That's insane. I paid $40 and didn't even get a full tank.
This is crazy stupid on how quick the prices rose. IMO.
Okay...just 48 hours ago, gas was around 3.69, now it's at 4.89. That's $1.20 in two days, or 60 cents a day. Anyone selling gas for anything under 4.30 was sold out...probably because no one wanted to go to the higher priced places. I never even imagined the gas would go up THAT quick.
That's insane. I paid $40 and didn't even get a full tank.
This is crazy stupid on how quick the prices rose. IMO.
I have this friend who rides a moped with a helmet that says F*** GAS. Its hilarious !
I have this friend who rides a moped with a helmet that says F*** GAS. Its hilarious !
They got little bikes that run on electricity now. My folks have one. It's great if you're just running a few errands and aren't in a hurry. Though I do look like the proverbial whale on a tricycle when I ride it...
around here the gallon is about 6.98 $ but then again I live in the most expensive country in the world
Tell me about it. It always makes me laugh when Americans complain about gas prices...it's around £1 to £1.20/litre here in the UK, which is around $9 to $11/gallon!
Tell me about it. It always makes me laugh when Americans complain about gas prices...it's around £1 to £1.20/litre here in the UK, which is around $9 to $11/gallon!
I think it's more a rate of inflation thing. When I first started driving, I was paying 79 cents a gallon. That was around 10 years ago. Now, we're staring down the barrel of 5 or 6 times that being "cheap."
Tell me about it. It always makes me laugh when Americans complain about gas prices...it's around £1 to £1.20/litre here in the UK, which is around $9 to $11/gallon!
Well, it's not so much that we're paying lower prices than other countries (I recognize that we are), but gas prices are truly the source of our economic problem we've been experiencing. When gas has quadrupled in price over the past 8 years, some people are now barely getting paid enough to cover the cost of driving to work. It's also driven our food prices up tremendously.
Fortunately, our governor (in Kentucky) declared a state of emergency Friday afternoon. There isn't anything wrong here of course, but doing so allows the state to prosecute anyone who gouges gas prices. Our prices have gone up to about $4.15 from $3.60, which is still crazy, but it's not like some other states.
If we were a small country with good public transportation, it would be one thing, but since everything is spread out, and the U.S. is large, there really is no option but to drive to get just about everywhere unless you live in a big city and actually work there. Even there, public transportation is not always up to snuff.
We are an average of twelve cents cheaper than our competitors and we make a nickel for every gallon we sell. It's expensive alright, but the stores are partially to blame. We have fuel trucks in and out all day long because our gas is so cheap. Of course, we have the luxury of having three different fuel companies on the line, so they either give us a decent price or lose out to the competition.
It makes me mad that they blame Ike for the high fuel prices. Hurricane Katrina didn't raise the price that much if I recall.
I decided that I'm going to throw down a couple thousand in oil stocks. Given my luck, the price will drop so drastically that the whole lot will be worth less than a dollar in two days!
Tell me about it. It always makes me laugh when Americans complain about gas prices...it's around £1 to £1.20/litre here in the UK, which is around $9 to $11/gallon!
Here here. Next they'll be complaining about how expensive their beer and cigarettes are.
Also, it's "Hear hear." Why does nobody on the Internet ever get that right?
I worked seven years in the Syncrude Canada Ltd. oil refinery on a fluidized coking unit, which essentially cracks carbon heavy oil and separates it into refinable light gas oils. I know it cost our company approximately $25-30 to make a barrel of oil. That included covering the costs of running the refinery, salaries, power supply, and maintenance. They then sold that $30 barrel of oil for roughly $100 a barrel. That is $70 profit per barrel!
And the unit I worked produced 110 000 barrels of oil a day.
We had three of those units, plus a vacuum tower that produced roughly the same, and a hydro-cracking unit that produced upwards of 25 000 a day as well.
So that's roughly 465 000 barrels of oil every day at $70 profit each barrel.
And then I had to go and pay $1.49 a litre or almost $6 a gallon for gas.
Ain't life a *****?
I decided that I'm going to throw down a couple thousand in oil stocks. Given my luck, the price will drop so drastically that the whole lot will be worth less than a dollar in two days!
The reason for the oil companies' record profits is in the speculation. Light sweet crude is selling high, but those barrels that are selling now won't be delivered for months. The gasoline we're buying now was considerably cheaper when it was still crude, but the oil companies' inflate the prices now to cushion the impact of having to purchase crude at higher prices next week (month, year, et cetera). The record profits are being pushed to an extreme to help them absorb record losses later.
I'm surprised no one has tried to go the methenol route. I know ethenol is cleaner, but methenol can be made from anything organic. That clear liquid that seeps out of your compost heap isn't as refined as fuel-grade methenol, but that's what it is. Wouldn't it be wonderful when you can run your lawnmower using fuel made from last month's yard waste?
I'm surprised no one has tried to go the methenol route. I know ethenol is cleaner, but methenol can be made from anything organic. That clear liquid that seeps out of your compost heap isn't as refined as fuel-grade methenol, but that's what it is. Wouldn't it be wonderful when you can run your lawnmower using fuel made from last month's yard waste?
That would be cool! I would love to stop buying oil altogether if I could. Not only is it unhealthy to burn, it chafes that all I'm doing is padding the ass of some oil executive that has no concept of social responsibility.
Oil means money and power to a lot of people and until the last drop is completely used up, they'll do what they can to sell it to you.
Of what's available at teh moment I reckon methane is the best. The only problem is that the tank fills up your boot and you still need petrol (though much much less).
Other than that use a bicycle and/or public transport where possible.
(Plus it would be relatively cheap once the infrastructure is paid for).
Sorry, I thought that bit needed more emphasis, because that is the root of the problem. We'll never turn away from oil simply because the infrastructure is already paid for. Retooling our entire society to utilize a different source of energy costs more money than we as a people are willing to pay. Our best option is to find an alternative fuel source that uses a portion of the existing infrastructure.
I'd wager we'll see automobiles that use liquid fuels (alcohol*) before we see a total conversion to electric, simply because our infrastructure is designed to handle liquid fuels. There is an electric grid in place, but how many people will pay the cost out of pocket to wire their garages to handle recharging their cars? How about apartment buildings?
In the end, we'll be paying for more than one alternative fuel source. People will convert to one, just as breakthroughs in the technology make another more efficient. We've seen it in every other part of our life before. What do you think, VHS or Beta?
Gas prices rose in order to temporarily slow unnecessary consumption to bolster supply in case the industry took a big hit from the storm. When it turned out not to have, the price of oil barrels plummeted back down.
DarkRaven, something's wrong with your numbers. Profit margins of oil companies are around 10%. Your numbers are suggesting 233%. Methinks there are quite a few costs you were entirely unaware of.
lol it is hilarious I know Ga/Fl are fining the hell outta gougers. The ones selling it for close to 5/gal...
If anyone can link global gas prices, I'd love to see them.
DarkRaven, something's wrong with your numbers. Profit margins of oil companies are around 10%. Your numbers are suggesting 233%. Methinks there are quite a few costs you were entirely unaware of.
http://money.cnn.com/2007/02/01/news/companies/exxon/index.htm
There's a fun fact. Yep, oil companies like exxon were making records on profits. Dunno if that's still the case, though.
