Submitted by
Users who Dugg This
NotifyNeal
10141 Followers
BeShirtHappy
13460 Followers
Rohit Chhibber
-7 Followers
Shovelbaby
2110 Followers
DIGG-WillNotFixMy-STATISTICS
7055 Followers
lucas123May 4, 2011
And still, no serious renewable energy policy in this country. Instead, Congress wants to impose a 60mph requirement for cars by 2030. Boy, they're really harsh on that auto industry. /s
lucas123May 4, 2011
errr, I mean to write 60mpg. However, I would be opposed to reducing the speed limit from 65 to 60mph.
lyonsbanMay 4, 2011
Gasoline is used almost exclusively for transportation. With every person in the USA using a little more than a gallon every day, keeping up with demand requires, well all the crap we put up with from opec along with the occasional oil spill.
Renewable energy won't replace gasoline.
The closest is alcohol and that is -not- all that renewable. Half the topsoil in the midwest has already been used up and while herbicides are helping by reducing plowing, we are still removing topsoil every time we send a crop to market.
Hydrogen/oxygen generation is possible but we don't get all that much sunlight per meter, it's limited geographically and impossible to create enough to seriously reduce our dependence on gasoline.
If you have any ideas I'm positive you can get a loan.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
tguk143May 4, 2011
And you don't think that electric car technology won't ameliorate in the coming decades? Of course it will and to go even further, we can procure our electricity from renewable sources.
How about the bio-fuels that are being developed in spain that are being produced via algae. Furthermore, in Sweden there's technology developing that produced energy by way of osmosis! Also not to neglect solar / wind which will advance as well.
Now , whether or not our government will act to develop these technologies is a whole other discussion.
There's lots of money to be made in perpetuating the status quo.
inajeepMay 4, 2011
Outside of the fuel costs and the dependency issues, I'd rather not have to add to the pollution if possible. Climate change issue aside I hate the smog and health issues it if not causes exacerbates.
lyonsbanMay 4, 2011
Electricity - Look at your bill. As much or more is spent on transporting the electricity to your home than is spent on generating the electricity. Huge state-of-the-art electric plants with high voltage lines waste more energy getting the electricity to consumers than they deliver. Guess what they run on? Oil.
Now I'm a huge fan of nuclear, but the USA is so far behind right now. France has most of the decent patents. I'd love to see thorium or strontium batteries, but no way will the government let even low grade radioactive compounds get to the general public. Even though you could buy a battery that would run your house and car for years using it.
Bio fuels - Exactly how many hundred million gallons of algae do you think could be made per day? You know they need sunlight right? Needing sunlight is a killer to mass production.
Osmosis electricity generation is great, but you need generally pure elements (what ever the element of the day is, gasoline works well incidentally) on either side of the membrane, making the fuel for the osmosis takes ... energy.
I hate to be a gainsayer... I really honestly do. I'd love to hear some great idea, but it's going to be thousands of great ideas, not one knockout punch.
tguk143May 4, 2011
You make good points, and I know that there are a wide range of products and necessities that start with petroleum. Its going to be awhile till we can conceivably take it out of the picture.
But to relate back to the article, we need to at least for the time being stretch every gallon as far as possible. I hate to be a cynic on this issue as well, getting too optimistic is probably not good either.
Just came across this article thought it was fitting and relevant.
http://money.cnn.com/2011/05/02/autos/volt_1000_miles/index.htm
goweigusMay 4, 2011
We can replace oil as a source for plastics and a lot of other things with Hemp and Hemp byproducts, in the 90s I guess people said it would only take 6% of the continental US growing HEMP to replace oilComment is buried, click here to see the rest.
digger1123May 4, 2011
Or we could use a fraction of a percent of the continental US to drill for oil to replace the oil we import from Canada and the Mid East.
goweigusMay 4, 2011
at digger1123
yes that is true, but do we know how long it would last us? I actually think the idea of saving it was probably one of the best things our government as done as far as planning for a future disaster (although they probably had more reasons than that)
goweigusMay 4, 2011
Hemp for biofuel*
Number 1 plant known to man for this purpose, that is also 1 reason why it they started making it illegal (because its the best source known to man for a TON of s**t)Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
rbstrMay 5, 2011
Your efficiency facts are very misleading. Sure, if you take into account plant, transmission and then appliance efficiency you might breach %50.
