For some it may mean driving less efficient cars, trucks or joining with other workers when possible to share means of shouldering the gas bill with co-workers.
Are Americans the only people experiencing the need for more energy-efficient living? Americans are more likely to carry thru what they have learning to be more energy efficient. This does not guarantee that many who have begin to change their use of natural energies will fall right back into the same old habits they have tried to anticipate.
If we look other places in the world we find that the Iraqis have already shown that adopting to a shortage of natural resources is not caused by not having natural resources. Iraqis have rich oil deposits. For the Iraqis , they are unable to have accecss to their rich oil deposits because government has not acted.
Nonetheless, Americans are not the only persons feeling the gas price increase; Iraqis have experienced the need for the Iraqi government to build more gas stations. Iraqis were used to spending several hours in the hot sun only to find out that by the time they rolled into the station (speaking literally), the gas attendants simply told them no more gas for today. Furthermore, when this shortage was occurring it was not uncommon to spend several hours waiting , but knowing that it would be possible to not have gas when it was your turn. It has not been uncommon for Iraqis to wait now several hours to have the chance to fill their tanks, but now they also feel the increase of gas prices as much as 500% increase in prices (Komarow Iraqis).
Again, Democrats are leading the way in the trend toward less subsidizing and more towards more efficient living, since “Democrats in both houses say they want to go further toward eliminating subsidies and investing in alternative fuels (Wolf House). What these alternative fuels are not clearly spelled out yet, since “The energy bill sets up a fund for renewable fuels but doesn't choose winners and losers among solar, wind, hydrogen and other types of energy” (Wolf House).
The term renewable fuels refers to natural resources of energy. It appears that government officials are the first to offer possible solutions to the problem of energy efficient living. Politicians readily focus on practical solutions, but it is easy to justify that spending heavily upon gas subsidies would yield a wide agreeable response from the American public. The contrary shows itself to be true and that Americans respond by showing that they want less national debt and more-efficient living, even at the cost of making a few changes in their lifestyles.
Although government officials name these alternative fuel sources tells the American public that it is steering more toward energy efficient living and alternate source so fuel. When college students receive subsidies to lower the cost of education it amounts to a signaling to raise fees for education (Davidson Economics).
If government offered companies money to lower prices it would not amount to a further increase in other expenditures. In short, would subsidies for fuel fix the underlying problem of fuel efficiency?
Biofuels is another issue at stake. Biofules became one of the more serious types of solutions that Americans were looking for. The combination of using additives to enhance fuel-efficiency were one of the first alternatives Americans could choose. Americans began to realize that fuel additives was less expensive to burn and produced a more efficient result. Biofuels are used to mix with gas and solve the gas fuel prices this way, by providing more efficient fuels to burn.
The problem here is that it raises the food prices of cops like corn on the world market (Canadian Business protectionism). There are options like fuel additives, which can cut motorists spending up to 4%. It is called Platinum Plus by Clean Diesel Technologies (Commercial Motor Additive). Corn and ethanol which is produced from Platinum Plus counts as a viable source of lowering gas prices and reducing the need for greater fuel subsidies. Ethanol making produces another problem, which is using taxpayer dollars.
With an estimated one hundred ethanol plants, which are already productive, Americans can take heart that fuel-efficient living is a reality to be exercised. Its costs around tens of millions to build one plant; furthermore, “it would take 85% of the U.S. corn acreage to produce enough to replace just 10% of gas demand” (Green Corn Rush).
Rather than moving toward gas subsidies, it seems that more government funding and subsidies are being given to energy-efficient or alternate fuel production. At present there is the worry that if the country goes energy efficient, will everyone accept it or will some resist the changes, and find themselves left behind? (Patterson Cope).
