NationStates Jolt Archive

Who's to Blame for High Gas Prices (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2005/04/14/EDGLUC816J1.DTL)

"Gasoline prices are at record highs again. Many think oil companies are to blame. A Field Poll from May 2004 showed that 77 percent of Californians believed this to be true... One thing is certain: Oil companies are not the culprits. In California, where gas prices are among the nation's highest, the oil industry has been repeatedly investigated yet no evidence of "price manipulation" has ever been found."

Read on and remember - the mind is like a parachute - it only works when it is open.

Look at UK prices then you would have something to complain about> I would bet our prices are heading towards doubling yours

You know, gas prices aren't particularly high. Bottled water, soda, and milk are all more expensive than gasoline.

Look at UK prices then you would have something to complain about> I would bet our prices are heading towards doubling yours
That's because you don't have any oil fields of your own.

That's because you don't have any oil fields of your own.
No it's because our government actually taxes ours

That's because you don't have any oil fields of your own.
yes we do, we just get massively taxed

yes we do, we just get massively taxed
Imagine what your economy would look like without THAT burden!

Imagine what your economy would look like without THAT burden!
wouldnt have enough money for stuff like the NHS

wouldnt have enough money for stuff like the NHS

That's TWO good reasons to cut the tax!

"Drive more - help save poor Granny's life!" - LOL! That's just wrong!

wouldnt have enough money for stuff like the NHS

You mean the same NHS which takes four hours to fix one small puncture wound, or takes three hours in a quiet period to put in three stitches?

Can someone please answer this:

There's Unleaded Gas and there's Premium Gas, both of which are made from the same source: Crude Oil.

Both of the prices have risen, but not proportional to one another. No matter what the Unleaded cost is, Premium is always only 20 cents more.

The cost to refine a barrel of Crude Oil to Unleaded is constant, as is the cost of refining Crude to Premium. They are fixed multipliers of Crude Oil's original cost, and therefore should result in Unleaded and Premium costs that are proportional to one another and which rise proportionally with the cost of Crude.

If this is an open market and prices aren't being manipulated, why has the 20 cent gap remained constant? What's going on??

You mean the same NHS which takes four hours to fix one small puncture wound, or takes three hours in a quiet period to put in three stitches?
imagine how bad it would be without fuel tax

incidently, when my brother broke his arm last year, he was seen within half an hour, and had an operation to set it within 5 hours

That's TWO good reasons to cut the tax!

"Drive more - help save poor Granny's life!" - LOL! That's just wrong!

To you, perhaps, but it is not the majority opinion in Britain.

To me, the American medical system is... shocking, but that is not what the debate is about.

Can someone please answer this:

There's Unleaded Gas and there's Premium Gas, both of which are made from the same source: Crude Oil.

Both of the prices have risen, but not proportional to one another. No matter what the Unleaded cost is, Premium is always only 20 cents more.

The cost to refine a barrel of Crude Oil to Unleaded is constant, as is the cost of refining Crude to Premium. They are fixed multipliers of Crude Oil's original cost, and therefore should result in Unleaded and Premium costs that are proportional to one another and which rise proportionally with the cost of Crude.

If this is an open market and prices aren't being manipulated, why has the 20 cent gap remained constant? What's going on??

Well, considering the answer is clearly given in the article we are supposedly discussing, the real question would fall on why you'd ask such a redundant thing...

I live in Surrey, BC. The Prices here have reached $1.05/Liter and we are quit taxed. The gas is cheaper on the US side of the border.

One Gallon is Aprox 3.8Liters
That makes out gas prices at $3.99/Gallon here.

Ofcourse that is Canadian Dollars :p

Time to convert to US Dollars and British Pounds...
CAD = Canadian Dollar
USD = US Dollar
GBP = British Pound

1.05 CAD = 0.844499 USD
1.05 CAD = 0.449218 GBP
3.99 CAD = 3.20877 USD
3.99 CAD = 1.70816 GBP

How much does gas cost in London, on an Avarage day these days? I know it is usually higer then it is here, but can someone give a number? I know across the border, near here it is almost $2.2/Gallon USD, which is quite abit less then here.

I live in Surrey, BC. The Prices here have reached $1.05/Liter and we are quit taxed. The gas is cheaper on the US side of the border.

One Gallon is Aprox 3.8Liters
That makes out gas prices at $3.99/Gallon here.

Ofcourse that is Canadian Dollars :p

Time to convert to US Dollars and British Pounds...
CAD = Canadian Dollar
USD = US Dollar
GBP = British Pound

1.05 CAD = 0.844499 USD
1.05 CAD = 0.449218 GBP
3.99 CAD = 3.20877 USD
3.99 CAD = 1.70816 GBP

How much does gas cost in London, on an Avarage day these days? I know it is usually higer then it is here, but can someone give a number? I know across the border, near here it is almost $2.2/Gallon USD, which is quite abit less then here.
in london its usually £0.75 - £0.85 per litre

lucky

How come everyone is screaming "We're running out of gas!"? They've been saying that since the 70s! Jeez, if they do it long enough, its going to be like the boy who cried wolf.

How come everyone is screaming "We're running out of gas!"? They've been saying that since the 70s! Jeez, if they do it long enough, its going to be like the boy who cried wolf.


What, you mean like the kid that ended up getting eaten by a wolf?

No it's because our government actually taxes ours


http://api-ec.api.org/industry/index.cfm?bitmask=001004003000000000

21%+ of the pump price for gasoline in America is tax :confused:

Roughly $.44 per gallon.

How come everyone is screaming "We're running out of gas!"? They've been saying that since the 70s! Jeez, if they do it long enough, its going to be like the boy who cried wolf.
only we've always had a problem its just people in power won't listen

http://api-ec.api.org/industry/index.cfm?bitmask=001004003000000000

21%+ of the pump price for gasoline in America is tax :confused:

Roughly $.44 per gallon.
Be lucky its not the UK

only we've always had a problem its just people in power won't listen

Well if you'd only cried wolf when there really WAS a problem.

You post an OP-ED as PROOF?! The "real" reason is this person's unsubstantiated claims?

Did you read this article before posting it? There's not a shred of evidence in it to support its claims, not a single supporting fact! I see unsupported claims, statistics with no sources, blazingly creative talking points.

Why the heck did you bother to post this? Is it a test to see how gulible people are on the internet?

I live in Surrey, BC. The Prices here have reached $1.05/Liter and we are quit taxed. The gas is cheaper on the US side of the border.

One Gallon is Aprox 3.8Liters
That makes out gas prices at $3.99/Gallon here.

Ofcourse that is Canadian Dollars :p

Time to convert to US Dollars and British Pounds...
CAD = Canadian Dollar
USD = US Dollar
GBP = British Pound

1.05 CAD = 0.844499 USD
1.05 CAD = 0.449218 GBP
3.99 CAD = 3.20877 USD
3.99 CAD = 1.70816 GBP

How much does gas cost in London, on an Avarage day these days? I know it is usually higer then it is here, but can someone give a number? I know across the border, near here it is almost $2.2/Gallon USD, which is quite abit less then here.

Don't forget about Purchasing Power Parity. A Canadian dollar buys much the same in Canada as an American dollar does in the US. Our gas seems cheaper to an American than it does to us, but the price still hurts us as much or more than the price of US gas hurts Americans.

