Anyone want to know why oil prices have been rising dramatically in the last two years? This chart from the very cautious U.S. Energy Information Administration (part of the U.S. Dept. of Energy) says a lot....

 

http://www.theoildrum.com/uploads/12/monthly_total_jan06.jpg

 

Production typically matches consumption 1:1. While demand for oil continues to rise at rates similar to those before 2004, production has not kept up. In fact, this chart shows production leveling off.

 

Could production start to decline?

 

Yes, and very soon. Consider this next graphic and the information at the bottom of it...

 

http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/images/NA-AH703_MEXOIL_20060208202012.gif

 

If Ghawar is past its peak, then world oil production is past its peak. Many of these huge, older fields are being kept up by injecting sea water, CO2 and NO into them. The United Arab Emrites did the same thing in the 1980s and 90s and their major oil field's production didn't just wane as it got older -- it collapsed.

 

Of course, this weekend's attacks in Nigeria, the U.S.'s fifth-largest oil supplier will cause some havoc in the oil markets this week. Don't be surprised to see prices spike at your local gas station soon. Fill your tanks before Tuesday, IMO.

Here's a link to a new print advertisement by Exxon, claiming that "Peak Oil" scenario's aren't true.  I don't believe them (Exxon), but in the interest of balance....

 

http://www2.exxonmobil.com/Corporate/Files/Corporate/OpEd_peakoil.pdf

 

 

As long as we're doing a balancing act, here's a link to an advertising campaign by Chevron to warn people about peak oil and to comtemplate solutions and alternatives now, before it's too late....

 

http://www.willyoujoinus.com/

^ Awesome. Everyone at the office loved it!

^^ When will the new round of riots start.  :roll: :-D

Holy smoke! Even the off-peak trains are full and sometimes have standees leaving Chicago, because of the way equipment is allocated for maintenance and rush-hour capacity. Headed for Indiana, I always go to Randolph Street to board, in order to have a seat. Board anywhere south of Van Buren, and you can be almost sure of standing until at least Hegewisch, and most likely Hammond.

 

They already need more cars.

 

http://www.fortwayne.com/mld/journalgazette/news/local/14164523.htm?source=rss&channel=journalgazette_local

Rail line weighs adding 1st double-decker cars

 

Associated Press

 

Michigan City - The managers of northern Indiana's commuter rail line are working on a $40 million plan to buy a dozen new passenger cars, including possibly some double-deckers.

 

The additional cars are needed as the South Shore rail system saw its ridership grow by 7.3 percent last year, which has been followed by a 10.7 percent increase for the first two months of this year.

Maybe somebody has already brought this up, but I missed it:

 

Will peak oil, in itself, trigger increased, self-perpetuating instability in the Gulf region? The oil-producing countries support over-inflated economies with the revenue from oil exports; when their reserves are diminished and other countries develop alternative energy sources, the oil revenues will be sharply curtailed. Do the oil-producing countries have any prospects or strategies for keeping their economies from going into sharp decline?

 

Economic collapse historically has triggered political upheaval that has spilled across international borders. It's not hard to visualize a cycle in which diminishing oil exports lead to political unrest that destabilizes govenments and sharply accelerates the decline of oil production.

 

http://www.toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060330/BUSINESS06/603300375/-1/BUSINESS

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Article published March 30, 2006

 

Ethanol not cure-all, speaker warns

 

 

Although ethanol has gotten a lot of hype as an alternative fuel, it's only a partial solution to America's dependence on oil, an executive of the Maumee firm building two ethanol plants told area econmic development officials yesterday.

 

"It just postpones the real reckoning we have coming," said Neill McKinstray, vice president and general manager for ethanol for The Andersons Inc.

 

But such ethanol production will pump hundreds of millions of dollars into the Midwest economy annually, he said, addressing the annual meeting of the Northwest Ohio Regional Economic Development Association, representing 11 area counties.

Will peak oil, in itself, trigger increased, self-perpetuating instability in the Gulf region?

 

That's a distinct possibility, which is one reason why the nations continue to say they have more oil than they almost certainly possess. Their initial reason for overstating their reserves relates to OPEC's quota system, in which countries having more reserves are allowed to sell more oil. But now there is an additional reason -- having more oil gives those nations more political security and stability.

 

Ironically, it is Saudi Arabia (which has the most oil) is likely the most vulnerable. The reason isn't limited to the royal family's corruption or that a third of its citizenry is unemployed. More so, the royal family may have sown the seeds for its own destruction by promoting the fundamentalist religious teachings of the Wahabi in schools -- teachings which run counter to the ultra-excessive ways of the Saudi Royal Family.

