Gas Prices

[-V-]

So, as all of you are propably aware, now-a-days each time you go to get gas, an event resembling a prison gang rape happens, concerning your wallet.

While this sucks, royally, this may also be a good wakeup call that we may need to seriosly consider switching to an alternate fuel source.

Now a days, the most popular contendors seem to be Hydrogen and Electric cars, albeit bio-fuels also seem as a very viable alternative too.

Discuss.

[Daffy]

If we are able to harness Hydrogen energy in a cost effective way, we would be all set. In chemistry class one of the charts showed how much energy is produced in gasoline, hydrogen, etc, and hydrogen easily surpassed gasoline. Not sure if it was true or not, I haven't read anything about it cept in my chem book last year.

[-V-]

The main problem with hydrogen right now is the difficulty in storing enough of it to equal the range of one tank gasoline.

From what I remember of reading in Popular Science or some such, fairly lay-man's, scientific journal is that a lot of reserch in the field of Hydrogen powered cars is going into discovering more compact ways to store it. I believe even with the most advanced metal-compound that they have come up with, you will only get 1/2 the range of a Gas-powered car unless you wish to have a huge tank on your roof, causing your car to resemble the Wiener-Mobile.

However, it is not out of the realm of the possible that they may come up with better compounds to compact hydrogen in, nor of better layouts to not have the single huge tank.

[Daywalker]

I think bio-fuels like ethanol will in the short term be used to augment gas. For example ethanol and gasoline mixes already being used at some stations. This will extend our gas supply until a hydrogen or electric cars become more viable.

[siddy]

i believe cananda is supposed to have 10% biofuels in their gasoline by 2008.

I was watching an interesting segment, i belive it was on daily planet on the discovery channel...

anywho, what the segment was talking about was using wind turbines to seperate the hydrogen from water...apparently this 30 ft high windmill could create enough hydrogen for 6 cars to fill up every 24h.

[Glock23]

Hydrogen requires a ton of energy with current methods to obtain any amount; more energy than that required to make gasoline in the first place. Hydrogen is only a fuel storing medium because of its high energy costs. Moving to a strictly hydrogen fuel transportation economy is not the way to reduce dependence on foreign oil or oil in general because more oil will be needed to make enough hydrogen to supply everyone. Besides, gasoline may cost a lot here in the US, but it costs more elsewhere, something like $2 more on average.

Thus, as of right now, hydrogen is not a viable as a fuel. Fuel cells might make it possible, but only if they can be made cost effective (to use and produce), reliable, and safe.

Gasoline is NOT the primary energy concern when it comes to the United States. It's only the most visible. What all the cars burn in a day to drive all the miles they drive is a drop in the bucket compared to what the US, and world, economies use per day to fuel themselves and furnish you with all the little doo-dads and knick-knacks you need to survive.

Imagine the world, tomorrow, without any new plastic products; there's something for you to worry about if (and when) an oil crash starts to happen. And that's just the beginning.

[Daywalker]

I thought most plastics were synthetic and not made from oil and oil related stuff.

[Locke]

Im glad gas is only 2.5399 here.....and my tank takes 50 bucks to fill.

[KillerChiaPet]

Hydrogen is a really clean-burning fuel though: the exhaust is mostly water vapor.

Arizona tried an Alt. Fuels campaign but it failed miserably. We do have a Chevy Tahoe that can run on either gasoline or Compressed Natural Gas (CNG). They also have them that can run on propane.

[[Political] Slayer]

$2.46 here, 40 gallon gas tank.... I can't wait to fill it on friday:( I'm just waiting for them to start selling gasahol again, or get rid of the gas tax. Up here cheap gas=more tourists=good economy, expensive gas=less tourists=shitty economy.

[Memorex]

I don't own a car, but I own a boat and I frequently fill up the tank at the local gas dock, the prices are insane! For essentially the same fuel a car would use, I run a gas engine, I pay around $2.60, buy sometimes it gets above $3.00 :\.. Alternative Fuel Source !11

[Daywalker]

I don't own a car, but I own a boat and I frequently fill up the tank at the local gas dock, the prices are insane! For essentially the same fuel a car would use, I run a gas engine, I pay around $2.60, buy sometimes it gets above $3.00 :\.. Alternative Fuel Source !11


No offense but, way to go dumbass. They always, ALWAYS fuck you at the dock. Fill up at a gas station on the way there, or if it is always in the water, I'd fill gas cans and bring them. It'll save you lots of money.

[[Political] Slayer]

I don't own a car, but I own a boat and I frequently fill up the tank at the local gas dock, the prices are insane! For essentially the same fuel a car would use, I run a gas engine, I pay around $2.60, buy sometimes it gets above $3.00 :\.. Alternative Fuel Source !11
That is why most of the lobstermen down here use diesel. Gas is $2.59 a gallon, while diesel is only $2.25, even though it was $.89 only 5 or 6 years ago down here.

[-V-]

Fun fact: You can make synthetic oil by pressurizing carbon and hydrogen at high temperature and pressure. If done on a commercial scale it could satisfy industrial gas needs. Further refinment of it could make it more efficent and cheaper, sort of like the process that makes ammonia from air.

[GrosPoisson]

Fun fact: You can make synthetic oil by pressurizing carbon and hydrogen at high temperature and pressure. If done on a commercial scale it could satisfy industrial gas needs. Further refinment of it could make it more efficent and cheaper, sort of like the process that makes ammonia from air.

The Haber Process by any chance? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haber_process)

Hydrogen sounds good, but yeah, the main problem is getting enough energy from another source to make the stuff. I read an interesting article in Technology Review a while back that mentioned a new kind of solar power. Basically, instead of using the sun to shine on photoelectric cells and generate electricity directly, the idea was to use parabolic reflectors and heat up a large pipe. The pipe would be connected to a traditional water and steam turbine system.

The main trick was in the contents of the pipe. The idea was to put sodium (Na) inside of it. The reflectors would generate so much heat on the pipe that it would melt the sodium and turn it into molten, liquid sodium. According to Wikipedia, the boiling point of sodium is 883 C (1621 F). Molten sodium was thought to be a good choice because it would retain it's heat from the parabolic reflectors well, and solve the traditional problem of clouds and solar energy.

I believe they have a working prototype system out in the Arizona or New Mexico desert. Sounds like an idea worth checking out.

[marty]

Prices skyrocketed here in the 3 weeks. Started out as 2.15 for regular. 2.55/gallon to fill up today. Jesus. It was 2.45 yesterday.

[Daywalker]

GM has some hydrogen powered car research plant thing in like Honeyoye Falls or something, some place around Rochester. Allegedly, the military is interested. I think its a Chevy Silverado that uses hydrogen.

[MattW]

Stupid fuel prices are always changing around here. The other day for regular gas it was $2.20 and today it was $2.35. Right now for me to fill up my truck it would cost me $86.95. good thing I get 16 mpg. I remember reading a article a while ago about gas prices. and it said that South America, Alaska, and Russia individually held more oil then the whole Middle East. I wished we could find some other country that could keep up with the worlds demands besides the Middle East.


Did anybody read the article on gas prices at howstuffworks.com? Heres the link if anybody is interested.

http://money.howstuffworks.com/gas-price.htm

[GoatChomper]

I remember reading a article a while ago about gas prices. and it said that South America, Alaska, and Russia individually held more oil then the whole Middle East.
Maybe, if you can beleive an oilman. You can always tell when an oilman is likely to lie.....is he breathing?

The main problem with using oil from those sources is twofold.....firstly, the oil from those regions tends to be heavily-sulfered and much more expensive (and giving lesser end yields at the cracking unit) than the "light, sweet" crude prevalent in the Middle East, or heavily laden with water and gas and other contaminants that have to be removed.

The other is (especially in the case of Siberian petroleum) that much of that reserve lies at depths excruciatingly expensive to exploit with current technologies.

[FaKToR]

Hydrogen isn't a replacement for gas, it's just a storage medium. You still need energy to use it, which we would need to remedy. Ethanol requires oil to be produced and currently I think production of ethanol results in less than a gallon of ethanol for one gallon of oil put in.

[nojmaster]

You think you got it bad, we're nearing £1 a litre in the UK, do the math :eek:
One point that needs looking at is the economy of the larger engined cars prevalent in the US (and spreading to the UK, I keep seeing more 4x4's on the road), such as SUV's. I love big, loud and fast cars as much as the next red-blooded beer drinking male, but the rate at which they drink petrol is a contributing factor to declining supplies and thus increased prices.

[-V-]

Use a gallon of oil to make a .9 gallons of ethanol?My grand-pappy can make a gallon of ethanol from a pack of yeast and a bag 'o suggar!

