Friend in Airport Heights with a 1100 sq. ft. gas heated house, 2x4 construction with lousy insulation, no vapor barrier - highest heating bill has been $120. Friend over by Russian Jack with all electric heat (and hot tub) in a 2 bedroom house - biggest bill has been $190. You just lived too far up the road. :-)
There's a new windmill in a neighbor's backyard a few blocks away that I just noticed walking the dog next door. Didn't see a generator on top, but it was hard to tell. Looked like it was about 30' in the air - maybe the owner is using it to get rid of gophers.
Devaluation of the US$. The Euro prices today are far far higher than anything we've ever experienced...that is when translated to US$.
It makes anything we have here dirt cheap to the rest of the world and anything in the rest of the world ungodly expensive to we poor colonists.
US Domestic industry loves it but importers like BMW, MB, Toyota, GM hate the fact that in the last 15 months they've either lost 30+% or their products need to be sold 30+% higher than before.
VW and BMW bringing inexpensive low margin diesels to the US is probably not very likely in the near term. A new clean diesel Jetta TDI that should have sold for $25000 back in Jan 07 now needs to be sold for $33000!!
VW and BMW bringing inexpensive low margin diesels to the US is probably not very likely in the near term. A new clean diesel Jetta TDI that should have sold for $25000 back in Jan 07 now needs to be sold for $33000!!
I could agree with you on those cars coming from the EU. The Jetta is built in Mexico. The Mercedes ML,GL, & R320 CDI are all built in the USA. I am not sure which BMWs are built here. If the X5 diesel comes from a US plant it will get a test drive from me. The X5 is the best handling of ALL SUVs.
"China is building coal fired generators at the rate of one per week. I guess that tells you what they think of Kyoto."
On the contrary, China loves the Kyoto Accord -- mostly because it would never apply to China!
That's right, listen closely to the description of that "agreement" when folks like Al Gore describe it. They're careful to say that the Kyoto restrictions apply to "developed" nations. And China and India, two of the world's biggest polluters, simply aren't developed, according to environmentalists.
So they can spew all the pollution possible into the atmosphere, and only we, the United States, have to restrict ourselves and our economy to fit the Kyoto concept.
Of course, this proves that most environmentalists don't really care about the environment, only a left-wing political agenda. That's the REAL inconvenient truth. .
You are correct of course. In additional China will be adding as many vehicles as the USA by 2016. With uncontrolled growth they will be putting out more CO2 than the US very shortly if not already. It just shows how ineffective the UN really is.
Our gas did take about a 7 cent dip yesterday. Costco was back down to $3.37 for regular.
Your facts are correct though I don't agree with your conclusion.
Kyoto is obviously a flawed treaty. At the time it was essentially the best deal that could be cut. I'd like to see it revisited as now, 8 years down the road, you can no longer exempt China and India.
2015 Mazda 6 Grand Touring, 2014 Mazda 3 Sport Hatchback, 1999 Mazda Miata 2004 Toyota Camry LE, 1999.
Revenues from the federal fuel tax are only generated when you buy fuel. So, if your cars are sitting at home, they are not using fuel, and thus not generating revenue for road and bridge construction and repair. Realistically, you are not subsidizing anything if your cars are sitting at home when you ride your bicycle to work.
Revenues for road maintenance and repair come from more than just tax on fuel. I pay all of the fees listed below. The cost is the same, whether I drive my cars or not.
Local gas price drifted back down to $3.03 today. However, it's officially spring and the riding season is here.
kernick:
The gasoline tax at the pump - the retail tax - is just a small part of the amount of money that flows to the government from drivers. You need to consider all the $ that goes to government, if you want to consider all the costs.
What do automobile drivers pay? State registration, city registration in some areas, inspection fee, titles, plates
And then you have all the automobile insurance money that goes into supporting many, many thousands of jobs in the insurance industry; and they and the companies all pay taxes.
And then you have the sales taxes on the cars themselves, all the parts and tires, and then you have the taxes people pay who build, fix, or sell autos and parts.
We could probably add to this, but I think you get the idea that each any every driver in this country is pumping thousands of dollars into government directly and indirectly each year!!
"So they can spew all the pollution possible into the atmosphere, and only we, the United States, have to restrict ourselves and our economy to fit the Kyoto concept."
No, the US did not sign the treaty. As you stated the Kyoto accord does not apply to China. It also does not apply to the USA either.
'' And China and India, two of the world's biggest polluters, simply aren't developed, according to environmentalists."
China and India have a point. Why should the US keep a high standard of living while they are trying to lift hundreds of millions of people above the poverty level. China is trying to provide basic services like electricity and water to many of their people.
From 1996 to 2006 the USA increased oil imports by an estimated 3.6 million barrels per day. China, with 4 times the people, only increased 3.1 million barrels per day. I would think it would make sense for all countries to work out a deal, but I doubt it will happen. We can only hope there isn't over a war over all this.
The GW issue, in my view, is not the main issue facing the world. High energy and resource prices coupled with increasing populations will be a much bigger issue in the next few decades. The competition for the resources is already creating problems. It will just get worse. And it is not just Asia that is growing.
The Middle East has a few countries that are expanding rather nicely. In the Oilwatch Monthly done by Rembrandt Koppelaar (theoildrum) he has a chart (10) showing that oil demand for OPEC countries went from 5 MBD to over 6 MBD in about 6 years. In another 5 years they could be at 7 or 8 MBD. The KSA is undergoing a massive increase in population. The demographics show that they will have a large number of kids reaching the driving age in a few years. When that happens they will want jobs and cars. Jobs + cars = fuel, lots of fuel. Check out www.skyscrapercity.com to see how crazy it is getting. Lots of tall buildings in Dubai = lots of people = lots of cars = lots of fuel, energy and material.
In another ten years we will look back fondly to when gasoline was only $4 a gallon.
Gas ( unleaded reg ) is $ 15 HK dollar per liter, which is around US $ 7.30.
Most people use the well developed public transportation system.
The United States needs to do a better job of looking into the future...and plan housing and work areas close to each other. We need public transportation ( any type) , plus alternative fuel vehicles, IMO.