The article is about a year old, but it still is in the heat of the "rising gas price" crisis. Maybe not 233%, but still a slap in the face.
DarkRaven, something's wrong with your numbers. Profit margins of oil companies are around 10%. Your numbers are suggesting 233%. Methinks there are quite a few costs you were entirely unaware of.
Do you really think they tell you how much they actually make?
This thread is not about what I thought it was about.
Glad I'm not the only one.
Glad I'm not the only one.
Did you think it was about some guy who got the beer farts and was playing Warcraft and some rogue snuck up and used Gouge on him? Because if so, you are so much more the geek than I am.
Nice going!
Cheers
Ga...25,000 per gouge...no limit.
There's a fun fact. Yep, oil companies like exxon were making records on profits.
Profit margins. Margins.
There is a significant difference between profits and profit margins. If profit margins hold steady, then everyone would make record profits every time you have the slightest bit of inflation -- which is pretty much yearly.
"Record profits" actually isn't a big deal at all for any kind of successful business or industry. It's a pretty nice phrase to get people angry when paired with the reality of the increased cost in USD of gasoline, though.
Do you really think they tell you how much they actually make?
Unless they're breaking the law and fooling all the experts who are watching the situation, yes.
i think all americans need to watch V for vendetta and Fight Club and stir up some action in this country....
i want to see some of these big companies crumble. All they care about is share holders, and buying 5 million dollar summer homes while their fellow citizens cant buy a loaf of bread.
i have a story to share about rich people mentality.
a girl (lets call her Sarah Bailey) has her friend from school come over to stay the night...her friend is lower middle class... Sarah's parents own 6 car dealerships and live in a 3 million dollar home. Sarahs friend brought her own toothpaste, shampoo, and a change of clothes...
she accidentally left her generic shampoo (pantene) in the shower..so Sarahs mother comes out yelling at Sarah asking why she bought this cheap s*** and yells at Sarah for buying the equivalent of urine. "We dont use krap like that in this house!"
Sarahs friend then explains to Ms. Bailey that its not her fault...It was her shampoo and she brought it when she stayed over. Sarah's friend was very offended and never came back over.
the end.
so the Baileys can now live in peace with their 80 dollar bottle of shampoo from the salon...and only have rich friends.
Tell me about it. It always makes me laugh when Americans complain about gas prices...it's around £1 to £1.20/litre here in the UK, which is around $9 to $11/gallon!
Agreed. I love watching American debates. With all the American movies and TV we watch, we have a tendency to feel we're very familiar with the US, and while we often are, things like these are a good reminder of how foreign it can also be.
Tell me about it. It always makes me laugh when Americans complain about gas prices...it's around £1 to £1.20/litre here in the UK, which is around $9 to $11/gallon!
ok so you are used to 9-11 dollars for gas.... you budget things accordingly..
so do Americans...
now if your gas jumps to 40 dollars a gallon over a few years... then maybe you will understand how we feel.
somethig we all rely on has gotten 4 times more expensive...
we do not have a public transportation system....and the average american lives 40 minutes away from their job.
and thats on top of vehicle payment (300 dollars a month) mandatory vehicle insurance (100 a month) and repairs...
so just to maintain your average 10 an hour job... 1200 a month income after tax... you pay 700 of that just to get to work and back.... thats a little less than 300 a month for gas on a vehicle at 25 mpg....when it used to be 80 a month.....
thats why lower, and middleclass americans are worried about losing their homes... after you get to work and back and subtract transportation fees we are living on about 4.50 dollars an hour....below poverty.
so YEAH we complain about it..
Gas prices have increased here too. Maybe not as much, but they have more than doubled over the last decade. And cars, repair, and insurance are not cheaper here, quite the contrary, and if anything, taxes are higher. While you do drive more than almost anyone else in the world, you also choose the most uneconomic vehicles (or perhaps they're just insanely cheap for you). In my experience, American cars are really big, quite comfortable, and frankly, luxurious by European standards, and it's no wonder you have trouble now that your gas prices have risen to about half that of ours. We've manage to adapt, and I'm sure you can too.
It's more than 5 years ago the Iraq war started, and everybody was talking about how it was only because of Iraq's oil. Whether that's true or not, it made it pretty difficult to ignore that oil prices was becoming a problem (if it wasn't painfully clear already). Have none of you bought a new car since that time? A more economic car? And why on earth are you complaining about your gas prices, which are half that of most other countries you compare yourself with, and not your public transportation, which absolutely sucks in comparison? Why don't you demand that your government lowers the taxes on energy saving cars, and makes public transportation a viable alternative? I really don't think this “extra special low US gas price”-thing is a viable long-term solution.
Sorry for my ignorance, but as a foreigner, I have a hard time understanding your priorities
So the solution is to buy a new car, eh? Well, considering most of us need to finance the - at the very, very least - $15,000 a new car with a shiny, slick, efficient 4-banger would cost us, it's not exactly the best reactionary move. I can't dump a car I still owe a ton of money on and simply get a new one. It doesn't work that way. The reason this is important is that the quadrupling of cost was not incremental. It shot waaaay up between last year and this one. Over $1/gal, IIRC. So as easy as it is to criticize Americans and their gas guzzlers, it's not quite as easy to change rides. ;)
Public transportation. Great idea. Two problems, though. One is that the busses and such run on - get this - gas. Increased demand for transport of this sort will elevate the price of that very transport. Just like it increased the cost of pretty much everything since we ship with trucks. Food costs more to ship because gas costs more. So the price goes up. That one's not a huge issue, though, because it should still be cheaper. The bigger problem is that we do not have much of a public transit infrastructure. It would be nice to have, certainly, and it would help the issue. But we'd have to wait for that. A long time. And in the meantime, we'd need to drive. So it's not a solution that's reactionary. And that's the problem. People need solutions now. Not the next time they're due to get a car, not when a subway can be built. Now. Gas prices are not waiting for us to implement these "simple" fixes. And that's why we complain. Justifiably.
BTW, the market for "luxury" cars is actually not based in American companies. We have a couple of "high enders", but they fail to be as good as the rest. BMW, Audi, Mercedes, etc have that market in hand. And their nations of origin are in Europe. Not that Americans don't buy them, of course, but it's hardly a segment indicative of what the American auto industry typically offers. And they are certainly out of reach of those that truly concern themselves with gas prices.
Sorry for my ignorance, but as a foreigner, I have a hard time understanding your priorities
Don't sweat it. I'm an American and I can't understand the rest of these peoples' priorities.
i think all americans need to watch V for vendetta and Fight Club and stir up some action in this country....
i want to see some of these big companies crumble.
I just want to make sure you understand what you're fighting for.
The big energy companies, such as Shell, are about 99% publically-owned. Much of this comes from your average individual shareholder who owns a 401k account. Indeed, I investigated the 401k investment options I have, and Shell Oil was in the top 5 companies in more than one of these investment options (other energy companies were also frequently in the top).
To jump straight to the conclusion, while stating it simply: if you get what you want, you will tank the retirement accounts of all working Americans with a 401k.
