Perfect. More Federal subsidies to promote oil use. This could have been an incentive for research into improved solar, wind, or biofuel energy production. The status quo by definition is entrenched, and big oil will continue to hold on to its cash cow for as long as possible. Exxon-Mobile recorded profit of $10.4 billion for 2nd Quarter 2006, a 36% year on year increase. BP PLC quarterly profit rose 30 percent to $7.3 billion. ConocoPhillips earnings rose 65 percent to $5.18 billion. Five major oil companies earned roughly $33 billion in the 2nd quarter of 2006. With this kind of payola lining the pockets of elected Federal politicians, it is a long road to transform to a sustainable energy ecosociety. Nevertheless, many Goliaths have been slain in history, big oil is next on the list. If 10% of the US population would write their elected representatives a letter every week demanding alternatives to big oil, I'm guessing we would likely see the incentive structure changed, and the number of PHEVs, EVs, and alternative fuel choices expand dramatically.

The only way to *get* alternatives is to make those demands on the marketplace. You don't need to involve politicians. If there is demand, and a profit incentive for alternative fuels, they will appear.

Thanks Cervix. But I don't believe Exxon-Mobil style "capitalism" and NASCAR fans alone will bring us these alternatives. Seatbelts and air bags didn't become commonplace until politicians got involved. Profit incentives only work in a fair and open trade environment. Large industries such as petroleum, automobile manufacturing, and paving/concrete have a well known track record of working in concert to squash viable industries and products that pose a competitive threat. As inept as politicians may seem, they can serve a useful and needed purpose.

I'm not sure that the seatbelts and airbags nanny laws are a good example, since I am inclined to believe that they give a false sense of security and lead to more accidents. People ought to drive as if they were strapped to the hood of their car.

Strapped to the hood of their car, hmm... that would be interesting legislation....

tthoms- If you are "inclined" to believe seatbelts and airbags lead to more accidents it is a simple matter to do a little research regarding US crash statistics year to year. It only gets difficult in the last 3-4 years where traction control, electronic brake force distribution, abs, and electronic stability control have really become entrenched to mitigate the number of accidents occuring...unless you think such advances are also leading to more careless driving.

If you want to get into air bags, I am waiting for someone to invent an air bag to protect cars, rather than people. If large air bags could be deployed outside a car immediately before a crash, I think the protection factor of both vehicle and passangers could be increased. It sure would save on car repair bills and also on loss of life and injuries.

adrianakau@aol.com

The concept has already seen some development (find "kinetic safety vehicle" in old, old back-issues of popular magazines) but it doesn't seem to have gone anywhere.  Given the need for radical new production systems and the fact that they would reduce new-car sales, the auto companies have a strong incentive not to go that way.