 

However, even as oil supplies peak and begin to fall, the oil revenues will keep flowing in to the Middle East as prices continue to rise. But their oil customers, especially the U.S. will also probably cut back on what they can affordably consume, and that's where the Middle East becomes at risk of instability.

 

Nations of the Middle East will need to diversify their economies, which is what the United Arab Emirates has been doing. Their leaders recognize that the days of ever-increasing oil production aren't going to last. Their largest oil field began going into decline several years ago after attempts to inject sea water into it to force more oil out damaged its production capacities. Now they are investing their oil revenues in things like manufacturing, shipping, banking and tourism while building light rail transit and alternative energy sources.

EPRI chief sees carbon-free generation growing by 2020

March 31, 2006 5:01 PM

By Wayne Barber

 

The United States and much of the world could have a sizable amount of emissions-free generation online by 2020, ranging from nuclear to renewable energy, Electric Power Research Institute President and CEO Steve Specker said in a March 30 presentation in Washington, D.C.

 

"We have an extraordinary opportunity to develop this low-carbon portfolio," Specker told the nonpartisan Resources for the Future policy group. This can be accomplished through a mix of new nuclear power plants, larger and more efficient wind energy turbines and also coal. "We have to move very fast," Specker said.

 

http://www.snl.com/InteractiveX/article.aspx?CDID=A-2418138-13153

As we march toward $3 per gallon, before the busy summer driving season and without the aid of a hurricane, I thought you all might find interesting a California DOT-commissioned report from 2003, with lots of data that's applicable to the rest of the nation.

 

For those of you doing urban planning in a post-cheap oil world, this link might be worth bookmarking for future and frequent reference...

 

http://www.jfaucett.com/caltransenergy/

 

The executive summary is worth reading even if you're not an urban planner.

Here is a cogent analysis from another website that puts a more grave light on the oil situation (if that were even possible!):

 

The concept I present to you today is Net Oil. When one understands the concept of net oil it quickly becomes apparent that the situation is far more dire then Peak Oil leads you to believe.

 

Peak Oil is based on the logic of Marion King Hubbert's curve which states that when half the world's oil is gone the rate of oil extraction will peak and decline. The Hubbert curve roughly resembles a bell shaped curve. After the peak is reached the world will have less oil every year. The results of peak oil will be at the very least an end to infinite growth replaced by perpetual economic and social decline possibly which only may lead to societal collapse. The process will take a long time after all half of the worlds oil still remains to be extracted after the peak.

 

If Peak Oil represents a long emergency of slow energy decline then net oil represents an apocalyptic end to energy as we know it. The concept of Net Oil is based on Energy Returned on Energy Invested or EROEI. It can easily be explained by this simple equation any economist will recognize.

 

Profit (Net Oil) = Revenue (Oil Outputs) - Costs (Oil Inputs)

 

Oil has been so cheap from an EROEI perspective over the last 140 years that it is easy to assume pumping oil has no costs. With an average EROEI of 30 to 1 return on energy investment in the last century all oil pumped for all practical purposes is profit or (Net Oil). The world Average EROEI has been falling for years and right now is around 15. So if the world is pumping 85 MBPD then put into the Net Oil Equation it looks something like this.

 

Net Oil = 85 MBPD - 5.67 MBPD = 79.33 MBPD.

 

Net Oil dares to ask the question of how much useful energy or how much Net Oil is left in the ground after the peak of oil production. The first half of the worlds oil extracted had a very high EROEI. Some times approaching 50 to 1 Net Oil capture. In the last 140 years humans have pumped out almost 1 trillion barrels of oil and almost all of that was net oil. The oil we must extract over the next few decades will have much lower EROEI. The full implications of this are dire to say the least. It means that of the oil that remains very little of it will be net oil. Over 80% or the all useful energy may have already been consumed leaving only 20% of the world's total energy for the future uses.

 

Net Oil helps explain the the so called missing barrels of oil production in recent years. In the last five years oil world production has increased by 9 MBPD from 76 MBPD in 2001 to 85 MBPD in early 2006. Not all of this increase can be accounted for by normal demand. Chinese demand has grown hugely every year and has doubled to incease by 3 MBPD. American demand has increased by 1 MBPD but Europe and Japan have added none and India has only inceased silightly compared to Chinese growth. Roughly 4 MBPD can no longer be accounted for. The new oil coming online has much lower EROEI then past oil and older fields are also dropping in EROEI. The tapping of unconventional heavy oils has lead to an increase in unconventional demand to process those oils. The 4 MBPD that cannot be accounted for is energy that is used to pump out the inceasingly more difficult to extract oil. In the next five years Saudi Arabia plans to increase funding for oil extraction by 50 billion dollars. Much of that will go to pay for creased energy costs in the Net Oil Equation.

