Gas Prices? ARGH!

Where do you live and what is the price of gas in your area? Anyone here drive or plan on buying a flex-fueled vehicle? This is another curiosity thread.

Find more posts tagged with

Free for TechExams community: Cybersecurity salary guide

Compare cert salaries and plan your next career move

Button

Comments

dynamik

seuss_ssues wrote:

I saw a totally electric car on the discovery channel (or some similar channel) and it could go from 0-60 in 4.x secounds. Ahh yeah, plus it was a convertible and looked kinda like a porsche.

but i dont think it was production and if it was i couldnt afford it :P

http://daily.mahalo.com/2007/11/05/nov-5-2007-tesla-roadster/

sprkymrk

I found this:
http://www.nacsonline.com/NR/exeres/0000615ekahlbkkqgboantrc/GenUseWithOneCallOut_Resource.asp?NRMODE=Published&NRORIGINALURL=%2fNACS%2fResource%2fPRToolkit%2fFactSheets%2fprtk_fact_gasvolatility2004%2ehtm&NRNODEGUID=%7bAAB9188C-E5D8-445A-8922-AEFD93FFD361%7d&NRQUERYTERMINATOR=1&cookie%5Ftest=1

National average price for gasoline in the U.S.:
Year Beginning of transition period Peak seasonal price Change
2003 $1.53 (week ending Feb. 3) $1.73 (week ending Mar. 17) +20
2002 $1.11 (week ending Feb. 4) $1.41 (week ending Apr. +30
2001 $1.44 (week ending Feb. 5) $1.71 (week ending May 14 +26
2000 $1.33 (week ending Feb. 7) $1.68 (week ending June 19) +35

Man, it sure has gone up a LOT and FAST.

Lee H

Hi

If only this link were true guys, would make me very happy

Although the thought of a hairy biker filling up at the road side would scare my kids half to death

http://www.thespoof.com/news/spoof.cfm?headline=s5i7788

Lee H

Plantwiz

SnAdam,

I don't know where you lived, but gas hasn't been 99 cents a gallon since the early 90s. We are one of the most expensive regions so this may be a factor, but I've been paying in excess of $1.25 for well over 10 years.

We also don't need it. It will call for some drastically different lifestyles, but it is not a necessity....we're told it is and many belive it is, but you can walk, bike or use public transportation. It may not be the fastest way to travel, but it's not a requirement.

And the US has been holding prices down for years. We've not paid a fair market value in ages compared to what Canada, Europe, and Asia have all been paying. So yes our prices should rise to meet the market level.

If you haven't noticed, people don't care because they have continued to drive, they drive 'harder' (faster speeds), and have made almost no attempt (as a society) to curb their consumption. Lot's of people complaining....very few making any changes.

And while I don't enjoy paying more myself, I'm also very aware we haven't been paying what the value has been across the world. Just because somehting is cheap...doesn't mean we need it or need more of it.

BeaverC32

We also don't need it. It will call for some drastically different lifestyles, but it is not a necessity....we're told it is and many belive it is, but you can walk, bike or use public transportation. It may not be the fastest way to travel, but it's not a requirement.

Define "need". If you're talking about a matter of survival, sure, we don't NEED gas...much like we don't NEED electricity. It's more a matter of what we rely on to perform our everyday tasks. I have a 30 minute commute every morning in good weather/traffic; you really suggest I ride my bike to work?? I also don't think public transportation is even feasible for where I work (if it is, it would take drastically longer to get to and from work).

My argument is this: why should I be forced to be dramatically inconvenienced due to a huge increase in gas prices? I could technically live without electricity, but would be sacrificing my quality of living in the process.

These bastards raise the prices the most during times of heavy holiday travel as well; I have seen the gas price jump about $.50 the past month, conveniently right when people will be driving long distances for Thanksgiving.

candycorn

Lee H wrote:

Hi

I only have a 1.3 Ford fiesta and i fill up £35 every week.

99.9p per litre is what i paid yesterday, its getting out of hand.

If i lived near to my work i would use a bike, remember that yellow pages advert

"I was right about that saddle though"

Lee H

I've always wanted a ford fiesta. I think gas prices are over $3.00 per gallon here.

dtlokee

BeaverC32 wrote:

We also don't need it. It will call for some drastically different lifestyles, but it is not a necessity....we're told it is and many belive it is, but you can walk, bike or use public transportation. It may not be the fastest way to travel, but it's not a requirement.

