|
Post by marjar on Feb 26, 2011 15:12:26 GMT -5
Thought I'd start a thread tracking gas prices.
Today, we are at 3.45. Earlier in the week we were at 3.35 for regular.
|
|
b2r
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:35:25 GMT -5
Posts: 7,257
|
Post by b2r on Feb 26, 2011 15:25:44 GMT -5
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on Feb 26, 2011 15:36:37 GMT -5
Lowest around here is $3.14, marjar. It's going up, I'm sure. That can be expected with all the goings on in the Middle East; however, we're so much more fortunate than most of the world in what we pay for our gasoline I find it really hard to complain too loudly.
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Feb 26, 2011 15:49:18 GMT -5
Thought I'd start a thread tracking gas prices. Today, we are at 3.45. Earlier in the week we were at 3.35 for regular. I went out at once when I heard of the increase and paid $3.13 a few days ago..up now to the 3.30's I think. Heard a explanation of why prices go up at once when gas per barrel goes up even though the gas in the tank had been purchased at a lesser price, thus not yet affected , from former CEO of Shell this week, was onm CNN. His explanation, the owner of the station, has no idea what he will be paying on his next tank of gas..there fore to be able to pay for it, next delivery, he has to raise prices to make sure he can cover the delivery. As far as why prices drop lower at a slower rate..it's what is happening around him, competitors..if he can hold off a bit on the reduction and still sell his product, it's a bit of extra profit for him. Hey, didn't say I agree, just reporting here. He also says, there is so much oil available here, USA, we will NOT run out , not saying never , but to worry about it...not necessary. So why don't we go for it? Decisions made , usually by the politicals..it's a dirty business, let some one else deal with the mess. However since we are sending so much $ off shore, to not increase production here is just stupid..just get us back to what we did produce, we produce so much less then what we use to, and again, it's here, he mentioned where, and as far as the political being the ones stopping, as he said, this year, nothing in any bills dealt with energy. Nada. Got to blame the present leadership on that one. Again, just reporting..but he made some very good arguments. name was John Hofmeister?{possible off on the last name, hard to read my own writing when I scribble, you can go google , Shell former CEO}
|
|
|
Post by privateinvestor on Feb 26, 2011 16:05:55 GMT -5
$3.98 for regular and $4.09 for premium gasoline plus the price of oil has been increased @$1.20 a quart...San Francisco South Bay area...
|
|
b2r
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:35:25 GMT -5
Posts: 7,257
|
Post by b2r on Feb 26, 2011 16:08:22 GMT -5
I don't know Dezi, you sound middle-right there.
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Feb 26, 2011 16:26:23 GMT -5
I don't know Dezi, you sound middle-right there. Heaven forbid...bite your tongue...Tenn, help here..can't you give a warning or something, where's moon when I need her.....the idea that I would..REALLY. I do like the idea that we have all that oil actually..and that the politicals, and we know who is in office now, and holding back? mmmm, shhhhhhhh
|
|
henryclay
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 5, 2011 19:03:37 GMT -5
Posts: 3,685
|
Post by henryclay on Feb 26, 2011 16:33:06 GMT -5
desi says we have to "blame the leadership". Well desi, we are on the same page there. And we are not alone. Just as using corn to produce ethanol, (which is worse on the environment than if it were not used), has caused food prices to skyrocket, Obama's approach to other energy production will only cause more displacements and rising prices in everything related to energy. The hardest hit will be industries that rely of massive energy consumption: airlines, railroads, water transportation, and electricity production. And farming itself doesn't happen in a vacuum, so food prices will also have to rise. "........If the president is truly serious about raising revenue, [NOTE: See the article below], then he should eliminate all energy-related tax preferences and let all sources compete—fair field, no favor. Short of that, he should at least subject ethanol to the same treatment he's giving to oil and gas......" We need a new president. "............The president's 2012 budget, released earlier this month, calls for eliminating a dozen tax incentives that benefit producers of coal, oil and natural gas. Mr. Obama is most eager to eliminate what he calls "costly tax cuts for oil companies." Big Oil has long been a plump piñata for politicos and environmental groups, but a simple cost-benefit analysis shows that eliminating decades-old tax rules for oil and gas could be a lousy deal for consumers. Two tax deductions for the oil and gas sector are most important: percentage depletion (part of the tax code since 1926) and intangible drilling costs (part of the tax code since 1913.) According to Mr. Obama's budget, those two items will cost taxpayers about $2.4 billion per year over the next decade. A handful of other oil- and gas-related tax policies, including an increase in the amortization period for geological and geophysical expenses, cost taxpayers an additional $2 billion per year. So the sector's total annual tax advantages amount to about $4.4 billion. Percentage depletion allows well owners to deduct a certain amount of the value of their production in a given year. It's significant, but the really important tax rule is the deduction for intangible drilling costs, or IDC. That allows drillers to immediately expense, rather than capitalize over years, many of the costs associated with drilling a well, including labor, supplies and fuel. The energy industry contends that the deduction encourages capital formation—and greater production—in their high-risk business. And many economists have long favored expensing to encourage capital formation throughout the economy. Still, even if we assume that the IDC deduction is in fact a subsidy, are consumers getting a tangible benefit? Consider natural gas. Thanks to the increasing use of horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing, U.S. gas production has soared over the past few years. The result: Methane prices are now about half what they were in 2008. Various studies—including one done in 2009 by Tudor, Pickering, Holt & Co., a Houston-based, energy-focused investment bank—predict that eliminating the deduction for intangible drilling costs could increase natural gas prices by 50 cents per thousand cubic feet. Their reasoning is simple: As the industry sees its costs increased and cash flow reduced, it will drill fewer wells and recover less gas. Given that the U.S. burns about 23 trillion cubic feet of gas per year, simple arithmetic shows that eliminating the deduction could mean an increased cost to consumers of $11.5 billion per year in the form of higher natural gas prices. Changing the tax rules could also slow the surprising resurgence of the U.S. oil industry. After decades of declining production, domestic drillers are increasing their oil output because they are tapping shale deposits with the same new techniques that have helped increase gas production. The result: Domestic oil output could jump by as much as one million barrels per day by 2015, according to the analytics firm Bentek Energy. This is great news for tax-starved local and state governments. And it's directly in line with one of the stated goals of Mr. Obama's 2012 budget: to "enhance our national security by reducing dependence on foreign oil." The president also wants to "break our dependence on oil with biofuels," as he said in his State of the Union address. But using biofuels to displace oil requires massive subsidies. Last year, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) reported that the cost to taxpayers of using corn ethanol to reduce gas consumption by one gallon is $1.78. This year, the corn ethanol sector will produce about 13.8 billion gallons of ethanol, the energy equivalent of about 9.1 billion gallons of gasoline. Using the CBO's numbers, that means the total cost to taxpayers this year for the ethanol boondoggle will be about $16.2 billion. That's compared to the $4.4 billion in foregone tax revenue for oil and gas tax rules. So annual ethanol subsidies are nearly four times as great as those provided for oil and gas, even though domestic drilling provides about 36 times as much energy to the U.S. economy. Per unit of energy produced, the tax preferences given to corn ethanol are 130 times as great as those given to oil and gas. If the president is truly serious about raising revenue, then he should eliminate all energy-related tax preferences and let all sources compete—fair field, no favor. Short of that, he should at least subject ethanol to the same treatment he's giving to oil and gas......" online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704900004576152431935573812.html
|
|
rockon
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 22, 2010 8:49:55 GMT -5
Posts: 2,384
|
Post by rockon on Feb 26, 2011 16:55:07 GMT -5
Damm Bush and Cheney!
