# Civic Matters > Ask Anything About OKC >  Skyrocketing Gas Prices

## greatdane

I am frustrated at the ongoing rise of gas in our town.  Just over two weeks ago I filled up (non-ethanol) at 3.299.
This evening the same station has the same gas at 3.949.  That's a 64 cent per gallon increase!  That is OUTRAGEOUS!
Looking at GasBuddy, gas in Los Angeles is what we're paying here.  What the heck is going on??

----------


## BBatesokc

That's why I fired up the Prius this week. Found gas still at $3.55 this morning and a full tank was only $32 and will get me 460+ miles.

----------


## zookeeper

Leave it to a little newspaper in central Minnesota to ask the same question given all the positive circumstances. It's a good question!
U.S. has glut of oil, but gas prices continue to rise - what gives? | BrainerdDispatch.com | Brainerd, Minnesota

----------


## ou48A

> Leave it to a little newspaper in central Minnesota to ask the same question given all the positive circumstances. It's a good question!
> U.S. has glut of oil, but gas prices continue to rise - what gives? | BrainerdDispatch.com | Brainerd, Minnesota


That article was so inaccurate that it could have only been written for the gullible and stupid.

----------


## ou48A

> So close to the ignore button. Lately, you've just resorted to nothing but name calling.  Go have a beer or something, but it's getting old fast.


On the ignore button please feel free because that article is for the uneducated or worse.

----------


## ljbab728

> 


sid, obviously ou84A is one of the few educated people who post here (or so they think).  LOL

----------


## Achilleslastand

Memorial Day?
Switch to summer blend?
Either way 50 cents or more in 2 weeks is rediculous.

----------


## Martin

> On the ignore button please feel free because that article is for the uneducated or worse.


ok... if it's inaccurate, why not discuss *why* you think it's inaccurate? -M

----------


## Just the facts

Number 1 way to not be affected by gasoline prices - don't use it.  For example, I don't care what the cost of caviar is.

The author of that story seems to think that from ground to gas pump only one all-powerful company touches the oil when in fact there are lots of handlers and owners along the way.  My understanding is that refiners need $4 per gallon to run a profit, but at that price the economy goes in the tank.  That is not a good combination.

----------


## BBatesokc

> Number 1 way to not be affected by gasoline prices - don't use it.  For example, I don't care what the cost of caviar is.
> 
> The author of that story seems to think that from ground to gas pump only one all-powerful company touches the oil when in fact there are lots of handlers and owners along the way.  My understanding is that refiners need $4 per gallon to run a profit, but at that price the economy goes in the tank.  That is not a good combination.


Not biting on your caviar comparison. None of us needs caviar to function in our daily lives. Can't say the same for gas prices.

Even if you stay home  -  so many other things in your life are indeed effected by fuel prices.

----------


## RadicalModerate

> That article was so inaccurate that it could have only been written for the gullible and stupid.


"Sir, you have no call to get snippy with me . . . I'm just doing my job here."

-Marge Gundersen, Chief of Police, Brainerd, Minnesota

----------


## Martin

> Number 1 way to not be affected by gasoline prices - don't use it.


that sounds good in theory, but since fuel prices affect the whole supply chain and therefore affect the price of pretty much anything you buy, you're affected whether you personally use or not. -M

----------


## Just the facts

Yes, but every gallon of fuel I don't use is one more gallon available for the people that deliver stuff.  Plus, the embedded price of fuel in the goods I buy pales (and I mean PALES) in comparison to the price of filling up a gas tank.  Besides, most of the 'stuff' getting delivered is powered by diesel fuel anyhow and one CSX freight train can move 2,000 pounds of 'stuff' 450 miles on a single gallon.  Step 2 is then rearranging our development patterns to reduce how far local stuff has to move.

I am actually surprised gas in OKC hasn't always cost close to the most in the country given the local populations near 100% dependency on it.  If gas went to $10 per gallon today you would have to buy it.

----------


## BBatesokc

> Number 1 way to not be affected by gasoline prices - don't use it.  For example, I don't care what the cost of caviar is.


I think you just uncovered how to avoid the high cost of clothes, food, education, fuel and housing..... "don't use it."

