« Modec Introduces Electric Light Commercial Van | Main | Basque Hydrogen Fuel Cell Scooter »
President Bush Tries to Tackle High Fuel Prices
25 April 2006
![]() |
| Average US retail gasoline prices, all grades, all formulations. |
President Bush today announced a range of measures in an attempt to curb the current increase in fuel prices, if not reduce them.
The approach, which he outlined in remarks to the Renewable Fuels Association annual meeting in Washington, DC, consists of four main elements: promoting increased fuel efficiency; increasing supplies of oil and gasoline; investigations into possible price gouging; and investing in alternatives to oil to reduce demand. Some of these items have been in play and discussion for awhile; others (such as a proposed moratorium on reformulated gasoline) are a tactical response to the current situation.
Promoting fuel efficiency. President Bush called on Congress to make all hybrid and clean diesel vehicles sold this year eligible for federal tax credit. The current tax credits apply to only a limited number of hybrid and clean diesel vehicles for each manufacturer.
Increasing supply of oil and gasoline. Most of the President’s proposals were in this area, including:
Suspending deposits to the Strategic Petroleum Reserve during the summer driving period, thereby making that oil available to the market. The SPR, which has a storage capacity of 727 million barrels, currently has 687.6 million barrels in inventory, 60% of which are sour. The US consumes about 20 million barrels per day.
The IEA requires 90 days of import protection from both private and public stocks. The current SPR has 59 days of import protection, but the US has approximately 118 days from both the SPR and private company stores.
Waiving local fuel requirements for reformulated gasoline. The President has directed EPA Administrator Steve Johnson to use all his authority to grant waivers, as the agency did following the fuel disruptions caused by the hurricanes last summer (earlier post), to waive fuel requirements on a temporary basis.
Regions requiring reformulated gasoline. Source: EIA. Reformulated gasoline (RFG) is gasoline that is blended such that, on average, it significantly reduces Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) and air toxics emissions relative to conventional gasolines—especially during the summer.
Oxygenates are a key element of RFG, and it is the switchover from MTBE to ethanol as the default oxygenate in RFG that is causing some of the current supply disruption.
Reid Vapor Pressure is one of the standards applied to RFG, and is an indicator of the propensity of the fuel to evaporate, thereby emitting Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) that contribute to ozone formation. RVP is measured in pounds per square inch (psi), and the lower the psi, the fewer evaporative emissions. Federal regulations require use of lower RVP gasoline in hot summer months to reduce VOCs emissions.
After Katrina last year, the EPA issued waivers that temporarily allowed refiners, importers, distributors, carriers and retail outlets (regulated parties) to supply gasoline meeting a Reid Vapor Pressure (RVP) standard of 9.0 psi in areas of the affected states where a lower RVP is required. This opened up the opportunity for a broader supply of imported gasoline of differing qualities.
The EPA also temporarily allow regulated parties to supply motor vehicle diesel fuel to affected states having a sulfur content greater than 500 ppm.
The exact nature and duration of the waivers the EPA Administrator will seek are not yet defined. The President said that if Johnson didn’t have appropriate authority, the Administration would work with Congress to change that situation.
Reducing the number of boutique fuels. President Bush is also directing the EPA Administrator to convene a Governors’s Task Force to reduce the number of localized fuel blends.
Calling on Congress to streamline paperwork for refineries seeking to make modifications, and speeding up the permitting process for refinery construction and expansion.
Calling on Congress to authorize exploration in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.
All I’ve outlined here today are interim strategies—short-term and interim strategy. The truth of the matter is, the long-term strategy is to power our automobiles with something other than oil—something other than gasoline, which is derived from oil.
Fair treatment at the pump. The President is directing the Department of Justice to work with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the Department of Energy (DOE) to conduct inquiries into cheating or illegal manipulation related to current gasoline prices. The FTC is already investigating whether the price of gasoline has been unfairly manipulated since last year’s hurricanes.
The FTC and Attorney General are contacting all 50 state attorneys general to offer technical assistance and to urge them to aggressively investigate illegal price manipulation within their jurisdictions.
The President also called on Congress to repeal $2 billion in tax breaks for energy companies over a 10-year period of time.
Record oil prices and large cash flows also mean that Congress has got to understand that these energy companies don’t need unnecessary tax breaks like the write-offs of certain geological and geophysical expenditures, or the use of taxpayers’ money to subsidize energy companies’ research into deep water drilling...Cash flows are up. Taxpayers don’t need to be paying for certain of these expenses on behalf of the energy companies.
Investing in alternatives to oil to reduce demand. The President used this section of his talk to plug the use of ethanol—corn and cellulosic—in particular, but had no new initiatives to offer or to call upon Congress to enact.
