Home › News › County News
Pricey gas is good for earth and waistlines
Download this story as a podcast!
James Glover Ii / Star staff Damisha Fulton of Oxnard climbs aboard a bus near Pacific View Mall in Ventura. Fulton says high gas prices are part of the reason she rides the bus to work every day.
James Glover Ii / Star staff 7/8/8 VENTURA- Celeste Escamilla of Ventura smiles in her seat while riding a Vista bus to Santa Barbara City College on July 8, 2008.
James Glover II / Star staff Maren Mochizuki, of Carpinteria, unloads her bicycle from a Vista bus at the Ventura County Government Center in Ventura. Mochizuki says she chooses to ride public transportation because it's better for the environment.
STORY TOOLS 
More from County NewsSoaring gas prices have made commuting to work seem like an endeavor that requires a second mortgage.
But if you can get past the pain in your pocketbook, and all those numbers at the end of your monthly gasoline bill, there could be something good to come out of the high price of gas.
If high gas prices cause just 10 percent of drivers to take mass transit or carpool, easing congestion on the freeways, could road rage decrease?
Fewer cars spewing exhaust could mean cleaner air.
That spare tire around your belly could get smaller as you walk or bike more places rather than hopping in the car.
Good things can come from pain, said Rachel Morris, a Ventura global warming crusader who rides her bike just about everywhere.
She is worried about the effect of rising gas prices on working people, "but I think that on the other side, we'll have a better society because of it," she said. "I think people are going to be closer to each other, they are going to be healthier, going to have less trash and a lot less traffic, and they are going to have more meaningful lives. If we can make it through this, things are going to be better."
The fact that increased prices may mean less driving could be what needs to happen to curb global warming, she said.
"When we look back on this, it could be the thing that prevents us from going over the cliff," Morris said.
It could help us breathe easier, too, said Mike Stubblefield, chairman of the Los Padres chapter of the Sierra Club.
"I think there is a silver lining, and it is significant," he said as he took a break from working on his Ventura deck.
His family was supposed to go to Italy for a vacation, but with gas prices so high, they decided to save some cash and stay home.
"Anytime people cut back on their driving, air quality is going to improve," he said. "This is the tipping point."
State figures show Californians used 3.2 percent less gasoline in March 2008 compared to the same month in 2007, or 43.5 million fewer gallons.
Mike Villegas, executive director of the Ventura County Air Pollution Control District, said about 16 percent of the smog-forming compounds in our air come from passenger cars and trucks on the road. With every decrease in miles driven, you can see an improvement in air quality, he said.
"There is no doubt when you reduce emissions, you reduce smog levels," he said.
None of this will happen overnight. Habits, especially ones as deeply ingrained as the way we drive, are slow to change.
But there are signs the tide is starting to turn, said Darren Kettle, executive director of the Ventura County Transportation Commission.
People are starting to call his agency more and more to figure out how to take a bus or train somewhere instead of their cars.
"People are thinking about it, and the only way to see a change is if people start to ask of themselves the question, do I want to do something different,'" he said. "This is the first step."
The bus route between Ventura and Santa Barbara has had a dramatic spike in riders over the past few months. Whereas riders within the county tend to be lower-income people who have no choice but to ride the bus, the people on the Santa Barbara route are often upper-income professionals who could drive if they wanted, Kettle said. They just want to save money.
If gas prices stay high over a prolonged period, they could change not only driving habits, but also the makeup of our communities, say urban planning experts.
As people start debating driving long distances for shopping, eating or entertainment, they will stay closer to home and pump more money into the local economy — leading small communities to provide more amenities, said Ali Modarres, associate director of the Pat Brown Institute, a public policy center.
People have been talking about the benefits of having jobs near homes for years, but when the cost of gas was low, it never made much of a difference, he said.
"What I can hope for is that some of the ideas that have been around for a long time become practical," he said.
