Inevitably, gas/diesel will be $5/gallon in a few years..what then... - Page 2 - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

Pete Burton · #16 05-02-2006, 08:13 AM

I WISH it would go up to $4 or $5 quickly, but I expect government interference in the marketplace will stop that short term. That's unfortunate, because the USA is moving like a runaway train toward a real fuel crisis, which is a shortage. It's been 27 years since I've pushed my car down a gas line to buy a maximum of 6 gallons.

When you hear about our representatives in congress suggesting suspending fuel taxes instead of increasing them, you can see that we are protecting supply instead of discouraging demand.

Time to put up another cord for next winter.

Ken300D · #17 05-02-2006, 08:24 AM

I'm sorry sir, but you don't seem to have an EPA license to burn that firewood.

It will start off with "we must license homeowner wood stoves because we want to ensure their efficiency and reduced smoke production" and then proceed to "we have to reduce air pollution in your state, so you may not burn fire wood".

Would be interesting to hear from anyone who already faces restrictions on their wood burning freedoms.

Ken300D

aklim · #18 05-02-2006, 08:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pete Burton

I WISH it would go up to $4 or $5 quickly, but I expect government interference in the marketplace will stop that short term. That's unfortunate, because the USA is moving like a runaway train toward a real fuel crisis, which is a shortage. It's been 27 years since I've pushed my car down a gas line to buy a maximum of 6 gallons.

When you hear about our representatives in congress suggesting suspending fuel taxes instead of increasing them, you can see that we are protecting supply instead of discouraging demand.

Time to put up another cord for next winter.

And having done your bidding the devil will just go away with no repurcussions? Really? If it does go up to $5 quickly, you think your grocer will still keep eggs at the current price? What about milk or butter? Meat?

I am all for suspending fuel taxes. WTF? They take the taxes and do what with it? Spend it on other things? Look at what we did in WI. They used the tax to pay for something else. I thought fuel tax was for road improvements? That means they have too much money. And you want them to take more? I think it is a good thing we are screaming about it. It makes the representatives do something at least to keep the increases lower. Government having money is like a crack addict guarding the crack supply.

Pete Burton · #19 05-02-2006, 08:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aklim

And having done your bidding the devil will just go away with no repurcussions? Really? If it does go up to $5 quickly, you think your grocer will still keep eggs at the current price? What about milk or butter? Meat?

I am all for suspending fuel taxes. WTF? They take the taxes and do what with it? Spend it on other things? Look at what we did in WI. They used the tax to pay for something else. I thought fuel tax was for road improvements? That means they have too much money. And you want them to take more? I think it is a good thing we are screaming about it. It makes the representatives do something at least to keep the increases lower. Government having money is like a crack addict guarding the crack supply.

I said I wanted them to take more for fuel, yes. But only if they make it revenue neutral, such as through tax credits or marginal income tax reductions. This was basically what Ross Perot was saying in 92. I don't expect it to happen, because there is less courage in all of Washington than your average Girl Scout troop.

Pete Burton · #20 05-02-2006, 09:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ken300D

I'm sorry sir, but you don't seem to have an EPA license to burn that firewood.

It will start off with "we must license homeowner wood stoves because we want to ensure their efficiency and reduced smoke production" and then proceed to "we have to reduce air pollution in your state, so you may not burn fire wood".

Would be interesting to hear from anyone who already faces restrictions on their wood burning freedoms.

Ken300D

Since 1990, all new wood stoves have been required to meet emission standards. My first stove was a Vigilant built in the 70's. When I moved, I picked up a Consolidated Dutchwest that had a Catalytic converter in it. I must say, it's a good thing. The catalyst burns the fumes and smoke making the emissions much less, and keeps the chimney cleaner. But it also gives me more heat. It gives off nearly as much heat as the Vigilant did, but with less than 1/2 the wood. That's less wood to cut, split stack and load.

97E300D · #21 05-02-2006, 09:30 AM

The Price of Crude Oil is artificial..... The Middle Eastern boys OPEC and others around the world will jack up the price of crude as high as they can before 1 the US begins to Complain to much and exerts political pressure, and 2 just before it becomes economical for older domestic and foriegn oil wells to pump again and more importantly Canada's Oil Sands. I believe Canada has far more oil then Saudi Arabia, it's just an issue of how expensive it is to extract it out of the oil sands. There is a funny little ceiling to the market price of crude, it needs to stay low enough to prevent the supply side from opening up and collapsing the market price.

