What If - Gasoline is $5 a gallon in 2010?

brucej · April 2005

There is a remarkable consistency in the delusional thinking at every level of American life these days. When Americans think about the future at all, they seem to think it will be pretty much they way we live now. The buyers of 4000 square foot McHouses think that they will be able to continue heating them with cheap natural gas, not to mention commuting seventy miles a day. (Cont.)

Complete article here:

http://www.energybulletin.net/5261.html

weatherman2 · April 2005

Brucej,

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

larsb · April 2005

Imagine this chart when gas is more than DOUBLE the $2.31 it is now...

brucej · April 2005

(If you have loved ones in the Detroit area you'll want to encourage them to get---out---now!)

"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

euphonium · April 2005

"Ford cited fuel prices as a key factor when it warned investors that its
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."

kevm14 · April 2005

I imagine the risk of auto accidents are far greater than disease from mass transit.

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.

avalon02wh · April 2005

I tell ya, miss a day and the whole discussion goes right by.

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

avalon02wh · April 2005

Nice quote. I think a big part of the problem with Ford management and the UAW is they spend too much energy fighting each other. Both sides need to lower salaries, work harder and get rid of dead wood to remain competitive. (same goes for GM)

aquaticexplore · April 2005

I live in Canada, but think America is a fabulous country (I went to grad school there). Great people, great philosophy, great innovators. However (sorry, you new it was coming), the love affair with the big SUVs and pickups is insane. Nearly half of the US trade deficit stems from fuel imports, much from hostile countries. I read a story about a guy in CA who traded his SUV in for a Prius because he felt he was one of the persons contributing to the kidnapping and terrorist execution of American citizens in the middle east. I agree with his view.

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.

grbeck · April 2005

aquaticexplore: 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.

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."

brucej · April 2005

April 14 (Bloomberg) -- Bogged down by a decline in sales of pickups and other large vehicles, Ford Motor Co. is struggling. Sales are just one facet of the trouble. Ford is also having a tough time explaining how the slowdown will affect earnings.

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

brucej · April 2005

"GM's situation has deteriorated since then. First-quarter U.S. sales fell 5.1 percent, while Toyota Motor Corp.'s rose 9.1 percent. Some directors have sought counsel from a friend, former GM CEO John F. Smith Jr., according to another person familiar with the situation. And the board has asked Wagoner to present a tougher plan for fixing U.S. sales, others familiar with the situation say. The board's next scheduled meeting is May 2."

Full Story Here:
http://quote.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000103&sid=a2lZr.RIque0&refer=news_index

lemko · April 2005

The six-cylinder Chevrolet Impala gets better fuel economy than the 4-cylinder Nissan Altima.

"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!

andre1969 · April 2005

when we were talking about rising fuel prices, one thing that got brought up was that GM would be the best poised to ride out a storm like this because it had the most fuel-efficient big cars. At the time, just about any non-supercharged 3.8 was EPA-rated at 29-30 on the highway, and the Impala 3.4 is 21/32.

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.

li_sailor · April 2005

...shale oil...
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.

li_sailor · April 2005

Hey, maybe we should just talk about what we like/dislike about SUVs. Might generate a post or 6 (0,000) :=)

...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....

oregonboy · April 2005

Any alternative energy source that requires any oil-driven input to develop, process, or deliver will naturally increase in cost as conventional, oil-based energy sources rise in cost.

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

li_sailor · April 2005

The six-cylinder Chevrolet Impala gets better fuel economy than the 4-cylinder Nissan Altima.

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.

andre1969 · April 2005

if I'd exactly call a 3.4 Impala and a 2.5 Altima a night-and-day difference. Both of them have interiors that they should be ashamed of when it comes to plastics, fit and finish, etc. About the only difference here is that the Impala's interior might have "Fischer Price" stamped on it somewhere, versus "Playskool" for the Altima! :P And I'm sorry, but black electrical-looking tape should NOT be an exterior material of ANY car, let alone an Altima. Especially a top-line Altima with a $30K pricetag. (thanks to Grbeck who pointed out at the Philly auto show that Nissan, Ford, and even Toyota have discovered that tape is a viable construction material in cars)

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.

lemko · April 2005

...It's those '55 Dodge taillights! If they had three stacked taillights on each side you'd definately have one.

li_sailor · April 2005

I've driven neither, but I've driven plenty of Chevys and plenty of Nissans. The ride quality is typically not close. From what I've read of these two, the attributes are similarly disparate.

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 :=)

lemko · April 2005

...I had the good taste not to have an SUV in the first place! Anyway, I already have a quality car that gets 25 mpg - my 2002 Seville STS! My girlfriend gets phenomenal fuel economy with both her 2001 Chevrolet Impala and 2005 Buick LaCrosse.

PF_Flyer · April 2005

If you want to get into individual cars, sue the search tools in theleft sidebar to track those topics down.

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

lemko · April 2005

...why is it that I read about oil prices falling in the Business section of the paper yet the price at the gas station hasn't - even by pennies?

PF_Flyer · April 2005

It took a solid six days of falling oil and gasoline futures, but the price at the pump has backed off 6 cents in three steps here over the last 4 days.

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

kernick · April 2005

...I had the good taste not to have an SUV in the first place!

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.