|
|
|
Post by privateinvestor on Feb 26, 2011 16:57:46 GMT -5
It's all John Boehner fault since this gas price increase happened after he took the gavel from Nancy Pelosi....too bad Keith Olbermann is not around to play this for all it's worth on MSNBC But have no fear Chris Matthews and Rachel Maddow will pick up the torch
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Feb 26, 2011 17:06:03 GMT -5
desi says we have to "blame the leadership". Well desi, we are on the same page there. And we are not alone. Just as using corn to produce ethanol, (which is worse on the environment than if it were not used), has caused food prices to skyrocket, Obama's approach to other energy production will only cause more displacements and rising prices in everything related to energy. The hardest hit will be industries that rely of massive energy consumption: airlines, railroads, water transportation, and electricity production. And farming itself doesn't happen in a vacuum, so food prices will also have to rise. "........If the president is truly serious about raising revenue, [NOTE: See the article below], then he should eliminate all energy-related tax preferences and let all sources compete—fair field, no favor. Short of that, he should at least subject ethanol to the same treatment he's giving to oil and gas......" We need a new president. "............The president's 2012 budget, released earlier this month, calls for eliminating a dozen tax incentives that benefit producers of coal, oil and natural gas. Mr. Obama is most eager to eliminate what he calls "costly tax cuts for oil companies." Big Oil has long been a plump piñata for politicos and environmental groups, but a simple cost-benefit analysis shows that eliminating decades-old tax rules for oil and gas could be a lousy deal for consumers. Two tax deductions for the oil and gas sector are most important: percentage depletion (part of the tax code since 1926) and intangible drilling costs (part of the tax code since 1913.) According to Mr. Obama's budget, those two items will cost taxpayers about $2.4 billion per year over the next decade. A handful of other oil- and gas-related tax policies, including an increase in the amortization period for geological and geophysical expenses, cost taxpayers an additional $2 billion per year. So the sector's total annual tax advantages amount to about $4.4 billion. Percentage depletion allows well owners to deduct a certain amount of the value of their production in a given year. It's significant, but the really important tax rule is the deduction for intangible drilling costs, or IDC. That allows drillers to immediately expense, rather than capitalize over years, many of the costs associated with drilling a well, including labor, supplies and fuel. The energy industry contends that the deduction encourages capital formation—and greater production—in their high-risk business. And many economists have long favored expensing to encourage capital formation throughout the economy. Still, even if we assume that the IDC deduction is in fact a subsidy, are consumers getting a tangible benefit? Consider natural gas. Thanks to the increasing use of horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing, U.S. gas production has soared over the past few years. The result: Methane prices are now about half what they were in 2008. Various studies—including one done in 2009 by Tudor, Pickering, Holt & Co., a Houston-based, energy-focused investment bank—predict that eliminating the deduction for intangible drilling costs could increase natural gas prices by 50 cents per thousand cubic feet. Their reasoning is simple: As the industry sees its costs increased and cash flow reduced, it will drill fewer wells and recover less gas. Given that the U.S. burns about 23 trillion cubic feet of gas per year, simple arithmetic shows that eliminating the deduction could mean an increased cost to consumers of $11.5 billion per year in the form of higher natural gas prices. Changing the tax rules could also slow the surprising resurgence of the U.S. oil industry. After decades of declining production, domestic drillers are increasing their oil output because they are tapping shale deposits with the same new techniques that have helped increase gas production. The result: Domestic oil output could jump by as much as one million barrels per day by 2015, according to the analytics firm Bentek Energy. This is great news for tax-starved local and state governments. And it's directly in line with one of the stated goals of Mr. Obama's 2012 budget: to "enhance our national security by reducing dependence on foreign oil." The president also wants to "break our dependence on oil with biofuels," as he said in his State of the Union address. But using biofuels to displace oil requires massive subsidies. Last year, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) reported that the cost to taxpayers of using corn ethanol to reduce gas consumption by one gallon is $1.78. This year, the corn ethanol sector will produce about 13.8 billion gallons of ethanol, the energy equivalent of about 9.1 billion gallons of gasoline. Using the CBO's numbers, that means the total cost to taxpayers this year for the ethanol boondoggle will be about $16.2 billion. That's compared to the $4.4 billion in foregone tax revenue for oil and gas tax rules. So annual ethanol subsidies are nearly four times as great as those provided for oil and gas, even though domestic drilling provides about 36 times as much energy to the U.S. economy. Per unit of energy produced, the tax preferences given to corn ethanol are 130 times as great as those given to oil and gas. If the president is truly serious about raising revenue, then he should eliminate all energy-related tax preferences and let all sources compete—fair field, no favor. Short of that, he should at least subject ethanol to the same treatment he's giving to oil and gas......" online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704900004576152431935573812.htmlIt seems that the oil Companies in many cases are reluctant to drill here and spend the $ here as it is more expensive and they would rather drill and explore elsewhere. If that is true...as the Shell former CEO says plenty of oikln here, what about the government taking control of their[our} own resources...spend the $ and hire independent qualified oil explorers, understand there are m,any, let them explore..work on a % with them and then the oil they find, the CEO says it's there, the nation owns it's own resources...the nation, you and I...profit in the find, rather then the oil companies?
|
|
Mad Dawg Wiccan
Administrator
Rest in Peace
Only Bites Whiners
Joined: Jan 12, 2011 20:40:24 GMT -5
Posts: 9,693
|
Post by Mad Dawg Wiccan on Feb 26, 2011 17:16:57 GMT -5
$3.89 for regular here.
|
|
henryclay
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 5, 2011 19:03:37 GMT -5
Posts: 3,685
|
Post by henryclay on Feb 26, 2011 17:17:01 GMT -5
desi, desi. desi, , , , What aee we going to do with you? Have you completely lost your way? You're singing Sarah Palin's, (and Alaska's), theme song.