All silliness aside, I understand what you mean in that it will require more energy put in then will be gotten back out. However that may not be such a big hurtle as it really seems if you use an organic starting point and a bio-reactor to synthasize the actual ethanol, or methanol. Then the rest of the energy needed to extract (see distill) the fuel out can come from other fuel sources such as coal, nuclear or hydro-electric.

Other stuff that you can ferment is methane. Nice thing with methane is its propably easier to transform it into a hydrocarbon polymer then strait-up carbon and hydrogen.

[Daywalker]

You think you got it bad, we're nearing £1 a litre in the UK, do the math :eek:
One point that needs looking at is the economy of the larger engined cars prevalent in the US (and spreading to the UK, I keep seeing more 4x4's on the road), such as SUV's. I love big, loud and fast cars as much as the next red-blooded beer drinking male, but the rate at which they drink petrol is a contributing factor to declining supplies and thus increased prices.


I agree, it seems like they are just getting carried away with the whole thing.

[[Political] Slayer]

You think you got it bad, we're nearing £1 a litre in the UK, do the math :eek:
One point that needs looking at is the economy of the larger engined cars prevalent in the US (and spreading to the UK, I keep seeing more 4x4's on the road), such as SUV's. I love big, loud and fast cars as much as the next red-blooded beer drinking male, but the rate at which they drink petrol is a contributing factor to declining supplies and thus increased prices.

Well jesus christ, if 78% of your gas price wasn't tax, it wouldn't be so much. I think this is what we should do to consume less gas and lower gas prices: Not require a catalytic converter, all it does is suck power and fuel economy, who cares about a little extra pollution, and get rid of the gas tax. My states economy depends on people travelling here, and noone is travelling when gas is $2.50 a gallon.

[vecdran]

You think you got it bad, we're nearing £1 a litre in the UK, do the math :eek:
One point that needs looking at is the economy of the larger engined cars prevalent in the US (and spreading to the UK, I keep seeing more 4x4's on the road), such as SUV's. I love big, loud and fast cars as much as the next red-blooded beer drinking male, but the rate at which they drink petrol is a contributing factor to declining supplies and thus increased prices.

I'm with you on this one, not only do they got horrible MPG, but a lot of the people who drive such vehicles get into the "I'm big and invincible" mindset. I can't count how many times I've had bimbo soccer moms on their cell phone in their iced out Suburban try to merge into my car.

[-V-]

You know, with SUV's they should just re-classify them as Trucks and require having a truck license to drive them. That alone should propably cut the US's consumption of gas in half...

[GrosPoisson]

They should axe that crazy "SUVs count as trucks because they weigh a certain amount loophole" that small business owners exploit all the time. Only thing that does is allow people to write off big honking vehicles that they can later sell for a profit and artificially buoy up the American car industry instead of letting them suffer (more) and make decent cars for the rest of us.

[Toastar]

at least in ontario its by weight

[Daywalker]

I'm with you on this one, not only do they got horrible MPG, but a lot of the people who drive such vehicles get into the "I'm big and invincible" mindset. I can't count how many times I've had bimbo soccer moms on their cell phone in their iced out Suburban try to merge into my car.

I hate people who use their cell phones driving, the fucker sits outside of the entrance to the carwash, we try to wave her in, but the dumb bitch is yakking away about her period or the newest vaccum cleaner, that she doesn't look up. Then she can't fucking get the wheel into the track, and is all like "WTF I suck at driving, but I'm trying to aim my wheel into an area that just has about an inch clearance on both sides of my monster fucking wheels that I need for the off roading I do when I have to park on the lawn at little billy's birthday party, those damn employees need to make it easier for me becuase I can't stand not being connected for 2 minutes." Fucking assholes.

Honestly though, there are people that don't need these things. I understand some people have reasons, but most just do it becuase they need all the room for their fat asses or because they are pompus douchebags that need the giant excursion to show everyone how successful they are. If you are going to own an SUV atleast do it for a reason.

[knute]

Happiest news ever (http://www.autoblog.com/entry/1234000973051590/).

[-V-]

Heck, perhaps with today's gas prices all those stupid soccer moms will wisen up, when they notice they don't have nearly as much of their husband's cash to buy useless rags with since they are throwing down $80-$90 at the pump every 5 days thanks to their 5 gallons per mile Hummer H4 that they are driving.

/vent.

[Reef]

I'm betting on fusion.

http://www.iter.org/

[Agent Law]

An interesting way to create hydrogen from water is to use existing power plants for electrolysis during off-peak hours. Places like wind farms, hydroelectric dams and nuclear power stations could be used since they run 24/7 (nuclear reactors are more efficient if they run continuously). The majority of that energy isn't being used during the night, and that could be put to work. The electric company may even benefit from selling hydrogen.

[kreket]

You think you got it bad, we're nearing £1 a litre in the UK, do the math :eek:


Pff... You're nearing the levels where I live.

On the other hand, the people here do have a bunchload of money and damned steep prices on any and everything.

[Bone_Vulture]

"World running out of time for oil alternatives" by Yahoo News (http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20050818/sc_nm/energy_dutch_ecn_dc)

Ton Hoff, manager of the Energy Research Center of the Netherlands, said it could take decades to make alternatives affordable to the point where they can be used widely, although high oil prices were already stimulating such research.

"If we run out of fossil fuels -- by the time the oil price hits 100 dollars or plus, people will be screaming for alternatives, but whether they will be available at that moment of time -- that's my biggest worry," Hoff said.

Wow, finally someone else has figured that out as well.

[Daywalker]

are there any diesel/electric hybrid cars on the market? You could convert it to be a grease car and have a highly efficent vehicle that doesn't use gas.

[-V-]

No, but disel is one of the products refined from oil.

On grease-powered cars: I know some multi-engine disels, mainly for battle-tanks and other military equipment, can run on more or less anything combustible, be it JP-7 jet fuel, Disel, Grease, Parafin, hell Dead Bodies if you can get them to feed through the fuel system, but outside of military applications I have never heard of a multi-fuel engine.

I would say once oil hits $100 a barrel, your going to at first see a lot of electric cars, but that may trail off and the slack picked up by alternate fuels, or heck maybey electrics will stick (although I hope not).

[Daywalker]

I know disel comes from oil. What I was getting at is, disiel engines can be converted rather simpily to run on grease(http://www.greasecar.com). If it was a disiel electric hybrid, then you'd be able to get more miles out of the grease, making it so you might not have to buy gas again.

[BattleWhack]

I'm all about having an alternate fuel source. As long as my '68 V8 engine can run it.

[BlindSite]

The problem with getting an alternative fuel source is that it is going to be exceptionally difficult to simply say out with the old in with the new. Almost every single mechanic is going to have to retrain. The same for refineries and logistical aspects of the feul companies that currently have the infrastructure and systems in place that would be needed to undertake such a task.

[Daywalker]

I saw somewhere Sony or someone made a rapid recharge battery, that'll get half its charge in like half a second and full in a minute. Even though this is for laptops and cellphones, I think its an important break through. If they could get that technology into big batteries that could be used in electric cars it would greatly help electrics.

[-V-]

Well battery size, I don't think, is really that much an issue, since if you can make it work, its a fairly easy task to scale it up. Interesting though, do you have any links?

[Bone_Vulture]

I saw somewhere Sony or someone made a rapid recharge battery, that'll get half its charge in like half a second and full in a minute. Even though this is for laptops and cellphones, I think its an important break through. If they could get that technology into big batteries that could be used in electric cars it would greatly help electrics.

Issues:

Waste burden of each battery - scaled with size?
Lifespan?
Wouldn't you need a huge high voltage cable to feed a car battery that much energy that fast?

[BlindSite]

Not only that but what'll the power input cause, usage and production of power wise.

[Daywalker]

http://www.worldchanging.com/archives/002435.html

[-V-]

Quite interesting!

Issues:

Waste burden of each battery - scaled with size?

Not much, with batteries, the bigger they are the more stuff the hold, and since its similar to the currently avalible Lithium-Polymer batteries, Amp-per-gram ratio is a lot higher then a Pb-H+ battery. (Think molecular weight here)

Lifespan?

They report that the batteries loose only 1% compacity per 1,000 charge cycles. Whereas Li-Po batteries loose 80% or more after 500.

Wouldn't you need a huge high voltage cable to feed a car battery that much energy that fast?
Not really much an issue if you ask me. Just a thick cable, nothing really that exeptional about such a thing, if you ask me.

[Daywalker]

The article I found, toshiba is actually thinking about hybrids with the batteries.

[Modest Genius]

Not really much an issue if you ask me. Just a thick cable, nothing really that exeptional about such a thing, if you ask me.so, but a grib that supports drawing that amount of current wouldnt be simple. its not like you could plug that in at home, it would blow all the fuses, no matter how big a cable you got

[theMIKKO]

so, but a grib that supports drawing that amount of current wouldnt be simple. its not like you could plug that in at home, it would blow all the fuses, no matter how big a cable you got

That's not a problem at all. It only takes a handful of basic components to make a recharger that keeps the recharging current stable and within predefined limits.