 

World Oil production may very well increase to 100 MBPD in the coming years but the cost in lower EROEI undoubtably will rise. If the EROEI falls to 5 then 20 MBPD of that 100 MBPD will simply by associated with the cost of pumping that said oil thus leaving only 80 MBPD for other uses. When the EROEI drops below 5 the world will come to a breaking point which will witness apocalyptic declines in useful energy. If EROEI declines from 5 to 4 then that represents a 20% net energy decline. The much promoted tar sands only have an EROEI of 2. If we do manage to get 5 MBPD from tar sands only the half of that will be net oil. Many older nearly depleted American wells only have EROEI of 2. Other great wells of the world are declining as well not just in output but EROEI as well.

 

If you were to graph the Net Oil curve it would look like a cliff with massive year after year declines when the breaking point occures. Even if absolute production keeps up the amount of useful energy will decline at rates many times greater then Hubbert model declines. Society as we know it would not survive such massive declines in useful energy.

 

Gallon of gas may hit $3 level once again

Rising usage, tightness of inventories among reasons, experts say

Saturday, April 08, 2006

Paul Wilson

THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH

 

 

After watching gasoline prices rise nearly 30 cents a gallon during the past month, drivers are starting to ask whether $3 a gallon is on the way back.

 

The best guess? Yes.

 

"I don’t expect a national average of $3, but you will see $3 in some markets," said Bill O’Grady, an energy analyst at A.G. Edwards in St. Louis. "And $3.50 wouldn’t shock me in some markets."

 

A gallon of unleaded regular cost an average of $2.61 nationally yesterday, up from $2.34 a month ago and $2.23 a year ago, according to AAA. Prices in central Ohio have made a similar climb but are slightly lower at $2.53 a gallon on average.

 

Information from Knight Ridder Newspapers was included in this story.

 

[email protected]

 

http://dispatch.com/business-story.php?story=dispatch/2006/04/08/20060408-A1-01.html

 

Gas-price spike could hit Columbus hard

Saturday, April 08, 2006

Monique Curet

THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH

 

Columbus residents’ love of driving could cost the city big if oil prices rise high enough, a study predicts.

 

Columbus ranked 45 th among the country’s 50 largest cities in its preparedness for an oil crisis, according to SustainLane.com, a Web site focused on environmental and lifestyle issues.

 

( http://sustainlane.com/ )

 

The site says the ranking "reveals how well . . . cities would maintain economic vitality and quality of life in the face of exorbitant gas prices."

 

[email protected]

http://dispatch.com/business-story.php?story=dispatch/2006/04/08/20060408-D1-02.html

U.S. Cities’ Preparedness for an Oil Crisis

Sustainlane.com

 

This is a Tale of Two Types of Cities.

 

One type of city has a dense, walkable center with cultural attractions, jobs, farmers markets, and residential neighborhoods easily accessible by foot, bike, or public transit. The other type has lower density, a poorly or undefined center, separate centers of business and residential life, and is generally only accessible by car. 

 

We compared these two fundamental types of cities’ underlying infrastructure, food and mobility as part of an economic competitiveness analysis.  With gas prices on the rise and $3 or $4 a gallon gas on the horizon, SustainLane.com took a close look at the 50 largest U.S. cities to see which are most prepared and which are most vulnerable to an extended gas price shock in the $3 to $8 dollar a gallon range. Those cities that can reduce or stabilize their spending on gasoline will keep substantially more money in their state’s economy, rather than siphoning it overseas.

 

http://sustainlane.com/article/747//U.S.+Cities%92+Preparedness+for+an+Oil+Crisis.html

Glad to see Cleveland is rated 17th. That's not too shabby. But how can Phoenix be at 22? Or Las Vegas at 28? I would think those sprawling, land-locked cities would rank much more poorly. And where's Cincinnati on the list?

 

Of course, if the net oil model is right, then the place to be isn't in any of these cities.  The place to be is out in the sticks, learning how to hunt and gather berries.

Bodman: Brace for summer gas pains

Energy Secretary says there could be some shortages or price spikes coming soon.

