• Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie Global logoCarnegie lettermark logo
DemocracyIran
  • Donate
{
  "authors": [
    "Deborah Gordon"
  ],
  "type": "legacyinthemedia",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
  ],
  "collections": [],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
  "programAffiliation": "",
  "programs": [],
  "projects": [
    "Carnegie Oil Initiative"
  ],
  "regions": [
    "North America",
    "United States"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Climate Change"
  ]
}

Source: Getty

In The Media

Guessing at the Gas Pump

It may seem counterintuitive, but a carbon fee on oil placed far up on the supply chain could stabilize gas prices and benefit American consumers.

Link Copied
By Deborah Gordon
Published on Jul 17, 2012
Project hero Image

Project

Carnegie Oil Initiative

The Carnegie Oil Initiative analyzed global oils, assessing their differences from climate, environmental, economic, and geopolitical perspectives. This knowledge provides strategic guidance and policy frameworks for decision making.

Learn More

Source: Hill

By all accounts, future gasoline prices should rise as oils become heavier and harder to handle. The more waste carbon and the less hydrogen fuel in new oils, the higher the cost to turn them into gasoline. But when it comes to predicting prices at the pump, all bets are off.

From 1949 to 1973, real gasoline prices remained flat, hovering between $1.50 and $2 a gallon (in 2011 dollars). Following the ’70s oil crises, gas prices once again settled down to $1.50 a gallon from 1986 to 1999. All told, American motorists experienced some 50 years of remarkably stable and low fuel expenditures — albeit interrupted by a volatile decade.

But recent fuel costs have motored up and down, nearly tripling in a single year. An average gallon of regular gasoline swung from a low of $1.55 (2002) up to $3.17 (2008), back down to $2.66 (2009) and up again to $3.71 (2011). This roller coaster signals a wild ride ahead.

Essentially all of today’s gasoline is made from crude oil, the very stuff that until recently we thought we were running out of. Today we are witnessing an economic and technological redefinition of oil. New oils are being found in new places and different formulations. These so called unconventional oils are poised to change everything — from extraction techniques to processing protocols to petroleum fuels themselves and their uses.

With change comes uncertainty. As such, the oil boom is expected to trigger a paradigm shift. The vast differentiation in oil feedstocks and geographies upon us could lead to less predictable prices.

From bitumen-laced oil sands in Canada and extra-heavy oil in Venezuela to light shale oils in the Bakken and the crude array throughout the Middle East and North Africa, 21st century oils are a heterogeneous bunch. Add in kerogen-based oil shales in the Rocky Mountains and pre-salt oil in Brazil. No doubt there’s more — all told, Americans are preparing to feast on a super-sized alphabet soup of hydrocarbons.

West Texas Intermediate (WTI) crude — our benchmark — has historically traded at a premium to Europe’s North Sea Brent crude. This is no longer the case. For the past two years, WTI crude has sold at a $15 per barrel (plus) discount to Brent. Moreover, the Energy Information Administration predicts WTI could sell anywhere from $40 to $170 per barrel next year.

Looking ahead, oil traders aren’t forecasting normal market conditions — where prices trend smoothly upward. Why? Worldwide economic recovery appears tentative and the rate of growth in China and India is declining. Still, North American oil production could continue to outpace demand if new infrastructure, including the Keystone XL pipeline, is built. And the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) could resort to cutting oil supply to manipulate global prices.

What does this all mean for American motorists? Uncertainty.

Transforming oil markets need structure. New rules must be established for new fuels in order to ensure their sustainable development and address environmental concerns. One option is to price oils based on their imbedded carbon. The lighter the hydrocarbon feedstock, the lower its carbon, with less processing required and more gasoline produced. Heavier oils, on the other hand, yield greater shares of diesel and petroleum coke — a coal substitute. Americans currently use almost three times the amount of gasoline as diesel. And some 1 million barrels a day is currently being exported. Introducing greater a greater share of heavier oils in the United States, therefore, will not relieve pressure at the gas pump.

A carbon fee on oil is a win-win solution. Switching from a gas tax on consumers to a percentage (ad valorem) fee on oil inputs, domestic and imported, would help prioritize which oils to tap and which to save. Moreover, a carbon-indexed oil fee would encourage system-wide efficiencies and reap revenues at home for the growing share of petroleum products that are refined in the United States and exported — untaxed.

It seems counterintuitive, but a carbon fee on oil placed upstream could stabilize gas prices and benefit Americans. Pricing oil far up on the supply chain based on its carbon content is one way to reduce price volatility by spreading the cost among more users.

It’s a new era for oil. The industry is barreling ahead, learning as it goes. The public is searching for confidence in future markets. If there was ever a time for policy intervention, it is now. Congress must safeguard the public interest regardless of pressures for payoffs in the oil patch.

This article was originially published in The Hill's Congress Blog.

About the Author

Deborah Gordon

Former Director and Senior Fellow, Energy and Climate Program

Gordon was director of Carnegie’s Energy and Climate Program, where her research focuses on oil and climate change issues in North America and globally.

    Recent Work

  • Article
    Petroleum Companies Need a Credible Climate Plan

      Deborah Gordon, Stephen D. Ziman

  • Article
    Advancing Public Climate Engineering Disclosure

      Deborah Gordon, Smriti Kumble, David Livingston

Deborah Gordon
Former Director and Senior Fellow, Energy and Climate Program
Deborah Gordon
Climate ChangeNorth AmericaUnited States

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

  • Pashinyan shaking hands
    Commentary
    Emissary
    At Stake in Armenia’s Election: Peace and Russian Influence

    Regardless of the outcome, there’s another path to ensuring that progress doesn’t stall.

      Zaur Shiriyev

  • Commentary
    Emissary
    Trump and Xi Are Angling for Three Years of Stability

    But their "principal to principal" model will only be as effective as the political strength of each leader back home.

      • Damien Ma

      Damien Ma

  • Commentary
    Strategic Europe
    Europe Should Not Let Nuclear Nonproliferation Die

    Amid uncertainty caused by the Iran war, the global drive for nonproliferation has stalled. With Europe diplomatically marginalized and countries reassessing their nuclear options, efforts to curb the spread of nuclear weapons risk becoming irrelevant.

      • Jane Darby Menton

      Jane Darby Menton

  • Commentary
    Can Europe Compete with the United States and China?

    Between the United States’ market-driven approach and China's state-led industrial strategy, Europe is reckoning with how it can remain competitive in the global economy. But is Europe in danger of becoming a U.S. or China colony?

      Noah Barkin, Anu Bradford

  • Commentary
    Strategic Europe
    Trump Turns NATO into a Tool of Coercion

    The full list of humiliations Europe has endured since Donald Trump returned to the White House makes for grim reading. But Washington’s adversarial approach to its allies undermines its own power base.

      • Rym Momtaz

      Rym Momtaz

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Carnegie global logo, stacked
1779 Massachusetts Avenue NWWashington, DC, 20036-2103Phone: 202 483 7600
  • Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
  • Donate
  • Programs
  • Events
  • Blogs
  • Podcasts
  • Contact
  • Annual Reports
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
  • Government Resources
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.