question about gas prices

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Countryside : One Thread

I might have mentioned it before but gas over here in the UK is knocking $6 a gallon. A wry smile came across my face when I read about $1.61 'hurting'.. we all have tiny economy cars here and only travel when totally necessary. If the roads were not so dangerous I would seriously consider buying a near by field and keeping a horse as it would be the single biggest return for our time and investment.

But what I would like to know is why the price of fuel in the U.S. is creeping up? Over here we always know that its going up because our socialist government is adding tax to pay for yet another hand out scheme - we're used to it. But is that the way it works over there? Sarah.

-- sarah matthess (william@matthess.freeserve.co.uk), March 10, 2000

Answers

Dear Sarah: Our economy depends on screw your neighbor and this is why you see increased fuel prices. Speculators need to reach their goals and when that need is endangered--they raise the cost ! Recently our president signed a bill that let the united nations rules govern our personal guns-that's ok--we will turn this continent into a bloody red mess before any american surrenders as much as his slingshot. They think we are headed for a one goverment world--me and mine and the state I live in are headed for secession. I may ride a horse myself-hopefully into battle! Get ready for the last war

-- Joel Rosen (Joel681@webtv.net), March 10, 2000.

$1.60 for gas .... it is really something like $1.00 for gas $0.60 in taxes, depending on your state. It will not get any better has anyone ever heard of taxes going down.

Oil from Alaska where does it go? To Japan! Is Japan having a problem with the oil prices? NO. Why isn't that oil used here in the US?

Alternative energy? The budget cuts in the early 80's was the nails in the coffin for many of these technologies. Yes many readers on the forum use alternative energy systems, but does the county on a large scale?

Also the US oil consuption is going up due to the clean air act. Power plants can't burn Eastern US coal, too high in sulphur, some of the powerplant have converted over to oil and gas. That is why unemployment around here is still 10 to 15%, some economic boom, huh?

Maybe it's time to fire-up the still and produce your own alcohol for fuel.

Another thought is this a Y2K computer problem? It was reported by the commerence department last fall that the Arab world was way behind in fixing their systems.

-- Rich (pntbeldyk@wirefire.com), March 10, 2000.

I'm sorry if I complained about 1.61 a gallon compaired to 6.00 . but this time last year we were at .99 to 1.21 depending on were you got it.I go to the indian reservation its cheaper " less or no tax I'm not sure"We are in a small town and all stores are a 30 min. drive , not an option for horse and buggy.We have a Sm truck my husband drives and I have a king cab pickup truck which is needed not only to pick up supplys ,but to fit the 6 of us.I dont know what the solution is but I hope there is one soon .Good luck to all.

-- Patty Gamble (fodfarms@slic.com), March 10, 2000.

The reason or at least the reason given by the big boys, is that gasoline is going up in price due to a shift away from gasoline to making heating oil for use back East. Something about a colder than normal winter. With the rest of the nation being milder I don't buy it. Also OPEC has tightened supplies to the US to drive the purchase price of crude up. Whatever the reason, the higher prices will be with us for a year or two, then drop back some to make everyone happy and think they are getting a bargain. As for me, I walk and bicycle a lot, but I don't have a family or employment like many of the others that need a vehicle. When comparing your price for gasoline to the price here, it should also be noted that your British gallon (Imperial ?) is smaller than the US gallon. The US gallon is multiplied by .83267 to get the size of the British gallon. That makes your price even higher yet.

-- greenbeanman (greenbeanman@ourtownusa.net), March 10, 2000.

I heard a news anylyst say that the OPEC nations have threatened from time to time to cut back on production to raise prices. The problem for them (OPEC)is that each country wants to sell more than the others and so production never actually got cut. This time however, they really did cut back and the US used up it's reserves. The end result is less gas and higher prices. I'm no economist but that's the explanation one gave.

-- Peg (jnjohnsn@pressenter.com), March 10, 2000.

I don't know about anyone else but the US as a country bends over backwards to help every other county (opec too) and what do we get ? kicked in the butt!Its about time we stand up for ourselfs!What do most other countrys do for us ? Hold there hands out thats what .I'm sorry you may not agree with me ,but we have people in need here and we dont help them enough either .But we send millions over seas . I just don't understand all the ways of our goverment.