April 7, 2006: 6:08 PM EDT

 

BATAVIA, Ill. (Reuters) - Consumers may face gasoline shortages or price hikes at the pump this summer due to fuel additive changes at refineries and a likely strong hurricane season, Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman said Friday.

 

"We face a combination of factors that could mean some localized shortages," Bodman said in an interview with Reuters, adding that the markets should sort themselves out quickly.

 

Find this article at:

http://money.cnn.com/2006/04/07/news/economy/gas_supplies.reut/index.htm?cnn=yes 

 

Gas costs expected to be high this summer

Associated Press

Tuesday, April 11, 2006 8:51 AM

 

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Pump prices for gasoline are rising with the temperature, and motorists should expect little relief during this summer's heavy driving period, the government reported today.

 

The Energy Department's new seasonal outlook projects the price for regular grade gasoline this summer will average $2.62 a gallon, 25 cents higher than last summer, barring any unexpected supply disruptions.

Gasoline prices have soared since February.

 

http://dispatch.com/news-story.php?story=178920

When will twits like this drop out of the "we-re-getting-gouged-at-the-pump" parade.  Of course we're getting nailed at the pump!  But nothing this SNP editor suggests is going to prevent oil companies from maximizing their profits while they still have oil in the ground.  The point is that oil is running out and people like Mr. Meyer need to start calling for real answers to becoming truly energy independent.  In other words: use less oil anbd gasoline.

 

Instead, Meyer adds his name to the long list of opinion leaders who fail to see that diversifying our transportation systems to provide more, better and easier choices is a major way to tell the oil companies their product is needed less... or not at all.

 

Daily gas gouge demands changes

 

By JOE MEYER

(Columbus) Suburban News Publications Editor

 

When it looks like a gouge and feels like a gouge, is it really a gouge? You bet your eyeballs it is.

 

The subject here is being gouged at the gas station. I'm talking about exorbitant gasoline prices bringing record profits to the oil producers, oil refiners, oil distributors, oil futures traders and yes, oil retailers -- our friendly local gas stations.

 

Here's the deal. Gas prices are high. They're going to stay high. Because you and I aren't doing anything about it. Because you and I are hardly making a peep about it.

 

http://www.snponline.com/COMMENTARY/weekly/4-12_alljmgascolumn.htm

"we can shop around for the best gas prices locally"- And burn more gas (and time) to save a nickel?

Who's to blame for high gas prices?

Politicians propose legislation that would increase regulatory scrutiny of Big Oil -- but fail to mention that voters could maybe give up the giant SUVs.

By Nelson D. Schwartz, FORTUNE senior writer

April 13, 2006: 9:59 AM EDT

 

LONDON (FORTUNE) - Spring is not even a month old but it's already promising to be a long hot summer for American drivers. Gasoline prices are surging toward highs not seen since the wake of Hurricane Katrina last fall - the national average now stands at $2.68 a gallon - and some experts are predicting $3.00 a gallon before long.

 

Consumers aren't the only ones feeling the heat, though - on Capitol Hill, politicians are scrambling to head off the anger of constituents furious about having to spend $50 each time they fuel up their Honda (Research) Accord or Ford (Research) Taurus and roughly double that to fill the tank of a maxi-SUV.

 

Plugged In is a daily column by writers of FORTUNE magazine. Today's columnist, Nelson D. Schwartz, can be reached at [email protected].

 

Find this article at:

http://money.cnn.com/2006/04/12/magazines/fortune/pluggedin_fortune/index.htm?cnn=yes 

 

"It made for great theater but I was amazed that the Senators, including liberal Democrats, barely mentioned fuel efficiency and conservation in their public remarks."

 

And I am amazed that the media largely still doesn't get the link between transportation mode, land use, and energy consumption.

 

Many of my former colleagues in the TV news business still have trouble getting their arms around anything more complicated than the nightly "pump price patrol". 

 

from the April 13, 2006 edition - http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0413/p09s02-coop.html

 

Tame oil's wild price ride with a tax

Volatile oil prices keep energy companies from investing in alternatives.

By Henry Lee

 

CAMBRIDGE, MASS. - With the onslaught of high oil prices, war in the Middle East, an increasingly bellicose Iran, and the aftermath of hurricane Katrina, energy security has reemerged as a major public policy priority.

 

We have been here before, and the responses from elected officials have been quite predictable: find scapegoats (usually the oil companies), demand subsidies for the energy technology of the month, and point out that the country lacks a coherent national energy policy.