[Modest Genius]

sure, i was merely pointing out the flaw in his argument

besides, having a huge arse capacitor like that sitting around isnt very safe, and would need to be shielded to prevent interfering with electrical equipment. and the losses through eddies on such a big capacitor could be quite large, even large enough to require a specialised grid (like petrol stations) as i suggested

[Paluch]

Problem with running methanol or Ethanol is that your gas milage will be worse. The stoichometric mixture for enthanol/methanol is much richer than gasolines 14.7:1 air fuel ratio. You're looking at about a 6.8:1 air fuel ratio. Much richer meaning you need to use more to get the same power. Plus you will use more energy to make ethanol than you get from it. IMO I dont think its very efficient.

Someone made a comment about getting rid of catalytic converters in the cars. Blame it on the 70%+ of Nitrogen in our air and the fact that cars dont burn all the hydrocarbons. This is what the cat does. Gets rid of these pollutants, because when you burn hydrocarbons the result is alot of NOx and unburned hydrocarbons. The NOx is a result of high combustion temperatues. The unburned hydrocarbons we shouldnt worry so much about, its the NOx that we should worry about. Automobiles give out a lot of these gasses, multiply this by the millions of cars on the road and you see why there are smog days.

Switching to hydrogen doesnt solve this problem, because there is still nitrogen in the air. In order to reduce the NOx in cars with hydrogen you need to lean out the mixture because hydrogen burns cooler when its lean. The stoichometric air fuel ratio for H2 is 34:1, in order to burn hydrogen with little to no NOx emissions you need a ratio of about 80:1. Much leaner, the downside is you make much less power at this airfuel ratio. Although, hydrogen is probly the best solution to fuel cars if we can make it on demand from water. That way we can inject the oxygen aswell to reduce the amount of NOx emissions and yeild the same amount or even more power! Its something I am trying to work on now, i mentioned it in a thread on the Fa forums.

In regards to the synthetic hydrocarbons, those require a lot of energy to make. In order to get to, the proper temperatures and pressure you will probly use a lot more energy than you get. I think this method would be suitable for oils and lubracants.

I saw a post on fusion, that is the only promissing source of energy right now, if they can get it right. The problem is containing the reaction (H + H + 4e = He)(i forgot the equation :E). A hydrogen bomb is an example of fusion, so trying to contain that is somewhat of a challange. Although reading that site, it looks like they'll get it figured out by 2016. The cool thing about fusion is that, the result amount of energy is more than what was needed to put the 2 atoms together.


Sry if something doesnt make sense, i'm pretty tired.

[Agent Law]

The problem with fusion right now is it doesn't break even (generate the same amount of energy as it took to start the reaction), it's way below that. That is, the one in reactors. Thermonuclear devices is simpler because it uses the nuclear fission of the uranium or plutonium to create the temperature and pressure necessary to cause the tritium to fuse.

The reaction is deuterium + tritium = helium-4 + n + energy (A D-D reaction would yield helium-3 + n + energy, I don't know why).

[-V-]

Problem with running methanol or Ethanol is that your gas milage will be worse. The stoichometric mixture for enthanol/methanol is much richer than gasolines 14.7:1 air fuel ratio. You're looking at about a 6.8:1 air fuel ratio. Much richer meaning you need to use more to get the same power. Plus you will use more energy to make ethanol than you get from it. IMO I dont think its very efficient.

Well, with meth/ethanol versus gas, the big upside is that you can renew your supply of this fuel. While it will, no doubt, use more energy to create, then it will contain, I really do not see this as much of a problem. I guess it would be less efficent then oil-refining today but unlike oil, the supply of wood and wheat is not going to run out any time soon. Furthermore even if it does get worse fuel mileage, I think that's ok, since it is renewable, and when the oil-squeez comes, the advantages of renewable source of fuel that does not 'run out' or subject to extreme price fluctuations will outweigh it's disadvantages. Plus coupled with hybdrid technology, I really don't see much of a problem.

That and the air-fuel ratio's dont tell me much, sorry. Just don't know what exactly they mean. I'm a biologist, not an engineer.

Switching to hydrogen doesnt solve this problem, because there is still nitrogen in the air. In order to reduce the NOx in cars with hydrogen you need to lean out the mixture because hydrogen burns cooler when its lean. The stoichometric air fuel ratio for H2 is 34:1, in order to burn hydrogen with little to no NOx emissions you need a ratio of about 80:1. Much leaner, the downside is you make much less power at this airfuel ratio. Although, hydrogen is probly the best solution to fuel cars if we can make it on demand from water. That way we can inject the oxygen aswell to reduce the amount of NOx emissions and yeild the same amount or even more power! Its something I am trying to work on now, i mentioned it in a thread on the Fa forums.
Well another use for hydrogen in cars is through fuel cells. I personally don't hold much faith in this technology as right now it is too expensive and seems to yeild too little power to be practical. Not to mention you still have the trouble of storing hydrogen efficently since it does not like being compressed much.

In regards to the synthetic hydrocarbons, those require a lot of energy to make. In order to get to, the proper temperatures and pressure you will probly use a lot more energy than you get. I think this method would be suitable for oils and lubracants.
Well this suggestion was more aimed at the fuel-independent economy. There is no denying that in our day and age we are extreamley dependent on plastics. However, the downside is that they are made from oil, and if/when it runs out, what will we use to manufacture plastics, or what if we want to manufacture plastics on somewhere that doesn't have a ready access to oil.

Also more correction on hydrogen/fusion bombs. The amusing thing about them, is that a lot of their blast does not come from the fusion reaction itself. Its an interesting design in that it uses a fission reaction to start a fusion reaction which in turn fuels a much larger fission reaction.

[[Political] Slayer]

the advantages of renewable source of fuel that does not 'run out' or subject to extreme price fluctuations will outweigh it's disadvantages. Plus coupled with hybdrid technology, I really don't see much of a problem.

Yeah, prices that don't fluctuate would be nice. Shit, I wouldn't mind paying $2.50 a gallon if it just stayed that price, not skyrockets, then drops, then skyrockets, then drops, and so on, and so on.

[Modest Genius]

incidentally, a form of fusion known as 'inertial confinement fusion' CAN break even, in a laboratory. only problem with it is that it costs a shitload to make the equipment, and then you get a very low power out. its positive, but nowhere near enough for a power station

good thing about fusion would be that it could vastly improve the possibilities for electric cars, which then use rechargable fuel cells

[Kuken]

Slayer']That is why most of the lobstermen down here use diesel. Gas is $2.59 a gallon, while diesel is only $2.25, even though it was $.89 only 5 or 6 years ago down here.


here in sweden we steal the diesel from farms and other industrys that uses diesel :D

[Memorex]

Meh, ya I get plugged in the ass by the Dock gas, but It's soo much easier.. I guess I'm just lazy.

[-V-]

The article I found, toshiba is actually thinking about hybrids with the batteries.

Hybrids already have batteries in 'em. Would propably make hybrids more efficent though.

[psycho chicken]

Get rid of cats because they suck power? Yeah, about 3kw TOPS.

[-V-]

what??? How does a feline suck power?

[psycho chicken]

Catalytic converter.

[Captain Colon]

You think you got it bad, we're nearing £1 a litre in the UK, do the math :eek:
At least you guys drive efficient cars over there :o There's a lot more 1.6l cars and small motorcycles/scooters in europe than here.

My bike gets about double the gas mileage of the average american sedan, even when ridden hard (in which case it'll still beat the piss out of most V8 10mpg monsters driven by people who can't shift). But of course for the average american, a motorcycle is "too dangerous" or "too hooligan" and a scooter is "too gay," better buy a big SUV with huge blind spots instead! :mad:

Summary: IMO, while alternative fuel sources are important in the long run, a better solution for the next 10-20 years is to just crack down on large, inefficient vehicles, particularly the SUV weight loophole. Not only would this reduce consumption and emissions, but it would most likely result in less traffic accidents and less deaths resulting from a giant suv plowing through someone's civic.

[-V-]

Ah, gotcha.

[Modest Genius]

having a car of less than 30mpg should be a crime, punishable by higher road tax/ fuel duty

only my opinion mind

[[Political] Slayer]

well, pretty much all of our vehicles would not fit that standard. Shit, Maine wanted to pass an emissions thing for inspections, and it took 2/3 of the cars off the road, so they ditched that.

[knute]

having a car of less than 30mpg should be a crime, punishable by higher road tax/ fuel duty

only my opinion mind

It is a crime, punishable by higher fuel costs. Isn't capitalism great?