Have none of you bought a new car since that time? A more economic car? And why on earth are you complaining about your gas prices, which are half that of most other countries you compare yourself with, and not your public transportation, which absolutely sucks in comparison? Why don't you demand that your government lowers the taxes on energy saving cars, and makes public transportation a viable alternative?
The response to this can basically be summed up in two words: population density. Europe has a lot of it. The United States doesn't. Public transportation is great when you have a large number of people packed into relatively small geographical locations, but the US is spread out. The extraordinarily cheap energy prices for decades certainly encouraged this sort of behavior, although the large amount of open land (and its relatively cheap price) also contributes a lot to it.
Can we retool our nation to handle high transportation costs? Sure, but not easily, not quickly, and not without great cost in and of itself. Our nation is built in transportation -- long distances to get to work (usually from low-population rural areas to either offices in metropolitan areas or factories in industrial areas), heavy dependance on trucking to transport goods around the nation, heavy use of planes for business travel (and the airline industry was not built to handle $100/barrel oil).
It's not just about buying a more efficient car. I mean, I have a small car that's quite efficient, and I even live rather close to work (15m drive). I can afford the gas for my car, and since I live in the South, I can afford heating my home in the winter. But energy prices are still a big deal to me, because I know it affects everything else in the country -- every product I buy.
If energy prices don't come down, or at least hold where they are now, we will see pretty significant adjustments in the US -- heavier dependance on telecommunications over business travel, localization of goods rather than purchasing stuff grown or manufactured on the other side of the country, the collapse of half the transportation industry, retooling our rails system to serve as a replacement, and slow devaluing and egress from rural America.
and you cant make public transportation work when everyone is so spread out. is the bus going to come 15 minutes out into the country to pick up just me? i dont think so.
but wait!!!! maybe you think i should move closer to my job! well if i could afford to sell my home in this economy and buy a new home in the city then i would....but homes in the city cost twice as much.
where does this money come from?????
many people with 4 and 6 year college degrees are making less than 18 an hour. they are struggling to make it month to month.
i think all americans need to watch V for vendetta and Fight Club and stir up some action in this country....
The Narrator rejects Tyler Durden and his non-material world view at the end of Fight Club. Most people conveniently forget that.
Also, the idea that crowds of people will be driven to anarchic individualism by mass-produced media is pretty flimsy. If Howard Zinn and Noam Chomsky couldn't do it with the truth, why would Hollywood be able to do it with fiction?
The Revolution will not be Televised.
That means that the cost of gas for me quadrupled in 14 years. Budget for that, whydontcha. ;)
And you haven't bought a new car in 14 years?
So the solution is to buy a new car, eh? Well, considering most of us need to finance the - at the very, very least - $15,000 a new car with a shiny, slick, efficient 4-banger would cost us, it's not exactly the best reactionary move.
I don't know what you mean by '4-banger'.
The reason this is important is that the quadrupling of cost was not incremental. It shot waaaay up between last year and this one. Over $1/gal, IIRC.
The fuel has risen way more than 1$ a gallon in that time here. And furthermore, what I don't understand, is why no one saw it coming
People have talked about oil prices for a long time now. It must be about 10 years ago I read an article about the concerning tendency for Americans to buy a certain type of car (using a lot of gas, polluting a lot, and being so dangerous that safety-experts said they wouldn't use it if it was the last car on earth), and that the tax on them was too low. I can't remember the specifics, but if articles like that can make the news here, there must have been a lot more coverage of this problem in it's homeland. Environmental issues with America (not just concerning oil, but water too, as well as general pollution) has been a cause for concern for decades in other places.Of course many people are a lot less critical towards their own country, which can be seen here too (a large party here is generally referred to as racist and extremely nationalist outside of Denmark, but here, they're pretty much accepted, though hated by the left wing), but the problems are still talked about in most democratic countries (for instance, the fact that Denmark's reputation has suffered as a result of the government cooperating with this party, has been mentioned frequently), so people tend to know when others are concerned and why they're concerned. It boggles my mind how so many people can be so surprised that the super special extra low US gas prices are more vulnerable during an energy crisis.
Public transportation. Great idea. Two problems, though. One is that the busses and such run on - get this - gas. Increased demand for transport of this sort will elevate the price of that very transport.
Why? Public transportation generally uses less fuel per passenger than private transportation, so every person using the bus/train instead of the car will be saving fuel. That's the whole idea of public transportation – to get several people to use the same vehicle, thereby saving fuel (and money). 3 people or 20 people in a bus only makes a small difference.
Just like it increased the cost of pretty much everything since we ship with trucks. Food costs more to ship because gas costs more. So the price goes up. That one's not a huge issue, though, because it should still be cheaper
Hey, I just spent close to 5$ on 6 apples, don't talk to me about increasing food prices (it was organic apples though. I could have gotten 10 for that price if I hadn't decided to spoil myself a little :D ). And I'm lucky to be in the southern part of Scandinavia (shudders while thinking of the price on vegetables in Norway).
So it's not a solution that's reactionary. And that's the problem. People need solutions now. Not the next time they're due to get a car, not when a subway can be built. Now. Gas prices are not waiting for us to implement these "simple" fixes. And that's why we complain. Justifiably.
And they wouldn't need solutions now if they'd thought about it before. The problem is not the prices, the problem is that too few people have thought about a solution until it was too late. And you should blame whoever is in charge for not being more foresighted. I know we do.
BTW, the market for "luxury" cars is actually not based in American companies. We have a couple of "high enders", but they fail to be as good as the rest. BMW, Audi, Mercedes, etc have that market in hand. And their nations of origin are in Europe. Not that Americans don't buy them, of course, but it's hardly a segment indicative of what the American auto industry typically offers. And they are certainly out of reach of those that truly concern themselves with gas prices.
I'm not talking about actual luxury cars (and it doesn't really matter where they're produced anyway), I'm talking about regular American cars often being luxurious after other standards. And big. Really big. We had to rent a car in the US, we went for the smallest one possible, and still had more than enough space for 3 people. Of course, maybe smaller companies also have smaller cars, and maybe used cars aren't as big (but in my experience, most of them are), but the average size difference is still significant. I realise you probably have to drive longer, but I'm not sure if you need that much bigger cars to do it.
The response to this can basically be summed up in two words: population density. Europe has a lot of it. The United States doesn't. Public transportation is great when you have a large number of people packed into relatively small geographical locations, but the US is spread out.
Well, it should be possible to make efficient public transportation to fixed locations (e.g. between two cities) and inside cities (of course, bikes work fine for that to). So for people who don't live on farms in the middle of nowhere, and work on factories spread around the country, pubic transportation should at least be an option.
yeah im sure there are many americans that wold love an energy efficiant car...but we are already struggling and the cheap hybrid vehicles are still over 25 thousand dollars. so thats not an option...
I'm not talking about hybrid cars (though 25 thousand dollars sounds pretty cheap). But many of the cars I saw when I was in the US, were very large and heavy, and seemed to use way more fuel than a normal Danish car. Of course, I don't know how far you count on getting on a liter, so it's hard to say, but just looking at how many Americans drive a van, I find it hard to believe if they don't use more fuel than our smaller cars.
and you cant make public transportation work when everyone is so spread out. is the bus going to come 15 minutes out into the country to pick up just me? i dont think so.