-- Patty Gamble (fodfarms@slic.com), March 10, 2000.

You might want to wander over to the Forum at

http://pub3.ezboard.com/fdownstreamventurespetroleummarkets

Some of you may know Downstreamer from the old TB2000 forum. Anyway, there's some intelligent talk about the oil situation over there.

Sorry, I don't know how to hotlink.

BTW, I have been grousing about gasoline prices, too, but I am mostly amazed that it's going up 5 cents every other day....the velocity is amazing, not so much the price (which will eventually impact Wall Street as well as Main Street, but that's another story). Well, I guess the price is significant relative to our markets, but not to what Europe has been paying in this sense.

We still have gas stored from the rollover....will be using it for the tractor and tiller this spring. Be an interesting year at the supermarkets!

Got seeds?

-- sheepish (rborgo@gte.net), March 10, 2000.

Having read the forgoing, there are 2 key phrases. Socialism, ala' Despicable Bill. And the demise of the 2nd Amendment. I agree with Joel. Good Luck (let's hope to God!).

Brad

-- Brad (homefixer@mix-net.net), March 10, 2000.

Well it's not because of turning it to heating oil for us in the east. we had a few cold weeks. hey, it's winter! We already hit 70 degree on thursday, but with the exception of a few weeks it's been a mild winter here in MA.

-- Sue Landress (Sulandherb@aol.com), March 10, 2000.

Strasburg,PA here...this Winter was the coldest and "snowyest"in five years...As it was explained to me by an NBC news producer, the oil companies receive their allotment based upon the previous 2 years sales in their area...That allotment is predetermined and shipped to them at the start of the season...OPEC et al, clapped their hands in glee as the demand for more oil reached their ears, so,production was not increased, but the price was...OUR illustrious government of the people, by the people and for the people, decided NOT to release any of the huge oil storage to meet our needs, so....the price of a gallon of home heating oil in our area went from 78cents to..are you ready for this...$$2.98/gallon in THREE WEEKS...This has been killing us here for the last two months, and thank God for the warmer weather these last few days...Now that the same thing is happening with the price of gasoline, the entire country is on the band wagon that we have been screaming about to deaf ears....Global economy????? A pox on them and all of their ancestors...our government is NOT our government..it belongs to anybody BUT us...I'm really sick of the whole mess and wish there were a nice cave to live in , but it's probably already been promised to OPEC...

-- Lesley Chasko (martchas@gateway.net), March 10, 2000.

Doesn't this sound familiar to anyone? Maybe I'm gettin old but I think this is starting to look like the 70's. Muscle cars---SUV's. I know people will hurt but I wish gas would go up to 6 dollars and then people would start going back to a little sanity!! If we don't, the next cars will be 2 story and speed limits will be 75+. I blame us. If people of this country would conserve energy high prices could not happen. I'm with Greenbeanman. I'm down to 15 dollars a month for gas. The heck with goverments. Individuals have all the power if they use it. Isn't this what JD has been saying all these years?....Kirk

-- Kirk Davis (kirkay@yahoo.com), March 10, 2000.

Heating oil prices in Maine began trending up right after the CDC. The "colder than normal" winter argument is completely bogus -- except for a brief spell of cold and snow in late Jan/feb, winter has been relatively mild in New England. In fact, didn't I read just today that this winter is yet another record-breaker for warmth in North America? OPEC supposedly began cutting back production early last year, after oil hit $11 a barrel. The big increases, though, didn't hit until Jan/Feb of this year, when supposedly deliberate cutbacks combined with a much higher-than-normal number of refinery problems. Possibilities:

OPEC is actually making a production quota stick for a change and reaping the benefits.

The oil fields and refineries are having real y2k problems, can't admit them for legal/economic reasons, and so they're trying to make a virtue of necessity.

The Hubbert Curve is kicking in. North Sea fields have peaked already. Is it possible that the Saudis and others are also seeing problems already? Seems unlikely, so maybe they're just trying to make the supply last as long as possible. Delicate balancing act -- cut production, make up the loss on higher prices, but without kicking off a major recession or increasing the use of alternate energy sources, all while holding off/paying off the fundamentalist mullahs to stay in power. Not a good time to be a Saudi prince.

