High Gas Prices

[Jesse Torres]

Are the high gas prices really constraining some to cut back on driving for pleasure or in any other ways? I ask because the ubiquitous media coverage of high gas prices isn�t slowing down economic growth (according to the media).

How high does a gallon of fuel or barrel of crude have to rise before we REALLY start complaining? The media continues to state that today�s high prices aren�t as high as during the 1970s Oil Embargo (When adjusted for inflation). But did fuel prices remain high for a long period of time during the Oil Embargo?

Right now where I live, a gallon of auto fuel is $2.89 and premium is $3.09. OUCH. That�s high for me.

[Paul Bourdeaux]

Yeah, gas prices are high, but it is not enough to make me adjust my way of life. I am considering purchasing a hyrbid with my next purchase, but that is about it.

I think the bigger impact from gas prices going up is the cost of other consumer goods going up with it. If it costs Walmart an extra 25% to ship its products to the stores, you can bet we willsee that reflected in the end user prices. This, IMHO, is much more cause for concern than my gas bill each month.

[Svend Rost]

Originally posted by Jesse Torres:
Right now where I live, a gallon of auto fuel is $2.89 and premium is $3.09. OUCH. That�s high for me.

Forgive me if im wrong, but as far as I know a gallon is 3,8 liters, making
auto fuel cost 0,76$/liter.. and YOUR complaining??? LOL in Denmark a liter of gasoline cost 1,6$

[Dan Maples]

Originally posted by Svend Rost:


Forgive me if im wrong, but as far as I know a gallon is 3,8 liters, making
auto fuel cost 0,76$/liter.. and YOUR complaining??? LOL in Denmark a liter of gasoline cost 1,6$

well not too long ago gas was under $1.50 a gallon, so $2.89 a gallon is almost double, hence the reason people are upset.

[Jesse Torres]

Originally posted by Svend Rost:


Forgive me if im wrong, but as far as I know a gallon is 3,8 liters, making
auto fuel cost 0,76$/liter.. and YOUR complaining??? LOL in Denmark a liter of gasoline cost 1,6$

Maybe $1.60 per liter in Europe is o.k because the cost of living is much higher there. Is this the case?

[Peter Rooke]

In the UK we pay �0.90 (or 90 pence) a litre. Using todays exchange rate thats equal to $1.64 a litre (1 U.S. dollar = 0.55 British pound).
Most of this is tax.

If this happened in the US, you'll be throwing oil barrels into the river!

[kayal cox]

Petrol is more expensive in India too, although the cost of living is cheaper than US.

[Peter Rooke]

Maybe $1.60 per liter in Europe is o.k because the cost of living is much higher there

- er, No
The FTSE (100) contains some big oil companies (BT, Shell), so those companies do quite well. Still think its bad news, almost everything depends on the cost of oil.

What was it that Napoleon said: "China is a sickly, sleeping giant. But when she awakes the world will tremble"

[Michael Ernest]

Well, ask yourself how you'd feel if in two years you were paying double for gas what you pay today. That's what we're going through over here.

It's approaching $3/gal in the San Francisco Bay Area.

<TIN_FOIL_HELMET_ALERT>
The key to all this is the pricing is based on global demand and supply. Meaning, in short, sources of domestic oil in the US can draw from reserves and charge according to global production. Which is to say the rise in prices gives domestic producers margins a true capitalist only dreams of. Sure, they can't change the global market supply, but why would they want to anyway?

Check the cost of domestic oil production per barrel against it's supply/demand global value. Someone's making more than a penny.

I dropped a line to an old fire department buddy, one I know who is heavily invested in domestic oil, just to prod him. He's saying little and living well.

</TIN_FOIL_HELMET_ALERT>

[ August 12, 2005: Message edited by: Michael Ernest ]

Edited for being too meaningful.
[ August 15, 2005: Message edited by: Thomas Paul ]

[Paul Bourdeaux]

Some might be surprised to learn that most of our oil doesn't come from the OPEC nations. Here is a breakdown of the top five countries from Energy Information Administration.

