....Don't forget the "T" Stamps of WWII....{Tractor gas}, but a lot of it went into automobiles.
Quentin
Bucyrus wrote:Anybody that is selling a supply of something is going to limit that supply if he can get a higher price and make more money overall, even though he is selling less quantity. If OPEC decided to double the price of oil, they might end up making less money overall than they are now because the higher price would reduce demand. From our perspective, it may seem like OPEC has a gun to our heads, but you have to look at it from their perspective. Nothing could be worse for them than to have all that oil and nobody wanting to buy it. There is no conspiracy, just the beauty of supply and demand.
Which it is our duty as a Nation to unify and produce domestic vehicles running on fuels we control. Not Middle east, opec or anyone. If that means getting rid of gasoline and Desiel. So be it.
Nothing will please me more than to see Iran, Saudi and all the rest sit in the sands on top of fuel that the USA wont need or use.
If enough of USA, Europe gets off the oil imports OPEC will survey the oil wells and see them sitting still and not pumping very much if at all. THEN the supply will be overflowing and the costs will drop to 10 dollars a barrel. That is the very thing OPEC does not want.
It's too bad because we have the Gulf, deep sea drilling, ANWAR etc.. but no one is sufficient backbone to stand up and actually make it happen.
It is my firm belief that they can place a "Tax" on that gallon of gasoline and try to discourage me from buying that gasoline.
Since Katrina I have watched gasoline get close to 4.00 a gallon and absolutely no slow down in the morning commute downtown. The people are buying gasoline any way they can get it; including credit card debt if need be.
In my home, I dont pay attention to the cost per gallon I want that tank filled each week without any shorts at the pump. If you want my attention, ration gasoline to odd-even days, dig out the ABC cards from world war two or not have any gas at all availible.
Then I will be looking into other ways to make our work happen each week. But to raise prices in order to "Discourage" me from using gasoline does not work. I have enough room built into my budget to withstand such increases up to and including my monthly allowance for trains if need be.
Having said this, I see several times a week people who need to choose between a tank of gas, medicines or food. Sometimes they get gas first, food second and medicines last and endure hardships to get to the next paycheck.
Or some times just get gas, skip the medicines and not eat very much at all to survive the current pay period.
From the sound of the cars going by with very high dollar sound systems, some folks spend thousands and have the resources to cruise around 24/7 regardless of gas prices.
That is unacceptable to me.
Modelcar wrote: If we can believe what we are being told the oil suppliers have cut back supply considerably below their capacity to produce pushing prices high and making sure they stay there.
This is the exact stated purpose of OPEC. As long as we are beholden to them, we will pay whatever price they think we will pay. OPEC has stated that they feel oil should be around 60-70 bucks per barrel. Strangely enough, this is exactly what we have been paying. I suppose if they felt we could absorb oil at 100 bucks a barrel then they would constrict supply to produce that price. OPEC is a cartel. As long as we let them dictate the supply of oil, then we will pay their price.
....Politicians have been rattling around in D C for decades spouting about we need a "tax" to curtail consumption.....Who knows what the answer really is. Listening to all the "noise", it's my opinion we need some more capacity to refine the products.
But if even we could make that happen I wonder then if someone along the chain would decide we have too much supply, and turn down that supply a bit, and hence keep the prices high as they are now.
If we can believe what we are being told the oil suppliers have cut back supply considerably below their capacity to produce pushing prices high and making sure they stay there.
Why we waste our young lives and nations resources, going over there to "protect these suppliers" is beyond me. We need to leverage our side towards them once....After all, we're the largest cusotmers.
....Europe not a good comparison.....Their gasoline price {taxes}, pays for a bunch of social programs. We're of course taxed, but not anyway near the European model.
Modelcar wrote: .....But....gasoline we have to have and cola, really...we don't. Cola, if I remember correctly, was in 7oz. bottles {Coca Cola}, when it was 5 cents....And gasoline was {in my lifetime}, as low as 6 for 1.00...!The thing that concerns me now....Our gas price was 3.49 some weeks ago and now it's as low {yes, now we think that's low}, as 2.89...!! It's a mind game with them. Perhaps the big ratchet up is not far away.
.....But....gasoline we have to have and cola, really...we don't. Cola, if I remember correctly, was in 7oz. bottles {Coca Cola}, when it was 5 cents....And gasoline was {in my lifetime}, as low as 6 for 1.00...!