We used the MTR subway, the ferry, the double decker buses, and smaller redtop buses. Have not used the taxi yet, though a friend drives us around in a Toyota Alphard minivan sometimes.
The SMART car looks nice here...and there are many small vehicles here.
The sad part is all the idiots that complain and curse the attendant
It is amazing how some people think that guy in the booth making minimum wage has raised the price of gas. The truth is we are lucky he or she even comes to work with the high price of gas. Every gas station convenience store in my area has "help wanted all shifts" in the window.
Of course they have "help wanted" signs. No one can afford to drive to work just making min. wage.
A guy a few houses down from mine owns one of the local hotels. He's always complaining that he can't keep employees, and he pays $8 an hour. People see little value in earning a wage, since it buys so little. Such is the insidious nature of inflation.
Oil prices certainly contribute to inflation. So do government ethanol mandates, which drive up the price of food. And when the Federal Reserve decides to print extra money to bail out investment banks, it de-values our money that much more.
But those $600 stimulus checks are in the mail, so I guess everything's okay. I just hope they get here soon, before inflation reduces their value to $500 ..... or $400 .... .
It had to happen. Someone has a site to track worldwide energy problems. http://energyshortage.org/ Now we can see how others around the world are dealing with fuel shortages and high prices all in one place.
Near the bottom the following news item caught my eye: "Motorists in Venezuelan city panic after fuel shortage" This is the same country where you can buy gasoline for 7 to 17 cents gallon - $2 to fill a typical car. They may actually have the cheapest gasoline in the world. I hear Hummers are big sellers.
This is the same country where you can buy gasoline for 7 to 17 cents gallon
The good news is gas is only 17 cents a gallon. The bad news is greedy Chavez sold it all to the USA for $3.50 per gallon. They probably only have good gas supplies just before election time. I think Iran pulls the same kind of political BS.
Gasoline in Venezuela might cost 17 cents per gallon, but the average worker there only makes $11 a day. Compare that to the average U.S. wage of $140 per day, and our $3.20 gasoline compares favorably.
It's certainly more expensive, even on a relative basis. But I still wouldn't want to live in Caracas.
I've also heard that the Iraqi government fixes gas prices at 5 cents per gallon. Wouldn't want to live there, either. .
China thinks very little of Kyoto or any other environmental mandates. The Olympic Comittee is even worried about the health of athletes who will be competing in the Beijing Olympics due to the attrocious Chinese air quality. A trip to Shanghai will remind one of Pittsburgh circa 1955. It's been said you can see the air pollution in China all the way from California.
Yeah, pretty soon you're going to go to Wal~Mart and see one guy working and he happens to be the manager. In Philly, we've got a weird phenomenom of "reverse commuting." That is, low-income inner city residents commuting to the suburbs to work in the big box stores, malls, and fast food restaurants. Many of them use public transportation, but SEPTA doesn't go everywhere and isn't exactly the most reliable system, so others rely on their own vehicles.
It's more than rough out there for the owner-operators... you can also read an comment on other articles and opinions at my blog here at Edmunds, The Big Rigs.
no chad... i didnt argue against myself. My point was they were way over charging at 50. barrel & 3.25 gas...even moreso than now.
#2 yes chad trucks done use gas but deisel follows ALL the price hikes.
#3 you better check with some truckers...my weekly trip from SO Cal to PHx and back includes a stop at the Flying J truck stop...You should here the truckers talk and complain..It def and directly affects them....And what if the retailer doesnt want to pay for the price hikes?...you dont think the truckers will strike?.... guess again...they have before and will again.
#4 Do i think the gov will sit and sideline and watch the grocery store shelves empty?...LOL they havnt done a thing ..They've sidelined themselves over our gas and oil argument you and i are talkin bout right now....lol... I didnt see them do anything about that... nor will they in reguards to groceries.
#5 Here in Cal. the last time there was a strike in the grocery buss. Some of the stores..like next to my bank just closed its doors...never could recover VONS...a very large company and the strike was 6 yrs ago...just closed this store 6 months ago....almost 6 yrs after the strike..
Dont be thin king the gov will do anything when they wont do anything about the current oil problem...They probably have stock in food and futures and dont care if it goes up either.
Later Caaz
p.s. Look at what the host just posted above my remarks...read it and check it out.
“Our federal government is subsidizing railroads, airlines, banks and farmers,” he said. “Meanwhile, we’re being taxed to death.”
Therein lies the problem. They are small business men and women that do not have the money to lobby a Congress that does not move without being paid off.
I hope they all conveniently run out of diesel on all the major freeways in the largest cities of the USA, April 1st. That would get some attention.
In CA diesel is taxed at 72 cents per gallon. Highest in the nation.
As a percentage of the total fuel cost gas taxes are probably near a historic low. The federal tax is 18.4 cents a gallon, the same as it's been since 1991. Even in a high tax state like CA I'd be willing to bet that you were paying a significantly higher percentage in fuel taxes in 1998 when gas was only about $1/gallon. In the 10 years since then your prices have risen about $2.50/gallon and I'd guess that no more than 25 cents of that is due to increased fuel taxes.
When gas prices were below $1.50 I used to advocate raising fuel taxes. Not a popular idea and one of the biggest objections was that feds have no business manipulating the free market. Okay, I can accept that argument but it works both ways. If the feds take any action to artificially lower the price of fuel that is also manipulation and it also represents a pro-consumption policy.
I've never been in the trucking business but I've got to believe that you are allowed to deduct fuel expenses from your income. If that's the case then the feds already are subsidizing these trucker's fuel costs. In fact they're probably giving back a lot more than the 18.4 cents that they collected.
"As a percentage of the total fuel cost gas taxes are probably near a historic low."
I think you're right. I don't know that the taxes need to rise with gas price, but they should be tied to inflation so that we can keep up with basic road maintenance and repairs. They'd have to be given a bump over inflation now, to make up for the large deferrals in maintenance that have gone on the last 10 years.