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Feb 26, 2011 17:19:55 GMT -5
desi, desi. desi, , , , What aee we going to do with you? Have you completely lost your way? You're singing Sarah Palin's, (and Alaska's), theme song. Don't like that idea? Ok..probably a law against but why not get a better piece of the action...also nudge the oil companies to go find the oil...
|
|
b2r
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:35:25 GMT -5
Posts: 7,257
|
Post by b2r on Feb 26, 2011 17:22:54 GMT -5
Governor Sean Parnell: "Let Alaska help put America back to work"With uncertainty spreading across the Middle East the current Governor of Alaska, Sean Parnell, is on a mission to open his state to more oil exploration. Parnell, not to be confused with his predecessor, the other famous Alaskan with the initials SP, spoke at the National Press Club in Washington and emphasized that America’s security is at stake if our nation’s oil supply continues to come from unstable areas and unfriendly regimes. “More domestic oil production, not less, better secures our nation and grows our jobs at home.” Oil production in Alaska has long been a matter of fierce political debate, particularly whether companies should be able to drill in the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve and offshore oil drilling. Alaska has been targeted in the moratorium since the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. In a press conference on May 27, 2010 President Obama said, “We will suspend the planned exploration of two locations off the coast of Alaska.” Originally scheduled to expire in November, the moratorium was lifted in October because pressure from oil and fishery businesses. However, regulators at Interior Department have yet to issue permits due to the strict safety regulations imposed after the Horizon oil spill. There has been no exploration in US waters deeper than 500 feet since BP’s explosion in April. www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CCgQqQIwAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fblogs.abcnews.com%2Fthenote%2F2011%2F02%2Fgovernor-sean-parnell-let-alaska-help-put-america-back-to-work.html&ei=Q3xpTYezLIGasAOgutimBA&usg=AFQjCNGwdMnjahz2yInEPbIP3wuLz0Sgmg
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Feb 26, 2011 17:27:00 GMT -5
Heres a funny one..though have to say, it probably won't be the last one..people are starting to go a bit koo koo...wait till we are over $4 per gallon.. ___________________________________________________ www.nola.com/crime/index.ssf/2011/02/motorist_dials_9-1-1_over_risi.html---------------------------------------------------------- Motorist dials 9-1-1 over rising gas prices Published: Friday, February 25, 2011, 4:59 PM Updated: Friday, February 25, 2011, 8:29 PM By Lori Lyons, The Times-Picayune "The complaints that the St. John the Baptist Parish Sheriff's Office receives on a daily basis run the gamut from the mundane loud barking dog to the routine reports of speeders, to the make-you-shake-your head-and-say-what? calls about "my child is refusing to go to school." But the call that came through on Thursday caught even veteran law enforcement officials off guard and perhaps created a new category: Way out of the ordinary" ------------------------------------------------- {click on link to read article}
|
|
|
Post by privateinvestor on Feb 26, 2011 17:36:47 GMT -5
For Californians, the revolutions burning through the Middle East could bring the return of $4 gas. The state's average price for a gallon of regular topped $3.60 on Thursday, up 10 cents in the past week alone. San Francisco's average hit $3.66, while San Jose's reached $3.62, according to the AAA auto service. For more than a year, Californians have had to deal with gasoline that costs about $3 per gallon or more - expensive by historic standards. But not since October 2008 have prices been this high. The violent upheaval in Libya, a member of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries, has pushed oil prices back to $100 per barrel, a level not seen since the financial meltdown two years ago. Oil futures sold on the New York Mercantile Exchange closed Thursday at $97.28 after crossing the $100 mark on Wednesday. If the uprisings that have already toppled governments in Egypt and Tunisia spread to the region's major oil producers - such as Saudi Arabia, Iran or Kuwait - oil prices will soar and take gasoline prices with them. They could shatter California's previous gas-price record - $4.61, set in June 2008. "Very bad things could happen," said Severin Borenstein, director of the University of