A price to pay for alternative fuels

[Brian]

A price to pay for alternative fuels (http://www.thetechlounge.com/news/11649/A+price+to+pay+for+alternative+fuels/)

"Bob Teixeira decided it was time to take a stand against U.S. dependence on foreign oil.

So last fall the Charlotte musician and guitar instructor spent $1,200 to convert his 1981 diesel Mercedes to run on vegetable oil. He bought soybean oil in 5-gallon jugs at Costco, spending about 30 percent more than diesel would cost.

His reward, from a state that heavily promotes alternative fuels: a $1,000 fine last month for not paying motor fuel taxes.

He's been told to expect another $1,000 fine from the federal government.

This is like having an orphan foisted on you for buying condoms. But call it a hunch, after an article like this, he's probably not going to have to pay."

Read full story here (http://www.charlotte.com/112/story/153260.html)

[handrail]

nice use of foist.

[Max Slowik]

I almost said "have an orphan hucked at you" but decided against it. Can't really beat that imagery, though.

Unless you had a bat.

[handrail]

a foisting bat?

[PsychoSnowMan]

If the government has a fuel tax scheme set up to pay for its road projects then they're assuming that most people will be using conventional fuels. and that the amount of tax a person pays will then be automatically governed by the amount they use the roads. If you drive less you use less fuel and you don't pay the tax on the fuel you don't use, that way someone who doesn't own a car, or rarely uses it, isn't forced to pay for maintenance and improvement costs on roads which they don't use.
If you look at it that way then what they're asking for in that article is a tax exemption to encourage people to use alternative fuels. Which is great, but if you want a sustainable system then the tax on conventional fuels would need to be raised proportionally to the increase of alternative fuels being used. But that would hardly be equitable to those people not using conventional fuels, so a new taxation scheme would need to be derived.
Unfortunately that would potentially mean the use of a less transparent form of taxation, and one that might not affect a person proportionally to the amount of driving they do.

[Max Slowik]

Yeah, someone pointed that out to me Friday night: that the taxes added to the costs of gas allay the costs of road work.

So by making his own fuel, he's not paying for the roads but using them. Also, biodiesel stations are showing up, (at least in Denver) so both the tax issues are covered as well as the very real issues that might arise from f'ing up your basement fuel operation.

On the flipside, if alternative fuel is viable in the near-term, and is in fact as good for everyone as its proponents make it out to be, then granting a kind of tax break to biodiesel users, increasing the taxes on regular gas could be made out to be a good idea.

But as far as punitive taxation schemes go, I'm pretty much against them.

I dunno. Fuel economics are a huge topic, and something I'll never be any kind of informed person on.

I'll say this: orphan hucking. High-larity!