Let's say that fuel taxes are actually going towards highway funding. Then I agree that they need to rise with inflation. Someone a while back made the comment that fuel taxes did not need to factor for inflation because since we use more gas every year that will increase the revenue. While that's true this additional revenue only reflects more people driving more miles. So in a world with zero inflation that would offset the fact that we now need to build and maintain more roads. However inflation is not zero so it doesn't take into account that these building and maintenance costs have also risen.
On top of that if we actually improve the efficiency of our fleet then taxes will need to be raised to reflect that the government is now taking in less money per mile driven. If EVs become available and start representing a measurable percentage of our fleet this gas tax as an effective user fee will probably have to be scrapped.
If the federal fuel tax had been pegged to inflation in 1991 it would now be 28.6 cents instead of 18.4 cents. Probably no one would have squawked all that much about a fuel tax rising less than 1 cent per year.
As a percentage of the total fuel cost gas taxes are probably near a historic low. The federal tax is 18.4 cents a gallon, the same as it's been since 1991. Even in a high tax state like CA I'd be willing to bet that you were paying a significantly higher percentage in fuel taxes in 1998 when gas was only about $1/gallon. In the 10 years since then your prices have risen about $2.50/gallon and I'd guess that no more than 25 cents of that is due to increased fuel taxes.
Agreed, but here's the issue...
Ten years ago or so, I was paying $0.899 for diesel. Same station today is charging $3.959. Even with the negligible rise in tax, the fuel has essentially quadrupled. What else has risen the same 300% in that time period? Not much - this means that cost has not been fully passed on to the end consumer.
Trucking is extremely competitive. In order to keep working, you have to keep rates down. But if the independents match the fleets on rates, they get killed on their expenses because they don't have the benefit of volume discounts on fuel and insurance, nor can they enjoy business financing rates on the truck/trailer. So by the time an owner/operator has paid those expenses, he doesn't have anything left... and many of them find themselves in negative territory even before the expenses are paid. So tax deductions don't help when you're already in red ink... you still don't have any actual cash.
Ten years ago or so, I was paying $0.899 for diesel. Same station today is charging $3.959. Even with the negligible rise in tax, the fuel has essentially quadrupled. What else has risen the same 300% in that time period?
The price of fuel ten years ago represented a historic low when adjusting for inflation. I'm not sure why people use this period as the benchmark for what gas prices should be. If you look at a longer period, say the last 50 years, we're probably only about 20% above where we would be had gasoline prices tracked inflation. Plenty of expenses have outpaced inflation by this much during this period. Add to that the fact that vehicles are tremedously more efficient than 50 years ago and we should be spending less of our budget on fuel. The only reason we aren't is somewhat self imposed. A lot of us have chosen to buy large, low mpg trucks and SUVs despite the fact that we really don't need the utility. A lot of us have adopted lifestyles that require us to drive more miles. If these choices represent a higher standard of living then there is a price tag associated with it.
If truckers aren't making any money then that is obviously an unsustainable situation and they will leave the field. The goods still have to make it to the market so eventually shipping fees will have to be increased and we'll be back to some sort of equilibrium. I believe that fuel prices will only continue to get more volatile so this is an issue that the trucking industry better get a handle on. I don't believe that it is the governments responsibility to sort this out. And, quite frankly, if I was a trucker I wouldn't want the government involved unless for some reason I was looking to screw things up worse than they already are.
My point was they were way over charging at 50. barrel & 3.25 gas...even moreso than now.
Technically, there is no such thing as overcharging. The market adjusts to supply and demand. The value of something is what people are willing to pay for it. In this case, it's a global commodity. If you were selling ham sandwiches and you had 100 to sell and no one would pay you the asking price of $20, then you'd probably sell them for $10. If someone was going to buy all 100 at your asking price of $20, and I came along and said "Those sandwiches are overpriced. You should only charge $10". You'd say "move along, because the next guy is willing to pay $20 and I'm selling ever sandwich I can make".
I get a kick out of people saying "Why doesn't the government do something about the gas prices?" Just what exactly are they supposed to do? Buy out OPEC? Stomp up and down and throw a tantrum until someone sells us oil at less than what other nations are willing to pay? I wish someone would outline exactly what they think the government should (or could) do to keep gasoline prices down. Try visiting the rest of the world if you want a reality check on what others are paying for a gallon of gas. When the US gets to $8 gallon like other nations, then maybe the world will take our whining more seriously.
That being said, we are really spoiled by the artificially low gas prices compared to most of the rest of the developed world. That has been part of the problem. Our economy, businesses, and nation are based on, and have grown up on and around, cheap oil. From lack of mass transportation to goods shipped by individual trucks rather than train, etc. So when the price starts to adjust upwards, it is a shock to the system. Businesses and individuals are going to have to make a lot of adjustments because gas will never come back down. Between the upcoming oil peak and the demand from a global economy, the worst is yet to come.
The price of fuel ten years ago represented a historic low when adjusting for inflation. I'm not sure why people use this period as the benchmark for what gas prices should be.
Hypothetical on your part. The reason that figure is used is because that's what fuel prices actually WERE. It's speculation as to what they "should be" or "should have been". You could say that a Benz S-Series "should be" $XX,XXX, but the only debatable argument involves what the prices actually are. Inflation-adjusted prices are fine for financial industry analysis, but Joe Average doesn't handle his checking account that way. If it costs $5 today, he doesn't care that it's "cheaper" than it was 20 years ago when adjusted for inflation. All Joe knows is, it's five bucks.
If you want to have it narrowed down, I paid $3.239 for diesel on Feb 12. Same station on March 20 was $3.959. That's a 22% increase in 5 weeks.
As was mentioned in the article, the direct equivalent is the farming situation. Independent farmers were subsidized to keep the industry in check - otherwise, the corporate farms would be able to set prices at their whim. If the independent truckers all fall by the wayside, the same thing would happen to freight shipping. We all agree that everything is delivered by truck - if you're down to a much smaller group of national and super-regional carriers, they can set the rates wherever they want and they will indeed pass that price on to the end consumer because there's no alternative.