You'll find oil-field-to-car-power efficiency figures would be far less. The engine itself is only 20% efficient TOPS. If you count distribution you're in single digits. Refining and extraction, it wouldn't surprise me if it was less than 1%.
Transmission losses are somewhere between 7 and 15%.
Powerplants are also many times more efficient in generating power than an ICE to begin with.
The largest portion of power plants in the country operate on coal, as well.
Both of which are, rather obviously, NOT oil. We don't import coal and we've got a good amount of natural gas.
"Now I'm a huge fan of nuclear, but the USA is so far behind right now. France has most of the decent patents. I'd love to see thorium or strontium batteries"
I hope you don't mean a real "battery" as in the electrochemical kind. That wouldn't make sense. Neither of those metals can really do anything that shakes a stick at various experimental Li-ion technologies in that regard.
rbstrMay 5, 2011
instead of "as well" that should read, "with the next largest being natural gas."
goweigusMay 4, 2011
Don't forget Hemp biofuel! Even Ford was rolling on his Hemp Plastic and Hemp Biofuel car that was 10x stronger than steel.
Closed AccountMay 4, 2011
Most areas of the country couldn't even come close to producing enough renewable energy to cover our CURRENT electricity needs. Add the HUGE amount of extra required to recharge a car battery every night at 6:30 and there is no way. And I am not talking about cost...I am talking about the fact that there is simply not enough land to put the huge amounts of solar or wind collection units since many areas don't get nearly enough of either in any given area.
Nuclear, however, would work.
lyonsbanMay 4, 2011
Agreed, however nuclear power has pretty large regulatory and start up cost and time hurdles. 20-30 years lead time, billions of dollars and a skittish government. Especially the way we do it in the USA.
I don't see it ever becoming prevalent enough, much as I would like it to.
1) Radioactive waste is a fact of physics when you are using fission. Fusion... is a dream so far.
2) A melt down is really bad and Murphy happens. The Japanese are going through this.
3) Uranium is the fuel of choice in all? operational nuclear plants. Thorium was used in oakridge, bumped up to uranium during the process, but only as a test and it needed uranium to sustain itself. Uranium is very rare stuff and will be depleted before oil is. Different processes could be developed, but we're talking a long time frame for something as sophisticated as nuclear power. You don't just use a theory to develop a slow burn nuclear bomb.
4) A plane dropped into a nuclear plant would be... bad. Real bad.
Cutting the hockeystick curve of energy usage will have to be done first. Part of that is new CAFE changes as originally mentioned in this thread.
lyonsbanMay 4, 2011
"I don't see it ever becoming prevalent enough"
Should be
"I don't see it becoming prevalent soon enough"
goweigusMay 4, 2011
I agree. We should be using more nuclear for the power, and if we find we don't have the resources to produce the electric cars we need now then we could grow Hemp for biofuel which is FAR better for such a purpose than Corn (and is the best plant in the world to make biofuel with right now).Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
dauntless1May 5, 2011
On the solar bit, I see constant mention of how many areas don't receive enough sunlight, but why doesn't anyone ever mention geosync orbit collection facilities? They get massive, 24/7 unfiltered sunlight and it can be microwaved to a distribution center on the ground. They're as viable as anything else right now and it would be a good reason to restart our space program for some added benefit.
goweigusMay 5, 2011
they don't talk about them simply because they don't exist
Imagine we will see something like them in the next 20 years as private space gets the ability to carry cargo up
lyonsbanMay 5, 2011
I seriously doubt you will get solar collectors powering earth based plants. Any collector worth putting up would be a weapon or at least would fry birds and planes on contact. Someone would get cancer and sue for the GDP of a small country.
It makes great scifi though.
Closed AccountMay 5, 2011
dauntless, If something is in geosync orbit, it would not get 24/7 sunlight. Since they are always over the same spot on the planet, it will be blocked BY the planet for some of the day.
Closed AccountMay 5, 2011
lyonsban...the microwave transmissions of to the earth based collectors would not be harmful to brds and certainly not planes. I forget where I saw it but I read it was like getting a few x-rays if you were standing in the collection area for a bit. But that area would be off limits to people who are not with the power company, and those people would be protected.
umdweiMay 5, 2011
Who said you have to put wind turbines on land or only on top of hills? Placing them in shallow oceans is certainly an option. Of course, we could also try and find a way to capture the energy from lightning bolts - maybe call them energeon.
goweigusMay 4, 2011
hemp fuel
lyonsbanMay 4, 2011
I'll take 6 liters of bud please.
goweigusMay 4, 2011
yeah if it costs thousands per pound how much is it gonna cost at the pump!?!!!??!?!