Define "need". If you're talking about a matter of survival, sure, we don't NEED gas...much like we don't NEED electricity. It's more a matter of what we rely on to perform our everyday tasks. I have a 30 minute commute every morning in good weather/traffic; you really suggest I ride my bike to work?? I also don't think public transportation is even feasible for where I work (if it is, it would take drastically longer to get to and from work).

My argument is this: why should I be forced to be dramatically inconvenienced due to a huge increase in gas prices? I could technically live without electricity, but would be sacrificing my quality of living in the process.

These bastards raise the prices the most during times of heavy holiday travel as well; I have seen the gas price jump about $.50 the past month, conveniently right when people will be driving long distances for Thanksgiving.

It's not quite the way you describe it here, it's far more complex. Gasoline is traded as on the market similar to stocks, so traders buy it up now in the anticipation it will sell for a higher value later due to supply and demand. This leads to the price of fuel going up at the busy times like Thanksgiving, but it's not price fixing. ust the other day oil was over $98/barrel, then it dropped below $96 because "the new reports show gasoline reserves have not fallen as much as was anticipated." What does all that mean? there was more gasoline in storage tanks than they predicted (they were hoping there would be less, therefore higher prices) so the price dropped. It didn't change the supply and demand, just the price. You want to fix the price of gasoline, get it out the futures.

Also we could all use less like Plantwiz said

Oh by the way, ethanal is not the answer yet. It takes almost as much fossil fuel to produce as the amout of energy it creates.

I vote for solar, I was thinking about putting photovoltaic cells on my new house, 1500 sq ft of cells would produce about 10kva, but it would havev cost over $60,000 to buy and install. Didn't seem to be cost effective when the paback period was like 50 years.

Plantwiz

Plantwiz wrote:

SnAdam,

I don't know where you lived, but gas hasn't been 99 cents a gallon since the early 90s. We are one of the most expensive regions so this may be a factor, but I've been paying in excess of $1.25 for well over 10 years.
.....

Gumble........must read through all the OTHER posts before posting. I see Spmyrk also commented and then you replied you lived in AZ.

Well, Mid-west...gas is high.

snadam

Plantwiz wrote:

SnAdam,

I don't know where you lived, but gas hasn't been 99 cents a gallon since the early 90s. We are one of the most expensive regions so this may be a factor, but I've been paying in excess of $1.25 for well over 10 years.

We also don't need it. It will call for some drastically different lifestyles, but it is not a necessity....we're told it is and many belive it is, but you can walk, bike or use public transportation. It may not be the fastest way to travel, but it's not a requirement.

And the US has been holding prices down for years. We've not paid a fair market value in ages compared to what Canada, Europe, and Asia have all been paying. So yes our prices should rise to meet the market level.

If you haven't noticed, people don't care because they have continued to drive, they drive 'harder' (faster speeds), and have made almost no attempt (as a society) to curb their consumption. Lot's of people complaining....very few making any changes.

And while I don't enjoy paying more myself, I'm also very aware we haven't been paying what the value has been across the world. Just because something is cheap...doesn't mean we need it or need more of it.

Plantwiz,

I lived in the Phoenix Metro area during that time. And Yes while it wasnt the national average, gas here at one point in time was .99 cents. It probably was just the one region I was in at the time, who knows. Unfortunately, I have no statistics to show, so you can believe me or not. It may not even have been in '01, but definitely within the past 8-9 years. While it was only for a few months, if that, it was present. It was an all time low, as gas price was on a decline.

In feb '02, looks like the average gas price in AZ was 1.20. That is long since changed here.

My source is below. Just change the time period from 1 month to 6 years to see.

http://www.arizonagasprices.com/retail_price_chart.aspx

Trust me, Im all for not using gas either. But I need to support my family, and this is the job I have. There only way I can get there in a timely manner is to get in my car and drive. I also NEED to go from office to office in a timely manner. I'm also required to transport equipment from site to site Sorry, im going to walk or ride a bike 50+ miles a day lugging computers on my back. It would take me hours to get to/from work work. Im always considered "on call" so carpooling is difficult for me to do. Extremely impractical.

I want a change also. We definitely need one. Most people want to completely cut off of one type of fuel, and completely start using alternative fuel. Unfortunately, that will NEVER happen. We have become so dependant on one type of fuel for such a long time, the country needs to ween itself off and progressively make the transition for anything to be considered successful. Hybrid cars are a good start, but they are mostly overpriced, underpowered, and usually ugly.