[Daywalker]

Hybrids already have batteries in 'em. Would propably make hybrids more efficent though.

Yea, I know hybrids already have battereies, but the current batteries aren't as efficent. I guess alot of electricity is wasted because the batteries can't store it since its too much too fast I guess.


The problem with driving motorcycles now is, the SUVs and the general attitude towards driving. Untill people take it more seriously, its too dangerous for most people to consider riding a motorcycle. The same thing with small cars. We got people driving around in 2 tons of steel, that don't even pay attention to the road. Some things people put on their SUVs to make them look more "manly" are really bad in crashes, push guards are a big one. It makes it a lot easier for an SUV to literally run over smaller cars.

[Agent Law]

Slayer']Shit, Maine wanted to pass an emissions thing for inspections, and it took 2/3 of the cars off the road, so they ditched that.
There's something like that here in B.C. You have to go for emissions checking once in a while to see if your car passes certification.

[Violin]

Why does gas keep raising so high in price? They are literally gouging us now. By the end of the year it is prolly going to be 3 dollars per gallon in the USA. I hear other counties have to pay something to the equivalent of 4 USA dollars per gallon.

Where does this money go?

Why does it raise in price?

How much gas do we have left on this earth?

And are we developing new technology to use differnt types of fuel for our cars?

[GoatChomper]

Summary: IMO, while alternative fuel sources are important in the long run, a better solution for the next 10-20 years is to just crack down on large, inefficient vehicles, particularly the SUV weight loophole. Not only would this reduce consumption and emissions, but it would most likely result in less traffic accidents and less deaths resulting from a giant suv plowing through someone's civic.
Offset by a rise in deaths among people who previously had been driving those more-crashworthy SUVs.

[Modest Genius]

Offset by a rise in deaths among people who previously had been driving those more-crashworthy SUVs.
goat, more people are killed in accidents involving SUVs than those which dont, mostly because the SUV ends up falttening a smaller car. so taking all the SUVs off the road would result in LESS deaths in accidents

the only way SUVs would be good for safety would be if a majority used them

[Daywalker]

Offset by a rise in deaths among people who previously had been driving those more-crashworthy SUVs.


WRONG WRONG WRONG, cars are very crash worthy, but being hit by something much larger than it of course there is going to be fatalities. If a car v. car would be much better than SUV v. SUV.

[GoatChomper]

Whoa, wait a minute and look at what you're saying.....you're claiming that you can ram your SUV and non-SUV into another vehicle with equal impunity.

Wrong.

[knute]

Well...I think SUVs are more dangerous, accident-wise, but like everyone else, I'm too lazy to look up the stats.
a) SUVs are big and less maneuverable; hence less likely to avoid an accident. They also oftentimes have longer braking distances; hence more likely to be in an accident.
b) SUVs are big and more likely to roll over, which makes any crash more dangerous.
c) SUVs, like trucks, are built on rigid ladder frames (except for the car-based SUVs, which are just glorified minivans) which don't crush in an accident to absorb energy. Hence more of the impact impulse is transferred to the occupants, which is bad.

[Daywalker]

You claimed SUVs are more crashworthy, which they are not. SUVs have a higher rate of fatalities in single car accidents. All I'm saying is the weight advantage and height with the option of push guards and the like, give a false sense of security. Sure an SUV will beat the piss out of a car, but thats only because its got the weight and height advantage.

Mid-sized cars on the other hand, fair better in crash against something its own size than an SUV would against something its own size. The only reason why cars aren't seen as safe vehicles compared to SUVs is becuase when in a car you are more likely to hit something smaller than you in an SUV, but in a car you are hitting something bigger.

[psycho chicken]

Why does gas keep raising so high in price? They are literally gouging us now. By the end of the year it is prolly going to be 3 dollars per gallon in the USA. I hear other counties have to pay something to the equivalent of 4 USA dollars per gallon.

Where does this money go?

Why does it raise in price?

How much gas do we have left on this earth?

And are we developing new technology to use differnt types of fuel for our cars?

The simple answer - there's too much demand for supply.

Now we have crap loads left, but they only sell so much of what they produce, so they can build up a stockpile and still be making money off oil for a long time to come. This was all dandy for the last few years as supply and demand were pretty much the same.

However, the last year or so, China and India have upped their demand. They can afford to pay more for it, so they do, sending the price sky high. Chinese demand is set to drop off in the fourth quarter of this year, so the price per barrel may level out, might even drop. If that is transfered to the pump, who knows.

China is also trying to set up a refinery, that might knock off demand from OPEC.

I'm pretty sure we're still under the early 1980's prices once you factor inflation. Only just though.

I'm not fussed, fuel prices will always go up and down. If I was worried about it I wouldn't be driving a carbied 351 CI V8 would I?

[GoatChomper]

I'm pretty sure we're still under the early 1980's prices once you factor inflation. Only just though.
Still way, way under.....factoring inflation, the current price-per-barrel would have to hit $91.00 to match the 1981 peak price.

[Captain Colon]

goat, more people are killed in accidents involving SUVs than those which dont, mostly because the SUV ends up falttening a smaller car. so taking all the SUVs off the road would result in LESS deaths in accidents
Plus the threat of imminent death would force most people to not drive like fucking idiots.
Whoa, wait a minute and look at what you're saying.....you're claiming that you can ram your SUV and non-SUV into another vehicle with equal impunity.

Wrong.
That's pretty much what it looked like when I watched the EMTs cart away a covered stretcher while the SUV that hit the station wagon lamented its tilted license plate.

[psycho chicken]

Still way, way under.....factoring inflation, the current price-per-barrel would have to hit $91.00 to match the 1981 peak price.

Ahhhh, I thought it was low seventies before it was even considering inflation.

That's the other reason I'm not whinging. People got through it then, we'll do it again. I'm not complaining, V8 parts are getting cheaper and cheaper.

[Loké]

Just to pour some petrol onto the fire, americans may whine, but in england I payed 92.9 pence per litre.

[Psyche]

Just to pour some petrol onto the fire, americans may whine, but in england I payed 92.9 pence per litre.


heh I never complain because I know europe is so much more expensive. I'll bitch about it when (hopefully) I move there. After I become rich and famous and it doesn't really matter anyways. Just to be funny =D

[[Political] Slayer]

they just jumped from $2.59 on saturday here to $3.07, they were $2.89 this morning :(

[Violin]

3.09 here

[Krispy Joe]

2.99 here...... screw you, Katrina! :|

[[Political] Slayer]

well, I would take this with a grain of salt, as I hate speculations, but this might be good news: http://www.forbes.com/business/feeds/afx/2005/08/30/afx2195813.html

[-V-]

So, gas prices right now in Atlanta have gotten to or exeded $6 A GALLON. Also apparently by now there is almost no gas left in all of atlanta and everything in ~60 mile radius of it.

[BattleWhack]

This is absoloutly fucking insane. I refuse to buy gas until that shit goes down. And when my boss flips because I'm late to work, I'll tell him to go get me some freakin' fuel. That'll teach him...

:(

[Captain Colon]

So, gas prices right now in Atlanta have gotten to or exeded $6 A GALLON. Also apparently by now there is almost no gas left in all of atlanta and everything in ~60 mile radius of it.
Yeah I just read about that...apparently the governor is putting sanctions on price gougers though, and he called them shameful :)

[Bone_Vulture]

Slayer']well, I would take this with a grain of salt, as I hate speculations, but this might be good news: http://www.forbes.com/business/feeds/afx/2005/08/30/afx2195813.html

Certain smug economists predicted that the bubble would burst almost a year ago.. let's see if someone gets it right at some point.

Yeah I just read about that...apparently the governor is putting sanctions on price gougers though, and he called them shameful :)

WHAAAAAT?! Price caps are a tool of a planned economy, not an American free market! :mad:

[-V-]

Last time the american economy was a totally free market, the horse was the principal means of transportation :)

[Bone_Vulture]

Last time the american economy was a totally free market, the horse was the principal means of transportation :)

Yeah, and next you'll probably say that the 2nd Amendment should only apply to flintlocks, you filthy LIEberal. :rolleyes:

[Modest Genius]

well, the higher the price of oil, the better. at least that way it would encourage people to look at alternatives. the stuffs running out, and doing huge amounts of damage to the climate at the same time.

[HodgeMASHEEN MkIII]

It would be nice if the oil companies would get off their greedy arses and refinethe damn stuff.

[Agent Law]

Except it's all about making money, and values (or lack of values) dictate that the almighty dollar and greed pay off more.

Lining your own pockets comes first to many.

[lucky644]

Wow....just hit $1.25 a liter here...