The thing that concerns me now....Our gas price was 3.49 some weeks ago and now it's as low {yes, now we think that's low}, as 2.89...!! It's a mind game with them. Perhaps the big ratchet up is not far away.
It says a lot about us as a culture when we bee eye tee ceee aitch about the cost of gasoline, which most of us have to have in order to make a living, but we still keep the major suppliers of soft drinks healthy with stuff we pee out only an hour later that costs at least as much, usually more. We buy bottled water that is five times the cost of gasoline! The stuff out of our taps must be for the little people...I guess.
When gas gets to $8.00/gal, we'll be close to what they pay in most of Europe. Long way to go yet.
As Don mentioned, oil and gasoline are commodities and are subject to supply and demand pressures. Gasoline and diesel are refined, so another supply issue comes into play (refinery capacity).
I read somewhere that it takes 9 years to build a refinery from the time it is planned until the gasoline is finally produced. Anyone here want to invest in such a project?
Think about where you will be in 2016 and ask yourself...do I want to wait that long for a return on investment?
ed
....A little side note: Talking about Cola's when they were in glass bottles, etc....My family owned and run an Esso Station in Pennsylvania for years and one day as the local distributor was nearing our business {on rt. 30}, he was involved in an accident and the truck rolled over and all the cases {wooden}, were knocked out of the truck and all over the main east / west route...with as much broken glass as one would care to see on the highway....What a mess.
My point exactly. Gas we "have to have" and cola is a luxury (of sorts). The taxes on gas are a large portion of the cost to us consumers and yet the luxury item is cheaper.
I remember getting gas at 10 cents per gallon one evening at a regular "gas war" betwixt two stations not far from where we lived.
Oh, and it was "Pepsi" (tm) that sold in 12-oz bottles for the same price (5-cents) as "Coca Cola" (tm) that was in 10-oz bottles. That was their big selling point. "12 full ounces, that's a lot; Pepsi Cola hits the spot." (That might have been "12 FLUID ounces" instead of "12 FULL ounces", I never could quite understand the people singing the jingle. (This is terrible, I even actually remember the tune of that jingle! AAAAARRrrrrggggg!)
Semper Vaporo
Pkgs.
....I still find it easy to pick out a diesel vehicle in our traffic locally. In fact, I find myself automatically looking around as we smell diesel from a vehicle as we wait for a stop light or whatever stopped for in traffic.
I agree, diesels are much better now, in this regard of being annoying, than they were a decade ago.
Modelcar wrote: ....I agree, something really {different}, must happen to address our gasoline pricing and supply problem.But, just think what our streets and surroundings would smell like if all our vehicles were consumming diesel....Wow...!
....I agree, something really {different}, must happen to address our gasoline pricing and supply problem.
But, just think what our streets and surroundings would smell like if all our vehicles were consumming diesel....Wow...!
That is not as bad as it used to.
The rigs I drove hardly stunk unless fueling.
Here is a concept.
Stop selling gasoline for motor vehicle use. We rely on Desiel/hybrids or all electric or some other fuel to run the cars.
If we can get this country off the gas fumes and remove it from our list of things we need every day then we will get strong.
I am all for more fuel efficient cars. If a person buys a Escalade and wants to pay 4 bucks a gallon go ahead! But what consumers can do is drive as little as they can. Every year my local AAA tells about where to get the lowest price on gas. People should stay closer to home, the H*ll with big oil. I guess my main gripe is the same as buying an efficient furnace or windows you pay more up front then the gas prices rise anyway. So as per usaual Joe Sixpack is behind the big 8 ball!
It a commodity. Supply and demand drive the price. Demand is very inelasitic so small changes in supply create REALLY BIG changes in price. It really is that simple.
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
Bucyrus wrote: Modelcar wrote: ....If the oil co's. refrain from building more refineries to keep gasoline prices high, let our government build as many as we need...They should be able to get clearance in environmental regs., etc. and it sure sounds like a money making business so the government should make money in so doing business....Contract it out in a proper manner to civilian enerprise but not under the oil co. control.Someone has to start the ball rolling in doing something or we'll continue to pay sky high prices because the oil co's. have all the controls.We've not fared very well under either political party on oil prices, so no matter which one is there I doubt it will be the cure.Neither party may be the cure, but one of the two is quite inclined to start rolling the ball you have suggested. Hugo Chavez is rolling that same ball. You have to ask yourself if gas prices are high because oil companies refuse to build refineries or if prices are high because certain political forces make it financially unattractive to build refineries.