Personally, I think E85 is the most practical solution to springboard from. Its cleaner burning, RENEWABLE, and we can CONTAIN OUR OWN SUPPLY. At the same time we boost the farming economy. Oh, and it works in most current vehicles! Auto manufacturers have to do little to no changes to engine design. You get less mileage, fine, but it would most likely be a fraction of current costs, your helping the environment. AND since it burns cleaner, mechanics in vehicles tend to last ALOT longer. You claim that there is not enough farmers/land/corn to support the country? I CALL BULL!!! There should be PLENTY of farmers/farmland to support a healthy dose of E85. Most of the farmers that went bankrupt years ago would surely be willing to start farming agian if the demand and consistency for corn went way up. It doesn't even have to start with the consumer vehicles. Cities/states can adopt all commercial/city vehicles to run off of E85 first. If it doesnt really work out, fine we tried on a smaller scale. But who knows how much red tape/BS politics is involved with that; I have heard little to nothing about E85 in a while. With so little sacrifices to make (such as less mileage), it seemed quite promising as the next fuel type.

I am however, an advocate for public transportation. I visit cities like Montreal all the time, and I use nothing but their public transportation to traverse the city. ITs great! Unfortunately, we do not have a practical mode of "inexpensive, gas-consuming" transportation in my area. With this edition of light rial in our city, Im hoping it catches on so I will have to use less of my car.

so while you are correct, we can definitely go about our days without fuel; there is no way in hell the US (or even the world) could function in a practical manner if we just severed the ties with fossil fuel.

missed this earlier

dtlokee wrote:

Oh by the way, ethanal is not the answer yet. It takes almost as much fossil fuel to produce as the amout of energy it creates.

okay, but whats stopping them from making E85 fuel for the machines that produce the E85 for consumers? where does it say you NEED to use fossil fuel to produce E85? So we use the fuel soley to produce E85, we would still making an environmental improvement, still consuming less fossil fuel as a whole, still increasing lifespan of mechanical engines, and still boosting the US farming economy. But I digress, because you said its not the end-all be-all solution YET. In time, but not yet. I agree with that.

I still have a hard time believing that E85 was written off based on that fact...

garv221

Gas is currently 3.29/gallon. I remember paying .99/gallon in the summer of 98' and 1.09/gallon 99-2000 here in Michigan.

I currently drive 1/4 mile to work in a 25mph zone. I honestly gave up on worrying about gas, I need it, no amount of complaining will change the price so it doesn't bother me. I also enjoy driving my car like I stole it, I just no longer buy premium.

Plantwiz wrote:

SnAdam,

And the US has been holding prices down for years. We've not paid a fair market value in ages compared to what Canada, Europe, and Asia have all been paying. So yes our prices should rise to meet the market level.

This statement could not be more wrong as well all pay market value. The reason for these higher gas prices has absolutely nothing to do with their purchase price of gas but everything to do with the fact these countries have a 140-160% gas tax to help encourage other methods of transportation.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12452503/

Plantwiz

snadam wrote:

dtlokee wrote:

Oh by the way, ethanal is not the answer yet. It takes almost as much fossil fuel to produce as the amout of energy it creates.

okay, but whats stopping them from making E85 fuel for the machines that produce the E85 for consumers? where does it say you NEED to use fossil fuel to produce E85? So we use the fuel soley to produce E85, we would still making an environmental improvement, still consuming less fossil fuel as a whole, still increasing lifespan of mechanical engines, and still boosting the US farming economy. But I digress, because you said its not the end-all be-all solution YET. In time, but not yet. I agree with that.

I still have a hard time believing that E85 was written off based on that fact...

E85 is definately not the answer as dtlokee pointed out. You may want to read "Omnivore Delimena" for starters.

Corn should NOT be produced and it is something that is not healthy (at least with all the hybridization that has happend). Corn cannot seed itself like other plants...the seed must be stomped into the ground either by equipment or by (back in Mexico of it's thought to be origins)...it was stomped into the earth by wild bore. If you study anthropology you'll find that bores were prohibit from being eaten because to raise them up to serving size

they would consume the same food as humans. On a survival note...if a hog eats it..it is probably safe for you to eat, but when they are competiting for your food...you don't want them....I digress...