Probably not (unless you're part of the bus route). But on the other hand, you don't have to use public transportation all the way. I have met people who use a car or bike to get to the nearest train station. I ride my bike for 20 minutes (30 if I want to arrive without sweating) every time I need to get to a lecture, the same amount of time for meetings, gaming, and when I want to visit some of my best friends. That's after I've moved to a more central location, before that, it usually took 40+ minutes to get to my old gaming group (I eventually got it down to around 35 minutes, sometimes even faster, but I had to bring a spare set of clothing). And I'm definitely not slow on a bike. I ride the train for 3 hours or more when I visit my friends in Copenhagen, and none of them have a car either, so I usually walk, or take the bus/subway after I've arrived. I know one of my friends there (an engineer) have to get up early every day to ride his bike to work, and the rest of them simply use busses.
If you live 40 minutes away from work (wasn't that the average given?), and the problem is the first 15 minutes the bus wont pick you up, couldn't you take the bus the remaining 25 minutes? Or is it parking that's a problem?
And you haven't bought a new car in 14 years?
In the 14 years that I have been driving, I've owned one new vehicle. The other three were used. The worst offender was an at best 12mpg truck. I got rid of that out of gas concerns and bought a car. It gets about 20mpg since most of my driving is now residential. And since it has 93,000 miles on it. :D I take care of it, but it's not going to get any better. Since I'd rather eat, have electricity, cable, heat, ac and pay my mortgage (and other bills), I can't go out and finance me a new car. And my situation is not outside the norm for people in America.
I don't know what you mean by '4-banger'.
My apologies. I should have known better. "4-banger" means a 4 cylinder engine.
The fuel has risen way more than 1$ a gallon in that time here. And furthermore, what I don't understand, is why no one saw it coming
It's true Americans had an obsession with SUVs and Pick-ups for a few years. And now they're paying for it. The problem isn't these people, though. If you could afford to spend $40,000 on a new gas guzzler, fuel costs generally weren't a great concern. If you're the type of American that can't afford to lease a new car every two years, fuel is a concern. Just getting by and having the ability to survive "emergencies" is hard enough. Gas jumping by a huge amount makes it even tougher.
The safety concerns were not really about the vehicles in question. It was that these vehicles had a nasty habit of killing people in smaller ones. Their bumpers were about eye level in a car. They also weigh so much that smaller vehicles stand little chance against them. Small, economical cars are really the ones that placed people in more danger and this fact, coupled with the tank-like performance of many SUVs, was actually cited as a deciding factor for many "soccer mom" types when they bought their gigantic vehicles.
It boggles my mind how so many people can be so surprised that the super special extra low US gas prices are more vulnerable during an energy crisis.
No surprise. But the problem is a difficult one to solve. Knowing you need to buy a new car doesn't help you pay for it. And when you must redirect budgeted car savings to pay for the gas to drive the one you've got and to heat your home, it makes it even more difficult. ;)
Why? Public transportation generally uses less fuel per passenger than private transportation, so every person using the bus/train instead of the car will be saving fuel. That's the whole idea of public transportation – to get several people to use the same vehicle, thereby saving fuel (and money). 3 people or 20 people in a bus only makes a small difference.
True. But with increased demand comes increased use of fuel and increased price. It certainly would be far cheaper, though.
The problem is that public transportation isn't a viable option for many of us. Suburbs are generally not busing "hot spots". And since we generally don't have a huge demand for buses, we don't have an infrastructure capable of handling any significant increase in demand. It's easy as pie to tell Americans to ride the bus. It's not so easy to find a bus stop or, in plenty of cases, a friggin bus itself. Increase use and you increase the amount of buses needed. Again, this is certainly an ok thing to say. But it is impractical to use this idea as some sort of solution. That's not the case. We can get started now to make this a possibility in the future, sure, but that sure as hell isn't helping any American pay for gas for the car they still need to drive. That's the issue.
Hey, I just spent close to 5$ on 6 apples, don't talk to me about increasing food prices (it was organic apples though. I could have gotten 10 for that price if I hadn't decided to spoil myself a little :D ). And I'm lucky to be in the southern part of Scandinavia (shudders while thinking of the price on vegetables in Norway).
Just another example of why it's not a simple "buy a more efficient car, duh!" solution. Costs go up. Wages do not. So you're stuck.
And they wouldn't need solutions now if they'd thought about it before. The problem is not the prices, the problem is that too few people have thought about a solution until it was too late. And you should blame whoever is in charge for not being more foresighted. I know we do.
Woulda, coulda, shoulda. The fact remains that we need solutions now regardless of past oversight. That's why we complain.
We certainly do blame our leaders, too.
I'm not talking about actual luxury cars (and it doesn't really matter where they're produced anyway), I'm talking about regular American cars often being luxurious after other standards. And big. Really big. We had to rent a car in the US, we went for the smallest one possible, and still had more than enough space for 3 people. Of course, maybe smaller companies also have smaller cars, and maybe used cars aren't as big (but in my experience, most of them are), but the average size difference is still significant. I realise you probably have to drive longer, but I'm not sure if you need that much bigger cars to do it.
Ahh. Ok. Yes, our cars are generally bigger than the cars offered in Europe. We have seen more "compacts" appear on the market recently (I wonder why ;)).
Well, it should be possible to make efficient public transportation to fixed locations (e.g. between two cities) and inside cities (of course, bikes work fine for that to). So for people who don't live on farms in the middle of nowhere, and work on factories spread around the country, pubic transportation should at least be an option.
This is what I was trying to explain. It's not "city to city," and it's not "farms in the middle of nowhere." It's wide rural areas that surround the cities and go out for miles. It's not isolated farms; it's rural communities with decent plots of land per house and nothing but houses scattered about. There aren't enough people in these rural communities for public transportation to be remotely efficient to carry them back and forth to the metropolitan and industial areas, and even if there were, they probably aren't going to the same area for work.
Our metropolitan areas tend to have public transportation, because there's enough population density there to warrant it (and we have bus systems for city to city transit as well, as well as rails and planes for longer distances). But that doesn't work for the commutes of rural America.
This is what I was trying to explain. It's not "city to city," and it's not "farms in the middle of nowhere." It's wide rural areas that surround the cities and go out for miles. It's not isolated farms; it's rural communities with decent plots of land per house and nothing but houses scattered about. There aren't enough people in these rural communities for public transportation to be remotely efficient to carry them back and forth to the metropolitan and industial areas, and even if there were, they probably aren't going to the same area for work.
Our metropolitan areas tend to have public transportation, because there's enough population density there to warrant it (and we have bus systems for city to city transit as well, as well as rails and planes for longer distances). But that doesn't work for the commutes of rural America.
yep.... some foreigners just dont understand.....
saddly i think our only solution may be to use bicycles....and leave the fuel for the delivery trucks. Remove the work commuters and you remove 70 percent of consumption.
but who wants to ride a bicycle for 2 and a half hours to get to work....
I just had some gas...and WOW...did I have to open the window. It was pretty raunchy.
*cranks up the civil defense siren and dons a gas mask*
Okay...just 48 hours ago, gas was around 3.69, now it's at 4.89. That's $1.20 in two days, or 60 cents a day. Anyone selling gas for anything under 4.30 was sold out...probably because no one wanted to go to the higher priced places. I never even imagined the gas would go up THAT quick.
