# Average Fuel Prices



## Rich Parsons (Sep 28, 2006)

The attached was sent to me via e-mail.

What are your thoughts?

Thanks


----------



## michaeledward (Sep 28, 2006)

Still cheaper than bottled water. Although, I think that says more about our decision to purchase bottled water than anything about petroleum distillate. 

The recent crash in fuel prices is interesting. 
Something about it reminds me of the rolling blackouts in California in 2001.


----------



## Kacey (Sep 28, 2006)

I think it ignores inflation in general... yes, gas costs more than it used to - but so does everything else!  Also, when I was in Great Britain last summer, gas there was 99.9 pence/liter - that's about $8/gallon... so even at $3/gallon (and now down to ~$2.50) I'm not going to complain _too_ much.


----------



## mrhnau (Sep 29, 2006)

We have been loving it here. I'm just waiting for it to get down below $2. Saving  about $10 a fill up now.

Was interesting to see the averages over the years. Thanks for sharing!


----------



## Drac (Sep 29, 2006)

Saw it for $2.10 up here and filled up...


----------



## Makalakumu (Sep 29, 2006)

We'll probably see a rise around mid-November.  The talking heads will say something about heating costs...


----------



## Drac (Sep 29, 2006)

upnorthkyosa said:


> We'll probably see a rise around mid-November. The talking heads will say something about heating costs...


 
That goes without saying....


----------



## Flatlander (Sep 29, 2006)

Rich Parsons said:


> The attached was sent to me via e-mail.
> 
> What are your thoughts?
> 
> Thanks





> Were we better off then when we rolled into the filling station in 1972 than we are today? No, because our cars get 60 to 70 percent better mileage today than in 1972 (22.4 miles per gallon versus 13.5 miles per gallon). That more than offsets the 10.5 percent increase in gas prices adjusted for change in inflation and income from then to now.






> Now let's put the recent price increase in terms of real outlays. The average household is spending $136 more on gasoline every month than it was in 1998 and $114 per month more than it were spending in 2002. But, believe it or not, real (inflation-adjusted) disposable income per household has increased even faster than have pump prices; by $800 a month since 1998 and $279 a month since 2002.
> Accordingly, Americans are still, on average, economically ahead of the game.



There's more here in the article.


----------



## crushing (Sep 29, 2006)

michaeledward said:


> Still cheaper than bottled water. Although, I think that says more about our decision to purchase bottled water than anything about petroleum distillate.
> 
> The recent crash in fuel prices is interesting.
> Something about it reminds me of the rolling blackouts in California in 2001.


 

Only 2001?  What about 2000?  Oh nevermind, I know why.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/blackout/california/timeline.html


----------



## HKphooey (Sep 29, 2006)

I guess if everyone had business and were selling a hot commodity; you would all mark it down and give it away, right?   If someone is willing the pay the higher prices, they will always be around.  

It is called capitalism, it has been around for ages!


----------



## michaeledward (Sep 29, 2006)

crushing said:


> Only 2001? What about 2000? Oh nevermind, I know why.
> 
> http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/blackout/california/timeline.html


 
Your clairvoyance is amazing. That you know why I remember rolling blackouts in January of 2001. That is just awesome. 

That, somehow, you *know* I was in California, (San Ramon, specifically), in January of 2001. And that I experienced the rolling blackouts as I had to several times, usher myself and my colleagues out of our home office building. It certainly was memorable. It was also memorable because my wife had some challenges in the house while I was in California. We had put a new furnace in the house that prior fall, and in January, while I was in California, the furnace died. 

But, really, it is amazing. You are just so ****ing smart. You KNOW why I remember those rolling black outs. 

Oh, and attached is my screen capture of my Outlook Calendar.


----------



## crushing (Sep 29, 2006)

michaeledward said:


> Your clairvoyance is amazing. That you know why I remember rolling blackouts in January of 2001. That is just awesome.
> 
> That, somehow, you *know* I was in California, (San Ramon, specifically), in January of 2001. And that I experienced the rolling blackouts as I had to several times, usher myself and my colleagues out of our home office building. It certainly was memorable. It was also memorable because my wife had some challenges in the house while I was in California. We had put a new furnace in the house that prior fall, and in January, while I was in California, the furnace died.
> 
> ...