SO corn (or Maize) cannot sew itself and require a means to be burried. Corn also needs to be planted in excess to have enough seed for a second year crop. You gain no benefit by consuming the whole product because unlike an apple where you eat the flesh...you are left with a seed ot then grow more apple trees. Corn, if you eat it, it's gone. Not self-renewable.

The whole E85 process is crazy. You burn fossil fuels to plant your first crop. You use fossil fuels to keep that crop maintained (fertilzier...and where does that come from???

) Pivots, or boom watering if in a drought which require energy to run, then there is harvest. After harvest, there is processing, packaging, shipping.....and some of that seed needs to remain to have crop for the next season.

Corn is one of the only crops I can think of where a deficit is created to have a second season. THEN it robs the nutrients from the soil, which is why it requires soooooo much fertilzer. And because of Atrazine (used as an herbicide)
http://www.epa.gov/safewater/dwh/c-soc/atrazine.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atrazine
http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/criteria/atrazine/atrazinefacts.html

We are still paying for the ill-effects of it's use on corn.

Schluep

My personal thoughts (trying to reach back and touch on quite a few different aspect of this topic that were brought up).

Regarding the hybrids: Gas prices are not high enough yet in most cases for the extra cost in purchasing a hybrid vehicle to account for the savings in gas usage. Many of the tax credits on purchasing hybrids in the U.S. are also expiring now. Even prior to this experition nearly all of the studies I saw had timeframes of 7-20 years before the savings would be reached if the buyer paid cash for the car (sadly most people finance everything and live beyond their means). I just saw one recently (couldn't find the exact page with a quick search and don't have time now for in depth analysis on something I don't plan to buy) showing that if you were to purchase a Toyota Camry Hybrid over a Toyota Camry paying cash it would take 17 years for the gas savings to be realized using an average gas price of $2.70 per gallon. Even if gas cost doubled to $5.40 per gallon the day after you purchased it you would only break even at 8.5 years.

Regarding Mass Transportation: In Pittsburgh where I live we just closed down several bus routes because the government's transportation program was managed very poorly from a financial standpoint and has been operating for years at a huge loss. Even though public transportation usage has been increasing in the area routes are being cut, prices are being raised, and funding is being pulled from taxpayers due to poor management. All of our trolley tracks and most of our lightrail was line was pulled out years ago even though it covered most of the city. If private companies ran the buses I think competition and accountability would increase the usage of public transportation, but sadly that is not the case. Regardless, where possible many people are switching to public transportation over a desire to save money on gas, and many have cancelled trips they usually take for that reason. Obviously the effect on the airline industry is felt as well for anyone who flies.

Regarding E85: I was going to say something about E85 but Plantwiz took care of that one so well that I couldn't possibly add anything else. He raises what I believe to be a very good point however so I am mentioning it for emphasis.

Regarding not Driving: Personally I would rather drive and have control over my time than to ride a bus, train, or bike in almost every case. My time is more valuable than the cost of the gas. If it cost $15.00 per gallon I would still drive without question. As a result I really don't even think about gas prices, but just accept the fact that I would rather it be lower, but need to use it anyway. I don't speed, but I would rather be able to drive as quickly as it is safely possible to do so.

Regarding our cost compared to other Countries: The cost of bringing all of the crude oil in, refining it, and making the various environmental mixtures that differ from state to state is kept surprisingly low. Taxes account for a high percentage of the price of gas as well. This is where our savings over Europe and other Countries truly exist however. Even as high as our taxes on gas are theirs are higher which largely results in the higher price mentioned earlier in the thread. As was mentioned the diminishing value of the dollar certainly hurts us substantially in this arena as well in the U.S. Tariffs and trade agreements obviously play a part as well.

