FamilyLife Forums

Well, it's not going to help that workers at the BP pipline and refinery in Scotland are on strike wanting more money.. The problem also includes higher wages in other countries, these workers just like here in America no longer want to work for pennies a day. These folks in other countries want the American dream without moving to America to make money, to be able to buy computers and cars and video games and all the other 'stuff' American's have..as wages rise throughout the world..prices on everything else will continue to rise, until employers begin laying more people off (just like here in America, people wanting to make $15 to $20 an hour or more) because they want more money.. If I owned a company I'd have to look at that things too, do I move my company here and pay these employees $2 an hour or stay here and pay my employees $15 or $20 an hour??? I can employ more people at $2 an hour than I can at $15 or $20 an hour.. Just like with the MW going up, some companies had to fire some workers, because they couldn't afford to pay people more money...unless they raised their prices or fire others.. America needs to start building more refineries, and join the Cubans in Drilling for Oil 40 miles off the Florida Coast line..as well as off the Alaskan coast line in order to provide for its own people instead of being totally dependent on OPEC. Or they need to build more nuclear and coal facilities. What's going to happen when Iran takes over OPEC and encourages them to refuse to sell oil to America holding an embargo against us concerning their nuclear growth??? They could get all the OPEC nations to agree..and America would be hurting even more than it is right now.. I got this from my congressman... We are now seeing record highs for the cost of crude oil, well over $100 a barrel. The previous highs were in 2005 after hurricanes disrupted oil and natural gas production in the Gulf of Mexico. The supply of crude oil around the world is not keeping pace with the burgeoning demand in such markets as China and India. Although increasing domestic oil production would bring some benefits, other oil-producing nations and the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) could cut production to keep supplies tight and thus the prices high. How can we lower gas prices and reduce our dependence on imported oil in the near future? One government survey indicates that the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) in Alaska could yield 10 to 16 billion barrels of oil, enough to replace all of our imports from Saudi Arabia. The Refuge covers 19 million acres, but development would occur only on 1.5 million acres utilizing advanced technology to prevent any environmental damage. In addition, America possesses about one quarter of the world's coal supply, enough to meet current demand for 250 years. There is already a workable process that turns coal into a liquid fuel for trucks and automobiles, and clean-coal technologies are reducing the environmental impact of using this fuel. Also, we could open up more of offshore America to development, while keeping any new drilling at least 125-230 miles away from the coast of Florida. After all, Cuba, with the help of China, is producing oil 45 miles from the Florida coast. The Department of the Interior estimates that 8.5 billion barrels of oil could be recovered from off of America's coast. Nuclear energy provides almost 20 percent of the United States' electricity and it is the number one source of emission-free electricity. The U.S. currently has 104 reactors in operation and most were brought on-line in the 1970s and 1980s. In fact, 37 of the current reactors began operating between 1970 and 1975 and no new reactor has been ordered since the mid-1970s. In addition, the limited refining capacity of the United States leads to high gas prices, and this nation has not built a new refinery in three decades. What can Congress do? America has the means to increase domestic energy production, and I am working to develop the will to reduce our dependence on imported oil. Congress should open ANWR to environmentally sensitive production, increase offshore drilling, reduce the barriers to more nuclear plants, and allow more refineries to be built. We must also develop renewable and alternative fuels. As a member of the Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Caucus, I am working to increase the use of new fuels and technologies, including renewable energy sources, along with promoting more efficiency.

JaneFW:

Hey Pooh!!!  :D

I have to say that I agree with you.

It's easy to say "look at the vehicles with one occupant" - well, that would be me, driving to work on my lonesome every day as I don't have anyone to take with me, because it's a very small business and my co-workers don't start work at the same time as me nor live anywhere near me.  I'm not cycling 30 miles to work and 30 miles home - and no buses go out into the wilderness where I work (on a ranch in the hill country.)  So, please don't pass judgements when you see one person in a vehicle.  I don't drive at 75+ though.  I have learned to slow right down and to coast down hills!!

But no one has forced you to make the choices that have you in your situation.  No one forced you to live 30 miles away, in the wilderness.  So to complain that it costs more to drive now, and there is nothing you can do about it seems silly to me.

Folks have made the decisions that have lead to this issue.  It's not the evil oil companies, they don't even set the price of oil.  It's the demand, and world demand is increasing, dramatically.  So others in the world want the American dream, and that is going to put even more strain on the world's oil supply.

I'm not judging anyone who chooses to live in the boonies and commute 30 miles each way.  I simply don't understand why people complain about it when it's what they wanted.  That's all.

The current system is NOT sustainable.  As much as I love cars, the day will come when we cannot fuel them in the current fashion.  As fossil fuels increase in price, alternative sources will become more economical.

Right now, there is no fuel that is more energy dense and cost efficient than gasoline/diesel fuel.  But since more folks want it, and want to drive 3 ton vehicles to and from work, it's going to be even more expensive in the future.

I watched a program I had on my DVR last night, NOVA (PBS) with Tom and Ray from Car Talk looking at fueling cars.  Fuel economy almost doubled from the 1970's to the 1980's.  Then from the 1980's to the 1990's it actually dropped.  Why?  Because consumers chose SUV's instead of cars.

Combine this with no new refineries in three decades, not to mention some have closed in the past decade due to stricter environmental standards and you have fewer refineries producing more fuel.  Any little hiccup in the system and prices are impacted.

Oh, and add on the couple of dozen fuel formulations mandated by the EPA based on where you live and there is even more trouble in the marketplace.  You can't take gas from one EPA region and ship it to another, so prices may go up one place, but not in another due to those artificial constraints.

JaneFW:

As for car payments, well, we got into that vicious cycle a few years ago, which wasn't my desire, but oh well.  We recently tried to trade down to get a Scion XB each (my h has a truck, I have a van), but of course our vehicles have hugely depreciated but we still owe a bundle, so buying that much smaller vehicle would have meant us having higher payments *and* it would have cost us the same to insure those vehicles (we checked with our insurer).  Even with the Scion guzzling less gas than our present vehicles, it would not have made up the difference with the higher payments. 

This is true.  It's typically not cost effective to trade down when you owe money.  The most cost effective strategy is to pay off the car you have and drive it till it drops, say to 200K+ miles.  Thankfully for me, most folks want a new car every two to four years, so I find nice cars that have 75K miles or so on them and can drive them for another 150K for far less than what it costs the original owner to drive when new.

With the credit crunch, those who bought their new SUV's and trucks with equity in their homes are also hurting, as many can no longer tap the equity in their home due to stricter lending, and perhaps shrinking of HELOC's.

JaneFW:

So we are stuck.  And we still have to drive.  We can't actually boycott the gas companies because, guess what, I would lose my job and my h would lose his college place, and we would be a whole lot worse off than we are now. 

But you don't have to drive 75MPH, you can combine trips, or do other things to reduce what you use.  Driving at 60MPH or lower saves about 14% in fuel compared to 75+.  That's like one free mile for every 7 you drive.  The other things matter too, like checking your tire pressure weekly, maybe putting an extra pound or two in the tires over what the carmaker suggests for your vehicle, but not exceeding the pressure on the sidewall.  Removing things from your car that you don't need to carry every day, removing the roof rack, etc.  Keeping your car in excellent tune and watching the tires, extra weight, etc can make a difference.

With my little buzz box that has 221K miles on it as of yesterday, I can get in the low 40's MPG wise if I drive 55-60MPH, but in the mid 30's if I push it above 75MPH and that's WITH A/C.  Keeping the RPM's below 3K seems to save the most fuel.  It's not the fastest acceleration, but then what does one expect out of a 1.6L engine that is 14 years old.

---

God didn't send His son to make us happy, He sent His son so we could be Holy!

I live on a military base in the middle of nowhere land, and we see hummers, suburbans and many other gas hogs here. I lived out in the woods and had to drive 45 minutes one way to work before it stinks. The worse thing they are pushing now is ethanol. That is one reason for the high price of food, they are diverting corn for food into gas.

---

There is no problem too big that can't be solved with the use of high explosives

the best way to solve morale problems is just to fire all of the unhappy people. ~ despair.com

I would much rather live closer, but I can't. I have to live where I can afford housing. That happens to be out a little further. (About 25 miles). After Hurricane Katrina, housing went crazy on the coast, and there are alot of people in my position. We can't afford the homeowners insurance, etc that comes along with living closer to the water. So now, we live further and are still stuck paying crazy amounts for gas.

But no one has forced you to make the choices that have you in your situation.  No one forced you to live 30 miles away, in the wilderness.  So to complain that it costs more to drive now, and there is nothing you can do about it seems silly to me.

I'm not judging anyone who chooses to live in the boonies and commute 30 miles each way.  I simply don't understand why people complain about it when it's what they wanted.

What's silly is when someone doesn't read a post and then makes a derogatory remark about the post/the person.  I don't *live* in the wilderness/boonies, I *work* in the wilderness, and as for choice - like everyone else, I go where the money is, and this job was a huge pay increase from my last job.  That's what people do - that's how they choose where to work.

Where did all this stuff about "the world wants the American dream" come from?  People in other countries really don't spend their time worrying about getting the "American" dream, honestly.  Most of them are just trying to make ends meet.

But you don't have to drive 75MPH

I categorically stated that I do not do this.  *sigh*

---

"I will honor Christmas in my heart, and try to keep it all the year." (Charles Dickens: A Christmas Carol)

Isn't the ability to live closer a subjective opinion? I don't know how it is where iamjabeksa and Jane are, but I know that if my dh and I chose to live closer to his work, we wouldn't be in a safe neighborhood. We could live within a mile - or less - of his office, but it's a beat up neighborhood. So we live farther from town, which kind of makes mass transit difficult, and he uses more gas for the commute. Living out here isn't a frivolous kind of choice, kwim?

Also, we need a pickup truck (maybe a second pickup in the future) to carry supplies for our farm - can't get by on little fuel efficient cars. Okay, so farming is a *choice*, but not one that we made lightly...

 

---

"More than that, I count all things to be loss in view of the surpassing value of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord...that I may know Him and the power of His resurrection..." (Phil 3:8,10)

_________
*No opposite gender PMs, please!

JaneFW:

But no one has forced you to make the choices that have you in your situation.  No one forced you to live 30 miles away, in the wilderness.  So to complain that it costs more to drive now, and there is nothing you can do about it seems silly to me.

I'm not judging anyone who chooses to live in the boonies and commute 30 miles each way.  I simply don't understand why people complain about it when it's what they wanted.

What's silly is when someone doesn't read a post and then makes a derogatory remark about the post/the person.  I don't *live* in the wilderness/boonies, I *work* in the wilderness, and as for choice - like everyone else, I go where the money is, and this job was a huge pay increase from my last job.  That's what people do - that's how they choose where to work.

Sorry, I was mixed up with another's posting.  The point is you made a choice, and likely it was a smart choice as the increased cost of driving is likely more than offset by the higher price of driving to and from work.

I guess what I don't understand is that you made a choice that puts more money in your pocket, but are still complaining.  What is that about?

JaneFW:

Where did all this stuff about "the world wants the American dream" come from?  People in other countries really don't spend their time worrying about getting the "American" dream, honestly.  Most of them are just trying to make ends meet.

True, but many ARE trying to live just like we do.  China is projected to have as many cars on the road as we do in the next 10 years and it's only going to get worse with some 1.2 Billion Chinese.  I was speaking of how the demand for oil is on the rise.  Places like India and China with about 20% of the world population are seeing new prosperity and buying cars, homes with more appliances and such.

It's not a judgment, it's a statement of how things in the world are and where they are going.

JaneFW:

But you don't have to drive 75MPH

I categorically stated that I do not do this.  *sigh*

I wasn't really saying you were.  My original post was about how many single occupant SUV's I saw passing me at 75MPH or more.  You responded with how you were stuck in your current vehicles, if I understand what you said.  The implication is that perhaps these folks are also stuck.

OK, so if they are stuck, who is forcing them to drive at 75MPH?  Is that more clear?

---

God didn't send His son to make us happy, He sent His son so we could be Holy!

I guess what I don't understand is that you made a choice that puts more money in your pocket, but are still complaining.  What is that about?

Strange.  I don't perceive myself to be complaining.  I perceive myself to be asking my brothers and sisters how they are dealing with the rocketing price of gas, and to obtain advice/any tips on how to cut costs further that I have already cut them. 

Actually, the money that this job put in my pocket two years ago is considerably less than it is now.  Then, gas was considerably cheaper, and of course the cost of living has risen since then also.  We also have growing children.  They never get cheaper!

Question: if the Chinese and Indian populations want more cars, how does mean they are striving to be American?  Doesn't it just mean that the are striving to be more mobile? 

Many people aren't "stuck".  That's why they continue to drive their jacked up, gas guzzling monster trucks around San Antonio.  That's why I see students at my son's high school driving Hummers and trucks that you have to know their parents are funding - as I doubt that a job at Bill Miller's funds the gas and insurance for those things.

I don't know why people continue to fly past me at 75mph.  I don't really care.  They will be the one at the petrol pump watching the dollars fly by as they fill up yet again.

---

"I will honor Christmas in my heart, and try to keep it all the year." (Charles Dickens: A Christmas Carol)

Seeking His Path:

Lostsomuch:

Why are oil companies making millions in record profits in the last two years???

I didn't read the entire post yet, but the real fact of the matter is that Exxon/Mobil has been averaging more than $10 billion in profit per quarter for more than 2 years. That equates to over $110 million in profit per day. This is profit, not total revenue.

Yet oil companies have some of the worst Return on Investment historically.  It's probably better now, if they actually have oil and don't just buy it on the market.

No one asks how much XOM spent to make 110 million in profit/day.  If they are spending 1.1billion, that's ONLY a 10% return.

It's a lot of money for profit, but as a percentage, it's not as good a return on your investment as other industries such as telecom, computers, etc that have closer to 30-50% return on the investment.  Sure, they don't do the volume of business an oil company does, but they make more per dollar you've invested with them on average.

---

God didn't send His son to make us happy, He sent His son so we could be Holy!

You are right, you are not complaining.

I gave some tips that may or may not help.

You might look into an oil company branded card that saves 5% on gas.  I think there is a Discover Card that does this as well.  If you pay the balance in full each month, it's "free" money.

I just got another $25 gift card from BP yesterday as my most recent 5% rebate.  That will just about fill my car when it's at 1/4 tank remaining!

---

God didn't send His son to make us happy, He sent His son so we could be Holy!

spare_parts:

OK, so if they are stuck, who is forcing them to drive at 75MPH?  Is that more clear?

  Part of my daily commute is on the interstate with the speed limit being 65 mph and I go close to 70 mph. The other half of my trip ranges  from 45mph to 55 mph based upon the speed limits in the different areas.

So, how much more fuel am I using at the higher speed?  I thought you get better mileage on the highway.  Actually, isn't that correct highway miles are better.

 

 

 

 

---

God has given me a really Good Man for a Husband!!! :)

It's Great to be a FLORIDA GATOR!!!

Thank you spare for your advice.  If that's a credit card though, I don't want any more credit cards.  We cut up ours a while back, and we have resolved not to have one any again.  BUT, we do put $300 each on Wal Mart cards (lol) at the beginning of each month.  WM offers 3c off the price of a gallon, and their prices are typically a little lower than other place, so we figure we might be saving 3c-5c as compared to such as Shell.  The gas prices can vary enormously within a ten mile radius.  It's $1.49 in my neighborhood but $1.55 in the neighborhood where I work, so it makes sense for me to make sure I always have enough gas to get home and fill up. 

Isn't that correct, highway miles are better

I have heard that too.  There is a lot of advice that I'm not sure whether it is correct or not - particularly as I'm not at all mechanically minded, and I really don't care how a car works so long as it gets me from point A to point B.

For instance, I travel to work on the 'back' roads, which is a 65mph limit for about 10 miles, and includes a lot of downhill, uphill and sharp bends.  It then changes to 70mph for more uphill, downhill etc.  I could, alternatively, take 2 highways to work, with a constant 70mph - well, I10 is more like 80+ but that's another story - and those are "straight" roads without the bumpiness of my present route to work.  I have heard that sticking to straight, flat surfaces is better for gas mileage.  I don't really want to take the highways to work - the stress of dealing with 10 would probably make me quit my job within a week - but I wonder whether this is true. 

---

"I will honor Christmas in my heart, and try to keep it all the year." (Charles Dickens: A Christmas Carol)

Tech Harris:

Also, these prices we are seeing will be this way until after the election.  All of these economic woes we are going through are planned so the American people will be so outraged that they will vote in a democrat as president. 

That's really funny.  Sorry, I don't believe it.

Melinda

---

Oh, so here's where I put my signature. Unfortunately, I don't have anything cute or profound to say today. :)

iamjabeksa:

I would much rather live closer, but I can't. I have to live where I can afford housing. That happens to be out a little further. (About 25 miles). After Hurricane Katrina, housing went crazy on the coast, and there are alot of people in my position. We can't afford the homeowners insurance, etc that comes along with living closer to the water. So now, we live further and are still stuck paying crazy amounts for gas.

I'm finding that to be true too.  We have started the process of house hunting.  DH would like to be closer to his work because of the commute.  However, the good school districts and the cheaper housing are actually further from where we are.  For the moment, we may be staying put, because the whole idea for our moving was a smaller payment than rent, and since I won't go closer to his work and he won't go further.......*shrugs*

Hugs,
Melinda

---

Oh, so here's where I put my signature. Unfortunately, I don't have anything cute or profound to say today. :)

pooh girl:

spare_parts:

OK, so if they are stuck, who is forcing them to drive at 75MPH?  Is that more clear?

  Part of my daily commute is on the interstate with the speed limit being 65 mph and I go close to 70 mph. The other half of my trip ranges  from 45mph to 55 mph based upon the speed limits in the different areas.

So, how much more fuel am I using at the higher speed?  I thought you get better mileage on the highway.  Actually, isn't that correct highway miles are better.

The point of diminished fuel economy is different for different vehicles.  In city driving, stop and go, it's the mass of the vehicle that plays the biggest role in reducing fuel economy.  If it's a large vehicle and you try to accelerate that vehicle quickly, you burn more fuel than moving a smaller, lighter vehicle. 

The more stops you have, the more energy you consume.

As you transition to highway speeds, it's not the mass of the vehicle that matters as much as aerodynamic drag.  Drag increases as a square if I recally my physics correctly.

If you look at the following paper, while about tractor trailer trucks, the physics applies to cars as well, you can see that at about 50MPH for those vehicles, the horsepower to overcome drag matches the horsepower to overcome things like friction and other mechanical losses.  You can also see how much faster the curve for aerodynamic losses increases, compared to other factors.

If you look at this page:  http://gas2.org/2008/03/15/car-and-driver-increase-pinto-fuel-economy-with-11-of-ecomods/

one will see that about 1/2 of the modifications have to do with the aerodynamics of the car.  The air dam keeping air from under the car, as wellas the radiator block and the smooth front end all contribute significantly to highway fuel economy, while the others apply in both city and highway economy.

Of course, going slower is the 100% free way of reducing losses to aerodynamic factors.

---

God didn't send His son to make us happy, He sent His son so we could be Holy!