Besides, Atlana, can't you just drive to Abbotsford to fuel up? Aren't the gas prices there about 30 cents cheaper? :P

You know, gas prices aren't particularly high. Bottled water, soda, and milk are all more expensive than gasoline.

You know, I've been frantically trying to figure out why I'm paying $4 a gallon for milk and $2 a gallon for gas. Doesn't it cost more to drill and refine oil than it does to feed & milk a stupid cow??

You know, I've been frantically trying to figure out why I'm paying $4 a gallon for milk and $2 a gallon for gas. Doesn't it cost more to drill and refine oil than it does to feed & milk a stupid cow??

Doubt it would if each person drank 30 gallons of milk a week (our car uses about that much a week, but we live in a small town) as well as using it to generate 20% of their electric and produce a vast array of chemicals and plastics.

Well if you'd only cried wolf when there really WAS a problem.

You know the real moral of the boy who cried wolf story? If you're thinking don't lie or people won't believe you when you're telling the truth, you've got it all wrong. The real moral is simply that you should never tell the same lie twice. :)

You know the real moral of the boy who cried wolf story? If you're thinking don't lie or people won't believe you when you're telling the truth, you've got it all wrong. The real moral is simply that you should never tell the same lie twice. :)

Same diff. The point is, until we got about 5 years of Gas left, we do not have a problem. It may be last minute, but I believe that when we do our best work.

You know, gas prices aren't particularly high. Bottled water, soda, and milk are all more expensive than gasoline.Well gee, its a good thing all our cars don't run on bottled water, soda or milk then, eh ? then we'd really be screwed, :rolleyes:

The point is, until we got about 5 years of Gas left, we do not have a problem. It may be last minute, but I believe that when we do our best work.Certainly works in all those " Asteroid " movies !

Well, considering the answer is clearly given in the article we are supposedly discussing, the real question would fall on why you'd ask such a redundant thing...

Uhmmm... no it isn't einstein.
If you can't answer my question just say so. And if you somehow misinterpretted my question, I suppose that means I'll have to ask it using simpler language:

-Crude Oil costs are rising.
-Refinery costs are fixed.
-Therefore, the cost of refined products of Crude Oil are rising proportional to the cost of Crude Oil.
-Refined products are not for sale at values proportional to their degree of refinement. They are being sold with fixed price differentials.
-Why?

In other words, what do environmental restrictions have to do with the simple mathematics of oil refinement? Not formulations. Not blends. Refinement.



And I'd prefer that someone who actually knows something about economics and mathematics answer my question. Sorry bozz.

Indeed. Lets wait until the last moment, and hope we arent screwed by immense oil shortages, instead of investing into nuclear power programs and using a combination of the two energies to sustain us until future power sources are available.

Same diff. The point is, until we got about 5 years of Gas left, we do not have a problem. It may be last minute, but I believe that when we do our best work.

That's amazingly short sighted. Let's just ignore all our problems until they're smacking us in the face.

Indeed. Lets wait until the last moment, and hope we arent screwed by immense oil shortages, instead of investing into nuclear power programs and using a combination of the two energies to sustain us until future power sources are available.

Can anyone remember bunker hunt and the silver scam?

I think it is instructive insofar as commodity pricing is concerned.

Hey, Surrey BC!

I regularly spend lots of time just across the border from Abbotsford in Everson. Howdy, neighbor!

I just paid $2.37 for 87-octane gas. It's so weird paying close to $30 to fill my tank when that used to be SUV range not so long ago (I drive a 1991 Acura Integra...someday I'd like to drive a car that's younger than my students, but then again, that's not why I went into teaching...).

I began driving in 1987, and prices were still hovering at or below $1/gallon then.

Worry not, my Canadian and European brethren, I always shout down those who bitch about high gas prices here in the States. We've had it good for a long time and continue to have it good in comparison to the world. Our economy (if you believe in such fiction as economics) has been effectively propped up by this cheapness of gas. Things are now going to cost far more dearly to transport, which will raise the price of damn near everything, and we've earned this metaphorical kick in the groin by burying our heads about oil for so damned long.

I bike where I can, but public transport is so shoddy here -- combine that with my odd hours (being a performing arts teacher menas you're never home at teh same time every day and often have to go places the buses don't conveniently run), and you catch me in my solo car. I had a carpool partner a while back but he moved away. Not all USans are SUV-driving, gas-bathing pigs, but you'd be right to say the majority sure as hell is. My dream car right now is a Prius.

Sorry to ramble. Carry on and cheers!

HB Jubal Harshaw, Magister of Intangelon

You post an OP-ED as PROOF?! The "real" reason is this person's unsubstantiated claims?

Did you read this article before posting it? There's not a shred of evidence in it to support its claims, not a single supporting fact! I see unsupported claims, statistics with no sources, blazingly creative talking points.

Why the heck did you bother to post this? Is it a test to see how gulible people are on the internet?

ROFLMAO! Don't take much to make you panic, does it? If you were level-heades about this you'd specify just what you found to be unsubstantiated, unsupported and creative. I can understand when your cognitive dissonance is on overload that happens. Looks like your parachute is broke.

Imagine what your economy would look like without THAT burden!
It might look better. Higher gas taxes would encourage hybrids and other gas saving technology. People would depend less on foreign gas. The price of gas worldwide would drop, and the US would hold on to more of it's hard currency rather than giving it to unfriendly nations like Saudi Arabia and Venezuela.

How come everyone is screaming "We're running out of gas!"? They've been saying that since the 70s! Jeez, if they do it long enough, its going to be like the boy who cried wolf.
It's because new drilling and exploration technology has outpaced consumption, but that can't happen forever. There's a finite supply of oil, and we already have to drill deeper and in more remote locations to access it. It will run out, and we'd better have a system in place to replace it.

Uhmmm... no it isn't einstein.
If you can't answer my question just say so. And if you somehow misinterpretted my question, I suppose that means I'll have to ask it using simpler language:

-Crude Oil costs are rising.
-Refinery costs are fixed.
-Therefore, the cost of refined products of Crude Oil are rising proportional to the cost of Crude Oil.
-Refined products are not for sale at values proportional to their degree of refinement. They are being sold with fixed price differentials.
-Why?

In other words, what do environmental restrictions have to do with the simple mathematics of oil refinement? Not formulations. Not blends. Refinement.



And I'd prefer that someone who actually knows something about economics and mathematics answer my question. Sorry bozz.

You are partially right; I was apparently experiencing male-PMS when I posted the reply. Not sure what got into me - I'll go take a Pamprin now.
(leave)
(return)
ahhh, better.

Where is it you determined that the price differential is $.20? There are a number of variables to consider - some lie in economics and some lie in chemistry. Before your solution can be determined you need better definition of the terms and verification of the premise.
Play nice and I'll play nice too. We can find the answer together if you provide a more tangible question with suitable justification of the terms.


Also, you would be hard pressed to find anyone here who is more knowledgeable about economics than I. An uncomfortably large number of posters here couldn't tell the difference between a capital gain and a capital G. There are a precious few (not all of whom agree on many things) - but they seldom appear and most leave in frustrated exasperation because o the overwhelming ignorance embraced by the masses. I only stay because it is fun to laugh at them. :)

That's because you don't have any oil fields of your own.

what about the north sea oil rigs?

How come everyone is screaming "We're running out of gas!"? They've been saying that since the 70s! Jeez, if they do it long enough, its going to be like the boy who cried wolf.

