Valley Firms Push California Oil Tax

isabotage3 writes, "Still smarting from California's recent enactment of emissions caps, the oil industry is confronting another assault in the Golden State — this one bankrolled in part by Silicon Valley tycoons pushing to fund conservation and alternative-energy initiatives with a tax on oil output. Slightly more than half the money raised by the Prop 87 tax would be earmarked to help cut gasoline and diesel use. Another 27 percent would be put toward alternative-energy research at California universities. The remainder would be used to help start-ups, retrain energy workers in new fields, and for administration." Oil companies claim the backers of Prop 87, some of them venture capitalists, would profit from state money flowing into the alternative-energy projects they are funding.

Comments

you inosensiti7e clod!

[Anonymous Coward]

To look i8to

A 6% production tax is trival..compared to..

[FirstOne]

the amounts we've spent on IRAQ war for Oil + DOD expenditures to insure oceans are safe for Oil shipments. (IRAQ 100B/yr + DOD 200B/yr )/(US oil consumption) ~15Mbbl/day/365 == $54.80 per barrel of oil in direct subsidies.

Or the costs to mitigate the environmental impact of GW.. Est 200 Trillion(total) by 2056 for looses&mitigation incurred by submerged coast lines, dozens of land falling Cat-5's per year, crop failures, etc == 4 Trillion per year/(Oil share 33% towards GW) /15Mbbl /day / 365 == $237 per barrel indirect environmental impact. Note: This estimate may be a gross underestimation!!

What price do you associate with an activity that has a high probability of triggering of an Extinction Level Event?

Each of those huge costs are currently hidden from view..
The bill sponsors are doing the right thing by adding just a small fraction of the real costs of oil back into the production equation.

Re:Taxes on oil companies end up being paid by peo

[Quaoar]

"Makes it illegal for oil companies to raise gas prices to pass the cost along to consumers."

So, unless the oil companies plan on breaking the law, there will be no price increase on our end of it.

Re:Money flowing

[Gospodin]

On a sidenote: do conservatives really think the US has a "free market" when all this govt. money is being pumped into damn near every industry?

As a aside to your sidenote: Not all conservatives are laissez-faire economists.

That being said, most conservatives that I know would gladly accept less pork in exchange for lower taxes. I don't know any conservatives who are big fans of industrial subsidies. I'm not talking about politicians here, few of whom can be considered conservative.

Re:No on Prop 87?

[evilviper]

So it is the oil companies fault that people have built their lives around gasoline and refuse to change?

What? Who said anything of the sort?

I said a straight tax on oil won't push people to alternatives, because there really aren't any right now.

The alternatives I am talking about? Smaller cars and shorter commutes.

Those aren't alternatives in ANY sense of the word, that is straight conservation.

That's good, of course, but higher taxes on oil are just as big of a disincentive to the person driving a 40MPG car, as it is for those driving a 2MPG car.

Soccer moms don't need small trucks.

Go rant somewhere else...