What If - Gasoline is $5 a gallon in 2010?
This discussion has been closed.
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
Complete article here:
http://www.energybulletin.net/5261.html
I recently read that Australia is one of the only countries in the world that is developing commercial capability to produce oil from shale deposits. Here in the United State, we are constantly told that we have the world's largest deposits of shale oil, but, to date, there are no successful commercial operations to tap this potential resource. As I recall, the breakeven price is on the order of $15/bbl.
Bob
"Jerry Cox faces so many questions about sky-high gas prices from SUV shoppers that he has devised a rapid response.
The salesman at Dean Sellers Ford in Troy whips out a list of pump prices in 24 countries -- from $3.03 a gallon in Cuba to $6.48 in the Netherlands -- and says Americans still have it good.
"Would you pass up your dream car because it would cost you an extra $25 a month?" he says.
The answer, increasingly, is yes. Buyers are turning away from the gas-swilling, large sport utility vehicles that ruled the 1990s and kept Detroit's Big Three awash in profits.
After downplaying the impact of rising gas prices for months, Ford Motor Co. and General Motors Corp. now acknowledge they're losing sales. Last week, Ford cited fuel prices as a key factor when it warned investors that its 2005 profits would be $900 million lower than expected.
GM has forecast a huge first-quarter loss as it struggles with weak sales of several of its large, aging SUVs, such as the Chevrolet Tahoe. And analysts now question the automaker's assertions that a slew of new large SUVs and pickups coming out next year will solve its problems."(Cont.)
Full Story Here:http://www.detnews.com/2005/autosinsider/0504/12/A01-147923.htm
2005 profits would be $900 million lower than expected."
It's not fuel prices Henry, it's your UAW's poor quality of craftsmanship
combined with ignorance of buyers wants. Considering the vehicles produced
at Wixom, having toured the plant, unionism has enabled complacency via the
seniority rule. Labor discipline leaves a lot to be desired and the consumer
discovered a long time ago "Quality is Job 1" is located overseas.
Fuel is not expensive unless your income hasn't risen much in the last 15
years and if it hasn't, the problem is not the cost of fuel. If you are not
educated to earn what it takes to live and drive these days, the problem is
not the price of goods.
"The educated maintain while the ignorant complain."
Not the point of the discussion, of course...but, I am inclined to think that while risk of death from an auto accident is probably greater than risk of death from a disease caught while using mass transit, risk of getting in any auto accident is probably much lower than catching any disease while using mass transit.
I agree that siting is an issue. Out here in the prairie our population density is low enough we can find lots of open spaces. Yes, loud is a problem, but, how many people live next to train tracks, subways or interstates? I still think the evidence points to the energy market adjusting to high oil prices with lots of minor adjustments. In other words, I do not expect gas to hit $5 in 2010. I expect $3 to $4 per gallon with the usual up and down swings.
Recently the North Dakota House passed HB 1478. It says in part:
Sale of E85 fuel is exempt from the tax imposed under subsection 1 and is instead subject to a tax of one cent per gallon [3.79 liters] on all E85 fuel sold or used in this state.
The new law, if signed by the Gov, will drop the tax 20 cents versus regular gas. It will make E85 more competitive.
Bob
Europe isn't perfect, but when you see the vehicles they drive, the speed they drive them at, and the cost of fuel, one can only wonder about things like the Hummer. A big engine there is 2L, not 5L. Plus those cars kick [non-permissible content removed]. Turbo diesels are awesome - wish my car came in diesel here. Time for a revolution. I hope the jeep Liberty, Mercedes E diesels etc. kick butt sales-wise, so we see more of these engines. So, open the Alaskan wilderness if you need to, bit only after conservation measures have been implemented in the lower 48. A big [non-permissible content removed] truck stuck in highway traffic could have 100HP or 300 - either way it ain't movin.
Well, here in the United States we have a whole contingent of people who believe that the earth is flat, oops, I mean that speed kills, so instead of fun-to-drive, efficient vehicles, we get...lumbering SUVs and Hummers that toddle along at 65 mph while the drivers yack on the cell phone. Hey, but at least they aren't exceeding the speed limit. If you doubt that, check out the Inconsiderate Drivers thread and scroll through the hysterical posts predicting Automotive Armageddon because people might drive 80+ mph on the interstates. Never mind that their arguments boil down to, "Because I say so."
The 5.2 percent decline in first-quarter retail sales of Ford, Lincoln, Volvo, Jaguar and other models surely was an important factor behind Ford Motor's April 8 announcement that it was cutting its 2005 earnings forecast and would fall short of its 2006 target of $7 billion in pretax profits.
Full Story here:
http://quote.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000039&cid=levin&sid=anJZ6a2PTxUE
Full Story Here:
http://quote.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000103&sid=a2lZr.RIque0&refer=news_index
"Would you pass up your dream car because it would cost you an extra $25 a month?"
Heck no! But I don't drive a gas-swilling pig like those SUVs. GM makes plenty of CARS with respectable fuel economy - something I have known for over 20 years!