"One of the unintended consequences is the strengthening of local everything," said urban planning expert Joel Kotkin. "There will be a focus on the local economy and local amenities."
And then there is the benefit to the waistline if people start walking and riding bikes, even if it's not to work but just for a quick trip to the store.
Americans are 10 pounds heavier than a decade ago, and nearly two-thirds of adults are overweight or obese. A stretch of the legs instead of a depression of the gas pedal could be a good thing, said Ventura fitness guru Robert Ferguson.
He said he's seen more people show up at his healthy living seminars on bikes these days.
"This raises consciousness on a lot of things," he said of the gas prices. "I think it's going to have a healthy benefit for all of us."
Posted by cassandra2 on July 16, 2008 at 7:45 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Nice article, Zeke.
Rachel Morris is a community asset of the first rank, always positive and civil even facing the GW deniers funded by Exxon.
BTW ditching soda sweetened with high fructose corn syrup would decrease childhood obesity big time, possibly the upsurge in diabetes in this age group as well.
Making streets bicycle friendly enough for kids to get to school safely by bike would help too.
Posted by jeff93024 on July 16, 2008 at 9:07 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I'm praying for a Republican president, a Republican Congress, drilling in all of the national monuments, national parks, national forests, state parks, wildlife sanctuaries, all coastal waters, and $15-dollar-a-gallon gasoline for you and me in America while the oil companies continue to sell most of the petroleum overseas, all the while claiming that it's good for the economy and decrying anyone who disagrees with them as being unpatriotic and a threat to national security.
Think that'll do it? Think that'll turn the tide?
Nope -- the Republicans will still be trying to blame the whole mess on the Democrats, the majority of Americans will believe them, and the Democrats will be huddled together all teary and blinky-eyed, crying "Stop it! Stop it!", as opposed to getting their act together and actually doing anything about it.
People get the government they deserve, and we've gotten exactly what we've deserved for the past 8 years. Get ready for at least another 4 years.
Posted by bill on July 16, 2008 at 9:13 a.m. (Suggest removal)
One of the most important and best results of the higher gas prices will be more pressure to open up more areas for drilling... offshore, ANWAR, etc. People will be a lot less concerned about the myth of global warming and more concerned about the cost of gas, thus putting pressure on our politicians to change their stance on drilling (we all know how politian's "beliefs" can change rapidly when votes are involved!). All the tree huggers that are so excited that higher gas prices are hurting the "working man" will be chocking on their excitement as the oil derricks pop up in next to their tree.
Posted by BeaHappi on July 16, 2008 at 9:53 a.m. (Suggest removal)
"Making streets bicycle friendly enough for kids to get to school safely by bike would help too."
Amen to that cassandra! Not just for kids but for adults too. We need more bike paths. People who ride bikes down Victoria and Harbor are taking their life into their hands. It can be nerve-wracking to drive cars on those roads; let alone bike.
Posted by jeff93024 on July 16, 2008 at 9:57 a.m. (Suggest removal)
"All the tree huggers that are so excited that higher gas prices are hurting the "working man"
Nobody here is happy that the working man is getting hurt. Expressing joy, not disgust, over other people's troubles is mostly a right-wing trait.
We're glad that everybody is now seeing what gasoline really costs. Europeans have been paying the equivalent of $9.50 US per LITER of gas. Not per gallon, but per liter. They've been paying that while making solid plans to switch to new fuel sources: http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&...
We'll be paying the same thing soon, but instead of making any real effort to wean ourselves off of incredibly expensive petroleum, we'll continue to pursue the same goals that brought right to where we are right now: up a creek.
Posted by BeaHappi on July 16, 2008 at 10:14 a.m.
(This thread was removed by the site staff.)
Posted by BeaHappi on July 16, 2008 at 10:28 a.m.
(This thread was removed by the site staff.)
Posted by mikeb6804 on July 16, 2008 at 10:39 a.m.
(This thread was removed by the site staff.)
