Does that include biodiesel, or does it have to be petro?

Because they can.

Some industry mouthpiece can probably regurgitate a scrupulously-memorized litany of reasonable answers. Some of them might even bear a resemblance to fact. But, at the end of the day, it's about what sellers can get away with, also known as unfettered, or maybe "under-fettered," capitalism.

Go USA.

It's trucks and buses, who have God knows what deals worked out with God knows what suppliers (and may even be owned by the same holding company). Good point.

or gets subsidised more.

In the UK, petrol and diesel have the same tax per litre (before Value Added Tax, which goes on the whole amount), but diesel comes out about 5p per litre more: http://www.petrolprices.com/the-price-of-fuel.html (which would be about 25 cents more per US gallon, before the VAT).

Because diesel has slightly more carbon in it per litre (larger hydrocarbon molecules, and about 12% denser), it actually produces a bit more carbon dioxide per litre - 2.7kg, compared to 2.3kg for petrol/gasoline: http://www.environment.gov.au/settlements/transport/fuelguide/environment.html

However, it gets better fuel economy. Some countries tax it less/subsidise it more, to encourage its use, I guess. I think fuel ought to be taxed according to carbon content, myself.

to tax fuels on the basis of carbon emissions per mile, than on overall carbon content (since diesel engines are more efficient; this table indicates that, allowing for 4.5 megajoules per mile, diesel is very slightly less carbon-emitting than petrol; 327 grams of CO² per mile for diesel, 328 grams per mile for petrol) while emitting much more CO² per litre.

4.5 MJ/mile is a fairly arbitrary figure for what a 'typical' car uses; as that says in a footnote, "diesel engines run at higher compression ratio than petrol engines and therefore are typically more efficient", and by more than the 36.4 mpg/32.5 mpg ratio the 4.5 MJ/mile represents. In practice, different cars get different economies.

The point is that the pollution is the total amount of CO2 that ends up in the air; when that came from a thirsty car going 10 miles, or an economic one 20 miles, it's the same damage done if it's the same mass of CO2. So you measure the amount of carbon in the type of fuel, and since liquid fuel is most easily metered by volume, that's what you then express the fuel tax in.

IE the Fischer-Topp process, where coal is converted to diesel fuel.

The Germans perfected it in WWII to supply fuel for their tanks, not because it was cheaper but because it's all they had. The Allies and Russians had cut their access to conventional oil fields. The Battle of the Bulge was in large part a desperate run to take a prized oil field because they had so little fuel left, and was lost because the Nazis ran out of fuel before they could route out the Americans.

Theoretically, the US could do that as well, but it would be more expensive and incredibly damaging to the environment (more so than oil extraction already is).

Time and money to process..."Low Sulfer" diesel for US auto consumption so they are charging more...

But then when you go take a look at it taking 3 processes to make low sulfer diesel compared to 13-23 processes to make gasoline varieties I go back to calling BS...

So I guess the only answer is...because no one has the money and power to go after the Big Oil refineries and force them to clean up, automate and stop lying and gouging the American Public.

You can adjust refining to change how much of each is produced, but not by a lot.

The US has a very large trucking industry that uses diesel. Diesel is also the product that is used in residential oil burners for heating.

When gas prices skyrocketed to almost $5/gal (where I live, I know it got over that in some other states), diesel went up with it. A lot of old farm tractors ran on diesel, as well as some construction machinery, like dozers, front end loaders, road graders and dump trucks. My big trailer mounted generator/welder ran on diesel, as did a lot of old back-up emergency generators.

There were also some automobiles that ran on diesel, mainly some Volkswagens and Mercedes-Benzes. Ford and Dodge made some work trucks/ farming trucks that ran on diesel. They weren't much to look at, but they had a LOT of power for pulling. Then, like what happened with Harley-Davidsons when the "bad-boy" rockers started tricking them out and making show bikes out of them, and people like Malcom Forbes and some other millionaires started riding these customized, chromed out, decked out Harleys they became the "in" thing to have, the newest fad/craze. Everyone had to have one! This caused the prices to skyrocket, where they had once been seen as a scourge associated with "vicious, drug dealing biker gangs". You used to be able to buy a "basket case" Harley for about $250, spend a winter putting it back together, fixing it up, get a paint job.. *maybe* have about $800 to $1000 in it and have a damned nice bike. Now you can't find a basket case for less than 3 grand if you're lucky.

Anyways, back on point, we had people starting to ask dealers to add more options to the diesel work trucks to make them look a little better when they went into town and stuff, and that's how we got to these big $50,000-$60,000 F-350s with dually rear ends that were all fancy, with leather seats, custom paint jobs, etc., etc., and people driving them because the fuel was so much cheaper.

Of course, we also had all these 18 wheelers that delivered our food, and just about every other commodity, from the farms and the ports to where they needed to be. Once the diesel prices were up above the price of even premium gas, it stayed there. I personally think it was an effort to push the independent truckers off the road and give more business to the Fleet Giants, like J.B. Hunt, Roadway and a couple other corporations that owned thousands of trucks and ran hubs in just about every major city across the Nation. Thousands of independent truckers were put out of business, because they couldn't bear the cost of the higher fuel prices and were losing money. They wound up parking, or selling, their trucks and going to work for the big corporations just to make a living.

Let's not forget all the major cities with their diesel powered mass transit busses, either. Higher fuel costs meant passing that cost on to the users with higher fare prices. Anything these giant corporations could do to suck more money out of the little people, the working class people, they did it.... and laughed all the way to the bank!

But that's just MY opinion....

Ghost