Also I wouldn't be surprised if we are trying to drain the middle east of oil, and power early....in the game, to eliminate them as a world threat. Give some idiots money and look what you get..... Political instability and a world threat.... Take away the money (oil) and they have nothing, but a third world country with a front yard filled with sand. Sorry But these countries have not contibuted very much to the modern world other then cheap oil.

aklim · #22 05-02-2006, 09:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pete Burton

I said I wanted them to take more for fuel, yes. But only if they make it revenue neutral, such as through tax credits or marginal income tax reductions. This was basically what Ross Perot was saying in 92. I don't expect it to happen, because there is less courage in all of Washington than your average Girl Scout troop.

They will take as much as you tell them to. So your first part will come true easily. Tax credits and all that will never come true. Governemnt has shown itself able to take money. However, to use it as it should be, not a chance. Forgetting what WI did, aren't they raiding SS for all sorts of projects and things like that? And you want to give them more money? Strikes me as tossing more gas into an out of control fire.

The more we keep pressure on our representatives, the more they will pressure the supply chain and keep the cost growth less. What you are suggesting has merrit tho. However, when it comes to government, I don't trust they can manage money. Therefore, I am loath to give them any more things to do or money to burn.

Let me ask you this personally. How far do YOU trust the government to manage the money as they are supposed to be doing? With their current track record, do you think we should have them manage more money? IOW, would you trust your life savings to them?

Pete Burton · #23 05-02-2006, 10:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aklim

Let me ask you this personally. How far do YOU trust the government to manage the money as they are supposed to be doing? With their current track record, do you think we should have them manage more money? IOW, would you trust your life savings to them?

I don't trust them at all. I should have made it clear that I am not suggesting an overall increase in taxes, rather a redistribution of them. But again, I don't think it will happen because politicians tell us what we want to hear, and that's no hard choices.

I've been learning how to make and fix things (and doing it) for over 40 years. I fully expect the government will change the rules and screw me out of every cent of social security I'm supposedly eligible for in 22 years. I'm not rich, but I'm better prepared for retirement than most people I know.

aklim · #24 05-02-2006, 10:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pete Burton

I don't trust them at all. I should have made it clear that I am not suggesting an overall increase in taxes, rather a redistribution of them.

But again, I don't think it will happen because politicians tell us what we want to hear, and that's no hard choices.

Oh, why didn't you say redistribution. They will redistribute them all right. Back to themselves.

Politicians tell us what we want to hear because that is why we vote them in. IIRC, Ross P. was a failure because he told us that we are screwed unless we do something while others told us that we could make minor changes and life is good. That is why I am a pessimist. I believe if you tell me it will cost $10, I think it will cost $1000 when all is said and done. So far, I have not been disappointed. Just expectant.

83-240D · #25 05-02-2006, 10:26 AM

two reading suggestions for all of you.

1. out of gas the end of the oil age by david goodstein published by norton and available from b&n for 15 bucks
2. biodiesel:growing a new energy economy by greg pahl published by chelsea green also b&n and 20 bucks.

there is some history here of crude oil useage and future. history is that a rxr conductor drilled the first oil well in pa. in 1859 and here we are roughly 147 years later discussing the end of oil. there has been no major oil field discovery since the saudia arabian one in 1948. if another 90 billion barrel oil field were to be found it would put off the halfway point for a couple years.

something to remember here in these kind of discussions, oil companies do not produce oil. they extract it, already in crude form, from the ground and make gas, diesel, etc thru refining. no oil is being produced today. the oil industry and the oil industry speculation people use the agreed upon number of 2 trillion gallons of oil in the ground at day one. experts cited in the books above state that we are closing in on the half way point of extraction. what our children and grandchildren will see in the future are wars forught for control of the oil fields.

the anwar and canadian oil sands are just a blip on the oil consumption radar. the only reason to drill in anwar is to preserve those items used in petroc chemicals and not to use in transportation. the off shore oil in the usa is a smaller blip. alternate power sources such as nuke and solar need to be developed to power the country not transpost the country. we consume about 25 million barrels of oil a day. most of that keeps the lights on

to extract useable oil from canadian oil sand would take more energy in making the machinery to do so and powering those machines than would be recovered. this is something like a 1.5/2.5 : 1 ratio. why expend more to get less back?