 

Please Sir, I meant the other reason.  The reason that got you so defensive and excited.

Also, I didn't mean to bring up such painful memories.  I sincerely hope your day improves.

All the best,
crushing


----------



## michaeledward (Sep 29, 2006)

crushing said:


> Please Sir, I meant the other reason. The reason that got you so defensive and excited.
> 
> Also, I didn't mean to bring up such painful memories. I sincerely hope your day improves.
> 
> ...


 
What other reason?


----------



## zDom (Sep 29, 2006)

Drac said:


> Saw it for $2.10 up here and filled up...




It's not completely miserable living in the Midwest.

My last fill up was at $1.93


----------



## tshadowchaser (Sep 29, 2006)

It is around 2.37 for regular around here right now  Thats down a lot from what it was but I expect it will go higher the closer we get to the holidays


----------



## Cruentus (Sep 29, 2006)

michaeledward said:


> Your clairvoyance is amazing. That you know why I remember rolling blackouts in January of 2001. That is just awesome.


 
Curiousity has gotten the best of me. So why are you reminded of the rolling blackouts in 2001?


----------



## Kacey (Sep 29, 2006)

zDom said:


> It's not completely miserable living in the Midwest.
> 
> My last fill up was at $1.93



I wish... my last fill-up was $2.49/gallon, and that's the cheapest I've seen lately.


----------



## Kreth (Sep 29, 2006)

Kacey said:


> I wish... my last fill-up was $2.49/gallon, and that's the cheapest I've seen lately.


Right now it's about $2.70/gallon here...


----------



## michaeledward (Sep 29, 2006)

Tulisan said:


> Curiousity has gotten the best of me. So why are you reminded of the rolling blackouts in 2001?


 
The timing .... 
the power generating plants were going offline at just the crucial moments to drive prices up. Californians were screaming about the costs down the road. Recall these blackouts ended up driving Gray Davis from office. 

The timing here ....
We have all seen price spikes before. After Katrina, prices jumped pretty precipitously. The discussion is always that "Prices Go Up Fast, and Come Down Slow". In the past month, it seems odd that the prices have crashed, dropping 4 or 5 cents per day. 

Some may argue its competition and the free market .... but, if you examine the history, this behavior is not in synch with behaviors past. Just makes you wonder why.


P.S. I will again put in a plug for ... www.gasbuddy.com ... it is defensive driving for the fuel cost concious.


----------



## Rich Parsons (Sep 29, 2006)

michaeledward said:


> The timing ....
> the power generating plants were going offline at just the crucial moments to drive prices up. Californians were screaming about the costs down the road. Recall these blackouts ended up driving Gray Davis from office.
> 
> The timing here ....
> ...



I read an article that stated that The President of Venezuela would continue to sell Cheap Oil so those that were cold in NY City and elsewhere in the US could get geat. Of course that Pres does not like the Pres of the USA. 

I agree it goes up real fast and comes down slow.

I paid $2.09 today for Regular Unleaded and $2.19 for Mid-Grade


----------



## Carol (Sep 29, 2006)

$2.19 for regular, full serve.


----------



## Don Roley (Sep 29, 2006)

upnorthkyosa said:


> We'll probably see a rise around mid-November.  The talking heads will say something about heating costs...



Strange they seem to do that every year....  Especially when it is a cold winter.

In recent months, the price of oil has been kind of in a bubble.  A lot of people were buying oil futures and such in the hope that they could profit from the rise in price. It became a type of herd mentality. Too many people chasing too little. Then when a few people and funds jumped out, the price started to come down and it again turned into a herd mentality as everyone tried to avoid being the last one out the door.

Right now, oil is probably just a little below what they market should pay. It is the after effects of a bubble with few people willing to take the risk that it will stop going down. But once the panic on the street stops, the rise will begin again I think. Probably a lot slower than the rapid rise we saw up to now, but it will rise.


----------



## michaeledward (Sep 29, 2006)

I found this comment .. 



