POST A COMMENTtwiz(04/29/2008)
This story just angers me to no end... especially watching businesses like truckers and families struggling to make ends meet... while these bozos rake in the cash at our expense...
What's next? I bet a tax relief program for their profits where the government offers them more cash to "help" aid in their search for oil...
CK(04/29/2008)
Just last week I spent $27 on less than a full tank of gas. I get the cheap stuff at Costco because they are cheaper then anyone else around. I figure a full tank would cost $60. And that isn't taking in my wife's small SUV!
Yea ... my money is going streight to the middle-east cartel.
CK(04/29/2008)
I hope that companies design a good renewable fuel alternative. I firmly believe that hydrogen power is the best way to go. If we could convert a car to run on water (it's been done before) in a closed fule system, milage could approach 100+ miles/gal.
With water in the fuel tank, electrodes in a divided tank to seperate the H2 and O, pump the hydrogen through the system, burn the H (need O to do that), and pump the exhaust (H20) back into the tank. Repeat process.
Now if you were to add an electric hybred into the mix, a person could get even more to the mile!
BPFH(04/29/2008)
"With water in the fuel tank, electrodes in a divided tank to seperate the H2 and O, pump the hydrogen through the system, burn the H (need O to do that), and pump the exhaust (H20) back into the tank. Repeat process."
I wouldn't get your hopes up on that. Minimally, you'd need an external fuel source because of the simple fact that no process is ever 100% efficient. (Some of the energy from oxidizing the hydrogen is wasted as heat, for instance, rather than being turned into kinetic energy.)
In any event, back to the original question: I have a Ford Taurus and a Hyundai Elantra. The Taurus gets filled up for $45 once a month, and the Elantra for $38 three times a month, so we'll say roughly $160/month, or $40/week.
Why are you so angry that these oil companies are raking in the money?
Sure they are making money hand over fist with oil prices so high. Are they gauging? Maybe, but there's no proof even though we keep investigating them.
But why are people so mad at high energy prices when:
1) We did nothing about investing in alternative fuel sources.
2) We basically banned nuclear power.
3) We won't drill off of California or in the ANWAR because of environmental reasons.
4) We won't raise CAFE standards because it pisses off the UAW and the auto companies.
5) We complain about the oil companies raking in the bucks but say nothing about the government that's getting a big increase in taxes from gas/oil.
My state has a state gas tax. And a sales tax on the price and the state gas tax. Plus the Fed. gas tax.
Why are some people pissed that oil companies are benefitting immensely from higher oil prices but don't say a peep about the government benefitting from higher oil prices? (eg Sen. Boxer)
BTW, both my cars are gas guzzlers. I spend about $100. For either car, I need to fill up about 3 times every 2 weeks.
Thank God I only live 10 min. from work. I am thinking of bicycling to work 1-2 days, not to save gas but for exercise reasons.
Sorry folks but our existence as "americans" is heavily oil-based.
ohiodude(04/29/2008)
Exxon-Mobile is the largest company in the US. They have record demand for their product. Why should they not be richest company in the US?
Everyone who hates "Big Oil" look at the Mutual Funds in your 401K and realize you own "Big Oil", and that portion of your portfolio is the only thing making money right now.
thelma(04/30/2008)
what bonusonus said, except the part
about owning a gas guzzler. I have
a compact car and fill up once a week.
BonusOnus(04/30/2008)
People don't seem to realize that our lives in America are heavily impacted by our use of oil.
Let's list some examples:
1) Car driving. This is the easiest, most tangible way we see how oil is used. Your car needs gasoline and if your car doesn't have it, it doesn't run. When you fill up, you see how much you are spending.
2) Water. Most of us do not have a water pump in our backyard. Most of us live in an urban or suburban area. Just how do you think water is moved from a reservoir into your kitchen faucet?
3) Electricity, although this is the one area that can be changed with alternative energy.
4) Food. Most of us do not grow our own food. In fact, most of us eat a lot of food that's not grown within 100 miles of where we live. That salmon you had for dinner? Or the fresh fruit imported from Chile because it's out of season in the Northern hemisphere? Just how do you think it got to your grocery store? Using solar energy?
