 2008 20:15:13 +0000</pubDate>
  <generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
  <language>en</language>
  <item>
    <title>Obama&#8217;s Plan to Reduce Foreign Oil Dependence</title>
    <link>http://cleantechnica.com/2008/06/05/obamas-plan-to-reduce-foreign-oil-dependence/</link>
    <comments>http://cleantechnica.com/2008/06/05/obamas-plan-to-reduce-foreign-oil-dependence/#comments</comments>
    <pubDate>Thu, 05 Jun 2008 20:15:13 +0000</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Sarah Lozanova</dc:creator>
    
		<category><![CDATA[alternative energy]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[fossil fuels]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[global warming]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[politics]]></category>

    <guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/2008/06/05/obamas-plan-to-reduce-foreign-oil-dependence/</guid>
    <description><![CDATA[<h3><a title="obama energy policy" href="http://cleantechnica.com/files/2008/06/obama.jpg"><img src="http://cleantechnica.com/files/2008/06/obama.jpg" alt="obama energy policy" width="248" height="167" align="left" /></a>As Americans spend $41 million in foreign oil an hour and are left broke at the pump, what plan does Obama have to solve this problem?</h3>
<p>Oil is destined to be a heated issue in this upcoming presidential election and Barack Obama’s opposition to the gas tax “holiday” has already been a hot topic.  Obama has made it clear that national energy policy needs to be taken in a new direction.</p>
<p>“We send a billion dollars to foreign nations every single day and we are melting the polar ice caps in the bargain,” said Obama.  “That has to change.”<!--more--></p>
<h4>Here are some of the key elements of <a href="http://www.barackobama.com/issues/energy/">Obama’s energy plan</a>:</h4>
<h4><strong>Fuel Economy Standards</strong></h4>
<p>Doubling fuel economy standards within the next 18 years is a priority to Obama.  Research in engines and advanced lightweight materials will help meet this goal.  He also wants to assist auto makers in increasing fuel economy standards through loan guarantees and tax credits for domestic auto manufacturers.</p>
<p>“We are going to raise fuel efficiency standards on cars because that is the only way that we can actually lower gas prices over the long-term and I know you need that,” <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZzIkwW2HlKM\http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZzIkwW2HlKM\">said Obama</a>.</p>
<h4><strong>Next Generation Biofuels</strong></h4>
<p>Obama’s goal is to have two billion gallons of cellulosic ethanol in use by 2013.  He plans to use tax incentives, government contracts and cash prizes to help this industry mature and specifically wants to encourage farmer-owned refineries.  He would like renewable fuel standards to increase, such that 60 billion gallons of advanced biofuels are in the fuel supply by 2030.</p>
<p>A National Low Carbon Fuel Standard is a mechanism that Obama plans to use that requires fuel suppliers to decrease carbon emissions from fuels by 10% by 2020 and he specifically wants to encourage non-petroleum fuels to reach this target.</p>
<p>“The only way we are going to seriously reduce the price of gas is if we actually start investing in alternative fuels and we raise fuel standards on cars,” <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eHiavhPGXSo">said Obama</a>.</p>
<h4><a title="solar panel installation" href="http://cleantechnica.com/files/2008/06/solar-install.jpg"><img src="http://cleantechnica.com/files/2008/06/solar-install.jpg" alt="solar panel installation" width="233" height="174" align="right" /></a><strong>Renewable Energy</strong></h4>
<p>By 2025, Obama would like 25% of U.S. electricity to be generated from clean, renewable sources including wind, solar and geothermal with a Renewable Portfolio Standard.  Obama calls for $150 billion to be invested over 10 years in clean energy and infrastructure to support it.  Investment in a national digital electric grid would allow greater amounts of renewable energy to be utilized and make plug-in hybrids more environmentally sound.</p>
<p>&#8220;For the sake of our security, our economy, our jobs and our planet, the age of oil must end in our time,&#8221; <a href="http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2007/05/obama_tougher_fuelrules_needed.html">said Obama</a>.</p>
<p><strong><br />
</strong></p>
<h4><strong>Related Posts on Renewable Energy:</strong></h4>
<p><a href="http://redgreenandblue.org/category/renewable-energy/">Germans Debate Renewable Energy Supports<br />
</a><a href="http://cleantechnica.com/2008/03/27/solar-thermal-electricity-can-it-replace-coal-gas-and-oil/">Solar Thermal Electricity: Can it Replace Coal, Gas, and Oil</a><br />
<a href="http://redgreenandblue.org/2008/05/08/consumer-first-energy-act-of-2008-lacks-support/">Consumer-First Energy Act of 2008 Lacks Support</a><br />
<a href="http://www.triplepundit.com/pages/congressional-bills-that-addre-003182.php">Congressional Bills that Address Climate Change</a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.triplepundit.com/pages/congressional-bills-that-addre-003182.php"></a><br />
<strong>Image credit:</strong> <a href="http://cleantechnica.com/wp-admin/post.php?action=edit&amp;post=476">Radiospike Photography at Flickr</a> under a Creative Commons license</p>
<p><strong>Lower Image Credit: </strong><a href="http://www.solarserviceinc.com">Compliments of Solar Service Inc.</a></p>
]]></description>
    <content:encoded><![CDATA[ [1]As Americans spend $41 million in foreign oil an hour and are left broke at the pump, what plan does Obama have to solve this problem?
Oil is destined to be a heated issue in this upcoming presidential election and Barack Obama’s opposition to the gas tax “holiday” has already been a hot topic.  Obama has made it clear that national energy policy needs to be taken in a new direction.