[[Political] Slayer]

I highly doubt the oil companies like the prices being this high. Sure, they are making tons of money, but how royally fucked are they going to be when people decide that they don't want to pay anymore, and then oil prices plummit?

[lucid]

Well Oil is price inelastic, the quantity consumed doesn't change as much in response to a change in price. What this means is that because fuels derived from Oil don't have any close substitutes (i.e. you can't shove ethanol in your car tommorow), as prices increase, revenue for the Oil companies increase as well.

The only way the bubble will burst is if people move to ethanol/hydrogen/diesel/hybrid cars en mass or the Oil companies make the mistake of wanting more market share and start a price war (which isn't going to happen, it's too risky).

[Loké]

Slayer']I highly doubt the oil companies like the prices being this high. Sure, they are making tons of money, but how royally fucked are they going to be when people decide that they don't want to pay anymore, and then oil prices plummit?
Because people have become so dependent upon petrol for their cars they're willing to pay.

[BlindSite]

People are never going to stop using oil. Almost the entire economy of the world would collapse if an alternative was discovered tomorrow that was just as effective.

[GoatChomper]

It would be nice if the oil companies would get off their greedy arses and refinethe damn stuff.
Huh? Whose? All the refineries we have were already going full-blast before the hurricane season began, and now about a quarter of them are inoperative.

[siddy]

Huh? Whose? All the refineries we have were already going full-blast before the hurricane season began, and now about a quarter of them are inoperative.

why not like....build more?

[Modest Genius]

People are never going to stop using oilyes they will. unfortunately it will probably take the stuff running out to make them do so

[Bone_Vulture]

People are never going to stop using oil. Almost the entire economy of the world would collapse if an alternative was discovered tomorrow that was just as effective.

How would this alternative fuel magically destroy the world economy?

[Captain Colon]

Probably something to do with the world economy largely being based on oil and things that use oil.

[Modest Genius]

but surely having a cheap form of oil would make things, well, cheaper?

[Bone_Vulture]

but surely having a cheap form of oil would make things, well, cheaper?

Indeed. Western oil companies and the sheiks of Middle East would cry "OH SNAP!" in unison, but the rest of the world would definitely benefit from this.

Actually, these two groups would benefit as well - the oil companies could use their existing logistical network to start distributing the new fuel (depending on how localized the production would be, obviously), and the sheiks could in turn invest the billions of oil dollars to development of this new fuel, securing their cash flow long after the oil fields have ran dry.

[[Political] Slayer]

woo hoo, $3.79/ gallon here now. The thing I am wondering is, they pumped the gas into the resivoir tanks back when it was $2.54/ gallon (last week), and they still have that same gas in there that they only paid $2.54 for, why do they have to jack up the prices, and jack them up so rapidly at that. They were $2.89 on wednesday.

[children mcnuggets]

what makes me angry is that nobody will give me a clear explanation of why gas prices have tripled in 3 years here. $10 used to fill my tank in 2002, now it cost about $38 :o

i hope we get something going with thermal depolymerization (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_depolymerization), could provide a source of relief for our insane fuel prices. an even better benefit would be that it could turn raw sewage and other wastes into something that's actually useful...

[GoatChomper]

why not like....build more?
Overnight?

And in areas where environmentalists have blocked them for decades?

[Bone_Vulture]

Overnight?

And in areas where environmentalists have blocked them for decades?

You really must take part to the "Deal With Reality or Reality Will Deal With You" thread. :rolleyes:

Slayer']woo hoo, $3.79/ gallon here now. The thing I am wondering is, they pumped the gas into the resivoir tanks back when it was $2.54/ gallon (last week), and they still have that same gas in there that they only paid $2.54 for, why do they have to jack up the prices, and jack them up so rapidly at that. They were $2.89 on wednesday.

Because they can. It's the owner's benefit that the price is set to such a level that the station's tanks are almost empty when the next fuel shipment arrives. And since there have been concerns on whether the distribution network will function in the coming weeks, it's only logical to jack up the price.

And likewise, news of possible distribution difficulties will also drive consumers to hoard gas, so why ask less when you can get more?

[siddy]

Overnight?

And in areas where environmentalists have blocked them for decades?

there are plenty of places in the world that we could put refineries if we'd like to. But the lack of 'em keeps oil prices artifically high which means more $ for the oil companies.

[Modest Genius]

oil price fell $2 a barrel today, because the IEA opened europes reserves. so give it a week, and the price my be back to normal (i mean the normal upward trend, rather than the spike in the last week)

[Daywalker]

oil price fell $2 a barrel today, because the IEA opened europes reserves. so give it a week, and the price my be back to normal (i mean the normal upward trend, rather than the spike in the last week)


I hope so, I filled up my car before it went up. I'm gonna try to get as much out of it as I can before I refill. I'll probably be able to go a week or week and a half, if I'm careful.

[GoatChomper]

there are plenty of places in the world that we could put refineries if we'd like to.
Except for pesky damned locals who fight to keep them out.....think maybe they should have a say in that?

[Evil Superstar]

the good old 'not in my backyard' argument ...

[GrosPoisson]

Ah yes, the same reason why that nuclear waste disposal site in Yucca Mountain never really took off.

[Bone_Vulture]

Here's an article (http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2005/08/31/bush_gives_new_reason_for_iraq_war/) for Goat.. trust me, I didn't see this one coming. :rolleyes:

[GoatChomper]

Sounds like a good idea to me.

[Bone_Vulture]

President Bush answered growing antiwar protests yesterday with a fresh reason for US troops to continue fighting in Iraq: protection of the country's vast oil fields, which he said would otherwise fall under the control of terrorist extremists.

After the numerous excuses about Al Qaeda connections, WMD's and nation building didn't pan out, the Bush administration is trying to serve it's original motive as the next natural move in "war on terror".. OIL. :rolleyes:

[Modest Genius]

lol, thats quite amusing

[GoatChomper]

What..... there has to be one and only one reason to the invalidation of all others?

Looks like you slept through the economics classes where the rest of the world learns that increased supply equals lower prices.

[lucky644]

Here's an article (http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2005/08/31/bush_gives_new_reason_for_iraq_war/) for Goat.. trust me, I didn't see this one coming. :rolleyes:

Thank god, I was beginning to think the war in Iraq was bullshit.

Wait, it still is.

[Bone_Vulture]

Looks like you slept through the economics classes where the rest of the world learns that increased supply equals lower prices.

Also, wars are caused by soldiers shooting at each other. Really, it's as simple as that. Do you have any other bits of elementary school wisdom that you'd like to share? :rolleyes:

[Daywalker]

all I know is, I have no other means of transportation than driving. Well, no other viable means.

[marty]

I love where I live right now. Apparently, my state has the third lowest gas prices in the US. Apparently, my metro area has the lowest gas prices in the state.

Yes.

[FaKToR]

I've always liked pricing of gasoline, the whole fraction of a cent thing and all. They posted an invoice at my local grocery store for their gas station trying to show that the increase in cost was warranted and not an attempt by themselves to profit. I found the price of gas going out to the hundredth of a cent more interesting.

[GoatChomper]

Also, wars are caused by soldiers shooting at each other. Really, it's as simple as that.
At least you're honest about the kind of thought processes behind your output.

[Bone_Vulture]

At least you're honest about the kind of thought processes behind your output.

Have you ever been even near an economics class? You have a finite resource controlled partially by a cartel, that is vital to the whole world economy, where the demand appears to rise constantly. Besides, the final price of a barrel is not decided at the oil fields, but in the exchange halls, where the actual price is skewed by speculation.

So don't insult the intelligence of other forum members with your oversimplifications.

[FaKToR]

I've noticed you seem to stay conspicuously out of economic discussion GC.

[GoatChomper]

Heck no, I jump into them all the time.
Have you ever been even near an economics class?
Have you, or were you still snoozing when the rest of the class learned that increased value from scarcity means absolutely squat if the holder can't sell enough to offset the reduced volume.

[Bone_Vulture]

Have you, or were you still snoozing when the rest of the class learned that increased value from scarcity means absolutely squat if the holder can't sell enough to offset the reduced volume.

If you're saying that the turnover (units sold times price per unit) drops, that is correct. But since we're dealing with a finite resource here, the cartel gains long-term benefits from selling every drop of the stuff at the highest possible price. I haven't heard that oil sheiks' been battling against diminishing profit margins for crude oil. Not to mention that the western world's dependency on oil has made its demand curve a very inelastic one. Or would you like to point out substitutes for crude oil? :rolleyes:

[Violin]

Isnt there some type of website to check gas prcices in the US an d each of its states?

-- Threads are not created so you can use them to air personal grievances, including illusory ones.

