Gas!

Brewer's Friend 728
Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum

Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
I thought you meant "gas" as in farting when I read the subject line. Pairing that with the mad face was very very funny to me!
 
I just saw diesel at $5.54 a gallon today in Rockland County, NY. The best part is, half a mile down the road in Jersey, its only $4.60. (only... haha)
 
I just read something on CNN that gas is over $9 a gallon all over Europe...we are paying out the ass for gas but we still have it good. Hey that rhymed :D
 
MikeFlynn74 said:
So why cant we pay lower prices with the oil we dril for in Texas, California, Colorado and Alaska, Gulf of Mexico......
Click to expand...

I personally feel like we in this country have had at least our fair share of inexpensive fuel, be it foreign or domestic. We are also fortunate enough here to have never had our country invaded or torn apart in a struggle to control out fuel reserves, which cannot be said about the countries you mentioned.

Experts ranging from economists to petroleum geologists to environmental scientists have been warning for years that petroleum will not remain an indefinitely viable fuel source, consider $4.00 at the pump just another warning shot.
 
Meh I think it should be 10$ a gallon to encourage alternatives.

The less money we give to the middle east the better the world is
 
Im buying a Schwinn scooter. I am gonna get laughed at sooo bad but I dont care*** I really do care *** but my other mode is a Ford F 250 crew cab diesel lifted w/ some 35'S so 70 MPG is a BIG jump from 15
Diesel here TODAY is 5.30 a gal but tomorrow its gonna be 8.99 Im sure
 
Ok, so Saudi Arabia pulled ahead of Mexico slightly so far in '08. The point being that the majority of our imported oil does not come from the middle east.
 
This would be the biggest problem. It isn't just gasoline that is rising at an alarming rate, it is everything derived or associated with petroleum.

If gasoline jumps to $10 a gallon what do you think will happen to food, electricity, heating and raw material costs just to name a few. A lot of people are just making it now....if fuel prices make that big of a jump all hell might just break loose.


The reason the price of gas is low in the countries mentioned is because their supply out weighs their demand and it is also government controlled.

Our demand greatly out weighs our supply and it is not government controlled.
 
Jaybird said:
Im buying a Schwinn scooter. I am gonna get laughed at sooo bad but I dont care*** I really do care *** but my other mode is a Ford F 250 crew cab diesel lifted w/ some 35'S so 70 MPG is a BIG jump from 15
Diesel here TODAY is 5.30 a gal but tomorrow its gonna be 8.99 Im sure
Click to expand...

What scooter are you getting? I getting the Schwinn Valo 150! Hopefully getting it Tuesday!
 
I saw that Diesel was 4.69 this morning when i was filling up on the way to work. I noticed when i Pulled in a guy in a semi was hitting the Diesel pump and when i finished paying i went back to my car and noticed his pump had well passed the $200 mark.. i thought to myself... damn im glad im not a trucker.
 
Jaybird said:
Yep thats the one!!! comming in June. Oh Im gonna get laughed at!!!! (all the way to the pump) FK the oil co's
JJ
Click to expand...

I don't think you have to worry about getting laughed at....I have a feeling we will be seeing a whole lot of scooters on the road this year.

If I didn't own a motorcycle and didn't live 27 miles from work via the freeway I would look into one.
 
wihophead said:
You are aware that the we import most of our oil from Canada with Mexico being second?
Click to expand...

That's really a moot point. It's an international economy. America could buy all their oil from Venezuela. All that would do is drive every other country to buy from somewhere else. So the net effect on the flow of money would be nil.

We don't buy oil from Iran, but guess what- everybody else does, so our little "embargo" there really doesn't mean much of anything. Remember the Food for Oil program with Iraq? The freakin French were buying the oil under our noses.

It's a global economy. Where we get "ours" from has to do with logistics more than price. Buying from one source does not deprive the other so long as there are more willing buyers..
 
wihophead said:
This would be the biggest problem. It isn't just gasoline that is rising at an alarming rate, it is everything derived or associated with petroleum.

