Gas prices and alaska

[vladimir]

Yes but these taxes are partly used for the protection of environment and they teach people not toab use the resources of the world... and it pushes alternative energies and new technologies... You destroy the world with this waste... ... nobody can deny that... What do you think what happens if the gulf stream dies ? Then you can invade Mexico in order to survive... I don't want to start flaming here, but the major problem seems to be your actual president, I don't really think that the Iraq war was a bad idea, but your president doesn't want to take responsibility for the world ( Kyoto agreement ) and that is his greatest disadvantage... I'm no enviromental angel flying around the planet, I drive a Sti... but hey I pay a lot for that and the gas price prevents a wasting behavior in general ... I don't complain, because it is right and I know, that I have to pay hard if I want to destroy the earth more than needed in order to come from A to B...

our government is using the so called ecology-tax on petrol to keep the welfare state working. of course it also has an effect on how much is used and therefore helps a little bit but its not used to save the environment at all.

in addition, you should know the reason why our government likes the kyoto protocol so much. guess what, we just don't have to do anything to meet the kyoto protocol. after the german unification, huge amounts of the former GDR's industry was destroyed, thus reducing the amount of emmisions dramatically. so germany can push the kyoto protocol forwards without actually doing much.

besides, the german policy regarding the environment is, thanks to the green party in charge, highly idealistic and ineffective. the abandonment of nuclear energy makes the tree huggers happy, but effectively creates moe emmissions. nuclear energy is at the moment the cleanest and safest (yes indeed, safest) we have and german companys had top technology. but instead of evolving we are at the moment going backwards to coal burning powerplants.

don't get me wrong however, i am no fan of the opposition either and i think we have to do something to reduce pollution and save the environment. i have actually voted green in the last election, but i have to admit that i am not very satisfied at the moment.

Personally, I've always thought we're really saving the reserves in Alaska for when the rest of the world runs dry in about 50-100 years. This way, we're in charge of the oil supply to other nations, and OPEC can go back to making castles out of sand.

the OPEC nations are not that stupid. they know they cannot rely their wealth on oil in the future. at the moment they are using all their money to buy the world...they will never go back to sand castles, they are going to buy major companys and real estate.
they are also in a good situation to produce alternative fuels. they just don't want to start too early, because then nobody would buy their oil anymore.

 

[PS]

And what happens in the event of a leak, huh? When the metal becomes brittle and weak, or too much stress is exerted somewhere? What happens what 10,000 tons of oil spills into the arctic? It doesn't just affect Alaska you know, Yukon, British Columbia and Northwest Territories will be affect by it too, if something goes wrong and you'll end up pissing off 2 countries. *cough* Exxon Valdez! *cough*

 

[Event]

Anyways some of us need a big truck to haul around whatever. I use my dad's truck to haul my dirt bike around, I could do it with mine but it's lowered. And you make it sound like Amercians drive big cars, not really many of us drive small ones. It's just I prefer something bigger so I don't die in an accident.

I was in central Illinois today, and I noticed that about 75% of the vehicles down there are trucks. But I could see how they need the trucks, since nothing down there is very accessible. It is mostly farmland. I guess it's the same in other barren areas. It seems like in the cities and suburbs, about 15-25% of vehicles are trucks. I guess it all averages out to be about 50% of vehicles in America are trucks. I can see the need for trucks, but I don't see the need for SUVs. They aren't the greatest for hauling stuff and if you want to carry a lot of people around, AKA soccer mom, buy a dang minivan. They burn less gas. Also, people who don't need trucks or SUVs shouldn't buy them. If we take away their trucks and SUVs, it will most likely cut down on the gas consumption.

 

[Danoff]

I can see the need for trucks, but I don't see the need for SUVs. They aren't the greatest for hauling stuff and if you want to carry a lot of people around, AKA soccer mom, buy a dang minivan. They burn less gas. Also, people who don't need trucks or SUVs shouldn't buy them. If we take away their trucks and SUVs, it will most likely cut down on the gas consumption.

Listen to you. "If we take away their trucks and SUVs". If that's not facist...