..... wait.

----------


## Just the facts

> Not biting on your caviar comparison. None of us needs caviar to function in our daily lives. Can't say the same for gas prices.


That is what I am saying.  Surely you see the danger inherent in that setup.

----------


## Just the facts

> I think you just uncovered how to avoid the high cost of clothes, food, education, fuel and housing..... "don't use it."
> 
> ..... wait.


Well, not to get to far off topic, but those items are dirt cheap and have lots of competition in the market place at all price points.  100 shirts might have 100 different prices - from 10 cents at a yard sale to $500 at Harrods.  Gasoline - sold within a few pennies no matter how many outlets there are.

----------


## LocoAko

According to gasbuddy.com the OKC average is more than $0.25 above the national average now. Certainly unusual.

----------


## HangryHippo

ou48A, are you going to share why you think the article is inaccurate?  Why are gas prices rising so quickly?

----------


## venture

> ou48A, are you going to share why you think the article is inaccurate?  Why are gas prices rising so quickly?


Would love the insight from someone who has been a major defender of anything oil/gas related on this forum. 

It is pretty insane on how far off we are from the national average right now. Some stations in Norman are over $4/gal now. I feel like I'm back in Chicago.

----------


## SoonerDave

I'm generally loathe on conspiracy theories, but I'm having a hard time accepting conventional answers at this point. 

I filled up 15 days ago at $3.03. Same station is now $3.89. Normally, big bumps are tied to economic upheaval, warfare, cataclysm, something. But even then we haven't (or at least I don't recall) having seen a 25% jump in so short a time. I've heard about refinery maintenance, blend changes, summer price increases, etc., but nothing explains this size of change. 

Part of me wonders if there's something going on in currency markets that is having some obscure but tangible affect on pump prices. It was barely three weeks ago we were hearing about ample supplies and lower consumption. Something doesn't add up.

----------


## venture

*puts on tinfoil hat*

Lower consumption = low oil company profits?

*returns to "reality"*

Seriously though Dave, I agree. Something is odd about this.

----------


## SoonerDave

> That article was so inaccurate that it could have only been written for the gullible and stupid.


That wasn't an article. It was an editorial. 

If you know the answer, ou48A, please share. I'm fully aware that that the price of gas at the pump is not as simple as one evil oil guy with a handlebar mustache pressing a button. But I also am not "gullible and stupid" enough to believe there's _no_ reason for this huge price increase. So, as I said, if you know the answer, please share.

----------


## Anonymous.

Just in time for my fill up... I am just under 1/4 tank. Wondering if I should fill up today after work or wait it out and see if I can avoid driving this weekend and fill up Monday or Tuesday.

The great wait debate!

----------


## OKCTalker

C'mon - there have to be enough people on this forum to make all the connections between refiners and consumers, including the commodities guys who are placing bets on higher and lower prices.

----------


## sacolton

At this rate, we will probably see $4/gal. this weekend.  My local 7-11 (the cheapest in my area) is already $3.89.  It was $3.27 last week.  The big question is ... what is the breaking point for most people on fixed budgets?  $4.00 would be hard to deal with.  Already cut my Cox bill by eliminating TV.  No more Netflix.  Tightening the belt and eating out less.  All these things I'm doing to save myself money is hurting the economy.  I'm spending less to budget for gasoline.  

... and then there's the trucking issue, when gas goes up the prices at the store goes up.  

If we reach $5/gal by this summer ... I'll have to cut back even more.

----------


## ou48A

> ok... if it's inaccurate, why not discuss *why* you think it's inaccurate? -M




The author says that “It’s not because we have fewer barrels of oil. It’s not because demand is up.”

Crude is traded on a world market. World demand for crude is up.

 The price depends on what world investors think the price of oil will be in the future. When world traders think oil will be high, they bid it up even higher. Traders around the world know demand for gasoline rises in the summer. They therefore start buying oil futures contracts in the spring in anticipation of that price rise.

There are costs differences in the different blends of gasoline at certain times of the year…The author write like he doesn’t believe so. 