> Then he interviewed an expert, Peter K. Ashton, described as "a longtime consultant on petroleum issues who has testified on gasoline pricing" before a Senate Subcommittee. Here is Ashton's response:
> 
> "As an economist I cannot speculate on the politics that may be involved, but my recent research suggests that the recent drop cannot be explained by the drop in crude prices or the change in inventories alone. From an economic standpoint, therefore, it certainly raises questions in my mind as to whether the high prices we saw this summer were in any way justified by market fundamentals. I do not believe that they were. To the extent that prices are now declining more than market fundamentals might dictate suggests to me that a decision has been made to reduce prices back to levels that might be considered more in line with the forces of supply and demand -- whether that is a politically motivated decision is up to others to decide, not me! Nevertheless, it is clear to me that the prices we witnessed this summer could not be justified by the market."​



​Kinda fits with what when on during those rolling blackout, eh? The companies jacked up the prices because they could. Taking power stations off line at just the right time to create a shortage. 

The $3.00 a gallon prices were at that level because the companies could charge that much. They had lots of excuses: Israel & Lebanon, Iraq, Iran and Uranium, Hurricane Season. As long as those excuses sounded good, and it helped the bottom line of the oil companies, why the hell not? 

Now, prices are coming a bit back in line. Excuses ran out.


----------



## Carol (Sep 29, 2006)

If more companies allowed partial telecommuting, demand would be driven down.


----------



## Makalakumu (Sep 29, 2006)

Anyone who thinks the oil market is "free" is living in fantasy land.  The price of oil is strictly controlled based on how much is produced + how much refined is in reserve + how much is actually in reserve (which is a constant debate).  The end result is that a group of people end up deciding what the price of oil will be from day to day...

This geologically determined truth determines American foreign policy.


----------



## Don Roley (Sep 29, 2006)

upnorthkyosa said:


> Anyone who thinks the oil market is "free" is living in fantasy land.  The price of oil is strictly controlled based on how much is produced + how much refined is in reserve + how much is actually in reserve (which is a constant debate).  The end result is that a group of people end up deciding what the price of oil will be from day to day...



The image of a few guys in a cigar smoke- filled room determining what the price of gas will be is just a silly image made up by people that want to have something to blame.

The closests to that reality is OPEC, and you can see that they get together only so often, argue at great length and then some of the members seem to try to cheat on the output they determine.

There are a lot of things that determine the price of oil and gasoline. Human decisions are among the least important factors. Everyone who produces a product wants to sell as much of it as possible. If they could keep a tight grip on prices, they would always stay high.

And prices tend to go up all over the world at the same time. Unless you are talking about OPEC and the people that produce the crude product, the idea of all the companies in all the nations being part of an agreement is too large a concept to work and remain less known than OPEC.

The problems with oil and gasoline prices are quite large and varied. Take a look at how long it has been since a refinery has been built in the US. Many of us were not even alive when the last one was built. A company that built one and increased its output could profit a lot. But there is a lot of opposition to new construction from enviromental groups and the typical "not in my backyard" mentality that you find.

One of the reasons I expect oil to go back up again sometime in the not so distant future is that Venezuela supplies a sizeable chunk of America's supply. But for the past few years I have been reading about the situation there and the infrastructure of the oil business has been slowly run into the ground.

There are other reasons, but I think you get the drift. Those that produce oil want to get as much as they can from selling it. OPEC does try to control the price of Petroleum, but it does not do a perfect job. The Saudis used to be able to turn on the tap more to take up the slack when prices got too high, but that is not really the case anymore.

Personally, I hope oil comes down to about 40 dollars a barrel but not much more. My reasons may sound silly, but at that price things like wind power is competative with oil. And I think we should be investing more in things like that than burning something as usefull as oil. I don't think that anything any goverment does will stop us from using oil like we do. But high prices will.


----------



## Makalakumu (Sep 29, 2006)

When W. was elected president, I took my meager college student funds and dumped a little into oil stock.  Now, I wish that I would have had a little more...if you know what I'm saying.  This is how I got into studying the oil market...besides being a geology major.