Top Sources of U.S. Crude Oil Imports (January-October 2004E)

Canada (1.61 million bbl/d)

Mexico (1.59 million bbl/d)

Saudi Arabia (1.48 million bbl/d)

Venezuela (1.29 million bbl/d)

Nigeria (1.09 million bbl/d)

The web site also has a very interesting chronology of oil prices.

[Paul Bourdeaux]

Full of innuendo and snide speculation, of course

He he he, that's the understatment of the century! It actually did touch on one or two good points, and could have been a good documentary if it wasn't for Moore's blatent hatred of the administration. Instead, his lack of objectivity really turned it into a long political commercial.

[Roger Johnson]

the gas price is $2.4 per gallon here. i still remember that the gas price is less than $1 per gallon in atlanta in summer 1996. when i took a visit during the atlanta olympic games.

my jeep got a 15-gallon tank. each time it costs me ~$40 to fill it up. somehow it only give 200 miles (less than spec). the round trip form home to work takes 20 miles, if i pick my dry clean, or drop by stores, or go out for lunch, or go to ymca, it easily tops 50 miles per day, that is a quarter of the tank. of course, miata is much better, i got ~300 miles every 12 gallons. but still, if i need cash, i will go to the nearest ATM, no matter how much fee it charge me.

[Paul Bourdeaux]

Yet another link related to gas prices.

[Michael Ernest]

Having looked at both links, I think the term 'article' is rather generous. Alarmist rhetoric on a garage-artsy Goth site, yes. Some of the reasons given on that site for economic collapse are opinions and wild, unfounded assertions.

Mandarin is now more important than English in the world market? By what agreed-upon measure is that claim even partially founded? How many countries out there does one fancy are now speaking Chinese, instead of English or French, to maintain status in the world market?

[Dave Lenton]

Originally posted by Jesse Torres:
Are the high gas prices really constraining some to cut back on driving for pleasure or in any other ways? I ask because the ubiquitous media coverage of high gas prices isn�t slowing down economic growth (according to the media).

At the moment the western economy is doing OK because of the large level of international demand for goods produced there. While higher fuel prices are driving costs, and therefore prices, up, there is currently enough demand to soak the price increase up. Ironically part of this high international demand is from middle eastern states grown rich on oil revenue. In the short term this means that the economy will continue to grow, but there will be increasingly high inflationary pressure.

But.....

How high does a gallon of fuel or barrel of crude have to rise before we REALLY start complaining? The media continues to state that today�s high prices aren�t as high as during the 1970s Oil Embargo (When adjusted for inflation)

True, at the moment the oil "crisis" isn't as bad as in the 70's. Then the proverbial really did hit the fan. Unfortunately it looks like we could be heading for a similar situation. Although international demand for western produced goods is high, its possibly unsustainable in the long term. Part of this demand is from the Middle East and, as in the 70s, they'll probably get fed up of selling the west crude oil for $X and then buying back oil-based products at $100X. Secondly a large amount of the international demand comes from developing countries like China, and its questionable how much more they can afford to keep paying.

The other big problem is China (and to a lesser, but still big, extent India). While supply has been slightly reduced (and we could probably cope with this), demand is very much up. China's ever increasing demand for oil will prove to be a very large long term inflationary pressure on oil prices - they just can't stay this "low"(!) at the current rate of China's growth in demand for it. Currently the USA consumes a quarter of the world's oil with a population of 296,800,000. What will happen when China and India's combined population of 2,386,578,200 want the same consumer goods? While its unlikely that China and India could have enough growth to replicate the life styles of the average American for their entire populations, there's no doubt that as they grow they will want more oil, and the price will go through the roof.

So who will it hurt? While Europeans pay famously high fuel prices, much of this is down to the level of taxation on it. This means that its possible that European governments can lower the fuel tax to counter the increasing cost of oil, meaning that Europeans can offset the effect a bit. Even if they can't, an increase in oil price means a smaller percentage increase in the fuel price at the pump then in a lower taxed country, as the oil price makes up a smaller proportion of the total amount paid.