Refinery’s shut downs have a significant impact on price particularly when there are unscheduled shut downs.
The author says “that oil refineries have been running at or near capacity.” The current refinery utilization rate is at 88.0%. But it’s been as low as 81% this spring… That’s not near capacity.

The author says that “Oil company profits have not slumped during the nation’s Great Recession.”
While they have come back, it totally false to say they did not go down during parts of the “nation’s Great Recession”
Furthermore most of the major integrated oil companies profit margins that are close to the averages of many other major companies.


The author makes several inaccurate statements. The author lacks specific information and engages in way to many broad generality’s. Its lazy journalism and a low information article that only a low information reader would find acceptable.

There are many shorter term reasons that have helped cause the current price spike in the USA and around the world.
But the 2 biggest long term reasons why prices are rising in my view is the increases of world crude demand, and in the USA the drop in value of the dollar that was caused by the decision to massively increase federal government spending and borrow the money.

----------


## sacolton

double post

----------


## Just the facts

> $4.00 would be hard to deal with.  Already cut my Cox bill by eliminating TV.  No more Netflix.  Tightening the belt and eating out less.  All these things I'm doing to save myself money is hurting the economy.  I'm spending less to budget for gasoline.


I have been saying for a while now - if we want to keep the economic lights on we better find a way to live without gasoline.

----------


## zookeeper

OU48a, Come join us in the No Spin Zone. It couldn't have a simple answer? You know, Occam's razor?
Speed Trap: Big Oil Profits from High Gasoline Prices | Center for American Progress

----------


## Bellaboo

> OU48a, Come join us in the No Spin Zone. It couldn't have a simple answer? You know, Occam's razor?
> Speed Trap: Big Oil Profits from High Gasoline Prices | Center for American Progress


The article states how they are 'sitting on leases and not drilling'.....these are in the Gulf, very expensive to drill compared to the new technologies in the continental US. This is the reason Devon exited offshore drilling a couple of years back. They were ahead of the curve...

I don't blame them one bit for cutting the risk of off shore drilling for the less risky on shore drilling reward.

Not only that, that article bases its substance from politicians....you really want to go there ?

----------


## Ginkasa

> I have been saying for a while now - if we want to keep the economic lights on we better find a way to live without gasoline.


I thonk almost anyone can agree that society needs to find a cheaper and sustainable alternative to gasoline.  I think it is more difficult for an individual to abstain from gas right now. It depends on their situation.

----------


## venture

> I thonk almost anyone can agree that society needs to find a cheaper and sustainable alternative to gasoline.  I think it is more difficult for an individual to abstain from gas right now. It depends on their situation.


$4/gal gas and higher is definitely going to be a killer for a commuter/sprawl prone area like OKC - which Kerry has been saying for ages. Perhaps we need to push for it to get to $5-6/gal to force things to finally change. Of course at that time we might see an all out riot against the Oil/Gas industry coupled with another recession. There really should be a major push to have all new build cars utilized CNG or have a gas and CNG version that people can pick from.

----------


## ou48A

> . There really should be a major push to have all new build cars utilized CNG or have a gas and CNG version that people can pick from.


The best solution IMHO would be to manufacture duel fueled vehicles that use both NG and gasoline.
The NG would work well for shorter trips and the gasoline for longer trips.

Perhaps this is where a government mandate is needed. For most, there are currently very few options for duel fueled vehicles.
 A mandate to produce a few each year might be worth a look?

----------


## Just the facts

You can make a car that runs of dried leaves and dry leaves will start costing $3.95 per gallon equivalent.  If CNG ever becomes common place the price will skyrocket (newsflash - that is what the NG companies want).  The only real solution is to eliminate the distance between point A and point B that makes the car a requirement in the first place.  Instead of living 3 miles from the Super Wal-Mart grocery store - live 3 blocks from the corner grocery store, and then who cares how much transportation fuel cost - it isn't needed.

----------


## kelroy55

I was in Ft Worth Wed/Thur and stopped at the gas station at Walmart. It was 3.25 there and yes there was a line but I was able to fill up fairly quickly.