Looks people will voluntarily buy vehicles that burn less gas as the price goes up. The market will take care of it, but it will do so gradually - unlike making trucks and SUVs illegal.

 

[Joey D]

I enjoy my Blazer, it's a very very small SUV and it works nicely. Great interior room and can pull a trailer if I need to. It doesn't get aweful mileage, but with the amount I drive it seems rediculous. So that is why I will be buying a new car.

Anyways SUV have a point, they are a ulternative to ugly nasty mini wans.

But yes the market will take care of the big vechiles soon.

 

[Famine]

What do you think what happens if the gulf stream dies

Well, I think that three super-anticyclones would form, engulfing the Northern Hemisphere. The streets of New York would flood "because" and then the entire world would enter a new Ice Age in the space of two weeks.

No, wait. That's the plot for "The Day After Tomorrow".


Mind you, that'd stop all the whining about "global warming".


Hint: Don't rely on big budget films for scientific information.

Also, your car will run fine on 98RON if it's something silly or 95RON if it's an everyday NA car. Think about it - you'd be using 2-5% less octane, saving fuel and cutting emission. If the German government is educating people how not to waste resources and you're using 100 octane in anything less than a Le Mans Prototype, they aren't doing a very good job.

 

[Event]

Listen to you. "If we take away their trucks and SUVs". If that's not facist...

Looks people will voluntarily buy vehicles that burn less gas as the price goes up. The market will take care of it, but it will do so gradually - unlike making trucks and SUVs illegal.

I never meant banning them, I meant to say that if people would not have them in the first place, or they didn't buy them in need of them, then we would be using less gas.

My grandma recently bought a Buick Rainier. She never drives more than 1 other person. She certainly never hauls anything. She should not have bought that big honking SUV.

 

[Max_DC]

Well, I think that three super-anticyclones would form, engulfing the Northern Hemisphere. The streets of New York would flood "because" and then the entire world would enter a new Ice Age in the space of two weeks.

No, wait. That's the plot for "The Day After Tomorrow".


Mind you, that'd stop all the whining about "global warming".


Hint: Don't rely on big budget films for scientific information.

Also, your car will run fine on 98RON if it's something silly or 95RON if it's an everyday NA car. Think about it - you'd be using 2-5% less octane, saving fuel and cutting emission. If the German government is educating people how not to waste resources and you're using 100 octane in anything less than a Le Mans Prototype, they aren't doing a very good job.

Well I wrote that a "ice age" in the US would be ONE possible consequence and I don't rely on TV.... I study at a University, so... I don't get my infos from Hollywood... global warming is not the main problem it is its increased speed ... but as I can remember some of your posts in other threads, you know a lot about science, so... I' ll skip that one.....

Ok, next thing... I drive a Subaru Impreza WRX STi and 100 Octan means a huge power gain compared to ROZ 95, and I konw that because once I accidently filled my car with 95 Octan..... + the 100 Octan here in Germany has additives that have less emissions and less need for gas per 100 km as a consequence

 

[Famine]

Actually it doesn't. Bear with me here.

The higher the Octane rating, the more stable the fuel. This means that, essentially, 95RON is more "reactive" than 98RON so provides "more" power.

The difference is in highly-stressed turbocharged systems, 95RON can actually react before it's where it should be - preignition. 98RON only reacts in the piston chamber (or wherever it reacts in a rotary... ). 98RON provides "more" power to these cars because more of the fuel reacts in the right place. But in actual fact, 98RON doesn't provide MORE power, it provides LESS LESS power than 95RON in this instance.

To put it another way round, you aren't seeing power gains because you use 98RON. You see power loss when you use 95RON. To see what I mean, try using 98RON in a 1.1 litre Polo.


98RON is what is recommended by Subaru. Unless you've altered the timing, you're seeing no benefit from 100RON compared to 98RON.



And, onto the science, "global warming" is a con, Kyoto is a pathetic attempt to look as if countries are doing something and cars provide less than 0.5% of global carbon dioxide emissions.

 

[Max_DC]

Actually it doesn't. Bear with me here.

The higher the Octane rating, the more stable the fuel. This means that, essentially, 95RON is more "reactive" than 98RON so provides "more" power.

