Comments on: A Little Numbers Game

By: John Dahlman

John Dahlman — Sat, 10 May 2008 12:31:39 +0000

I just read a comment about I-70 not going past Greenriver Utah. I don't know where he is from but of course it goes past Greenriver it goes through Richmond and connects with I-15 lok at a map or take a nice drive the mountains are spectacular out that way.

By: Tom

Tom — Sun, 30 Apr 2006 10:00:52 +0000

I definately agree that the chief villians reside in congress on this one. The main proplem is refinining capacity. The oil companies have the money now to expand that capacity for several years, at least. So why don't they build more refineries? Some blame corporate greed, some blame envirnmental laws. But both are wrong. The oil companies face uncertainty over future demand. They are concerned that they will build more refineries and then congress will increase fuel efficiency requirements. If that happens, the new capacity may not be needed by the time it is completed, and a lot of money will be wasted. It has been a rather long time since the fuel effiancy requirements have been tightened, so oil companies are right to believe they will be changed sometime soon. What congess should have done 3 years ago was tighten the fuel efficiency standards and also passed a real energy bill that establishes a predictable but tightening regulatory climate for the next 20 years. The key word here is predictable. As an engineer, I know almost any regualtion can be overcome with a few years of research. But when regulations keep changing, you may try to meet a regulation that won't exist when you are done. And you may not have done the research to meet regulations that were unexpected. Having a known regulatory future would really help.

By: Jimmie

Jimmie — Fri, 28 Apr 2006 22:36:11 +0000

Tom, you get no real argument from me. We ae, I believe, the finest highway system in the world. What I doubt is whether the gas taxes that have steadily increased since 1981 have been wisely spent. I won't ever argue that our interstate highway system is the best destination for those taxes. What I will argue is how much of that has gone to that system. It's obvious that gas taxes get diverted to pay for all sorts of other things and we've generally let that pass us by. Now that we're paying $3 a gallon for gas, we're casting about looking for villans.

I say the chief villains in this particular story work in Congress and they've been bilking us at the pumps for an awfully long time.

By: Tom

Tom — Fri, 28 Apr 2006 09:03:23 +0000

You know, I was about to look up some numbers on construction costs. But then I realized two things. First, I don't have Nexis-Lexus, so I won't get good numbers. But, more importantly, the quality of construction is much highr than it was only 25 years ago. Comparisons would really be hard to judge. How would you you assess the value of greatly improved safety, for instance? Here's some things I do know. The per unit labor costs have dropped in real terms, while the cost per mile has risen. And safety has been immeasurably improved. Is it still a good deal? Without question. Our 28 cents per gallon buys us the most extensive and safest highway system in the world. Sure, it is not as slick as the Autobahn, but we have lower taxes. And the benefit to us all is irreplaceable. Think of this, if Exxon-Mobil's profits vanished tomorrow, our economy would be fine. I'd lose some money on my stocks, but I would still survive. In fact, our economy was pretty good 7 years ago, when oil profits were lower. But if we took away the interstate highway system, our economy would grind to a halt. I have driven every single interstate highway in the continental US except for I-8. I can tell you that everywhere you go, you will see miilions of dollars of commerce travelling those roads every hour, every day, every year. The scale and effinciency of the system is absolutely stunning. There is nothing like it in the world. Whenever you buy a gallon of gas, that money gets sent to many different destinations, including my pocket. But the best destination is the interstate highway system. By far.

By: Jimmie

Jimmie — Thu, 27 Apr 2006 22:03:14 +0000

And what of the construction costs in 1956 dollars? I'd expect that those have remained proportional, if they haven't decreased thanks to better and more efficient tecnhology.

Oil profits do benefit all of us..at least all of us who have any sort of retirement investment.

By: Tom

Tom — Thu, 27 Apr 2006 21:30:29 +0000

The current 18.4 cents tax is really only 8.5 cents in 1981 dollars. So we really only doubled the tax from 1981 until now in real terms. And today's 18.4 cents is 2.6 cents in 1956, when we started building the interstate highway system. If we were to keep the tax the same in real dollars as it was in 1956, we'd be paying 28 cents per gallon now. So, in fact the taxes have gone down substantially. What to we get for it? Think of all those construction projects you have been stuck in. That's the gas tax at work. And guess what? It's not just maintenance. I-95 is still not done in Pennsylvania, which is the reason for the PA Turnpike/I-95 Interchange project. I live in Colorado and the Glenwood Canyon tunnel/viaduct sytem wasn't completed until 1992. Hell, I-70 still doesn't go past Green River, Utah, but they gave up on that one. And we haven't completed our 470 loop project around Denver. Everywhere we go around the US, there is lots of construction on the interstate highway system. And that benfits all of us, unlike oil industry profits.