A view into the future................

.............of gasoline prices.

It's seldom we are exposed in advance to the the consequences of largely undisclosed legislation. For those with the intellectual curiosity to read and comprehend the information on the attached link, pay particular attention to Table 1. You'll note that these projections show that without the current efforts of our beloved Senate leaders that gasoline will likely climb somewhere around 54 cents over the next 9 years (not considering any political events outside our shores that could inhibit worldwide supplies of crude oil). An increase of some 16-17%. However, apply the wisdom (?) and "protection" from gouging and "saving the environment" and the price will come close to doubling. Thank you Senators! This, btw doesn't take into account the effects of raiding our food supplies to produce biofuels, and the resultant price increases at the grocery store that we can also expect.

As history repetes itself, in 2016 the bleaters will be blaming the oil companies again even though they may see (and ignore) this.:rolleyes: :(

Enjoy; http://www.heritage.org/Research/Ene...ent/wm1512.cfm

Let's face it, we are on a runaway train and have absolutely NO control over any of this. :mad: :mad: But even if it goes to $6.00 a gallon, we have no choice, we depend on gas to run our cars. They have us by the short hairs.

Don

ill justy buy trick its only 5.50-7.75 :LOL:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Itoldyouso

Let's face it, we are on a runaway train and have absolutely NO control over any of this. :mad: :mad: But even if it goes to $6.00 a gallon, we have no choice, we depend on gas to run our cars. They have us by the short hairs.

Don

---

I couldn't disagree more, that's why I think people should know and understand this stuff while there's still time. If you recall your recent comments to godspeed 32 about the rad vs eng positioning, you, along with others, were able to convince him that fixing it properly now would keep him from paying a penalty later. He heard the voices and acted accordingly. Politicians can be reached in much the same manner.

In a similar vein the Senate tried to sneak/rush through the latest "comprehensive" immigration bill loaded with extraneous giveaways. While I think most polls indicate that a strong majority of Amaricans want "something" done, they also recognized the proposed bill was a gorged turkey and bowed their backs. Lo and behold the politicos went back to the drawing board. And just like that battle isn't won or lost yet, neither is the one about this ridiculous bloated "energy" bill that is nothing more than a tax burden of enormous proportions. In Fl. you have Senators from both parties and should drill them with emails, snail mail, phone calls, turkey sandwiches, whatever and let them know you will punish them if they support this rip off. And spread the word down there, as every car enthusiast should across the country.

Otherwise we'll end up doing the same thing over and over hoping for a different result.......................and you know what that is!!!

Maybe we should be figuring out how to hot rod a fuel cell.

I don't really blame the oil exporters for getting together and forming a cartel it's their natural resource,and is finite,so it should be protected. If you check the historic prices for a barrel of oil,you will find that the price we pay at the pump has multiplied at a much higher rate than theirs. Before you start screaming those darn oil companies,take a peek at the tax per gallon.Now,who needs to be talked to? I'm retired and $6 a gallon for gas is very scary,but what I worry more about is heat. The prices for oil and gas are never very far apart. Now,back to resources, how many opec countries can feed themselves,lead the world in manufacturing and technology,or can even defend themselves without someone elses weaponry?Yeah I think it's high time for some drastic changes, and putting the word out to start getting vocal is a very good idea. ps oil opened at $69.18 this morning

The US Senate maybe a concern, but so are the State houses. Maryland is anticipating a $1.5 billion shortfall in fiscal year 2008 (12 months ending 6/30/2008), and therefore to reduce this they are looking to increase their already high gas taxes to new levels. Knowing that people have to have gas to get to work and play, it is a great source of new money. They can't raise cig taxes and sales taxes as effectively cause people will just quit buying and taxes will fall. If they raise income taxes, they may get voted out of office. :eek: But gas taxes are always fair game. They'll say they need the money to fix the potholes.:LOL: :LOL:

The tax credits to gasoline producers were substantited how????

mopar34, are you sure that shouldn't be "potheads?":eek:

Jack

I'd sure like to have unlimited cheap fuel but, let's face it, It ain't gonna happen.
When I started to feel like I was spending my kids inheritance on fuel, I traded in my Dodge Durango and got a car that got a realistic 55mpg.
Now I can still go for my Sunday drives and anywhere else for that matter without breaking the bank.
Couldn't we at least slow down this runaway train if we all did this?

DT

Just hope the voters don't elect Obama :( ,I saw on TV he stated that one of his first goals will be to require new standards on cars to increase fuel mileage standards by 10 MPG:rolleyes: with that mindset he will be on our case for sure.

