To put things in perspective!
Then it is screw Calfornia again.
Graham, It's closer to $4.50 a gallon at .75 pounds per liter. Still very high by our standards. c.i.
Don't doubt it, Graham. In the late '60s, gas in Germany was 1 mark for one liter. At the rate of exchange at that time, a mark was $.25, making fuel roughly $1.00/gallon compared to about $.25/gallon in the U.S.
All things considered, I conclude your price is more closely related to taxes than cost of fuel + transport charges.
Why gas has to be cheap in the US:
This week, I paid $1.44 in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. The cheapest I could find in my neck of the woods in Houston was $1.56.
cjh, That's one of the most stolen vehicles in the US.
ci...how many times has it been stolen?
cicerone imposter wrote:Graham, It's closer to $4.50 a gallon at .75 pounds per liter. Still very high by our standards. c.i.
£0.75 x 1.58 = $1.18
1 litre = 0.22 gallons
$1.18 / 0.22 = $5.37?
Cic - where's the error? I used to be good at maths at school, probably too much 'herbal fun' has fried my maths synapses!
Gee, mac, I think I'll drive to Baton Rouge to fill up!
I haven't checked out my local Costco but by the other stations around me, I'd guess it's around $1.89 for regular.
$2.02/gallon for regular at my neighborhood Shell.
Slovakia: 38 crowns per litre, or just abou $1.15 - so the price per gallon would be similar as in UK, over 5 dollars.
Keep in mind that average monthly wage is $400.
Now grumble! :-(
Something I've been curious about for a long time: Why is the price of gasoline so much higher in Europe?
Graham, One liter equals .26 gallons. c.i.
I saw $2.28 for premium this morning in my neighborhood.
Gasoline is at a lower price in the states because of consumption. Hold back on the consumption and Shell, Exxon and the rest of them will lower the price to encourage consumption. They've got entire staffs working on their computers to figure out where the point of no return is on gas prices (in other words, how much they can get away with). The same mechanism is at work in my industry, both lighting and art. Halogen lamps, for instance, have come down dramatically because of the consumer getting wise that it's more economical to use them as they save about one-third in energy use (also effective in detering blackouts and brownouts). The light bulb is the primary gobbler of electrical energy. If one walks into a giant warehouse like Costco, they'll see HID (high energy discharge) lamps being used. Even though the name seems like an oxymoron for saving energy, it takes about half the energy to run them over halogen (actually better than even flourescent). Getting rid of the inefficient incandescent lamp is not much different than getting rid of dependency on fossil fuels in automobiles. The politicians have sold us out to the energy companies. The contrast is that the electrical power industry is in dire straits and the gas producing industry is flying high. Dubya and his VP have cronies in both industries, some in serious legal trouble. All this progress has taken decades where it should have taken five or six years (like enforcing the ban on commercial buildings using incandescent).
Dubya just approved upgrades to energy plants without any consideration for our environment. c.i.
That's not news c.i., that's status quo - par for the course for this dim light!
Approved upgrades for power plants? Big deal. Now who's going to pay for it? The investors don't want to buy energy company stock because they totally mismanaged their money. Is he willing to advocate a plan like TVA to put people back to work?