Posted by BeaHappi on July 16, 2008 at 10:41 a.m. (Suggest removal)
"Can you imagine carpooling with someone who said the same thing over, and over, and over again?"
I would throw myself out of the car and run myself over...
Posted by sslocal on July 16, 2008 at 11:18 a.m. (Suggest removal)
"Nobody here is happy that the working man is getting hurt. Expressing joy, not disgust, over other people's troubles is mostly a right-wing trait."
I'm going to call you on this one Jeff.
Just what makes you think that it is just the right wing folks that wish pain and hurt upon someone else? I certainly don't. Nobody I know does either.
Seems to me it is you that does these things as is evident in your post.
As for the article, I hope it does reduce traffic. I know it has made me ride my bike to work 3 times a week. (the other two times I have places to go where I will need my vehicle)
Cassandra is correct that we need more bike friendly cities. VC is not to bad but it could stand some improvement.
Posted by sslocal on July 16, 2008 at 11:54 a.m. (Suggest removal)
To back up my statement:
http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/...
Posted by cassandra2 on July 16, 2008 at 12:12 p.m.
(This thread was removed by the site staff.)
Posted by caskier on July 16, 2008 at 12:40 p.m. (Suggest removal)
If we all drove solar powered cars we still would need petroleum products. It seems like everyone posting here thinks that petroleum is used soley to fill your gas tanks. Fact is, we can REDUCE our dependency on foreign oil, not eliminate it. We need leadership that is willing to implement all kinds of ideas - alternative fuels AND drilling AND Nuclear. Its not an either or proposition. Both candidates for president don't seem to get it at all.
Posted by Arnold on July 16, 2008 at 1:05 p.m. (Suggest removal)
So I guess the Dems here don't mind that the poor can't afford gas to get to work anymore and are cheering the $4 gas because they can lose weight?
Posted by cassandra2 on July 16, 2008 at 1:24 p.m.
(This thread was removed by the site staff.)
Posted by Comments on July 16, 2008 at 1:36 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I generally like reading some of the "human interest" stories, but this one was just plain silly to me. I think it's making light of a very serious situation. Yes, it would be great if we were to lessen our dependence on automobiles and become more fit. However, lessening our dependence on cars in CA is no small task and would require huge changes to our current infrastructure. A good goal, but not something that will change overnight. And, the whole tie in to waistlines is just ridiculous. Yep, I may lose a pound but I'll develop some respiratory problems from riding my bike or walking along all the diesel fuel trucks and gas driven vehicles. Silly, silly, silly. I'm all for seeing things from a rosy perspective, but this is just, well - silly.
And, Veritas it's clear you don't care for JW. Why you feel the need to call him out and attack him on various posts is beyond me. If you have an issue and would like a moderator's attention how about sending an email to the Star? Why do you feel the need to put on an obnoxious public show for all? Indeed, why aren't you able to simply ignore him? Trolls become so tiresome and watching you two squabble is boring. The way I see it, you are continually attacking JW personally (I don't know what his posts are like other than being repetitive to talk about his political views) and I thought that was an offense that could cause one to be banned.
Posted by Arnold on July 16, 2008 at 1:38 p.m. (Suggest removal)
So will we start drilling if gas gets to $10 a gallon?
Deomcrats blocking drilling and refineries is causing food riots in other parts of the world because Americans are using corn for bio-fuels. I hope they are ashamed of themselves.
I don't care how much Dems want high gas prices so they can lose weight, people in other parts of the world are losing weight for a very different reason. How can Democrats live with their shame?
Posted by hotwildflower on July 16, 2008 at 1:52 p.m.
(This thread was removed by the site staff.)
Posted by Arnold on July 16, 2008 at 1:55 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Posted by jw1000 on July 16, 2008 at 1:42 p.m.
