Fuel Surcharge, 'Price Floor' Could Help California Cut Emissions While Bankrupting Them NOTE: LINK IS TO PDF of The Implications of a Gasoline Price Floor for the California Budget and Greenhouse Gas Emissions, by Severin Borenstein of CSEM.

(Summary here is from subscription newsletter, so not linked.)

A variable surcharge on transportation fuels could help California curb greenhouse gas emissions and generate revenue the state needs to shrink its budget deficit, Severin Borenstein, a University of California Berkeley economist, said Jan. 15.
Kinda hard to do with everybody leaving the state, isn't it?

Unless you spread it to all 57 states. Stay tuned ...

At a conference on clean transportation technologies and policies, Borenstein outlined a proposal he floated late last year soon after state Democratic leaders proposed a 1.5 percent sales tax increase to boost revenue.

Borenstein said the "Fuel Price Stabilization Program" would create a "price floor" for gasoline and provide clear long-term price signals for consumers that we intend to screw over them as much as possible and for investors in clean technology.

Under the plan, a surcharge would be imposed on fuel whenever the price falls below a certain target. The surcharge would apply to retail sales of gasoline, diesel, and jet fuels, and it would move inversely to the world price of oil, Borenstein explained.
The mind boggles. This guy is an economist?
The price target would depend on how much revenue the state wants to generate and the "price signal" it wants to send to discourage increased fuel use, according to the plan.
Ummmm - it might not work out quite that way....
Rapid drops in gasoline prices, like the one that began in July 2008, are likely to turn drivers back to gas-guzzling vehicles and habits and we can't have that, hindering the state's effort to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, Borenstein said.
Then why don't you quit breathing? There'd be less CO2 right there.
The surcharge would be a tough sell in the Legislature and to the public because in all some cases it would could mean higher gasoline prices, Borenstein, a professor at Berkeley's Haas School of Business and director of the UC Energy Institute, acknowledged.
"We'd make sure it happened. It's for the children, you know."
Borenstein's Fuel Price Stabilization Program, however, does appeal to clean technology developers who want a price floor for oil that would encourage investor and consumer interest in their products.
So the palms are greased fix is in? (They hope.)
CALSTART, the consortium of businesses and groups that support clean transportation technologies and host of the two-day conference, is recommending that the state adopt such a fuel surcharge.
"It's further bankrupt the state, if that's possible, but what the hell, we'll get ours."
State Assemblywoman Fiona Ma (D) led a discussion on how best to motivate consumers to admit they exist to support the state reduce their carbon footprints. Carbon taxes, fuel surcharges, and other hidden fees were among the options panelists said would be most effective.

The Sierra Club's Bill Magavern, however, said the fees cannot appear to be penalizing consumers.
"It's OK to penalize the rubes consumers, just make it look like you're not."
"We need to give them choices, like non-vehicle ways to get around," he said.
They can walk, after all. Though of course we don't have to.

Good grief.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut 2009-01-22