While you contemplate the full misery that this sad state of affairs inflicts upon the average UK motorist, eating into what's laughing called their after-tax income, consider this factoid. At various times in the last three years, the UK was an oil exporter. So why the masochism at the pump? Hey, you try running a socialist country– whose population's roughly equal to California and Texas combined– on just £552b per year. The bottom line: taxes. Pistonheads reports that "Duty on both petrol and diesel is now 50.3p a litre – around 40% of the total cost at the pumps. The duty on champagne is said to be £1.87 a bottle, which means that on a £20 bottle the duty makes up roughly less than 10%…. Polls have shown that more than half the population now blame the Government for the spiralling cost of fuel." So what's a government faced with disgruntled (disgruntled I tell you) motorists to do? Raise the fuel duty by .2p per [imperial] gallon. PH commentator 109 Bob shows how cynical UK subjects have become. "What bloody difference will it make by scrapping the 2p increase that is planned. What difference would it make if 10p was to be taken off duty, absolutely no difference what so ever to me our you. The decrease in price would just get swallowed up & prices will continue to increase." Yes they're mad as Hell and they're gonna take it some more. 

In an excellent E85 editorial we published two years ago, Michael Karesh pointed out that U.S. corn growers would need a landmass nearly the size of Texas to make a significant dent in American gas consumption. And now a lot of the existing corn-growing land is under water. Ethanol opponents reckon the recent flooding will mean that even more of the current corn crop will be devoted to E85 production– driving-up food prices even further, faster. They want the feds to suspend its ethanol "mandate" (i.e. .51 per gallon subsidy, tariffs on imported ethanol, price supports, CAFE credits, etc.). That little piece of business currently stands at a directive for 15 billion gallons of biofuels by 2015, and 21 billion gallons by 2022. The ethanol industry says HELL NO. Instead, they want the feds to release protected land for their profit patriotic efforts. According to The Detroit News, "Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa… and other farm state members of Congress argue that the Agriculture Department should allow more planting in 35 million acres of conservation land as a way to help ease the price increases." It just gets worse. 

Forbes' Jerry Flint has some strong words for Detroit. But first… "Yes, Asian car companies cheated. They kept us out of their countries and kept their currencies weak. Yes, our government changed the rules so foreign brands could sell in domestic dealer showrooms, making it cheap for them to attack this market. Yes, our unions helped by ignoring the destruction they were causing until it was almost too late. State governments helped by giving foreign carmakers huge tax breaks when they build plants. Then there was bad luck, or whatever it is that has pushed gasoline prices to $4 a gallon." BUT "the blame has to fall on Detroit's executives. They didn't know enough about their own business to build better cars than the foreigners did, and they were unprepared for a change that was sure to come, sooner or later." BUT "That's not the issue. If we want a home-owned industry, our government will have to help for a change instead of piling on, treating the automobile and the industry like devils." OK, so, how much is this boondoggle going to cost me? Nothing! All we have to do is "halt immediately all new regulations–safety regulations, emission regulations, bumper regulations, mileage regulations." Where do I sign?

Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama's love – hate relationship with Detroit automakers– they're evil, foot-dragging SUV-builders who need federal green initiatives (i.e. taxpayer money) to protect votes jobs– continues apace. Yesterday, Obama visited The Wolverine State to promise he'd meet with American automakers– unlike George Bush, who didn't have a sit-down with The Big 2.8's well-compensated execs until the sixth year of his presidency. Actually, it was his third year. But, as The Detroit News reports, "Late Monday, Obama's campaign acknowledged the misstatement as an 'unintentional oversight.' But they said it didn't take away from Obama's broader point. 'When the auto industry needed help the most, President Bush delayed for months meeting with them and now American workers are feeling the devastating effects of record layoffs and job losses,' said Obama spokeswoman Amy Brundage. Yes, well, one can only imagine how that meeting would go. "You are bad, bad people. Now take these billion dollar handouts and go!" Make no mistake, the former Chrysler 300C driver (yes it's got a Hemi) is ready to ask "what's in YOUR wallet?" when it comes to helping Detroit: "Obama today reiterated in his speech his pledge to spend $150 billion over 10 years to help create 5 million jobs in the 'green' sector, including helping automakers retool older plants to make plug-in electric vehicles."