-- Cash (cash@carry.com), March 11, 2000.

I just had to write back--I loved all the responses from regulars and the silent majority. The answers all had one common thread. We know it is a conspiricy. I had the opportunity to meet a state senator from Virginia at a local town street fair. He ask me where I lived--I replied down the road 15 miles on a farm.. He said" I work for u than" and I replied "no u don't --your fired" I never saw a man looked as confused as he did that day. I don't have all the answers but have a start--quit paying taxes and use the money to buy ammunition. No government has ever stepped down willingly and it is time for this one to go. I ask myself --what has my country done for me lately? I could find no answer. Sure did enjoy the broad range of people in Countryside and the range of their thoughts. It is a real shame that you aren't willing to become our leaders and bring some level of sanity back !!!!

-- Joel Rosen (Joel681@webtv.net), March 11, 2000.

Joel,

I dunno about a conspiracy. That would seem to imply some level of planning, organization, and goal. I am not sure the government usually demonstrates that efficiency!

I think maybe trying to coverup for stuff that has gotten way out of control is more to the point. I think poor planning, organization and no goal (national energy self sufficiency) is more of the reason for this situation.

Throw in the usual greed, power politics, and international intrigue, and you have a pretty unmanageable mess. And it's an election year here, to boot!

I am going to keep working toward self sufficiency, and watch this one from the sidelines.

-- sheepish (rborgo@gte.net), March 11, 2000.

I guess I must be the only regular who doesn't totally agree with you guys. I have no animosity toward any OPEC nation over gas prices. In my opinion the U.S. has done this to themselves. Any country that would base it's entire economy (and believe me ours is) on a resource we can't supply ourselves is bound to have trouble. For decades we have gotten rich because of cheap oil prices, and yet the amount of money we spend on research to develop sustainable and alternative energy sources is piddly!

Do you folks realize that when agri business produces food they use 2 calories of energy for every one calorie they produce - and yet we have the cheapest food prices anywhere (not to mention the associated demise of small farms). Why is this: government subsidies and cheap oil.

Rather than complaining I sure wish people would look at alternatives, yes they are presently more expensive but an economy based on cheap oil is just not sustainable. I'm afraid we are a pretty spoiled group.

Kim

-- Kim (fleece@eritter.net), March 11, 2000.

Greenbeanman, I think you have it backwards. An imperial gallon is equal to almost five quarts. To convert, DIVIDE a U.S gallon by .83. The imperial gallon is equal to about 1.2 U.S gallons.

Patty, I agree that the U.S helps a lot of foreign countries. And, while I don't want to turn this forum into another center for contention, I do want to say that the U.S. also has been known to exploit a lot of people in a lot of third world countries. Without this exploitation, I don't believe we would have a standard of living that is so much higher than these countries. (higher in a material sense, at least)

Lesley's tale of fantastic increases in fuel oil prices is amazing! I suspect a lot more people are going to start thinking wood heat. (I have just as many trees dying this year in my forest as I did before the OPEC happenings. By the way, I can still remember the "oil shortage" of the early seventies. We were told by TPTB that the world was running out of oil, etc etc. As many of us knew at the time (I was working as a geologist for ARCO in 1968, when the first Prudhoe Bay oil strike ALONE proved out at a fifty year's extra reserve for ARCO and Texaco), and everyone found out eventually, there was no oil shortage. Just another scam to make the rich get richer.

Kirk, I agree with you--conservation is where it's at. I only drove my truck 4000 miles last year, which is the least ever in my life.

By the way, Kirk, and everybody, my friend, next door, who is a retired VP at Unical Oil Co. tells me that the US is actually using LESS oil now than in the early seventies, due to conservation. Considering our increased population, that is pretty impressive. I don't have any data to back up his claim, but I believe him. He's an honest man.

I do know that there has been a huge conservation effort in home heating costs. For instance, bs a builder I have been involved in the "Super Good Cents Program" for quite a few years (which the power company here discontinued three or four years ago, for some reason). Under this program, the contractor, or owner builder, would receive cash incentives for building the building to a higher energy efficiency level. The program worked extremely well: I can attest to that, as I have three of these houses as rentals, and the heating costs are very low.