In terms of reducing demand: Personally the biggest issue for me with the gas prices in the U.S. is that we are not doing nearly enough of our own drilling, we aren't building new refineries, we aren't significantly expending alternative methods of creation energy nor are we expanding our current methods of gathering. It all comes down mainly to supply and demand again. Until we have enough energy available the prices will cotinue to rise at a high rate because demand increases. The potential impact Iran for example could have on gas prices in the U.S. and many other places around the world by damaging pipelines that run through their Country similar to what happened at the end of the Iran/Iraq War is ridiculous. In the U.S. we could be drilling in most of our Western states (especially Colorado/Wyoming), off many of our coasts, and in Alaska. Of course the mountains are one of my favorite places to travel (I head to Colorado every summer). The problem is that nobody wants a Nuclear Plant in their backyard for fear of growing three heads. Nobody wants to see a pipeline running near their favorite hiking trail. Windmills and solar panels are ugly as well. As many posters indicated we do not need to be switching entirely to one new source of alternative energy at once, but we should at least be doing what can to reduce the demand by increasing the supply using methods currently available to us. As much as I love a nice landscape, we need to do something to produce more energy as we continue to use more or there will be a greater shortage. Just think of how much more electricity we are using now with all of the computers we have running on these giant networks, let alone the fact that most of us have several running in our own households. I bet your electric and gas bills have gone up by large amounts as well over the past 10 years.

One final thought on the above paragraph: Usually I prefer to keep the government out of things as they tend to make problems worse when they get involved and gain more control over us. However, one idea could be to keep the tax money already being collected and use it to offer a credit on electric bills and/or home heating bills to people who live near Nuclear Plants. Instead of people petitioning and suing to prevent them from being built they will be house shopping for the cloest house they can get.

Sie

Im sat here reading everyones comments and wishing i was only paying the prices you US guys are!

Another poor, skint UK guy here

Road Tax for 6 months cost me £96 aswell

sprkymrk

The answer, my fellow techies, is simple. Use more computers and less gas.

DISA, in the Washington, DC area is planning on having over half it's work force telecommute by 2009. They will provide GFE laptops with VPN's and assist in setting up users high speed access with recommended equipment and other such necessities. I don't know all the details, but this will supposedly keep thousands of DISA employees from the daily commute into and out of the city. I think they will still be required to come "to work" once a week for face to face meetings and such, but these will be scheduled for mid morning to early afternoon to avoid the rush hour traffic.

I think this kind of solution is great for many situations.

I, of course, am also doing my part to conserve gas through the use of computers. I have so many in my home I don't need to run my furnace in the winter...

I just realized not everyone may be familiar with a couple of acronyms I used:
DISA = Defence Information Systems Agency
GFE = Government Furnished Equipment

Lee H

Road Tax for 6 months cost me £96 aswell

In the UK, our road tax is based on our cars emitions. This is established during the M.O.T and the DVLA already have access to this info when you pay for your road tax.

Mine is only £55 for 6 months so i wonder what kind of car you have that costa £96 for 6 months

Lee H

snadam

Plantwiz wrote:

snadam wrote:

dtlokee wrote:

Oh by the way, ethanal is not the answer yet. It takes almost as much fossil fuel to produce as the amout of energy it creates.

okay, but whats stopping them from making E85 fuel for the machines that produce the E85 for consumers? where does it say you NEED to use fossil fuel to produce E85? So we use the fuel soley to produce E85, we would still making an environmental improvement, still consuming less fossil fuel as a whole, still increasing lifespan of mechanical engines, and still boosting the US farming economy. But I digress, because you said its not the end-all be-all solution YET. In time, but not yet. I agree with that.

I still have a hard time believing that E85 was written off based on that fact...

E85 is definitely not the answer as dtlokee pointed out. You may want to read "Omnivore Delimena" for starters.

Corn should NOT be produced and it is something that is not healthy (at least with all the hybridization that has happend). Corn cannot seed itself like other plants...the seed must be stomped into the ground either by equipment or by (back in Mexico of it's thought to be origins)...it was stomped into the earth by wild bore. If you study anthropology you'll find that bores were prohibit from being eaten because to raise them up to serving size they would consume the same food as humans. On a survival note...if a hog eats it..it is probably safe for you to eat, but when they are competiting for your food...you don't want them....I digress...

SO corn (or Maize) cannot sew itself and require a means to be burried. Corn also needs to be planted in excess to have enough seed for a second year crop. You gain no benefit by consuming the whole product because unlike an apple where you eat the flesh...you are left with a seed ot then grow more apple trees. Corn, if you eat it, it's gone. Not self-renewable.

The whole E85 process is crazy. You burn fossil fuels to plant your first crop. You use fossil fuels to keep that crop maintained (fertilzier...and where does that come from??? ) Pivots, or boom watering if in a drought which require energy to run, then there is harvest. After harvest, there is processing, packaging, shipping.....and some of that seed needs to remain to have crop for the next season.