That sort of proposal is already in the bill that, unfortuanately, passed out of the Senate today, so Mr. Obama isn't the sole source of such thinking.

I find it interesting that we have examples of both ends of the spectrum on our little site here at the same time. Conventional (meaning broadest distribution) media covers a near meaninless issue with gasoline (see thread titled "Gas Science"), that at it's most improbable extent will have an effect of pennies, while this so called energy bill will take dollars out of consumer's pockets and it gets virtually no attention from either.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by moparjack44

mopar34, are you sure that shouldn't be "potheads?":eek:

Jack

---

Naw they contribute millions of dollars to the economy out here in cali thru taxes on there lettuce.......its legal here{as long as you have the card} and they like the taxes collected,so it will not change soon.All you gatta do is give em a taste of that tax money and they will let anything fly.:LOL:

Corporate fuel averages did force the big auto manufacturers to produce cars to use less gas. They did, We went on a gas diet for a little while,and when things seemed a little better,we rewarded ourseves with news cars with just a little more power,and a little more comfort. In just a few years these became 4x4 SUV's with ac,global locator,heated leather seats etc. Seems like we are the enemy that needs to be dealt with Hank

Let's consider the two most powerful things that we, as consumers, can do to change this doomsday scenario Uncle Bob has laid out:

1. Become an educated voter!!!!! Don't just vote the party ticket or for the candidate with the best dog and pony show... Do some research and find out what their voting record is on causes that concern you.... A direct email to your Seantor and Representatives with questions concerning their stand on issues you consider important will get a response... Probably not from them, but from someone on their staff who will reflect the position of the candidate. If you just get a bunch of double talk, then email him again, and again until you get a real comittment from them on their stand on an issue. Then, get out and vote accordingly!!!! IMO if you don't vote, you can't complain!!!

2. Conserve some fuel on your own without waiting for mandates.... Car pool or use public transportation on your daily commute when possible. Consolidate trips so you can get two or three things done on the way to and from a destination. My own personal contribution is to use E-85 in the shop truck and my shop for the last few years is 10 yards behind the house.... Yeah I know, maybe it doesn't do anymore then give me a feel good....BUT, what would the result be if everyone cut their fuel usage by 50% or more??? If it accomplishes nothing else then meaning you have the extra $$$$ to put the good stuff in the tank of your hot rod on weekends, then fine!!!!

Waiting for the government to solve this or any other dilema we are facing is admitting defeat right now!!!! The majority of our politicians, regardless of party affiliation, accomplish little more then keeping their numbers up in the polls and are reluctant to attack issues that the voters would hold them accountable for. Well, that would be true if more then 40% of our population would take the time to vote........ Let's make these clowns accountable to the voters for their lack of action, and get some people in office who will actually work to solve problems......

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by halftanked

Seems like we are the enemy that needs to be dealt with

---

Pogo said: "We have met the enemy and he is us!"

I have made it a practice to drive at the speed limit, and do some of the things Dave said too to consrve fuel. As I drive along at 65 on the freeway, I am passed by a steady stream of SUVs and jacked up 4WD trucks flying past at 75 and 80 or more. Usually they have one person in them. These people are consuming our resource at a rediculous rate and high prices don't seem to defer them one bit. If we can get the the majority of the population to slow down and drive the speed limit, the reduction of fuel use would go a long way towards reducing the price through reduced demand. Most trips are 50 miles or less, 10 mph slower costs you about 2-3 minutes, so the argument that we can't afford the time does not carry any water. I am not advocating reducing the speed limit, lets just drive at the ones we have

Pat

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by halftanked

Corporate fuel averages did force the big auto manufacturers to produce cars to use less gas. They did, We went on a gas diet for a little while,and when things seemed a little better,we rewarded ourseves with news cars with just a little more power,and a little more comfort. In just a few years these became 4x4 SUV's with ac,global locator,heated leather seats etc.

Seems like we are the enemy that needs to be dealt with Hank

---

It's easy to understand why these sorts of comments are made. After all, we get a steady diet of negativity from our "news" media and politicians. The media is driven by the notion that bad news sells (meaning profit for them, though the profit of others is evil in their beliefs), and the politicians maintain their power by demoralizing us into believing that they are our saviours.

CAFE in and of itself didn't "force" higher mileage cars onto the market, consumer demand did. Which is why this current round of government mandating higher fuel economy standards is a farce. True, the government has the power (if we allow it) to force us into smaller vehicles that may get higher fuel economy, but will it really solve the problem? History would show that the answer is no. I'm going to attach a link to some data that will help those who are especially curious and analytical to better understand reality. For those who want others to guide their thinking this stuff will not appeal. http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/aer/ep/ep_frame.html
Chart 19 shows how dramatically our petroleum consumption has mostly increased over the past 50+ years. But if you look at chart 31 the consumption per vehicle stayed relatively flat. Chart 30 tells you what happened when the mpg went up..........people just drove more miles, probably because they felt better about getting better fuel economy. And that doesn't mean that they just did more joy riding. Very likely a goodly number of them made decisions such as taking a job further from home (thinking that they could afford it better because of the better mileage), or the inverse, they bought a home further from their work because it was cheaper, or bigger for the cost, or some similar rationale. None of this sort of consumer analysis plays into the sort of decision making that the politicians do because they're not interested in supporting the market, they want to control it (which virtually never works in our favor). Just a side note about something that doesn't show up in what we're told about fuel/vehicle useage, again in chart 31, look at the dramatic increase in over the road truck consumption (not miles per gallon). It far exceeds that of automobiles, pickup, suvs, etc., and it's growth rate has been significant, rather than relatively flat. This is not to say that that's necessarily a bad thing. These vehicles support the basic operation of our economy by moving goods necessary for our daily lives from place to place. This begs the question, if CAFE standards were really effective, why aren't they imposed on the HD truck market where the overwhelmingly greater impact would be felt?

As for the notion that we're the enemy, again, this comes about because idealogs and politicians have learned that guilt is a powerful tool. We are assailed with negative characterisations frequently. Two in particular that are used when discussing energy that I find offensive are what Mr. Bush said during his SOTU speech (and has been picked up by others), "We're addicted to oil". The other is that we represent 7% of the worlds population and consume ~25% of the petroleum.

Saying we're "addicted" to oil is like saying you're addicted to the blood in your body. Energy (oil being the foundation because it's so reasonably priced for the amount of work that results) is the life's blood of our societal economy. Without it, life as we know it would be impossible, just as trying to live without blood would be for us individually.

As for the notion that we in North America are evil gluttons look at these data; http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/northamerica/engecon.htm
With 7% of the worlds economy, we contribute 30% of the value of all the goods and services in the WORLD. If you look at the third charts down you'll see that we also use slightly less energy per unit of GDP that the average in the rest of the world, which means we're more efficient in the use of the energy we consume when compared to what we do with it. That's particularly significant if you think about how much leisure use of fuel we have. For example, this whole hot rod thing we do is completely unnecessary in a theoretical sense, and as such is a "waste" of vital energy. So is water skiing, dirt biking, long distance hunting trips, vacations, and on and on. Why not give up all those wasteful practices and really save the planet? Sure, we should endeavor individually to be as efficient as is practical, but the scope of our energy needs shows that we are a spit in the ocean.

The reality is, we have a diverse and complex economy that employs people in many facets all interrelated for mutual benefit, and it largely runs on petroleum energy. Without it we couldn't produce wondrous benefits like life saving drugs and medical procedures, clean water at the twist of the wrist, sanitation systems that prolong life, and so on.

Energy issues are tough to reduce to sound bites so understanding all these interrelated complexities is tough. We do that at our own peril. If this bill that's been forwarded to the House of Representatives for consideration were really trying to do something about our energy needs it would include a lot of positive alternatives which it doesn't. Probably the most glaring example is not a single reference to nuclear electrical generating plants, not to mention increasing domestic petroleum production.

This bill isn't about solving energy problems, it's about empowering politicians and bureaucracies through excessive taxation and restriction of freedom.

The whole bill to me looks like our do-nothing politicians are doing it again, doing nothing.... Time we started running these boys out of office and get some heavy hitters in their that will address the real problems in this country.

I dunno, maybe it's the fact that the media can pull a 10 second sound byte out of a 20 minute oration and at their discretion make the speaker either a hero or a zero? Maybe we all just don't pay attention, and let these sound bytes as presented by the media influence us and we don't bother taking the time to actually study the issues???

I personally think we need real people and successful businessmen running things in DC and get all the lawyers and professional politicians out of there.... The clowns we have now seem to do nothing but write ridiculous laws that benefit no one but them, and do nothing for the rest of us but raise our taxes and take away our individual freedoms....

Or maybe we need to do away with our current ineffective system of President, Congress, and Constituents and go to a system of CEO, Board of Directors, and Stockholders!!!!

I used to think I at least knew some of the answers, nowadays I can't even figure out the questions....