I will see if I can dig up the quote, but they have been saying it from the 30s

what about the north sea oil rigs?

Valid point. Can their output per capita keep up with Alaska and Texas?

Who's to Blame for High Gas Prices (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2005/04/14/EDGLUC816J1.DTL)

"Gasoline prices are at record highs again. Many think oil companies are to blame. A Field Poll from May 2004 showed that 77 percent of Californians believed this to be true... One thing is certain: Oil companies are not the culprits. In California, where gas prices are among the nation's highest, the oil industry has been repeatedly investigated yet no evidence of "price manipulation" has ever been found."

Read on and remember - the mind is like a parachute - it only works when it is open.

Bozzy.

Why do you bother? Do you actually believe people with set attitudes will change their minds? Will you actually try and convince people that gasoline prices have more to do with refinery capacity and that shippers receive payment based on the price of oil? Do you think you will make them understand the economic consequences of having gradation of gasoline that arent easily fungible so that vrious parts of the country are suseptable to supply shocks? Maybe you will make them understand that refineries in the Northeast have to shift between gas and heating oil yet they havent been able to ramp up production(home growth/miles traveled) because of environmental regulation.

edit: you might as well try to explain how many oil wells stop producing after they have withdrawn(I forget the amount) 50-60% of the oil in a deposit because it is no longer cost effective. When oil wells go "dry" it isnt because there is no oil left, it is because it doesnt make fiscal sense to take it out of the ground.

Valid point. Can their output per capita keep up with Alaska and Texas?

probably not. but hey in terms of sheer size of land mass we lose on that one

heres a potential solution
tax the creation and purchase of gas guzzlers sports cars and high octane gasses
the average person remains unaffected while the rich people who buy this crap and pollute the environment more than anyone else suffer.
then take all that money and subsidize hybrid cars. great for the environment and helps the economy. how you say?
if we subsidize hybrids to the point that they are the same price as regular cars, nearly everyone will buy them because gas is SO expensive and getting even more expensive. thus you save so much with a gas mileage of like 55 mpg or whatever it is.
less demand for gas means gas price goes down (or atleast balances out and doesnt rise so fast.)
what do you think?

Look, geniuses, oil prices are fixed through (mostly) free market. And in a free market the seller doesn't think "gee! how cheap can I sell my oil today?"

If oil prices are high it's because people are more willing to pay high prices for oil. There's a finite supply of oil, and you can't just increase production overnight. So, when China starts requiring more oil, the US starts requiring more oil, Europe starts requiring more oil, what do you think is going to happen?

You know, I've been frantically trying to figure out why I'm paying $4 a gallon for milk and $2 a gallon for gas. Doesn't it cost more to drill and refine oil than it does to feed & milk a stupid cow??

short answer, no.

and the reason milk prices have been going up is mostly because gas prices have been going up (which adds to transportation costs, as well as plain old operating costs), mad cow disease restrictions causing a decrease in supply, and increased feed costs due to this whole multi-year drought thing.

I just though I would throw this in because ... well I am kinda drunk and hopeful for the species.

You guys realize that this clamor about oil prices is kinda stupid for the simple reason the oil sales are DOLLAR based. The culmination of departing from the gold standard(which I think is a good thing) and the change in the fed stance on monetary policy coupled with the dollar based pricing of oil has led to a very interesting problem when demand spikes. Producers are less willing to immediately increase capacity because their real world profits might not have increased.

There are many country where real world price of oil has DECREASED despite increased dollar/barrel prices.

This makes it very difficult to forcast future production plans. I am not saying this is a good or bad thing, just keep it in mind. Many oil producers are reluctant to increase capacity because they will not gain on their investment in relative terms regardless of the dollar price of oil...YAH, we gotta love Nixon(joking, I dont mind leaving the gold standard)

It's because new drilling and exploration technology has outpaced consumption, but that can't happen forever. There's a finite supply of oil, and we already have to drill deeper and in more remote locations to access it. It will run out, and we'd better have a system in place to replace it.
There is alo a finite supply of copper, gold, iron, uranium, fresh water and coal. We'll run out of all those someday too. When do you suggest we find an alternative for them?

I love that article. I can see that guy at some gas station:

WHAT!!! Two dollars a gallon?!? How dare I pay gas prices anywhere near that which the rest of the world pays?!? Those darn Environmentalists! With their... desire to save the environment... grumble grumble... who are they to try and keep us from killing our one and only habitat so I can save a few bucks a the pump while I fuel my Hummer H2 that gets like 10 feet to the gallon! Thank god for selfless Oil Companies, with their desire to make obscene amounts of money by drilling in our wildernesses, now those are some good people there!

The whole issue of high gas prices is very convoluted mostly due to the oil futures market which is played and manipulated extensively by the oil companies and is almost impossible to investigate shy of a Congressional hearing which isn't likely in a Republican controlled Congress, or with a Republican President who received so much financial backing from the oil industry he didn't even need Federal Campaign matching funds.

In the early 1980s we were able to find out how much we getting screwed by the oil companies when they employed a convoluted scheme of price fixing. This caused a Democratic Congress to enact the Windfall Profit Tax. Sadly with the Republicans firmly in control there is no way this will ever happen.

I do understand that oil company profits are up, as well as the investments of those well connected oil futures players who have an uncanny ability to guess when President Bush is going to arbitrarily destabilize the Middle East again. :D :D

There is alo a finite supply of copper, gold, iron, uranium, fresh water and coal. We'll run out of all those someday too. When do you suggest we find an alternative for them?

We can't find an alternative for water because it is essential to survival.

Gold, in reality is just a worthless shiny metal that 10s of thousands of years of human economic experience has valued variably (iron used to be more valuable than gold in the early iron age) and has no real intrisinc value.

There's more iron in the Earth than will possibly ever be used, demanded or consumed.

Uranium is only used in nuclear fission power and fusion will not require it.

Coal is continuously renewed faster than oil and is very abundant. It will eventually be replaced by nuclear fission.

Bozzy.

Why do you bother? Do you actually believe people with set attitudes will change their minds? Will you actually try and convince people that gasoline prices have more to do with refinery capacity and that shippers receive payment based on the price of oil? Do you think you will make them understand the economic consequences of having gradation of gasoline that arent easily fungible so that vrious parts of the country are suseptable to supply shocks? Maybe you will make them understand that refineries in the Northeast have to shift between gas and heating oil yet they havent been able to ramp up production(home growth/miles traveled) because of environmental regulation.

edit: you might as well try to explain how many oil wells stop producing after they have withdrawn(I forget the amount) 50-60% of the oil in a deposit because it is no longer cost effective. When oil wells go "dry" it isnt because there is no oil left, it is because it doesnt make fiscal sense to take it out of the ground.
if its not cost effective, then the only way to make it cost effective is to raise prices. this means higher prices at the pump (or government subsidies). that is not where the solution lies.

Indeed. There is a simple way to look at this.

A. Due to increasing demand(especially because of the war), gas prices go up.

B. With major war actions over, there is probably some lee-way available.

C. Gas companies see improved net revenues. Decide to keep price the same.

Also, I think gas companies get an option in inventory reporting under GAAP, unlike other companies. Something to do with FIFO and LIFO, but that may only be for tax reasons though.

Really, this thread needs a CPA.

I live in Surrey, BC. The Prices here have reached $1.05/Liter and we are quit taxed. The gas is cheaper on the US side of the border.

