Why aren't fuels prices dropping?

Why aren't fuel prices dropping like expected? There is a web site that
shows a graph of fuel prices since 1995. I thought after the war we would
see a decrease, but regular gas is up 10 cents a gallon from the same time
last year. See it at www.storydata.com

 

We have seen a decrease in our area. Gas was running $1.39 or so a
year ago and is $1.22 now for regular unleaded.

 

Several years ago under the Clinton administration, the EPA changed the
summer formulation for fuels in various parts of the country. As a result,
refineries cannot simply refine large amounts of a particular octane
unleaded fuel, but have to specifically formulate smaller amounts of fuel to
comply with EPA regulations. As a result of this, every summer brings with
it a rise in gas prices vs. winter levels - often a substantial rise. The
fact that the hike is only 10 cents a gallon is probably due to the
beneficial effects of the war. The first year they did it, it was more like
40-50 cents a gallon.

 

you are just funding your governments brand of socialism with fuel
taxes

 

I dunno, personally I think they're too cheap here, gasoline is cheaper than
bottled water. Maybe if we were paying $3-$4 a gallon there'd be fewer SUV's
on the road and alternative transportation would be more practical.
Afterall, we'll run out of the stuff completely one of these days.

 

We won't be running out any time soon - just the shale oil deposits in
Colorado, currently unexploited, will sustain current usage for about 600
years - currently exploited deposits will also last hundreds of years. We
have plenty of time to develop "alternative transportation" and SUVs ain't
no problem except in the minds of the environmentalist whackos who don't
live in the real world.....

PC

|
| <JohnDoe> wrote in message
| | > On Sat, 28 Jun 2003 21:17:59 +1000, "John Robertson"
| >
| > >here in skippy land where we pay@ 90cents a litre x4.56 litres to the
| gallon
| > >imp we are cheesed off too .So you think you got it hard ??
| > >
| > you are just funding your governments brand of socialism with fuel
| > taxes
|
|
| I dunno, personally I think they're too cheap here, gasoline is cheaper
than
| bottled water. Maybe if we were paying $3-$4 a gallon there'd be fewer
SUV's
| on the road and alternative transportation would be more practical.
| Afterall, we'll run out of the stuff completely one of these days.
|
|

 

That would certainly be nice, though why then are we still dependent on
middle eastern sources and considering drilling in the wildlife refuge? I
don't consider myself an environmentalist but that just sorta defies common
sense. When it comes right down to it I don't really care what people drive,
though IMO anything less than 25 mpg is pathetic unless it's a vehicle used
for towing something or hauling heavy cargo.

I still don't have much sympathy for those who whine about gas prices, I can
afford gas for my car, if you can't then get a more efficient car or don't
drive as much.

 

|
| | > We won't be running out any time soon - just the shale oil deposits in
| > Colorado, currently unexploited, will sustain current usage for about
600
| > years - currently exploited deposits will also last hundreds of years.
We
| > have plenty of time to develop "alternative transportation" and SUVs
ain't
| > no problem except in the minds of the environmentalist whackos who don't
| > live in the real world.....
| >
|
| That would certainly be nice, though why then are we still dependent on
| middle eastern sources and considering drilling in the wildlife refuge?

It makes sense to burn up THEIR reserves while preserving our own.....fact
is, we aren't "dependent" on them at all, but rather are suffering the
consequences of stupid energy policies that permit them to hold us
up.....another example of the gospel according to Pogo: "We have met the
enemy and it are us!"

Drilling in the refuge will simply provide an alternate source of cheap
fuel - and the phoney claims that it "endangers"
anything are silly at best......

|I
| don't consider myself an environmentalist but that just sorta defies
common
| sense.

