
Obama to announce $2 billion plan to get US cars off gasoline - leephillips
http://www.nature.com/news/obama-to-announce-2-billion-plan-to-get-us-cars-off-gasoline-1.12617
======
ams6110
_Weaning the nation off fossil fuels entirely for its transportation needs may
not be practical or realistic._

Reality never stopped a good government money grab before, why should it now?

Sarcasm aside, the idea is of course ridiculous. If/when viable alternatives
to petroleum fuels are available, the transition will happen. Companies like
Tesla and every major automobile manufacturer have R&D going on in this area
right now. Grabbing $2 billion via a new tax on oil production will do nothing
to further that, however. Look at results of similar "stimulus" spending a few
years ago.

~~~
toomuchtodo
I guess DARPA is pretty ridiculous too, right? What have they ever come up
with, what with their tax money grab and all?

In all seriousness, you're not helping. At all. Clearly R&D is doing well, but
battery and other component prices are too high, while oil consumption has
huge externalities that no one is ever forced to pay for. So yes, we're going
to tax oil and pour the money into electrification of transportation. Get over
it.

~~~
waterlesscloud
"Get over it."

This is helping?

This is how you play into the politics of division. It's also how you make
enemies and not get what you want as a result.

Don't play the combative divisiveness game. It's for suckers. It serves the
politicians, it doesn't serve you.

~~~
toomuchtodo
Yes, "get over it."

Oil is non-renewable; it's getting much more expensive to find ; and the US
(my country) spends a _huge_ portion of its tax revenue financing a military
to ensure a constant supply of said oil.

The shift to renewables is already well underway, whether the OP wants it to
or not. I'm not being combative. On the contrary, I'm simply stating they
should accept the inevitable.

~~~
danielweber
We can manufacture oil.

I expect in 50 years we will still have personal cars, but I'm split on
whether they will be running on batteries, or running on some liquid fuel that
we manufactured from environmental carbon.

------
mackem
What could possibly go wrong?

Oh I know, like the last time government pumped massive amounts of money into
biofuels and there was a massive food crisis in the 3rd world due to rocketing
food prices which was caused by the government buying up massive amounts of
corn for ethanol fuel.

~~~
hga
Indeed; there's absolutely nothing new here for those of us who lived through
the '70s, e.g.: <http://www.csmonitor.com/1980/0701/070114.html>

------
jeffehobbs
This is great news and a worthy cause. Our dependence on oil and gasoline
create a raft of other problems. Sooner the better.

------
mesozoic
$700 billion to invade and control foreign countries, "offense" spending. $2
billion to reduce our reliance on oil sounds legit. I bet the military spends
more than $2 billion annually on oil themselves.

~~~
ihsw
Invading and controlling foreign countries costs far more than $700B, we've
been doing it for over half a century and it's a few dozen trillion dollars so
far.

------
frozenport
I certainly support research, but isn't there a sequester looming? I would be
happier if Obama took steps to raise taxes. At the place I work we lost an
employee due to grant shortages.

~~~
chanced
>> I certainly support research, but isn't there a sequester looming

Looming? No. It has already taken affect.

>> I would be happier if Obama took steps to raise taxes.

Do tell, what steps would you have him take? The Republicans have sworn to not
raise taxes _at all_. They control the house and have unleashed a record
smashing set of filibusters (and no, not the Rand Paul style) in the senate.
Thanks to gerrymandering, they can (and must) hold stedfast to ideologues.
There's also the corporate interests to look after.

>> At the place I work we lost an employee due to grant shortages.

Classic. You want taxes to be raised so your employment can be safeguarded.
Meanwhile the grants, and jobs in turn, are a waste of time and energy.

~~~
frozenport
I get paid less then half what I would make working in industry. My hope is
that I can continue my work developing new materials.

------
dj2stein9
$700 Billion for banks. $2 Billion to convert all cars to electric. Something
smells fishy here.

------
rayiner
$2 billion won't buy jack shit in the way of R&D on a problem like this.

~~~
Daniel_Newby
$2 billion represents about 10,000 man-years of effort by scientists and
engineers. That's a lot if it is focussed well.

~~~
dmix
60-70% of that will go to bureaucratic overhead before it gets to the
engineers and scientists.

~~~
overloaded
[citation needed]

~~~
just2n
Does the past 100 years count?

~~~
potatolicious
That's cynical snark, not a citation.

~~~
just2n
Aw, I was hoping you wouldn't notice! :)

------
thatswrong0
I guess I just don't seem the point. Car manufacturers already see that this
is the way to go, which is why we are seeing more electric cars / hybrids from
car companies.

If the government really wanted to get cars off gasoline, why not raise the
gas tax and stop the corn subsidies first? Higher (visible) prices for
gasoline would push people toward smaller more energy efficient cars and
public transit and it would make people pay for the externalities. Oh yeah..
that's politically unpalatable.