I guess they could use the tons they catch every year to power their vehicle fleet to catch even more of it? hahaComment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Closed AccountMay 4, 2011
"If you have any ideas I'm positive you can get a loan."
--Here's an idea: Why not do what we once did as a country during times of war--sacrifice? Use less. Why is conservation a four-letter word? You say renewables won't be enough to keep up with demand but what about reducing demand? Wouldn't that help while we're trying to get alternative sources into full production?
lyonsbanMay 4, 2011
Agreed. CAFE standards are a start.
goweigusMay 5, 2011
you're totally right
unfortunately people care too much about themselves now and too little about the collective, this kind of thing must be made law before most Americans will budge, and even then they ignore some rules.
They need to educate people more on proper driving to save gas I bet it would help, most people just don't know or care enough to look but might change if told/taught that way. (like not breaking too much all the time)
goweigusMay 5, 2011
sorry I wasn't paying attention to how poorly I wrote that
sutleyMay 5, 2011
There's no oil shortage. That's an excuse for the oil cartels to drive their prices up and keep people like you fuming at the wrong parties.
konraxMay 5, 2011
In Canada gas is $1.36 per liter, and 3.78541178 liters make one gallon, so for the same amount of gas we pay:
$5.148 per gallon.
We also produce a lot of the oil you Americans get so to be honest all I can say is QQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQ.
We don't have it any better as an OIL PRODUCING NATION.
Closed AccountMay 5, 2011
But more of your money is going toward taxes that help pay for things you use.
ryogaveeMay 5, 2011
Unless you own a hybrid, electric cars, or have personally modified your car to get 100 MPG like many other Americans have, you have no room to talk or any reason to put blame on the auto industry.
The options are there, all around us. People just choose not to use them.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
ihaterobotsMay 4, 2011
today's high gas prices have very little to do with demand. all major oil producers have surpluses at the moment. the issue is the change in how commodities markets function. TONS of extra money has been pumped into these newly unregulated markets in the last 5-6 years. that's what's causing the price increase.
lyonsbanMay 4, 2011
Speculation is estimated to produce 60% of a price swing in oil and gasoline. The general trend is higher usage of both oil and gasoline worldwide, which feeds speculation upwards.
It's doubtful Congress has the balls to regulate a market as volatile as commodities and in my mind even more doubtful they could do it successfully.
A downward spike could put wall street in a serious bind and require yet more bailouts.
tsuruchibrianMay 4, 2011
A downward spike on wall street will require more liquidation sales and poorer shareholders, if we really want a healthy economy.
lyonsbanMay 5, 2011
No, just better management from the government. This is a situation where a market won't regulate supply and demand. A rare situation, but the energy market won't self regulate.
tsuruchibrianMay 5, 2011
I wasn't talking about the energy industry, I was talking about wallstreet investment companies gambling on energy.
They need to NOT be bailed out to ensure that only truly strong responsible companies remain and the weak (as big as they may be) are purged.
furrygeekMay 4, 2011
Here in Australia, we were recently paying about $2/litre. Granted, that's because of heavy excise, but it's still four times what you are paying. I still see a lot of SUVs on the roads here. Go figure.
furrygeekMay 4, 2011
Sorry. I should have said it's twice what you are paying, not four times! Must have inhaled too many fumes.
laurahoustonMay 4, 2011
here the american federal tax is about 18 cents a gallon. I think in parts of europe the tax is close to 1.00 a gallon.
In one state of america, Alaska..the higher the price of gas..the more their state coffers fill. Alaska also gives every man, woman and child a dividend check yearly more than 1k for each, from oil corporations. Alaska loves the high gas prices.
see by the list I posted above many countries pay well under 1.00 a gallon for gas.
patmann03May 4, 2011
Right now I'm loving my TDI. People gave me s**t for buying a Jetta, but now they are sucking wind. Diesel by me has dropped below gasoline for the first time in awhile. I'm paying 4.30 for diesel and gasoline is at 4.65.
steve860May 5, 2011
$4 per gallon?
In the UK we currently pay £1.35 per litre.