In contrast, when the price of oil increases, Americans see a larger increase in fuel prices when they go to fill their car up. There is a counter argument however in that as Americans pay a lower price, they will be more able to cope with a price increases, even if they psychologically feel as if they are being hit worse then the Europeans.

A minor factor in the problem may be something as simple as the size of your car. On average European cars are smaller and more fuel efficient then cars in the US, so in the short term Americans with mega-big fuel guzzling cars will find things a lot more expensive. This should just be short term however as market forces should make smaller engine cars more desirable... as long as American drivers can get past the long entrenched American idea that "big is better".
[ August 15, 2005: Message edited by: Dave Lenton ]

[Dave Lenton]

Originally posted by Paul Bourdeaux:
It actually did touch on one or two good points, and could have been a good documentary if it wasn't for Moore's blatent hatred of the administration. Instead, his lack of objectivity really turned it into a long political commercial.

This is a real shame. Moore turned up a few really interesting, shocking and possible disgraceful things, but then ruined the effect by being too sensationalist about it. He played into the hands of his detractors by presenting his film more as political propaganda then as a factual investigation.

I really think that had he impartially and calmly presented the evidence in a non-biased way, he could have reduced the support for the government. In the US image is everything however, so by accidentally playing up to the image of outraged anti-Bushie, the facts in the film are over shadowed by Moore himself. Its often a bad sign of a documentary when you remember more about the presenter then you do about the subject matter.

[Ashok Mash]

Originally posted by Roger Johnson:
the gas price is $2.4 per gallon here. i still remember that the gas price is less than $1 per gallon in atlanta in summer 1996. when i took a visit during the atlanta olympic games.

It's about 110 euro cents a litre here in Ireland, which is about $5.20 a gallon. Commute to work for me was just 20 miles, but with the poor infrastructure and bad traffic, that's more than an hour on road twice a day, and costs me nearly 50 euros ($70?) a week, on petrol alone - I gave up driving and moved further out into the country, and now I commute by train - it costs me nearly $100 a month, but I save on petrol, parking and I can work/read or watch a movie while a commute!

[Peter Rooke]

n contrast, when the price of oil increases, Americans see a larger increase in fuel prices when they go to fill their car up.

It's not just fuel prices that will increase. Most of the our economies are too dependant on oil, and the big profit making companies. Whatever happened to the Nuclear option?

In the UK the tax on fuel has not been increased as much as it possibly would have been under lower oil prices. Of course, unlike our fuel tanks, the chancellors coffers are still being filled up - the higher price generates more revenue. Fiscal drag in action.

Hopfully, if we do get a economic downturn, overvalued house prices may fall in the UK. Would not hurt to reinvest some of the money from the inflated housing market into the (IT) technology sector. Of course I'm a bit bias :roll:

[Michael Ernest]

Originally posted by Dave Lenton:


This is a real shame. Moore turned up a few really interesting, shocking and possible disgraceful things, but then ruined the effect by being too sensationalist about it. He played into the hands of his detractors by presenting his film more as political propaganda then as a factual investigation.

I really think that had he impartially and calmly presented the evidence in a non-biased way, he could have reduced the support for the government. In the US image is everything however, so by accidentally playing up to the image of outraged anti-Bushie, the facts in the film are over shadowed by Moore himself. Its often a bad sign of a documentary when you remember more about the presenter then you do about the subject matter.

Well, see, but that's Michael Moore for you. The man is incapable of producing an objective story, and I think he knows it. Maybe you could call his stuff guerilla journalism or something. It seems to me he feels he fights fire with fire.

The heartache is he seems to get so close to real and troubling information, builds up this momentum with it and then...well. It's all there to see.

It does "work," in its way, this hearts-and-minding people. It's just not tapping the high plane of principle and reasoning one might hope for.

My stepfather for me is a good example of the same kind of thing happening on the other side of the political fence. He makes these great-sounding arguments all the time that amount to about the exact opposite of what Moore has to say. It was only after listening to him a little more closely that a common thread emerged to me. Both guys from Michigan, both interested in the 'real truth' with a combination of real facts, poignant insights and a deeply-held conviction that they've got it figured exactly right.

