US Gas Prices

spikeitgirl_mcw

New member
Apr 5, 2008
24
0
1
I've been reading a lot about how gasoline prices are "disgrace" at the moment, but from looking at the prices quoted- WOW, I would LOVE to be paying those! From my POV, it's incredibly cheap.
Currently UK unleaded petrol averages 94p a litre, using 3.79 as the conversion to US gallons, and 1.72 as the conversion to US dollars it comes to the equivalent of $6.13 for a gallon.

I guess that if you are brought up on very cheap prices, then the hikes do seem disgraceful. In addition, the US is a big country (I'm clever me) and everything appears to be set out for drivers. What I love is your parking spaces. They're really wide and angled so that you can pull into them easily. Parking spaces over here are a nightmare for someone like me without power steering.
All in all, I guess you have to do a lot more driving in the US, even if you never leave your home town.
But with gas prices going up, wouldn't it be more sensible to ditch the huge gas guzzlers, which despite their engine size, have about as much pulling power as a tricycle? Also, switching to manual gearboxes would be prudent, as they have better fuel economy in general, not to mention the ability to actually pull away with speed.
If people did all this, I'm sure quality of life wouldn't suffer, and the higher gas prices wouldn't matter so much.
 
I heard that, adjusted for inflation, gas prices were higher during the OPEC oil embargo in the 1970's. Oil prices stayed very low for more than 30 years, and part of the current rise in prices is just a normal market adjustment.
 
Gas has always been more expensive in Europe. The real outrage comes from the fact that prices have more than doubled in the last few months, something that people find unacceptable considering the circumstances.
 
I did a search on the net a few weeks back and found that both biofuels (ethanol, biodiesal which I think is also called methanol) and hydrogen fuel cells cost about $2.50 to produce the equivalent of a gallon of gasoline(if I'm wrong please let me know, I can't remember which sites I visted). Maybe with oil prices on the upswing we'll see one of these become a major fuel source in the next 20yrs or so.
Luckily I don't have to worry so much about fuel right now, I use my muscles and pedal my bike to and from work. Come winter though...
 
Um, impending shortages, strained relations with the major oil producers, the continuing increase of oil purchases by the ever increasing asian nations, the popluarity of large SUV's, trucks and vans (which increase demand), the hurricane that caused a loss of oil transportation in the SE united states, the refusal of the big oil companies to open more refineries to up production. Need I go on?

The sad part about all this is, I bet that Exxon and Amoco have a longer term plan than most of the worlds governments. I bet that current projections on oil use are something like: we'll be out of oil in 80 years if we keep consuming it at this rate. That's not much of a long term plan. I bet Exxon has a plan that will keep them in business for the next 300 years, with oil to spare.

That sucks, you guys have it rough in Britain. I don't really complain about gas prices too much. My car gets 32+ mpg. And yes, our driving situation is much better over here. We have a lot more room for expansion, and EVERYTHING is based on transportation infrastructure in the U.S.. Food distribution, commerce, health care, production, etc.
 
Check this out. Hydrogen fuel isn't all that great IF Bush and his administration create the fuel the way they want to.
http://www.motherjones.com/news/outfront/2003/05/ma_375_01.html
 
Electric engines have been around for ages and could have helped keep prices low if only the oil companies and governments had allowed it to be developed we would'nt be in this mess.The Yanks have finally had to succome to higher prices but there still cheap compared to Europe,and when you consider that they are responsible for eighty percent of greenhouse gasses I think their getting of lightly.Also if we had helped develop alternative technologies we wouldn't have to invade other countries at the expense of lots of human lives and a ludicrice amount of money.
 
Meh, I don't see what the big deal is. Yes, it was a major shocker watchng gas rocket in price (it was going up almost 10 cents a day in my area), but on the plus side, I filled up right before labor day, and the full tank lasted me 3 weeks.
 
The big deal my friend is that it cost my old man £120 quid in fuel last week now I know he can afford it and Ive no doubt you can afford it but many cannot especially here in rip of Britian.
 
Unfortunately, that's part of the responsibility of owning a vehicle. It costs money to insure, keep road worthy, and fill up. *shrug*
 
No matter how you make it, though, you're going to get less energy out of the hydrogen than it takes to produce it. That's a simple law of thermodynamics.

The method described in the article, while it uses fossil fuels, is actually more energy efficient than electrolosis of water, which only generates as much pollution as the power plant that you get the electricity from.

I don't think there's really any way to win with hydrogen.
 
There isn't any way to "win" with hydrogen, but at some point, it may be the only option.
 
I'm somewhat uninformed as to the current state of hydrogen powered engines, as well as the current efficiency of solar panels. However, since hydrogen is relatively simply to create compared with gasoline, shouldn't it be possible for someone to set up a few solar cells to in order to make their own fuel? Like I said, I'm not sure if this is cost or space effective currently, but if it is it would seem like a major advantage of hydrogen fuel cells.
 
Umm hydrogen extraction from water is an extremely complex process that requires a lot of energy (think nuclear plant here), so untill there are huge advances in:

A. Thin film solar cells.
B. Recovering hydrogen.
C. Miniturization of equipment

No one will be making/recharging their own hydrogen cells.

The status of hydrogen engines and all that:

The first hydrogen powered cars have been released by honda. The problems currently are:

A. You can't go far before refuelling.
B. Hydrogen is uncommon.
C. You put more energy in extracting the hydrogen then you get out by driving the car.
 
Heh heh heh! I have no idea what vehicles you are talking about. The "huge gas guzzlers" over here can uproot trees and pull yachts uphill. And when I last took any interest in trucks and SUVs, some of them could do zero to 60 mph in 6 seconds. But even if a particular vehicle does zero to 60 in 10 seconds I would call that "speed."

But anyway, I agree with the larger point you were making. We would certainly be better off with fewer gas-guzzlers on the road. For sure.
 
But that is exactly why the price is going up.....demand is skyrocketiong at the same time supply is dwindling. Expect things to get worse, too, as US infrastructure for oil refining hasn't been added to/improved in about three decades, and China's oil consumption is increasing exponentially.

THIS is where it's really going to hurt. It will impact the cost of everything. One of the US's greatest contributions to the world right now is the amount of food we produce and export. Unfortunately, it will dramatically affect what we can do in this regard, as well. I might not like paying more for gas, but like usual, Third-Worlders will suffer most.


Add to that the problem that Hydrogen is unstable and tends to....well, for lack of a better word.....explode!

Power storage (battery technology, hydrogen-holding cells) and switching are major issues for both hydrogen and electrical (battery or solar) vehicles.
 
From what I know of economics (which isn't much maybe, but I study it at school), that isn't normal market adjustment. Markets rarely adjust as quick as the current rise in fuel prices.
 
When I'm on Kwajalein, fuel is subsidized for those who have to have it and its bicycles for the rest of us. So it won't really affect me unless I go home to Wisconsin/Indiana from time to time. Maybe it will help the environment if people drive less.
 
When I was younger I went to the States a few times with my parents. They were never happy about the pulling power of the cars we had. This years, they went to California and Nevada, had a 3.5 litre Chrysler which they said had less pull than the 2.4 litre DIESEL Volvo that my father drives here.
{Not a conclusive study of cars in the US I know }

I guess general purpose cars in the US should be set up more for long distance and cruising, and it doesn't matter if your cars handle like boats either. I think in the UK it's more important to have good acceleration from rest, because it can give you an edge when pulling out onto busy roundabouts, and not having that pull, IMO, is rather dangerous in these situations. In addition, handling is more important all over Europe because of the older road systems, and hence being able to do 60mph down a narrow winding country lane is quite important to some people
 
Back
Top