One other thing. While I am not pleased about $2 per gallon gas, especially if the reason for it is to fatten some rich dude's purse, my neighbor (the Unical one) told me a year or so ago that if the price of oil goes up past $10 per million btu's, which is where it was during the 1970's oil "shortage", solar powered cars will start becoming economically competitive with gasoline powered cars. So maybe this "oil shortage" cloud will have a silver lining. Unfortunately, it will be at the expense of the poorer members of society, as usual.

Sheepish, at the risk of sounding like a "conspiracy theorist", I would like to mention that it is not necessarily "the government" which is controlling worldwide oil prices/quotas/shortages. I don't think any informed person will deny that there are some very powerful people controlling many aspects of our lives, particularly the world economy. WTO comes to mind. Just because there are a lot of unorganized beaurocrats in government does not mean that there is no one else, possibly a lot more organized, pulling strings on the government puppets.

Kim, I agree with what you are saying here. Certainly we are spoiled by cheap, subsidized, energy. Do you know that the U.S. was, until fairly recently, an oil EXPORTER? No more. We're too into STUFF.

Where'd you get the figures about using more energy to produce food than we get back in food? I hadn't heard that. Is this referring to only chemical fertilizers and pesticides, or what? I would assume that a plant would use a LOT more solar energy to make plant material that we would get back from the plant; otherwise the plant would have to be 100% efficient at building cells, and also we'd have to eat the whole plant.

Kim, I especially agree with you that we need to do more to encourage the use of alternative energy. There are a lot of things we can do now that don't even cost more money. I can personally speak for efficient building design, orientation, and so forth. Not to mention mass transit. It seems pretty lame to me to have to power a two ton hunk of steel and plastic all over the place, when all I really want to do is move my petite little 225 pound body over to a friend's house.

Jeez, time to get off my soap box!

-- jumpoff joe (jumpoff@echoweb.net), March 11, 2000.

Jumpoff,

Hey some of us like you up there on your soapbox! Well, on this forum anyway...ahem!

Your comments were well taken. I am not so naive as to think that there are not international potentates and power brokers behind a lot of what passes for commerce these days. I think most half- way awake people know that corporadoes and banksters are the handlers behind most of the politcal players.

But I ask you whether or not it makes any difference who they are...if it's localized bumbling or international strategy, I personallly think that becoming as self reliant as I can (and advocate the same for others) is the right thing to do. My experiences and observances with organized protests leaves me somewhat jaded. (WTO protests, for example...what legacy? Seattle gets a big bill and a black eye. That's about it!) Maybe I am getting more cynical than I think!

At any rate, not paying taxes, and going after Washington DC in some kind of armed insurrection isn't anything remotely connected to my psyche. And I suspect that the international corporate powers that be aren't any more capable of grandiose strategies to enslave us than our federal overlords. After all, they have more layers of stuff to deal with. But hey, I could be wrong.

I think the real problem is us as idiot consumers of all the crap that gets marketed to us. If we continue to chose to support all this stuff by not becoming self reliant (be it fuel, sweatshop clothing, artificial food and animals, etc) then we shall reap what we sow. The power to fend off these perils is within us as individuals. Just say no to dependence on those you don't know, and don't trust! Make it and use it yourself!

Now I'll get off this soap box before it breaks from the weight of all this heavy discussion!

p.s. I am also being extremely careful about my car trips these days. This reminds me of the last 2 gas crises in my lifetime...

-- sheepish (rborgo@gte.net), March 12, 2000.

Umm, p.s.

I don't have a gas refinery on site here at the ranch. So I didn't mean make it and use it for everything! But I think you get my point. Be smart about your choices.

-- sheepish (rborgo@gte.net), March 12, 2000.

If you ran an oil company you would maximize profit and raise prices any time it would not cut into profits from lost sales. If you can find some one else to point to to divert the blame from your company you would do that also. If you could contribute to a political party and influence the politicians votes to go solw on mass transit and renewable energy resources, particularly those you had no stake in, you would do that also. Any "democratic" system that allows any one other than the individual people to influence their law makers has a democracy based on dollars not sense.

