Skip to main content

Today's Poll: Do you agree with Obama that tax subsidies for oil companies be eliminated?

By Howard B. Owens
Dave Olsen

Yes, and he shouldn't stop there. I hope everyone realizes that the oil companies won't be shrugging their collective shoulders and saying Oh, Well we had a good run. The cost of gasoline, diesel and heating fuel will go through the roof. It'll be worth it in the long run.

Jan 26, 2011, 9:00am Permalink
Lorie Longhany

I think the point is to switch the incentives to clean energy sources. There are so many positives: stop American dollars going to countries that want to kill us, creation of emerging industries which will spark innovation and the American entrepreneurial spirit, and a big win for the environment. The gulf oil spill was a wake up call.

If we can wean ourselves off oil isn't it a win win? Big oil should be taking the lead and they probably are.

Jan 26, 2011, 9:27am Permalink
Dave Olsen

Lorie; I think the point is clean alternative energy sources will never be viable while gas and oil are still relatively cheap. Taking away the tax incentives from the oil companies will cause the price of petroleum products to rise and tax breaks theoretically will cause other energy sources to be cheaper than they are now. It's a clear manipulation. I'm not necessarily against it, as long as the incentives have an expiration date, so that if something doesn't work, we the taxpayers aren't subsidizing a loser. Ultimately, the market should decide and government subsidies should end..

Jan 26, 2011, 9:45am Permalink
Bob Harker

Peter, good point about supply. One word: ANWAR.

And Dave, you're right also. What happened to the free market? Ethanol has caused food and other prices to rise, is not efficient, nor a long term solution (my opinion). Solar, thermal, wind - all unproven, and certainly not cost effective to date, yet our tax dollars are thrown at them in huge piles. Are subsidies helping R&D as they were designed to, or are they a means to an end for businesses? Why NOT R&D a product or process whether or not you believe it to be viable? You're guaranteed to make money through the use of government funds.

Fossil fuels are finite and must be replaced. But why not use proven energy sources as private sector innovators develop long term solutions. If there is a buck to be made in the market, investors will be there.

We have fallen WAY behind most of the world in the use of nuclear power. It's been proven to be safe and efficient. We are, I believe, the only country with a ban on offshore drilling. On land, Anwar would safely support our needs for many years - without inconveniencing wildlife. There are vast natural gas and oil resources across the country that are untapped due to tax and regulation issues.

And here we sit, paying 3.33/gallon, with 4.00 on the horizon.

I've heard that the government makes more money on a gallon of gas than than the oil company. Is that true? It depends on who you ask.

End rant.

Jan 26, 2011, 9:53am Permalink
Chris Charvella

Government research grants and subsidies have been the driving force behind technological development in America for 235 years. Why would we stop that now?

Jan 26, 2011, 9:59am Permalink
Dave Olsen

Well, yes and no Chris. In the yes column, I was listening to a radio program a few days ago about how the military is working on developing fuel sources, such as bio-fuels from garbage and plants. We learned in WW2 from Patton that if you can't get fuel to the army when it needs it, it stops and waits. They also found that by insulating tents, it saves running air conditioners as much. The US Navy has been leading the way on nuclear power for decades. Why that technology hasn't gotten into the mainstream, I can't figure out.
http://www.npr.org/2010/12/03/131785448/Military-Goes-Green-For-An-Edge…

Jan 26, 2011, 10:39am Permalink
C. M. Barons

Bob, I've been heating my home with a geothermal system for three years at a savings (over oil) of 200 - 300 dollars per month. What's unproven about it?

Jan 26, 2011, 1:35pm Permalink
terry paine

Chris, nobody is stopping you from subsidizing whatever you want, But using force to make other people pay isn't very liberty minded.

I also have to disagree with the you about the government being a driving force behind development. The free market has been much more effective in developing new technologies. If we were to let fuel prices return to market pricing some innovating enterprise like Tesla would recognize and fill the increased demand for fuel saving technologies. As it is now, with the government keeping fuel prices falsely low, their is'nt enough incentive to drive the development of fuel saving technologies.

Jan 26, 2011, 1:53pm Permalink
C. M. Barons

Sales of Hybrid Electric cars are estimated at 940.3 thousand units in 2010 and are expected to cross the 1 million unit mark in 2011. The Market for Hybrid Electric cars is predicted to reach 22.9% during 2006-2015, 2.5 million units by 2015. Solely electric-powered cars project a 2 - 9% increase in sales, largely driven by increase in gasoline cost.

Depending on the volatility of domestic gasoline pricing, the electric/hybrid market share will be 10 - 30% by 2020.

$5-a-gallon gas could come as soon as 2012, predicts former Shell Oil President John Hofmeister, according to CNN Money. Prices are expected to reach $4-a-gallon by Spring.

The French opted to favor diesel-powered Vs gasoline-powered vehicles in the 80s. With under 2% of the nations vehicles powered by diesel, the government lowered the fuel tax on diesel, and by 2005, nearly 50% of that country's vehicles were diesel. The U. S. government could accomplish the same by reducing the vehicle tax on hybrids and electrics. The resulting drop in petroleum consumption would allow the market to lower gasoline pricing.

Jan 26, 2011, 2:22pm Permalink
C. M. Barons

John, I had to drill. I live in a village- a yard full of easements! Three wells, 310 feet deep. Normally the horizontal loop is 5 feet deep and 1,000 feet of pipe (coiled).

Jan 26, 2011, 3:00pm Permalink
Bob Harker

Kudos on the innovative approach, CM.

If you indeed save a couple a hundred a month in the winter, what is the REALISTIC expectation of a ROI? From the wells themselves to whatever heat exchange process you use, it sounds like a hefty up front investment.

Also, was this some sort of "off the shelf" solution, or a design of your own?

Thanks

Jan 26, 2011, 3:15pm Permalink

Authentically Local