[Roger Johnson]

Originally posted by Michael Ernest:
Having looked at both links, I think the term 'article' is rather generous. Alarmist rhetoric on a garage-artsy Goth site, yes. Some of the reasons given on that site for economic collapse are opinions and wild, unfounded assertions.

Mandarin is now more important than English in the world market? By what agreed-upon measure is that claim even partially founded? How many countries out there does one fancy are now speaking Chinese, instead of English or French, to maintain status in the world market?

i agree with you on those links, some of reasons might be true, some might be false, but no one will make big decision based on those.

regarding Mandarin, i definetely believe it went too far, Mandarin as a foreign language selective class in US high school, is picking up, thanks to the economy development in China, but i am pretty sure it is still way behind French, German, or Spanish.

But language is a tool at any time, just like computer languages, the most popular one in a particle scenario or in general, will be decided by programmers, "the most current version of UNIX is the one most programmers are using when 10 programmers were locked in a room, working on a UNIX project day and night", i recall reading it in a UNIX book forward.

in short, people have to bring food to their table, that is the bottom line. starting from that, we will derive most of the causes for human behavior.

there is an intern working at GE global research currently, he won gold at Athens Olympic games, as a member of US men's 800 m free relay team, but swimming is not a professional sports, unlike football, basketball, ...so i won't be surprised if seeing him coming back again in the next couple of months.
[ August 15, 2005: Message edited by: Roger Johnson ]

[Jesus Angeles]

it seems like the price of oil is at the tip of the tail of a hyperactive dragon.

even the seasoned futures trader would take very cautious approach on making money on it.

but it sure is exciting for the traders.

[Dave Lenton]

You would have thought that with increasing prices of oil, and the subsequent increase in plastics prices, that companies would be looking to reduce the amount of plastics in their products. It seems the opposite is happening though - often when I go into supermarkets I notice things having a lot more packaging then previously. Some crazy examples I've seen are packets of biscuits were each biscuit is individually wrapped within an external wrapping. Another is a set of four apples on a polystyrene tray and in plastic wrapping. What a waste.

If plastic prices are increasing, then these costs must be being passed on to the consumer. Market forces would suggest that consumers would move to buy products that are cheaper because of less packaging, but that isn't happening. Maybe its because people subconsciously see the large flashy packaging and assume that the product inside it will be better because of it.

This brings to mind a slight flaw in the market system - it assumes consumers are logical!

[Jesse Torres]

Prices at the BP by my place are the following:
$2.89 for regular
$2.99 for Mid-grade
$3.09 for Premium

Ouch

[Alan Wanwierd]

For the first time in ages Deisel was actually cheaper than Petrol!!

Regular Unleaded - AU$1.20 /lt
Premium Unleaded - AU$1.30 /lt
Deisel - $1.10 /lt (~US$3.50 /Gal??)

[Jesse Torres]

www.gasbuddy.com can help you find the least expensive fuel in your city.

[Peter Rooke]

Fry and Drive Diesel from cooking oil on sale
Engineer serves up fish'n'chip fuel

Only one problem - It's illegal in the UK.

[Michael Ernest]

Originally posted by Adrian Wallace:
For the first time in ages Deisel was actually cheaper than Petrol!!

Regular Unleaded - AU$1.20 /lt
Premium Unleaded - AU$1.30 /lt
Deisel - $1.10 /lt (~US$3.50 /Gal??)

Diesel is about $3+/gal here. Shuts up a lot of smug Jetta drivers. 'Course, now all those people are paying above sticker for hybrids...

If you're into making statements with your gas purchases, however, here's something to consider.
[ August 20, 2005: Message edited by: Michael Ernest ]

[sunitha reghu]

This is cooool

[Jesse Torres]

Originally posted by Sunitha Raghu:
This is cooool

I can't believe people are actually bidding on this.