5) Agriculture. One of the things about the US is that this nation increased agricultural production using less labor and less land (until recently). Farmland is now being redeveloped into housing tracts. And we have more acres of national forests than we did 100 years ago. We are growing more agricultural products using less land and less labor because US agriculture is heavily dependent on using oil (and water). Farmers in Vietnam use water buffalos, physical labor, and manure to grow rice. Farmers in the US use airplanes to drop the rice seedlings by air and harvest it with a tractor and use petrochemical based fertilizers.
With the world population growing, there will be more demand for food. The only ways to increase food production is to increase the acres of land being farmed, which means less land set aside for environmental protection, or increase the yield per acre. And to increase yield, you need to use oil.
One other note - everybody likes "organic" produce. I like it myself since it has less chemicals and is supposedly healthier. But this is a niche market for wealthy liberals. If every farmer in the world used "organic" methods, the yields would go down, more land would have to be used for farming, and food prices would go up. One of the reasons why America's food is relatively cheap is the heavy use of oil and chemicals to increase the yield per acre.
SouthernProgrammer(04/30/2008)
One thing about America, when gas prices rise it hits us....HARD. One of the reasons I think this happens is due to the way our lives are designed around the auto. In most cases, we live in one area yet work in another and (with the exception of New Yawkers And Chicagoians) don't have a good transportation system so we DRIVE to work.
I recently read about how McCain and Clinton (Hillary) are wanting to remove taxes from gas to help out the voters, I mean American people yet Obama is against it. I bet he realizes that if the Government removes all taxes from gas and brings it below $3 the American people will have a FIT if they try to add that tax back in...
twiz(04/30/2008)
And who is partially responsible for why we do not have more alternative fuel solutions? Why do you think there is hundreds of millions poured into government lobby stool-pigeons every year to help protect the interests of these oil companies... they have been trying to squash alternative fuel solutions for decades...
BonusOnus(04/30/2008)
You might be right that the lobbyists for oil companies have donated millions to politicians (OF BOTH PARTIES) for this.
At the same time, lobbyists for big agricultural companies have donated large sums so biofuel laws would be passed.
But ultimately, if the voters had raised a stink, wouldn't investments by the government in alternative fuels have been done by now?
Unfortunately, most Americans don't want to change their lifestyle (and I don't want to dramatically change mine either), especially since for most of the last 50+ years, oil was relatively cheap. There was a time within 10 years in the past when a gallon of bottled water was more expensive than a gallon of gas. Why invest in alternative fuels when gas was so cheap? We're only talking about it now because gas prices are exorbitant and China/India are becoming more industrialized.
Until we get some alternative fuel that replaces oil, which could be a generation away, we're either stuck with using oil, or living a life dramatically different than how we live now.
labtech(04/30/2008)
I am one of those poor souls who has to drive an hour to work - because I'd have to take a 67% paycut to get a job that I could walk to, where I live - which would qualify me for food stamps, BTW. The option for a train isn't there - it would actually cost me more to drive to the train station, pay for the train pass, and then take a taxi or the extremely unreliable bus system to my job. I'd love to work closer to home and not pay 80$ a week for gas (AND 30$ a week in tolls) for my subcompact...but there's no jobs where my house is located. New meaning to the term "working poor" - I have to keep this job or we'll lose everything. I have to do 17 more years of this too - and hope that I can afford to retire then.
SouthernProgrammer(05/01/2008)
No doubt about it, this country is in the pockets of big oil. I really hope people get fed up this time and companies like this
http://www.news.com/1606-2_3-6233989.html
will bring their product to market and not have their ideas killed by big oil.
truck21(05/01/2008)
I'm new to the site, so if I make a mistake, or misunderstand something, please let me know. As, to this article about high fuel prices: Yes, they are high, yes the oil companies did (and still are) taking advantage of Katrina. It was devistateing. What gives ANYBODY the right to make a "profit" off of someone elses misery, misfortune? I lost my wife in 2005 (heart attack) I figured it would be cheaper to cremate than to have a burial. I just found out, I could have buried her for $7,000. The cremation was $5,00.00 +. The biggest expense? "Professional services" $2600.00. In that case I had to pay-----but these people that cry and moan about $3.50 @ gal. for fuel and then put 25-30 gallons into a "Gas Guzzler" that gets (if you are lucky) 18-23 mpg
(which is EPA for most SUV's) twice (sometimes 3 times) a week, just what ARE YOU saying? I have a saying: "IF YOU DON'T PAY IT, THEY CANNOT CHARGE IT!!!!" As long as people keep paying $100-$150.00 to FILL their tanks the oil companies will keep charging it. I don't know about you, but I cannot afford to BURN UP 100-150.00 dollars every week.