If gasoline jumps to $10 a gallon what do you think will happen to food, electricity, heating and raw material costs just to name a few. A lot of people are just making it now....if fuel prices make that big of a jump all hell might just break loose.
...
Click to expand...

I think about this too, but am not sure it would be a completely bad situation. If products have very long shipping routes, perhaps they would become more expensive than local products. Maybe it wouldn't be so cheap to buy produce from central and south america anymore...maybe it would make U.S. products more affordable. Who knows...this might even stimulate locally-grown produce and small local manufacturers of goods. This could happen, but I wonder about how high gas prices will need to get for this to become feasible. If transportation costs get prohibitively expensive for global distribution, maybe we'll see global markets recede...my point is, we'll never find out if oil keeps being cheap and plentiful.
 
Sir Humpsalot said:
That's really a moot point. It's an international economy. America could buy all their oil from Venezuela. All that would do is drive every other country to buy from somewhere else. So the net effect on the flow of money would be nil.

We don't buy oil from Iran, but guess what- everybody else does, so our little "embargo" there really doesn't mean much of anything. Remember the Food for Oil program with Iraq? The freakin French were buying the oil under our noses.

It's a global economy. Where we get "ours" from has to do with logistics more than price. Buying from one source does not deprive the other so long as there are more willing buyers..
Click to expand...

I am quite aware of this, I was just addressing this post....great points though

MikeFlynn74 said:
Meh I think it should be 10$ a gallon to encourage alternatives.

The less money we give to the middle east the better the world is
Click to expand...
 
TwoHeadsBrewing said:
I think about this too, but am not sure it would be a completely bad situation. If products have very long shipping routes, perhaps they would become more expensive than local products. Maybe it wouldn't be so cheap to buy produce from central and south america anymore...maybe it would make U.S. products more affordable. Who knows...this might even stimulate locally-grown produce and small local manufacturers of goods. This could happen, but I wonder about how high gas prices will need to get for this to become feasible. If transportation costs get prohibitively expensive for global distribution, maybe we'll see global markets recede...my point is, we'll never find out if oil keeps being cheap and plentiful.
Click to expand...


I know a guy who speaks with many people at MIT. He has been saying there will be a complete re-industrialization of the US over the next couple decades due in part to the rising shipping costs. This means fewer imports, greater economic independence for the US and possibly lower costs. It's not that this could happen, its when is it going to happen.
 
bethlehembrewer said:
I know a guy who speaks with many people at MIT. He has been saying there will be a complete re-industrialization of the US over the next couple decades due in part to the rising shipping costs. This means fewer imports, greater economic independence for the US and possibly lower costs. It's not that this could happen, its when is it going to happen.
Click to expand...

The big problem with this is that it will still raise prices significantly. What do manufacturing plants use? Electricity, 24% of which comes from natural gas in the US...then it still has to be shipped somewhere...gas again. Now since everything is more expensive to buy the factory worker needs to be paid a higher income tada, prices go up again.

Off topic, but if people really want to see the US become more economically independent the answer isn't oil prices, its taxes. Switch to the Fair Tax or another tax that doesn't include work and capital as the tax base and the US will become the tax haven for the worlds largest manufacturing companies vs. them all leaving in droves because its too expensive to operate here.
 
Bernie Brewer said:
Sounds good. You can pay my heat bill.
Click to expand...

Sorry...I only pay my own bills. If heating oil or natural gas is too expensive...don't use it. I know, I know...easy to say when I live in sunny CA, but instead of paying a crapload for heating/air conditioning...I pay a crapload for real estate. I think it all works out in the end.
 
Wait till the government passes the Warner Lieberman bill.