The difference is in highly-stressed turbocharged systems, 95RON can actually react before it's where it should be - preignition. 98RON only reacts in the piston chamber (or wherever it reacts in a rotary... ). 98RON provides "more" power to these cars because more of the fuel reacts in the right place. But in actual fact, 98RON doesn't provide MORE power, it provides LESS LESS power than 95RON in this instance.

To put it another way round, you aren't seeing power gains because you use 98RON. You see power loss when you use 95RON. To see what I mean, try using 98RON in a 1.1 litre Polo.


98RON is what is recommended by Subaru. Unless you've altered the timing, you're seeing no benefit from 100RON compared to 98RON.



And, onto the science, "global warming" is a con, Kyoto is a pathetic attempt to look as if countries are doing something and cars provide less than 0.5% of global carbon dioxide emissions.

Ok, the effect for me is the sam : I need high octane fuel ... in Japan they even have more I heard 102 +, don't konw if that is true, but especially high tuned cars like the 800 hp Skylines ans Supras need that for perfect performace, for the reasons ( precice timing ) you pointed out.....

And honestly, if you like the Kyoto agreement or not, you can't deny the fact, that the US need to do WAY more than now, and not signing the agreement was false...

 

[Famine]

The engine timing has to be adjusted to cope with the fuel. You're not seeing any benefit from 100 compared to 98, since 98 is recommended by Subaru - unless you've adjusted the timing accordingly.


Nevertheless, do you not see the inherent conflict in driving a 25mpg car using 100RON and criticising Americans for driving 20mpg SUVs using 89RON?

 

[Max_DC]

The engine timing has to be adjusted to cope with the fuel. You're not seeing any benefit from 100 compared to 98, since 98 is recommended by Subaru - unless you've adjusted the timing accordingly.


Nevertheless, do you not see the inherent conflict in driving a 25mpg car using 100RON and criticising Americans for driving 20mpg SUVs using 89RON?

The egine timing can adjust itself to a certain degree and there is a benefit, as I said it is not only the 100 Octan, there are also other things added in this particular gas, and it reduces emissions compared to other gas, and it "cleans" the engine by burning completly, dunno how to express that in a proper way... however, your second point is true in a way, but the point is that I pay hard for my thirsty car and I don't start complaining about it... I knew the prices before, I could have bought a car that needs less gas... of course... I wanted to say that the world or especially the USA have to learn and accept that fossil energy HAS to be expensive,and I'm not talking about 2,50 $ per gallon....
You will never stop a SUV lover, who absolutly wants this kind of car... ok, then he has to pay for that luxury... but perhaps 7 out of 10 SUV drivers change their mind if they have to pay 6 $ per gallon, you know?

 

[MrktMkr1986]

Well, I think that three super-anticyclones would form, engulfing the Northern Hemisphere. The streets of New York would flood "because" and then the entire world would enter a new Ice Age in the space of two weeks.

So what's suppose to happen to me?!

Oil prices will never drop unless conflict in the Middle East settles down, an unexpected increase in supply, or some combination of the two occur.

The UK, I think, pays one highest prices per gallon for gasoline. From what I've read, that is due mostly to taxes.

 

[Famine]

but perhaps 7 out of 10 SUV drivers change their mind if they have to pay 6 $ per gallon, you know?

Although you'd probably get arrested, come and sit outside a school in the UK at 8.30am.

 

[Max_DC]

Although you'd probably get arrested, come and sit outside a school in the UK at 8.30am.

hey that sounds interesting... specify your thoughts please...

 

[Famine]

Well, we DO pay the equivalent of $6.50 a gallon (US), and 75% of the mothers who drop sprogs off at school are still driving SUVs.


YOU try telling the cops that's why you're parked outside a school though.

 

[Danoff]

Well, we DO pay the equivalent of $6.50 a gallon (US), and 75% of the mothers who drop sprogs off at school are still driving SUVs.

Are you serious? People are still driving gas guzzlers at $6.50/gallon? That's amazing. Perhaps I underestimated how cheap gasoline really is.