[Modest Genius]

well, bone is essentially correct, increased supply does NOT necessarily mean lower prices, thats an oversimplification. there are all sorts of reasons why it could be wrong, not least of which are the time taken for the supply to reach the source of demand and the activities of speculators

oh and as a further twist, the 'oil price' always quoted is actually for oil futures, not the 'spot price' which is how much its actually worth at the time and place

[GoatChomper]

If you're saying that the turnover (units sold times price per unit) drops, that is correct. But since we're dealing with a finite resource here, the cartel gains long-term benefits from selling every drop of the stuff at the highest possible price.
Until the volume sold due to being priced so high fails to compensate for the loss in sheer volume. It's the same dynamic people finally figured out here about 2002 regarding the moratorium on "high-capacity" firearms magazines.....sure, they could demand $200.00 for pre-1994 OEM Glock magazines, but unless they actually sold any they weren't making diddly for profit from their hoarded items.

[Bone_Vulture]

Until the volume sold due to being priced so high fails to compensate for the loss in sheer volume.

I'm yet to see the oil sheiks crying next to endless rows of unsold crude barrels. :rolleyes:

[-V-]

Diffirence is, a person can go without a 1994 OEM pre-ban high compacity Glock magazine, its what economists term a luxory good, and thus not essential to your survival, a person can't go without any fuel in his car to get around, or no water in his tap to drink, or the most favorite example: Insulin for the diabetics, these are termed essential good(correct me if i'm wrong been a while), who's prices are usually quite inelastic, with insulin being the model for an inelastic good.

[Bobo*the*Clown]

If you're saying that the turnover (units sold times price per unit) drops, that is correct. But since we're dealing with a finite resource here, the cartel gains long-term benefits from selling every drop of the stuff at the highest possible price. I haven't heard that oil sheiks' been battling against diminishing profit margins for crude oil. Not to mention that the western world's dependency on oil has made its demand curve a very inelastic one. Or would you like to point out substitutes for crude oil? :rolleyes:

So why isn't OPEC's price pegged at $150 or $200 a barrel instead of $70?
Finite resource+monopolistic cartel=extrodinarily high price...but that's not the case. Why is that?

btw...China's demand for oil and overall energy use is estimated to surpass all current global usage within 50 years-ie-if China continues its current industrialization and growth pattern, China will be the largest consumer of all forms of energy output by 2060-China as a single country will use more energy than the entire globe does now. You can drop the term 'western world' from all the 'oil dependancy' diatribes-this really is a global problem.

[Bone_Vulture]

A point well made, -V-.

So why isn't OPEC's price pegged at $150 or $200 a barrel instead of $70?
Finite resource+monopolistic cartel=extrodinarily high price...but that's not the case. Why is that?

Let's say OPEC would try to make oil more expensive than gold:

1) Each member of a cartel has only a limited amount of loyalty towards the other members. If you attempt to drive the price to insane heights, sooner or later some member nation will be overcome by greed, and will drop out of the cartel to cash in.

2) You'll have a lot of angry "customers", i.e. nations dependent of oil. If the barrel rates would suddenly skyrocket due to artificial pegging, I'm certain that every European nation would suddenly be happy to start another crus... Uh, I mean spread democracy to the Middle East.

3) There are distant substitutes to oil, yes - and the longer you maintain the oil rates at draconian levels, the more motivated your customers will be to find alternative energy resources.

4) Also, it's known that Middle Eastern power players have invested their oil profits to the stocks of Western companies and treasuries - fucking up their economies would be counter-productive at some point.

btw...China's demand for oil and overall energy use is estimated to surpass all current global usage within 50 years-ie-if China continues its current industrialization and growth pattern, China will be the largest consumer of all forms of energy output by 2060-China as a single country will use more energy than the entire globe does now. You can drop the term 'western world' from all the 'oil dependancy' diatribes-this really is a global problem.

China hasn't become a major economic player with magic, but due to the greed of the Western world - be it raw materials, consumer goods or durables - every time you, me or anyone else buys something Chinese, we're contributing to this "global problem".

[GoatChomper]

Diffirence is, a person can go without a 1994 OEM pre-ban high compacity Glock magazine, its what economists term a luxory good, and thus not essential to your survival, a person can't go without any fuel in his car to get around.....
Not true at all.....quite a bit of the world does without either gasoline or a vehicle in which to put it.
China hasn't become a major economic player with magic, but due to the greed of the Western world.....
Even if they weren't catering to the production of goods, they would still be an increasing market for oil due to modernization efforts and sheer size. Calling all demands for goods "greed" is just more vapid agitprop.

[FaKToR]

So why isn't OPEC's price pegged at $150 or $200 a barrel instead of $70?
Because you don't want to push the prices higher than alternatives, and it's better to increase prices slowly alongside a eventually decreasing supply for legitimacy because people have limits to what they'll put up with.

Not true at all.....quite a bit of the world does without either gasoline or a vehicle in which to put it.
The developed world runs on oil, of which we happen to be a part if you haven't noticed.

Calling all demands for goods "greed" is just more vapid agitprop.
Or it's an opinion.

[Bone_Vulture]

Not true at all.....quite a bit of the world does without either gasoline or a vehicle in which to put it.

FaKToR already said it one way, but could you name one country in your bit of the world where the standards of living include something more modern than a clay hut and a herd of livestock in the backyard?

Even if they weren't catering to the production of goods, they would still be an increasing market for oil due to modernization efforts and sheer size. Calling all demands for goods "greed" is just more vapid agitprop.

Then what you're saying is that these "modernization efforts and sheer size" involve magic somehow, yes? Cause otherwise you're going to need trade, or more specifically a positive trade balance.

[Col.Kurtz]

it would help if we drilled some more oil wells.

[Modest Genius]

Not true at all.....quite a bit of the world does without either gasoline or a vehicle in which to put it.indeed. but much of it still relies on electricty or plastics. and the problem isnt that there are areas which dont need it, but that there are areas which DO need it, if they are to maintain their lifestyles. so of course you can construe this as a lifestyle problem, which environmentalists have been doing for decades (turn the light off when you leave the room. oh and the damn computer you leave running all day while you arent there too)

it would help if we drilled some more oil wells.
not much. mostly because the easy wells are already tapped, and the remaining ones cost more to get out. yes it would help, but it doesnt address the fundamental problem - its running out. that means that no matter how fast you produce the stuff the price will still rise eventually, increasing production would only be prolonging the inevitable and storing up the problem for later. a gradual increase over decades is better than a sudden skyrocketing over a year or so when its too late to adjust economies and lifestyles, or find alternatives

[Daywalker]

I think people fail to realize, that if enough people moved from a 15 mpg SUV to even a 25 mpg mid-sized sedan, the amount of oil we use would drop a lot.

[GoatChomper]

FaKToR already said it one way, but could you name one country in your bit of the world where the standards of living include something more modern than a clay hut and a herd of livestock in the backyard?
Right next door.....Mexico: where most of the populace lacks personal transportation, yet is still a highly-industrialized nation.

[Krispy Joe]

That's the downfall of a free market (Or is it?). Gas stations will continue to charge $3+ a gallon as long as people keep buying it and they can turn a profit. It's supply and demand on steroids, really.

[Agent Law]

I think people fail to realize, that if enough people moved from a 15 mpg SUV to even a 25 mpg mid-sized sedan, the amount of oil we use would drop a lot.
Yes, but I doubt many are willing to give up their SUVs. They must navigate the dangerous urban jungle!

[Bone_Vulture]

Right next door.....Mexico: where most of the populace lacks personal transportation, yet is still a highly-industrialized nation.

a) Would you like to live in Mexico?
b) Why does it appear that every day people are attemping to move from Mexico to the 'States?

Tiscali offered some interesting statistics about Mexico (http://www.tiscali.co.uk/reference/encyclopaedia/countryfacts/mexico.html) and USA (http://www.tiscali.co.uk/reference/encyclopaedia/countryfacts/unitedstatesofamerica.html).

[Modest Genius]

interesting reversal of goats normal line of attack...

and krispy kreme makes a good point. if you dont like paying so much for petrol, then dont buy it

[Bone_Vulture]

interesting reversal of goats normal line of attack...

I wanted to underline that the part of the world we're willing to live in is dependent of oil. Now, it'd be interesting to see a nation with a western world's standard GDP per capita, and a very low density of cars per capita. And.. holy crap, Iceland (http://www.tiscali.co.uk/reference/encyclopaedia/countryfacts/iceland.html) has a higher density of cars than United States??!! :eek:

[edit]

Makes partially sense, though.. such a tiny nation doesn't utilize heavy mass transit, like subways. (Damn typos)

[Captain Colon]

Japan (http://www.tiscali.co.uk/reference/encyclopaedia/countryfacts/japan.html) has more cars than both of them...I'd always thought they used a lot of mass transit.