We've heard a lot about U.S. corn-based ethanol production lately, what with E85 boosters saying it ain't got nothin' to do with rising food prices. In search of some reliable stats on this issue, TTAC's opened its wallet and bought some hard facts to fuel the debate. Industrialinfo.com [sub or PPV] reveals that "the United States now has 156 operational ethanol plants capable of producing a whopping 8.8 billion gallons of the renewable fuel. With an average of 2.6 gallons of ethanol per bushel of corn, that translates to more than 3.4 billion bushels of corn going toward fuel production. Earlier this month, the U.S. Department of Agriculture released numbers that estimate the 2008 corn crop would be about 11.7 billion bushels, meaning that about 24% of the crop will go straight toward ethanol production." I'm not sure who did their math, but when I divide 8.8b gallons by 2.6 gallons/bushel, I get almost 3.4b bushels, which equates to about 29% of the crop. Either way, that's a lot of Fritos. And just in case you want to know whose Senators are behind the .51 per gallon federal subsidies for the corn go-juice, check out this handy little chart. Question: does America actually consume all this ethanol? Hell no. Ethanol Producer Magazine reckons we burned 414k barrels of E85 per day in '07. Round that up to 500k for increased E85 use, and that's 182,500,000 barrels, or 7.6b gallons, per year. I make that 1.2b gallons worth of E85 overproduction, so far. Somebody add some subsidies, quick!

So, now that the feds are forking-out $30m of your hard-earned tax dollars to GM, Ford and Chrysler/GE for plug-in hybrid battery technology research, auto industry observers are asking the obvious question: what the Hell's that going to do? As reported previously, GM's paying $3b in a year interest on their loans. Ford's in hock up their logo (no, really). Chrysler's so hard-up for cash they're stiffing their suppliers. Our friends at Wired make the kvetch from deep left field. "What'd it do — scrounge change from couch cushions in the Pentagon? EV advocates were quick to thank Uncle Sam for the money but said it's going to take a whole lot more than that to wean us from oil — which, by the way, will collect $17 billion in tax breaks during the next decade." BTW? C'mon, you know what comes next (assuming you've read the headline). "David Sandalow, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and former Clinton Administration official, says we could transform the nation's vehicle fleet if we spent about $18.5 billion over the next decade." We're talking $5b for "retooling," $12b for plug-in hybrid buyer tax credits, $1b for 30k plug-in hybrids per year for 10 years for Uncle Sam's fleet and $500m to "underwrite warranties on lithium-ion batteries until the technology is proven." And if your business needs new investment to compete? Ha! 

Autocar magazine has suddenly woken-up to the threat to UK jobs posed by the Government's new CO2-based car taxes. And boy are they miffed! After listing the auto industry's contribution to the island nation's economy– 800k employees, £200b turnover– Julian Rendell lets 'em have it with half a barrel: "And yet the government's policies could be putting that business, and those jobs, in increasing jeopardy." [emphasis added]. Ya think? CO2- belching Bentley, Land Rover, Jaguar, Aston Martin and Lotus all call Britain home. Instead of bringing out the big guns to attack the anti-car jihad– union leaders, car makers' reps, opposition politicians, analysts– Autocar picks up the cudgel on behalf of the working stiff. "Those who govern our country are making cars prohibitively costly to buy and to own, and by doing so they've giving the ordinary people who make, sell, service and repair those vehicles real concern for their jobs and their futures." That said, the guys on the line really know their onions. “I feel the government’s policies are clearly anti-car,” said Craig Caves, line manager at Ford of Britain’s Dagenham Diesel Centre. “On a daily basis they are producing an anti-car mentality that can only threaten jobs in the car industry. And it’s not just us at risk; it’s all the people supplying us and the people local to the plant.” News flash: the time to bring-up this issue was five years ago. At least. 