People complain over here if it goes up 10 cents.

I drive 60 miles per day. Which, at 30mpg, is $13.00 per day of gas if I were paying $6.50/gallon. I commute rougly 20 days per month, so the result would be $260 per month in gas. Right now I pay $2.50 which is $5 per day or $100 per month in gas.

Yea perhaps I was wrong about the $4 thing. Maybe it'll take $10 per gallon to get people to really start caring about their gas mileage.

My solution is to move closer to work - which is what I'll be doing shortly.

 

[Max_DC]

Are you serious? People are still driving gas guzzlers at $6.50/gallon? That's amazing. Perhaps I underestimated how cheap gasoline really is.

People complain over here if it goes up 10 cents.

I drive 60 miles per day. Which, at 30mpg, is $13.00 per day of gas if I were paying $6.50/gallon. I commute rougly 20 days per month, so the result would be $260 per month in gas. Right now I pay $2.50 which is $5 per day or $100 per month in gas.

Yea perhaps I was wrong about the $4 thing. Maybe it'll take $10 per gallon to get people to really start caring about their gas mileage.

My solution is to move closer to work - which is what I'll be doing shortly.

I drive about 120 km ~ 75 miles) a day to university and back = 26 $ per day = 520 $ in a month....
Moving closer would be an option, you're right....I also thought about it

 

[Delirious]

cadillac (according to auto consumer guide) was going to make a cadillac escalade-v like the XLR-V, CTS-V and STS-V...but since gas prices are out to wazoo and soon out to even more wazoo...we wont see escalades at many dragstrips

 

[CAMAROBOY69]

Damn 2.20? Where I live in Michigan it's in the 2.30's.

It was down to $2.16 yesterday here in Muskegon. MI. Wednesday is usually the cheapest day of the week around here, then it goes up on Thursday. It will be interresting to see what todays thursday prices are.

 

[Famine]

Are you serious? People are still driving gas guzzlers at $6.50/gallon? That's amazing. Perhaps I underestimated how cheap gasoline really is.

People complain over here if it goes up 10 cents.

I drive 60 miles per day. Which, at 30mpg, is $13.00 per day of gas if I were paying $6.50/gallon. I commute rougly 20 days per month, so the result would be $260 per month in gas. Right now I pay $2.50 which is $5 per day or $100 per month in gas.

Yea perhaps I was wrong about the $4 thing. Maybe it'll take $10 per gallon to get people to really start caring about their gas mileage.

My solution is to move closer to work - which is what I'll be doing shortly.

Absolutely 100% serious.

It changes depending on what area the school is in, but the average car dropping kids off at school is a Land Rover Freelander.

Now, granted, the Freelander is no H2 in terms of petrol consumption (22-28mpg for petrol, 32-37mpg for diesel - that's about 16-27mpg (US) for the range, all figures representing combined mileage), but it's still way off the average family car.

Move into London's more elite suburbs, or the hellhole that is Alderley Edge and you'll see 95% of school run cars are BMW X5s, Mercedes M-Class, Range Rovers, Isuzu Troopers, Nissan Patrols, Explorers and Toyota Landcruisers, with the odd Escalade and H2 thrown in around Cheshire. My school is in a more deprived area and the cars tend to be smaller hatchbacks, but we still have the odd Freelander.


And of course the cars are being used at their very least fuel efficient - stop-start traffic. My dad's 28mpg combined XJ6 managed 11mpg in Sheffield's rush hour. Mary-Kate and Ashley alone only know what effect this has on a 15mpg (combined) Landcruiser.

But people PAY it. They sit in their SUVs with some of the worst crash test results and a tendency to roll over when taking avoiding action, thinking that if they hit a small car their kids will be safe - not thinking for a second that they'll most likely hit another SUV since they're crammed into small spaces with lots of other SUVs. They think their kids are safe, so they pay the 75% duty and 17.5% VAT on petrol.

 

[ExigeEvan]

There aren't so many SUVs in my area, but sadly alot of the old Mitsu' Shogan people (you know who I'm talking about) are converting to Warriors and L200s.

It's just I prefer something bigger so I don't die in an accident.