Corn is one of the only crops I can think of where a deficit is created to have a second season. THEN it robs the nutrients from the soil, which is why it requires soooooo much fertilzer. And because of Atrazine (used as an herbicide)
http://www.epa.gov/safewater/dwh/c-soc/atrazine.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atrazine
http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/criteria/atrazine/atrazinefacts.html

We are still paying for the ill-effects of it's use on corn.

It seems you alienate the corn process like its an environmental hazard all of a sudden. Millions of People eat corn and nothing happens to them. We have an entire state affiliated with the production of corn (Nebraska; in which many of my family members reside and are retired farmers). I'm no horticulture/agriculture expert, but what I DO know is that corn is not going anywhere. Processing corn is not a "new technology" by any means. People have been mass producing, and consuming corn for centuries. Not only for fuel, but for other things such as starch, alcohol, and FEED.

I'm not a farmer, but if you want a successful crop in anything, you have to physically plant the seed in the ground. The farmer that just tosses his crop seed out in a patch of dirt is not going to produce as nearly as much as the farmer that has a system for planting the seed in the ground. The process of planting corn has been mastered over the years; or else corn would be on such high demand that it would cost $50/husk (exaggerated a bit). Pesticides, although not the best thing, have been used for decades and yet people still eat the produce. Fertilizer comes from cow crap (amongst other things); yet another renewable resource. And besides, we are not talking about consuming corn, we are discussing the means of turning corn into a combustible source; which has been done for centuries, but not on as MASS a scale thats needed (i.e. EVERCLEAR). Again, why the hell cant we use alternative fuel/other methods that we can harness NOW to create E85? Where in the rules does it say fossil fuel MUST be used to produce E85?

It sounds like all these arguments are for the fact that you want something to change tomorrow, and no looking back at fossil fuel. And again, from my statement earlier:

snadam wrote:

most people want to completely cut off of one type of fuel, and completely start using alternative fuel. Unfortunately, that will NEVER happen. We have become so dependant on one type of fuel for such a long time, the country needs to ween itself off and progressively make the transition for anything to be considered successful.

So why would it be impractical to create a surplus of E85 ahead of time before its publicly available?

look IM not even saying that E85 is the end-all be-all solution. I stated earlier that its a good platform to springboard from. Im not a die-hard fan of E85 specifically, Im a die-hard fan of a practical alternative fuel that we can progressively merge to. Because thats really the only way it can be done with minimal incident/impact on the country or even world.

at this point, its probably an agree to disagree situation. And just so its clear, Im not trying to start a "fuel war" here.

sprkymrk

snadam wrote:

And just so its clear, Im not trying to start a "fuel war" here.

Hmmm..., relatives that are/were farmers in Nebraska? I see right through your thinnly veiled attempt to make them rich by convincing us all to buy ethenol!

Seriously, there is no one "end all, be all" solution to the problem. Alternative fuel sources are just one answer, but that must be combined with methods of cutting down consumption as well. Walking/biking/public transportation are definately NOT the answer as urban sprawl has made the walking/biking impossible for too many people and public transportation is only effective in the largest of cities. Small to mid-sized cities will use MORE fuel trying to run enough busses that end up carrying 5-8 passengers than it would take for those same passengers to drive their own vehicles.

Anyone want to start drilling more oil wells in Alaska? Conservationists have so far thwarted those efforts - right or wrong.

snadam

sprkymrk wrote:

snadam wrote:

And just so its clear, Im not trying to start a "fuel war" here.

Hmmm..., relatives that are/were farmers in Nebraska? I see right through your thinnly veiled attempt to make them rich by convincing us all to buy ethenol!

Seriously, there is no one "end all, be all" solution to the problem. Alternative fuel sources are just one answer, but that must be combined with methods of cutting down consumption as well. Walking/biking/public transportation are definitely NOT the answer as urban sprawl has made the walking/biking impossible for too many people and public transportation is only effective in the largest of cities. Small to mid-sized cities will use MORE fuel trying to run enough busses that end up carrying 5-8 passengers than it would take for those same passengers to drive their own vehicles.

Anyone want to start drilling more oil wells in Alaska? Conservationists have so far thwarted those efforts - right or wrong.

haha, but they are all retired (and in thier 80's+). I have a hard time seeing them form a corn conglomerate

.

I agree with you sprkymrk. It just seems like most people are looking for the divine solution, while we need to be a tad more conservative and at the same time find multiple methods of alternative fuels. I think for any energy solution to be successful, "multiple" and "progressive" are some of the keywords to focus on.