Is great to be leader of glorious Russian Federation. Of course, we can always be more glorious. And glory be to the Russian car industry. Make world's greatest automobiles for world's greatest people. Is natural we want to build cars inside Russian Federation, to help our economy grow and prosper, like garden. So we are placing new tariffs on used cars more than five years old. Is simple economics. Russian-made cars are only 40 percent of the market, including foreign brands. This is all because the Russian car industry has receded from its position quite seriously. I am thinking about 80 percent of cars sold in Russia should be made in our country. New import tariffs rates will increase demand for clean new cars. Pravda, which means truth, says "Russian car manufacturers may not derive profit from it at all." But who knows what they mean and that is before I make phone call. Until then, I remind Russia's foreign partners in auto industry of old proverb: "What's mine is mine and what's yours is mine." Dasvidanya.

With HillRod and McNasty calling for a summer vacation from reality gas taxes, populist posturing on the price at the pumps is hitting an all time high. It's one thing for presidential candidates to propose sweet, feel-good nothings. It's another when the sitting Secretary for Transportation disses the dollars that help fuel her agency's good works (and the rest). Although Mary Peters held short of weighing-in on the tax holiday proposal, the SecTrans did tell The Detroit News that "as family budgets strain under the burden of record gasoline prices, it is increasingly clear that fuel taxes are not only ineffective but also wildly unpopular. Increasing dependence on gas taxes to fund infrastructure makes zero sense when Detroit and other automakers are working so hard to make more efficient cars every year." Oh, so Detroit is going to solve the energy crisis, is it? Why didn't we see that one coming? Peters made no mention of what would be taxed so as to pay for such trivialities as roads and bridges. After all, if gas is cheap enough for us to all buy SUV's again, who needs the infrastructure?

No, it's not Heidi Fleiss talking. It's a different kind of prostitute: Florida Governor Charles "Charlie" Crist. I kid, I kid. But that's Charlie's ultimate justification for hopping on the summer gas tax holiday bandwagon (there's got to be a Cliff Richard joke in there somewhere). Speaking to the The New York Times, Charlie says he's been "struggling" to cut 10 cents a gallon from the Sunshine State's gas taxes. And yes, he knows it doesn't mean shit, moneywise. But that's not the point. "'It’s about trying to serve the people and trying to understand and have caring, compassionate hearts for what they’re dealing with at the kitchen table,' said Mr. Crist, a Republican." Wow! A Republican said that? And now a word from the Law of Unintended Consequences. "Since 2000, four states have enacted gas tax holidays: Florida, Georgia, Illinois and Indiana. In general, retailers did not pass on all of the intended savings…  During the last gas tax suspension in Florida in 2004, people hoarded gasoline, driving up demand and prices." D'oh! And, to conclude, a little not-so-subtle Bush bashing. "Several drivers, even in Republican strongholds, blamed President Bush for high gasoline prices because of his support for oil companies and the war in Iraq. Others suggested consumer sacrifices like a return to the national speed limit of 55 miles per hour, which would conserve gas but have little immediate impact on prices." Several? Others? Oh brother. 

File this under "News That Effects Me Personally." As in, "Those city hall pricks are taking tacos out of my mouth." Where I live in North Eastern LA, there are– or rather were— six taco trucks with a one mile stretch along the same road. As The New York Time rightly reports, each one offers uniquely delicious fare. Except for that one up on 51st — their tacos suck. But the other five, man… So here's the dirt straight from the hungry horse's mouth. Restaurants are complaining (and have been complaining) that the "roach coaches" are stealing customers because their food is so cheap. My new mortal enemy, county supervisor Gloria Molina, is pushing through the ordinance that will require taco trucks to move every hour. Effectively putting them out of business. Why? Henchman Gerry Hertzberg claims the trucks represent a "big quality of life issue." Whatever that means. Taco truck owner Jose Naranjo puts it best, "We are poor people feeding other poor people." Yeah, and me! The ordinance goes into effect today. This is a total tragedy as one truck in particular serves-up the best carne asada tacos in all of Los Angeles. And trust me, I've looked. Anyhow, I wrote Molina a letter and signed the save our taco trucks petition. Though I fear you can't fight city hall. Tasteless jerks. 