Do you have independant car safety testers in the US? Find out how they rated your truck, you might be surprised.

 

[Famine]

Actually, they're getting better. Anything built before 1998 will disintegrate if it hits, say, a 2003 BMW X5 - which of course is far more likely to happen if all the school moms buy SUVs thinking they're going to protect their kids then all try to stuff themselves into the same 400 yard stretch of road.

Land Rover Freelander Euro-NCAP test:
Land Rover Freelander
Test Scores: Front 6 (38%) Side 13 (72%) Overall 20 Pedestrian 7 (19%)

The Freelander is a small off-roader that was designed almost a decade ago. The cabin became structurally unstable during the frontal impact, the driver’s door buckling and the screen pillar moving back significantly. Forces fed through to the driver’s chest were relatively high and there were problems, too, for his legs. The side impact also left the driver risking chest injuries – a side airbag might have been helpful. The child restraints protected well in the side impact but did not safeguard heads in the frontal crash. Protection for pedestrians was average for this type of vehicle.

Impact Protection
Frontal Impact: The restraints and airbags protected the front occupants’ heads and necks but they experienced high chest loadings. The driver’s door was kinked along its inner beam and could not take further loading and the footwell behind the driver’s seat buckled. The front occupants risked injury from striking hard points behind the fascia. The centre rear belt was three-point, which protects much better than a lap-only belt. But there was a worry that it could be used with the seat back only partly latched.

Side Impact The Freelander provided only reasonable protection for such a high vehicle, its driver risking chest injuries from contact with the central pillar trim, door trim, and side wing of the seat.

Child Protection: The older child’s restraint was forward facing, the younger’s was rear-facing. In the frontal impact, neither head was fully protected. The younger child also sustained a slightly high neck load. Land Rover said that the restraint used was suitable for an 18-month-old but it was was too small for an average child of that age. Even so, the restraints protected both children in the side impact. Labels on the 3-year-old’s restraint could lead to a parent installing it incorrectly. The Freelander had no labels to warn against placing a rear-facing restraint opposite an airbag.


Frontal impact takes place at 64kph (40mph), car strikes deformable barrier that is offset.

 

[Joey D]

It was down to $2.16 yesterday here in Muskegon. MI. Wednesday is usually the cheapest day of the week around here, then it goes up on Thursday. It will be interresting to see what todays thursday prices are.

$2.26 on the way to work this morning.

Do you have independant car safety testers in the US? Find out how they rated your truck, you might be surprised.

Actually the Blazer is supposed to be the deadliest thing on the road But I doubt that I've been in two accidents with the truck and one was serious. I came out just fine.

 

[ExigeEvan]

Serious to kill/serious injure usually means a write-off.

So unless you have a really desperate insuranec cmopany or you really love that truck I'm guessing they weren't that serious.

 

[Joey D]

I do like my truck a lot and I wasn't being sarcastic.

 

[CAMAROBOY69]

BlazinXtreme,
Here is a pic of our average gas prices as of yesterday. I paid $2.15 gal in Muskegon, MI yesterday. You said your paying around $2.30 gal and your in MI too??

 

[Joey D]

Ya but I live in Oakland County, Lake Orion to be exact right next to were the Pistons play basketball, and that supposed to be the highest for gas prices in Michigan. I work down in Warren were the prices aren't as bad but still up there.

There is a gas station right down the street from my house and this morning it was 2.30 for Regular. I just think it's a scam since OC is the thrid richest county or something.

 

[CAMAROBOY69]

It really is amazing how much it fluctuates just within a 10-15 mile radius. Ive seen a difference of 15-20 cents just by driving a few miles. Lowest I saw yesterday was $2.11 on my way home. I drove 3 miles and it was already at $2.15 so I just stopped and got gas right away.
However, I am very thankful it isnt $4.00 or $5.00.

 

[Delirious]

very thankful it isnt 4-5 dollars...yet...

welp, if gas prices keep going up, i wont think about buying another 6 cylinder (drives a 95 taurus now) car again...even though that would be very nice...IMO it just isnt worth the money paying for a more expensive car to just pay more at the pump