I want to show you my bike.
She is always trusty, and freshly tuned up and tightened down.
Here she is, parked in the SEIU office. If you look at the rear storage area, you’ll notice a milk crate (obtained through completely legitimate means) mounted on the rack. Inside the milk crate is something I’m quite pleased with that I recently put together. It’s a box, taped together out of corrugated plastic political signs that were kicking around here. It increases the amount of hauling capacity I have by a lot. The next plan is to add square buckets to the sides of the rack area. When all is said and done, I’ll have enough water resistant cargo space to carry around 3 bags of groceries.
I did this because my Bike is my primary mode of transportation. I ride it to and from work, I use it to pick up my son (who rides in a Burley trailer), and I use it for recreation. I also own a car. I drive places where I can’t reasonably bike, like the Country Fair, Portland, the Coast. All are accessible from Eugene by cycle, but all require a greater degree of commitment to the journey than I am willing to give myself over to on a Saturday when I’d rather be dipping my toes in the surf or eating Pad Thai by the Long Tom.
My wife uses the car for a lot of the family’s errand running as well, but between the two of us we hardly buy a tank of gas once a month. 14 Gallon tank, 30 Miles per Gallon, that’s under 500 miles a month of driving for the whole family. Not much, considering that many people I know drive twice that much or more.
Taylor and I have made a lot of choices and commitments to minimize the driving we do. We do this for several reasons. One reason is saving money, and that’s important to us. But more important is our commitment to conservation. We know that there is a limited amount of fossil fuel remaining under the ground, and recognize that it is important to be cautious stewards of the remaining fuel so that future generations can continue to use it for the public good. Also, we are concerned about climate change and about the impact our driving has on greenhouse gas emissions. So we choose not to drive when we can walk, bike, or take the bus. We encourage others in our community to do the same, but for the most part we recognize that we’re making an individual choice and we can’t compel others to join us.
But I have this niggling issue about economics. Supply and demand dictate the price of fuel. As supply dwindles the price of fuel increases until demand drops and the market comes back into equilibrium. So here’s the issue; right now I’m conserving fuel while the price is low because of my concern for the public good while others are using buying fuel with impunity at a low price. Say I use 200 gallons a year, while my neighbor who drives everywhere in his big cargo van uses 1000 gallons a year. At current prices, about $2 a gallon, he’s paying $2000 a year for fuel while I’m paying $400. Now, let’s imagine that the price of fuel increases fourfold to $8 a gallon (before you pooh pooh this thought, remember that in Europe they’re paying around $6.50 a gallon right now). Now he’s paying $8000 while I’m paying $1600. But my neighbor can’t afford the $8000 price tag, so he begins to take simple measures to reduce his fuel consumption (the same measures I’ve already taken). He cuts back on his driving by half and starts paying only $4000. I, on the other hand, have already taken the basic, simple steps toward fuel economy and even taken more drastic ones. I don’t have room in my life to drive less. I’m still paying $1600.
So, even though my neighbor and I pay the same price for gas today and in the future, in a sense I am currently subsidizing his over-consumption. He’s buying a lot of gas at the cheaper price whereas I’m buying a little. When gas goes up and he cuts down on driving, he buys less gas at the higher price while I buy the same amount. On average, I’ve paid $5 per gallon while he’s paid only $4.
This situation is unfair, and I think something needs to be done about it. I would, therefore, propose a graduated fuel tax, asking people who use more fuel to pay a higher percentage in taxes. The revenue from this tax would be directed toward research into alternative fuels in order to, hopefully, mitigate the subsidy that those of us who are conserving fuel today while it is inexpensive provide to those who are consuming more than their fair share.
As an added bonus, maybe such a tax would encourage more people to use bicycles for transportation. It’s such a pleasure to get around on a bike, you never need to search for parking, and you see the world from so much closer up. Not only would society benefit from less fuel consumed, we would be healthier (and probably happier).
Until next time.