That's £6.13 per gallon
That's $10.13 per gallon
Quit your complaining.
djbennyMay 5, 2011
Yeah, agreed im in the states at the moment the highest i seen so far was in Hawaii at $4.45 and even then thats cheaper than the UK i believe...not looking forward to going back to the UK!
Closed AccountMay 5, 2011
Yeah, but a lot of that money is due to taxes, which (at least theoretically) goes back to society
KittyKaetzchenMay 4, 2011
I like how they try to give an explanation for the high gas prices... HELLO... it's a FACT THAT THE OIL COMPANY'S PROFITS HAVE INCREASED BY 42% THIS YEAR. Obviously they're not spending more to make it.. they're just making it COST MORE because they're scum.
lyonsbanMay 5, 2011
Oil companies in the USA make a percentage of sales. If prices go up they make more, much more. This money is used, religiously, for more exploration of new oil supplies. This is a fact that is not lost on the government. Rightly so.
The problem is in the markets below the major (western) oil companies, and in the simple fact that demand world wide is rising. The latter is unresolvable, unless you advocate taking over developing countries "for their own good", the former is ... complex and I'm not sure the government has the tools to handle it. Who do they ask for expert advice? Lehman Brothers? The Russian mob? Saudi Arabia sheiks?
cryinlionMay 5, 2011
If an oil company makes a 2% profit on oil sold (i have no idea what the number is), and the cost of importing oil goes up 42%, and they subsequently raise prices 42%, their 2% profit will also be 42% larger. here's some numbers to prove the point:
1 gallon produced for $1.96, sold at $2.00 -- oil company makes $0.04
1 gallon produced at 42% higher cost ($2.783), sold 42% higher ($2.84) -- oil company makes 42% higher profit ($0.057)
you're calling them scum for taking a percentage profit instead of a flat profit? you're ridiculous.
satori3000May 4, 2011
vote with your dollar, only buy high efficiency cars, avoid SUVs As long as the market is there the car makers will make highly efficient cars if they know we're buying them. The SUV boom made them almost ignore this field.
Closed AccountMay 4, 2011
i agree - people who own cars and trucks that get less than 30mpg should pay more per gallon in gas to offset their stupid waste.
martoqMay 4, 2011
That is narrow minded. There are people that require larger vehicles whether it's due to climate or utilitarian purposes, it doesn't matter, the necessity is there. Whose going to judge "their stupid waste" you? The government? No thanks.
Closed AccountMay 4, 2011
I am sick of paying more at the pump because of your "utilitarian purposes". stupid waste is owning a vehicle that gets less than 30mpg in 2011. see it as a tax incentive to get people to save gas.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Closed AccountMay 4, 2011
Some people's JOBS require them to carry goods. Their driving is FAR more beneficial to society than yours. And it is far better to make 1 trip in a larger car than make 2 trips in a smaller one.
So get off your high f**king horse and realize that YOUR lifestyle is not the one correct one.
Closed AccountMay 4, 2011
it is obviously different if you drive an 18wheeler for your job.
Closed AccountMay 4, 2011
It is not just about 18 wheelers. Lots of jobs require large vehicles. Contractors for example. They are not going to get all their tools and materials in a Chevy Volt.
celarnorMay 4, 2011
Did you ever consider the fact that some of us driving third or fourthhand cars with >200k miles and thirty years on them don't make enough extra money in a month to buy a fancy new efficient car?
martoqMay 4, 2011
Let me know how transporting sheet rock in your prius works out for you.
srh2oMay 4, 2011
You don't pay more at the pump because of his "utilitarian purposes." The price of gas is what it is. He pays more for his gas already because he uses more and as an added bonus he also pays more taxes because gas tax is a flat tax per volume.
digger1123May 4, 2011
You are a total retard. How do you recommend people with 7 person family's drive around? Get two cars and pollute that way? Or how about people who have tons of building materials to transport? Or how about semis that make the US run?
Closed AccountMay 4, 2011
lol because you need a lame 6000 pound hummer to carry around 7 people at a time. BTW own a hummer if you want - but you should pay more for gas. Many vans get more than 30mpg.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
digger1123May 4, 2011
Why? That is a double standard, if anything I should be paying less because I am giving money to the fed, whereas people in a faggy little prius or leaf or some s**t pay way less to the fed than me. That is why states are looking at charging fuel efficient drivers more to make up for the shortfall in gas tax revenues because of this CAFE standards bulls**t.
breadfredMay 4, 2011
I do not think you understand this debate. This is ab out energy efficiency - and really, how many families of 7 people do you know? The majority of people I know driving SUV's are small families; ie mum dad and 1 or 2 kids. And the other car they drive is usually a sports car.
