High oil prices are painful, which will not come as news to anyone who has filled up the car lately with gasoline costing $4 a gallon or more. The cost of driving has soared in recent months, and no one seems to be doing anything about it. The question is: Should the government be taking action to relieve the strain on motorists? And if so, what should it do?
It’s not an easy question. In an age of global warming, high prices are partly a blessing. They help reduce emissions of carbon dioxide by discouraging unnecessary driving, fostering fuel efficiency and stimulating investment in alternative energy sources. They are bad for the pocketbook but good for the planet.
That, however, doesn’t mean the government should stand by and let prices climb. One reason is that some government policies help push them higher than they would be otherwise. Another is that we as a nation don’t gain when more of our income goes to undemocratic oil-producing states. If high prices reduce greenhouse emissions only to strengthen Iran and Venezuela, the world isn’t necessarily better off.
So we ought to be looking for ways to bring down world oil prices, which in turn would make gasoline cheaper. That was what President Bush hoped to do last week when he asked Saudi Arabia to increase its output — only to be summarily rebuffed.
Fortunately, there are other ways to advance that goal. One is for Washington to stop buying oil for the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, as Congress recently voted to do (over the objection of the White House). The SPR is already 97 percent full, and it makes no sense to top it off at these prices.
Another is to accommodate more domestic oil production. A bill recently introduced by Republican senators would allow coastal-state governors to petition to allow more offshore leasing within their state boundaries. It also pushes for new regulations to facilitate the exploitation of oil shale, a fuel source abundant in some Western states.
Demand-side steps could help as well. States and cities could look for ways to expand use of mass transit. Phasing out incandescent bulbs in favor of more efficient ones, as mandated in the energy bill that Bush signed last year, should also help.
But the ultimate goal should not be to reduce the price consumers pay at the pump. It should be to reduce the amount going to oil producers. Global warming is more than ample grounds for levying taxes on carbon-based fuels, including gasoline, to reduce emissions. But those taxes would fall partly on foreign oil producers. By cutting consumption, they promise to put downward pressure on world crude oil prices — weakening OPEC and stemming the flow of dollars to anti-American regimes.
American consumers have a choice: They can pay high prices to oil producers or to themselves. The tax proceeds can be used to finance programs of value here at home or to pay for cuts in other taxes — even as they curb the release of carbon dioxide.
It is tempting to dream of going back to the days of cheap fuel. But it makes more sense to recognize the value of high-priced gas and make it work for all of us.
———-
IN THE WEB EDITION:
WHAT DO YOU THINK?
Should the government intervene to reduce gas prices?
Tell us what your answer at chicagotribune.voxpop.