 

Demand for gas may be slowing as prices increase

Consumption could even stall, some analysts say

Sunday, April 16, 2006

Brad Foss

ASSOCIATED PRESS

 

 

U.S. motorists will spend an estimated $20.5 billion more on gasoline in the next six months than they did during the same period last year, the government says, because of higher prices and increased demand. But they’re not happy about the trend and might just drive less.

 

"That’s it? That’s it for 20 bucks?" said Laurie Payne of Plano, Texas, as she topped of the tank of her Land Rover with $2.85-a-gallon regular unleaded, vowing that the day she trades it in is getting closer.

 

http://dispatch.com/business-story.php?story=dispatch/2006/04/16/20060416-G1-00.html

 

Demand for gas may be slowing as prices increase

Consumption could even stall, some analysts say

Sunday, April 16, 2006

Brad Foss

ASSOCIATED PRESS

 

 

... In some instances, the high price of energy might even spur consumer spending. Los Angeles firefighter Dan Marsh, who commutes 56 miles a day, said he is considering trading in his Ford pickup next year to by a hybrid gas-electric vehicle that gets better mileage...

 

If someone buys a hybrid for altruistic reasons (conserve energy, reduce pollution, etc.), that's a good thing. If he does it to save money, it's folly. The payback period for the extra cost of a hybrid, over a comparable conventional model with the most economical engine/transmission options, is longer than many people keep their cars.

 

The guy with the pickup truck will spend a lot less for gas when he trades for a hybrid, but his net long-term savings would almost certainly be greater if he were to buy an economical car with a conventional drive line.

^ There's been a discussion about that at one of the peak-oil forums where I lurk -- www.theoildrum.com -- but most of the discussion focused on how long it would take for the U.S. car culture to transition over to something more sustainable. It was very interesting, as topics included the 15 years it takes for the U.S. auto fleet to completely turn over, or that Americans in the 1970s didn't run right out to buy new, smaller cars because they couldn't afford to.

^Also, some cars in the recent and distant past got better gas mileage than these new hybrids, like the Honda CRX, which was a cheesy sport coupe from the late 80's but got 55 mpg.  There weren't very many to begin with and I can't remember the last time I actually saw one in action.  Crosleys and other small, lightweight cars from 50 years ago also got 50+ mpg.

 

It's tough to walk the walk with hybrids right now if you can't afford a new car, and right now used hybrids seem like a big mistake since the maintenance will almost surely be higher than traditional cars.  I have a regular 2001 Civic, there wouldn't really be any gas milleage advantage to getting a hybrid. 

 

 

>Many of my former colleagues in the TV news business still have trouble getting their arms around anything more complicated than the nightly "pump price patrol". 

 

Yeah, because they waste all their time with stories on school bus and car seat safety.   

...  Crosleys and other small, lightweight cars from 50 years ago also got 50+ mpg...

 

I remember Crosleys, although I never rode in one. They were powered with a V-twin air-cooled engine. They were so small, I'd think they'd probably come out on the worst end in a collision with a really big person on a bicycle. Apparently not many have survived; every now and then one will turn up at a collector car show.

 

In the late 1950's my cousin had a King Midget, and commuted 25 miles each way with it for several years, except in winter. It had a rear-mounted 6-horsepower Wisconsin air-cooled engine and could make a little better than 50 mph wide open.

 

http://www.midgetmotors.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/newcar.jpg

When I first saw the picture of that King Midget, I thought it looked like a kit car. So I clicked on the link and sure enough! I think kit cars are a great idea to save money and if they have a battery powered car, that's terrific! That's just about all you need for going grocery shopping, moving things, or for tooling around the neighborhood.

 

But does it come with XM Satellite Radio?  :-D

 

Hybrids cars a philosophical, not financial choice

 

Published: Monday, April 17, 2006

By Dan McLean

Burlington (Vermont) Free Press Staff Writer

 

There are signs taped to the back of Bill Keogh's 2003 Toyota Prius that read, "A hybrid is a Volts Wagen," and "A hybrid, that's Watts new!"

 

Those signs and his car -- which uses energy-efficient technologies to cut down on gas consumption -- often elicit a response from passers-by.

 

"People say, 'Hey, that's neat' or 'That's cool,' Keogh said. "Sometimes a bicyclist will pull up behind me and wave their hands."

 

Contact Dan McLean at 651-4877 or [email protected]. On the Web -- To check fuel efficiency: www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/sbs.htm

 

http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060417/NEWS01/604170309/1009

The Prius is establishing an excellent reputation for quality and reliability; that's not suprising, I guess, because it's consistent with the reputation of Toyota vehicles in general. I've heard of some that are approaching 300K miles trouble-free, still using the original batteries.