One Gallon is Aprox 3.8Liters
That makes out gas prices at $3.99/Gallon here.

Ofcourse that is Canadian Dollars :p

Time to convert to US Dollars and British Pounds...
CAD = Canadian Dollar
USD = US Dollar
GBP = British Pound

1.05 CAD = 0.844499 USD
1.05 CAD = 0.449218 GBP
3.99 CAD = 3.20877 USD
3.99 CAD = 1.70816 GBP

How much does gas cost in London, on an Avarage day these days? I know it is usually higer then it is here, but can someone give a number? I know across the border, near here it is almost $2.2/Gallon USD, which is quite abit less then here.

UK drivers pay an equivalent of $6.10 per gallon.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4425593.stm

For those discussing how high the price is in Britain and such; please remember that a small nation with easy access to tons of public transport has a much easier time of sustaining high gas prices than a large nation designed around cars, with very little infrastructure for public transport.

The US developed itself into a corner in the long run, utterly dependent on gas, unable to "sacrafice" it on an induvidual basis without throwing away their jobs, we are almost entirely at the mercy of oil companies and government subsidies for our livelyhoods.

I live 35 miles from my workplace, that's a 70 mile round trip. At 20mpg, my 12 gallon tank of gas gets a little over 3 round trips. Money is tight; thus I cannot buy a better car. The job market is non-existant; thus I cannot find a closer job. If gas prices rise I eat less than 3 meals a day, its as simple as that.

For those discussing how high the price is in Britain and such; please remember that a small nation with easy access to tons of public transport has a much easier time of sustaining high gas prices than a large nation designed around cars, with very little infrastructure for public transport.

The US developed itself into a corner in the long run, utterly dependent on gas, unable to "sacrafice" it on an induvidual basis without throwing away their jobs, we are almost entirely at the mercy of oil companies and government subsidies for our livelyhoods.

I live 35 miles from my workplace, that's a 70 mile round trip. At 20mpg, my 12 gallon tank of gas gets a little over 3 round trips. Money is tight; thus I cannot buy a better car. The job market is non-existant; thus I cannot find a closer job. If gas prices rise I eat less than 3 meals a day, its as simple as that.

While I feel bad for you, this is what I like to think of a direct example of the problems with collective action gone wrong.

UK drivers pay an equivalent of $6.10 per gallon.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4425593.stm
jesus i didnt realize it was THAT bad. thats almost 3 times as much.

Has anyone read the article mentioned in the first post?
Though other factors cause high gas prices, such as high taxes and increasing world demand, environmental regulation is among the primary reasons. For example, environmental regulation has significantly restricted drilling for oil in Alaska and on the continental shelf. More drilling will increase the supply and thus lower prices.
...
From drilling to refining to distribution, environmentalists have done everything they can to raise gas prices.
The above raises a question: Why do environmental regulations exist?
One might think they exist to protect consumers, but the evidence doesn't show thi
Environmentalists are not actually concerned with the well-being of man. Their real motive is to sacrifice man to nature by stopping industrial activity.

All this is an apologist article for deregulation and eventual gutting of any environmental protection aimed at preserving what little pristine natural environment we have left.
We can no doubt expect a lot more of these articles to come out over the next few months, as the Bush admin start preparing the US for Alaskan mining and various other attacks on National parks.
Considering the BUsh admin past track record, I wouldn't be at all surprised to find out that this author had been paid by them to write this article.

One thing I would like to know - if the reason for high gasoline prices is not due to Oil companies price-gouging (but environmentalists), why have so many Oil companies reported massive record profits over the last year?

For example, Exxon Mobil Corp., the nation's largest refiner and marketer, 2004 fourth-quarter earnings were $5.12 billion, up $2.4 billion from the year before -- the fourth consecutive quarter of record earnings.

Consumer price watchdogs have found a direct correlation between rises in pump prices and rises in Oil companies profits. This is a bit out of date, as it refers to 2003, but considering they're reporting even bigger profits now, I don't see why it still doesn't hold true:
http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/corporate/pr/pr004219.php3

While I feel bad for you, this is what I like to think of a direct example of the problems with collective action gone wrong.

I'm not sure I follow you. Can you explain?

There is alo a finite supply of copper, gold, iron, uranium, fresh water and coal. We'll run out of all those someday too. When do you suggest we find an alternative for them?
Some can't be replaced easily. Gold for instance is highly resistant to corrosion, yet a fantastic conductor of electricity. Still people are working on ceramic based superconductors which will have both those properties, and will also be lighter and less prone to melt at low temperatures.

Uranium can be replaced with Thorium, which is very plentifull, but we'd have to redesign reactors.

Oil is the closest to running out. It can't be recycled, like gold, iron, copper, and water, and demand for it is much higher than demand for coal and uranium. It only makes sense to find alternate sources of energy before it runs out.

Has anyone read the article mentioned in the first post?

All this is an apologist article for deregulation and eventual gutting of any environmental protection aimed at preserving what little pristine natural environment we have left.
how little? Only 5% of US land is occupied by cities, and 20% by farmland.
We can no doubt expect a lot more of these articles to come out over the next few months, as the Bush admin start preparing the US for Alaskan mining and various other attacks on National parks.
Considering the BUsh admin past track record, I wouldn't be at all surprised to find out that this author had been paid by them to write this article. Yup, The SanFrancisco Chronicle is CLEARLY in Bush's back pocket. Can't trust them to be impartial at all.

One thing I would like to know - if the reason for high gasoline prices is not due to Oil companies price-gouging (but environmentalists), why have so many Oil companies reported massive record profits over the last year?

For example, Exxon Mobil Corp., the nation's largest refiner and marketer, 2004 fourth-quarter earnings were $5.12 billion, up $2.4 billion from the year before -- the fourth consecutive quarter of record earnings.
Umm, no you are wrong. It was $8.42bil vs $6.65 prior 4th quarter - far from a 50% increase, but respectable none the less. Much was from producing oil (drilling) but also from refining - they won't comply with 18 different standards for free! There is also a small amout to consider due to inflation.

Consumer price watchdogs have found a direct correlation between rises in pump prices and rises in Oil companies profits. This is a bit out of date, as it refers to 2003, but considering they're reporting even bigger profits now, I don't see why it still doesn't hold true:
http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/corporate/pr/pr004219.php3 Gasp! They make more money when prices are higher! OMG! Call the cops!! Wait.. That must mean they make lower profits when prices are lower! Since gas prices have not kept up with inflation for the last twenty years or so we should all send them a thank-you card! These profits are long overdue!

Gee, maybe a less partisian website would be more convincing. Even though they claim not to be, ya gotta wonder how 'non-partisan' a website is when their top referring site is 'Arnoldwatch.com" LOL. Hacks! They don't even list their donors. Who supports these wolf-like sheep? Did you look at their B.O.D.? (Hack-hack!)

For those discussing how high the price is in Britain and such; please remember that a small nation with easy access to tons of public transport has a much easier time of sustaining high gas prices than a large nation designed around cars, with very little infrastructure for public transport.

The US developed itself into a corner in the long run, utterly dependent on gas, unable to "sacrafice" it on an induvidual basis without throwing away their jobs, we are almost entirely at the mercy of oil companies and government subsidies for our livelyhoods.

I live 35 miles from my workplace, that's a 70 mile round trip. At 20mpg, my 12 gallon tank of gas gets a little over 3 round trips. Money is tight; thus I cannot buy a better car. The job market is non-existant; thus I cannot find a closer job. If gas prices rise I eat less than 3 meals a day, its as simple as that.

