Energy consumption, and suburban sprawl: Is the government the solution or the problem?

Question

So, two of the major reasons I see that Americans are using so much more energy per capita than the rest of the world (other than Australia, I think), are obviously that we drive more and walk/ride bikes less, we tend to like bigger, less efficient vehicles, and that because we have more space, like Australia, our population centers tend to grow outward rather than upward, and more and more people have having longer daily commutes.

Now, as gas prices are going up, people will have more incentive to drive less, drive more efficient cars, and live in more convenient location to where they work. On top of this, the collapse of the housing market will make housing more affordable in the convenient locations, it will take away the incentive for builders to keep building more and more new suburban communities.

Answer 1

The Government could be the solution if it really truly wanted to be. Also, Americans want what they want, but are not willing to make sacrifices for it.

Answer 2

<<Why is it that so many of the very people who claim to care about the environment, are screaming for the government to ‘fix’ these ‘problems’ caused by the free market.>>

never mind gas, bought milk, or bread, or cereal, lately?

that's "free market" for ya.

doesn't help you at all.

Answer 3

I purchased a home 2 miles from work, then work moved 20 miles away - I tried!

A small side comment about smaller vehicles.  

I have been driving a Ford Ranger since 2001 and am happy with the gas mileage.  I went out to purchase a new one last month, and the price has gone up approx $6,000 in 6-7 years!  They attributed that increase to inflation.  Bull _ _ _ _.  That would have made the truck FREE not so long ago.  They are asking a ton more for the more fuel-efficient truck and practically giving the larger trucks away.  

Problem:  When gas prices go down and the market price for this small 'nothing to it' truck levels to where it should be, the public is going to get hammered on resale value and will not have SAVED any money in the process.

Lower gas consumption, but a higher car payment do not make for a win-win transaction.  

Is this how the Ford Corporation is helping the American people become more energy efficient????  Is that the best they can do for their valued customers?

Meanwhile, I'm stuck with a dying vehicle and can't afford a newer model small truck (which I need for many reasons) till gas prices go down . . . Luckily I also have a bike!  Cycling on the highway during rushhour is safe, right?

Answer 4

No, Americans will just make do. We'll ***** and moan, but not change our lifestyles until severely impacted.

Here's an example. My gasoline cost has risen by 50% in the past year. What does that mean to me? What used to cost 20 bucks a week now costs 30. So, a little more than $500 a year. It is a nuisance, but I'm not really changing my lifestyle.

By the way, the "collapse" of the housing market isn't a collapse at all. It is a slight price correction in all but the worst of areas (Detroit). It means new home construction will be reduced, but also that those homes in the suburbs will become more affordable. The "convenient" locations, by which I gather you mean more urban areas, won't change any more, and considering that most urban families want to leave those urban decay areas, they will find the suburbs more attractive. It happened in Houston during the 1980s in a tremendous way. What were upper middle class "white" communities are now marginal working class areas due to the number of apartments built there (originally for convenience to growing office space). So, a housing slump really just damages suburbs. It doesn't help urban areas at all. Never has, never will. Economic boom times help urban areas (gentrification).

Have a nice day, and please don't let reality get in your way.

Oh, lastly, government is ALWAYS the problem. They mean well, but use the stick more than the carrot. That's the way Democrats are.

Answer 5

We live in a Republic. It is an indirect democracy. This should help to protect the interests of all. But in most electrions we have low turnout. We cynically say that it is the politicians. The alternative to politics is civil war. We should have a ballot that says: NONE OF THE ABOVE.

In a democracy the people get the government they deserve. Wake up, people, and get together. When you hear demagoguery, denounce the speaker. The internet is here. Research your potential representatives.

It is possible for the government to manage and regulate, with open meetings and sincere and honest people IF we aren't the SOME OF THE POEPLE WHO ARE FOOLED ALL THE TIME.

There's enough demagoguery to go around to all the parties. I believe we would be better served if there were more parties instead of voting for Coke and Pepsi, look for the smaller guys.

Look at all the environmental and other concerned organizations that can lobby and bring to light the problems.

Let's be less greedy and vote for representatives at all levels, from your county commissioners to the president that will represent ALL the people instead of the unbalanced favor of special interests and big business.

The government can be a useful tool and administrator.

Government is NOT the problem, it is US.

Answer 6

The governement is never the solution, it is always part of the problem.

Answer 7

Many people (especially Democrats) see government as the fix for most any perceived problem.  Which is, of course, nonsense; government regulations drive where people build and live, but ultimately the market prevails.  The whole question of how to effectively create and use energy is far too complex to try to address here.