California Energy Institute in Berkeley. "If Saudi Arabia gets taken offline, the price doubles, at least." If oil prices stay roughly where they are, California's gasoline prices will probably stay in the range of $3.70 per gallon, he said. $130 per barrel "Oil prices would have to go higher for us to get to $4 per gallon," Borenstein said. The last time California's average gasoline price hit $4, oil cost about $130 per barrel. California's average now stands 37 cents per gallon higher than the national average, which reached $3.23 on Thursday. Gasoline here typically costs 25 to 35 cents more than it does elsewhere in the nation, the result of California's high taxes and its use of unique pollution-fighting gasoline blends used in no other state. The "California premium" that Golden State drivers pay has grown larger than usual this month because of timing. The uprisings in the Middle East came at a time of year when California's oil refineries typically cut their production, perform maintenance, and switch to making the state's summer blend of gasoline - a process called "turnaround." Production slows As a result, worldwide oil prices started climbing just when the state's gasoline production slowed. Valero's refinery in Benicia, for example, restarted production this week after undergoing extensive maintenance in January and February. "There are a couple of turnarounds still going on, and they're probably going to be wrapped up in the next few weeks," said Denton Cinquegrana, senior editor for West Coast fuel markets at the Oil Price Information Service. He added, however, that the state and the country both have adequate supplies of gasoline to meet demand. "Supplies in California and the rest of the country have been nowhere near as dire as you might think from these prices," Cinquegrana said. Despite sluggish demand in North America, gasoline and oil prices throughout the economic downturn have stayed high by historic standards. Oil traded between $75 and $85 for most of 2010, a level that economists once feared could lead to a recession. California's average price for regular gas hovered between $3 and $3.20 for most of the year. The current run-up in gas and oil prices, therefore, started from a level that was already high. No choice for some "It's ridiculous," said Andre Manzoni, who paid $3.91 to fill up in San Francisco on Thursday. A pizza deliveryman, he has no choice but to pay. "Me? I can't take Muni to work, I can't take a bike to work," said Manzoni, 32. "I have to drive. I'm so frustrated with this." Manzoni, who has family in Brazil, wondered why the United States hasn't moved more aggressively to promote alternatives to oil, such as biofuels or electric cars. Brazil relies heavily on ethanol, which the country makes from sugar cane. "This fossil fuel one day is going to be out," he said. "We should make the investment and do something different, like Brazil does." It remains to be seen whether the rising prices will force Americans to drive less, the way they did in 2008. That will probably depend on how long the high prices last, said Andrew Clyde, a partner with the energy practice of consulting firm Booz & Co. "My sense is, this is a point where consumers look at (the price) closely and say, 'OK, do I need to change my habits?' " he said. "But we're not at the point where people say, 'OK, I need to cut my summer vacation, I need to trade in the truck.' " E-mail David R. Baker at dbaker@sfchronicle.com. sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/02/25/BUR81HU8RR.DTLThis article appeared on page D - 1 of the San Francisco Chronicle
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,386
|
Post by billisonboard on Feb 26, 2011 17:38:10 GMT -5
Out of the mouth of babe's:
My great-great-great-great-grandson said, "They might have run up a huge debt we are still attempting to pay off but at least the bastards didn't pump all the oil out of the ground here in the states so they could save a few pennies on gas."
|
|
henryclay
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 5, 2011 19:03:37 GMT -5
Posts: 3,685
|
Post by henryclay on Feb 26, 2011 17:40:40 GMT -5
"............The AAA gauge of national averages showed a 6 cent increase from Thursday to Friday, the biggest one-day jump in two years ..........."
HAH!! I wish the triple A had been with me whenI gassed up Thursday night on the way home from work. Gas was up 20 cents a gallon from what it was when I came to work that morning.
Admittedly, at $3.29 9/10th a gallon it is still cheaper than a lot of places. But a 20 cent rise in one day was a first class attention getter.