Modelcar wrote: ....If the oil co's. refrain from building more refineries to keep gasoline prices high, let our government build as many as we need...They should be able to get clearance in environmental regs., etc. and it sure sounds like a money making business so the government should make money in so doing business....Contract it out in a proper manner to civilian enerprise but not under the oil co. control.Someone has to start the ball rolling in doing something or we'll continue to pay sky high prices because the oil co's. have all the controls.We've not fared very well under either political party on oil prices, so no matter which one is there I doubt it will be the cure.
....If the oil co's. refrain from building more refineries to keep gasoline prices high, let our government build as many as we need...They should be able to get clearance in environmental regs., etc. and it sure sounds like a money making business so the government should make money in so doing business....Contract it out in a proper manner to civilian enerprise but not under the oil co. control.
Someone has to start the ball rolling in doing something or we'll continue to pay sky high prices because the oil co's. have all the controls.
We've not fared very well under either political party on oil prices, so no matter which one is there I doubt it will be the cure.
Neither party may be the cure, but one of the two is quite inclined to start rolling the ball you have suggested. Hugo Chavez is rolling that same ball. You have to ask yourself if gas prices are high because oil companies refuse to build refineries or if prices are high because certain political forces make it financially unattractive to build refineries.
Why would they build new refineries when they've been shutting them down over the past few years? They've learned they can keep prices high by limiting supply by having just enough capacity to meet demand. Then when anything goes wrong, prices skyrocket and they say it's not their fault. Congress investigates price gouging, but never looks beyond the retail level. Both parties like high prices, just in different ways.
Us 'mericans is so gullible. The oil companies have figger'd that if they want to raise the price of gasoline, say 25 cents per gallon, all they have to do is raise it 50 cents for a week or so, and let everybody get in a tizzy and Congress start rattling that they ought'a start some sort of investigation. Then the oil companies let it slowly drop back to the level they wanted to begin with and all us consumers are so happy that it has gone "down" and Congress finds something else to do as they then no longer have the impetus to do anything. We're happy, the oil companies are happy and Congress can go back to sleep.
Of course, if you compare the price of gasoline to the price of a soft-drink at a diner over the last 50 years, you will find that the price of gasoline is just playing a wee bit of catch-up. A 12-oz soda used to be all of 5 cents and Gasoline was around 23.9 cents per gallon. Two days ago a 15.9-oz soda cost me 95 cents and gas was $2.98.9 per gallon. Cola is now 14.34 times more expensive than it used to be vs gas being only 12.5 times more expensive than it used to be.
Gas prices are going higher?
Here in the great state of Wisconsin, we, as a progressive bastion of futuristic ideas, are currently debating wether or not the state should tax oil companies based on their gross earnings. In other words, Shell, which is a worldwide company, would be taxed based on the amount of money they made in, say, Alaska. "These companies are making billions of dollars" is the refrain. "They should pay their fair share!" What isn't printed on the signs and slogans is that these companies make maybe 20 million dollars of that money in Wisconsin. They pay taxes on that portion of the money that they make in the state, which is fair. Why oh why would a company that makes money drilling for oil in Africa have to pay taxes in Wisconsin on that money they earned? Because the budget of this state has been floating on iffy grounds for years (both parties get the blame on this one) and those oil companies are just the solution to prop up the state for a few more years. (Remember that tobacco money - that's gone like the wind).
What does this have to do with gas prices? Well, our governor assures us that he will make it 'illegal' to pass this increase in oil company taxes on to the consumer. Therefore, it is a win-win situation. Wisconsin can spend money like a kid in a candy store and the consumer won't have to deal with the taxes. But wait! How are they going to inforce this? Well, let's not let facts get in the way of a good idea. Enforcing this would mean that the oil company books would have to opened to the governor in a way previously unheard of. Wonder if that's really legal. Anyone? It would also mean that the oil companies would have every incentive to NOT do business in this state at all.
The end result - higher taxes on the consumer. That in a state that already makes three times as much money off of oil revenues then the oil companies themselves do.