Gee. Let me know when you reach $5/gal. Of course, I shouldn't complain. Switzerland got it worse ($8+/gal).
Okay...just 48 hours ago, gas was around 3.69, now it's at 4.89. That's $1.20 in two days, or 60 cents a day. Anyone selling gas for anything under 4.30 was sold out...probably because no one wanted to go to the higher priced places. I never even imagined the gas would go up THAT quick.
That's insane. I paid $40 and didn't even get a full tank.
This is crazy stupid on how quick the prices rose. IMO.
You will continue to pay prices like this until you stop buying. Simple economics.
You will continue to pay prices like this until you stop buying. Simple economics.
Query: How long will it takes for us Americans to completely switch over to a very different personal transportation vehicle with a completely different fuel resource that we can produce domestically and keep up demand?
I'm not talking about just the metropolitan areas but for those in the rural or fringes.
Personally, I would love to have a car that runs on hydrogen or on water considering the abundance of resource surrounding my home State of Hawaii, and not rely on shipping fuel from the mainland (unless shipping is free but I doubt it).
Profit margins. Margins.
There is a significant difference between profits and profit margins. If profit margins hold steady, then everyone would make record profits every time you have the slightest bit of inflation -- which is pretty much yearly.
Sorry, hadn't been back in a while... but I understand what you're saying. And while I, not being a certified economist or accountant might have left out the word "margin". I guess you are meaning they are making less considering expansion, inflation, and returns on retrieving crude oil.
http://money.cnn.com/2008/02/01/news/companies/exxon_earnings/
They did it again! I don't see how they could be setting historical records and still only making profit margins. Note that these are net records, not gross, and are include calculations for both inflation and the increasing size of the organization (I admit freely that CNN might be biased in these records, but Exxon is equally when they stated that the record profits were because of expansion. Its he said-she said, but I'm more inclined to believe CNN has less to gain from lying.). I don't think Exxon was ever hurting from the crisis, and from someone much more qualified than I:
Only a crisis, actual or perceived, produces real change.
In the footsteps of Friedman, one of the most notable and influential economists of all time, I truly hope you will take the time to watch the video link and consider it (I'm assuming most people would be bored reading the whole CNN article as opposed to the headline and first paragraphs :P ), as well as anyone else in the thread. I think it applies to more than just the price of oil, and whether true or not, well... I'll let you decide.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kieyjfZDUIc
Profit Margin
That article (from back in February) mentions nothing about Exxon's profit margin. It does, however, include a lot of important information:
Exxon attributed its impressive results to strong performance across its divisions, but a large part of the profit surge was underpinned by climbing oil prices...
Natural gas prices also jumped last year, albeit marginally. But costs have also increased for the oil companies, which is why profits haven't risen as rapidly as crude prices.
Big oil companies that both pump oil and refine crude into gasoline have to spend more for crude but are unable to pass on all the extra cost to consumers, which eats in to gasoline profit margins...
The average price for a gallon of regular gasoline hit an all-time high of $3.23 in May, according to the motorist organization AAA. The high prices were blamed on strong demand and a series of accidents that shut down refineries in the U.S. But slack demand for gasoline in the latter half of last year kept gas prices from rising as dramatically as crude prices...
But finding oil has also become more costly. The oil boom has led to a surge in exploration and drilling activity, which has pushed up the price for skilled workers and equipment.
Furthermore, new supplies of oil are increasingly difficult to find and generally tend to be located in harder to reach - and hence more expensive - places. The new natural gas field discovered this week by Brazil's Petrobras lies three miles under the ocean.
ExxonMobil representatives also stressed the cyclical nature of the business and noted that growing global demand for energy will require companies to heavily invest in future growth. The company said it estimates that global demand will grow by 30 percent by 2030.
"The challenge for all of us in the industry is how to we meet that increased demand," said Henry Hubble, vice president of investor relations.
But that stuff is never stressed. Nope, it's always the dollar profit numbers.
And it was just a month or two ago that Exxon's stock fell because their income did not rise as high as expected.
The problem is that people's pay haven't risen in repsonse to inflation, we make less and less every year. And most americans are too busy blaming the other guy to do anything about it.
The upside would normally be that it would make American goods cheaper abroad, improving our import/export ratio and thus expanding US industry and creating jobs -- except that we already have a high employment level, so we won't really see a whole lot of benefit even from that (not to mention much of the rest of the world taking minor economic hits as fallout from what's happening here).
The house of cards is coming down. It's not going to be a particularly pleasant restructuring. Some key technological advancements could make a huge difference, but that's still a few years away.
Just gonna' start tossing out factoids opinions, take 'em or leave 'em people.
Exxon made more money last year, and the year prior, than any public trade US company ever. -NPR, "Market Share"
Scary. I thought it woud've been some biotech outfit. Still, the 401k plug made earlier gives pause for consideration. But, alot of people are seeing all this $ being made, and in true to American form, they glance an overcrowded market and say, "Me too! Me too!" So they buy in, make money, and facilitate the process. Another cog in the machine as it were. I don't believe they have completely settled (paid off) the Valdeze spill though. Classy.
We were stupid, bought SUVs like crazy. We do this all the time. Gas shortage in the 70's, fixed in time, Americans buy more "land yachts". Tighten our belts in the 80's and you saw an abundance of more toyotas and higher mpg cars, minivans, etc. Bit more conservative and mindful, especially in crash of '87.
Then, the 90's...gas was cheap as Hell again. I started driving around, oh, '92-'93 when the Nekei was in the crapper and our economy was roaring. Gas was around $.80-.90/gal. Gluttony! Omg...so what do we do, start making SUVs and pushing for more conspicuous consumption, an American standard to be sure of.
And a few years later, here we are...ppl selling their SUVs for huge losses. To be fair, contractors and such did get a leg up tax wise I think under the "utility" tip in SUV. The enticement then was good. Now they listen to the things we've always known about. Oil is finite, more ppl = more cars, etc.
But downtown, all I see are soccer moms in them, lawyers down by the courthouse in suburbans, g-thugs in escalades, and all manner of ppl that have NO BUSINESS being in them...except they coudl afford them. Just not now. None of them live in the country, are avid outdoorsmen, etc. It's bunk.
But I live in Cincinnati. Plenty of rural areas abound and our mass transit is a joke. They bungled the subway way back when (embarrassing story), so we go the bus. Ok, but when you take the bus, you're losing 1.5-3 hrs of downtime riding w/ the masses around here for all the stops, etc..
That's time you coudl be working (making $), getting the kids ready for school, housework, etc. The money you might save on fuel, you lose to inefficiency, and our buses are terribly inefficient here.
In Europe, their mass transit is way more developed. Subways everywhere. Only car we took was a cab in Bavaria to Neuschwanstein. London, Amsterdam, Munich, Rome, Genoa, Venice, Paris, and Brusels...all Eurail or subway all the time. Paris' especially was veyr modern/clean. A pain in the ass w/ alot of luggage, but the price is right and they were timely.
Not here, oh, no...