 

KJP, the King Midget originally was available as a complete vehicle, but now it comes as a kit that allows you to design your own driveline. It probably would be fairly straightforward for a capable engineer/technician to design a hybrid drive system derived from a battery golf cart, with a small, quiet gas engine and alternator to recharge and maintain the batteries for longer distances.

Thanks for the info Rob.

 

I found this quoting of Thomas Edison, who spoke of the folly of relying on internal combustion engines for converting stored energy into motion. Instead, Edison was an advocate of alternative energy sources like solar energy, wind energy etc. Just an interesting piece which gives a peek into the mind of the great genius. He was way ahead of his time.....

 

http://www.energybulletin.net/14927.html

 

Published on 1 Jan 1970 by Roycrofters (via Proj. Gutenberg). Archived on 14 Apr 2006.

 

Edison on renewables

by Elbert Hubbard

 

Source: Interview in Elbert Hubbard's Little Journeys to the Homes of the Great (Vol. 1 of 14), now in the public domain and available from Project Gutenberg.

 

The interview apparently took place in 1910. The original has much more on Edison.

 

For the full article, visit http://www.gutenberg.org/files/12933/12933-h/12933-h.htm#THOMAS_A_EDISON

My assistant editor asked me last December if I thought oil would hit $70 per barrel again (as it did when Katrina was pounding the Gulf Coast). I told him it would probably hit $70 sometime between April and June...which caused his eyebrows to raise. He didn't think it would hit that high again and if it did, it wouldn't be so soon. But I wasn't done with my prognosticating... I then said I believed oil would hit $80 per barrel sometime in the period from August to November.

 

Both of those periods are when oil prices typically peak for seasonal demand -- in the spring as the summer driving season approaches and in the late summer/early fall as home heating oil reserves are filled in preparation for the coming winter.

 

None of my so-called clairvoyance includes special circumstances, like a crisis involving Iran, or another devastating hurricane in the Gulf, a terrorist strike against a major oil facility like Abqaiq in Saudi Arabia or some political instability like Hugo Chavez tightening the spigot to piss off George W. If any one of those happens, adjust the price of oil upward by another $10/barrel.

 

Unfortunately, the blame game has begun, with anyone and everyone being blamed but the two people most directly responsible -- you and I.

Uncle Sam's hand in high gas prices?

Critics say ill-timed legislation is partly responsible for prices at the pump, but others say the industry should have seen what was coming.By Steve Hargreaves, CNNMoney.com staff writer

April 18, 2006: 6:26 AM EDT

 

 

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) - As gasoline prices spiral upward ahead of the high-demand summer season, some traders and consumer advocates are laying at least part of the blame squarely on the doorstep of the federal government.

 

While near-record crude prices account for nearly 60 percent of the cost of making gasoline, and unabated demand from U.S. drivers has done nothing to ease prices, part of the run-up has to do with problems with switching from one type of gasoline additive to another.

 

The switch is happening because lawmakers didn't include liability protections for makers of MTBE, a cancer-causing additive easily soluble in water that has been the subject of several lawsuits, when they enacted an energy bill last August.

 

http://money.cnn.com/2006/04/18/news/economy/gas_prices_ethanol/index.htm?cnn=yes

"I think it's a preposterous argument," said Dorgan. "It has to do with the OPEC countries organizing a cartel, larger oil companies and an orgy of speculation."

 

What an ass. OPEC can no longer control oil prices, as they are pumping flat out. Oil companies do not control wholesale prices and their margins haven't changed from the 10 percent profit they desire -- the rest is taxes, distribution and administrative/marketing expenses. As for the speculation, price is set by the market. Yes, there's a premium or a mark-up in bidding for future deliveries due to political instabilities in certain oil-producing nations -- but why is that we now have to rely on them for supplies? It's because we've already grabbed the low-hanging fruit. Thus, the price is set by what the market will bear and demand is the ultimate price-driver and the balancing variable between flat (and possibly declining) supply and rising demand.

 

 

Here's some reader/viewer comments about fuel prices from CNN/Time, followed by some worthwhile graphics and an article....

 

http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/04/19/feedback.gasprices/index.html

 

Your e-mails: Spend $3 in gas to buy $6 beef jerky

CNN.com readers on rising pump prices

 

Wednesday, April 19, 2006; Posted: 4:43 p.m. EDT (20:43 GMT)

 

Gas prices are rising, seemingly unstoppable on their way to an average $3 gallon, and the peak vacation driving season is still ahead. On Wednesday, oil prices jumped above $72 a barrel to set another record after a government report said supplies of crude made a surprise decline and gasoline stocks fell far more than expected.

