GM Volt Forum banner

1 - 10 of 10 Posts

·
Moderator
Joined
·
4,851 Posts
Discussion Starter #1

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,782 Posts
'Abandons' might be a little strong/misleading. The TAR recommendation isn't due until 2018. And it is only a recommendation. CARB/EPA can agree on something different.

Hopefully, CARB and EPA can abandon this discord of what the actual law is. It is probably VERY expensive to adhere to different rules depending on which State the vehicle is sold.

BTW. CAFE is/was 56mpg. EPA stickers are around 40mpg.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,202 Posts
"The EPA's original 2025 standard expected cars to make up two thirds of the new vehicles sold that year, while trucks, crossovers, and SUVs represented just a third of MY2025 sales."

It figures that what's likely to happen in the real world and the gov't forecast are just about diametrically opposed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,464 Posts
Given that multiple manufacturers are already on track to produce 200+ mile EVs with fast charging capabilities, I think the government could actually take a step back from establishing fleet fuel economy. However, to do so reasonably, I feel that we would first need to end all oil subsidies. If people want to buy 18 mpg SUVs when gas is $8 a gallon, let them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,005 Posts
Given that multiple manufacturers are already on track to produce 200+ mile EVs with fast charging capabilities, I think the government could actually take a step back from establishing fleet fuel economy. However, to do so reasonably, I feel that we would first need to end all oil subsidies. If people want to buy 18 mpg SUVs when gas is $8 a gallon, let them.

We don't have oil subsidies . I think you mean you want to add a massive tax to oil .

" As reported in the New York Times on May 25, 2013, that when it came to corporate income taxes -- federal, state, local, and foreign – between 2007 to 2012 the three major oil companies paid the following: ExxonMobil, $146 billion; Chevron, $85.5 billion; and ConocoPhillips, $58.2 billion. "

That totals $289.7 billion.

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/penny-starr/3-us-oil-companies-paid-highest-corporate-income-taxes-2897b-2007-12
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,464 Posts
We don't have oil subsidies . I think you mean you want to add a massive tax to oil .

" As reported in the New York Times on May 25, 2013, that when it came to corporate income taxes -- federal, state, local, and foreign – between 2007 to 2012 the three major oil companies paid the following: ExxonMobil, $146 billion; Chevron, $85.5 billion; and ConocoPhillips, $58.2 billion. "

That totals $289.7 billion.

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/penny-starr/3-us-oil-companies-paid-highest-corporate-income-taxes-2897b-2007-12
This discussion seems familiar to me (I think it was discussed on these boards earlier). So the three major oil companies combined to pay less than $60 billion a year in taxes while the cost of subsidizing and protecting the United States oil interests costs tax payers as much as $100 billion a year? Even if you stick with just the official, subsidized amount, the United States offsets most of what these companies pay in taxes (about $40 billion annually), but that doesn't account for climate, environment, health, and military costs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,005 Posts
This discussion seems familiar to me (I think it was discussed on these boards earlier). So the three major oil companies combined to pay less than $60 billion a year in taxes while the cost of subsidizing and protecting the United States oil interests costs tax payers as much as $100 billion a year? Even if you stick with just the official, subsidized amount, the United States offsets most of what these companies pay in taxes (about $40 billion annually), but that doesn't account for climate, environment, health, and military costs.
Yes , there was similar false propaganda regarding subsidies.

The federal gasoline tax pays for the war machine . Venezuela , Saudi Arabia and a few other countries have subsidies on gasoline and oil. Not the U.S. The non subsidized , non taxed cost of gasoline is about $1.50 per gallon , not $8.00 .
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
4,851 Posts
Discussion Starter #10 (Edited)
Yes , there was similar false propaganda regarding subsidies.
The federal gasoline tax pays for the war machine . Venezuela , Saudi Arabia and a few other countries have subsidies on gasoline and oil. Not the U.S. The non subsidized , non taxed cost of gasoline is about $1.50 per gallon , not $8.00 .
Federal subsidies in 2014? $37.5 billion annually (see below)

The federal gasoline tax is supposed to pay for our roads, not the war machine, and its falling behind on roads since it is not linked to inflation. The numbers I've read are very different than the ones you state here. The amount we spend on military presence in oil-rich areas to keep that supply reliable, from what I've seen, is not factored into the price of our gasoline. And if it were, conservative estimates peg it at gas effectively costing $10/gallon, with some estimates going higher than $20/gallon. Not to mention the lives of so many soldiers.

Our gasoline is subsidized, some directly, but mostly indirectly in this manner. The military cost to protect those supplies that our country is burdened with should be reflected in its price.

Also, see: http://priceofoil.org/fossil-fuel-subsidies/
As of July 2014, Oil Change International estimates United States fossil fuel subsidies at $37.5 billion annually, including $21 billion in production and exploration subsidies. Other credible estimates of annual United States fossil fuel subsidies range from $10 billion to $52 billion annually – yet none of these include costs borne by taxpayers related to the climate, local environmental, and health impacts of the fossil fuel industry.

Fossil fuel subsidies in the United States also include massive military expenditures to acquire and defend fossil fuel interests around the globe, and infrastructure spending and related maintenance based on an antiquated energy system built on large, remote power plants and cheap electricity.

Through 2013, fossil fuel subsidies linked to production actually increased under President Barack Obama’s administration, largely as a result of an “All of the Above” energy strategy promoting oil and gas industry expansion. At a federal level, production and exploration subsidies – some of the most inefficient and least defensible subsidies – rose from $12.5 billion in 2009 to $18.5 billion in 2013.
 
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
Top