×
Man, even The Corner is demanding an end to our oil addiction. But as far as I can tell, Cliff May wants to solve the problem by mandating that cars can run on coal, which seems odd. I mean, not to get on a conservative for being too heavy-handed with government regulation, but what about just providing some incentives to make them smaller and more fuel-efficient? A lot of the hubbub over gas prices and ending our dependence on foreign oil misses the fact that it would be pretty easy to, in the short-term, vastly reduce our dependence on oil. Peter Hong makes the point that gas prices, adjusted for inflation, still aren't that expensive. Until a few weeks ago, they were at the 1981-82 level. A year ago, a gallon didn't cost much more than it did in the early 1970s. Now, because we tend to talk about it in terms of absolute values -- $4 gas, $100-a-barrel oil -- it seems like it's getting pretty costly. But historically speaking, it's not terribly out of line:But part of what's driving that visceral feeling is that we simply use a lot gas than we used to. Our cars are bigger, our engines more powerful. We have more V6s, more V8s, and many more V10s and V12s than we used to. A 2006 Honda Accord gets 19mpg and has more horsepower than a 1990 Porsche 911. The way to work on this is to simply increase CAFE standards, force manufacturers to give more thought to fuel efficiency. Of course, when you try to do that, the National Review responds with weird nostalgia for the age of the station wagon, which is "gone primarily because government fuel-efficiency standards drove manufacturers out of the station-wagon business." A sentient observer might reply that the station wagon was killed by the SUV and the minivan, but it hardly seems worth it.