 

CNN.com asked for readers' opinions on how rising gas prices affect their daily routines, how much gas costs in their area and how concerned they are about overall trends in energy pricing. Here is a sampling of responses, some of which have been edited:

 

I fill my car with 50 dollars worth of gas. I drive to the store to buy a 6 dollar bag of beef jerky.

 

.........

 

http://money.cnn.com/2006/04/19/markets/eia_oil/oil_guzzling_restyled.gif

 

http://money.cnn.com/2006/04/19/markets/eia_oil/oil_production_10.gif

I find it amazing to read about all of the contortions that these people are having to go through because of the rise in gas prices.  They should have put the letter from the guy in Portland last though, to put the rest into proper perspective.

 

Personally, I have cut down on leisure driving some.  I haven't taken any day trips in a while.

http://www.toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060420/NEWS11/604200423/-1/NEWS

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Article published April 20, 2006

 

Toledo area braces for $3 a gallon; oil hits $72.17 per barrel, third straight record price

 

 

By DAVID PATCH

BLADE STAFF WRITER

 

 

Ryan Coppola paid $3.069 a gallon for gas yesterday at the Oak Openings Carry-Out to top off the PT Cruiser he was driving but while surprised at the price wasn't particularly upset.

 

"I get reimbursed for this," Mr. Coppola, a Stonington, Conn., resident in the area for business, said during the $10 fillup he made before returning the rented auto at Toledo Express Airport. "So this [filling station] is where most of the rental cars come, I would imagine."

 

The seemingly inexorable return to $3 a gallon gasoline continued throughout the Toledo area yesterday, with many area gas stations posting $2.899 prices for self-service, unleaded regular and above $3 for premium.

 

...

 

Information from the Associated Press was used in this report.

 

Contact David Patch at:

[email protected]

or 419-724-6094.

 

Drivers curb use as gas goes up

Updated 4/20/2006 9:42 AM ET

By James R. Healey, USA TODAY

 

Americans have cut back gasoline use in apparent response to increasing prices, separate surveys by the government and a petroleum trade organization showed Wednesday.

 

Gas use last month was 0.6% less than a year ago, the American Petroleum Institute reported, because "high fuel prices have led to decreased demand for gasoline and other refined oil products."

 

The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) said gasoline use the past four weeks was up a slight 0.6% vs. a year ago. Typical is an increase of 1.5%, and that's the growth rate assumed in many industry, analyst and government forecasts.

 

Contributing: Barbara Hagenbaugh

 

Find this article at:

http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/energy/2006-04-19-gas-use-usat_x.htm 

 

The following is my letter to the editor published by the Suburban News Publications (Columbus) in response to an earlier column by one of their editors, Joe Meyer.  His column the week before suggested that government needs to go after the oil companies for price gouging.  This same hue & cry comes up every time oil and gasoline prices jump.  President Bush also called for an investigation this week... though I doubt he'd really do that to his buddies in the "oil bidness".

 

To the editor,

 

Though I don't disagree with Joe Meyer's complaint about the "Daily Gas Gouge Demanding Changes", real "change" isn't going to come unless we simply use less oil.  It is a finite resource and continuing to whine about and demand investigations and penalties for the oil companies price-gouging and resulting profits provides little salve for our wounded wallets.  At no point does Mr. Meyer suggest anything that will actually result in our using less oil.  And that is what we must strive for if we are to really have an impact on the oil companies and their profits.  It is also what we must do to help clear our air and improve the quality of life for ourselves and future generations.

 

Instead, Mr. Meyer joins a string of voices from the media and government who offer words that ring hollow or offer solutions that don't begin to address the issue.  Even President Bush's recent call for "energy independence" stopped at vague half-answers about "alternative fuels" and more hybrid cars.  But like your editorial, he failed to go beyond scratching the surface of the oil slick.

 

Why is no one talking about taking serious steps to provide options to the automobile?  Why is no one, for instance, mentioning the critically-needed redevelopment and expansion of our railroads: the most fuel efficient way of moving large numbers of both people and freight?  Why are we not doing more to develop the modes of transportation.... buses, light rail, bicycles and even our own feet.... that encourage denser development instead of continuing the very sprawl that leaves us no choice to reach for the car keys and use more gasoline.  How stupidly short-sighted of us (and our leaders) to sit here and gripe about $3.00-plus a gallon gasoline and oil company profits, when we could be taking real steps to provide real transportation choices.