I always find the "America is bigger, thus needs lower petrol prices" argument puzzling. Sure, USA is larger in land-mass than any European country. However, I would doubt that the average commute distance to work is much different - at the end of the day, seconds minutes and hours are the same length in Europe and USA - so there's only so much time one can afford to be driving.

For example, I live 70km away from where I work - and thus most weekdays drive 140km in total. Petrol here is probably something along the lines of 1,20 USD / liter. However, I've just done the conversions, and my car does roughly the equivalent of 31 miles / gallon. So, perhaps environmentally motivated taxation does lead to vehicle manufacturers making their vehicles more environmentally sound.

What I hate about the oil fuckers in Australia is when the price of a barrel of oil goes up the price of processed petrol goes up right away, yet when the price of a barrel of crude oil drops they keep the prices up and say shit like, "The prices have not been affected yet because it takes some time for this oil to be processed and this cheap oil is not on the market yet."

Well whoop-di-fucken-do! The more expensive oil wasn't on the market but they were more than willing to charge us it its prices. This is one of the reasons why petrol is so expensive in Australia (not a small place to get around either).

I always find the "America is bigger, thus needs lower petrol prices" argument puzzling. Sure, USA is larger in land-mass than any European country. However, I would doubt that the average commute distance to work is much different - at the end of the day, seconds minutes and hours are the same length in Europe and USA - so there's only so much time one can afford to be driving.

For example, I live 70km away from where I work - and thus most weekdays drive 140km in total. Petrol here is probably something along the lines of 1,20 USD / liter. However, I've just done the conversions, and my car does roughly the equivalent of 31 miles / gallon. So, perhaps environmentally motivated taxation does lead to vehicle manufacturers making their vehicles more environmentally sound.

My car gets 20mpg roughly because its old and tired, back when it was new it was probably closer to 25 or so. The average commute to work in my area is very long, considering I'm about average in terms of commute distance. If you think about that, my weekly commute is equivilent to (5 x 70 =) 350 miles or so, that's the length of some smaller European nations. How far is it from one end of their nation to the other every week? How many people commute from one end of Germany to another every week?

Its anecdotal to be sure, but my experience is fairly average among people I know; there are people who have extremely long or short commutes as well. However America is not densely populated, jobs are found in major cities, with tens of thousands commuiting into them from outside the city. This is not unique to the US, but the SCALE of it is. Virtually every place in the US has the same configuration, the same massive numbers of commuters driving these distances.

You'd think that, if anything, the distances I speak of and the need for low gas prices would create a class of highly aware consumers desperate for efficient cars. How strange that nothing could be further from the truth.

I, personally, detest SUVs and decry those who drive them who had a choice to drive something better, more efficient as pitiable people. They fell into a trap, and now pay 60 dollars a tank of gas, hundreds more on insurance, and all for the honor of being bigger than the car next to them. Its foolish and irresponsible, vain and senseless. The 1% of people who might actually have a case for wanting one as their ideal commuting car is not balanced by the millions who buy them because they're trendy.

I love my hybrid car. Very much. I think I will go kiss it now :fluffle:

Its anecdotal to be sure, but my experience is fairly average among people I know; there are people who have extremely long or short commutes as well. However America is not densely populated, jobs are found in major cities, with tens of thousands commuiting into them from outside the city. This is not unique to the US, but the SCALE of it is. Virtually every place in the US has the same configuration, the same massive numbers of commuters driving these distances.

This is something I've always found very odd about the US. Why do people insist in living so far from the workplace? How can you lose 40 hours of your life each month to traffic (if you're lucky)? Why not live closer to where the works are? Sure, it may be a smaller home, but do you really need a gigantic yard and all those spare bedrooms?

Or is it too hard to live so close to all those horrible neighbors? At least in the 'burbs there's a fence.

My car gets 20mpg roughly because its old and tired, back when it was new it was probably closer to 25 or so. The average commute to work in my area is very long, considering I'm about average in terms of commute distance. If you think about that, my weekly commute is equivilent to (5 x 70 =) 350 miles or so, that's the length of some smaller European nations. How far is it from one end of their nation to the other every week? How many people commute from one end of Germany to another every week?

I have no idea, but equally I doubt it's proportionally any less/more than the number of people who commute from one end of e.g. Texas to the other each week.

I'm not sure how long Sweden is, I think our land area is roughly 450 000 km². That could be very wrong though, it's along time since I sat in a geography class.

My weekly commute is 5x140 = 700 km. Which I have worked out in American is 437,5 miles. Journey usually takes me a shade under 1 hour each way, although more sometime in winter. So boring - thank goodness for CDs and radio.

I love my hybrid car. Very much. I think I will go kiss it now :fluffle:
my family is thinking of getting one. which one do you recommend?

I always find the "America is bigger, thus needs lower petrol prices" argument puzzling. Sure, USA is larger in land-mass than any European country. However, I would doubt that the average commute distance to work is much different - at the end of the day, seconds minutes and hours are the same length in Europe and USA - so there's only so much time one can afford to be driving.

For example, I live 70km away from where I work - and thus most weekdays drive 140km in total. Petrol here is probably something along the lines of 1,20 USD / liter. However, I've just done the conversions, and my car does roughly the equivalent of 31 miles / gallon. So, perhaps environmentally motivated taxation does lead to vehicle manufacturers making their vehicles more environmentally sound.

I don't think the problem is with commutes to work. The problem is the suburban landscape. Urban areas have most amenities within walking distance, but in most suburbs it's a drive of several miles to get a quart of milk. So if one must buy groceries, pick up dry-cleaning, and visit a video store, then several destinations must be driven to seperatly. That's why when the "uninvention" thread came up I said I'd uninvent the urban sprawl. Stack everything up high and everything is within walking distance.

You know, gas prices aren't particularly high. Bottled water, soda, and milk are all more expensive than gasoline.

My answer to that, Argentina, you can get 3.5 liter Cokes for literally 50 cents american

My answer to that, Argentina, you can get 3.5 liter Cokes for literally 50 cents american
Argentina is amazing for cheap stuff, when i was there (2002) a packet of 20 cigarettes was 5 peso (which at the time was about £1), compared with about £4.50 here (22.5 peso). everything else was dirt cheap too.

/hijack

I just wanted to respond to some of the stuff the writer of that article had to say. I went into it with an open mind, but wow, was he ever biased.

"Oil companies deserve praise for producing an abundance of gasoline despite the massive burden of environmental regulations foisted upon them. To increase the gasoline supply, we need to start by eliminating needless environmental regulations, including drilling bans and prohibiting certain octane boosters. If the government makes the choice to protect people's freedom, gasoline prices below a dollar-per-gallon won't be just a relic of the past. "

boo-bloody-hooo I feel so sorry for the oil and gass companies. They have done so much for us, they are saints amuong men. Environmental regulations are such hassels. I know, let's get rid of all of them. Then we can let the oil and gas companies drill everywhere. Wouldn't it be nice to walk through Yellowstone park and look at the giant drilling apparatus.