Plantwiz

snadam wrote:

It seems you alienate the corn process like its an environmental hazard all of a sudden. Millions of People eat corn and nothing happens to them.

There is so much incorrect in that statement that I don't think I'll ever be able to show you enough evidence otherwise. You're entitled to your thoughts on Corn.

The corn lobbiest are one of the strongest lobby groups in Washington DC. Dairy is another. I come from a family with a number of relatives who made thier living as farmers and the rest in the auto industry. Doesn't mean I still don't think we can do better. If it's broken, it's time to fix it.

LukeQuake

Lol - I'm paying nearly £5 a gallon here ($10.22) !

Netstudent

I would not leave my frikin house if gas was that much. My company would be paying my gas or giving me a hella raise. Dang man that sucks.

Plantwiz

Netstudent wrote:

I would not leave my frikin house if gas was that much. My company would be paying my gas or giving me a hella raise. Dang man that sucks.

It's not up to your company to get you to and from work. Business milage is deductable (if traveling place to place for work), but aside from that, you'd either need to locate a job closer to where you live, carpool, walk/bike, bus, or just not work. It won't bankrupt you, it will merley eat into any savings you may have been doing...you could also cut back on other expenses.

We've been very, very lucky in the US. Other countries have managed...we will too.

steveo1985

It’s only going to get worse, be prepared for $4.00/gallon in the next year.

I would love to pay that

thats £1.95 or £0.39 a ltr. Wow if i lived in the US i would get myself a big car!!!!! say a 80 ltr tank so £31.20 for the whole tank of petrol

I pay £1.04 now

thats $2.12 a ltr or £5.20 a gallon.... $10.63. I have a 40 ltr tank and costs £41.6 to fill up or $85.64 ohhh wish i lived in the USA now :P

Hey sort of funny story if your american would you complain about the price.... i was in line to see the vatican museums and the sistean chapeal in rome the other week and an american couple were standing behind me. The price to get in was £12 or $24 dollers and they couldn't stop complaining. Then it reminded me of my trip to new york and how cheap everything was compared to back home...... it makes going on holiday a pleasure as everything is cheaper, it must be a pain for americans to go abroad and pay more for almost everything than they do at home. (although i would rather pay less for the 48 weeks a year im stuck at home than pay less for the 4 weeks i get off to go abroad lol)

networker050184

I lived in Europe for about two years and the gas was killer! After that I don't complain about US gas prices. When I was there I had a little car, good on gas. Now I'm back in the states I drive an SUV and still pay less for gas! We have it good and most don't even realize.

steveo1985

i bet beer is cheaper over there to?.... kind of makes me wish i lived in the states. ohhh better weather to :P oh well... travelling to OZ in 6 weeks for a long six month break hahahaha

Ricka182

I just filled up yesterday. Well, not a full tank....$60 got me almost 20 gallons. I have to fill up on average every 5 or 6 days; with a 30 mile highway commute one way. I have a full size Chevy pickup. It's also an E85 compatible engine. My problem is that with E85, you need somewhere to buy it. I live in Taxachusetts, and there are no E85 stations available to the public. There were plans to build a couple near the gas and oil ports, but they failed at some point, and I still have to use regular gas. I find myself driving an average of 70mph, sometimes 75. I try not to go much faster, and I've been trying to slow down; but everyone else is going so much faster, I'd get killed if I did the speed limit in some places. We are known for our bad drivers, just not me.

Road taxes, or excise as we call them for some reason, cost $25 per $1000 of value on the vehicle I think. But, they down the value of every vehicle as well. I bought my truck in 2005, for a little over $30,000. The next year, my excise had it valued at $15,000 for some reason, so my tax was way cheaper than I thought.

Also, I don't know if it's been mentioned, but here in Massachusetts, we have the Nations ' highest insurance rates. All rates are set by a regulatory commision, so there's no real competition. That is set to change next year, but for 30 years, you paid what the state told you to pay. All those Geico, Allstate, and State Farm commercials I see might actually mean something now, as those companies will be permitted to do business here. I still pay $1400 a year, granted with added points for an accident(wasn't my fault, but got screwed); without it I'd pay about $700 annually.