“We send a billion dollars to foreign nations every single day and we are melting the polar ice caps in the bargain,” said Obama.  “That has to change.”
Here are some of the key elements of Obama’s energy plan [2]:
Fuel Economy Standards
Doubling fuel economy standards within the next 18 years is a priority to Obama.  Research in engines and advanced lightweight materials will help meet this goal.  He also wants to assist auto makers in increasing fuel economy standards through loan guarantees and tax credits for domestic auto manufacturers.

“We are going to raise fuel efficiency standards on cars because that is the only way that we can actually lower gas prices over the long-term and I know you need that,” said Obama [3].
Next Generation Biofuels
Obama’s goal is to have two billion gallons of cellulosic ethanol in use by 2013.  He plans to use tax incentives, government contracts and cash prizes to help this industry mature and specifically wants to encourage farmer-owned refineries.  He would like renewable fuel standards to increase, such that 60 billion gallons of advanced biofuels are in the fuel supply by 2030.

A National Low Carbon Fuel Standard is a mechanism that Obama plans to use that requires fuel suppliers to decrease carbon emissions from fuels by 10% by 2020 and he specifically wants to encourage non-petroleum fuels to reach this target.

“The only way we are going to seriously reduce the price of gas is if we actually start investing in alternative fuels and we raise fuel standards on cars,” said Obama [4].
 [5]Renewable Energy
By 2025, Obama would like 25% of U.S. electricity to be generated from clean, renewable sources including wind, solar and geothermal with a Renewable Portfolio Standard.  Obama calls for $150 billion to be invested over 10 years in clean energy and infrastructure to support it.  Investment in a national digital electric grid would allow greater amounts of renewable energy to be utilized and make plug-in hybrids more environmentally sound.

"For the sake of our security, our economy, our jobs and our planet, the age of oil must end in our time," said Obama [6].



Related Posts on Renewable Energy:
Germans Debate Renewable Energy Supports
Solar Thermal Electricity: Can it Replace Coal, Gas, and Oil [7]
Consumer-First Energy Act of 2008 Lacks Support [8]
Congressional Bills that Address Climate Change [9]


Image credit: Radiospike Photography at Flickr [10] under a Creative Commons license

Lower Image Credit: Compliments of Solar Service Inc. [11]