----------


## mkjeeves

> You can make a car that runs of dried leaves and dry leaves will start costing $3.95 per gallon equivalent.  If CNG ever becomes common place the price will skyrocket (newsflash - that is what the NG companies want).  The only real solution is to eliminate the distance between point A and point B that makes the car a requirement in the first place.  Instead of living 3 miles from the Super Wal-Mart grocery store - live 3 blocks from the corner grocery store, and then who cares how much transportation fuel cost - it isn't needed.


Someone drove the groceries to the corner market, in a smaller, less efficient vehicle than at the super-center, where economy of scale is less and groceries cost more as a result...

The other option is to dramatically improve the well to wheel efficiency, (or tree to wheel, or fusion reactor to wheel.)

2013 Ford Tauras EPA Combined 23 MPG. Most of the electrics are around 100 + or -.

----------


## king183

> You can make a car that runs of dried leaves and dry leaves will start costing $3.95 per gallon equivalent.  If CNG ever becomes common place the price will skyrocket (newsflash - that is what the NG companies want).  The only real solution is to eliminate the distance between point A and point B that makes the car a requirement in the first place.  Instead of living 3 miles from the Super Wal-Mart grocery store - live 3 blocks from the corner grocery store, and then who cares how much transportation fuel cost - it isn't needed.


Transportation fuel is most certainly needed, which is why I would still care about it if I didn't own a car.  The food that you purchase from the corner market was delivered there by some method of transportation.  The food was transported off the farm or ranch to the distributor or the seller via some method.  What is that method?  Almost certainly a truck that runs on fuel.  So higher fuel costs lead to higher food and product costs.  Even if you don't own a car and never have to put gas into a vehicle, you're still paying for the high costs in every product you buy. So, we won't find a way to live without transportation fuel as suggested earlier.

Now, if most people moved to the urban core, where it was highly walkable and you didn't need a car, the demand for that transportation fuel, ceteris paribus, would drop, leading to a decrease in the transportation costs.

----------


## Bellaboo

2013 Nissan Altima 2.5 Litre 4 cyl.          38 mpg Highway      -    31 mpg avg

----------


## Dubya61

> 2013 Nissan Altima 2.5 Litre 4 cyl.          38 mpg Highway      -    31 mpg avg


Doesn't that seem kind of sad, though?  We used to aspire to much higher mileage cars.  It's like satisfaction at just going to the contest rather than winning it.  Why are we still content with 38 hwy/31 avg?

----------


## ou48A

Vehicles that get better gasoline mileage help, but they won’t slow down the world’s increased demand for gasoline / crude that is much larger than what is saved.

If we want lower prices more production is needed along with better government fiscal responsibility. 
A stronger dollar helps lower oil prices.

----------


## LandRunOkie

> Someone drove the groceries to the corner market, in a smaller, less efficient vehicle than at the super-center, where economy of scale is less and groceries cost more as a result...


Time to crawl out from under that rock ... the local food movement started over 20 years ago.  Places like the Earth in Norman grow their own produce.

----------


## Stew

I read not too long ago that oil based fuels was the USA's number one export for the first time in some number of years YET prices didn't drop as predicted by the drill baby drill crowd.

I never pay attention to gas prices and had no idea they had risen so much in the last few weeks and heck I just filled up yesterday. Hopefully they'll drop back down soon.

----------


## ou48A

> I read not too long ago that oil based fuels was the USA's number one export for the first time in some number of years YET prices didn't drop as predicted by the drill baby drill crowd.
> 
> I never pay attention to gas prices and had no idea they had risen so much in the last few weeks and heck I just filled up yesterday. Hopefully they'll drop back down soon.


If you will consider how much higher prices would be without it, drill baby drill works and would work much better with lower prices if not for a government that slows massive energy development in several areas.

----------


## king183

> If you will consider how much higher prices would be without it, drill baby drill works and would work much better with lower prices if not for a government that slows massive energy development in several areas.


Absolutely. Prices are assuredly lower relative to what they would be without the extra drilling.  If we could get better, faster government approval of energy development, we could become the world's largest exporter of oil and gas within five years.

----------


## Achilleslastand

> Absolutely. Prices are assuredly lower relative to what they would be without the extra drilling.  If we could get better, faster government approval of energy development, we could become the world's largest exporter of oil and gas within five years.


If
If
If
Chugh
Chugh
Chugh
Its almost as if those in power do not care.