Everyone seems to accept fuel surcharges on the airlines, but no one wants to have a similar surcharged passed on to them for the goods they buy all the time when diesel prices see these types of increases.
Well put and a good analogy. As long as there are buyers at a price then the price is the correct market price. There's nothing more that can be said.
Trying to have the government intervene to 'protect' us is wrong-headed and bound for failure. The only way(s) to get prices to slow down the upward spiral or to actually decrease is to reduce/eliminate the buyers. That has an immediate effect on market prices. IOW it's all on us.
As long as we continue to go to the pumps in increasing numbers and buy whatever the oil retailers have to offer then prices will never come down longterm. IOW it's all on us.
Yes I also agree with you two. If you want gasoline or anything else you have to pay the price. There are people in the world and this country who either can't pay or don't want to pay the price, and they don't get gasoline.
There is a certain amount of gasoline and diesel available in the world everyday, a lot of people who want it, and it basically goes to those who are willing to pay the most. It's a very fair and logical system from a capitalistic viewpoint.
All this feeds into the 'peak oil' question. Would we have hit peak production if oil price stayed at $30? Yes, IMO. It's the $90+ price, and the expectation of that price in the future, that makes oil sands, heavy oil, tight gas, and other projects viable and, maybe, oil shale a possibility. We can't have today's levels of consumption at $30.
Interesting that crude-oil futures dropped 1%. Wonder if the traders read the news?
"U.S. consumers caused a remarkable 1 percent drop in gas consumption the last eight-week-period over a year ago. Gas use should be rising 1.5 percent annually just to keep up with the population."
Writers always find ways to put their spin on data - gas use might have dropped because of higher prices, but what about all the bad weather - you'd think that would also reduce gas use.
It's speculation as to what they "should be" or "should have been".
I agree. However you're the one that seems to be commenting on what gas prices should be based upon what they were 10 years ago or 5 weeks ago. If diesel fuel is $3.95/gallon that's what it actually is and that's all that matters.
I believe that our government's farm subsidies ultimately benefit the corporate farm the most. Take these subsidies away and the corporate farms would actually have to compete. Your suggestion of corporate farms setting the price would be a violation of anti-trust laws. Same would be true if the trucking industry did this.
I believe that our government's farm subsidies ultimately benefit the corporate farm the most. Take these subsidies away and the corporate farms would actually have to compete. Your suggestion of corporate farms setting the price would be a violation of anti-trust laws. Same would be true if the trucking industry did this.
Compete with whom? Farms from other countries, maybe, but they'd certainly have no incentive to compete with the other US corporate farms. The independent farmers were supported to keep the work here, and to keep the big-money farms from getting comfortable
If the independent truckers vanish, there are no foreign trucking companies to compete with, and the remaining fleets would set the price because there'd be no one else competing with them, anti-trust or not.
We will obviously have to wait and see if the government will do anything, but the failure of the independent truckers doesn't bode well for all the other small businesses out there feeling the squeeze because they can't match the "corporates". Economic recovery should include the mom+pop businesses too.
I'm still not in the new house. I Just spent last two days loading up moving trailer. The new house closing date is March 28th. Today was a holiday so there are only 4 more days of the 94 mile round trip commute. It took 4 months and 3 weeks from signing contract to closing on the new house. I think that was fast of them. Starting a week from today, my commute will be 30 miles round trip.
Gas has eased here and today I saw $2.97 locally. I got some BP regular for $3.05 because I get 10% rebate on BP gas purchases with my BP Visa card, so it was like paying $2.75.
I drove my Silverado to Fla. starting on March 8th and spent well over $400 in gas on the round trip in 9 days. Gas spiked to $3.47 the day after I got to Fla. I managed about 19 avg mpg for the V8 4X4 ext cab, including the first 5 hours of driving through up to 10 inches of snow on unplowed roads on the way down there. Flying would have been $450 for each of the two of us, but I needed the truck to do my job, once down there. I remember that trip in my Astro used to be $200 or less for gas for the entire 2400 miles round trip.
If the independent truckers vanish, there are no foreign trucking companies to compete with, and the remaining fleets would set the price because there'd be no one else competing with them, anti-trust or not.
Over last couple of months, have seen a tv commercial (don't remember sponsor, perhaps a railroad association) that gave a statistic on volume of fuel (diesel) to ship an amount of weight a certain distance via rail. Don't know how that would compare to a semi truck, but the figures were impressive. Perhaps there is incentive for railroads and mfrs/producers to team up and do more medium to long haul shipping by rail. Obviously, trucks ultimately have to take freight from rail yard to final destinations. Is the time right for railroads to expand their capacity? If any subsidies, would Fed Govt subsidies to railroads to expand be justified?
Yeah, I've seen that commercial. It's the one where they drive what looks like a Civic hybrid onto a rail car? I think the stat they quoted was that railroads can move a ton of cargo 423 miles on a gallon of fuel.
In contrast, what's the biggest load a tractor trailer could carry? Maybe 40 tons? And what kind of mpg would it get? Maybe 8? If I'm doing the math right, that calculates a ton of cargo 320 miles on a gallon.
The Semi truck can deliver your ton of stuff right to your doorstep. Some one has to unload off the railroad car onto a truck then drive X miles to my doorstep. I am all for hauling as much across the US by rail as possible. Some things such as produce require shorter haul times than is possible by rail. Much is hauled by 747 cargo airplanes. Wonder what that costs per ton mile.
In contrast, what's the biggest load a tractor trailer could carry? Maybe 40 tons? And what kind of mpg would it get? Maybe 8? If I'm doing the math right, that calculates a ton of cargo 320 miles on a gallon.
Then there are the other cost comparisons: Cost of repairing damage to highways from semis vs rail costs of overpasses, underpasses, grade crossing, rail maintenance, etc.
Well yeah, obviously it's a team effort...you need both trains AND trucks. FWIW, not too many home deliveries are made in tractor trailers, either. Usually the big rigs will go to a centralized hub, and then distribute stuff via smaller trucks.
Only time I ever had an eighteen wheeler show up at my front door was when I had my garage built. The lumber, trusses, and all other material were trucked out from Ohio, and the flatbed trailer even had its own little crane on it to unload.