The bottom line is this, if you look at the "claimed" supplies of crude, if you look at refining capacity, if you look at consumption, you can see how the price of oil is going to react.  If you are in a position of power where you can affect one or more of those three things, then you can "affect" the price of oil with your decisions.  

This market has been anything but free.

This is how the business is done.  Or has been done until we approached the the global peak in production.  This will change everything about our lives.


----------



## Don Roley (Sep 29, 2006)

upnorthkyosa said:


> The bottom line is this, if you look at the "claimed" supplies of crude, if you look at refining capacity, if you look at consumption, you can see how the price of oil is going to react.  If you are in a position of power where you can affect one or more of those three things, then you can "affect" the price of oil with your decisions.



Affect maybe.. control..no.

And think about just how difficult the whole thing is. It is not a matter of Geology, but of geography, politics, nature and sociology.

Lets look at each part of the model you give.

Supplies of crude- supplied by various nations- some of whom hate each other's guts and most willing to stab each other in the back for some extra profit.

Refining- controlled by various businesses, each of them trying to make as much profit even at the expense of the others.

Consumption- all of us.

No one person or group of people can really control any part of that model. 

And let us not forget all the various factors such as future traders and the various influences on the market.

Saudi Arabia might decide to go full out on production tommorow to try to keep oil below the level where people are going to start doing some serious investment into alternate forms of energy. But if Chavez wants to mess with the US, their actions can't do much. Also, if there is a union strike by dockworkers, there will be no relief for consumers.

You can be pretty sure that people will cut back on their gas use in between the summer travel and air conditioning season and when they need heating oil and travel for the holidays. But otherwise, how are you going to control how much people use aside from rationing?

The simple fact is that while you guys have been complaining about gas prices in America, the price here in Japan has gone up about the same percentage. Now it is retreating a bit as people stay home more instead of travelling during the summer vacation. No election here to account for that drop in price. The main problem in America is lack of refining facilities. But the bigger problem is global and affects us all.


----------



## zDom (Sep 29, 2006)

Anybody read "The Long Emergency" by James Howard Kunstler?

He seems to think we have passed peak production.


----------



## Makalakumu (Sep 30, 2006)

Don Roley said:


> Affect maybe.. control..no.


 
I can agree with this.  "Control" may be too strong of a description.  And "affect" still indicates what I was driving at...that the price of oil is manipulated by non-market forces.


----------



## Makalakumu (Sep 30, 2006)

zDom said:


> Anybody read "The Long Emergency" by James Howard Kunstler?
> 
> He seems to think we have passed peak production.


 
Kunstler is a pessimist.  I don't know if it will be as bad as he thinks...however, it could if people don't do anything about it.  Anyway, he isn't the only one who thinks we passed the peak.  Alot of the leading petroleum geologists in the world also think so.


----------



## zDom (Oct 2, 2006)

upnorthkyosa said:


> Kunstler is a pessimist.  I don't know if it will be as bad as he thinks...however, it could if people don't do anything about it.  Anyway, he isn't the only one who thinks we passed the peak.  Alot of the leading petroleum geologists in the world also think so.



I completely agree. Surely is interesting food for thought. Very dry read, though.

I think he would have "gotten through" to more people if he had presented his ideas in a novel, for example.

The whole idea of developing alternate fuels BEFORE we "lose the hydrocarbon fuel platforms" IS something SOMEBODY needs to give serious thought to.


----------



## Phoenix44 (Oct 10, 2006)

$2.40

My crystal ball is predicting a precipitous rise at the pump around November 8th.


----------



## Don Roley (Oct 11, 2006)

Phoenix44 said:


> $2.40
> 
> My crystal ball is predicting a precipitous rise at the pump around November 8th.



Well, if you think the goverment has much of an affect on prices, you should try to remember when Bill Clinton released a good portion of the strategic reserve to try to bring down prices just before Gore went up against Bush. It did not work.

But don't get used to the current prices. Things look like they will be going up in the next few weeks.

Click here for just part of the story.


----------



## donna (Oct 11, 2006)

Here in rural Australia we are paying upwards of $1.40au per Litre, which converts to $3.93US per gallon. Needless to say we economise where we can but we are told it is still going up.