[SIZE=+2]Carbon Chastity[/SIZE]
The First Commandment of the Church of the Environment
[SIZE=-1]By Charles Krauthammer
Friday, May 30, 2008; A13
[/SIZE]
I'm not a global warming believer. I'm not a global warming denier. I'm a global warming agnostic who believes instinctively that it can't be very good to pump lots of CO2into the atmosphere but is equally convinced that those who presume to know exactly where that leads are talking through their hats.
Predictions of catastrophe depend on models. Models depend on assumptions about complex planetary systems -- from ocean currents to cloud formation -- that no one fully understands. Which is why the models are inherently flawed and forever changing. The doomsday scenarios posit a cascade of events, each with a certain probability. The multiple improbability of their simultaneous occurrence renders all such predictions entirely speculative.
Yet on the basis of this speculation, environmental activists, attended by compliant scientists and opportunistic politicians, are advocating radical economic and social regulation. "The largest threat to freedom, democracy, the market economy and prosperity," warns Czech President Vaclav Klaus, "is no longer socialism. It is, instead, the ambitious, arrogant, unscrupulous ideology of environmentalism."
If you doubt the arrogance, you haven't seen that Newsweek cover story that declared the global warming debate over. Consider: If Newton's laws of motion could, after 200 years of unfailing experimental and experiential confirmation, be overthrown, it requires religious fervor to believe that global warming -- infinitely more untested, complex and speculative -- is a closed issue.
But declaring it closed has its rewards. It not only dismisses skeptics as the running dogs of reaction, i.e., of Exxon, Cheney and now Klaus. By fiat, it also hugely re-empowers the intellectual left.
For a century, an ambitious, arrogant, unscrupulous knowledge class -- social planners, scientists, intellectuals, experts and their left-wing political allies -- arrogated to themselves the right to rule either in the name of the oppressed working class (communism) or, in its more benign form, by virtue of their superior expertise in achieving the highest social progress by means of state planning (socialism).
Two decades ago, however, socialism and communism died rudely, then were buried forever by the empirical demonstration of the superiority of market capitalism everywhere from Thatcher's England to Deng's China, where just the partial abolition of socialism lifted more people out of poverty more rapidly than ever in human history.
Just as the ash heap of history beckoned, the intellectual left was handed the ultimate salvation: environmentalism. Now the experts will regulate your life not in the name of the proletariat or Fabian socialism but -- even better -- in the name of Earth itself.
Environmentalists are Gaia's priests, instructing us in her proper service and casting out those who refuse to genuflect. (See Newsweek above.) And having proclaimed the ultimate commandment -- carbon chastity -- they are preparing the supporting canonical legislation that will tell you how much you can travel, what kind of light you will read by, and at what temperature you may set your bedroom thermostat.
Only Monday, a British parliamentary committee proposed that every citizen be required to carry a carbon card that must be presented, under penalty of law, when buying gasoline, taking an airplane or using electricity. The card contains your yearly carbon ration to be drawn down with every purchase, every trip, every swipe.
There's no greater social power than the power to ration. And, other than rationing food, there is no greater instrument of social control than rationing energy, the currency of just about everything one does and uses in an advanced society.
So what does the global warming agnostic propose as an alternative? First, more research -- untainted and reliable -- to determine (a) whether the carbon footprint of man is or is not lost among the massive natural forces (from sunspot activity to ocean currents) that affect climate, and (b) if the human effect is indeed significant, whether the planetary climate system has the homeostatic mechanisms (like the feedback loops in the human body, for example) with which to compensate.
Second, reduce our carbon footprint in the interim by doing the doable, rather than the economically ruinous and socially destructive. The most obvious step is a major move to nuclear power, which to the atmosphere is the cleanest of the clean.
But your would-be masters have foreseen this contingency. The Church of the Environment promulgates secondary dogmas as well. One of these is a strict nuclear taboo.
Rather convenient, is it not? Take this major coal-substituting fix off the table, and we will be rationing all the more. Guess who does the rationing.
Click to expand...

After this passes, we'll all be looking for scooters, those of us still employed.
 
I agree EdWort, this will just add to the costs of fuel, and will do nothing else.