Arnold: Its Republicans WHO HAVE a history of gas price increases. Gas has gone up 400% under Bush. Under Bill Clinton I paid 95 cents a gallon. Perhaps possibly you may be getting misinformation from Sean Hannity or Rush Limbaugh. Remember those two actually go to the oil companies for ideas on energy policy.
If you don't want to address the issues in my poast then don't bother to reply please.
Posted by HotModernMom on July 16, 2008 at 1:56 p.m.
(This thread was removed by the site staff.)
Posted by Arnold on July 16, 2008 at 2 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Posted by jw1000 on July 16, 2008 at 1:57 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Arnold: Apparently you were not able to comprehend that I DID address your post. Maybe you are preoccupied listening to Sean Hannity on the radio right now.
My poast was....
Deomcrats blocking drilling and refineries is causing food riots in other parts of the world because Americans are using corn for bio-fuels. I hope they are ashamed of themselves.
I don't care how much Dems want high gas prices so they can lose weight, people in other parts of the world are losing weight for a very different reason. How can Democrats live with their shame?
So how did you address the part about blocking drilling and refineries? How did you address the food riots because of it? Fact is, you didn't.
Posted by Joesombody on July 16, 2008 at 2 p.m.
(This thread was removed by the site staff.)
Posted by hotwildflower on July 16, 2008 at 2:03 p.m.
(This thread was removed by the site staff.)
Posted by HotModernMom on July 16, 2008 at 2:08 p.m.
(This thread was removed by the site staff.)
Posted by hotwildflower on July 16, 2008 at 2:19 p.m.
(This thread was removed by the site staff.)
Posted by BeaHappi on July 16, 2008 at 2:27 p.m.
(This thread was removed by the site staff.)
Posted by Relvd98 on July 16, 2008 at 2:31 p.m.
(This thread was removed by the site staff.)
Posted by HotModernMom on July 16, 2008 at 2:31 p.m.
(This thread was removed by the site staff.)
Posted by Arnold on July 16, 2008 at 2:37 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Posted by jw1000 on July 16, 2008 at 2:09 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Arnold: Its not Democrats blocking drilling!! They want 4.8 million barrels of oil per day from CURRENT LEASES to be produced before activities that are environmentally disruptive and would produce ONLY 900,000 barrels per day are undertaken. Republicans voted NO on June 26, 2008.
As for oil refineries EVERYBODY including Republicans are against locating refineries in their own backyard. In the mid-nineties it was the Republican congress that passed bill after bill of gas guzzling legislation. For example they exempted trucks and SUVs from CAFE requirements in 1995. That resulted as of two years ago in over 60% of new vehicles sold in the US being gas guzzlers. That in turn caused increasing demand for gas which resulted in price increases. It's no accident that gas prices have increased 400% under Bush and Gallegly.
Of course you have nothing to back this up and you do realize that Dems have publically stated they want high gas prices. Dems have also publically stated they want to block refineries as well. You can see the Democrats on this board are cheering the high prices. How can you deny it?
Posted by hotwildflower on July 16, 2008 at 2:37 p.m.
(This thread was removed by the site staff.)
Posted by HotModernMom on July 16, 2008 at 2:37 p.m.
(This thread was removed by the site staff.)
Posted by cassandra2 on July 16, 2008 at 2:39 p.m.
(This thread was removed by the site staff.)
Posted by FedUp on July 16, 2008 at 2:41 p.m.
(This thread was removed by the site staff.)
Posted by hotwildflower on July 16, 2008 at 2:42 p.m.
(This thread was removed by the site staff.)
Posted by HotModernMom on July 16, 2008 at 2:42 p.m.
(This thread was removed by the site staff.)
Posted by Relvd98 on July 16, 2008 at 2:44 p.m.
(This thread was removed by the site staff.)
Posted by hotwildflower on July 16, 2008 at 2:48 p.m.
(This thread was removed by the site staff.)
Posted by HotModernMom on July 16, 2008 at 2:48 p.m.
(This thread was removed by the site staff.)
Posted by HotModernMom on July 16, 2008 at 2:50 p.m.
(This thread was removed by the site staff.)
Posted by BeaHappi on July 16, 2008 at 2:54 p.m.
(This thread was removed by the site staff.)
Posted by BeaHappi on July 16, 2008 at 3:02 p.m.
(This thread was removed by the site staff.)
Posted by hotwildflower on July 16, 2008 at 3:09 p.m. (Suggest removal)
JW makes me want to vote as far extreme right as possible...I am secretly hoping that McCain selects Jeb as his VP to really see JW's blood boil!!
Posted by mikeb6804 on July 16, 2008 at 3:25 p.m.
(This thread was removed by the site staff.)
Posted by HotModernMom on July 16, 2008 at 3:27 p.m.
(This thread was removed by the site staff.)
Posted by Relvd98 on July 16, 2008 at 3:38 p.m.
(This thread was removed by the site staff.)
Posted by hotwildflower on July 16, 2008 at 3:39 p.m.
(This thread was removed by the site staff.)
Posted by HotModernMom on July 16, 2008 at 3:49 p.m.
(This thread was removed by the site staff.)
Posted by Relvd98 on July 16, 2008 at 3:49 p.m.
(This thread was removed by the site staff.)
Posted by HotModernMom on July 16, 2008 at 3:50 p.m.
(This thread was removed by the site staff.)
Posted by hotwildflower on July 16, 2008 at 3:54 p.m.
(This thread was removed by the site staff.)
Posted by hotwildflower on July 16, 2008 at 3:54 p.m.
(This thread was removed by the site staff.)
Posted by HotModernMom on July 16, 2008 at 4:03 p.m.
(This thread was removed by the site staff.)
Posted by HotModernMom on July 16, 2008 at 4:05 p.m.
(This thread was removed by the site staff.)
Posted by HotModernMom on July 16, 2008 at 4:13 p.m.
(This thread was removed by the site staff.)
Posted by Comments on July 16, 2008 at 4:39 p.m.
(This thread was removed by the site staff.)
Posted by FedUp on July 16, 2008 at 4:46 p.m.
(This thread was removed by the site staff.)
Posted by bmclean , Moderator, on July 16, 2008 at 5:03 p.m. (Suggest removal)
*SIGH* Well, there goes another half hour I'll never get back. All because you guys refuse to simply follow the rules. Today's lessons: No personal attacks. Stay on topic. Pretty simple. And this lesson goes for left wing nutjobs, right wing nutjobs, straight-down-the-center nutjobs, etc., etc. In these cases, sometimes, the lines are hazy, sometimes not. Does jw calling SUV drivers right wing nutjobs -- other than the fact that it's a ridiculous generalization -- really constitute a personal attack? Maybe, maybe not. Tough call. A proper response, and in fact, my response, would have been -- jw, i drive an suv and i'm not a right wing nutjob. i have four kids and we take trips together so i need lots of room. That's a perfectly acceptable response. Does veritas calling him out by name and insulting him constitute a personal attack. Definitely. Does everything that followed constitute personal attacks and off-topic comments. Without a doubt. Does everyone jumping in to talk about and choose sides in the argument between jw and veritas constitute off-topic comments. Yes.
See where I'm going with this?
So, now that some clarification has been provided, I hope we can all get past this. Otherwise, let the banning begin! And political leanings will have no impact on those decisions.
We really do want and appreciate all of your participation here. It makes things much more lively. Lets keep it civil.
Thanks,
Bruce McLean
Site Manager
Posted by Tom_Johnston on July 16, 2008 at 6:06 p.m. (Suggest removal)
WHOA! Thought I'd have trouble getting through all the posts!!! LOL!
Less of us on the road means less road rage? You've got to be kidding me! Looks like the rage moved in here!
Seriously, this article is bit like trying to cheerfully tout the regaining your old high school waistline, obtained because you've lived on a desert island with no food for the last few months.
This whole situation has a lot of reasons for occuring, and I don't think any one simplistic solution exists despite our yearning for simplicity in life.
It probably going to take a bit more drilling, a moderate to large increase in fleet MPG standards, a bit more reliance on renewable energy, conservation can't really hurt either, some cars really are just too big, more mass transit would be nice, bike paths are a plus, alternate work weeks (hey, who would not like an extra day to yourself now and then?), some research in dealing with safe nuclear power, less use of coal, eating an apple a day, buying local food, attach wind up keys to power cell phones....and on and on.
What do all these have in common? Somebody hates it. We argue incessantly about it, We all agree that something is wrong but lack the ability to work collectively, co-operatively to get anything done. Even worse we grow to despise people that don't agree.
For our lack of cohesive actions, we probably deserve this oil problem.
As Pogo said: "We have met the enemy, and the enemy is us".
Posted by sparks240 on July 16, 2008 at 6:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Moderator: You should give spelling lessons as well!
Posted by bmclean , Moderator, on July 16, 2008 at 6:52 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Now, see, this is exactly what I'm talking about. Sparks complimenting my spelling skills is completely off topic and has no place on this thread. However, I'm going to let it slide. Unless, of course, he or she was being ironic and I spelled a bunch of stuff wrong. Then it will have to go. In which case, I'll have to delete this comment as well.
By the way, is nutjob one word or two? Don't answer. It will be off topic.
Bruce McLean
Site Manager
Posted by sslocal on July 16, 2008 at 7:20 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I concur Tom. Multiple efforts including "US", are clearly needed.
Lets hope the State and FedGov can figure it out on their level while we do it on ours.
Posted by Tom_Johnston on July 16, 2008 at 7:35 p.m. (Suggest removal)
SSlocal....thanks! We've tangled before..but banter must at some point give way to actions. They might not please everybody at the time but we have to move the collective agenda forward.
Sometimes you might not get what you want, maybe next time you will...or is it get what you need?? LOL!
A few more wells here, a few more higher mpg requirements there.
This endless gridlock promoted by both wings does most of us no good. Carter talked about fuel efficiency years ago..had we started that..who know's where we'd be now?
Drilling and extraction/transport technology (as well as that to clean up after the "oops" have changed a lot since the SB spill of 1969.
We need to move to some sort of give and take here.
Shrill Republicans and Shrill Democrats help no one. The reality of progress lies somewhat to the center.
Posted by del on July 16, 2008 at 8:35 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Wow, looks as though I missed better fireworks than we saw in Portland on the 4th. A city where buses and trains move a large number of people everyday. Not as large a system...say as London, UK, but definably better than any thing we have around here.
Posted by katndog on July 16, 2008 at 10:18 p.m. (Suggest removal)
What about the families that are struggling financially and can't take a bus or train to work because of the nature of their employment? The high gas prices are no blessing in disguise as this article suggests. There are people eating top ramen instead of a healthy meal to make ends meet. In my line of work I have to drive and it costs $250 per month and climbing.
And speaking of road rage I think it's gone up since we can't talk on the phone while driving any more! Instead of telling my friend what I think of you, my hands are now free to send you the bird! HaHaHa!
Posted by kenwood63 on July 16, 2008 at 10:36 p.m. (Suggest removal)
less carpool lanes and more bike lanes,share the road people.
Posted by caffeinefree on July 17, 2008 at 7:38 a.m. (Suggest removal)
No matter what party is in office running this country, YOU; have a personal responsibility to do more. Ride the bus, carpool, ride a bike, walk, or even run if necessary. That is all for now, need more coffee
Posted by BeaHappi on July 17, 2008 at 8:25 a.m. (Suggest removal)
katndog...I hear you; I spend between $600 - $700 a month in gas because of my work commute. However, my neighbor and I figured out that we work relatively close to each other so we've started carpooling three days per week. Doing this we'll each shave one week per month off of our mileage...so like $100!