We're spread out as was mentioned earlier. We got an unfair jumpstart on our country size/resources and spread like wildfire, covering immense territory while steamrolling the indigenous ppl. Colonization changed everything. You took a vast ppl w/ firearms, navigation, some tech/science and pitted them against smaller, infighting tribes stuck in the stone/bronze age w/ no industry, no immunities to diseases, etc. We took it and grew really really fast.
Most other countries in the "old country" had to fight tooth and nail for every little scrap. They couldn't just grow unchecked ala "Manifest Dentisy". Germany is the size of Montana btw...and they still managed to conquer mainland Europe. Food for thought. In another time, we crush Canada and Mexico and just own the entire North American continent in Galatic Empire-esque tyranny. And they say Bush has the Ring of Power...;)
Anyway, gas prices suck. Some of this we earned, but not all of it.
-Don't listen to the election on this end. We can drill today and it isn't gonna' matter for about 8 years. Won't happen overnight. That's 2 terms for Mr. Pres. It takes time to excavate, set up shop, hire, drill, and refine, and distribute.
-We are fat & lazy though. We consume 25% of the world's resources. Related in an eerie tangent, we consume 65% of the world's illegal drugs.
-If we encouraged more light rail instead of stadiums (see my city), might help. If stupid fools stop racing you up to the red light, that might help. Consolidate car trips, that might help. Car pool, etc. Listen to traffic report, etc.
-Young stupid teens, stop sinking your money into gimmicky cosmetic features of your Accords (Fast & Furious sucked btw). Put it into the engine, not rims, spoilers, lights, paint, and those damned mufflers at 4am...
-"Car payments are one of the worst $ deals you can make."-Dave Ramsey, financial guru. Interest is outlandish + depreciation, etc. Just unsound all around. Buy used w/ a decent warranty, marginal insurance, don't drive like an ass, and maintain, you'll be alright. New cars are money pits.
-Below 40 mpg, window down. Above 40, use A/C. Better mileage (power vs drag).
-Political pressure on a badly managed auto industry to make actual relevant products that don't cost and arm and a leg. We did have electric cars in the 80's btw...funny how those conveniently disappeared w/ a magic wave of the hand from GE, Ford, and the like.
-Govt. taxes the Hell out of gas. They don't find it, drill, pump, refine, distribute, or employ anyone, but they get a tidy cut. Company does. Not the most ethical bunch, but it's messed up too.
-Drilling for oil is beneficial sometimes geologically. It makes buffers between tectonic plates (2 dinner plates w/ gel between them) that allow give/take, slip/slide. When removed, plates fit more snuggly, lower tremors and earthquakes.
-Most oil flows down the Saudi Pennisula...hence Iraq invading Kuwait. Doubly scary as it's the seat of Islam (Mecca). It would be awesome, say, if most of the world's gold or uranium or coal came from Nova Scotia or someplace equally peaceful/stable than a hotbed of religious/political strife.
And the big one...
Even if we go Green and check the oil/gas issue, it won't matter much. There's alot of mouths to feed in India/China and they all wanna' drive too.
It's just there, they don't give a damn about pollution standards industry wise or fuel efficiency and such, which keeps costs down...nice for 1 billion+ ppl, bad for your land (75% of all rivers in China uninhabbitable) and health (avg life expec for male in Beijing is 55yrs). Quality vs. quantity.
China, being communist (sorta') has fixed gas prices (cuz' they can do that) at $3/gal. We're stuck at the whims of an invisible market force, convenient "scheduled and unscheduled maintainence" checks, hurricanes, and recently, that nasty windstorm last week.
You should see how cheap it is in Venezuela. Also bad govt (Hugo
)All our environmental skrimpings will be undone by their unchecked consumption. You all saw the Olympics, you know the score. It's bad. They're going to eventually have more demand than us and the Middle Eastern suppliers are gonna' go w/ the sure bet or raise prices cuz' they can.
Get as much $ as fast as you can. They know eventually we'll get fed up and try petrochem, more solar, pure electric, hydrogen, etc. It's just when? How do we motivate ppl to be more conservative and progressive at the same time?
We'll have solar that's actually useful within a decade. Nanotechnology is vastly improving the energy gains, and it's almost doubling every year. Barring some extraordinary event or discovery, we'll be powering most things in our nation on solar by 2050 (and that's a very conservative estimate; experts on solar have quoted much earlier times, such as 2030), and that's without any social engineering or government intervention whatsoever -- the market demand for this alone (along with unrelated research in nanotech in computing) is pushing it just fine.
This is a problem that will solve itself before too much longer. We just need to make sure we can get through the next couple decades as well as we can.
This is a problem that will solve itself before too much longer. We just need to make sure we can get through the next couple decades as well as we can.
Assuming, and this is a really big if, that someone is actually doing the research to reach this end.
Not that it really matters, based on the tornado season, flooding in the midwest and the Hurricane season, we may not make it through next year, much less a couple decades. Mother Nature doesn't seem to be on very friendly terms with us at the moment and we're about to go into winter's grasp again.
Interview with Nanosolar CEO
It's in good hands.
Solar technology now cheaper than coal
Interview with Nanosolar CEO
It's in good hands.
Can I buy it now?
Pros: Renewable. You can sometimes get it for free from restaurants, because they PAY to get rid of it normally. Also, the vegetables take in more CO2 from the air than you put back in by burning it, so it's a net loss for CO2.
Cons: You have to change all your fuel filters more often, it has more sulfurous compounds than gasoline in the exhaust.
It's not perfect, but it's more within my means at the moment.
The issue is'nt gas prices, in actuality gas prices have risen less than inflation rates.
The problem is that people's pay haven't risen in repsonse to inflation, we make less and less every year. And most americans are too busy blaming the other guy to do anything about it.
Well put on all counts! It does suck that we're paying more for gas, but consider that my place of employment has started new employees out at the same pay rate for the last six years. If wages were increasing right along with it, we'd be a lot less concerned with things like fuel and grocery prices.
I sold my car and use my feet now. A nice pair of shoes that will last me a couple years cost a little less than my monthly gas cost me. Running off of vegetable oil is a good idea too and will be a lot cheaper once you've incurred the primary cost of procuring a decent vehicle.
What irritates me is the fact that not only are we helping the oil barons, we have to bail our banks out now too. I'd like to know where they put my "loan not approved" stamp?
It's supposedly congress, but as usual they aren't listening to the public.
I sold my car and use my feet now. A nice pair of shoes that will last me a couple years cost a little less than my monthly gas cost me. Running off of vegetable oil is a good idea too and will be a lot cheaper once you've incurred the primary cost of procuring a decent vehicle.
I'm one of the people using more than they should unfortunately. I drive a cab. I'm one of fourty or so that work in a city in the midwest that has a population of around 191,000 according to the last census. Using ethanol blend fuel helps, but the prices are still murder and since this is Iowa, we use fuel 24/7 in the winter months to avoid freezing to death.
I'll be more than happy to switch to a higher percentage of ethanol in the fuel, but it's not feasible at the moment due to the cost and the poor availiblity of 85% ethanol fuel. I'm looking into other, cleaner and more affordable fuels but for the moment, there just aren't any. But in the meantime, would you rather the DUI fatalities to go up or should I keep working?