[ August 22, 2005: Message edited by: Jesse Torres ]

[Megs Maquito]

Here in the Philippines its Php 32.60/liter for unleaded. Current exchange rate is Php 56.00 to a US$. So that's 0.58 per liter and yet it's pretty expensive for most because of low wages. Comparing your pump prices I see now that fuel here is quite cheap. I still want to buy a more economical car.

[Rick Beaver]

I spend �50 a week on fuel - I travel about 300 miles a week - it is ridiculously expensive to drive in the UK


This year's car expenses:

Car - �15,000
Tax - �165
Petrol - �2600
Insurance - �700
Service - �140
Toll bridge - �1128

Grand total, just to get to work and back, excluding purchase of car = �4733

I notice that my local macdonalds, which is walking distance, is recruiting for a manager, the salary is more than my current salary less �4733.

Makes you wonder...

[Frank Silbermann]

Originally posted by Michael Ernest:
Well, see, but that's Michael Moore for you. The man is incapable of producing an objective story, and I think he knows it.

Now, now, be nice!

The heartache is he seems to get so close to real and troubling information, builds up this momentum with it and then...well. It's all there to see.

It does "work," in its way, this hearts-and-minding people. It's just not tapping the high plane of principle and reasoning one might hope for.

To be fair, Moore is limited by the facts at his disposal. Were he to evaluate the facts objectively (so that his reasoning would not be vulnerable to the kinds of criticism that is found on the anti-Moore websites), the results would not serve his purposes.

Your complaints are like wanting a used-car salesman to be objective about the condition and value of the car he's trying to sell.

[Peter Rooke]

Just curious - why do you call petrol gas? - I know you run on liquid petrol, as I've got a old American car myself (sadly its off the road). How did you end up calling it gas?

[Jesse Torres]

Originally posted by Peter Rooke:
Just curious - why do you call petrol gas? - I know you run on liquid petrol, as I've got a old American car myself (sadly its off the road). How did you end up calling it gas?

Gas = Gasoline

[Stan James]

Looking for better mileage? How about 12,900 MPG?

[Dave Lenton]

Originally posted by Jesse Torres:

Gas = Gasoline

According to Wikipedia

The word "gasolene" was coined in 1865 from the word gas and the chemical suffix -ine/-ene. The modern spelling was first used in 1871. The shortened form "gas" was first recorded in American English in 1905. Although, Gasoline originally referred to any liquid offered for sale, sold or used as the fuel for a gasoline-powered engine, but does not include diesel fuel or liquefied gas. Methanol racing fuel would be considered gasoline.

The word "petrol" was first used in reference to the refined substance as early as 1892 (it previously referred to unrefined petroleum), and was registered as a trade name by English wholesaler Carless, Capel & Leonard.

Bertha Benz got petrol for her famous drive from Mannheim to Pforzheim and back from chemists' shops. In Germany petrol is called Benzin but this is not related to her name.

[Frank Silbermann]

The use of the words "gas" and "gasoline" date back at least to 1959, when I noticed my parents using those words to refer to automotive fuel. The use of "gas" to refer to a physical state (gas vs liquid vs solid) dates back to 1968, when I entered junior high school.

Therefore, the real question is why scientists refer to substances such as oxygen, nitrogen, carbon-dioxide, etc. using a term that connotes automotive fuel.

[Anand Prabhu]

Now, I read that the hurricane Katrina is all set to push the oil prices further up through the roof as she bashes the gulf of Mexico and the oil fields located out there. Anyone remember the good old days of the mid-late nineties when the oil prices were around 80 cents. Guess those days too got burst along with the internet bubble.

[Stan James]

I grew up burning 29 cent gas, and used my daddy's credit card for that! Across from the gas station was a family joint with 15 cent cheeseburgers, 10 cent fries, 10 cent sodas: lunch for 50 cents.
[ August 29, 2005: Message edited by: Stan James ]

[Gerald Davis]

The high price of gasoline reflects the high cost of oil. The way I see it, the high cost of oil is proof that the economys of the world are doing well so has a high demand for oil, a healthy hunger.

The high cost of oil is not a good sign for the economy of countries with low growth or already in a recession. It is common knowledge that most of Europe is not doing very well at the moment.