five dollar a gallon fuel in the usa only puts us closer to the eu who has had historically high prices all along hence the more fuel efficient cars. americans have to start consuming less, period. while the governments in europe have used fuel taxes to improve mass transit thru street rail, high speed rail and bus, the american government has kept its head in the sand. the governmant only funded amtrak when the major passenger carriers let d.c. know that they were getting out of the passenger train business because carrying freight was more profitable. gm and bucky knudsun bought the streetcar lines in the 40's and 50's and killed them to make a market for the gm city bus.

you all know bush recently decided to take away 2 million dollars of tax payers money from oil companies for exploration of new oil. well gee whiz george, if no new oil fields have not been found since 1948 do you think we will find them now with satelites and mri imaging? of course that 2 million was part of a 10 million dollar package so big whip. cosmetic news sound bite stuff. what gwb didn't say was that he vetoed 10 million dollars earmarked for the alt fuel industry to keep the research going. up yours america.

five dollar a gallon gas? well start living on less america because sooon the credit card boon is gonna end and this country wil be broke and looking to china and japan for handouts like we are doing in irag right now.

F18 · #26 05-02-2006, 10:28 AM

I think you just need to look at what people in Europe and Great Britain are paying for a gallon of fuel to appreciate what we are paying now and in the future.
On the News they interviewed a few people at Boston Logan Airport. One of them was from Great Britain. He lives on the outskirts of London and is paying the equivalent of $9.00 US per gallon. I assumed that was on the English Imperial Gallon......24% larger than the American Gallon... I could be wrong but It comes out to $6.84US per US gallon. The last car I imported from the UK was in Feb.2001 and they were already paying approx. $5.00/gal US.
The guy from Great Britain did'nt think we had much to complain about....

It will never go down substantually....its a guarantee that it will continue to climb in price inspite of anything the gov. will do. The scary part is that you can drive less and conserve but next winter people still have to heat their house or freeze.....

aklim · #27 05-02-2006, 10:31 AM

They have been predicting the end of oil since soon after it was discovered. That text would make sense IF you know how much oil there really is. I can tell you that there is more than 2 trillion barrels tomorrow and you can find someone that says there is 1 billion barrels.

Erupe us a lot more dense so public transportation is more viable. Not sure how it would work here with people so far spread out.

aklim · #28 05-02-2006, 10:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by F18

I think you just need to look at what people in Europe and Great Britain are paying for a gallon of fuel to appreciate what we are paying now and in the future.
On the News they interviewed a few people at Boston Logan Airport. One of them was from Great Britain. He lives on the outskirts of London and is paying the equivalent of $9.00 US per gallon. I assumed that was on the English Imperial Gallon......24% larger than the American Gallon... I could be wrong but It comes out to $6.84US per US gallons. The last car I imported from the UK was in Feb. 01 and they were already paying approx. $5.00/gal US.
The guy from Great Britain did'nt think we had much to complain about....

It will never go down substantually....its a guarantee that it will continue to climb in price inspite of anything the gov. will do. The scary part is that you can drive less and conserve but next winter people still have to heat their house or freeze.....

England's situation is different too. They have other things that make up for it while we don't and vice versa. It would be difficult to compare apples to apples when you are comparing europe unless you are taking the whole thing into account and not just one aspect. They probably have certain things that are way cheaper than we do here and vice versa. In Nam, gas is feared to be smuggled out of country because their prices are lower than the neighbouring countries from subsidies. They are an oil producing country with no refining facilities so they buy refined product and sell it at a discount to the people. Wanna still compare with Nam or Europe?

http://www.thanhniennews.com/business/?catid=2&newsid=14845

stock · #29 05-02-2006, 10:40 AM

Hey why not. We can produce about 60% to 70% of what we need to run our auto economy. Big industry/companies will have a harder time finding fuel.

aklim · #30 05-02-2006, 10:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stock

Hey why not. We can produce about 60% to 70% of what we need to run our auto economy. Big industry/companies will have a harder time finding fuel.

Not really. Most of our stuff is gas not diesel. Diesel is not really popular here as it is in europe. The amount of fuel we make will probably not make much of a dent in the oil companies since it will take some capital to build a factory and infrastructure to re-process the collected oil. Even if we do reduce diesel, they can still make the oil into other products that will sell.