[1] http://cleantechnica.com/files/2008/06/obama.jpg
[2] http://www.barackobama.com/issues/energy/
[3] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZzIkwW2HlKM\http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZzIkwW2HlKM\
[4] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eHiavhPGXSo
[5] http://cleantechnica.com/files/2008/06/solar-install.jpg
[6] http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2007/05/obama_tougher_fuelrules_needed.html
[7] http://cleantechnica.com/2008/03/27/solar-thermal-electricity-can-it-replace-coal-gas-and-oil/
[8] http://redgreenandblue.org/2008/05/08/consumer-first-energy-act-of-2008-lacks-support/
[9] http://www.triplepundit.com/pages/congressional-bills-that-addre-003182.php
[10] http://cleantechnica.com/wp-admin/post.php?action=edit&#38;post=476
[11] http://www.solarserviceinc.com]]></content:encoded>
    <wfw:commentRss>http://cleantechnica.com/2008/06/05/obamas-plan-to-reduce-foreign-oil-dependence/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
  </item>
  <item>
    <title>What We Pay For in a Gallon of Gas [graphic]</title>
    <link>http://ecoscraps.com/2008/05/12/what-we-pay-for-in-a-gallon-gas-graphic/</link>
    <comments>http://ecoscraps.com/2008/05/12/what-we-pay-for-in-a-gallon-gas-graphic/#comments</comments>
    <pubDate>Tue, 13 May 2008 05:43:53 +0000</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Timothy B. Hurst</dc:creator>
    
		<category><![CDATA[Transportation]]></category>

    <guid isPermaLink="false">http://ecoscraps.com/2008/05/12/what-we-pay-for-in-a-gallon-gas-graphic/</guid>
    <description><![CDATA[<p>(via <a href="http://www.doe.gov/pricestrends/index.htm">U.S. Department of Energy)</a></p>
<p><a href="http://ecoscraps.com/files/2008/05/gasbreakdown.jpg" title="gasbreakdown.jpg"><img src="http://ecoscraps.com/files/2008/05/gasbreakdown.jpg" alt="what we pay for in a gallon of gasoline" /></a></p>
]]></description>
    <content:encoded><![CDATA[(via U.S. Department of Energy) [1]

 [2]

[1] http://www.doe.gov/pricestrends/index.htm
[2] http://ecoscraps.com/files/2008/05/gasbreakdown.jpg]]></content:encoded>
    <wfw:commentRss>http://ecoscraps.com/2008/05/12/what-we-pay-for-in-a-gallon-gas-graphic/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
  </item>
  <item>
    <title>Clinton Gas Tax Plan Doesn&#8217;t Need Economists, Just Good Implementation?</title>
    <link>http://redgreenandblue.org/2008/05/05/clinton-doesnt-need-economists-just-good-implementation/</link>
    <comments>http://redgreenandblue.org/2008/05/05/clinton-doesnt-need-economists-just-good-implementation/#comments</comments>
    <pubDate>Mon, 05 May 2008 09:27:21 +0000</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Timothy B. Hurst</dc:creator>
    
		<category><![CDATA[Energy]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[elections and campaigns]]></category>

