NYT Economic Scene columnist Eduardo Porter makes a strong case against the new 54.5 mpg by 2025 fuel efficiency standards, arguing instead for higher gas taxes. Critiquing the piece, Reuter's economics blogger, Felix Salmon calls for both measures.
Porter makes a strong case for increasing gas taxes. "[T]hese (efficiency) improvements come at a high cost for drivers, automakers and society in general. They could be achieved much more cheaply by raising taxes on gasoline to a level comparable to that of pretty much every other industrialized nation."
Salmon, after first forcing a correction to Porter's analogy of the mileage comparisons of a Ford Fiesta sold in the U.S. compared to one in Britain (noted at end of article), makes an equally strong case for applying both higher fuel standards and fuel taxes.
"Porter's central point is absolutely right: there are two ways to reduce the amount of fuel that people use. The first is to make cars more efficient; the second is to reduce the number of miles that people drive. [Porter notes that higher fuel taxes would also result in higher fuel efficiency]
Higher gasoline taxes work on both fronts, while higher fuel-economy standards only work on the first. Indeed, at the margin they increase the number of miles people drive: since more efficient cars cost less to drive per mile, people drive further when they get more efficient cars.
Porter is also right that in countries with higher gas taxes, fuel economy tends to be much higher. But he's not necessarily right that the higher gas taxes alone are responsible. Porter implies that the US only has fuel-economy standards just because "a tax on gasoline doesn't stand a chance" of being passed. But the fact is that even countries with very high gas taxes have fuel-economy standards as well. And, guess what, they're significantly tougher than ours, and they always have been.
The fact is that the US has pretty much the lowest fuel-economy standards in the developed world, and it still will in 2025, even after the new standards are fully phased in. If US carmakers want to be internationally competitive, they're going to need to develop more fuel-efficient cars anyway, no matter what happens in the US."
Not stated by either writer is the near-insolvency of the Highway Trust Fund - attributed largely to gas taxes that have not increased since 1993.
Thanks to Charles Komanoff
FULL STORY: ECONOMIC SCENE: Taxes Show One Way to Save Fuel
How the Trump Presidency Could Impact Urban Planning
An analysis of potential changes in federal housing, transportation, and climate policies.
Midburbs: A New Definition of Suburbs
When the name “suburb” just doesn't quite fit.
Why Aren’t There More Bollards in US Cities?
Solid barriers, like the dormant ones in New Orleans, are commonly used to improve road safety in Europe. Why not here?
Menlo Park to Develop Parking Lots Into Housing
The city will issue a request for proposals to build subsidized housing on up to three downtown parking lots.
What Has Measure ULA Achieved?
Los Angeles has imposed an additional tax on luxury home sales to generate millions for housing efforts in the city. Shelterforce checks in on where the money has gone, and what’s to come.
London Congestion Pricing Zone Has No Impact on Local Spending
The city’s cordon pricing scheme did not affect how much people spent at local businesses, new research finds.
Urban Design for Planners 1: Software Tools
This six-course series explores essential urban design concepts using open source software and equips planners with the tools they need to participate fully in the urban design process.
Planning for Universal Design
Learn the tools for implementing Universal Design in planning regulations.
Roaring Fork Transportation Authority
Placer County
Skagit Transit
Harvard GSD Executive Education
Chaddick Institute at DePaul University
HUDs Office of Policy Development and Research
M-NCPPC Prince George's County Planning Department
HUDs Office of Policy Development and Research
NYU Wagner Graduate School of Public Service