If you have a lot of stuff you need shipped, but it doesn't really need to get there all that quickly, a train is probably the way to go. But with a lot of smaller shipments, adding a train into the mix probably just complicates the logistics.
tedebear: Revenues for road maintenance and repair come from more than just tax on fuel. I pay all of the fees listed below. The cost is the same, whether I drive my cars or not.
Federal fuel taxes are levied on gasoline (18.4 cents per gallon) and diesel fuel (24.4 cents per gallon), and some automotive products (tires, if I recall correctly).
There is no federal vehicle registration for passenger cars and light trucks.
The money raised by the federal taxes is used by states for road and bridge construction and maintenance. This is the money that is being diverted for non-road "demonstration projects," including bike paths.
How each state raises money for the portion of road and bridge repair and maintenance is up to that particular state, but the all levy gasoline taxes, and all rely heavily on them. The average state gasoline excise tax is 18.2 cents per gallon, with another 10.2 cents per gallon added through other state taxes.
In Pennsylvania, all fuel taxes go a special fund earmarked only (as per the state constitution) for road and bridge repairs and maintenance. Vehicle registration fees and driver's license fees also go into this fund as well, but they are not nearly as important as the tax on fuels (registering a passenger car costs $36 annually; driver's licenses are renewed every four years, and the fee is only paid at renewal time). I doubt that it is different in other states.
Highlighting a problem that is cropping up in other states, the Pennsylvania Department of Revenue noted that taxable gallons of gasoline had fallen by 4 percent, from 5.2 billion gallons in fiscal year end 2005 to 5 billion gallons in fiscal year end 2007. Revenues from the liquid fuels tax grew by only 25 percent from 1997 through 2007, whereas other taxes revenues grew by 50 percent.
PennDOT has reported a 0.13 percent decline in vehicular traffic at 59 counting points, and the Federal Highway Administration indicates, in preliminary reports, that nationally, miles driven in December 2007 were only 99.6 percent of those driven a year earlier. All of which diminish the reveunes available for road and bridge construction. And lest you think that because the number of miles driven is declining, Pennsylvania can spend less on road and bridge construction - Pennsylvania is grappling with a shortfall in funds for road and bridge work, and this is not making it any easier. Nor is the Keystone State the only one facing this problem.
Nothing wrong with biking - I do it myself (although not to work). But you are not "subsidizing" drivers through the vehicle registration fees and driver's license fees you still pay. Revenue generated by fuel taxes constitutes the bulk of the money for road and bridge projects.
Yes but can't most railyards just take the container off of the railway carrier and attach it to a truck trailer? I've seen lots of tractors hauling what looks like containers attached to a sort of specialized flatbed trailer.
Comments
There's a new windmill in a neighbor's backyard a few blocks away that I just noticed walking the dog next door. Didn't see a generator on top, but it was hard to tell. Looked like it was about 30' in the air - maybe the owner is using it to get rid of gophers.
It makes anything we have here dirt cheap to the rest of the world and anything in the rest of the world ungodly expensive to we poor colonists.
US Domestic industry loves it but importers like BMW, MB, Toyota, GM hate the fact that in the last 15 months they've either lost 30+% or their products need to be sold 30+% higher than before.
VW and BMW bringing inexpensive low margin diesels to the US is probably not very likely in the near term. A new clean diesel Jetta TDI that should have sold for $25000 back in Jan 07 now needs to be sold for $33000!!
I could agree with you on those cars coming from the EU. The Jetta is built in Mexico. The Mercedes ML,GL, & R320 CDI are all built in the USA. I am not sure which BMWs are built here. If the X5 diesel comes from a US plant it will get a test drive from me. The X5 is the best handling of ALL SUVs.
PS
Except maybe the Cayenne?
On the contrary, China loves the Kyoto Accord -- mostly because it would never apply to China!
That's right, listen closely to the description of that "agreement" when folks like Al Gore describe it. They're careful to say that the Kyoto restrictions apply to "developed" nations. And China and India, two of the world's biggest polluters, simply aren't developed, according to environmentalists.
So they can spew all the pollution possible into the atmosphere, and only we, the United States, have to restrict ourselves and our economy to fit the Kyoto concept.
Of course, this proves that most environmentalists don't really care about the environment, only a left-wing political agenda. That's the REAL inconvenient truth.
.
Our gas did take about a 7 cent dip yesterday. Costco was back down to $3.37 for regular.
Kyoto is obviously a flawed treaty. At the time it was essentially the best deal that could be cut. I'd like to see it revisited as now, 8 years down the road, you can no longer exempt China and India.
Revenues from the federal fuel tax are only generated when you buy fuel. So, if your cars are sitting at home, they are not using fuel, and thus not generating revenue for road and bridge construction and repair. Realistically, you are not subsidizing anything if your cars are sitting at home when you ride your bicycle to work.
Revenues for road maintenance and repair come from more than just tax on fuel. I pay all of the fees listed below. The cost is the same, whether I drive my cars or not.
Local gas price drifted back down to $3.03 today. However, it's officially spring and the riding season is here.
kernick:
The gasoline tax at the pump - the retail tax - is just a small part of the amount of money that flows to the government from drivers. You need to consider all the $ that goes to government, if you want to consider all the costs.
What do automobile drivers pay? State registration, city registration in some areas, inspection fee, titles, plates
And then you have all the automobile insurance money that goes into supporting many, many thousands of jobs in the insurance industry; and they and the companies all pay taxes.
And then you have the sales taxes on the cars themselves, all the parts and tires, and then you have the taxes people pay who build, fix, or sell autos and parts.
We could probably add to this, but I think you get the idea that each any every driver in this country is pumping thousands of dollars into government directly and indirectly each year!!
vchiu, "Gas Saving Gizmos & Gadgets" #171, 22 Mar 2008 8:00 pm
I am sort of surprised that more gizmos and scams haven't arisen along with the price of gas.
No, the US did not sign the treaty. As you stated the Kyoto accord does not apply to China. It also does not apply to the USA either.