Oh, and I doubt you are old enough to drive a car. The way you write is like a teenager - and with your attitude it would be very hard to find a job. And do not say you work for yourself; as customers do not take kindly to your attitude either.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
digger1123May 4, 2011
a) I am in a family of 6
b) I drive
c) 4 cars in my family, two SUVs (1 of which is a hybrid), two smaller cars
d) I make money just fine
e) owned.
Closed AccountMay 4, 2011
Ther is no movement to charge MORE for efficient cars. The plan being considered to make up for the shortfall due to efficient cars is to charge per mile. That would effect everyone the same.
Your comment may be the only one as idiotic as pulleys. Why should you be charged less again? Are you suggesting only poor people drive efficient cars? Or that you are paying more gas taxes? Becuase you DO realize that heavier cars chew up the roads a lot more than lighter ones, right? So the extra you are paying by having to buy more gas is legitimate. (double penalizing you as pulley suggests is ridiculous, though.)
Closed AccountMay 4, 2011
LOL because it is idiotic to penalize a knucklehead who drives a vehicle that gets 12mpg? it makes far more sense than taking the European route and taxing the s**t out of everyone who drives. we can't do that because america doesn't have their awesome public transit system. tax the lunkheads who think they need a 600 hp vehicle to drive back and forth to work. they can obviously afford it.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Closed AccountMay 4, 2011
Sorry but that is just stupid. You refuse to see anything but black and white and that is not the way the world works. No one said you have to drive a Hummer. But you are also seemingly trying to imply that there is never a reason why a large family would need to transport them all at once. And that is just plain ridiculous.
As for paying more...they do. Because they have to fill up more often.
And somehow, I don't think you would be so interested in "fairness" if someone suggesting double penalizing an activity that YOU do that is more wasteful than what others do.
That is because you are not about fairness. You are about what would benefit YOU the most.
Closed AccountMay 4, 2011
you are f**king stupid. i am not implying that at all. only stating a simple fact. you can get a van that gets 30mpg to haul around your dumbass 12 retarded kids. If you must have one that gets less mileage - pay more for gas bitch.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Closed AccountMay 5, 2011
wow, pulley...how quickly you resorted to immaturity.
tsuruchibrianMay 4, 2011
The answer is simple. Gas tax.
If gas is more expensive then people will become more fuel efficient without any further coaxing.
In fact rather than simply making it more expensive, we could be making it closer to it's true cost through taxation. There are many externalities (hidden costs) to gasoline that this added tax could help to fund.
Almost any problem like this can be solved by offsetting the affects of externalities with taxes and subsidies, and allowing the "free" (i.e. not free of all regulation) market find the most efficient solutions given the true costs of all these solutions.
I am not saying all taxes and subsidies are good. In fact we have a long history of taxing and subsidizing things we shouldn't be, but that just means we have to do a better job.
For example, If the true cost of gas consumption is ($5/gallon), then we should tax gasoline to achieve this price in the market. There is no need to tax SUV owners or give tax breaks to prius drivers. All we need to do is correct a few commodity prices for externalities and allow everyone to choose what to spend their money on. If they want to drive a giant 10MPG SUV then so be it. The massive amount of money they spend in taxes will be used to offset the damage they do.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
martoqMay 5, 2011
Gas is already taxed at the state level in almost every state. NY is around 45cents a gallon now.
tsuruchibrianMay 19, 2011
Obviously there is already a gas tax in many states. The whole point of my post was to suggest that the amount of this tax must also be correct in addition to simply existing.
Closed AccountMay 4, 2011
I would have thought it was well over it by now. In 2008 when it was almost as high, my area was consistently about 8-10 cents below the reported national average. And we topped $4 last week.
skeptictankMay 4, 2011
They call the Teapot Dome a scandal, I call it "standard operating procedure".
maxwestartMay 4, 2011
When Obama entered office, gas was actually under $2 a gallon.
laurahoustonMay 4, 2011
how come gas is so cheap in these places? looks like price setting to me. a lot of the low prices are just country tax aswell.
Brazil Brasilia $3.12
Cuba Havana $3.03
Taiwan Taipei $2.84
Lebanon Beirut $2.63
South Africa Johannesburg $2.62
Nicaragua Managua $2.61
Panama Panama City $2.19
Russia Moscow $2.10
Puerto Rico San Juan $1.74
Saudi Arabia Riyadh $0.91
Kuwait Kuwait City $0.78
Egypt Cairo $0.65
Nigeria Lagos $0.38
Venezuela Caracas $0.12
ref list
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:ecquMrwc5u8J:money.cnn.com/pf/features/lists/global_gasprices/+how+much+is+gas+in+saudi+arabia%3F&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&source=www.google.com
countess666May 4, 2011
subsidized.
the only reason those countries can afford to do that is because you keep buying their gas, even at high prices. and then continue to buy hugely fuel inefficient cars.
US gas is subsidized too BTW. or at least the oil industry is.
djguerrillaMay 5, 2011
Mass transit has to have a place in the future of American transportation (high speed rail, etc). If more people were willing to give up driving themselves, and take some form of mass transit (which could run off of a renewable source), it would make a serious dent in our oil consumption (I would think). But, Americans have grown very accustomed to the freedom of driving their own vehicle everywhere all the time (myself included; I love my Civic). Most people would really make some noise on having to give it up in any form; it has been sold to us through advertising campaigns as an American right over the last several decades by the car and oil companies.
Electric cars also need to have a place in our transportation landscape as well: people right now around the country have small solar panel setups on their roof that they collect energy with during the day, and plug their car in a socket in their garage at night and recharge, never producing any pollution of worry or having to pay high gas prices. They need to make the battery technology better to get a better distance range to make them more practical, which hopefully in the near future will happen. The technology was set back years by oil companies (Chevron for one) buying patents for battery technology they never intended to use, just sit on and never allow anyone to actually develop (electric cars are against their financial interests obviously).
We have to break up the relationship between the car and oil companies, and our government. Its holding us back big time.....
acroyear2May 5, 2011
This crap happens every year. Every presidency. Americans complain and then re-elect politicians who allow for this. It's getting old. If you're tired of the gas prices, get a bike, take the mass transit and move on.
chongqingkingMay 5, 2011
drill baby drill.... into America's own grave
surferessMay 4, 2011
Seriously, we are at $4.25 in California, and we are begging for $4 a gallon. That was a whole month ago for us.
stealthspcMay 4, 2011
Anytime you rapidly raise the price on an essential commodity you're going to have problems. Yeah, we don't have to pay as much as Canadians, but we are feeling the pain of the huge price jump.
injuryrateMay 4, 2011
Man I'm paying $4.29 a gallon for regular unleaded in SF. SUCK IT UP CHUMPS.
skellenerMay 4, 2011
Been over $4.50 here in L.A for over 2 months now. Where 'ya been? $5 and more is going to hit this summer easy.
Closed AccountMay 4, 2011
Just cost $38 to top off my car... a few months ago it was only $32. That's nearly a six pack. Stop stealing my beer! :(
breadfredMay 4, 2011
I pay £70 to fill my car up - a Ford Mondeo saloon. That is pounds, not dollars. Stop crying.
martoqMay 4, 2011
Been over 4$ in NY for some time now.
hung2theoverMay 4, 2011
Its been almost $5 here in DC
mikedothMay 4, 2011
Already over that here.
stuffradioMay 4, 2011
Congrats US, you're almost paying the same price that I'm paying! (Almost, I'm still paying more than you!) I'm paying between $4.76-$5.60/gall in Canada.
rusteh1May 5, 2011
You are still paying half what the rest of the world is, quit your complaining.
Closed AccountMay 5, 2011
Again..since you are ignorant...most of what the other countries pay is in taxes. That tax money goes back to society to fund highways, etc. US money almost exclusively goes to the oil companies.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
ShovelbabyMay 5, 2011
When the dollar value is high, oil prices are low and vice-versa. http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_sy2qqBjcPIg/SD2H1_xQX2I/AAAAAAAAAhA/CCwExkEzOvM/s1600-h/WTIC_Oil_Prices_vs_USD_vs_SnP500.png
The rising prices are related to the declining value of the dollar. Food is going up too.
laurahoustonMay 4, 2011
what would happen if an executive order regulated both the barrel price cap it at
80$ and gas capped at 2.00 with the federal tax raised to 25 cents from the 18 cents it is?