We encouraged this conspicuous consumption long ago. But we are inheritting our parents burden of waste and inefficiency, not to mention staggering health and retirement concerns. Thanks folks...
We're the 1st generation to actually have to work harder for less than the preceding one which tells you something right there. To be fair though, we have more options and luxuries at our disposal, but our golden years will be nothing like mom & dad's.
Ethanol: when they started mixing that in w/ the normal gas back in the day, alot of ppl forgot alcohol burns hotter. Engine blocks weren't necessarilly designed for it at transition, so they wore out a Hell of alot faster...and consequently, ppl had to buy more cars then. Still, it's supposed to be cleaner and so forth.
Petrochem: changing our corn crop to fuel is retarded. It's terribly inefficient. Sugar is far more efficient, Brazil having used it for as their model w/ significant success. It's just, alot more sugar down there. Even if we were to convert the entire corn crop to fuel here, we'd still be like 20% short and the cost of food, meat specifically, would skyrocket. 3 lbs corn = 1 lb chicken, 12 lbs corn = 1 lbs pork, 20 lbs corn = 1 lb beef. This is also why alot of the poorer ethnic communities are protesting in Mexico and so forth from the rising price of tortillas. Everything is made out of corn it seems. Fuel wise, there are better alternatives.
DIY Diesel home mechanics: nice...My friend Ben is a big rivethead and he keeps pitching this to me too. The price is right and diesel is very versatile. Every man needs to mess w/ his car at some point. I think it's in the 'Y' Chromosome next to the Steak & Beer nexus in every double helix ;) .
VW keeps pushing their turbo diesels for a reason. Figures. The krauts, they sure are good at engineering. Why the Hell aren't we?
Rudolph Diesel had allegedly made it to originally run on hemp seed oil...but they won't be legalizing that any time soon, and it ain't cuz' they're worried about ppl getting high. Weed stalks (hemp), not the buds you get high on, are miraculous as a plant. Oil burns terribly clean, little to no smoke/particulate, it grows anywhere (jungle, plains, desert, tundra, forest, etc) w/ minimal fuss (no chemicals needed, insects and most animals won't touch it), and it's yield is impressive in biomass. It has some of the most fatty acids too than most plants on the earth, ie)it's terribly healthy to eat.
We should be using this to support new fuels sources. It'll grow in all 50 states, they can tax it like tobacco if they want (or engineer it w/out the THC just for hemp if drug consumption is an issue), and it'll supply a ton of jobs. We're more service based than industrial these days, this might help immensely, especially in the heartlands. We'd have a surplus really, that's crop we could sell to other countries for more cash and cleaner living.
Solar: Krauts again (this tell you something)...are one of the biggest, if not, largest producers of photovoltaic cells in the world. There was a large govt. initiative to ramp up the country's residential solar use and the first few years were tight (they're quite expensive), but w/ enough economic acrobatics, probably some tax incentives, it paid off in the long run. Conservative bunch, but they made a smart gamble. I'm sure plenty of lobbyists flex muscle to political buddies in D.C. to keep it on the back burner so coal, oil, and other interests that are already in bed w/ them can keep their jobs, maintain the status quo. It's not all so conspiratorial, but alot of trading and favors are taking place to be sure.
Here (Cincy), like in parts of Texas, Duke energy runs the show. It would be nice to be able to sell some of my surplus electricity back to them, especially during blazing hot summer days w/ longer periods of sunlight...and A/C use.
...Remember old 50's montages where the family goes for a Sunday drive? Who the Hell goes on drives just for fun that isn't on something?...
Dude, I totally would, if I had a classic cruiser and a bit of extra cash to cover the gas. Wind in my hair, radio blasting, sunglasses on...that's freedom right there, man.
...Great, now I want a '69 Mustang again. Well, not again, because I've wanted one for a while. But you reminded me I wanted one. Or something.
Shoot, some days, I wouldn't even need a cruiser. Just a bit more pay than I get now (not minimum wage, but not incredible).
On a more serious note, walking and public transportation are both out for me. I work much too far away to walk no matter the weather, and since I'm going from suburb to suburb, basically, there's not really a bus run for it. Not to mention that I doubt they run buses during the hours I go to work.
But I don't have enough money to buy a diesel and re-jigger it either. And I'm plenty fine to wait a bit on ethanol; my car's old enough it wouldn't do well on it...
A car has to be specially designed to run an ethanol or ethanol blend. American cars aren't designed to run on either. Mixing Ethanol with Gasoline means there's a larger percentage of inert chemicals in the fuel and it doesn't burn.
All ethanol fuels were supposed to do is to increase the price of corn and reduce gas mileage so people buy more gas. That's all.
It's not that it burns too hot, it's that ethanol doesn't burn AT ALL.
It's a hydrocarbon. And unless they've changed the laws of physics on me, all hydrocarbons burn. Ethenol will burn in any internal combustion engine, but it takes a bit of tinkering to get it to burn effectively in larger percentages.
And now for the bad part. Ethenol is caustic. It will burn the skin, the fumes will burn the eyes and lungs. It deteriorates the rubber gaskets in the fuel system of your car and may cause quite a bit of extra wear on the engine of your car. Straight Ethenol is a solvent that can strip paint rather quickly and burns hotter and faster than gasoline. And just to add insult to injury, it evaporates faster than gasoline as well.
With the amount of damage that ethenol does to cars, I'm surprised the auto companies didn't jump on the bandwagon much sooner. If you're burning Ethenol in your car, you'll probably be replacing it or at least alot of it much sooner. Just wait, either an oil company will start producing Ethenol or the auto industry will see the value of it's effect in the replacement market and retool to use more of it.
It all comes down to the almighty dollar. When an oil company makes ethenol* cheaper to attain, you'll see more hybrid and straight alcohol cars. Once the corporations see profit in alternative fuels they'll become more availible.
*corn ethenol and sugar ethenol is a bit of a hot topic right now. In the US we use corn because that's what we've got. In Brazil, they use sugar. You can bet if we switch to more ethenol, Cuba's sugar fields will be a really big incentive to reopen relations with Fidel and his boys.
Right now, I'm saving to buy a diesel vehicle. You can tinker with them and have them run on vegetable oil.
Meh. Won't work on our small island state, and I prefer to reduce many imports both foreign and domestic.
Besides, diesel price here is more expensive than premium unleaded.
It's a hydrocarbon. And unless they've changed the laws of physics on me, all hydrocarbons burn. Ethenol will burn in any internal combustion engine, but it takes a bit of tinkering to get it to burn effectively in larger percentages.
That's what I thought, or was told anyway. Then I read Arioch's post and I started 2nd-guessing myself and the diatribe I'd heard in Sci-Tech (core course at my university) on the subject. Thanks for the validation/clarification.
And now for the bad part. Ethenol is caustic. It will burn the skin, the fumes will burn the eyes and lungs. It deteriorates the rubber gaskets in the fuel system of your car and may cause quite a bit of extra wear on the engine of your car. Straight Ethenol is a solvent that can strip paint rather quickly and burns hotter and faster than gasoline. And just to add insult to injury, it evaporates faster than gasoline as well.
