Another Case for Making People Pay for Scarce Blacktop

The long shadow cast by Nate Silver’s indomitable statistical enterprise has now darkened the doorway of transportation policy research. In a piece at Esquire, Mr Regression himself models driving behavior and determines that even taking oil prices and economic factors into account, Americans are driving much less than they used to. He adds some interesting factoids and commentary:

There is strong statistical evidence, in fact, that Americans respond rather slowly to changes in fuel prices. The cost of gas twelve months ago, for example, has historically been a much better predictor of driving behavior than the cost of gas today. In the energy crisis of the early 1980s, for instance, the price of gas peaked in March 1981, but driving did not bottom out until a year later.

Thus, the continued decrease in driving today reflects, in part, a delayed reaction to hundred-dollar-a-barrel oil. Maybe our commuter finally did get fed up and move his family to the city, but it took him until now to do so. The real test will come as the summer unfolds and Americans have had time to get “used to” lower gas prices.

I do think there is an underlying shift in preferences taking place, helped along by demographic changes and economic conditions, but as Nate says, most Americans do not live in places where they can easily reduce the miles they travel. Communities in which most daily tasks can be accomplished on foot or bicycle are fairly rare, and obviously transit infrastructure is underdeveloped in this country.

So it seems really, really odd that we’d use federal money, stimulus or otherwise, on new road miles. It doesn’t help congestion, and it diverts resources from alternative investments that would make it cheaper and easier for people to substitute away from driving. The best way to address that is to make people pay for use of scarce blacktop. Keep in mind, because transit-accessible and walkable neighborhoods are rare, they tend to be expensive, which means that those who can least afford to handle increases in driving costs are the ones with the least access to alternatives (or good alternatives, anyway).

At any rate, I hope people aren’t getting used to cheap gasoline. As of today, oil is back over $58 per barrel, and the gas across the street from my building has gone up a good 20 cents in price per gallon over the last month.

Comments

[john s. gordon:]

1981-82 were recession years (thank you r.reagan) and a reduction in vehicle miles would be expected @ that time.
> jack

May 08 09:40 AM

[OnTarget:]

(thank you r.regan - for getting us out of recession)


On May 08 09:40 AM john s. gordon wrote:

> 1981-82 were recession years (thank you r.reagan) and a reduction
> in vehicle miles would be expected @ that time.

May 08 11:16 AM

[Valley Boy:]

The author hopes people aren't used to cheap gasoline, he says,
and wants people to pay extra for blacktop.
It sounds like he has a certain agenda in mind.

May 08 12:49 PM

[notsosmart:]

hey,if you can pay hundreds to watch a game @ a stadium why would $4 gallon gas bother you? the dumb-dumbs of this generation will never learn.

May 08 04:29 PM

[Valley Boy:]

Laughing Out Loud! I'll be sure to equate the price of sports
tickets to the price at the pump from now on.


On May 08 04:29 PM notsosmart wrote:

> hey,if you can pay hundreds to watch a game @ a stadium why would
> $4 gallon gas bother you? the dumb-dumbs of this generation will
> never learn.

May 08 08:40 PM

[Nathaniel C:]

The goal of the elites who want high oil prices and gasoline is to force everyone back into the cities so they can be easily controlled. Some radical enviornmentalists like this idea becuase they believe that this will stop global warming.

People should not be penalized for commuting from the suburbs to the cities for employment. We already pay for the roads through state and federal taxes on each gallon of gasoline.

May 09 07:42 PM