If the government wants to protect people's freedom they should stop subsidising the industry, then people could make a real choice about the costs of oil. I wonder if people realise that a portion of their tax dollars goes to supporting multinational corporations. We are effectively paying the oil and gas companies to give us low gas prices...... :headbang:

Environmental protections are put in place for the health of people and the ENVIRONMENT. There are more was to be exposed to toxins than directly. Multuple instences of exposure can lead to cumulative effects which can lead to illnes like cancer which costs your community and yourself money to treat. And let's not forget about all of the problems we don't know these chemicals cause because we don't know what their interacting with in the environment.

As someone already pointed out, how does it make more sense for litre WATER to be more expensive than a litre of gas? Here's a solution to your bitching, try driving less. Maybe we should alter the way we plan our cities (ie end urban sprawl) so that distances are reduced and therfore our dependence on cars is reduced as well. There are options to the gas problem other than drilling for more gas.

Many experts believe that we have, or soon will have reached peak oil (http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/). (Here's another interesting site) (http://www.peakoil.net/) Which means oil prices will only continue to rise especially with the increased use of oil and gas in countries like China and India. Our current lifesyle is not sustainable in the long run and there is no way that "gasoline prices below a dollar-per-gallon won't be just a relic of the past. "

You can't have a single human let alone a billion humans without functioning, healthy ecosystems. Their value is greater than that of any oil field. People have lost touch with what the value of wild natural places and their processes. How much is a wetland worth to you? do you know what it does for you? How much is clean drinking water worth to you?

if its not cost effective, then the only way to make it cost effective is to raise prices. this means higher prices at the pump (or government subsidies). that is not where the solution lies.

Or we wait until technology improves until it is cost effective. Or, most likely some combination between improved technology and increased prices.

....Environmental protections are put in place for the health of people and the ENVIRONMENT. There are more was to be exposed to toxins than directly. Multuple instences of exposure can lead to cumulative effects which can lead to illnes like cancer which costs your community and yourself money to treat. And let's not forget about all of the problems we don't know these chemicals cause because we don't know what their interacting with in the environment.


I agree with you that govt subsidy should be terminated - for all industry. (Not to be confused with govermnet contracts)

Regarding the environment you make the mistaken asumption that all environmental legislation is about helping the environment. This is incorrect as the author of the article pointed out. DDT is yet another example of a useful chemical banned by scare tactics. In the case ot DDT it has resulted in deaths of millions by insect borne illnesses (particularly in the third world) rather than just high fuel prices.

Your own post contradicts itself. You say, in effect, that these laws prevent or reduce certain elements from being released into the environment even though there is no evidence that they are harmful. The author is not saying that preserving the environment is unnecessary, he is saying that some environmental laws are unnecessary or overreaching because they are based on unfounded or inaccurate information and presumptions.

Argentina is amazing for cheap stuff, when i was there (2002) a packet of 20 cigarettes was 5 peso (which at the time was about £1), compared with about £4.50 here (22.5 peso). everything else was dirt cheap too.

/hijack

Yea, being the rich little douche I am, I bought Lacoste shirts for 30 bucks, rather than the normal eighty.

So environmental regulation is to blame is it? Well we'd better do away with them, lord knows that cheap petrol is so much more important than preserving our traditional landscapes and planet. :rolleyes:

That's because you don't have any oil fields of your own.
The North Sea?

This is something I've always found very odd about the US. Why do people insist in living so far from the workplace? How can you lose 40 hours of your life each month to traffic (if you're lucky)? Why not live closer to where the works are? Sure, it may be a smaller home, but do you really need a gigantic yard and all those spare bedrooms?

Or is it too hard to live so close to all those horrible neighbors? At least in the 'burbs there's a fence.

...I feel like I'm answering the same question...Look at my first post. I'm too poor to CHOOSE where I live. I live where I can afford. I'm "fresh outta school" al la 2 years ago.

Those 2 years were spent casting about for a job, any job, and finding nothing. Perhaps you aren't aware, but the US job market simply is so tight that college educations are damaging to the prospects of finding a job. I was denied from buger joints, gas stations, and gocery stores because 18 year olds with a high school education were willing to work for minimum wage, a luxury I couldn't afford, 'cause I had bills to pay.

Far from insisting on living 30 miles from civilization, I am stuck out here in the boonies out of sheer hard fortune. I'm lucky in a way, 'cause I could stay at people's houses rather than living in the street during that time. But welcome to the new economy, you have to be experienced and willing to work for minimum wage without benifits or YOU DON'T GET A JOB.

I don't have a big back yard, I don't have luxuries or niceties. The computer I'm on was a gift from my parents 6 years ago, my walls are unfinished, my floor is made of concrete. I'm NOT living in the lap of luxury, nor are any of my peers. This economy is in the toilet, and these gas prices are making things that much harder to make ends meet.

I don't understand why you think I live this way out of choice, perhaps its the reputation of the US as being rich. I'll tell you something, about 1 percent of Americans are obscenely wealthy, roughly 10 percent are very wealthy, 20 percent are doing well, 30 percent are making do, and the rest of us are hurting like crazy. The middle class is rapidly being forced into the working and poor classes thanks to the economic policies of this administration and the state of the economy.

Dammit, I don't like bitching about my situation. I'm educated and young, healthy and strong. I'll be doing okay in a decade or so, once I get on my feet financially. Just right now things are getting harder, not easier, and I'm feeling the squeeze. I'm annoyed because I've done nothing wrong, made no "mistakes" that cost me money or time, but I'm hurting anyway. It feels unfair to be punished for having an education, to be denied because I have bills to pay and need the money to pay them. That's the state of our economy though, and we have to deal with the hand we're delt.

...I feel like I'm answering the same question...Look at my first post. I'm too poor to CHOOSE where I live. I live where I can afford. I'm "fresh outta school" al la 2 years ago.

Sorry to hear about your situation, but is that how the average family in the US lives? What's the percentage of people living like you do? And what's the livelihood of the average commuter?

Sorry to hear about your situation, but is that how the average family in the US lives? What's the percentage of people living like you do? And what's the livelihood of the average commuter?

I left my detailed statistical information on the status and wealth of my neighbors and fellow countrymen in my other pair of pants.

Look; if such data exists, its news to me. Nobody in power ever wants to hear bad news, so nobody asks these questions. Reliable acroecnomic data is hard to come by, and even more difficult to interpret. I don't make it a point to seek it out anyway.

The closest thing I can point you too are push polls taken in the recent elections that showed that people didn't feel better off than they did 4 years ago. Otherwise, all I can tell you is anecdotal evidence from my neck of the woods and what I hear from people outside my area.

I have no studies showing evidence of consumer downturns; just my observation that few people are shopping at the malls these days, people don't travel for vacations anymore, people work more jobs for less money, "benifits" like healthcare simply don't exist for jobs under 50k a year, etc. Everything I see and hear tells me that money is tight for anyone who isn't rich.

Nobody I know feels safe in the middle class anymore, and worse yet nobody tells me they are moving up in the world. Every economic force seems to be pushing down on the working induviduals, healthcare costs rise but coverage falls. Fewer and fewer cars get decent milage, jobs are scarce and people have to take whatever they can find wherever it is, but gas prices rise without limits. Debts mount, bankruptcy gets harder to declare, yet credit card companies face fewer and fewer resrtictions, raising rates without reasons, cornering the market, changing the rules and pushing people into debt. High unemployment rates means nobody feels safe in their jobs, there's always someone willing to work for less than you do just outside the door and the employers know that.

That's all I can tell you. I see it every day, I feel it myself. You want studies, facts and statistics, I'm afraid you'll have to look elsewhere. Try some of the US government sites, or consumer protection sites, they might have something.