We’re spending—I proposed, and I’m working with these members of the Renewable Caucus—$150 million in next year’s budget for research in advanced forms of ethanol. And that’s a significant increase over previous levels. I think it makes sense. And surely the prices at the gas pump should say to the taxpayer it makes sense for this government to spend money on research and development to find alternative sources of energy.
I also support biodiesel fuel, which can substitute for regular diesel in cars, trucks, buses and farm equipment.And so we also have got to understand that we got to research not only to find—to invest in ethanol and biodiesel, but part of a comprehensive strategy is to spend money on researching new battery technologies.
And one of the really interesting opportunities available for the American consumer will be the ability to buy a plug-in hybrid vehicle that will be able to drive up to 40 miles on electricity. Seems to make sense to me. If we're trying to get us off gasoline, with crude oil as the main—as its main feedstock, then why wouldn’t we explore ways to be able to have vehicles that use less gasoline? And one way to do so is to use electricity to power vehicles.
The President then touched again on his view of hydrogen as the long-term solution.
What I'm describing to you today is a strategy that recognizes the realities of the world in which we live. Our dependency on oil has created economic security issues for us, and national security issues for us. And therefore, this country must use our brain power and entrepreneurial spirit to diversify away from the hydrocarbon economy.
You all have known this a lot longer than most Americans. You’ve known that we’ve needed to have this strategy, and that’s why you’re on the forefront of incredible changes that are taking place in this country.
Following the President’s speech, oil and gasoline futures dropped slightly on the New York Mercantile Exchange.
Of the laundry list of initiatives, only the suspension of deposits into the SPR and the waiving of clean fuel regulations are likely to have a short-term impact on the present fuel price situation. Unlike during the post-Katrina period, the President did not call for citizens to be “better conservers” of energy by reducing non-essential travel. (Earlier post.)
Also following the address, Democrats labelled the proposals as too little, too late to reduce prices. Both parties are being driven by the national consumer desire for low gasoline prices. Neither party has called for comprehensive conservation measures in the face of supply uncertainty and rising prices—such as reducing the national highway speed limit to 55 mph, as President Nixon did in 1973 the wake of the first oil crisis.
...it’s not gouging when supply is tight and demand is increasing. In this country this year, demand went down slightly after the Katrina hurricane. It’s since recovered, and demand is going up about 1.5 percent a year.
You know, we’re not finding an additional 1.5 percent of oil reserves to convert to gasoline in this country or in any other country. So, you know, the price is a lot higher than I want it to be and Congressman Stupak wants it to be, but it’s because of supply and demand.
—Rep. Joe Barton (R, TX) on PBS’s NewsHour
April 25, 2006 in Fuel Efficiency, Fuels, Policy | Permalink | Comments (40) | TrackBack (1)
Comments
Posted by: Bill | April 26, 2006 at 12:59 PM
Bush or the dems should do nothing.We have gone through this before ,they investigate,find nothing, dems blame repubs,repubs blame dems.Market conditions then change and everybody goes about their business.Prices are high because of decisions made in the past by repubs,dems and we the public.The political panic forces everyone to ask the wrong question{how do we lower prices?}.Both parties should tell us we need to conserve,drive smaller vehicles,encourage alternatives and live with the higher prices until better decisions change market conditions in our favor.Dont let the pols entice you into a partisan fight.Only when we lead them will intelligent policy decisions be made.
Posted by: gerald earl | April 26, 2006 at 01:10 PM
Ok Lucas I'm going to ask in the probably naive hope that you aren't about to insult me. What's this about a Spad pilot?? I don't know what you're talking about.
Posted by: marcus | April 26, 2006 at 02:46 PM
I once knew a Navy A-1 Skyraider Pilot (Slang - Spad) named Marcus. Since Marcus is a fairly rare name I jumped.
If you had known what a Spad was, it might have been you.
Posted by: Lucas | April 26, 2006 at 03:14 PM
Besides your comments were in line with the highly intelligent man he was, and so obviously you are.
Is that an insult?
Posted by: Lucas | April 26, 2006 at 03:20 PM
Well Lucas I have learnt some new slang at least! Thanks for the compliment.
Cheers,
Marcus.
Posted by: marcus | April 26, 2006 at 03:54 PM
Joseph: it is free country and I will be first to defend your right to spend your hard-earned buck for the toy you like.
Personally I do not like to drive my performance coupe along with SUV and vans, especially when the only “toy” they hauling is the driver. They (or their drivers? ) are slow, not maneuverable, not stable in braking and cornering, always turn in second lane, never look back, you can not see through their high bodies and tinted windows for car in front of them suddenly brakes or decided to turn , have long braking distance and killing impact mass, etc. Couple years ago they were allowed to pollute much more then cars, but thanks god not any more. And I know for sure, that they employ the most outdated, most inefficient ancient engines, worst components money can buy at Wall Mart, the oldest and vastly over weighted body structure with lousy aerodynamics , etc.