    <guid isPermaLink="false">http://redgreenandblue.org/2008/05/05/clinton-doesnt-need-economists-just-good-implementation/</guid>
    <description><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://redgreenandblue.org/files/2008/05/gaspumps.jpg" title="gaspumps.jpg"><img src="http://redgreenandblue.org/files/2008/05/gaspumps.jpg" alt="gaspumps.jpg" height="344" width="277" /></a>I usually don&#8217;t watch the Sunday morning talk shows like <em>Meet the Press</em> or <em>This Week</em>. I&#8217;m not sure why. I think this is because I have a deeply ingrained aversion to them dating back to my childhood. You see, we really only had a handful of channels in those pre-cable days, and on Sunday mornings, before the cartoons really got going, three of those channels were running these incredibly boring talk shows - when they should have been running, at least from my point of view, cartoons. It was completely beyond me why they were running these shows at all, and not just doubling up on <em>Superfriends</em> or <em>Scooby Doo!</em> It seems I knew, even at that young age, that there were some things are just better off left till Monday.</p>
<p>What I&#8217;m getting at, is that I did not see <a href="http://abcnews.go.com/ThisWeek/Story?id=4783456&amp;page=1">Hillary Clinton on This Week with George Stephanopolous</a>, on Sunday morning. But since we have a 24-hour media matrix covering every breath and every word in this presidential campaign, I was told all about it by all of my regular news outlets as soon as I got up. I was most struck by Senator Clinton&#8217;s reply to Stephanopolous&#8217; question about the <a href="http://redgreenandblue.org/2008/04/30/obamas-new-ad-in-carolina-rejects-gas-tax-holliday/">pushback her proposed summertime gas-tax holiday has received</a>. <!--more--><br />
<strong>STEPHANOPOLOUS:</strong></p>
<blockquote><p>&#8220;Economists say that&#8217;s not going to happen. They say this is going to go straight into the profits of the oil companies. They&#8217;re not going to actually lower their prices. And the two top leaders in the House are against it. Nearly every editorial board and economist in the country has come out against it. Even a supporter of yours, Paul Krugman of The New York Times, calls it pointless and disappointing.</p>
<p>Can you name one economist, a credible economist who supports the suspension?&#8221;</p></blockquote>
<p>[Clinton tried to elude the question with a foray into populist appeals of how elite opinion is bringing down the hard-working middle class, but Stephanopolous reiterated the question]<strong>.</strong></p>
<p><strong>STEPHANOPOULOS:</strong></p>
<blockquote><p>&#8220;But can you name an economist who thinks this makes sense?&#8221;</p></blockquote>
<p><strong>CLINTON:</strong></p>
<blockquote><p>&#8220;Well, I&#8217;ll tell you what, I&#8217;m not going to put my lot in with economists, because I know if we get it right, if we actually did it right, if we had a president who used all the tools of the presidency, we would design it in such a way that it would be implemented effectively.&#8221;</p></blockquote>
<p>Now, I am usually the last person to be defending economists, but <strong>when it comes to designing energy tax policy, perhaps an economist is not a bad person to talk to, no?</strong> Former Labor Secretary in the Clinton administration, <strong>Robert Reich thinks so</strong>. <a href="http://robertreich.blogspot.com/2008/05/hillary-clinton-doesnt-listen-to.html">Reich wrote in his</a> blog on Sunday:</p>
<blockquote><p>&#8220;I&#8217;m not suggesting economists have all the answers. But when economists tell a president or a presidential candidate that his or her idea is dumb – and when all respectable economists around America agree that it’s a dumb idea – it’s probably wise for the president or presidential candidate to listen. When the president or candidate doesn’t, and proudly defends the policy by saying she&#8217;s &#8220;not going to put my lot in with economists,” we’ve got a problem, folks.</p>
<p>&#8220;Even though the summer gas tax holiday is pure hokum, it polls well, which is why HRC and John McCain are pushing it. That Barack Obama is not in favor of it despite its positive polling numbers speaks volumes about the kind of president he’ll be – and the kind of president we’d otherwise get from McCain and HRC.&#8221;</p></blockquote>
<p>This gas tax holiday is just a bad idea all the way around. First of all, Sen. Clinton proposes that her tax be paid for by the oil companies. Do you actually think something like that would get through the Senate? Let me say this, if Congress wouldn&#8217;t repeal tax breaks to big oil to fund renewable energy tax credits, they are not going to pay for a summertime tax moratorium on gas with an increased tax on the oil companies.</p>
<p>Abolishing the federal excise tax on gasoline in the summer leading up to the presidential election is exactly the kind of pure pandering that is not going to get Hillary Clinton or John McCain elected.</p>
<p>Photo: <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/robertstown/page24/">robertstown2001</a></p>
<p><strong>See Also: </strong></p>
<ul>
<li><strong>&#8220;<a href="http://redgreenandblue.org/2008/04/30/obamas-new-ad-in-carolina-rejects-gas-tax-holliday/">Obama&#8217;s New Ad Rejects Gas Tax Break</a>&#8220;</strong></li>
<li><strong>&#8220;<a href="http://redgreenandblue.org/2008/04/30/can-hillary-clinton-take-on-big-oil/">Can Hillary Clinton Take on Big Oil?</a>&#8220;</strong></li>
<li><strong>&#8220;<a href="http://redgreenandblue.org/2008/03/12/clinton-jabs-at-obamas-energy-policy/">Clinton Takes Jabs at Obama&#8217;s Energy Policy</a>&#8220;</strong></li>
</ul>
]]></description>
    <content:encoded><![CDATA[ [1][social_buttons]I usually don't watch the Sunday morning talk shows like Meet the Press or This Week. I'm not sure why. I think this is because I have a deeply ingrained aversion to them dating back to my childhood. You see, we really only had a handful of channels in those pre-cable days, and on Sunday mornings, before the cartoons really got going, three of those channels were running these incredibly boring talk shows - when they should have been running, at least from my point of view, cartoons. It was completely beyond me why they were running these shows at all, and not just doubling up on Superfriends or Scooby Doo! It seems I knew, even at that young age, that there were some things are just better off left till Monday.