My opinion

1. Oil companies collude and pay of the pollies so they are never to blame. They rip us off whenever they can or try to.
2. OPEC gets it cut and is happy for high prices now.
3. Taxes don't really help and inflate prices. When prices rise, they get more taxes so they don't really care if prices rise as long it doesn't kill the economy.
4. Oil companies and their reseller are so happy to pass on increases, but take forever to pass on decreases.

So environmental regulation is to blame is it? Well we'd better do away with them, lord knows that cheap petrol is so much more important than preserving our traditional landscapes and planet. :rolleyes:


The North Sea?

Are you one of those dolts who would support any proposal so long as it said 'environmental' in the title?
Maybe the 'Start Using Draft Servings (SUDS) Environmental Cleanup Bill' Where beer cans and bottles would be made illegal to prevent litter and beer could only sold by the mug.

Or how about the 'Everglades Environmental Atmosphereic Debris Removal' project. We could tax internet forums by the letter to fund a plan to hire specialists to go the the everglades and remove all of the airborne 'environmental debris' from all of the plant life there using specialized all natural non-allergenic fiber wipes soaked in a solution of H20 and plant oils.
(That is, they'd use a soapy cotton cloth to wipe dust from the plants in the everglads)

Could it be that maybe some of the current environmental rules are just as ridiculous? Wait just a minute! Since WHEN has anything ridiculous come out of Washington!

I find it extremely troubling that people think we can trust the oil corporations.

They don't care about you. They don't care about me. They don't care about the USA, or any other country. They don't care about your health, my health, or anyone else's, because they can afford the best health care money can buy. They don't care about the Earth, they don't care if the air we breathe and the water we drink is clean. They don't care what state of disrepair they've left the world in when they die. They don't care about anything or anyone.

Except of course, their pocketbooks. That's just how business works.

Any person who thinks he or she can trust a corporation, or really anyone who wants your money, is a naive fool. If it makes them money to do what is "right," then they'll do that. If it makes them money to do what is "wrong," then they'll do that.

And about running out of oil. We KNOW it's going to run out someday or another. Unlike many things, it cannot be re-used. Common sense tells us that it's better to plan ahead and not procrastinate until the last minute. Why shouldn't that apply here? I'm sick of hearing apologists for the oil industry.

I find it extremely troubling that people think we can trust the oil corporations.

They don't care about you. They don't care about me. They don't care about the USA, or any other country. They don't care about your health, my health, or anyone else's, because they can afford the best health care money can buy. They don't care about the Earth, they don't care if the air we breathe and the water we drink is clean. They don't care what state of disrepair they've left the world in when they die. They don't care about anything or anyone.
Yeah! And corporations like The Gap don't care about your car, corporations like 'McDonalds don't care about your footwear, and corporations like Nike don't care about your yeast infection. Gee, you are pretty godam observant, even if you don't care about lunar ecology. Of course, like me, you're reaching pretty far. Unlike me, your point is invalid, narrow-minded and presumptious. It seems to be the conclusion of reading a short and biased magazine article on a train. Or rather, talking with someone else who did. If it were any more shallow it'd be a hill.

Except of course, their pocketbooks. That's just how business works.
Yup, get rich quick, start your own corporation. Why doesn't EVERYONE do it! Hmm, maybe there's more to it.

Any person who thinks he or she can trust a corporation, or really anyone who wants your money, is a naive fool. If it makes them money to do what is "right," then they'll do that. If it makes them money to do what is "wrong," then they'll do that.

Right! So don't you dare give any money to the Mcdonald's house, nor to the Dave Thomas Foundation or Adoption, The Hershey Foundation or about a gazillion others. Those greedy bastards all just want your money!

And about running out of oil. We KNOW it's going to run out someday or another. Unlike many things, it cannot be re-used. Common sense tells us that it's better to plan ahead and not procrastinate until the last minute. Why shouldn't that apply here? I'm sick of hearing apologists for the oil industry.

Umm, right. All that Hydrogen Fuel Cell, Solar electric, ethyl alcohol and corn oil stuff is just pretend. So what if there is no imminent danger of running out! So what if it is still cheaper to fill your tank with gas than it is to fill your belly with dinner at Chili's on a date. Supply has NOTHING to do with price! These billion dollar greedy corporations just want to take all the oil and then when they've depleted it all they'll pack up their expensive oil rigs and go home and roll in all the money they made!

That makes more sense than anything from your post.

Regarding the environment you make the mistaken asumption that all environmental legislation is about helping the environment. This is incorrect as the author of the article pointed out. DDT is yet another example of a useful chemical banned by scare tactics. In the case ot DDT it has resulted in deaths of millions by insect borne illnesses (particularly in the third world) rather than just high fuel prices.

Your own post contradicts itself. You say, in effect, that these laws prevent or reduce certain elements from being released into the environment even though there is no evidence that they are harmful. The author is not saying that preserving the environment is unnecessary, he is saying that some environmental laws are unnecessary or overreaching because they are based on unfounded or inaccurate information and presumptions.


You are right, I do make the mistake that environmental legislation is about helping the environment, that is my youth and niavete at work. Let's face it, most people only pay lip service when it comes to caring about the environment. But when something affects the health of people and not just birds and fish and other mammals...well, that's when it really matters doesn't it.

DDT is a pesticide usually used for agricultural purposes. It kills insects. It also has an effect on fish, birds, invertibrates, microrganisms and humans, all in different ways because a human system is not the same as a dog system as a fish system as a bird system....

DDT seemed great because it was not absorbed readily through the skin of humans. However, we sprayed it on our food, and we injest it into our systems where it is then stored in fatty organs such as the adrenals, testes, and thyroid and breast milk. DDT is also stored in smaller concentrations in the liver and kidneys. It essensially bioaccumulates and the ony way it can be escreated is through human milk. If a woman is breast feesing she is giving her child a dose of DDT. DDT increases a womans chance of breast cancer and depending on your weight and the amount you've accumulated in your lifetime. True you would have to acculate a lot of it to kill you.

Now that may seem like an ok gamble considering how helpful you think DDT is, but what about the long term effect of DDT on the environment? Well, the insects will eventually build up a resistance to the chemicals (because that's what they do) which means manufacturers will have to make DDT more powerful so the insects can continue to be killed, meanwhile we're all still injesting DDT from crops. DDT is running off into rivers where fish and other animals are injesting the chemical and then it makes it's way up the food chain through biomagnification. You can look up for yourself the kinds of effects DDT has on animals here (http://www.chem.duke.edu/~jds/cruise_chem/pest/effects.html) and then extrpolate what larger effect these problems might have on the ecosystem and on Human beings.

Why is the death of "millions" (I'd like to know where you got this number) by insect bites (a natural occurence and a threat they should be aware of if they live in an area where there are deadly insects) more tragic than the threat of extinction for ENTIRE bird species due to egg shell thinning caused by DDT?

But I'm not sure why we're talking about DDT since this is a thread about Gas. I guess I was trying to make a point about the Precautionary principle and how I think it should be used in environmental legislation and how most people don't seem to understand the harm chemicals can have on the envirnment and subsequently themselves. As for "unfounded or inaccurate information and presumptions", by whose account? Peer reviewed scientific journals or Joe Schmoe from the San fransico paper?

Trees and lakes and wild things aren't the only things that make up the environment humans are a part of it too. What we put out there comes back at us and most of the time with results we weren't expecting.