----------



## Phoenix44 (Oct 11, 2006)

Clinton? Clinton's presidency ended 7 years ago.


----------



## crushing (Oct 12, 2006)

Phoenix44 said:


> Clinton? Clinton's presidency ended 7 years ago.


 
I'm not sure your point, but despite the best attempts by Republicans, President Clinton served two full terms, ending Jan 20th, 2001.  You know, it does seem like 7 (or more years) ago though.


----------



## Phoenix44 (Oct 12, 2006)

> I'm not sure your point, but despite the best attempts by Republicans, President Clinton served two full terms, ending Jan 20th, 2001. You know, it does seem like 7 (or more years) ago though.


 
Right, sorry about that.  My point is this:  I just don't understand why, whenever we discuss some current unpleasantness, like high gas prices, or the disintegrating situation in Iraq, or Korea, or a pedophile Congressman, someone finds it necessary to say, "Well _Clinton_ did _this_!" as if it's some kind of contest. Or a Monty Python sketch:  "Well I lived in a shoebox!"  The difference in the gas prices between July 2006 and October 2006 just don't involve Bill Clinton.


----------



## michaeledward (Oct 12, 2006)

Phoenix44 said:


> Right, sorry about that. My point is this: I just don't understand why, whenever we discuss some current unpleasantness, like high gas prices, or the disintegrating situation in Iraq, or Korea, or a pedophile Congressman, someone finds it necessary to say, "Well _Clinton_ did _this_!" as if it's some kind of contest. Or a Monty Python sketch: "Well I lived in a shoebox!" The difference in the gas prices between July 2006 and October 2006 just don't involve Bill Clinton.


artyon: artyon: 

Hallalujah ! ! ! ...... Hallalujah ! ! ! ...... Hallalujah ! ! !

But, then again, it is obvious, ain't it?


----------



## crushing (Oct 12, 2006)

Phoenix44 said:


> Right, sorry about that. My point is this: I just don't understand why, whenever we discuss some current unpleasantness, like high gas prices, or the disintegrating situation in Iraq, or Korea, or a pedophile Congressman, someone finds it necessary to say, "Well _Clinton_ did _this_!" as if it's some kind of contest. Or a Monty Python sketch: "Well I lived in a shoebox!" The difference in the gas prices between July 2006 and October 2006 just don't involve Bill Clinton.


 
I agree that gas prices between July 2006 and October 2006 don't involve President Clinton.  Did someone say they did?

I don't think it is all that unusual to put current events into a historical perspective.  In fact, I would say that it is a good idea to understand history and learn from it, not only to keep from making the same mistakes, but also make even better decisions for the non-mistakes.

History should not be off limits.  If one wants to compare decisions made by President Bush to Presidents Kennedy (Vietnam v. Iraq), Nixon (Watergate v. Scandal Du Jour), or Clinton (FBI Wiretaps approved by 'Yes Judges' v. Wiretaps without 'Yes Judge' review) , what is wrong with that?  If someone wants to draw comparisons between the current fuel price fluctuations and the fluctuations that have happened in the months preceeding previous elections, what is the problem with that?


----------



## Don Roley (Oct 13, 2006)

Phoenix44 said:


> Right, sorry about that.  My point is this:  I just don't understand why, whenever we discuss some current unpleasantness, like high gas prices, or the disintegrating situation in Iraq, or Korea, or a pedophile Congressman, someone finds it necessary to say, "Well _Clinton_ did _this_!"




Well, perhaps you should have read what I wrote instead of concentrating on the word Clinton. Here is is again.



> Well, if you think the goverment has much of an affect on prices, you should try to remember when Bill Clinton released a good portion of the strategic reserve to try to bring down prices just before Gore went up against Bush. It did not work.



If you pay attention, you will note that my post was pointing out that the one attept that a president made to lower gas prices failed. Even releasing a good portion of the strategic petroleum reserve, Clinton was unable to lower gas prices. So the idea that somehow someone in power could get prices to lower in a less visible manner is somewhat silly.


----------

