A Glimmer Of Sense
Earlier this week, Atrios put up a post which I was a little surprised by:
I've long been skeptical that even fairly substantial increases in gas prices would have a big impact on behavior and policy. $3.75 gas sucks, and gas is a big enough part of required expenditures for some people that it can cause economic pain, but I don't see that price level, or even $5-6/gallon, really shifting things. But $7.50? Yeah, things would start to change.
Now Atrios is pretty astute, especially when it comes to economic matters, but I thought his skepticism was a bit misplaced. I didn't/don't think it would take gas prices that high to start moving people out of their cars into other forms of transportation, or that people would wait that long (even with the receipt of tax rebate checks) to start moving their money away from their gas guzzlers. As the week progressed, I found some hints that this time I might be right.
First there was the brief "editorial" I found two days later in the Short Fuse section of the Boston Globe:
At the height of the SUV fad, automakers argued that Americans don't like small cars and only feel safe if surrounded by 8,500 pounds of metal. Such claims helped hold off tougher fuel-economy regulation. Yet they are proving false now that gas prices have risen. Sales are surging for small, efficient cars such as the Honda Fit and Ford Focus. In The New York Times, one analyst at Ford described the change as "easily the most dramatic segment shift I have witnessed." As John McCain and Hillary Clinton call for a summer moratorium on the gas tax, the latest sales figures argue for keeping the tax - which not only yields more money to fix highways, but also nudges consumers to make earth-friendly choices.
And then I found this article in the Business section of the Los Angeles Times:
Only 7% of people in Los Angeles took public transit to work in 2006, the last year for which figures are available, while 2.8% walked, 1.4% took a cab or motorcycled and 0.6% bicycled, according to the Southern California Assn. of Governments.
But people are cutting back in a million little ways, and even in the Los Angeles area they're cutting back on driving. Interest in cycling is growing, gasoline consumption is down and bus and light-rail ridership is up.
After declining at the end of 2007, L.A. rail and bus ridership started rising in January. From January to March, average weekday boardings were up 16% on the Red Line, 13% on the Blue Line and 17% on the Gold Line, which set a record for highest average weekday boardings in March with 22,231. Bus ridership grew 8% from January to March.
The explanation is in the math. It costs $1.25 to take the train from the North Hollywood Metro station to Wilshire Boulevard and Vermont Avenue, while driving a car would cost $6.05, according to the Metropolitan Transportation Authority. (The agency uses the AAA formula, which holds that driving costs 56.2 cents a mile if you take into account gasoline and wear and tear on a vehicle.)
To be fair, the article does contain a caveat to the figures, one that falls in line with Atrios' theory:
Not everyone who switches to biking, walking or carpooling will stick with it, MTA spokesman Dave Sotero said. The MTA usually sees a temporary increase in riders when gas prices reach certain thresholds, like $3, $3.50 and $4 a gallon. Then ridership goes down once people become accustomed to the higher cost.
Still, even if some of the people climb back into their cars, just what they drive may be different:
What is more likely, said Brian Taylor, director of the UCLA Institute of Transportation Studies, is that people will begin buying more fuel-efficient vehicles. In April, in fact, sales of passenger cars were up 5.2% nationally while light-truck and SUV sales were down 17.4%.
And that loops nicely to the "Short Fuse" editorial quoted earlier. Oh, I suspect I'll continue to see the Escalades, Hummers, and Tahoes grunting down the packed freeways here in car-crazy L.A., but there will be fewer Explorers and Expeditions. And that, at the very least, is a start.
I've long been skeptical that even fairly substantial increases in gas prices would have a big impact on behavior and policy. $3.75 gas sucks, and gas is a big enough part of required expenditures for some people that it can cause economic pain, but I don't see that price level, or even $5-6/gallon, really shifting things. But $7.50? Yeah, things would start to change.
Now Atrios is pretty astute, especially when it comes to economic matters, but I thought his skepticism was a bit misplaced. I didn't/don't think it would take gas prices that high to start moving people out of their cars into other forms of transportation, or that people would wait that long (even with the receipt of tax rebate checks) to start moving their money away from their gas guzzlers. As the week progressed, I found some hints that this time I might be right.
First there was the brief "editorial" I found two days later in the Short Fuse section of the Boston Globe:
At the height of the SUV fad, automakers argued that Americans don't like small cars and only feel safe if surrounded by 8,500 pounds of metal. Such claims helped hold off tougher fuel-economy regulation. Yet they are proving false now that gas prices have risen. Sales are surging for small, efficient cars such as the Honda Fit and Ford Focus. In The New York Times, one analyst at Ford described the change as "easily the most dramatic segment shift I have witnessed." As John McCain and Hillary Clinton call for a summer moratorium on the gas tax, the latest sales figures argue for keeping the tax - which not only yields more money to fix highways, but also nudges consumers to make earth-friendly choices.
And then I found this article in the Business section of the Los Angeles Times:
Only 7% of people in Los Angeles took public transit to work in 2006, the last year for which figures are available, while 2.8% walked, 1.4% took a cab or motorcycled and 0.6% bicycled, according to the Southern California Assn. of Governments.
But people are cutting back in a million little ways, and even in the Los Angeles area they're cutting back on driving. Interest in cycling is growing, gasoline consumption is down and bus and light-rail ridership is up.
After declining at the end of 2007, L.A. rail and bus ridership started rising in January. From January to March, average weekday boardings were up 16% on the Red Line, 13% on the Blue Line and 17% on the Gold Line, which set a record for highest average weekday boardings in March with 22,231. Bus ridership grew 8% from January to March.
The explanation is in the math. It costs $1.25 to take the train from the North Hollywood Metro station to Wilshire Boulevard and Vermont Avenue, while driving a car would cost $6.05, according to the Metropolitan Transportation Authority. (The agency uses the AAA formula, which holds that driving costs 56.2 cents a mile if you take into account gasoline and wear and tear on a vehicle.)
To be fair, the article does contain a caveat to the figures, one that falls in line with Atrios' theory:
Not everyone who switches to biking, walking or carpooling will stick with it, MTA spokesman Dave Sotero said. The MTA usually sees a temporary increase in riders when gas prices reach certain thresholds, like $3, $3.50 and $4 a gallon. Then ridership goes down once people become accustomed to the higher cost.
Still, even if some of the people climb back into their cars, just what they drive may be different:
What is more likely, said Brian Taylor, director of the UCLA Institute of Transportation Studies, is that people will begin buying more fuel-efficient vehicles. In April, in fact, sales of passenger cars were up 5.2% nationally while light-truck and SUV sales were down 17.4%.
And that loops nicely to the "Short Fuse" editorial quoted earlier. Oh, I suspect I'll continue to see the Escalades, Hummers, and Tahoes grunting down the packed freeways here in car-crazy L.A., but there will be fewer Explorers and Expeditions. And that, at the very least, is a start.
Labels: oil companies, The Environment
posted by Diane at 4:01 AM
1 Comments:
Just to put things in perspective. Here in Europe, I drive a mid size family car, something the average John Doe would drive if he was part of the Man-Wife-1.5 kid mid income category. It weights 2810 pounds. And yes of course there are idiots with Hummers and mega SUV's. The thing will probably take me like 33 miles a gallon (God I hate imperial conversions). What I am trying to say is not that I am a good guy, I am saying I am an AVERAGE guy by the standards here.
But then, gas here is $ 9.61 the gallon, and because of the falling dollar, we have not even been hit hard. Take your pick on price elasticity.
Post a Comment
<< Home