In contrast, the Chrysler LH cars were, 20/29 for the small 2.7 V-6 and 18/26 for the 3.5. I think in later years the 3.5 was boosted slighly to 19/27 or something like that. And the big RWD Fords were rated around 17/24, which is about what a typical V-8 RWD full-sizer has been ever since they started putting 4-speed automatic in them back in the early 80's.
However, it doesn't seem like GM's big cars are benefitting from the rising fuel costs. And the Accord and Camry have both gotten bigger AND more fuel efficient in the past few years, as well, so that's going to put a bit more pressure on the bigger domestic cars.
As I recall, the breakeven price is on the order of $15/bbl.
No, it's about $40/bbl. And it has to be certain to stay there for a while, to reduce risk of loss of capital.
...believe that the earth is flat, oops, I mean that speed kills..
Definitely not true. I have travelled at various speeds, none of which has killed me. Silly notion.
...hysterical posts predicting Automotive Armageddon because people might drive 80+ mph on the interstates.
Speaking of hysterical posts containing extreme hyperbole....
So if your alternative energy of choice requires construction, agriculture, or manufacturing, you can expect the breakeven viability point to increase with the inflation of oil prices.
james
Well, sure...the Impala 3.4L 6 cyl gets 26.5 and the Altima 2.5L 4cyl gets 26. The HP is about the same (180/175). But the quality is about as close as left and right politics today. And if you do mostly local driving, the Altima does better (23 v 21).
Interestingly, the Altima 6cyl 3.5 gets mpg almost as good (25) with 240 hp.
I don't drive a gas-swilling pig like those SUVs.
Good move!
GM makes plenty of CARS with respectable fuel economy...
Trouble is, not much else is very respectable about them :=)
Would you pass up your dream car because it would cost you an extra $25 a month?"
Only a hopeless US-car romantic would consider an Impala a dream car, compared to an Altima...even the 4 cyl...IMHO.
Now that being said, I do think the Altima's interior is nicer than the Impala's, but it's not a night and day difference. If I were grading them, for example, If I were to give the Altima a C, I might give the Impala a D+
As for acceleration, well maybe they've improved the tranny and other stuff since then, but a couple years ago, an Impala 3.4 would take a 2.5 Altima in acceleration, at least up to 0-60. And, of course, that would be an automatic Altima. The Altima is nice and quiet at highway speeds. In fact, it's almost TOO quiet, like when the airplane that Lynrd Skynrd were in ran out of fuel before crashing! But at idle, around town, with the hood up, etc, it defines "loud and coarse" as well as any GM pushrod!
Now if forced to choose, I'd probably take an Altima 4-cyl over an Impala 3.4. Mainly because I like the style better, and it's actually a bit roomier when it comes to legroom. Plus, the Altima used to have (dunno if they still do), a couple shades of greenish-blue that I really liked. I can be a sucker for color, sometimes! The Altima I test drove a few years back was a light greenish color with a beige interior...nice change from the grays and putty colors that seem to proliferate.
To bring this on to topic...if gas hits $5 a gallon, I think folks looking to trade in their SUVs and other gas hogs for a quality car at around 25 mpg will flock to the v6 Altima, not the v6 Impala. At least those with info and good taste :=)
We're ALWAYS open to discussions about gas prices in the chats!
PF Flyer
Host
News & Views, Wagons, & Hybrid Vehicles
The Subaru Crew Chat is on tonight. The chat room opens at 8:45PM ET Hope to see YOU there! Check out the schedule
Probably just a misguided perception, but prices at the pump sure didn't seem to be a lagging indicator on the way up!
Oil prices did briefly get below $50/bbl today. Nice round numbers like that are psychological support and take a bit more than intraday trrading to smash through
me: I'm sure you do as my experience has been that GM vehicles get excellent mpg for their displacement relative to other companies. I've usually had mpg results above the EPA estimates.
As far as what is good taste, that's your opinion and nothing more. I don't see why you care what other legal vehicles people drive, since you're not paying for the vehicle or the fuel. If we don't like having people tell us what to do, I think we should respect that others don't want to be told what to do either. I could care less whether my neighbors drive Excursions or Priuses, anymore then I care if they keep their house set at 60F or 80F, or own an RV or 500 hp boat.
Railroadjames(free thinkers= fresh air)
P.S. All due respect to you, the hosts and we(the forum) appreciate this avenue of hybrid gardening.
This has nothing to do with stifling the discussion. Some topics do have a natural lifespan. The more I have to steer things back towards the topic, the more we see the same points repeated, the closer we would seem to that point.
You have an EPA scores test page to prove that? I'd like to see it.....
"Vehicles fueled by ethanol actually use E85, a blend of 85 percent ethanol and 15 percent gasoline. Ford's interest in using ethanol as an alternative fuel goes back to the days of Henry Ford. Ford planned to use ethanol as the primary fuel for his Model T, however, the less expensive gasoline emerged as the dominant fuel. Vehicles designed to operate on E85 are called Flexible Fuel Vehicles (FFVs) and can function on either conventional gasoline, ethanol, or a combination of the two within the same tank."
james
As is evident in the current news (poor financial health of GM/Ford), US companies are hurting. And they are being sustained via the life support of trucks and the fairly large number of Americans that use them as family vehicles.