My thoughts on "the US paying artificially low fuel prices" is to compare the US to Walmart. Walmart is a hell of a big company selling goods worldwide. The tell their suppliers the prices that they will pay for the goods. If the supplier doesn't want to sell to Walmart, somebody else will. While the US was the major world consumer of oil, we could set the prices we would pay. With china and other countries consuming more the suppliers can and have told the US to go pound sand. If we don't buy it, someone else will.

To address another question asked previously, why do we have to pay so much for oil drilled in the US, is that the US suppliers can sell it on the world market at the going rate. Depending on the location of the oil reserves, if the oil comes from public lands, the US may in fact be getting a royalty on the sales.

Wanna save money on fuel, drive less.

Rick
 
EdWort said:
Wait till the government passes the Warner Lieberman bill.



After this passes, we'll all be looking for scooters, those of us still employed.
Click to expand...

Despite the somewhat offensive, Rush Limbaugh-esqe, paranoia over the "leftwing environmental conspiracy", I actually like that article. I would love it if our government behaved in a more centrist manner. Unfortunately, we seem to only have extreme reactionaries on both sides of every issue and a decreasing chance that actual policy will fall in a sustainable middle ground. In that tug of war, remember that the other end of the rope are folks with billions at their disposal to protect trillions that are on the line. That kind of cash has a historical tendency to make the ethics of humans questionable.
I agree wholeheartedly that we shouldn't just accept the most alarmist interpretations, but I like that the author doesn't pull the old "well they can't prove it and this little part of the theory has some counter evidence, therefore the whole thing is hogwash! Gas up my Hummer Honey!"
I like the way he casually refers to a "Feedback loop, like in our bodies". Such loops have been proposed and may be very effective in that one of those loops could be something that wipes out 85% of the human race. Riding a scooter would be a dream in such a scenario.
Did anyone see that insipid move "The Day After Tomorrow?" Well, in some of the earlier idiotic scenes, downtown Los Angeles was ravaged by tornadoes. Silly... but just last week they had two in Riverside county... Hmm?
 
Premium unleaded has surpassesed 5 a gal. in silicon valley.

Normal gas is running inbetween 4.20-4.50...

It seems to be increasing about .02 a day...
 
los angeles, its at 4.49 for regular on riverside drive. what pisses me off the most is that oil companies are getting record profits out of this.
 
EdWort said:
In addition to consumption going up, our own production is down like 40% in the same time frame.

Who do we thank for no drilling or refineries being built to fuel our country? Lame-ass politicians and people like AlGore with their hidden agenda to bring America down a few notches while they make billions through mandating "alternatives" in which they are heavily invested.

The envirowackos are gleefully rubbing their hands at the thought of less consumption due to $6 a gallon gasoline, but they never think of unintended consequences like tanking the economy, airlines going under, people losing their jobs and making people go hungry.
Click to expand...

I disagree. Many of them fully understand the "unintended" consequences all too well, in fact that is what they want to happen. Then they will have wonderful solutions like the government taking over industry etc. A tanking economy is a good thing for Marxists as then they can take power and force it even further down... all to be aided by their new policies that encourage more of the same.
 
We did bring this upon ourselves by electing idiots.

The Gas Prices We Deserve
By George Will

WASHINGTON -- Rising in the Senate on May 13, Chuck Schumer, the New York Democrat, explained: "I rise to discuss rising energy prices." The president was heading to Saudi Arabia to seek an increase in its oil production, and Schumer's gorge was rising.

Saudi Arabia, he said, "holds the key to reducing gasoline prices at home in the short term." Therefore arms sales to that kingdom should be blocked unless it "increases its oil production by one million barrels per day," which would cause the price of gasoline to fall "50 cents a gallon almost immediately."