That leaves plenty of massive profits on the difference between barrel & selling price.
Can the Pres do that? and what would happen?.(besides whining and cheering?)
cold0008May 5, 2011
something similar to this I would imagine
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1973_oil_crisis
ShovelbabyMay 5, 2011
http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/PriceControls.html
Closed AccountMay 5, 2011
Wait...how do you think the US President can control the price of a barrel of oil that comes from the Middle East.
I know Obama is dead, but somehow I don't think other countries are going to say "Yes Mr. President...we will lower our prices on your insistence.)Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
mogliusMay 5, 2011
Boo hoo, Americans still pay way less than anyone else in the world for gas
mrsarcasm22May 5, 2011
This is what happens when you elect a president who is in bed with big oil companies.
DarlyndearMay 5, 2011
We should park our cars, walk, and ride our bikes. We would become a healthier nation of people.
Closed AccountMay 5, 2011
As someone who bikes about 2500+ miles every May-October, I can say with 100% certainty that that is simply not possible for most people. Not everyone can just pick up and move to within a few miles of their jobs. Nor is anyone going to be riding to work in the winter,Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
DarlyndearMay 10, 2011
You are absolutely correct. Riding or walking to a destination will not be available for everyone; but for those that can it would decrease their spending on gas.
falloutboyMay 5, 2011
I kill for 4 dollar gas. I have been paying 4.25 here in central cal for a couple months!
daimposterMay 4, 2011
Oil companies are recording the highest profits in business and yet we subsidize them and they pay no corporate taxes?
These companies are ripping us off. Oil prices in the last 3 months have gone up 17% and over the past year 27%. Gas Prices?? 27% over the last 3 months and 37% over the past year. Gas prices are going up MUCH higher than oil prices so someone is making bigger profits and considering the financial reports that came out recently, I'm betting on the big Oil companies.
Closed AccountMay 5, 2011
And guess what happens without subsidies? Do you think that they will take less money or will they raise prices to have a slightly higher profit margin? (since their is currently EXTREMELY low)Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
daimposterMay 5, 2011
Their profit margins are 'EXTREMELY low'? Are you crazy? In YR2010, Exxon Mobile had the LARGEST profits of any US company. The first quarter of YR2011, they saw revenue jump about 29% compared to last year but profits jump by 70% or so. That means their profit margins are not only good but growing.
And yes, gas prices may go up if we remove the subsidize ($4 billion, I think, in 2010). But we could use that $4B on something better whether it would be some alternative energy OR just cut gas taxes. There is no reason to subsidize companies that rank #1 and #2 in profits (Chevron).
Subsidize are better used on areas where there are not enough profits but are important to the economy or environment. Why does big oil get a subsidy but not Microsoft or Apple? Railroads, public transit, alternative energy, postal service, perhaps mining of rare earth metals I get. They serve a purpose but are not very profitable. But Big Oil???
http://finance.yahoo.com/career-work/article/112672/fortune-500-biggest-companies-2011
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2011/05/big_oil_tax_breaks.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/04/business/04bptax.html
seattlegirluwMay 4, 2011
I'm steeling myself for $5 gas
bobdotcomMay 4, 2011
Oh man, almost having to pay near what other people pay?! blasphemy...
Closed AccountMay 4, 2011
You DO realize that "other people" pay a lot more due to taxes, right? So much more of what "other people" pay is going back into society in some way.
millisssandersMay 6, 2011
Its $
4.20 here in Wisconsin. I hope it does rocket towards $4
ashleyashy2013May 5, 2011
*cough* oil rig *cough*
creoleguy32May 5, 2011
well look at the worth of a 1 dollar bill! its only 60 cents
creoleguy32May 5, 2011
well look at the worth of a 1 dollar bill! its only 60 cents
ren1999May 5, 2011
Regardless of the size or age of the car, 4 dollars per gallon is going to buckle the working class economy so much that people are going to take notice.
read Robert Reich on 2 U.S. economies
antdudeMay 5, 2011
$4.3x is in my aera. :(
fauozMay 5, 2011
Do the folks in Washington forget so fast what made the auto industry and a wave of others chain reaction collapse? We are close to breaking that record again.
sniperhareMay 4, 2011
My car gets like 18.5 MPG in city and 24 on highway. After I save up enough cash I'm buying a car with better fuel mileage, but what I have is fine for now.