I know I know, used to work around it at a flavor processing plant (Givadaun, Cincinnati) and every other day, someone goes screaming to the eye wash station, EMTs come, something...always felt raw and labored, desert-like conditions of the avioli in the lungs and extra dry skin. It was everywhere.
As for cars, yeah, burns out quicker. Aluminum in the engine blocks aren't made for it, which means mo' cars, which means mo' money...just not for us John/Jane Does. But everyone knows GM and the rest are in bed w/ Exxon, BP, and the rest. Until cars don't need gas, they'll be real close for a long time.
Formula 1 and the like burn ethanol though for what it's worth. Auto racing and all, not really my bag (feels like 1 big left turn IMO), does bring up a good point though. We have rabid fans of NASCAR and its proliferation is big now despite an understood national cry to "cut back" or "conserve fuel", but here we are kinda' setting a poor example. But it's ethanol fuel though, not regular 87-92 octane.
Why do they use ethanol fuel in auto racing circuits like that anyway?
I know they're going through engines and all like crazy, is it more fuel efficient or something? Better for long periods at high speed, etc?
Has anyone ever seen a pit fire? It's scary as Hell; flames are nearly invisible cuz' it' burns so clean, so you can only see some guy just waving his arms around and you can't hear him scream as he's roasting in his suit cuz' the roar of the engines and general commotions drown it out. Alot of gloving injuries (just like it sounds; skin comes off like a glove) result from this and nastier than usual burns (hotter than gas). But we like fast cars, cheap beer, and rock n' roll, you know? ;)
With the amount of damage that ethenol does to cars, I'm surprised the auto companies didn't jump on the bandwagon much sooner. If you're burning Ethenol in your car, you'll probably be replacing it or at least alot of it much sooner. Just wait, either an oil company will start producing Ethenol or the auto industry will see the value of it's effect in the replacement market and retool to use more of it.
Ah, good eye, I was waiting for someone to say it...thanks.
Seems like that is the new way of things in terms of consumerism. High turnover, not much quality control (hence all these Chinese recalls for 1). When was the last time you saw a TV get repaired? Blender? iPod even?They stress mass production and price wars so you just buy a new one and say, "Screw it...just get an extended warranty." And a great many are almost surgically precise in the times when they stop working well or break outright. This is a world where everything is getting more disposable for sure. They even have cell phone vending machines in Japan.
Now, a car is alot of $, but the way they're made now...used to be you'd buy American products cuz' they were built to last and haivng bought product 'x' that was good to you & your family, worked well, good value = your customer loyalty and future sales. ie)Repeat business is where it WAS AT.
Now, it's repeat business but differt, cuz' consumption is much higher of product 'x' and a larger population to sell too. They don't need to insure your loyalty to company 'y', more ppl will take up the slack if you find they make crap. Quality vs. quantity I suppose. Now, quality control, though still an issue in some services or industries, isn't the same in terms of marketing/sales anymore. Just wait till the big digital TV switch over 2-09, the resulting price war(s), mass buying, and so forth should set the model more firmly in stone.
What this means IMO (for this thread) for cars & fuel, there will be a mass production of fairly shoddy hybrids & alternative fuel vehicles when the market for them takes off cuz' ppl will be in a rush to "go green", feel good about themselves as fair weather environmentalists, and citizens (read, consumers), and it will be in vogue largely. Not all the bugs will be worked out of course in the 1st big wave, but the rush to get these hot new cars to market will be boosted by a willingness/impatience for people to get off "that Devil oil". Best to wait a year or 2 for finalizing of product 'x', you know?
Remember all those x-box 360's that came out first? Microsoft lost $1 billion in tech support/troubleshooting/reissues/etc. for them; overhearting, stuff like that. Pushed them out super fast, super cheap...paid the price later.
The Chinese are doing this w/ regular intenal combustion cars at rock bottom prices. Cheap as Hell, but that's a maxim when you got over a billion ppl that want to drive. We've only got 300 million total, that's kids & elderly too btw...
It all comes down to the almighty dollar. When an oil company makes ethenol* cheaper to attain, you'll see more hybrid and straight alcohol cars. Once the corporations see profit in alternative fuels they'll become more availible.
Truer words were never spoken.
Same thing w/ solar. Very pricey. If enough ppl do it though, ie)demand goes up, competing price wars will lower them significantly...which will attract new customers, which will make more R&D which will make them cheaper...bla bla bla. Circle of life ($). But other interests would rather see consumers buy their product/service, namely your local electrical concern, or in terms of the thread, auto manufacturers.
*corn ethenol and sugar ethenol is a bit of a hot topic right now. In the US we use corn because that's what we've got. In Brazil, they use sugar. You can bet if we switch to more ethenol, Cuba's sugar fields will be a really big incentive to reopen relations with Fidel and his boys.
I know, I know...
If they would just get off Communism, Havana would be the hot spot again for tourism, their economy would explode w/ new jobs so close to America, people wouldn't be sneaking off in dingy lifeboats, they could trade sugar for actual cars not made in the 50's ;)...It's just Fidel, gah, bitter old man.
So much potential that is just stagnating, like algae choking out a pond.
Now a company in Europe is bringing it back. They use carbon-fiber canisters so that in the event that they do get damaged they will not explode and could more easily release the pressure.
I forgot the name of the company but they were introducing a all air...and a air-gas combo. The air-gas combo would use fuel to repressurize the empty while the car was running off of the other.
http://www.popularmechanics.com/automotive/new_cars/4217016.html
****
Ethanol or Methanol are not hard to home-make. There are pleanty of resources that can guide you through the process though you must be cautious as well and get the proper equipment and knowledge to handle the chemicals (like don't pour water on lye lol)
You can run it in your diesel easily. There will be a slight dip in your mpg but eh. If you want to run off of SVO, you will need some conversion to your engine because it is more viscous than diesel or meth/eth. With no conversion you can run straight off of SVO, but you will soon run into problems.
Ethanol or Methanol are not hard to home-make. There are pleanty of resources that can guide you through the process though you must be cautious as well and get the proper equipment and knowledge to handle the chemicals (like don't pour water on lye lol)
Ethanol is over-distilled moonshine. As long as the flame is blue when you ignite alcohol meant for consumption, it's safe to drink. If the flame is orange, it's ethanol and will kill you.
You can run a car on pretty much any form of alcohol. I've seen cars run on isopropyl, ethanol and methenol. As long as it's flammable and can be forced into the cylinders of your engine you can use it as fuel. It's better to have a car made to use it, but every internal combustion engine will run using alcohol.
My great-grandfather used to brew fuel-grade and drinkable alcohol. He started off brewing the alcohol to sell for drinking but when the government started taxing gasoline he figured making his own fuel was a way to screw the government. Bootleggers and moonshiners all have the knowledge to make fuel. Even if the sources of oil dry up, we will have fuel.
Ethanol does not have the BTU rating that gasoline has. It takes about 20% more Ethanol to equal the energy of gasoline. Ethanol does, however, burn cooler, actually, than gasoline. The octane rating for Ethanol is about 100, or better. which means that it burns for a longer period of time, and delivers more of it's energy to the engine. The reason that an engine "seems" to get hotter burning such high octane fuel is that the burn time is longer with such fuels as alcohol as opposed to gasoline, so the engine tends to retain more heat than with a lower octane fuel.