Carbon law drives petrol up 7c

but not till 2011 .
New Zealand passes carbont tax leglislation . Whats interesting is that we are due for an election before November .
the govt either thinks more people support a carbon tax than oppose it , or theyre just trying to do as much as they can before they possibly lose the election . They did introduce a petrol tax increase before the last election and still got elected .

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/1/sto ... d=10531627

Rail stands to benefit , particuarily the freight side .

Rail stands to benefit , particularly the freight side .

But as there is almost no passenger rail people don't have much alternative, unless they can make biofuel. (I have been approached about that for a project in Uganda).

COMMUTER AND LONG DISTANCE COMMUTER RAIL is likely to benefit .
govt announced november 8th as election date today .

David Benton wrote:COMMUTER AND LONG DISTANCE COMMUTER RAIL is likely to benefit .
govt announced november 8th as election date today .

First, there has to be some Long Distance Rail. Do they have any plans to increase service?

not really .Auckland - hamilton should happen as a long distance commuter service . but any long distance service would have to rely on tourist patronage to survive .as do the current long distance services . remember outside of auckland , wellington and christchurch , there are few cities with more than 100 000 people . and lots of mountains in between .

Here in the USA we're seeing the price of gas drop almost every day. Even when Russia invaded Georgia, the price of gas dropped. When Hurricane Gustav blew through the Gulf of Mexico and shut down oil production, the price of gas dropped again. And last week when Ike roared through the Gulf and destroyed everything that Gustav missed, the price dropped again. This summer, gas was selling for $4.45/gal at the closest station; today it sells for $3.65/gal. I'm thinking that the oil companies don't want to have "the price of gas" raging as a major election issue when they announce 3rd quarter earnings, just days before the US presidential election.

It would seem that NZ, being spread out over 2 mountainous islands, would have a great need for transportation spending. Is the 7c dedicated to a particular fund or is it just added to the general treasury?

Vincent wrote:Here in the USA we're seeing the price of gas drop almost every day. Even when Russia invaded Georgia, the price of gas dropped. When Hurricane Gustav blew through the Gulf of Mexico and shut down oil production, the price of gas dropped again. And last week when Ike roared through the Gulf and destroyed everything that Gustav missed, the price dropped again. This summer, gas was selling for $4.45/gal at the closest station; today it sells for $3.65/gal. I'm thinking that the oil companies don't want to have "the price of gas" raging as a major election issue when they announce 3rd quarter earnings, just days before the US presidential election.

The spike occurred because there is a general situation developing of being close to or past "Peak Oil". I would be surprised if it went back to the lowest price. There is an upward general trend with oscillations in it. Very cheap oil is not coming back.

In any case the climate problem is real and oil burning has to be curbed in favour of alternatives.

Vincent wrote:.

. Is the 7c dedicated to a particular fund or is it just added to the general treasury?

That is a good question . In theroy it would be used to buy carbon credits to cover the amount of carbon emitted by transport . wether this actually needs to be done or not im not sure . possibly it is part of a kyoto type agreement , possibly it is a voluntary thing . There really has been little coverage by the media its certainly not a main election issue .Labour pushed it through before they possibly lose the election . the greens and other minor parties wernt that happy with many details , but finally decided it was best to pass it before the election .
there are other petrol taxes that are paid into treasury , as well as funding road maintenance and renewal , accident compensation , and public transport / alternatives to road transport .

I would think the price of oil dropping would genrally favour the incumbent party , as would any good economic news .

from David Benton

I would think the price of oil dropping would genrally favour the incumbent party , as would any good economic news

Well then, we should be seeing a landslide for Obama and the Democrats! Other than the price of gas, all the economic news seems to be bad these days. Personally, I'm fairly confident that Obama/Biden will be elected (although it might be close) and that their administration will be dealing with the greatest economic mess since the 1930s. Energy costs and transportation are going to be central to the recovery of the US economy, let's hope that intelligent minds are put to the task.

Vincent wrote:from David Benton

I would think the price of oil dropping would genrally favour the incumbent party , as would any good economic news

Well then, we should be seeing a landslide for Obama and the Democrats! Other than the price of gas, all the economic news seems to be bad these days. Personally, I'm fairly confident that Obama/Biden will be elected (although it might be close) and that their administration will be dealing with the greatest economic mess since the 1930s. Energy costs and transportation are going to be central to the recovery of the US economy, let's hope that intelligent minds are put to the task.

In most countries rail passenger demand is rising. This leads to calls for more capacity. In Britain overcrowding is a serious problem on some lines, especially commuter routes. Most towns of any size have rail connections, though a few are lacking. Corby is the latest to be about to regain connection.

I am sure that in the US there is demand that isn't satisfied. This can be seen by the way many trains are fully booked. Some of that demand could be satisfied by running more vehicles. Many towns have no service and would probably reveal demand if service were to be provided. But the demand that is is most unsatisfied
is high speed rail.

France and Spain have proved that high speed trains take away passengers from air. That is, given the choice many people who previously used air are satisfied with a replacement high speed rail journey. Eurostar has certainly proved this.