What I'm getting at, is that I did not see Hillary Clinton on This Week with George Stephanopolous [2], on Sunday morning. But since we have a 24-hour media matrix covering every breath and every word in this presidential campaign, I was told all about it by all of my regular news outlets as soon as I got up. I was most struck by Senator Clinton's reply to Stephanopolous' question about the pushback her proposed summertime gas-tax holiday has received [3]. 
STEPHANOPOLOUS:
"Economists say that's not going to happen. They say this is going to go straight into the profits of the oil companies. They're not going to actually lower their prices. And the two top leaders in the House are against it. Nearly every editorial board and economist in the country has come out against it. Even a supporter of yours, Paul Krugman of The New York Times, calls it pointless and disappointing.

Can you name one economist, a credible economist who supports the suspension?"
[Clinton tried to elude the question with a foray into populist appeals of how elite opinion is bringing down the hard-working middle class, but Stephanopolous reiterated the question].

STEPHANOPOULOS:
"But can you name an economist who thinks this makes sense?"
CLINTON:
"Well, I'll tell you what, I'm not going to put my lot in with economists, because I know if we get it right, if we actually did it right, if we had a president who used all the tools of the presidency, we would design it in such a way that it would be implemented effectively."
Now, I am usually the last person to be defending economists, but when it comes to designing energy tax policy, perhaps an economist is not a bad person to talk to, no? Former Labor Secretary in the Clinton administration, Robert Reich thinks so. Reich wrote in his [4] blog on Sunday:
"I'm not suggesting economists have all the answers. But when economists tell a president or a presidential candidate that his or her idea is dumb – and when all respectable economists around America agree that it’s a dumb idea – it’s probably wise for the president or presidential candidate to listen. When the president or candidate doesn’t, and proudly defends the policy by saying she's "not going to put my lot in with economists,” we’ve got a problem, folks.

"Even though the summer gas tax holiday is pure hokum, it polls well, which is why HRC and John McCain are pushing it. That Barack Obama is not in favor of it despite its positive polling numbers speaks volumes about the kind of president he’ll be – and the kind of president we’d otherwise get from McCain and HRC."
This gas tax holiday is just a bad idea all the way around. First of all, Sen. Clinton proposes that her tax be paid for by the oil companies. Do you actually think something like that would get through the Senate? Let me say this, if Congress wouldn't repeal tax breaks to big oil to fund renewable energy tax credits, they are not going to pay for a summertime tax moratorium on gas with an increased tax on the oil companies.

Abolishing the federal excise tax on gasoline in the summer leading up to the presidential election is exactly the kind of pure pandering that is not going to get Hillary Clinton or John McCain elected.

Photo: robertstown2001 [5]

See Also: 

	"Obama's New Ad Rejects Gas Tax Break [6]"
	"Can Hillary Clinton Take on Big Oil? [7]"
	"Clinton Takes Jabs at Obama's Energy Policy [8]"


[1] http://redgreenandblue.org/files/2008/05/gaspumps.jpg
[2] http://abcnews.go.com/ThisWeek/Story?id=4783456&#38;page=1
[3] http://redgreenandblue.org/2008/04/30/obamas-new-ad-in-carolina-rejects-gas-tax-holliday/
[4] http://robertreich.blogspot.com/2008/05/hillary-clinton-doesnt-listen-to.html
[5] http://www.flickr.com/photos/robertstown/page24/
[6] http://redgreenandblue.org/2008/04/30/obamas-new-ad-in-carolina-rejects-gas-tax-holliday/
[7] http://redgreenandblue.org/2008/04/30/can-hillary-clinton-take-on-big-oil/
[8] http://redgreenandblue.org/2008/03/12/clinton-jabs-at-obamas-energy-policy/]]></content:encoded>
    <wfw:commentRss>http://redgreenandblue.org/2008/05/05/clinton-doesnt-need-economists-just-good-implementation/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
  </item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- 84 queries in 0.410 seconds. -->