'' And China and India, two of the world's biggest polluters, simply aren't developed, according to environmentalists."
China and India have a point. Why should the US keep a high standard of living while they are trying to lift hundreds of millions of people above the poverty level. China is trying to provide basic services like electricity and water to many of their people.
From 1996 to 2006 the USA increased oil imports by an estimated 3.6 million barrels per day. China, with 4 times the people, only increased 3.1 million barrels per day. I would think it would make sense for all countries to work out a deal, but I doubt it will happen. We can only hope there isn't over a war over all this.
The GW issue, in my view, is not the main issue facing the world. High energy and resource prices coupled with increasing populations will be a much bigger issue in the next few decades. The competition for the resources is already creating problems. It will just get worse. And it is not just Asia that is growing.
The Middle East has a few countries that are expanding rather nicely. In the Oilwatch Monthly done by Rembrandt Koppelaar (theoildrum) he has a chart (10) showing that oil demand for OPEC countries went from 5 MBD to over 6 MBD in about 6 years. In another 5 years they could be at 7 or 8 MBD. The KSA is undergoing a massive increase in population. The demographics show that they will have a large number of kids reaching the driving age in a few years. When that happens they will want jobs and cars. Jobs + cars = fuel, lots of fuel. Check out www.skyscrapercity.com to see how crazy it is getting. Lots of tall buildings in Dubai = lots of people = lots of cars = lots of fuel, energy and material.
In another ten years we will look back fondly to when gasoline was only $4 a gallon.
"a gallon of regular at Amerigo was going for $5.20. Premium was fetching an eye-popping $5.40 a gallon,"
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/12/us/12gorda.html?adxnnl=1&ref=automobiles&adxnn- lx=1206281088-7UmGp/dRi6Tdm/Zwo2K9oQ&pagewanted=print
The sad part is all the idiots that complain and curse the attendant.
Gas ( unleaded reg ) is $ 15 HK dollar per liter, which is around US $ 7.30.
Most people use the well developed public transportation system.
The United States needs to do a better job of looking into the future...and plan housing and work areas close to each other. We need public transportation ( any type) , plus alternative fuel vehicles, IMO.
We used the MTR subway, the ferry, the double decker buses, and smaller redtop buses. Have not used the taxi yet, though a friend drives us around in a Toyota Alphard minivan sometimes.
The SMART car looks nice here...and there are many small vehicles here.
It is amazing how some people think that guy in the booth making minimum wage has raised the price of gas. The truth is we are lucky he or she even comes to work with the high price of gas. Every gas station convenience store in my area has "help wanted all shifts" in the window.
A guy a few houses down from mine owns one of the local hotels. He's always complaining that he can't keep employees, and he pays $8 an hour. People see little value in earning a wage, since it buys so little. Such is the insidious nature of inflation.
Oil prices certainly contribute to inflation. So do government ethanol mandates, which drive up the price of food. And when the Federal Reserve decides to print extra money to bail out investment banks, it de-values our money that much more.
But those $600 stimulus checks are in the mail, so I guess everything's okay. I just hope they get here soon, before inflation reduces their value to $500 ..... or $400 ....
.
http://energyshortage.org/
Now we can see how others around the world are dealing with fuel shortages and high prices all in one place.
Near the bottom the following news item caught my eye: "Motorists in Venezuelan city panic after fuel shortage" This is the same country where you can buy gasoline for 7 to 17 cents gallon - $2 to fill a typical car. They may actually have the cheapest gasoline in the world. I hear Hummers are big sellers.
The good news is gas is only 17 cents a gallon. The bad news is greedy Chavez sold it all to the USA for $3.50 per gallon. They probably only have good gas supplies just before election time. I think Iran pulls the same kind of political BS.
It's certainly more expensive, even on a relative basis. But I still wouldn't want to live in Caracas.
I've also heard that the Iraqi government fixes gas prices at 5 cents per gallon. Wouldn't want to live there, either.
.
It's more than rough out there for the owner-operators... you can also read an comment on other articles and opinions at my blog here at Edmunds, The Big Rigs.
kcram - Pickups Host
#2 yes chad trucks done use gas but deisel follows ALL the price hikes.
#3 you better check with some truckers...my weekly trip from SO Cal to PHx and back includes a stop at the Flying J truck stop...You should here the truckers talk and complain..It def and directly affects them....And what if the retailer doesnt want to pay for the price hikes?...you dont think the truckers will strike?.... guess again...they have before and will again.
#4 Do i think the gov will sit and sideline and watch the grocery store shelves empty?...LOL they havnt done a thing ..They've sidelined themselves over our gas and oil argument you and i are talkin bout right now....lol... I didnt see them do anything about that... nor will they in reguards to groceries.
#5 Here in Cal. the last time there was a strike in the grocery buss. Some of the stores..like next to my bank just closed its doors...never could recover VONS...a very large company and the strike was 6 yrs ago...just closed this store 6 months ago....almost 6 yrs after the strike..
Dont be thin king the gov will do anything when they wont do anything about the current oil problem...They probably have stock in food and futures and dont care if it goes up either.
Later
Caaz
p.s. Look at what the host just posted above my remarks...read it and check it out.
Therein lies the problem. They are small business men and women that do not have the money to lobby a Congress that does not move without being paid off.
I hope they all conveniently run out of diesel on all the major freeways in the largest cities of the USA, April 1st. That would get some attention.
In CA diesel is taxed at 72 cents per gallon. Highest in the nation.
http://www.californiagasprices.com/tax_info.aspx
Also, they could probably sell a 520d for the same price as a 528i.
When we look at hybrids, the economical ones have succeeded, and "performance" hybrids have basically failed.
Anyone want to guess how it will turn out for diesels?
Will people want peak fuel economy, like hybrid customers?
Or will they want peak performance, sacrificing MPGs to get it?
It's a big gamble.
When gas prices were below $1.50 I used to advocate raising fuel taxes. Not a popular idea and one of the biggest objections was that feds have no business manipulating the free market. Okay, I can accept that argument but it works both ways. If the feds take any action to artificially lower the price of fuel that is also manipulation and it also represents a pro-consumption policy.