Au contraire, it's the phoney claims that defy common sense, one wonders
just how many people are willing to drink the Kool Aid rather than educate
themselves and form opinions based on facts, reason and logic....! Nowadays,
too many are ruled by "slogans" wildly proclaimed by demagogues....!

|When it comes right down to it I don't really care what people drive,
| though IMO anything less than 25 mpg is pathetic unless it's a vehicle
used
| for towing something or hauling heavy cargo.

It's none of your business - just as it's none of mine how you choose to
employ motor vehicles.....

| I still don't have much sympathy for those who whine about gas prices, I
can
| afford gas for my car, if you can't then get a more efficient car or don't
| drive as much.

Whiners don't deserve any sympathy, regardless of what they are whining
about.....

PC

 

I'd vote for an increase. They should double or triple the prices,
the roads are crowded, let's make some room.

 

Not a bad point, I could go with double, I think tripple would be a bit
extreme though.

Gah, just realized how many places this is crossposted to, there must be a
whole crop of trolls out there today.

 

you can keep you alternative transport, and the bullshit that we are
running out of oil too, they've been saying that for 50 years.

 

You are the problem since you claim that SUVs that get 12 miles per gallon
aren't a problem.
You are the wacko problem.
RZ

 

EPA ratings:
Toyota Highlander 18/22
Honda Pilot 17/22
Nissan Muarno 20/24
Honda CR-V 22/26
Lexus RX330 18/24
Chevy Tahoe 14/18
Jeep Grand Cher. 15/21
Ford Explorer 15/21

As compared to :
Ford F1-150 15/20
Toyota Tundra 14/17
Chevy Silverado14/18
Dodge Ram 14/19
Dodge Dakota 14/18
Ford Windstar 17/23
Chrysler Pacifica 17/22
Ford Mustang 18/24

My 94 Jeep with 172,000 miles on it still gets 18mpg, better than the
16mpg i got from mid-90's Crown Victorias. With MPG ratings like this,
why is no one calling for an end of pick-up trucks on the road instead
of SUV's?

 

Did someone repeal the law of supply and demand when I wasn't looking. Gas
guzzlers = high demand = high prices, simple enough?

Darn I swore I wasn't going to feed the trolls.
Dave Shannon
(Spring Valley CA)
1988 240 DL 18X,XXX
1985 240 Ti 20X,XXX
1984 245 DL 20X,XXX
1984 245T 19X,XXX
'01 Jeep Wrangler Sahara 10K
http://www.homestead.com/volvo2/

 

Heh... My 1964 Studebaker T-Cab gets a steady 16 mpg loaded or not and
is paid for and is appreciating every year...



--
Regards,

JT (Residing in Austin, Texas)

Just Tooling Down The Internet Superhighway With my G4.......

 

Same for my 1980 Mercedes and 1971 Cutlass that both get 14mpg.

 

How many miles on that 500? that is a w126 series, yes?

 

I think the real problem with SUVs lies in the sheer size of them.
Most newer vehicles get some semblance of acceptable fuel economy as
no car maker wants to be known for making gas guzzlers no matter the
performance level. Have you ever been at a stoplight beside a newer
Dodge pickup or one of the full size SUVs? Man, even in my Volvo I
would be toast if I got t-boned by one. The front bumpers are at the
same height as my window sill... While I agree that it is no business
of mine what the owner uses their vehicle for I have to wonder at what
point common sense takes over. Makes you wonder about the 100 pound
single blonde driving a Yukon... And now SUVs have power pedals so
that your dog could drive in comfort... Sheesh.


Jordan S70 Loaded!

 

Yeah it's not just SUV's, there's lots of cars out there that do pretty
poorly as well. Trucks are fine and dandy but I sure wouldn't want one as a
daily driver. Volvo 740 Turbo, 252,000 miles, 27 mpg driven with a light
foot, 16 mpg if I decide to lay rubber on a regular basis, 25 is easy on the
freeway though.

 

Just a couple hundred thousand. It is barely broke in... One pollution
no one ever talks about is what will we do with all these plastic cars that
only last 5-10 years?

Lee