Regardless of how many good points and bad points poeple bring up, it comes down to one thing....Demand for fuel, in some aspect. There will always be a demand for fuel, as long as there are humans here to consume it. I live with the high gas prices, because I have no real choice. Maybe in 10 years, but right now, bitching won't get back to $1.50/g......

*edit* Something else I just thought of.....The worst part of E85 for me at least, is that a lot of farmers, worldwide have given up traditional crops like barley, to grow corn. That causes barley prices to rise in turn, which cause beer prices to go up.....

Turgon

Yup. I pay over 10 dollars a gallon for my petrol here in the UK. A full tank sets me back 100 dollars.

Netstudent

There are a lot of alternative fuel options though. Theres E85, Bio Diesel, hydrogen, and electric just to name a few. Bio diesel can be made from any organic material. I was watching a show on the discovery channel last night about how they are making biodiesel out of scrap cars, tires, and all kinds of stuff you would find at a ****. Something about how they depolymerize and separate the organic from inorganic materials, then they heat it up and compress it at like 600psi. Ya it may be impractical or impossible to fuel every vehicle with corn based fuel, but there a lot more alternatives than just E85. IF we used every method of alternative fuel, I think we could do it. But we will never get there without government support. The US will never get there while spending trillions of dollars in Iraq. So it's a hard tradeoff. It seems as if most manufactorers that produce alternative fuels are privately owned and I don't know if they get any government subsidies at all. probably not. With todays technology, we can pretty much make something out of nothing. I don't agree that we don't have the resources to make a difference. We don't have to go completely away from oil and gasoline. Maybe we should start integrating all the options and incorporate electric technology on all engines so at least we can use less gasoline.

snadam

Netstudent wrote:

There are a lot of alternative fuel options though. Theres E85, Bio Diesel, hydrogen, and electric just to name a few. Bio diesel can be made from any organic material. I was watching a show on the discovery channel last night about how they are making biodiesel out of scrap cars, tires, and all kinds of stuff you would find at a ****. Something about how they depolymerize and separate the organic from inorganic materials, then they heat it up and compress it at like 600psi. Ya it may be impractical or impossible to fuel every vehicle with corn based fuel, but there a lot more alternatives than just E85. IF we used every method of alternative fuel, I think we could do it. But we will never get there without government support. The US will never get there while spending trillions of dollars in Iraq. So it's a hard tradeoff. It seems as if most manufactorers that produce alternative fuels are privately owned and I don't know if they get any government subsidies at all. probably not. With todays technology, we can pretty much make something out of nothing. I don't agree that we don't have the resources to make a difference. We don't have to go completely away from oil and gasoline. Maybe we should start integrating all the options and incorporate electric technology on all engines so at least we can use less gasoline.

funny you mention that netstudent, because I was watching Modern Marvels on the History Channel in regards to renewable energy. They covered solar, Ethanol, BioDiesel fuels, Wind, Geo-thermal, etc. An interesting twist on the E85 conundrum. Plantwiz was correct in saying that for ever unit of fossil fuel energy, Corn produces 1.33 units of ethanol. We will not be making too much headway from progressively weening ourselves from fossil fuel that way. HOWEVER, in brazil, they are harnessing the sugar cane and turning it into ethanol quite well, at a rate of 8:1. While switchgrass can be harnessed at a ratio of ~14:1. Is it the all definitive answer? NOPE. But it does show a progression in harnessing these types of fuels, and how they are looking at other renewable resources rather than corn.

I also found the solar section of this program very intriguing. They claimed that if they had a 10,000 sq. ft area of photo-voltaic panels, that would produce enough energy to support the entire US. They also have a thin film of solar energy panels, and they are even working on a paint that can harness solar energy. Imagine that, painting your roof with this stuff, and it can power your house...CRAZY!

Geo-Thermal seems to work well (check out Iceland, they run 80% of the country on geo-thermal energy). My only issue is, what happens when we run out of "steam" from the earth to support this kind of energy? Does it renew itself? What type of biological problems would this cause if used on a mass scale?

either way, I found the entire show VERY interesting, and ironic since we posted up this topic about the same time

IT_Admin

Not quite sure how this will fit it, but here I usually pay $40 - $45 to fill my car. Gas usually hovers around the 1$/litre mark. I figured gas would have dropped with the canadian dollar being so strong, but it was just the opposite it actually went up.

Its nothing but an ass raping, I dont know how gas can go down a 1 or 2 cent a week *if your lucky* but the next day shoot up dime, it just pisses me off.