I don't remember where I heard it, but I remember hearing that people buying gasoline for cars was actually not THAT large of a percentage of total oil consumption? Didn't really put much stock in it but I'd like to see the actual numbers.

[Bone_Vulture]

Japan (http://www.tiscali.co.uk/reference/encyclopaedia/countryfacts/japan.html) has more cars than both of them...I'd always thought they used a lot of mass transit.

Probably has something to do with the massive population density, over ten times higher than that of US (and twenty times more than in Finland!) - at some point mass transit is the only option.

I don't remember where I heard it, but I remember hearing that people buying gasoline for cars was actually not THAT large of a percentage of total oil consumption? Didn't really put much stock in it but I'd like to see the actual numbers.

Good question. I wonder what instance would have global statistics?

[Bone_Vulture]

Yeii, EIA's kiddie page (http://www.eia.doe.gov/kids/energyfacts/sources/non-renewable/oil.html) offers some actual clear statistics. Apparently half of each crude barrel goes to gasoline... and about only 15% to products other than fuels.

Pass me the crayons! http://bonevulture.homestead.com/files/oh.gif

[Krispy Joe]

Gas is "only" $2.79/gal here, but that's because we get most of our gas from Canada up here in Minnesota, as opposed to from the Gulf of Mexico/OPEC.

[Daywalker]

and krispy kreme makes a good point. if you dont like paying so much for petrol, then dont buy it

That doesn't work for those of us in rural U.S.A. Mass transit doesn't exsist. Closest bus stop is like 8 miles away, doesn't go into the towns in my rural county. Driving is the only option.

[Agent Law]

Gas is "only" $2.79/gal here, but that's because we get most of our gas from Canada up here in Minnesota, as opposed to from the Gulf of Mexico/OPEC.
That's cheaper than here.

[GoatChomper]

a) Would you like to live in Mexico?
I've seen some parts of it I damned well would.
b) Why does it appear that every day people are attemping to move from Mexico to the 'States?
Neither A nor B has anything at all to do with either Mexico's industrialization or vehicle ownership. Japan is even more industrialized than the USA or Mexico, but I wouldn't want to live there.

[Bone_Vulture]

Neither A nor B has anything at all to do with either Mexico's industrialization or vehicle ownership. Japan is even more industrialized than the USA or Mexico, but I wouldn't want to live there.

Nobody sane wants to live in Japan. But I see a correlation between the standards of living and availability of private/public transportation.

[Modest Genius]

That doesn't work for those of us in rural U.S.A. Mass transit doesn't exsist. Closest bus stop is like 8 miles away, doesn't go into the towns in my rural county. Driving is the only option.get a bike. or a car powered by something other than petrol. or move somewhere with public transport. or lobby local politicians to introduce it in your area. or a multitude of other possibilities

its a case of which inconvenience you are most happy with, paying or using an alternative. theres no such thing as a free lunch.

[Moe_Rahn]

get a bike. or a car powered by something other than petrol. or move somewhere with public transport. or lobby local politicians to introduce it in your area. or a multitude of other possibilities

its a case of which inconvenience you are most happy with, paying or using an alternative. theres no such thing as a free lunch.
When you can move five bags of groceries, plus two cases of beer and three twelve-packs of soda on your bike, give me a call. I want this bike.

[Bone_Vulture]

When you can move five bags of groceries, plus two cases of beer and three twelve-packs of soda on your bike, give me a call. I want this bike.

Errr... Purchase a cart for your bike? ;)

http://www.bicyclecart.com/front.jpg

[Captain Colon]

Or a sidecar ;)

[GoatChomper]

But I see a correlation between the standards of living and availability of private/public transportation.
Then you'd best look again, because that's the only mode of transport available to much of the population of Africa.

Public transport isn't a cause of prosperity, it's a result.

[-V-]

But I see a correlation between the standards of living and availability of private/public transportation.Then you'd best look again, because that's the only mode of transport available to much of the population of Africa.

Public transport isn't a cause of prosperity, it's a result.

Ok Goat, you just supported his point. Lets compare our standart of living and transportation means to that of the average sub-saharan african and his mode of transportation.

Also I suspect that I don't need to explain to you the diffirence between correlation, which Bone points out, and causeality which you imply he says.

'Sides you can pull examples up all day long, but it comes down to simple high-school economics that Gasoline is a nearly inelastic good, that is virtually independent of supply and demands.

[Modest Genius]

When you can move five bags of groceries, plus two cases of beer and three twelve-packs of soda on your bike, give me a call. I want this bike.again, you choose your own suffering. not being able to carry all that vs paying for petrol
Also I suspect that I don't need to explain to you the diffirence between correlation, which Bone points out, and causeality which you imply he says.aye, i spotted that too

[Walnut]

get a bike. or a car powered by something other than petrol. or move somewhere with public transport. or lobby local politicians to introduce it in your area. or a multitude of other possibilities

its a case of which inconvenience you are most happy with, paying or using an alternative. theres no such thing as a free lunch.

I really don't think cars powered by something other than gasoline are sold in the US. Toyota sold one in California a couple years ago, but it failed miserably (mostly due to a miniscule range, around 100 miles, and a much higher price than the gasoline version of the same car). \

Public transportation just won't work in the rural areas of the US.. You underestimate the distances involved. Unless they have a bus station at every single farm and every store and every town, it won't work, and that would be exhorbitantly expensive and inconvienient.

Plus, moving to somewhere with public transportation would be very expensive and stupid, because the only places with a lot of public transportation are cities. Rural land is cheap, urban land is very expensive. They'd have to get a new job. It is nowhere near cost-effective.

I'm perfectly content with paying market prices for gas until alternatives are available, and it will probably be cheaper than paying for public transportation.

[Daywalker]

get a bike. or a car powered by something other than petrol. or move somewhere with public transport. or lobby local politicians to introduce it in your area. or a multitude of other possibilities

its a case of which inconvenience you are most happy with, paying or using an alternative. theres no such thing as a free lunch.


I think you missed the rural U.S.A part, moving somewhere with public transportation wouldn't be rural america. Thats all I'm saying is, there will be a large number of people where public transport is impossible or so inconvient and costly it might as well be impossible.

[Bone_Vulture]

Well, MG is an urban Brit, so obviously he has a city-wise aspect. I think you misread him though - It's obvious to everyone that mass transit is only plausible when the population density is high enough. Finland has a very low average density, and most of the people are concentrated to the southern coast and several larger cities up north. Beyond this, it's small villages amidst great wilderness, strewn with roads here and there - a place where private transportation is the only option.

[Walnut]

Beyond this, it's small villages amidst great wilderness, strewn with roads here and there - a place where private transportation is the only option.

It's basically the same in the rural US, and even a lot of suburban US isn't suitable for public transport.

[Modest Genius]

I think you missed the rural U.S.A part, moving somewhere with public transportation wouldn't be rural america. Thats all I'm saying is, there will be a large number of people where public transport is impossible or so inconvient and costly it might as well be impossible.i AM aware of the wide-open-spaces aspect of america. i have it drummed into me every time i mention the words 'public' and 'transport' in the same sentence online

my point is that its still that tradeoff of expenses vs sacrifices. yes it would cost a shitload to make decent public transport system in america. thus, the alternatives can cost a shitload too

basically, im saying that you will end up paying huge amounts for petrol, unless you are prepared to find an alternative method of moving around. im not actually advocating that alternative at this juncture (since this thread is about petrol prices) but i AM pointing out that people will still pay because it is, to them, cheaper than the alternative. and thus complaining about paying it is missing the point slightly, because you should also be considering the alternative payments (in time, money and convenience) you could be making

i know that wasnt entirely clear, but do you get my meaning?

[Walnut]

and thus complaining about paying it is missing the point slightly, because you should also be considering the alternative payments (in time, money and convenience) you could be making

But there aren't any alternatives in most of the US. I would not have any problem with paying this much for gas if it was just a supply/demand thing, but it isn't. Around 50% of the price of gas is taxes. The taxes should not be anywhere near that high, I really see no reason for them to be any higher than the typical sales tax (4-8%).

[Daywalker]

i AM aware of the wide-open-spaces aspect of america. i have it drummed into me every time i mention the words 'public' and 'transport' in the same sentence online

my point is that its still that tradeoff of expenses vs sacrifices. yes it would cost a shitload to make decent public transport system in america. thus, the alternatives can cost a shitload too

basically, im saying that you will end up paying huge amounts for petrol, unless you are prepared to find an alternative method of moving around. im not actually advocating that alternative at this juncture (since this thread is about petrol prices) but i AM pointing out that people will still pay because it is, to them, cheaper than the alternative. and thus complaining about paying it is missing the point slightly, because you should also be considering the alternative payments (in time, money and convenience) you could be making

i know that wasnt entirely clear, but do you get my meaning?



