Posted by David, a resident of the Monta Loma neighborhood, on Jul 31, 2008 at 11:16 am
The editor is saying reduced driving and increased carbon emissions can't go hand in hand, but that's false. People could drive less, but pollution over all can still increase if industries that pollute or make products that pollute aren't forced to reduce emissions.
In fact, Bush and company are trying to stop California from reducing the pollution coming from new cars remember?
If you believe that our pollution problems really need to be tackled, higher prices is only going to go so far, which is not to say less driving is a bad thing, but much more is needed.
Also, if the price drops some amount will people just adjust and start driving more? This isn't really a plan is it? If you are really for reduced driving you should be asking for a higher gas tax.
(You could start by taxing windfall profits first - if you believe the rich should be taxed, no? Then you could add a tax based on cost to keep cost high and reduce driving, at least that seems to be what the Opinion wants.)
Finally, note headline in news today "Exxon Mobil 2Q profit sets US record". Reduced driving sure hasn't hurt profits for the oil industry.