Decades ago, a favourite rite of passage into summer-time fun was a trip to the Shand Dam for an ice-cream cone. Kids barely tall enough to peer into the glass case would choose flavours from numerous pails of ice cream buried deep in the frozen vault. We recall “tiger tail” as being the most exotic.
Not much has changed from those days since kids (and adults) still like ice cream. The cost doesn’t seem all that different either. But, as one American senior talked about ice cream on CNN this past Sunday, the price of gas actually influenced her decision to go out for a cone. Imagine that.
High prices have a surefire way of altering people’s habits. A smaller appetite for gas state-side has been partially responsible for the lowering of the crude price, according to American broadcasters. It seems reasonable then, that if efforts to conserve were meaningful, fuel prices would stabilize or ease off a little. Let’s not forget the environmental benefits of using less, too.
Much of last Sunday morning was spent mulling over this “gas price” business. We highly suspect the kind of logic of that American woman being conscious of the cost to get places will continue. In the near future the urge to save shopping excursions will probably heighten, and really, that is a very responsible way to deal with the economic hit that North Americans, particularly, have taken with rising crude prices.
Significant increases in fuel costs have most people monitoring their driving, whereas a year ago, little thought was given to hopping in the car at a moment’s notice. Now the cost to drive is a calculated equation of necessity over convenience.
While governments dither over which direction to head when it comes to developing renewable fuels there needs to be immediate programs that will curb consumption. Simply hoping consumers will drive less based on the economic squeeze hardly qualifies as proactive governance in such a sticky situation. Forcing car manufacturers to meet mileage targets years down the road does little to address today. All around us, costs are increasing.
Food has gone up, driven by increased fuel prices which affect crop input costs directly, but more insidious is the point that crop production for food now competes with bio-fuel production. Heating costs are set to rise substantially this fall, too. It stands to reason since we are dependent on petroleum as a base ingredient for so many consumer goods that, in turn, costs there will go up as well. That led us to think of proposals that would make a significant difference now – somewhere in the range of 10-15%.
Our primary idea involves reverting to a simpler time, before consumerism and 24 hour-convenience gripped the Canadian psyche and convinced us all that we need what we want now. Our proposal to take the pressure off fuel use is to revert to a six-day business week with Sundays off.
Business leaders will tell you that spreading business across seven days has not actually increased their sales. Sure the initial benefits of being the first to be open on Sunday drove the cash register, but after many years of seven-day convenience year round, the merits of an additional sale day per week are negligible. Competition for shopping dollars has led many merchants to further increase hours, offering late night shopping. Lost in that equation are small merchants, practically forced to open to meet customer need because another outlet is open.
While there will need to be an adjustment period for the government to register bona fide tourism-related businesses into a program, over time a marked decrease in retail traffic one day a week will ease the pressure on fuel consumption – and in the case of stores, electricity too.
It’s time Canadians slow their pace a little and get much needed time to wind down from the hectic pace that keeps everyone on the run.