I read ya, all I meant was that whatever the alternative, it would have to be some sort of personal transport, that was in the price range of the normal citizens.

[GrosPoisson]

i know that wasnt entirely clear, but do you get my meaning?

Loud and clear. I'm a big fan of good public transportation myself, but unfortunately it's hard to find here in California especially. The idea of people driving everywhere for everything is so deeply ingrained into people's heads that the public transportation we do have is fairly underdeveloped.

[Bone_Vulture]

But there aren't any alternatives in most of the US. I would not have any problem with paying this much for gas if it was just a supply/demand thing, but it isn't. Around 50% of the price of gas is taxes. The taxes should not be anywhere near that high, I really see no reason for them to be any higher than the typical sales tax (4-8%).

Wikipedia's take (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gasoline_tax#United_States_of_America)

The U.S. federal gasoline tax as of 2005 was 18.4¢/gal (4.86¢/L), and the gasoline taxes in the various states range from 10 cents to 33 cents, with an average about 22 cents per U.S. gallon (5.8¢/L). Unlike most goods in the US, the price displayed includes all taxes, rather than being calculated at the point of purchase.

That doesn't feel like 50%... Maybe it was, if the rate is fixed. Anyone got more precise figures?

[kreket]

Does rural Finland and USA not even have bus twice a day to take people to more central bus stops?

5 cents litre? That's.. ..unbelievable.

[Bone_Vulture]

Does rural Finland and USA not even have bus twice a day to take people to more central bus stops?

Most rural areas of Finland have bus routes that cover long distances, several time a day. But they're far between and expensive, and do not cover every creek, so they're hardly a choice for job commuting, unless you live very close to a freeway, or some other major traffic artery.

[Moe_Rahn]

Most rural areas of Finland have bus routes that cover long distances, several time a day. But they're far between and expensive, and do not cover every creek, so they're hardly a choice for job commuting, unless you live very close to a freeway, or some other major traffic artery.
Yeah, there's always Greyhound or some other bus service, but hell, even the nearest Greyhound stop is 30 miles away.

[Modest Genius]

But there aren't any alternatives in most of the US.yes there are, as ive already listed. things like riding a bike

they may not be particularly attractive alternatives, but theyre there

oh and the large taxes are there for two main reasons:

1. environmentalism and transport policy. basically, less use of petrol means less has to be spent maintaining roads and on environmental policy

2. making money. get rid of that tax, and youd have to add several points onto income tax to make up the shortfall. as to why it was added in the first place, thats just because theres less political damage to raising tax on petrol than income tax rises

[Captain Colon]

You're going to ride a bike 30 miles to school/work all winter?

[Bone_Vulture]

1. environmentalism and transport policy. basically, less use of petrol means less has to be spent maintaining roads and on environmental policy

Or inversely, the tax is there to create revenue for road maintenance at a same pace as the use of roads (=consumption of gasoline) increases.

2. making money. get rid of that tax, and youd have to add several points onto income tax to make up the shortfall. as to why it was added in the first place, thats just because theres less political damage to raising tax on petrol than income tax rises

A very good point - this is also the reason why just about everything has a little tax on it: to balance the flow of revenues. Did you know that some Finnish nutbag professor actually suggested that we could abolish all other taxes and put some outrageous, 60-100% VAT on all sold goods? Well, that'd be good times to anyone living close to the border (duty free goods from Sweden and Russia! :D )

[Daywalker]

yes there are, as ive already listed. things like riding a bike

they may not be particularly attractive alternatives, but theyre there

oh and the large taxes are there for two main reasons:

1. environmentalism and transport policy. basically, less use of petrol means less has to be spent maintaining roads and on environmental policy

2. making money. get rid of that tax, and youd have to add several points onto income tax to make up the shortfall. as to why it was added in the first place, thats just because theres less political damage to raising tax on petrol than income tax rises


you might have well said ride a magic dragon where you need to go, because the alternatives you listed aren't feasible.

[pro kossu]

Did you know that some Finnish nutbag professor actually suggested that we could abolish all other taxes and put some outrageous, 60-100% VAT on all sold goods? )

Got any linkage or the name of the guy?

[Bone_Vulture]

Got any linkage or the name of the guy?

I'll try to do some Googling, although there might not be any articles on this... I'll give it a shot anyway.

[later...]

Sorry, no dice yet. I can throw some questions at school; there's a slight chance that some economics teacher knows this guy.

[Modest Genius]

Did you know that some Finnish nutbag professor actually suggested that we could abolish all other taxes and put some outrageous, 60-100% VAT on all sold goods? Well, that'd be good times to anyone living close to the border (duty free goods from Sweden and Russia! :D )the BNP suggested that here at the last election. and the greens suggested abolishing pretty much all taxes (ecept environmental ones) in favour of much increased income tax. at least the second one would actually be fair...
You're going to ride a bike 30 miles to school/work all winter?
they may not be particularly attractive alternatives

[Bone_Vulture]

the BNP suggested that here at the last election. and the greens suggested abolishing pretty much all taxes (ecept environmental ones) in favour of much increased income tax. at least the second one would actually be fair...

It's also possible that I've mixed people and countries, and this actually occured in Britain. I'll still run a local check, though. ;)

[Modest Genius]

useful little facts and figures on UK petrol prices, along with some comparisons with US and EU

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/pop_ups/05/business_petrol_pricing/html/1.stm

[Walnut]

yes there are, as ive already listed. things like riding a bike

they may not be particularly attractive alternatives, but theyre there


Riding a bike is not just an unattractive alternative, it isn't an alternative. No one is going to survive riding a bike 20 miles in the summer in Texas, or in the winter in the rural parts of the northeast.

[StandingCow]

Well prices are comming back down and there are investigations looking into why they got so high...

And they want to prevent it from happening again.. Bet prices fall ALOT slower then they rose.

[Captain Colon]

useful little facts and figures on UK petrol prices, along with some comparisons with US and EU

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/pop_ups/05/business_petrol_pricing/html/1.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/spl/hi/pop_ups/05/business_petrol_pricing/img/3.jpg
Interesting...I wonder if most of that money goes to the tube system, or elsewhere?

[Modest Genius]

no, the tube is funded through private investment and the london council taxes.

oh and only that tiny bit marked public transport goes on that kind of thing anyway, most is spent on building and maintaining various roads

the surplus goes into schools and the nhs, reducing the income tax required

[Margs]

Price check on gas where you're at!!
2.79/gallon in NW Ohio.
In ohio we levee a 40.4 cent tax on EVERY gallon of gasoline.
Tell me the government doesn't fucking rake us at the pumps.

[Agent Law]

That'd be about 87.1 cents CDN per litre here. For comparison, prices here are in the 110+ cents per litre range last time I saw, or around $3.52 USD.

People in America have got it good compared to other places.

[Margs]

All depends on what part of the country you live in, this is a SLOW decline of the 3.09+ we WERE seeing all but a week ago, utter bullshit this market is.
-e-
Where do you live? I was in Windsor about a month ago and saw the price at about .90 cents a litre at the border by the ambassador bridge.

[Agent Law]

I live near the west coast (in Burnaby, right beside Vancouver). I guess it might be that everything is fucking ballooned in price here. You want a house? A normal size house will cost you over $420 000 USD.

[GrosPoisson]

I live near the west coast (in Burnaby, right beside Vancouver). I guess it might be that everything is fucking ballooned in price here. You want a house? A normal size house will cost you over $420 000 USD.

Upwards of $700,000 here for a two bedroom, two bath, 2000 square foot home. People will literally start bidding wars over houses like that.

[Moe_Rahn]

In 1990, the house I'm in right now and the 1/3 acre lot cost $66,000. If we sold it now, we could probably get well over double that. Two bed, two full bath, two kitchens, ~1500 square ft. Even in middle-of-nowhere, Missouri, real estate prices are silly.

And gas is down to I believe $2.79, from a peak of (IIRC) $3.09 last week.

[[Political] Slayer]

it's now $2.78 from a peak of $3.79 last week here.

No one is going to survive riding a bike 20 miles in the winter in the rural parts of the northeast.

I've done it, for years before I got my liscense I had to bike everywhere, including through snowstorms, man that sucks riding to work, soaking wet with snow, and the first job you get to do is stock the walk in soda cooler :(

[Daywalker]

Slayer']it's now $2.78 from a peak of $3.79 last week here.



I've done it, for years before I got my liscense I had to bike everywhere, including through snowstorms, man that sucks riding to work, soaking wet with snow, and the first job you get to do is stock the walk in soda cooler :(


well it is a significant safety issue, and some might survive, but many more will not escape with out some for of bodily harm.

[[Political] Slayer]

well it is a significant safety issue, and some might survive, but many more will not escape with out some for of bodily harm.
Well obviously I escaped without harm :)