Oil, will it be the last straw for America?

Yes, it is in liters. Today is $1.20 a liter

0 Replies

My gallon quotes are apox, by the way.

Give or take a few cents.

0 Replies

engineer wrote:

Does Canada still use "Imperial Gallons" instead of the smaller version of gallon we use in the US?

This was a thread similar to this one last year around this time that I think answers this question and I'll see if I can find it.

I wouldn't even know what to put into Google for this.

0 Replies

No need. Your conversion from liters is to our standard gallon. You are definitely paying a lot. (Of course, you already knew that.)

0 Replies

Found it http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=50670&highlight=

0 Replies

engineer wrote:

No need. Your conversion from liters is to our standard gallon. You are definitely paying a lot. (Of course, you already knew that.)

Oh yeah, for sure! It's having a very negative effect on my life.

0 Replies

3.785 litres in American gallon. 4.546 litres in Canadian gallon.

0 Replies

Montana, I hate to burst your bubble of ingrained prejudice against greedy oil companies, but my personal bet is that the government tax on gasoline where you live is far more than the profit made by the company. The government gets the money for not doing one thing in terms of exploring for, producing, refining, transporting, and marketing the oil. That would be nice for all of us to share in the profits of companies without lifting a finger.

And in the last oil downturn, where was all the sympathy for oil company profits suffering and being taken over and for smaller oil operators going broke? Also, the companies do not set the crude price. Blame the Middle East. And blame the liberals that don't want the companies to drill anywhere or build any refineries or do anything that would expand the supply.

0 Replies

Engineer

Chapter 2 is simply the results of the cultural changes that occurred after two oil crunches.

I was lucky. My mother didn't have to work because at teh time my father was in the top 5% of earners. My neighbors weren't as lucky. On the average my father earned 5 times what my neighbors earned.

I bring this up because I submit that a number 1 cause of marital friction and potential breakup is financial. How many families got ripped up because of the oil crises????

I have listened to all the economic spin about % of real income and factoring in inflation and all the rest. The reality is the oil companies are making record profits. They are paying more for their product and as somebody mentioned earlier Exxon has the greatest reserves and no doubt is charging their customers based on current market prices. What most people don't see is that the profits have to come from somewhere.
But they don't or won't make the leap to the reality that the oil companies are gouging. I don't know why this is so difficult?

Further, perhaps someone could explain why the car I bought in 1990, a brand new Dodge Dynasty with four doors and everything except leather seats cause in Central California, leather seat could fry your bottom from the heat, with a 3.3 Liter engine (6 cylinders) averaged 27 mpg at 60mph and todays 6 cylinder cars get 21mpg at hwy speeds?

0 Replies

My 3 liter engine family sized car gets 29 to 35 on the highway. I've gotten over 40 with a good tailwind. Where do you get your figures?

0 Replies

Okie

Just bought my wife a new car. Shopped for most of them and saw estimated mpg on the windows. Most had 23 hwy and 19 city. The BMW X3 that I bought my wife averages 21 mpg and has a 2.5 liter 6 cylinder. I also remember that during the Reagan and Bush Presidencys, the mpg standards set during the Carter Presidency, which would have required all cars to have 40 mpg averages by 2000, were reduced.

0 Replies

Quote:

I have listened to all the economic spin about % of real income and factoring in inflation and all the rest. The reality is the oil companies are making record profits. They are paying more for their product and as somebody mentioned earlier Exxon has the greatest reserves and no doubt is charging their customers based on current market prices. What most people don't see is that the profits have to come from somewhere.
But they don't or won't make the leap to the reality that the oil companies are gouging. I don't know why this is so difficult?

Because being in the right place at the right time is not gouging. Earlier I compared oil to real estate and I think the comparison is still apt. The true worth of a home in San Diego did not double last year. No extra square feet, no better amenities, no better view, but somehow it is worth 2x and no one is saying we should tax the daylights out of the homeowners who raked it in. Exxon et. al. spent a lot of time and money finding and developing those fields during times of stable or even dropping oil prices and now they are benefiting.

We should be angry, but not at Exxon. First we should be angry at ourselves for taking cheap energy for granted and creating lifestyles that are wasteful and lazy. Then we should be angry at our politicians who should have seen this on the horizon and implemented serious, long term policies to address energy concerns. Washington still has its head in the sand today.

Quote:

Further, perhaps someone could explain why the car I bought in 1990, a brand new Dodge Dynasty with four doors and everything except leather seats cause in Central California, leather seat could fry your bottom from the heat, with a 3.3 Liter engine (6 cylinders) averaged 27 mpg at 60mph and todays 6 cylinder cars get 21mpg at hwy speeds?