Higher gas prices are coming? They're already here. If supply disruptions don't constrict demand to raise prices then the governor of Wisconsin (with his willing legislature) will be sure to fill in the low places with their own brand of 'help'.
martin.knoepfel wrote:A Diesel-engine is inherently more fuel-efficient than an Otto-engine. (It is more expensive to manufacture, too.) So, if you have to buy a new car, take a close look at the diesels. There are a lot of models on the market. The expensive hybrids are only an option if you often travel in a stop-and-go-mode, i.e. in large cities.
My Dad is a big fan of diesels. He reads all he can about engines in general, but he shakes his head all the time when he reads how diesels are shunned by N. Americans over the years. So, this gets my vote, too. Short term, maybe, but it is a step in the right direction.
Safety Valve wrote: Apparenetly the oil companies are not adjusting the cost of gas for temperature, there is some law-suiting going on in different states including my own.I'll see if I can find that link but basically gas evaporates over 60 degrees in hot weather and should cost less per gallon.
Apparenetly the oil companies are not adjusting the cost of gas for temperature, there is some law-suiting going on in different states including my own.
I'll see if I can find that link but basically gas evaporates over 60 degrees in hot weather and should cost less per gallon.
I heard that story too. I thought it was saying that the fuel density goes down with increase in temperature, thus less btu per gallon. I would be very suspicious about a report that blames hot weather (climate) for high gas prices, if you know what I mean.
.....Here in Muncie today I've witnessed gas as low as 2.89 / gal....Down in Indy it was 2.81...!! We must be on the edge of a raise right around the corner.
A few weeks ago it was as high as 3.49, so look out....This is really getting strange.
mudchicken wrote: tree68 wrote: From my local paper this morning, an AP story with the headline: Biofuel drive may keep gas pricey.The gist of the story is that due to the push for biofuels, oil companies are cutting back on plans to expand refineries, which could keep gas prices high for years...Saw that, and our local paper was blabbing-on about one of the two coal conversion plants here. http://www.denverpost.com/business/ci_6165392Like ethanol, might make more fuel , but won't make it cheaper or as combustably efficient
tree68 wrote: From my local paper this morning, an AP story with the headline: Biofuel drive may keep gas pricey.The gist of the story is that due to the push for biofuels, oil companies are cutting back on plans to expand refineries, which could keep gas prices high for years...
From my local paper this morning, an AP story with the headline: Biofuel drive may keep gas pricey.
The gist of the story is that due to the push for biofuels, oil companies are cutting back on plans to expand refineries, which could keep gas prices high for years...
Saw that, and our local paper was blabbing-on about one of the two coal conversion plants here. http://www.denverpost.com/business/ci_6165392
Like ethanol, might make more fuel , but won't make it cheaper or as combustably efficient
Coal-to-liquids beats biofuels hands down in terms of relative efficiency, but of course petroleum refinement is still the most efficient way to get motor fuels. It's funny, but that one guy who opined his comment at the bottom of the Denver Post story has it completely backward. With nuclear power commercially viable, we really don't need to combust coal for future electricity needs, but we do need to utilize our available domestic hydrocarbon sources (e.g. coal, oil shales, tar sands) for transportation fuels. It makes more sense to use coal for conversion to transportation fuels than it does to grow crops for transport fuel or to use coal for generating electricity.
Coal-to-liquids is akin to an "Extreme Hydrocarbon Makeover" (Ty Pennington, we are ye?), while oil to fuels is more like a modification to the hydrocarbon molecule. In that vein, biofuels is more akin to tearing down a fine house and sticking a trailer in the lot.
BTW - The reason the oil companies are cutting back on plans to build new refineries is due more to the pending loss of the Bush tax incentives than it is on biofuel poliferation. Building a new refinery has a huge up front cost as well as huge potential environmental liability, same as for coal to liquids, and both need tax incentives to mitigate these environmental regs. The Dems seem set on "sticking it to Big Oil" by eliminating the tax incentives for new exploration/drilling/production/refinement, and by raising the royalties for oil and gas from federal lands. Of course, we the consumers will end up paying for these feelgood regs coming down the pike, but I fear most will not realize that before the 2008 elections.
You know, we could just streamline the environmental regs into a more concise common sense set of rules and save the taxpayers some money, right?
Naaaaahhhh!
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.