If a new administration in the US takes climate change seriously, and is no longer wedded to "free market" dogmatism, then a high speed network may begin there and eat into both the air travel market and the the long distance driving in private cars.

I don't believe it is useful to tax oil more highly until there are alternatives. But there has to be continual influence on people to use less oil. The French do it by planning high speed electric trains and electric transport in every city (trams and trolleybuses, as well as some heavy rail Metros, as in Lille). Can we expect the US to try this? Perhaps the lack of appropriate government structures may make it impossible. (The New York-New Jersey transport area would benefit from a single agency covering the whole built up area, running trains from New Jersey through to New Haven, for example. Only government complications would prevent it, but trains run from Copehagen to Malmo in two different countries through the tunnel and bridge.)

Countries like New Zealand could move towards an electricity system running without oil or coal input. I would hope to see them move, like Iceland, to a hydrogen economy, with universally electrified rail. Iceland will probably show the way. Swiss rail used to run on hydro power (now partly nuclear); Italian rail ran on geothermal power.

Iceland is planning a rail link to the airport, but otherwise has no rail system.

Low density suburbs may prove to be unviable in a post-oil economy. I expect to see people move to more densely built areas, suitable for public transport. Perhaps some of the disfiguring suburbs I have seen in Florida may be pulled down and replaced by orange groves.

Mr. Mathews--

Many good points in your post. I think that Americans are willing to get on the train, even if it never exceeds 80 mph, just to escape the congestion and competition on the highways. I sat at LA Union Station last week and watched several Surfliner trains boarding; young people are a large part of the new Amtrak demographic, they will be demanding more and better service in the years ahead.

Iceland was a favorite stopping point for me when traveling from the east coast US to Europe. Geothermal power seemed to be abundant and sufficient for a nation of 300,000. Lately, I'm hearing of huge dams being built, destroying ecosystems, just to create a few jobs at foreign-owned aluminum smelters. And given the number of people traveling from Reykjavik to Keflavik on an average day, I doubt that rail would the most efficient means of transport.

Vincent

Vincent wrote:Mr. Mathews--

Many good points in your post. I think that Americans are willing to get on the train, even if it never exceeds 80 mph, just to escape the congestion and competition on the highways. I sat at LA Union Station last week and watched several Surfliner trains boarding; young people are a large part of the new Amtrak demographic, they will be demanding more and better service in the years ahead.

Iceland was a favorite stopping point for me when traveling from the east coast US to Europe. Geothermal power seemed to be abundant and sufficient for a nation of 300,000. Lately, I'm hearing of huge dams being built, destroying ecosystems, just to create a few jobs at foreign-owned aluminum smelters. And given the number of people traveling from Reykjavik to Keflavik on an average day, I doubt that rail would the most efficient means of transport.

Vincent

The thing about Iceland is that there is a government plan to replace all oil imports. To do this they are developing a hydrogen system, with hydrogen derived from their local electricity, both geothermal and hydro. So far they have some buses but they intend to convert the fishing fleet. They have brought in large corporations to help develop the infrastructure and technology. (Some of these have been pretending in other countries that they couldn't do this. General Motors deserves to go bankrupt for its obstruction with regard to electric vehicles.)

Iceland of course is ideal for this plan as its road vehicles never travel to other countries. But its fishing boats will be in direct competition with those of other countries. If their fuel is cheaper they will have an advantage.

I would hope that in future Iceland will become a hydrogen exporter. Also, undersea electric lines could supply Britain, perhaps via Faeroe. I gather this is already technically possible. I am sure the Scottish government will be more receptive to this than the British government, still hung up on nuclear, and doing as little as possible.

A map has been produced showing a pan-European electric network for linking Iceland and north Africa (solar power).

As to whether dams are covering valuable ecosystems I don't know. Raising sea levels will cover many more, as well as human cities.

Most governments seem pretty good at doing as little as possible .
My mate is playing aoround with a hydrogen gnerator for his car . It doesnt produce pure hydrogen , and only supplements the petrol fuel . but you still get 20 -30 % savings overall . Still others are playing around with reburning the exhaust emissions form a engine . when you consider the ic engine is less than 30 % efficent , it appears its not too hard to make worthwhile improvements to that .

David Benton wrote:Most governments seem pretty good at doing as little as possible .
My mate is playing around with a hydrogen generator for his car . It doesn't produce pure hydrogen , and only supplements the petrol fuel . but you still get 20 -30 % savings overall . Still others are playing around with reburning the exhaust emissions form a engine . when you consider the ic engine is less than 30 % efficient , it appears its not too hard to make worthwhile improvements to that .

Something can be done with hydrogen. The main problem is storage. Metal hydrides are a good method of storage but the last I heard was that they need very pure hydrogen with no water vapour - which is difficult to achieve if the hydrogen is coming from electrolysis.

But a locomotive can store the hydrogen as a cold liquid more easily than a road vehicle. Fuel cells will probably be the method of use. I gather that locomotive sized fuel cells are n the way. They would be used on lines where it is not worth putting up the wires or a third rail.

these guys are using it as they genrate it so no storage needed .