I wonder how long gasoline is good for in a storage tank. If I was to find a 100 gallon tank and fill it up, it'd take me a year to use it all, and who can guess the price of gasoline a year from now?
|
|
|
Post by privateinvestor on Feb 26, 2011 18:08:40 GMT -5
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Feb 26, 2011 19:32:26 GMT -5
For Californians, the revolutions burning through the Middle East could bring the return of $4 gas. The state's average price for a gallon of regular topped $3.60 on Thursday, up 10 cents in the past week alone. San Francisco's average hit $3.66, while San Jose's reached $3.62, according to the AAA auto service. For more than a year, Californians have had to deal with gasoline that costs about $3 per gallon or more - expensive by historic standards. But not since October 2008 have prices been this high. The violent upheaval in Libya, a member of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries, has pushed oil prices back to $100 per barrel, a level not seen since the financial meltdown two years ago. Oil futures sold on the New York Mercantile Exchange closed Thursday at $97.28 after crossing the $100 mark on Wednesday. If the uprisings that have already toppled governments in Egypt and Tunisia spread to the region's major oil producers - such as Saudi Arabia, Iran or Kuwait - oil prices will soar and take gasoline prices with them. They could shatter California's previous gas-price record - $4.61, set in June 2008. "Very bad things could happen," said Severin Borenstein, director of the University of California Energy Institute in Berkeley. "If Saudi Arabia gets taken offline, the price doubles, at least." If oil prices stay roughly where they are, California's gasoline prices will probably stay in the range of $3.70 per gallon, he said. $130 per barrel "Oil prices would have to go higher for us to get to $4 per gallon," Borenstein said. The last time California's average gasoline price hit $4, oil cost about $130 per barrel. California's average now stands 37 cents per gallon higher than the national average, which reached $3.23 on Thursday. Gasoline here typically costs 25 to 35 cents more than it does elsewhere in the nation, the result of California's high taxes and its use of unique pollution-fighting gasoline blends used in no other state. The "California premium" that Golden State drivers pay has grown larger than usual this month because of timing. The uprisings in the Middle East came at a time of year when California's oil refineries typically cut their production, perform maintenance, and switch to making the state's summer blend of gasoline - a process called "turnaround." Production slows As a result, worldwide oil prices started climbing just when the state's gasoline production slowed. Valero's refinery in Benicia, for example, restarted production this week after undergoing extensive maintenance in January and February. "There are a couple of turnarounds still going on, and they're probably going to be wrapped up in the next few weeks," said Denton Cinquegrana, senior editor for West Coast fuel markets at the Oil Price Information Service. He added, however, that the state and the country both have adequate supplies of gasoline to meet demand. "Supplies in California and the rest of the country have been nowhere near as dire as you might think from these prices," Cinquegrana said. Despite sluggish demand in North America, gasoline and oil prices throughout the economic downturn have stayed high by historic standards. Oil traded between $75 and $85 for most of 2010, a level that economists once feared could lead to a recession. California's average price for regular gas hovered between $3 and $3.20 for most of the year. The current run-up in gas and oil prices, therefore, started from a level that was already high. No choice for some "It's ridiculous," said Andre Manzoni, who paid $3.91 to fill up in San Francisco on Thursday. A pizza deliveryman, he has no choice but to pay. "Me? I can't take Muni to work, I can't take a bike to work," said Manzoni, 32. "I have to drive. I'm so frustrated with this." Manzoni, who has family in Brazil, wondered why the United States hasn't moved more aggressively to promote alternatives to oil, such as biofuels or electric cars. Brazil relies heavily on ethanol, which the country makes from sugar cane. "This fossil fuel one day is going to be out," he said. "We should make the investment and do something different, like Brazil does." It remains to be seen whether the rising prices will force Americans to drive less, the way they did in 2008. That will probably depend on how long the high prices last, said Andrew Clyde, a partner with the energy practice of consulting firm Booz & Co. "My sense is, this is a point where consumers look at (the price) closely and say, 'OK, do I need to change my habits?' " he said. "But we're not at the point where people say, 'OK, I need to cut my summer vacation, I need to trade in the truck.' " E-mail David R. Baker at dbaker@sfchronicle.com. sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/02/25/BUR81HU8RR.DTLThis article appeared on page D - 1 of the San Francisco Chronicle "The last time California's average gasoline price hit $4, oil cost about $130 per barrel." That was then , a while ago, today the transportation cost are higher as all other axillary costs so adding then into it, easily beat the last hi price if it does go that high..possible.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Mar 28, 2024 15:15:00 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 26, 2011 23:50:46 GMT -5
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Feb 27, 2011 0:00:42 GMT -5
Weve had it good on Gas prices compared to many places for years....there was the going to 55 as a speed limit remember..think any one will try to bring that back?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Mar 28, 2024 15:15:00 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 27, 2011 0:29:44 GMT -5
I think SO many of the ways gov't tries to control people's behavior have failed, that one was one... I don't know. New people in high places, who knows?? Dez-- we always end up alone here. Should we get married or something?? LOL!! No-- we would counter link each other to death!!!