That's because you don't have any oil fields of your own.

You ever heard of the North Sea?

Yeah! And corporations like The Gap don't care about your car, corporations like 'McDonalds don't care about your footwear, and corporations like Nike don't care about your yeast infection. Gee, you are pretty godam observant, even if you don't care about lunar ecology. Of course, like me, you're reaching pretty far. Unlike me, your point is invalid, narrow-minded and presumptious. It seems to be the conclusion of reading a short and biased magazine article on a train. Or rather, talking with someone else who did. If it were any more shallow it'd be a hill.


The point they are making is that oil companies affect all those things yet have no forsight to care about them. Oil is something that is paramount to protect for the future of the world yet corperations are often not forsighted enough to keep drilling it out of the ground at the propper rate.

The point they are making is that oil companies affect all those things yet have no forsight to care about them. Oil is something that is paramount to protect for the future of the world yet corperations are often not forsighted enough to keep drilling it out of the ground at the propper rate.
Oh precognizant one, just what IS the proper rate???

LOL.

Can someone please answer this:

There's Unleaded Gas and there's Premium Gas, both of which are made from the same source: Crude Oil.

Both of the prices have risen, but not proportional to one another. No matter what the Unleaded cost is, Premium is always only 20 cents more.

The cost to refine a barrel of Crude Oil to Unleaded is constant, as is the cost of refining Crude to Premium. They are fixed multipliers of Crude Oil's original cost, and therefore should result in Unleaded and Premium costs that are proportional to one another and which rise proportionally with the cost of Crude.

If this is an open market and prices aren't being manipulated, why has the 20 cent gap remained constant? What's going on??

It's called "Premium" gas for a reason. The gasoline retailers know that a certain percentage of customers believe there is a value to higher octane and are willing to pay a "premium" for it. The $0.20 difference is that premium. It has nothing to do with the cost of refining. The retailers know they can get it, so they will charge it. It's likely there is a market study somewhere that shows that if they try to charge a higher premium, say $0.25, those customers willing to pay $0.20 won't pay the higher price. Thus, the premium is always $0.20.

You are right, I do make the mistake that environmental legislation is about helping the environment, that is my youth and niavete at work. Let's face it, most people only pay lip service when it comes to caring about the environment. But when something affects the health of people and not just birds and fish and other mammals...well, that's when it really matters doesn't it.
You will get no argument from me there. The key is first making sure that there is an actual risk, and second is making sure that the legislation actually does something beneficial and worthwhile to address it. (ex. Passing a law against the unlicensed release of methane - a greenhouse gas - into the atmosphere would not be worthwhile as it is a primary component of flatulence.) Too much 'environmental' regulatio has not included this crucible test before being enacted.

Why is the death of "millions" (I'd like to know where you got this number) by insect bites (a natural occurence and a threat they should be aware of if they live in an area where there are deadly insects) more tragic than the threat of extinction for ENTIRE bird species due to egg shell thinning caused by DDT?

But I'm not sure why we're talking about DDT since this is a thread about Gas. ...................... by whose account? Peer reviewed scientific journals or Joe Schmoe from the San fransico paper?

Trees and lakes and wild things aren't the only things that make up the environment humans are a part of it too. What we put out there comes back at us and most of the time with results we weren't expecting.

The deaths of millions are from Malaria borne by insects. A preventable problem. DDT does not have the harmful effects that the scare-you-silly environmentalists want you to believe. Here is the link;
http://www.junkscience.com/ddtfaq.htm

The deaths of millions are from Malaria borne by insects. A preventable problem. DDT does not have the harmful effects that the scare-you-silly environmentalists want you to believe. Here is the link;
http://www.junkscience.com/ddtfaq.htm


Ah Malaria. That's what I thought you were talking about. Malaria is a preventable disease. There are medicines that can be supplied to areas with Malaria but this isn't done becasue the medicines are too expensive to be afforded in the areas that are still affected by the disease. Pharmaceutical companies are here to make money.

If DDT truely is harmless then one day we will know that and we can benifit from it. For too long we have been willing to test new chemicals on ourselves and our environment rather than take the time to learn as much as we can about them and then implementing them. I guess that's because we're so jazzed up for short term results, but it's not a healthy way to do things now is it. Again, can't we invoke the precautionary principle?

I find it hard to understand how something that is made to be toxic isn't toxic. I would also like to know who funded the study that was done by J. Gordon Edwards. Lead was kown to be toxic to humans since the early 1900s and yet it remaind in wide use for many different products (gas, paint, solder) until the 1970s, even into the 1980s for some products. My point here, and I have one, is that lead remained in such wide use because the companies that manufactured leaded gassoline paid for studies which stated that lead was safe.

I would have liked to have read more of the website, but my internet use is restricted at the moment.

I don't know if this has been said yet, but the answer is very simple. It's because of nations such as China and India. As they need more and more oil the prices continue to rise. Its simply supply and demand.

4. Oil companies and their reseller are so happy to pass on increases, but take forever to pass on decreases

Just to let you know the reseller generally makes about 1-2 cents off every gallon.

I would have liked to have read more of the website, but my internet use is restricted at the moment.

Take your time - I have been reduced to dial-up until my home is restored from hurricane damage. It sux.

Essentially the report shows that there never was any evidence that DDT was harmful to humans or the environment in the amounts that were being used. And you know what they say about an ounce of prevention... Regarding malaria it is even more so.

I have experience to back up what I am about to say: I worked for an environmental consulting company so I know the field. People runs statistics on the net effect of environmental regulation and it is NOT why prices are skyrocketing. The problem is that our ever increasing demand, brought about by the extremely greedy and shortsighted with no regard for sustainablility, is out pacing the increase in supply. If you want to be a million times smarter than your neighbor and/or most Americans about what's going on, look into two things, it'll only take a few minutes online. ONE: the economies of rapidly developing nations are coming online like western consumers with western demands. China and India each have ~ 1 billion people (approximately 3-4 times the US pop) with Indias growing much faster than Chinas. Only the naive always mention China as a population problem, India's birth rate is at least 5 times higher. And TWO- 'Peak Oil'. Read about it until you are sick of it and keep reading. The production of any UN-renewable resource always follows a bell curve. Once the finds of new fields don't equal the increase in consumption in the same year period, the pricing of that commodity enters a whole new era. Economists keep saying that we are no where near there yet, while GEOLOGISTS are saying we are peaking right now. If economist told you that a field should have even more corn next year, but the farmer said this year would be a low crop yield, who would you believe? Those who do not take this reality into consideration and plan for the future and are fooled by those who seek to decieve them for financial gain are going to be in a terrible place when gas hits 5 a gallon. Do you really think it would be good for the economy if our nation's leaders told us gas was getting scarcer? No? Then that's why you haven't heard it.

Take your time - I have been reduced to dial-up until my home is restored from hurricane damage. It sux.

Essentially the report shows that there never was any evidence that DDT was harmful to humans or the environment in the amounts that were being used. And you know what they say about an ounce of prevention... Regarding malaria it is even more so.

That's pretty interesting. So the massive losses in Bald Eagle populations were from something other than DDT? What was it? And why, when we stopped using DDT, did those populations recover?

BTW: We just had a Bald Eagle viewing festival in our town a week or so ago; the population's back up quite a bit these days, so one can actually see them. I'd hate to see them go away again.