Sure. Look at the curb weight and engine horsepower. Automakers today believe (with some justification) that Americans will not buy cars that do not have insane power and low end torque. Even the new hybrid cars are sacrificing efficiency for horse power. I read the hybrid Accord will have more horses (over 200) than the standard Accord. Compare that to the Acura we bought 16 years ago. It only had 150 horses and that was considered very high end. Now that would be considered weak.

0 Replies

Cavolina quote:

Quote:

Okie

Just bought my wife a new car. Shopped for most of them and saw estimated mpg on the windows. Most had 23 hwy and 19 city. The BMW X3 that I bought my wife averages 21 mpg and has a 2.5 liter 6 cylinder. I also remember that during the Reagan and Bush Presidencys, the mpg standards set during the Carter Presidency, which would have required all cars to have 40 mpg averages by 2000, were reduced.

No wonder! You are sacrificing efficiency for horsepower. The manufacturers do it because there are people around like yourself that buy them. Its supply and demand. Buy a more economical car, like a Toyota Camry or a Ford or something with a V-6. You will not have any trouble getting 30 mpg on the highway. The car will not have BMW stamped on it however. Your 23 19 stickers sounds mostly like SUVs. Most cars or sedans should all do better than that. My full size truck can do 20.

I do agree the cars can be made more efficient, but I blame the consumer as much as the manufacturers because they don't have to buy a gas hog. If people quit buying gas hogs, they would quit trying to sell them, simple as that, and when gasoline gets sufficiently high enough in price, it will happen.

0 Replies

A little comment to rile people up probably, but it should be a free country, you should be able to sell gas for $10 per gallon if someone is willing to buy it. After all, the people complaining about high gas prices would probably sell their own stuff, such as a house, for the highest price and the most obscene profit they can wouldn't they? As long as there is no collusion between companies, it should be totally proper and legal. Whats good for the goose is good for the gander.

0 Replies

Those are some pretty weak mileage figures. My '03 Ford Focus does 26 in town by accident. I can squeeze it for 29 if I keep my big foot out of the gas. Highway mileage is crowding 40, and again, that's not babying it.

0 Replies

okie, I agree 100 percent.

To put another wrench in the gears, let's look at the macro economics of what our government is doing to the American People. We are spending about two billion dollars every week in Iraq, while this same government continues to cut funding for American needs - even veteran's benefits.

In order to save less than one billion during the next ten years, our government will require proof of American citizenship in order to get Medicaid benefits beginning July 1. How can Americans reconcile the spending of two billion every week in Iraq vs "saving" less than one billion but cutting benefits to Americans?

Can anybody tell me what's wrong with this picture? Americans are willing to cry bloody-murder because gas prices have increased 25 percent, but continue to support this government of ours as they spend billions upon billions of our tax money in another country.

This administration is asking to increase the budget for Iraq and Afghanistan by over 100 billion. Who cares?

0 Replies

I think what I was missing in trying to explain why this is gouging is the fact that the cost of production doesn't change . If a bbl of oil is 60 dollars it cost the same to produce if it is 20 or 40 or 70. Assign a value to the cost of production. Say 5 dollars for this demonstration. If the oil cost 20 per bbl and the markup is 700% then the profit will be 20 x 7 -5 = $135.
If the cost is 30 per bbl the profit is 30 x7 -5= $205. At 70 per bbl the profit is 70 x7 -5 =$485.

0 Replies

cavona, That's not how it really works. The actual margin of profit for oil companies is about ten percent no matter what the price of gasoline.

0 Replies

The just retired CEO of Exxon with a Ph.D. in Chemical Engineering, poohed poohed Global Warming and had great influence in scuttling the Kyoto Accords. Katrina was neglected because of this anti-global-warming generated by this CEO. His company profits should be used to rebuild the storm-ravaged SE coastal areas of the US.

0 Replies

cicerone imposter

I don't know where you get your numbers, but if your saying that on a $70 bbl of oil the Exxons of the world make $7, I think your math is factors are incorrect.

I remembered one number that I have bben leaving out of the examples I have been giving. It is the cost of production. It stays virtually the same whether a bbl costs 70 or 7. The cost to turn that into usuable product is the same. Four or five months ago when a bbl cost about 55 the cost of production was the same nimber as it is today with a bbl of 70 crude. So what happened to the extra cost of 15 dollars? Do you think that the oil companies ate that increased cost? No! They marked it up and passed it on to you the consumer. That extra 15 cost you 105.

0 Replies

Oil, will it be the last straw for America?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know