SouthernProgrammer(05/01/2008)
Truck - I think we are on the same boat here, sorry about your wife I know that has to be tough.
Regarding people and their SUV's. What has GM and Ford all pushed for years? SUV's! So a LOT of people bought them during the times of low gas prices and rebates. I know of one family (with 6 kids) who has two late 90's era Surburbans that are now paid for. Suddenly, this family, who has a hard time making ends meet, is having to fill up these big tanks while crying at the prices. Some people say "Dump that SUV and get a PRIUS!" That makes NO SENSE! If these people can barely afford filling their tank, how could they POSSIBLY afford a car payment? On top of that, they have two SUV's that are PAID FOR and are in good running shape. Lastly, how could they fit 8 people in a Prius?!? What I have a problem with is that their are a LOT of people with these SUV's that Detroit pushed for years that are paid for and now suddenly the solution is...get rid of it! If everyone dumped their SUV today, they would probably buy a foreign car so suddenly the American Auto makers would post record losses and then we have a different problem.
My thoughts are that we need to look at reasonable methods of bringing AFFORDABLE ethanol to the market. The link I posted is the best solution I have seen. Another good method I have seen is making fuel from ALGAE, I hope that works also.
truck21(05/01/2008)
In response to Southernprogrammer: You make a very valde point. I do agree with you. We need to find an alternative to oil. We had one in the 70's. But, the government, and the oil companies quashed it. There was a guy (don't remember his name, I think he was Minnesota) that actually had a working engine that ran off of corn oil. This was back when they had the so called "gas shortage". The government, oil companies, could not let this guy produce this engine because it would have dropped the "value" of gasoline tremendusly. So, they "bought" his invention, and that was the last anybody ever heard of it. Willie Nelson, a few years ago, came up with the idea if "Bio-diesel"
A few states even agreed to start producing it. What happened? Haven't heard anything about it. Why? Because the goverment has not found a way to TAX it, and until they do it will not happen. Here is something else for you to ponder over: 50 gallon drum of crude oil produces approximately 10 gallons of gas and 40 gallons of diesel fuel. Why then is diesel, on the average, $1.00 more per gallon than gasoline?
SouthernProgrammer(05/01/2008)
Truck - I really like BioDiesel, I had heard of what Willie Nelson was doing and apparently he is still going.
http://www.biowillieusa.com/
I came close to buying a Jetta Diesel a few years back with the idea of converting it to Bio but there weren't enough places in my area selling the stuff to make it worthwhile. As far as 'gallons of gas vs gallons of diesel' goes. My understanding is that the oil companies have their refineries set to make gas and not diesel. At least, that is what they say. I don't think it makes any sense other than to say they will charge what they darn well want to..
BonusOnus(05/01/2008)
Ethanol or anything that converts food into fuel is not a good idea. That corn oil idea might have reduced dependency on oil for auto companies but the increase in the demand in corn would require more oil usage.
Ethanol from switchgrass or wood chippings might work but anything that requires active agriculture in the US uses oil.
The oil companies might be gauging us but they're no different than ag companies that are charging more for meat and foodstuff. They will charge as much as they can get.
There needs to be a compromise between liberals and conservatives on this - liberals have to give up their resistance to nuclear energy and drilling for oil in the US while conservatives have to go along with higher fuel standards and increasing government investment in alternative energy.
One other thing - while the amount of crude oil being pumped has kept up with demand, the amount of gasoline being refined from crude oil has not kept up with demand. That's because the refinery capacity in the US is very limited. And like nuclear power plants, no one wants a refinery in their neighborhood so new ones will not likely be built even though they are needed in the short term.