Pity The New York Times. When presidential candidate John McCain suggested suspending the federal gas tax– a republican-anti-tax-compatible theoretical quick fix for pain at the pump– no problem. Off with his head! But when Democratic presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton threw her support behind the plan, well, that's heresy! Needless to say, the tax-loving liberal paper give both John and Hillary a proper bitch slapping. "Nixing the gas tax would increase demand for gasoline — exactly the wrong response to global warming and rising energy prices. So wrong, in fact, that both Mrs. Clinton and Mr. McCain support policies that would cut carbon emissions and increase the price of energy. (Talk about voting for something before they voted against it.)." Bad consumer! Bad consumer! "Americans — like the rest of the world — must find ways to curb their use of fossil fuels. Higher, not lower, prices are an important way to spur the needed technological innovation and curb demand." While they're at it, how about a good old-fashioned Bush bash? (Only 194 days 'til the next election!) "There is not enough oil in Alaska to provide a lasting solution. And Mr. Bush’s prescription would do nothing to address climate change or quench the thirst for oil." Barak wins! "Fortunately, Mr. Obama has not caved to the rising calls for cheap energy and has refused to follow his rivals down this misguided path." The editorial ends with just the right touch of sanctimonious self-congratulation. "We know pandering when we see it." 

It was the best of times, it was the worst of times. Just kidding, it's the worst of times. I can't even turn on the TV for fear of seeing anything having to do with the election. And gas prices have and are going up and up; I've paid $4.10 a gallon for the past two weeks. But presumptive Republican nominee John McCain (presuming he lives long enough) has a solution. Suspend the Federal gas tax for the summer. That's 18.4 cents per gallon to you and me. Not so fast says Barry Hussein Obama. That's a smoke and mirrors election year tactic that will, "save consumers little and do nothing to curtail oil consumption and imports." In comes Hillrod off the top turnbuckle. Mrs. Clinton says that Mr. Obama is "out of touch with ordinary Americans who are struggling to meet their mortgages and gas up their cars and trucks." Anyone else LOVE when multi-millionaires accuse other multi-millionaires of being out of touch? OK, so you might be expecting a spot of analysis. All I can tell you is this: my girlfriend is driving around in my WRX this week because her car is a death trap and I have some $100,000+  fun toy press car that you'll hear about later. Anyhow, she was bemoaning the fact my car requires premium fuel. I explained to her that the 20 cent premium over regular works out to less than $2 a tank. And the Federal gas tax is less than that. You catch my drift?

The Daily Mail reports that the UK's new carbon tax works spectacularly… as a revenue-builder. The recently-increased "showroom tax" costs consumers between $500 and $2k on cars based on their  C02 emissions. According to her Majesty's Treasury, the carbon tax will add nearly $5b to the government's coffers. And here's the kicker: the gov's own figures will only decrease auto-related greenhouse gas emissions by… wait for it… less than one percent. Conservative Treasury spokesman Justine Greening discovered the discrepancy between the cost to consumers and benefit to the environment during that awesome fixture of the British Parliamentary government known as "Parliamentary answers." "This is a massive tax hike which will have virtually no impact on the environment," said Greening. "Despite their claims, the Government don't expect this move to change behaviour at all – it is just another eco stealth tax of the worst kind." Hear hear.

"We've just got to get behind the doors and get these things resolved, which I'm sure we can do." So what is Rick Wagoner waiting for? God knows. But not Automotive News, which is happy to report (without further questioning) GM's Beancounter-in-Chief's belief that his back room boys can resolve the ongoing strike at American Axle, currently idling some 30 GM manufacturing facliities. And the United Auto Workers (UAW) strike over two-tier wages at GM's Delta Township factory. And, while they're at it, the possibility of a UAW strike at Fairfax, Kansas; the plant that makes the Chevrolet Malibu. And, at the same time, figure-out the mess at bankrupt parts supplier (and former GM division) Delphi. "Wagoner also said the work on Delphi's restructuring since it entered bankruptcy in 2005 provided 'a good base' for a revised exit financing plan. 'I hope it doesn't take an extended period of time,"'he said. 'The fact that they were able to arrange the debt side of the financing would suggest that the restructuring can be done.'" So much for a sense of urgency.