Can a senator, with so many things on his mind, know so precisely how the price of gasoline would respond to that increase in the oil supply? Schumer does know that if you increase the supply of something, the price of it probably will fall. That is why he and 96 other senators recently voted to increase the supply of oil on the market by stopping the flow of oil into the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, which protects against major physical interruptions. Seventy-one of the 97 senators who voted to stop filling the SPR also oppose drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

One million barrels is what might today be flowing from ANWR if in 1995 President Clinton had not vetoed legislation to permit drilling there. One million barrels produce 27 million gallons of gasoline and diesel fuel. Seventy-two of today's senators -- including Schumer, of course, and 38 other Democrats, including Barack Obama, and 33 Republicans, including John McCain -- have voted to keep ANWR's estimated 10.4 billion barrels of oil off the market.

So Schumer, according to Schumer, is complicit in taking $10 away from every American who buys 20 gallons of gasoline. "Democracy," said H.L. Mencken, "is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard." The common people of New York want Schumer to be their senator, so they should pipe down about gasoline prices, which are a predictable consequence of their political choice.

Also disqualified from complaining are all voters who sent to Washington senators and representatives who have voted to keep ANWR's oil in the ground, and who voted to put 85 percent of America's offshore territory off-limits to drilling. The U.S. Minerals Management Service says that restricted area contains perhaps 86 billion barrels of oil and 420 trillion cubic feet of natural gas -- 10 times the oil and 20 times the natural gas Americans use in a year.

Drilling is under way 60 miles off Florida. The drilling is being done by China, in cooperation with Cuba, which is drilling closer to South Florida than U.S. companies are.

ANWR is larger than the combined areas of five states (Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New Jersey, Delaware) and drilling along its coastal plain would be confined to a space one-sixth the size of Washington's Dulles Airport. Offshore? Hurricanes Katrina and Rita destroyed or damaged hundreds of drilling rigs without causing a large spill. There has not been a significant spill from an offshore U.S. well since 1969. Of the more than 7 billion barrels of oil pumped offshore in the past 25 years, 0.001 percent -- that is one-thousandth of 1 percent -- has been spilled. Louisiana has more than 3,200 rigs offshore -- and a thriving commercial fishing industry.

In his "Gusher of Lies: The Dangerous Delusions of 'Energy Independence,'" Robert Bryce says Brazil's energy success has little to do with its much-discussed ethanol production and much to do with its increased oil production, the vast majority of which comes from off Brazil's shore. Investor's Business Daily reports that Brazil, "which recently made a major oil discovery almost in sight of Rio's beaches," has leased most of the world's deep-sea drilling rigs.

In September 2006, two U.S. companies announced that their "Jack No. 2" well, in the Gulf 270 miles southwest of New Orleans, had tapped a field with perhaps 15 billion barrels of oil, which would increase America's proven reserves by 50 percent. Just probing four miles below the Gulf's floor costs $100 million. Congress' response to such expenditures is to propose increasing the oil companies' tax burdens.

America says to foreign producers: We prefer not to pump our oil, so please pump more of yours, thereby lowering its value, for our benefit. Let it not be said that America has no energy policy.
Click to expand...
 
217ae618-c18d-4989-931a-771ba4ae5657.jpg


http://www.americansolutions.com/actioncenter/petitions/?Guid=54ec6e43-75a8-445b-aa7b-346a1e096659
 
My bill wasn't so bad...but I filled up my Yukon Denali (6.0L) yesterday at lunch. $91.35 for a full tank or the CHEAP stuff! So, today I drove my little nissan pickup...and now that the kids are out of school I'll be leaving early to ride my bike to work. :)
 
My 10 year old Saturn SW2 wagon with manual transmission and 115K miles is looking better and better with its 40 mpg.
 

Similar threads

R
Beers of Australia/New Zealand
Replies
7
Views
201
Raider7296
R
oljimmy
New York Full Electric Apartment Homebrew Setup, Used Once (NYC)
Replies
3
Views
418
oljimmy
oljimmy
Pyg
Sulfur smell (how to get rid of)
Replies
3
Views
529
doublejef
doublejef
B
Introducing IoT Keg level sensor
Replies
1
Views
435
yowzers
Y
RyPA
Fermentation issue
Replies
23
Views
923
RyPA
RyPA

Latest posts

Back
Top