The only thin I want is that government (looks like automaker by themselves unwilling to do so) will force automaker to remake CUV according with modern state of the technology. That means much less weight, modern engines, more efficient structure, 30% less fuel consumption, comparable with cars bumper height, etc.
Posted by: Andrey | April 26, 2006 at 08:59 PM
hey its just poor business practice and too many complex rules and every one wants to break rules and make money
Also with out problems - we won't have any need for government and businesss.
but would it be great to have a life with the fewest problems - example - if india can have manditory retirement at 58 and we at 70 - I guess our gov't wants us to die before we take on our benefits.
so again - global troubles - coming across the scale - affects every thing in life
but other ppl would say "Thats Life!!" aka Frank Sinatra Song
Posted by: hhuey | April 26, 2006 at 10:24 PM
I don't think forcing an increase in suv MPG is the answer. If the MPG goes up more people will drive them.
If manufactures start using more diesel engines etc it would be good but what is likely to happen is that they will produce vehicles with less capability.
If the resulting suv gets better mpg but has a 1500 lb towing capacity ... then it is really just a car with lousey gas mileage.
ie Honda CRV
A 2001 cherokee weighs less than a 4 cylinder crv but has true 4wd with a low range and can tow 5000 lbs.
I do not like Honda "suv's" or the jeep compass based on the awd / fwd dodge caliber car chassis. toyota rav4, etc etc
If an suv can't pull its own weight (so to speak ) it is just burning gas.
But hey drive whatever you want I do not care, but what does make me mad is that people have been buying crap suv's and it makes it more difficult for me to get a vehicle to do what I need.
Cars will allways get better mpg than light trucks, lower CD, smaller engines, lower load towing capacity if any, lower rolling resistance tires, and less cargo capacity all play a part.
Why is it no one talks about the mpg of sports cars?
There is too much "SUV bad, car good" hype in the media ... people think they are a saint if they drive a hybrid.
Posted by: rj | April 27, 2006 at 08:02 AM
What I would do is make a fund that gets its money from a fee tacked onto all cars based on how much energy they use. That fund would be segmented and each car segment would pay for reserach into improveing that segments cars and trucks fuel eff.
Thus ruck owners would directly be paying for better trucks down the line. Luxury car buyers would directly be paying for better eff luxury cars down the line.
Posted by: wintermane | April 27, 2006 at 08:19 AM
When there is a drought, we conserve water and no one is allowed to waste it. But somehow, in situations like this, it is everyones right to drive an SUV, if they can afford it...hmmm
Posted by: Paul | April 27, 2006 at 09:03 PM
Why is it no one talks about the mpg of sports cars?
Probably because they don't make up 1/2 of all new vehicle sales.
Posted by: Joseph Willemssen | April 29, 2006 at 04:11 PM
I just read that Ford sells 900,000 F series trucks each year and GM sells 700,000 equivalent trucks each year. The Camry sell just over 400,000 units a year. With trucks getting maybe 14 mpg, maybe this is one reason we import more than 12,000,000 barrels of oil per day.
Posted by: Paul | April 29, 2006 at 09:35 PM
Why is it that goverment does not get invove in gas prices how come is not regulated.
prices are what ever the gas station owner wiches to put on the pump and price difers on the same gas from station to station.
gouging is actual;y permited in gas sales why?
Posted by: MARIO RANGEL | April 14, 2007 at 10:25 AM
Posted by: 岡崎市 不動産 | February 27, 2008 at 09:09 PM
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c4fbe53ef00d834263b4153ef
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference President Bush Tries to Tackle High Fuel Prices:
» President Bush and gasoline prices from Econbrowser
Unlike some other pundits, I see a number of good ideas in the President's new proposals and actions announced on Tuesday. [Read More]
Tracked on Apr 27, 2006 6:09:06 AM

Twitter headlines

Since when did gas prices become a part of the of the federal governments responsibility?
It is in the bill of rights that we have cheap gas?
Sorry, no.
Part of the greatness of the US is the free market. Which is part of the reason we can buy 9MPG Hummers and 60MPG Hydrids, and drive together on the highway. So if gas is (relatively) expensive because the raw material price is driven to record levels (by actions of the current administration), you can not expect the price of the refined product to be the same as it was 5 years ago. Plus, W can not help you; actually, he created the problem really, with his overly aggressive and screw-the-world attitude.
We (the readers of this great site) should be proud that we are in tune with the rest of the world and are doing the right thing. So smile at the 10mpg SUV driver the next time you are at the pump, knowing you are making a difference. Maybe even help a misguided truck buyer make a better choice.
Heck, who would want to drive one of those things every day anyway?