So check around with people you work with or even friends, neighbors. With gas prices being what they are I know that people who never had been interested in carpooling before are now ready to jump on board.
Good luck!
PS: Sorry about yesterday Bruce! :~)
Posted by FedUp on July 17, 2008 at 9:56 a.m. (Suggest removal)
our country has been built around the commuter in the last twenty-five years. now all of a sudden, everyone expects people to be able to drop their habit of driving?? no thanks. not going to happen. I commute with my wife to SB every day. thankfully we do not need to bring two cars to work. however, I can't simply go to the grocery store on my bike. I can't even walk to the store, unless I only need a few items that will fit in my daughters stroller. cars are a necessity when you live in the burbs, or have a family.
building more mixed use projects will help alleviate some of these issues, but they should not be done at the cost of peoples views that they paid a pretty penny for.
Posted by ebrockway on July 17, 2008 at 11:26 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Hmmmm,
Yeah I can see where having to choose between buying gas to get to work and buying food could be slimming if you opt for the gas. On the other hand, opting for the food would be slimming as well, no gas to get to work no job to buy food.
Yeah take the bus or train. What train runs between Moorpark and Camarillo before 6AM? Bus? None.
And as to the "Right-wingers" and their SUVs, saw one just this afternoon with an Obama sticker. Also said "Peace is Patriotic". Obviously a RNC donator and overall evil person.
Posted by leahb78_1999 on July 18, 2008 at 3:35 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Am I the only here who gets uncomfortable when someone says that you, the American people, have a duty or responsibility to conserve gas?
Caffeinefree says, “No matter what party is in office running this country, YOU; have a personal responsibility to do more. Ride the bus, carpool, ride a bike, walk, or even run if necessary.”
Here is my problem… You are trying to guilt people into changing their ways, and quite honestly most Americans can’t afford to change their lifestyle in any meaningful way. A poor family that uses an old, beat-up gas-guzzler may not be able get financing for a newer vehicle, and probably couldn’t afford it anyways. Some families can’t fit everyone into small cars. Many people cannot use public transportation because it is unreliable and is not developed to a point where it works for most people. Riding a bike is fine if you live only a few miles from your job and don’t need to carry any equipment with you to work, but most people don’t live so close to their work. When it comes right down to it, people have a greater duty and responsibility to support their families. They will do this in the best manner they know how, using the most convenient manner available to them. The duty to provide for one’s family overrides any duties to conserving gas.
I don’t know about you, but if my choices were to conserve gas and the environment or to provide a decent life for my family, my choice is clearly. Conservation is good if you can do it, but the meaningful solutions to this problem unfortunately rely on government.
Posted by marketrealist on July 23, 2008 at 9:06 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Global oil is on the decline anyway so this dialog reflects part of a transition that we have to go through in order to get used to perpetual high gas prices, redesigned cities, mass transit, and more importantly, alternative energy sources. It will take some getting used to as change is not always easy. However, it has to happen.
One point of correction, there is always chest beating about no new refineries built. Firstly, existing refineries have been vastly upgraded and de-bottlenecked so they get a lot more production out of them. Secondly, the oil crisis now is that crude oil supplies are tight. In fact, refining margins are quite low. There is not a problem in the refining sector. The reason why refineries are being built overseas like in India and China and not here is that those countries have the demand growth. The whole refinery issue is a straw man.
Article discussions on this site are to support community debates of issues related to our stories and editorials.
Discussions should not stray from the subject of the story or editorial.
We do not allow the following:
- Posts that degrade others on the basis of gender, race, class, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual orientation or disability.
- Disparaging remarks, abusive language or obscene comments.
- Threats, whether obvious or veiled.
We reserve the right to delete threads and/or ban users for these or other reasons we deem necessary.
Opinions are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.
There are 31 comments to this article.
Comments are found beneath the Yahoo! ad below.