-- Michael M. McFall (mcfallm@aol.com), March 12, 2000.

Can someone say "campaign finance reform"?

-- sheepish (rborgo@gte.net), March 12, 2000.

Here's something to ponder: One of the male guests on the 3-10-00 edition of Politically Incorrect (the late night TV roundtable) inferred that perhaps the people who gave $70,000,000 to George W. Bush's presidential campaign are pulling strings to up the pump price of gasoline, hoping that this would hurt the economy in a way that that the electorate would blame on Clinton, and by association Gore. Seems plausible to me considering that Bush is from Texas, one of the big oil states. I don't know the guest's name, so if anyone else out there saw this show and knows his name I would appreicate hearing back from you on this.

If this theory is true it sure needs to be given wider coverage so that inidividuals who think George W. may be the right choice, will be better equipped to make a more informed decision. It sure would not be the action of a presidential contender who claims to be a "compassionate conservative", or who wishes to unify the country... unless of course he would be trying to unify the country against his potential leadership. Anyway , there was no chance that I would have voted for Bush before hearing of this theory...it would just give me one more reason to justify my decision.

-- John Fritz (aeon30@hotmail.com), March 13, 2000.

Here's something to ponder: One of the male guests on the 3-10-00 edition of Politically Incorrect (the late night TV roundtable) inferred that perhaps the people who gave $70,000,000 to George W. Bush's presidential campaign are pulling strings to up the pump price of gasoline, hoping that this would hurt the economy in a way that the electorate would blame on Clinton, and by association Gore. Seems plausible to me considering that Bush is from Texas, one of the big oil states. I don't know the guest's name, so if anyone else out there saw this show and knows his name I would appreicate hearing back from you on this.

If this theory is true it sure needs to be given wider coverage so that inidividuals who think George W. may be the right choice, will be better equipped to make a more informed decision. It sure would not be the action of a presidential contender who claims to be a "compassionate conservative", or who wishes to unify the country... unless of course he would be trying to unify the country against his potential leadership. Anyway , there was no chance that I would have voted for Bush before hearing of this theory...it would just give me one more reason to justify my decision.

-- John Fritz (aeon30@hotmail.com), March 13, 2000.

Since his daddy had the US Army defend the oil interest in Kuait for benefit of the Oil business, that would not be much of a streach of the imagination.

-- Michael M. McFall (mcfallm@aol.com), March 13, 2000.

When I was in the Saudi region during Desert Storm, we didn't give a damn about the oil only the people that Sadamm Hussien was tourtering and murdering. Before you belittle the men and women who died over there you may want to consider that they are the ones who make it possible for you folks to have this kind of conversation with out fear of arrest and execution.

-- Jim Tanner (Tanner_jim@hotmail.com), March 13, 2000.

joel armed revolt and bring sanity back in the same setance woooo realty check

-- shaun cornish (shaun-terri@juno.com), March 13, 2000.

I think most of us (I do anyway) thank the military ,police,firemen ect. who risk there lives to save ours . I would not want your job .You should be proud , and THANK YOU

-- Patty Gamble (fodfarms@slic.com), March 13, 2000.

Jim you miss my point entirely. The men and women of our armed forces are heroes in my book. Their lives are far too valuable to be wasted supporting one absolutist nation over. That does not change the reason we went into that war. I spent my time in combat for the United States also. We defended oil, the demonization of Hussain, an admittedly deserving target, was just window dressing. We did not go into Camobia where millions were slaughtered, nor in several of the recent African nations where ethnic war was rampant. We did not even defend the Kurds or ensure they had a homeland when we defeated Hussain and had the opportunuty. Our leadership defends only the economic interest and wraps it in the colors you and I both hold dear. Our people have a great heart, but the political leadership use it against us to achieve their desired results.

-- Michael M. McFall (mcfallm@aol.com), March 13, 2000.