BonusOnus(05/01/2008)
SP, you make an implicit point.
Our lifestyle is based on driving. We don't want to live in cities. We want to live in the suburbs.
Here in California, we have cities that have "low growth" laws. These cities don't want to have suburban sprawl so liberals have made building houses tougher. The cities make zoning laws that limit the amount of housing that can be built. San Francisco limited the height of buildings in certain neighborhoods because it would "ruin the skyline."
These laws sound good on the surface because it prevents sprawl like what happened in LA. But there are unintended and pernicious consequences. First, it gentrifies the area. Houses that are near to the cities or jobs are not plentiful and cost a lot. A run-down 3bd, 2bath house here goes for $500K, even with the housing downturn. Lower class people can't afford that so they move to where they can afford a house, which is the exurbs.
Second, people have to live somewhere and if they can't find housing near the city centers, they move out. That means they drive to work, sometimes for an hour one way. That driving causes greenhouse gases and increases gas consumption.
I hear liberals around here say that we must "develop" smarter, closer to the urban centers to reduce traffic and car usage. But then the same liberals want laws that prevent more houses being built near the city centers because they don't want suburban sprawl or they want to preserve greenspace or they want to preserve SF's skyline (?).
You can't have it both ways. If you want to reduce traffic and auto usage, you're gonna have to build more houses closer to the city centers.
My Two Cents(05/02/2008)
I once lived in Washington DC and spent 2-3 hours on the road commuting to my job every day. I couldn't move closer to my job because the housing was so expensive in the urban area. So I bought a 2-door Honda Civic which is great for a single person. So then I moved to the midwest where high-paying jobs are VERY hard to find. Again, I could not afford to live in the urban center and so was forced yet again to live on the outskirts of the city and drive in every day. Currently, I pay $70-$80 a month for gas. But what am I going to do once I have children? Can you really cram a growing family of 4 (plus friends and family) in to a 2-door Honda Civic? UGHHHHHH... Seems I am screwed no matter what I do. I think the real solution is to make urban areas affordable for families and stop with the million dollar condos that force families to live so far from their jobs. I don't want to live in the burbs and spend money on gas but if I can't afford a home downtown then what choice is there?
By the way, my uncle BUILT HIMSELF an electric car! I even rode in it! Sure, it was a crappy old car with wires all over the place and no storage but it ran on a battery totally! If an average person can build themselves an electric car then there is absolutly no excuse for the car companies not to do it too. When my Civic dies on me I am going to turn to my uncle and find out the best way to get my hands on an electric car. (Watch the movie "Who killed the electric car?")
CK(05/02/2008)
2Cent - If you don't have room for the kids in the car think of adding skateboards. Kids LOVE skateboards! Just tie a rope or two to the back, yell "hang on kids," and punch the gas! WooHoo!!!
Dumber than a Catbox full of sh*t(05/02/2008)
2 Cent--I hear you! I work in Chicago but live a mile outside the city limits--14 miles to work everyday--I work way up on the North Side of Chicago--it takes me a little over an hour to get there and about 1hr. 15 mins to get home. I couldn't afford to buy in the city--plus at the time I had lived in the city and had a 7 yr. old son by the time I left--I didn't want to raise my child in the city--the main reason because as a teacher I would not have been able to live in a good neighborhood.
They do need to make city housing more affordable. Starting teachers in Chicago make about 41K/yr--I have a lot of late 20-something friends who are single who have mortgages for their condos that are at least 275K. Those that rent can't afford to live alone--they ALL have roommates. but the housing where I live isn't cheap either--about 280K to buy a tiny house that needs complete re-hab.
I can appreciate what you say about needing a better car someday when you have children--my son just turned 15 so you know what is coming--how to afford it? And you have to pay for parking in most of the communities around here--parking ban 2-5 a.m. so you have to rent a space. Stinks.
You could also get something that fits on top of the car--one of those storage travel things or a ski or bike rack and just tether the kids to it--especially if you live in Chicago because the traffic moves so slowly the kids would never get hurt.
comments (24)
digg | 
del.icio.us | 
e-mail it
POST A COMMENT