At $5/gallon, I think this will pretty much stop...and the feeding tube will effectively be removed. And if the choice comes down to cars...US vs Japan...I think it will get ugly for the home team.
Unless, of course, they can do something about it...improve quality, styling and value. Fast.
troy
...but we would survive. We always do. People would have to learn to sacrifice, scrimp, put on a sweater, combine trips, etc.
An Impala is a bigger car than an Altima. I don't think it's quite fair to compare them.
My wife's Impala LS (3.8L) got 33.8 mpg on a long trip recently and then 33.1 mpg on the way back.
That was with two large adults, two kids, trunk over-filled with luggage and the cruise set on 78 mph the whole way. GM cars are under-rated mpg-wise...and I'll take the low-end grunt of a 3.8L (or even 3.4L) over a screaming 2.7L 4-banger anyday. It's a real shame that GM put so much of it's future into trucks/SUV's because they make fantastic cars when they put their mind to it.
I think the Malibu Maxx is very attractive and innovative. If they make one with either hybrid, diesel, or (more likely) displacement-on-demand, that will probably be my next car.
But imagine the skyrocketing value of a city home! I Yeah, baby, yeah!
CAVEAT: "Only a few dozen types of vehicles are equipped to use E85, and Algers' '93 Suburban is not one of them.
So it is a little less efficient as a fuel. I would predict that E100 would worsen the MPG even more....
As far as price, E85 is about 30 cents cheaper in Illinois this week:
http://www.rrstar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050411/NEWS0107/504110316/1004/NEWS
A quick Excel spreadsheet tells me that if E85 gives the LOW END and reduces fuel efficiency by 15%, then an 18,000 mile year for a car getting 48.5 MPG on regular unleaded, you would save a whopping TWO DOLLARS A YEAR on fuel.
If your car only loses 5% of it's regular unleaded efficiency when using E85, then you would save $86 a year.
So somewhere between $2 and $86 per year savings using E85 all year.
I'm trying to find a clear spray product for license plates that keep traffic cameras from reading them. Any ideas?
Amber
james
You've posted in the wrong discussion - this one is about the future of gasoline prices. If this product is illegal, then members on this board can't advise you. If not, I suggest visiting our Aftermarket & Accessories board.
kirstie_h
Roving Host
Host, Future Vehicles & Smart Shopper discussions
MODERATOR
Need help navigating? [email protected] - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
Share your vehicle reviews
"But imagine the skyrocketing value of a city home! I Yeah, baby, yeah!"
.
Yeah with gas = $5, fewer people could afford those suburban homes, and there'd be high demand for city homes.
Depending on how much a city home's pricetag skyrocketed, I'd change careers before I moved into the city. It doesn't make sense to earn $70,000 a year, if I'm spending $50,000 a year paying off the mortgage on my new Baltimore home.
troy
The Suburbs were born because the urban housing was too expensive for the middle class. The crime is worse in an urban environment. The pollution is worse. I do not see any reason in the world to move into any city in the USA. In the cheapest neigborhood in the downtown San Diego area I just looked at the MLS. You get a 1300 sq. Ft. fixer on a 6000 sq. ft. lot for $550k. Fifteen miles inland you get a 1400 sq ft. house on a quarter acre for $400k. For the difference in the price of housing you can drive a gas hog SUV for 30 years worth of $5 a gallon gas.
On Monday, after plunking down $65.78 to fill it up, she was thinking about a trade-in. "I would love to have a car that wasn't using so much gas,"
She PLUNKED down $65.78. I usually SWIPE the credit card. The picture showed the woman filling up a big black suburban.
Did this person fail science/physics when she was in school? She must have missed the lesson where they said that energy equals MASS times velocity squared divided by two. I am sure she was sleeping when they covered the equation for force ( Force equals MASS time acceleration). Or maybe the person looked back over 30 years and decided that gas prices would suddenly stay at $1.00 a gallon. All those ups and downs were an aberration.
They end the article with:
"In one day I spend like $6 to go to work, and that's when I just go there and back and nowhere else," said Ma, who drives 26 miles each way to his job as a chef in Pontiac. "How can you survive? It's crazy."
The only thing crazy about this is that people buy a vehicle with poor economy when gas prices are low only to be surprised when prices rise.
And of course, we get all the conspiracy theories popping up. I had a person complain the other day that the local stations in town were charging 10 or 15 cents more than a town 200 miles away. Trying to explain that gas prices equal crude oil prices plus transportation plus local market adjustments is useless. I dare not tell them that the purpose of a business is to take the cash out of your pocket so they can put it in the pocket of the shareholders and the CEO.
My apologies to the people that are really getting hurt by high oil prices (truckers for example). Still, the extra $15 a month I pay is well worth watching people go nuts. I cannot wait till prices hit $3, the sparks are going to really fly.
Bob
Where did you get the info on how green it was? They did not make the list at
http://www.greenercars.org/12green.html