A few years ago, when I started paying attention to my diet, I found that drinking at least a liter of water a day kept my brain functioning better, and in the case of two liters a day, kept me from gaining weight. Where I was living, the tap water was unpalatable, so I made a habit of stopping at the Kwik-E-Mart and buying some bottled water for the road trip and the rest of my morning.

I’ve been a fan of recycling since I was a child, so none of my bottles ever got thrown away, but they hardly ever saw a second use. What I didn’t realize (and please forgive my lateness in arriving to this party) was how many of the Earth’s natural resources went into making, filling and then shipping each bottle so that I can buy it in the morning. Let me sum up: a lot.

Some alarming statistics from Wikipedia:

• The Pacific Institute estimates that producing the bottles for American consumption in 2006 required the equivalent of more than 17 million barrels of oil.
• Once the bottle is created and filled with water, large amounts of fossil fuel are expended delivering the water from its source to end user by means of ground transportation.
• If a container holds 1 litre it requires 3 to 5 litres of water in its manufacturing process

When people hear “petroleum,” we think “I use gas in my car”, but food costs and petroleum prices are so tightly knit. I am embarrassed that I never realized that before. If only to help reduce our dependency on oil (foreign or otherwise), I have stopped drinking bottled water.

My wife and I finally hooked up the water line to our refrigerator, which has a filter and a water dispenser (it was not an expensive refrigerator), and I started looking for a resuable mug for my water. I wanted something that could fit a liter, but I settled for the 32 oz. Eddie Bauer model in the picture over on the side. I found it at Target on one of our increasingly-consolidated shopping trips.

The mug cost about $16. The water line was at Lowe’s for $7. I imagine our water utility bill will be higher than it was, but annually, I bet I’ll still be saving money over $1.09 / day. More importantly, I’m helping reduce our need for oil. Please consider joining me in this effort.

A recent article on CNN Money described the woes of independent gas station owners. The increasing cost of a gallon of gasoline results in less profit thanks to the processing fees credit card companies charge the merchants. I can appreciate that doing business in this type of environment is tough.

With gas prices soaring to a national average of $3.76 Wednesday, according to motorist group AAA, those credit card fees add up to an average of 7.5 cents per gallon – taking away nearly 83% of gas stations’ fuel profits.

Most gas stations earn their bigger profits on items purchased in the attached convenience store and mechanic services. Gasoline is a loss leader. Everyone needs it, and many gas stations are willing to take even a slight loss on gas as long as they continue to make profits elsewhere.

The credit card companies don’t accept the blame. For example, Visa says the processing fee they charge their gas stations is set by the large oil companies.

The Electronic Payment Coalition (EPC), a group representing credit card networks and financial services organizations, said it’s impractical for card companies to negotiate with every single gas retailer. So, it said, gas station owners should put pressure on their parent oil companies to negotiate a better fee.

To compete, some gas stations are charging customers who use a credit card more than a customers who use cash. Apparently, they’ve found a way to avoid breaking the credit card companies’ rules by calling this a “cash discount” rather than a “credit premium.”

I don’t know what the real difference is, and the only effect it’s had on me is switching to another gas station. The main problem is when gas stations advertise their cash price without disclosing (until the nozzle is in your car) that you will be paying more if you use a credit card.

To help solve some of these problems, both for the consumer and the independent gas station owner, Congress is suggesting fixing the maximum rate that credit card companies can charge merchants to accept their cards through a bipartisan bill in the House, called the Credit Card Fair Fee Act. Congress will set up a committee who will define what rates the credit card companies can charge merchants.

Will this solve the problem or is it unnecessary meddling in a free(ish) market economy?

To help Americans pay for the increasing price of a gallon of gas, Hillary Clinton is suggesting a suspension of the 18.4 cent per gallon tax on gasoline and 24.4 cent per gallon tax on diesel from Memorial Day through Labor Day while enacting a “windfall profits” tax on the oil companies which have been making money hand over fist through out 21st century so far. John McCain is also in favor of a gas tax “holiday,” but Barack Obama calls this strategy pointless and possibly more harmful for the economy.

Obama figures that the gas tax holiday would save American consumers about 30 cents a day while underfunding the federal fund that pays for road improvements. And while we’re in an election year, Obama points out that Clinton and McCain’s positions are political posturing moves rather than good economic solutions.

Ignoring the fact that when a tax holiday is in practice, gas prices might simply rise to negate the savings and match what consumers are willing and able to pay, the 18.4 cent theoretical reduction in a gallon of gas will be almost invisible. With a gallon of gasoline around $3.60 for me here in New Jersey, this 5% discount doesn’t even bring the price down to its level from a few months ago.

Clinton suggests paying for the loss of government income by increasing windfall profits taxes for the oil industry. If there is a gas tax holiday, should oil companies pay for the loss of government income through taxes assessed for earning significant profits in this economy? I feel no pity for the large corporations, and I wouldn’t mind if their taxes increase. However, I don’t think this solution would improve the economy.

As a country, we seem to be willing to continue spending on gasoline no matter what the price, but perhaps that is only because we have little choice. If we stop driving, we stop going to work, earning money, and feeding our families. We’re ready to spend as much on gasoline as necessary to continue our lives, giving oil companies the freedom to keep pushing prices upwards.

The oil industry obviously is not happy about the idea that their profits could be taxed, claiming that taxes would eat into available capital for new production, but their profits are mostly used for buying back stock rather than research and development.

Rather than Clinton’s plan to tax oil companies, McCain wants to freeze or cut spending to pay for the gas tax holiday. Obama thinks these suggestions sound nice to voters but would have little real effect. What do you think?

Photo credit: x-eyedblonde
Obama attacks Clinton’s gas tax plan [AP]
McCain calls for a summer ‘gas-tax holiday’ [AP]
Taxing oil profits: Proceed with caution [CNN Money]