 

Do we still need our cars?  Of course.  Hybrid motor vehicles and alternative, renewable fuels like bio-diesel, ethanol and hydrogen are all worth pursuing.  But alone, they cannot get us to the goal of truly telling the oil companies Mr. Meyer and others so detest, as well as their foreign oil suppliers, to take a long dip in a deep barrel of their own crude.

 

When candidates come knocking at your door or make appearances in your town or neighborhood in May's primary and the November election, ask them what they are doing or proposing to redevelop and properly fund passenger rail or increase capacity on our railroads to handle what is fast becoming a crush of freight traffic our highways alone can't handle.  Or ask them what they aim to do to better fund mass transit, instead of forever forcing COTA and other transit agencies to constantly go back to the voters for meager levy increases that only perpetuate a hand-to-mouth existence and lousy service.  Or ask them what they are doing to promote walkable and bikeable neighborhoods that allow us to leave the car behind for those short trips that normally drain the gas from your tank.

 

But please, stop the pointless and useless whining over getting gouged at the gas pump.  We are, in truth, only gouging ourselves if all we do is exhale hot air and do nothing to really reduce our consumption of oil.

 

 

Very eloquent letter.  It's a shame that $3.00 a gallon gas hasn't generated more discussion on the topics you mentioned.  But the public discourse leaves me reminded of a drug addict who thinks that his big problem is that his dealer is ripping him off.

An addict's steps to recovery -- denial, anger, bargaining, acceptance. I think we're still somewhere in the denial/anger stage. I'm in the bargaining stage -- still owning a car, but taking transit and walking more and more. I'm about $1 away in gas price hikes from selling my car -- but then I'll get less money for it. Ah dilemma....

I'm also getting tired of the "woe is me" approach that the media is using to victimize poor, helpless citizens who CHOOSE to drive SUVs and live in the exurbs.  As an American Citizen you don't have a RIGHT to cheap fuel!  Welcome to capitalism and the global marketplace...it's what this country was built on!

 

And great letter Noozer!  Very well said. 

... A frickin' Jaguar! Americans never cease to amaze me....

 

Americans seem to identify with their cars more than most other nationalities. It's common in my neighborhood to see new and late-model cars in the $35K range and up, parked on the street in front of marginal-quality apartments that don't even have off-street parking. I'd rather have a decent place to live, than a fancy car -- and if I were to dump that kind of money into a car, I'd place a higher priority on a parking place safe from vandalism and late-night hit-and-run drunks.

 

... President Bush has refused to rule out a preemptive nuclear strike on the country....

 

Americans should be a lot more worried about Bush's intentions than about pump prices, given his track record of manipulated intelligence and unilateral decision-making ("I'm the decider"). They should be scared to death about his statements regarding a preemptive nuclear strike on Iran; I'm surprised his statements in that regard haven't sent the world economy into a tailspin.

 

 

Here's a great example of good ... but misguided.... intentions.  And I would question the reporter's characterization of this guy as some kind of hero.  What in the hell is heroic about prompting people to drive around to get a cheaper price on gas?  How foolish. 

 

GASBUDDY.COM

Volunteers stay primed to search for cheap gas

Saturday, April 22, 2006

Barbara Carmen

THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH

 

Bargain-hunting is a gas for David McNally.

 

In his gold Volkswagen Golf, this detail-oriented fiber-optics specialist searches central Ohio daily for the station with the cheapest fuel.

 

A cent of savings is duly noted in the notebook he keeps on the front seat. A dime difference is a triumph. Typically, McNally finds fuel at 20 cents a gallon off the going price.

 

This means just one thing: Time to tank up the car and boot up the computer.

 

 

Information from the Associated Press was included in this story.

 

[email protected]

 

http://dispatch.com/news-story.php?story=dispatch/2006/04/22/20060422-A1-06.html

 

>...don't even have off-street parking. I'd rather have a decent place to live, than a fancy car -- and if I were to dump that kind of money into a car, I'd place a higher priority on a parking place safe from vandalism and late-night hit-and-run drunks.

 

Don't forget guys in the military who buy new trucks when they're back on leave. The shiny new car sits there for 11 months out of the year while they're overseas. 

By the way, I don't know if you noticed the graphic on Google in the last few days... It shows a bank of solar panels as well as a wind turbine. Way to go Google!

 

Glad to see some entity out there with means of reaching of the masses is conveying the right message.