I've never been in the trucking business but I've got to believe that you are allowed to deduct fuel expenses from your income. If that's the case then the feds already are subsidizing these trucker's fuel costs. In fact they're probably giving back a lot more than the 18.4 cents that they collected.
I think you're right. I don't know that the taxes need to rise with gas price, but they should be tied to inflation so that we can keep up with basic road maintenance and repairs. They'd have to be given a bump over inflation now, to make up for the large deferrals in maintenance that have gone on the last 10 years.
On top of that if we actually improve the efficiency of our fleet then taxes will need to be raised to reflect that the government is now taking in less money per mile driven. If EVs become available and start representing a measurable percentage of our fleet this gas tax as an effective user fee will probably have to be scrapped.
If the federal fuel tax had been pegged to inflation in 1991 it would now be 28.6 cents instead of 18.4 cents. Probably no one would have squawked all that much about a fuel tax rising less than 1 cent per year.
Agreed, but here's the issue...
Ten years ago or so, I was paying $0.899 for diesel. Same station today is charging $3.959. Even with the negligible rise in tax, the fuel has essentially quadrupled. What else has risen the same 300% in that time period? Not much - this means that cost has not been fully passed on to the end consumer.
Trucking is extremely competitive. In order to keep working, you have to keep rates down. But if the independents match the fleets on rates, they get killed on their expenses because they don't have the benefit of volume discounts on fuel and insurance, nor can they enjoy business financing rates on the truck/trailer. So by the time an owner/operator has paid those expenses, he doesn't have anything left... and many of them find themselves in negative territory even before the expenses are paid. So tax deductions don't help when you're already in red ink... you still don't have any actual cash.
kcram - Pickups Host
The price of fuel ten years ago represented a historic low when adjusting for inflation. I'm not sure why people use this period as the benchmark for what gas prices should be. If you look at a longer period, say the last 50 years, we're probably only about 20% above where we would be had gasoline prices tracked inflation. Plenty of expenses have outpaced inflation by this much during this period. Add to that the fact that vehicles are tremedously more efficient than 50 years ago and we should be spending less of our budget on fuel. The only reason we aren't is somewhat self imposed. A lot of us have chosen to buy large, low mpg trucks and SUVs despite the fact that we really don't need the utility. A lot of us have adopted lifestyles that require us to drive more miles. If these choices represent a higher standard of living then there is a price tag associated with it.
If truckers aren't making any money then that is obviously an unsustainable situation and they will leave the field. The goods still have to make it to the market so eventually shipping fees will have to be increased and we'll be back to some sort of equilibrium. I believe that fuel prices will only continue to get more volatile so this is an issue that the trucking industry better get a handle on. I don't believe that it is the governments responsibility to sort this out. And, quite frankly, if I was a trucker I wouldn't want the government involved unless for some reason I was looking to screw things up worse than they already are.
Technically, there is no such thing as overcharging. The market adjusts to supply and demand. The value of something is what people are willing to pay for it. In this case, it's a global commodity. If you were selling ham sandwiches and you had 100 to sell and no one would pay you the asking price of $20, then you'd probably sell them for $10. If someone was going to buy all 100 at your asking price of $20, and I came along and said "Those sandwiches are overpriced. You should only charge $10". You'd say "move along, because the next guy is willing to pay $20 and I'm selling ever sandwich I can make".
I get a kick out of people saying "Why doesn't the government do something about the gas prices?" Just what exactly are they supposed to do? Buy out OPEC? Stomp up and down and throw a tantrum until someone sells us oil at less than what other nations are willing to pay? I wish someone would outline exactly what they think the government should (or could) do to keep gasoline prices down. Try visiting the rest of the world if you want a reality check on what others are paying for a gallon of gas. When the US gets to $8 gallon like other nations, then maybe the world will take our whining more seriously.
That being said, we are really spoiled by the artificially low gas prices compared to most of the rest of the developed world. That has been part of the problem. Our economy, businesses, and nation are based on, and have grown up on and around, cheap oil. From lack of mass transportation to goods shipped by individual trucks rather than train, etc. So when the price starts to adjust upwards, it is a shock to the system. Businesses and individuals are going to have to make a lot of adjustments because gas will never come back down. Between the upcoming oil peak and the demand from a global economy, the worst is yet to come.
Hypothetical on your part. The reason that figure is used is because that's what fuel prices actually WERE. It's speculation as to what they "should be" or "should have been". You could say that a Benz S-Series "should be" $XX,XXX, but the only debatable argument involves what the prices actually are. Inflation-adjusted prices are fine for financial industry analysis, but Joe Average doesn't handle his checking account that way. If it costs $5 today, he doesn't care that it's "cheaper" than it was 20 years ago when adjusted for inflation. All Joe knows is, it's five bucks.
If you want to have it narrowed down, I paid $3.239 for diesel on Feb 12. Same station on March 20 was $3.959. That's a 22% increase in 5 weeks.
As was mentioned in the article, the direct equivalent is the farming situation. Independent farmers were subsidized to keep the industry in check - otherwise, the corporate farms would be able to set prices at their whim. If the independent truckers all fall by the wayside, the same thing would happen to freight shipping. We all agree that everything is delivered by truck - if you're down to a much smaller group of national and super-regional carriers, they can set the rates wherever they want and they will indeed pass that price on to the end consumer because there's no alternative.
Everyone seems to accept fuel surcharges on the airlines, but no one wants to have a similar surcharged passed on to them for the goods they buy all the time when diesel prices see these types of increases.
kcram - Pickups Host
http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/commodities-rebound-more-volatility-ahead/- - story.aspx?guid=%7BD52E6018%2D7C47%2D4C68%2DAE64%2D3161AC4E141C%7D
Trying to have the government intervene to 'protect' us is wrong-headed and bound for failure. The only way(s) to get prices to slow down the upward spiral or to actually decrease is to reduce/eliminate the buyers. That has an immediate effect on market prices. IOW it's all on us.