PF_Flyer · April 2005

Let's not get into what people are drivng or what they should or should not drive please. Thanks!

explorerx4 · April 2005

i probably will still have an suv because it will still be cheaper than flying a family where we want to go. it will still depend how far you go though.

railroadjames · April 2005

I think a little leeway on this topic is in order..hosts... The topic is, at the least, vague or better yet, a generalization of thoughts about..."WHAT IF? There have been some interesting opinions about this "topic heading". Soooo, How about a little slack to give folks room to think and express. The 'ol ....lets see what comes from this topic would be appreciated. Other words....Don't Styfull us.
Railroadjames(free thinkers= fresh air)

P.S. All due respect to you, the hosts and we(the forum) appreciate this avenue of hybrid gardening.

gagrice · April 2005

I just picked up and drove a new Passat TDI to San Diego from Portland Oregon. I crisscrossed CA from the redwoods to the trail of 1849. Only the last 408 miles was on high speed Interstate highways. The first 1000 miles we averaged 37.5 MPG mostly driving under 75 MPH. Today doing the last leg we were on high speed rarely getting under 80 MPH. That dropped us to the 35.5 MPG range. It is the best handling car other than a Porsche 911 I have ever driven. I had a hard time getting the drivers seat from my wife on the back roads of CA. It is a pleasure to drive. Not the smoothest riding with the 17" wheels and low profile tires. I will take good handling over soft ride any day. We used less that 39 gallons of diesel for the trip. We got to CA on the first tank of Oregon # 2 diesel. We found an ARCO station and filled up with BP ECD-1 Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel. One more fill up in Fresno for a total of 3 times on the 1400+ mile trip. Diesel prices were + or - 2 cents of regular unleaded except the ARCO station here in San Diego. It is 10 cents more today. Anyone curious what ULSD diesel that is mandated for 2006 will cost, it looks like it will stay about the same as regular unleaded. As it stands now the VW TDIs that are currently being sold using ULSD are greener than equivalent gas cars burning regular unleaded outside of CA, including the hybrids.

PF_Flyer · April 2005

I know it spins off into many areas, but this topic is NOT about speeding, or SUV's or what cars you're driving or would like to drive. And like every topic, it's definitely not to be used as an arena to duke it out with another user.

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.

larsb · April 2005

quote gagrice-"As it stands now the VW TDIs that are currently being sold using ULSD are greener than equivalent gas cars burning regular unleaded outside of CA, including the hybrids."-end quote

You have an EPA scores test page to prove that? I'd like to see it.....

lemko · April 2005

...with a badge on the side that looked like a roadway with a green leaf sprouting from it. Underneath was "FFV." What does FFV mean?

oregonboy · April 2005

Flexable Fuel Vehicle

"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

li_sailor · April 2005

My take on the SUV/PU, etc. thing was that, if gas prices hit $5 anytime soon, I think that will be the death knell for US car companies. That was my point in that "Impala v Altima" comparison.

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.

electrictroy · April 2005

Why can't these cars run on E100 (100% ethanol)?

troy

andre1969 · April 2005

very cost-effective? How much does it cost per gallon? Don't E-85 vehicles usually get horrible mileage on the E-85, versus gasoline?

z28_sedan · April 2005

If gas hit $5.00/gallon (or even $4.00) there would suddenly be a glut of used SUV's and PU's on the market. It would be devastating for the economy not just because of the cost of gas, but the resulting inflation and all the lost equity on SUV's and suburban homes (no one would want to live 40+ miles from work anymore).

...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.

lemko · April 2005

"...and all the lost equity on SUV's and suburban homes (no one would want to live 40+ miles from work anymore)."

But imagine the skyrocketing value of a city home! I Yeah, baby, yeah!

graphicguy · April 2005

http://borgman.enquirer.com/weekly/daily_html/2005/04/041305borgman.html

larsb · April 2005

"cars MPG can drop anywhere from 5 to 15 percent. It depends on the make of the car -- one driver said her Suburban gets 3 mpg less with E85. ..."

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.

jamil · April 2005

Hi there,
I'm trying to find a clear spray product for license plates that keep traffic cameras from reading them. Any ideas?
Amber

oregonboy · April 2005

Umm, you're way off topic here, but I've seen that stuff advertised in the back pages of Road & Track and/or Car & Driver magazines. Try the Library.

james

larsb · April 2005

Yes, I have an idea - STOP SPEEDING !!

Kirstie_H · April 2005

Hi Jamil,
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

electrictroy · April 2005

"...and all the lost equity on SUV's and suburban homes (no one would want to live 40+ miles from work anymore)."

"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

explorerx4 · April 2005

gas prices are somewhat higher than they have ever been, but some of us have been there before. i wouldn't put all my eggs in the 'urban windfall' basket. jmo.

gagrice · April 2005

i wouldn't put all my eggs in the 'urban windfall' basket.

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.

avalon02wh · April 2005

Is it just me, or is anybody else out there enjoying the recent gas price increase? I really get a chuckle when I read articles where a reporter interviews some hapless owner of a gas guzzler. In a recent article from detnews they had the following:

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

avalon02wh · April 2005

Only 37.5 mpg? I hope the car gets better mileage as it breaks in. My Avalon gets about 28 mpg under the conditions you describe. A co-worker gets 35 with a 4cyl camry. Not sure the TDI is the answer to higher gas prices for everybody. The cost per mile does not appear to be much better than regular gas (our diesel is 10 to 20 cents more than the 87 octane).

Where did you get the info on how green it was? They did not make the list at

http://www.greenercars.org/12green.html

What If - Gasoline is $5 a gallon in 2010?

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles