$7/gal gas predicted w/i 2 years.....

This is an outsider's view, but still relevant in that we pay HIGHER petrol prices than you, and almost always have.

Most people outside the North American continent think that the root cause is Detroit. While the rest of the world looked for more fuel-efficient vehicles, Detroit kept pumping out barges. Not just big, fat, wallowing barges of cars; but barges with the fuel consumption of a pre-nuclear aircraft carrier.

Perhaps high fuel prices will force a change to more fuel-efficient vehicles, and we'll all benefit in the process.

Ron,

I appreciate your perspective. What's different about the USA is that the majority of our infrastructure is based on the automobile. America may be the rough geographaical size of Australia, but is much more evenly poplated in comparison.

It is an unfortunate fact that our public transportation system is generally vastly inferior to european countries or cities like Sydney. There are exceptions - San Francisco, for example.

I live in an area where I have few public transportation choices. It's a 10-15 minute walk to the end of my street, where I can take a bus and - with a change of bus lines - get to work in roughly an hour. I drive it in 15 minutes.

Since last year, I can ride it on a bike in 35-40 minutes.

Most parts of the USA are dependent on cars for transportation because that's how our country is physically laid out.

I submit that it's going to take significant change in the amount of time people are willing to spend commuting to reduce our oil consumption.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jeffrey Makiel

Imagine if our nation regulated the oil industry and also accessed our own oil fields, but kept the price somewhat high. We would bail out social security and have premium health care for everyone, and as icing on the cake, stimulate conservation and energy research to eventually gain full energy independence.

Nope...Can't do...Wall Street says no.

As Butch said: "I personally believe that capitolism can be a destructive way to run a nation,when allowed to operate w/o oversight".

-Jeff :)

---

The oil that exists on public property is there for the private industry to harvest and put on the global market for as much as they can get. And the only crime committed thus far is that we haven't opened up these areas for them. If only we'd let the oil companies into the Arctic Reserve.

Wall street is no less corrupt than any other public body. Wall Street not only wrote the book on corruption, but they seemingly add a new chapter every five to ten years. When it comes to believing anything Wall Street has to say, I just assume it is a lie.

Capitalism is amoral. Man however is prone to insatiable bouts of greed. And that is the problem. It only takes one jerk to screw it up for everyone else.

I'm unhappy with the oil prices, and it may eventually cost me my job. But I don't fault the oil companies or suppliers for charging what the market will bare. But the Joe's that cashed out all the equity in their homes so they can commute all by themselves in bumper to bumper traffic in an F350 4X4 Power Stroke and now find themselves upside down in their homes and can no longer afford their Tonka truck indulgence annoy me.

Especially when their homes go into foreclosure and sit empty for months, inviting vandals. Yeah, the oil companies are bad actors, but I don't live near them. I live near folks that are leaving my neighbors and I holding the bag.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ron Dunn

This is an outsider's view, but still relevant in that we pay HIGHER petrol prices than you, and almost always have.

Most people outside the North American continent think that the root cause is Detroit. While the rest of the world looked for more fuel-efficient vehicles, Detroit kept pumping out barges. Not just big, fat, wallowing barges of cars; but barges with the fuel consumption of a pre-nuclear aircraft carrier.

Perhaps high fuel prices will force a change to more fuel-efficient vehicles, and we'll all benefit in the process.

---

Ron,

I'm going to disagree with you. It's the consumer that buys the gas guzzling vehicles that creates the problems and causes the gas guzzlers to continue being made. Just this past week I think it was Ford announced they were cutting back on building SUVs and increasing the production on their "Fusion"? ....smaller more economical vehicle. Again, demand or a dramatic lack of demand by a buying public is changing the makeup of the market and what the manufacturer is going to produce.

Don't get me wrong. At one time we had 3 kids at home and we live in Idaho. Just a few blocks from my home is an `11% grade that when snow covered requires a skillful driver with 2 wheel drive or a less skillful driver with 4-wheel drive to navigate in the winter. We had reason because of the mountainous terrain, weather conditions and the number of kids we had at home. We had our share of SUVs....'74 International Scout II, '83 full sized Chevy Blazer, '86 Toyota 4-Runner and I currently have a '90 F-350 4x4 460 cui, 4:10 rear end, 5-speed manual pickup. I hunted elk and used that p/u to get in and out of and pull horse trailers into elk camp in the mountains here. After the kids grew up and the 4-Runner was 16 years old, we replaced it with a Honda Accord V-6....again V-6 because we live in the mountains and the 4-cylinders don't have the power to negotiate the moutain highways here without a constant strain on the transmission. But, there was never a need for a SUV when we lived in Illinois, Texas, Mississippi, Georgia. And we didn't have one. SUVs became a status symbol in many metropolitan areas where 4-WD isn't really necessary. Detroit was simply providing what the American consumer was demanding in my humble opinion.

Ken, I think we'd have to dig deeper into the relationship between what manufacturers make and advertise, and how that affects what people demand. Like you say, urban SUVs don't seem very necessary, although they are in high demand.

I also think our perceptions of what is "needed" in a car are often wrong. For example, almost forty years ago my parents and their kids went on a long haul around Australia, through some of the roughest desert roads on earth. We did it towing a caravan (your trailer) behind a crummy Holden (the local GM brand) with a 161ci engine with around 100kw of power. These days, with roads immeasurably better, mostly sealed, it is claimed to be "necessary" to use a four-wheel drive with a large capacity diesel or a V8 engine. Marketing vs. reality.

But enough of the heroic-youth stories :)

Getting back to the point of my original post - excessive fuel consumption - would you dispute that the average fuel consumption of the the typical US car is significantly higher than the average fuel consumption of cars from anywhere else in the world? I'm not talking about distance travelled, I'm talking about fuel per unit of distance, such as litres per 100km, or miles per gallon.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ron Dunn

Ken, I think we'd have to dig deeper into the relationship between what manufacturers make and advertise, and how that affects what people demand. Like you say, urban SUVs don't seem very necessary, although they are in high demand.

I also think our perceptions of what is "needed" in a car are often wrong. For example, almost forty years ago my parents and their kids went on a long haul around Australia, through some of the roughest desert roads on earth. We did it towing a caravan (your trailer) behind a crummy Holden (the local GM brand) with a 161ci engine with around 100kw of power. These days, with roads immeasurably better, mostly sealed, it is claimed to be "necessary" to use a four-wheel drive with a large capacity diesel or a V8 engine. Marketing vs. reality.

But enough of the heroic-youth stories :)

Getting back to the point of my original post - excessive fuel consumption - would you dispute that the average fuel consumption of the the typical US car is significantly higher than the average fuel consumption of cars from anywhere else in the world? I'm not talking about distance travelled, I'm talking about fuel per unit of distance, such as litres per 100km, or miles per gallon.

---

Nope.....I'd agree with that. But, I will also state, that because of the physical size of the US and dramatic changes in climate and terrain, we might have different needs in a vehicle. A small Mini-cooper aint' gonna hack it for this 6'2" 265 lb. country boy going 4800 kilometers from the Atlantic to the Pacific Ocean on the flats of the prairies, over the mountains and by the way....air conditioning isn't an option....it's got to be standard equipment for me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ron Dunn

Getting back to the point of my original post - excessive fuel consumption - would you dispute that the average fuel consumption of the the typical US car is significantly higher than the average fuel consumption of cars from anywhere else in the world? I'm not talking about distance travelled, I'm talking about fuel per unit of distance, such as litres per 100km, or miles per gallon.

---

I would generally agree with that statement. I also think that you have to look at some of the safety standards that US cars are required to meet. Some of those standards increase weight, which decreases fuel economy.

I do agree that the general size of US cars is larger than european cars.

I just filled up, it cost me $1.70 per liter for 95 octane, with no supermarket
discount docket at the local shell servo. That works out to $6.80/US gallon.

I would love to be paying $4.00 per gallon! (I could buy more tools)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ray Gardiner

I just filled up, it cost me $1.70 per liter for 95 octane, with no supermarket
discount docket at the local shell servo. That works out to $6.80/US gallon.

I would love to be paying $4.00 per gallon! (I could buy more tools)

---

95 Octane!!!!????? Really!!?? That's nearing avation grade fuel here. How about 87 octane for Regular fuel and Premium grade is 91 octane. Racing fuel here is around 106 octane.

Are Octane numbers calculated differently in different parts of the world?

What is the status of No Lead in other parts of the world? Is it done differently (or at all ) from how it is done in the US?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pete Simmons

Are Octane numbers calculated differently in different parts of the world?

What is the status of No Lead in other parts of the world? Is it done differently (or at all ) from how it is done in the US?

---

Check out Wikipedia for a discussion of how octane is calculated. The numbers on pumps in different parts of the world are indeed calculated differently.

Mike

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mike Henderson

Check out Wikipedia for a discussion of how octane is calculated. The numbers on pumps in different parts of the world are indeed calculated differently.

Mike

---

...hmmm...interesting....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Butch Edwards

the stock market is volitile, due to many factors...but I seriously doubt that crying wolf is one of them. as for the "experts", believe it or not, some are exactly that, and have been predicting this for years..they KNEW the sky was falling. I also heard 1 investor make the statement, that even retirement funds are buying up oil stocks, because as he put it.."if ya can't beat 'em,join 'em"..and they are doing just that...to the tune of nearly the same amount($$) that China is, buying oil. the CEOs of major oil companies are in front of congress yesterday and today, doing all they can to CONTINUE to pull the wool over the eyes of the elected. all their job is: turn a profit.period...and they will,anyway possible.
I agree that national news is built upon Bad news, and that's a statement of the condition of this society... we allow it to continue, by NOT turning it off...by maintaining silence...but that's another issue.

---

I unplugged my TV 3 years ago and haven't missed it a bit!