Hace algun tiempo escribí acerca del precio del petróleo (Mi antianálisis del precio del petróleo) y me referí a lo errado de los análisis. Una vez más queda demostrado que el mercado parece no obedecer predicción o tendencia alguna encontrándonos con precios del petróleo en alrededor de US$70 el barril. En este contexto me parece interesante el artículo aparecido en Des Moines Register.
Until about a week ago, the conventional wisdom was that high – and growing – crude-oil prices were here to stay, and that Americans had to change their wasteful driving habits. A tank of gas blew the family budget, taking the bus became fashionable and you couldn’t unload a used Hummer unless you threw a new house into the deal.
Then, just like that, it’s over.
Just a few weeks ago, experts were predicting crude-oil prices would hit $200 a barrel next year, but last week the price dropped below $70 for the first time in more than a year, thanks to an unexpected drop in U.S. gas consumption with the economic slowdown. Pump prices in the Des Moines area have dropped from above $4 a gallon just weeks ago to less than $2.50 in places.This is certainly good news for Americans struggling in a time of financial stress. One economist pointed out that if oil stabilizes at $80 a barrel next year, it would translate into a $275 billion economic stimulus that won’t cost the U.S. Treasury a dime.
This is bad news, however, for the goal of weaning the nation from burning oil for transportation, a leading source of greenhouse gas. Rising fuel prices provided long-overdue incentives for improved vehicle efficiency, research into alternative fuels and more healthful alternatives to driving.
High gas prices prompted a serious conversation about a more rational approach to transportation, not just increased efficiency and alternative fuels but creative thinking about how we design our cities and transportation systems to rely less on single-occupant automobiles and more on walking, bicycling, mass transit and sharing rides. The net effect would be cities that are more vibrant and livable, cleaner air, healthier lifestyles and less reliance on energy that comes from unstable parts of the world.
While the rocketing price of crude oil globally forced this conversation, market forces are an unreliable substitute for leadership on energy policy. The market price of oil over the past year bears less relationship to the realities of oil reserves and refinery capacity than to external market forces, including wild economic gyrations. As witnessed in recent days, changes in those external market forces can cause the price to drop, and the incentive for a sensible transportation policy evaporates.
Along with it goes the incentive for investment in new technologies and retooling to build more efficient vehicles. Public-transportation planners would have less reason to invest in expanding mass-transit routes and service at the risk of running empty buses and trains. And, if consumer demand sours for more walkable communities, developers and city planners won’t be as interested in changing the way they do business.
In other words, it’s back to driving the old gas hog to the corner store and shipping more U.S. wealth to the Middle East. That is not the way it should be. Instead, there must be more courageous leadership at every level of government and long-range thinking by private industry to change the way this nation views transportation.
That may require a hike in gas taxes – which Iowa needs to do in any case to pay for neglected roads and bridges – but it will require a commitment to change that does not rise and fall with gas prices.
And, if we get it right, we won’t be whipsawed at the gas pump any more.