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Feb 27, 2011 1:05:05 GMT -5
I think SO many of the ways gov't tries to control people's behavior have failed, that one was one... I don't know. New people in high places, who knows?? Dez-- we always end up alone here. Should we get married or something?? LOL!! No-- we would counter link each other to death!!! I was on the road when that was enacted..I drove at 60, no problem...In believe it saved a lot of lives, believe it also saved gas, lots of it. If I drove a 100 miles straight..it took me a hour. I think I saved what, 10 minutes if I drove 70? I understand way out West, hugh areas , no one there...so there let them go faster, but where the people are, using so much fuel..so many cars..55 was fine, ass long as they let you go 60. Well know go whatever and gas will cost what again?
|
|
deziloooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 16:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 10,723
|
Post by deziloooooo on Feb 27, 2011 20:36:46 GMT -5
Well if you go to the UK this summer..that $10 per gallon or lieter, what ever it is..it will probably be there waiting for you if you rent a car. ------------------------------------------------------------ www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2011/02/26/Gas-shoots-to-967-a-gallon-in-Britain/UPI-78851298704546/----------------------------------------------------- Gas shoots to $9.67 a gallon in Britain PrintGas shoots to $9.67 a gallon in Britain Published: Feb. 26, 2011 at 2:15 AM LONDON, Feb. 26 (UPI) -- Motorists are paying $9.67 a gallon for gas in Britain this week as the turmoil in the Middle East roils the oil industry, a trade group says. RMI Petrol, the British service station association, said the 6-pound barrier had been broken at 267 filling stations and the number would continue to rise quickly in the coming days and become the norm by the middle of next week, The Daily Telegraph reported Friday. "This is further bad news for motorists and forecourts [gas stations] as this increase looks set to coincide with the introduction of the ill thought out fuel duty escalator ...," RMI Petrol Chairman Brian Madderson said. Paul Watters of the AA agrees. "Drivers are going to have to brace themselves for a significant increase in fuel prices ... in coming days," he said. "Further increases will depend on how long troubles in the Middle East and north Africa continue. We hope that, once these subside or OPEC intervenes to boost oil supply, a drop in oil prices will filter through as quickly to the pumps
|
|
hello fromWarsaw
Senior Member
Hiya! Wake UP!!
Joined: Feb 13, 2011 1:24:04 GMT -5
Posts: 2,044
|
Post by hello fromWarsaw on Feb 27, 2011 21:01:50 GMT -5
Hope the turd/pub speculators are making a mint, though Saudi said they would make make up any shortfall. Also thanks to bought off Pubs for blocking Dem efforts to limit this kind of crappe... Congrats to the people of the MidEast for the new era there, and farther....
|
|
vonnie6200
Senior Member
Adopt a Shelter Pet
Joined: Jan 8, 2011 14:07:17 GMT -5
Posts: 2,199
|
Post by vonnie6200 on Feb 27, 2011 21:05:10 GMT -5
Hope the turd/pub speculators are making a mint, though Saudi said they would make make up any shortfall. Also thanks to bought off Pubs for blocking Dem efforts to limit this kind of crappe... Congrats to the people of the MidEast for the new era there, and farther.... uh - what are you trying to say?
|
|
handyman2
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 29, 2010 23:56:33 GMT -5
Posts: 3,087
|
Post by handyman2 on Feb 27, 2011 21:10:37 GMT -5
WEll it may or may not hurt oil prices but the attack that put Iraqs major refinery out of commision yesterday may cause panick and make gas jump even more. Seems every bit of news causes gas prices to jump even when there is adequate supplies just now. Here it is $1.35 and had increased twice in one day.
|
|
|
Post by ty on Feb 28, 2011 0:05:25 GMT -5
We are at 3.28 here. They say we should be expecting $4 to $5 by Memorial day if the war in Libya continues.
|
|