Since I started this mess than maybe I should close it. How we got from oil prices to down-gradeing police, fireman and military history--I'll never know. I totally accept the blame, however I respect everyone's right to voice an opinion--including my own. Homesteading to us was a decision based on our politics so we feel that addressing the question was not out of line in this forum. I think some of the answers showed great thought and interest. I can't help but notice that the catergory was quickly sent to the bury pit----thanks for the censorship !! I quess even Steve is looking out for the bottom line profit margin. To those we offended-our apologies--we are not sorry-just useing our southern manners. I think in the future--if the topic does not interest you--disgard it-instead of censor it. We isten to repetitive questions and topics we find boring also. In the end--it is not a question of "IF we seceed, but rathe when we seceed" A country built by criminal , for criminals and maintained by criminals shall no last on the face of the earth !

-- Joel Rosen (Joel681@webtv.net), March 14, 2000.

I too apologize. I've always been a "little" over reactive about the treatment of the Military. My time there was the turning point in my life that pointed me towards the homesteading lifestyle. As a Combat Medic and then a Paramedic I have been horrified with the cruelty of the human race and our ability to hurt one another with total disregard. I also know that our leadership in this country is corrupt regardless of which party they come from and that the only way we will ever change it is by staying involved in the process. Once again I apologize if I offended anyone. (Maybe I'll just stick to asking questions about my turkeys) :) God Bless you all. Jim

-- Jim Tanner (Tanner_jim@hotmail.com), March 14, 2000.

Poor Sarah, all you asked about was gas prices. Then you got wars and rumours of wars, political conspiracy, etc.,---the things books are written of. Hope this doesn't put her off asking questions of the crazy Americans.

-- Green (ratdogs10@yahoo.com), March 15, 2000.

Jim, your sensitivity is well understood. Both to you and others I apologize where offense was given. I would encourage all of us to make our point of view known here and in the political arena. Other wise by asking for nothing, nothing is what we will get. I favor honest differences of opinion by honest people. The legnth politicians go to twist those opinions to their will I do not like. I believe there needs to the a homestead group in both political parties, with the indivisualistic values we hold in common. If we don't get politically active, those who are will decide our fate. Get your friends together and take control of your local county and eventuall state and national government.

-- Michael M. McFall (mcfallm@aol.com), March 15, 2000.

Re the earlier question about energy cost of food, I just read on an energy discussion board today that modern agriculture requires 3 calories of energy input for one calorie of food output. That includes, I believe, the energy cost of not only growing but also transporting, processing, and packaging. Necessarily done wiht a broad brush, I believe, but still food for thought.

-- Cash (cash@andcarry.com), March 15, 2000.

Has anyone taken a look at available production capacity?

That is, are there fewer refineries producing than, say 12 months ago?

Are we getting a double-whammy - higher price per barrel **AND** less product being produced?

Just a thought...

j

-- j (jw_hsv@yahoo.com), March 16, 2000.

There is no conspiracy. Doesn't a conspiracy require some secrecy? OPEC doesn't mind telling you they have cut production in order to raise prices. Raw crude prices have been lower than production costs in a lot of oil producing areas. I live with wells on my property. There are thousands in my county. Over the last several years, well have been shut in, because it cost more to produce the wells than the crude was worth. Does anyone really truly believe that the wicked ol oil companies would put up with three or four years of below cost oil? If they had real power, oil would have never dropped out of the $30/barrel range.

Also, how many folks (besides farmers) work or produce a product at a loss and remain in business. If you want to see who controls the price of oil, look in your local paper and check out the Chicago Board of Trade. Supply and Demand. Futures trading. Less production, futures rise, and prices at the pump follow. How many people have mutual funds or other securites that have oil stocks included. Are those people complaining about their stocks soaring?

I live off the grid, but I still drive a truck. My baby truck gets the same mileage as my 1 ton diesel. My vw rabbit got the same mpg as my mothers monster Ford LTD did.

I heard on the radio today that the price of fuel has no bearing in 'todays economy'. I wonder how all those internet tycoons and their employees get to work? It doesn't matter how high fuel prices go, people will still buy it. What are we going to do? Everyone move into one small corner of the country, so we can all walk to work. Great, that'll leave more empty space for us ruralites!

-- phil briggs (phillipbriggs@thenett.com), March 16, 2000.

-- (noneofyour@biz.com), July 13, 2001