As long as we continue to go to the pumps in increasing numbers and buy whatever the oil retailers have to offer then prices will never come down longterm. IOW it's all on us.
There is a certain amount of gasoline and diesel available in the world everyday, a lot of people who want it, and it basically goes to those who are willing to pay the most. It's a very fair and logical system from a capitalistic viewpoint.
"U.S. consumers caused a remarkable 1 percent drop in gas consumption the last eight-week-period over a year ago. Gas use should be rising 1.5 percent annually just to keep up with the population."
Drivers Stay In, Gas Prices Drop -- When? (Yahoo News).
I agree. However you're the one that seems to be commenting on what gas prices should be based upon what they were 10 years ago or 5 weeks ago. If diesel fuel is $3.95/gallon that's what it actually is and that's all that matters.
I believe that our government's farm subsidies ultimately benefit the corporate farm the most. Take these subsidies away and the corporate farms would actually have to compete. Your suggestion of corporate farms setting the price would be a violation of anti-trust laws. Same would be true if the trucking industry did this.
Compete with whom? Farms from other countries, maybe, but they'd certainly have no incentive to compete with the other US corporate farms. The independent farmers were supported to keep the work here, and to keep the big-money farms from getting comfortable
If the independent truckers vanish, there are no foreign trucking companies to compete with, and the remaining fleets would set the price because there'd be no one else competing with them, anti-trust or not.
We will obviously have to wait and see if the government will do anything, but the failure of the independent truckers doesn't bode well for all the other small businesses out there feeling the squeeze because they can't match the "corporates". Economic recovery should include the mom+pop businesses too.
Good debate, though
Gas has eased here and today I saw $2.97 locally. I got some BP regular for $3.05 because I get 10% rebate on BP gas purchases with my BP Visa card, so it was like paying $2.75.
I drove my Silverado to Fla. starting on March 8th and spent well over $400 in gas on the round trip in 9 days. Gas spiked to $3.47 the day after I got to Fla. I managed about 19 avg mpg for the V8 4X4 ext cab, including the first 5 hours of driving through up to 10 inches of snow on unplowed roads on the way down there. Flying would have been $450 for each of the two of us, but I needed the truck to do my job, once down there. I remember that trip in my Astro used to be $200 or less for gas for the entire 2400 miles round trip.
KC has some links in a recent blog.
Some truckers are beyond "hurting"
There was a shutdown in Pittsburgh today:
Fuel protestors ‘park it’ for one day in Western Pennsylvania
April 1 is the day, supposedly, for a national truckers strike.
Over last couple of months, have seen a tv commercial (don't remember sponsor, perhaps a railroad association) that gave a statistic on volume of fuel (diesel) to ship an amount of weight a certain distance via rail. Don't know how that would compare to a semi truck, but the figures were impressive. Perhaps there is incentive for railroads and mfrs/producers to team up and do more medium to long haul shipping by rail. Obviously, trucks ultimately have to take freight from rail yard to final destinations. Is the time right for railroads to expand their capacity? If any subsidies, would Fed Govt subsidies to railroads to expand be justified?
That is already being done, and Federal money is involved in various ways.
In contrast, what's the biggest load a tractor trailer could carry? Maybe 40 tons? And what kind of mpg would it get? Maybe 8? If I'm doing the math right, that calculates a ton of cargo 320 miles on a gallon.
Then there are the other cost comparisons: Cost of repairing damage to highways from semis vs rail costs of overpasses, underpasses, grade crossing, rail maintenance, etc.
Regards,
OW
Only time I ever had an eighteen wheeler show up at my front door was when I had my garage built. The lumber, trusses, and all other material were trucked out from Ohio, and the flatbed trailer even had its own little crane on it to unload.
If you have a lot of stuff you need shipped, but it doesn't really need to get there all that quickly, a train is probably the way to go. But with a lot of smaller shipments, adding a train into the mix probably just complicates the logistics.
Most of the cargo that is handled by more than one mode of transit is containerized these days, though.
Federal fuel taxes are levied on gasoline (18.4 cents per gallon) and diesel fuel (24.4 cents per gallon), and some automotive products (tires, if I recall correctly).
There is no federal vehicle registration for passenger cars and light trucks.
The money raised by the federal taxes is used by states for road and bridge construction and maintenance. This is the money that is being diverted for non-road "demonstration projects," including bike paths.
How each state raises money for the portion of road and bridge repair and maintenance is up to that particular state, but the all levy gasoline taxes, and all rely heavily on them. The average state gasoline excise tax is 18.2 cents per gallon, with another 10.2 cents per gallon added through other state taxes.
In Pennsylvania, all fuel taxes go a special fund earmarked only (as per the state constitution) for road and bridge repairs and maintenance. Vehicle registration fees and driver's license fees also go into this fund as well, but they are not nearly as important as the tax on fuels (registering a passenger car costs $36 annually; driver's licenses are renewed every four years, and the fee is only paid at renewal time). I doubt that it is different in other states.
Highlighting a problem that is cropping up in other states, the Pennsylvania Department of Revenue noted that taxable gallons of gasoline had fallen by 4 percent, from 5.2 billion gallons in fiscal year end 2005 to 5 billion gallons in fiscal year end 2007. Revenues from the liquid fuels tax grew by only 25 percent from 1997 through 2007, whereas other taxes revenues grew by 50 percent.
PennDOT has reported a 0.13 percent decline in vehicular traffic at 59 counting points, and the Federal Highway Administration indicates, in preliminary reports, that nationally, miles driven in December 2007 were only 99.6 percent of those driven a year earlier. All of which diminish the reveunes available for road and bridge construction. And lest you think that because the number of miles driven is declining, Pennsylvania can spend less on road and bridge construction - Pennsylvania is grappling with a shortfall in funds for road and bridge work, and this is not making it any easier. Nor is the Keystone State the only one facing this problem.
Nothing wrong with biking - I do it myself (although not to work). But you are not "subsidizing" drivers through the vehicle registration fees and driver's license fees you still pay. Revenue generated by fuel taxes constitutes the bulk of the money for road and bridge projects.