----------


## mkjeeves

> Time to crawl out from under that rock ... the local food movement started over 20 years ago.  Places like the Earth in Norman grow their own produce.


What would be your guess of the percent of sales produce is in the average purchase at the wal-mart super center JTF compared the local market to? I'm going to make a wild guess at less than 5% of sales.

I'm with you though, I posted some things about the local food movement awhile back. 

http://www.okctalk.com/general-civic...tml#post623531

However, after 20 years, we have one place and it isn't local to most people in OKC. We're also in an extended  drought. It's probably a good thing the majority of Oklahomans haven't relied on local produce. I'm not so sure we have the water supply. Are you?

BTW...what's going to be the energy cost to manufacture brand spanking new materials, truck it all in and build new housing for close to a million people in downtown when you move everyone from the burbs there? (Not to mention all the other resources that would be gobbled up.) Too much! There are better solutions.

----------


## Stew

> If you will consider how much higher prices would be without it, drill baby drill works and would work much better with lower prices if not for a government that slows massive energy development in several areas.


Lets see... The USA has increased domestic oil production by over 25% in the last four or so years yet in the same time period gas prices have risen by well over 50%. I'm not saying you're wrong, I just have a hard time believing it.

----------


## venture

Sounds like several refineries are shutting down all at once. So its only going to get worse until they come back up. Seems to back up the notion that it isn't a supply (raw material) problem but a refining problem. At least we finally saw the permit for the first new refinery issued this year in 30 years. Now we just need to get more built. 

Of course doesn't solve the long term problem. I'm sure I am not the only one that scoffs at the commercials of "amazing low MPG of 31" and the like. We've been at that level for years. We should be well on the way to 100 mpg by now or higher. Unfortunately it'll take a gov't mandate to happen and that'll never happen.




> Lets see... The USA has increased domestic oil production by over 25% in the last four or so years yet in the same time period gas prices have risen by well over 50%. I'm not saying you're wrong, I just have a hard time believing it.


We could open ANWR and everything else up to drilling and I bet everything I have prices won't go down. Oil & Gas companies aren't interested in the prices going back down. It is like the cost of water. It is something that we essentially need to function and those guys know it. They will get whatever price they feel they need to get and no one will stop them.

----------


## Stew

> Sounds like several refineries are shutting down all at once. So its only going to get worse until they come back up. Seems to back up the notion that it isn't a supply (raw material) problem but a refining problem. At least we finally saw the permit for the first new refinery issued this year in 30 years. Now we just need to get more built. 
> 
> Of course doesn't solve the long term problem. I'm sure I am not the only one that scoffs at the commercials of "amazing low MPG of 31" and the like. We've been at that level for years. We should be well on the way to 100 mpg by now or higher. Unfortunately it'll take a gov't mandate to happen and that'll never happen.
> 
> 
> 
> We could open ANWR and everything else up to drilling and I bet everything I have prices won't go down. Oil & Gas companies aren't interested in the prices going back down. It is like the cost of water. It is something that we essentially need to function and those guys know it. They will get whatever price they feel they need to get and no one will stop them.


No kidding. The 1986 Chevy Sprint got 48 MPG. You'd think with all the advances in technology since then we'd have a plethora of gas powered cars that got at LEAST 48 MPG.  Id-a-make-a-no sense.

I never heard of a Chevy Sprint. I wonder if they were good cars.


25 All-time Best Gas Cars by MPG - Energy Maters - Green Transportation

----------


## ou48A

> Sounds like several refineries are shutting down all at once. So its only going to get worse until they come back up. Seems to back up the notion that it isn't a supply (raw material) problem but a refining problem. At least we finally saw the permit for the first new refinery issued this year in 30 years. Now we just need to get more built. 
> 
> Of course doesn't solve the long term problem. I'm sure I am not the only one that scoffs at the commercials of "amazing low MPG of 31" and the like. We've been at that level for years. We should be well on the way to 100 mpg by now or higher. Unfortunately it'll take a gov't mandate to happen and that'll never happen.
> 
> 
> 
> We could open ANWR and everything else up to drilling and I bet everything I have prices won't go down. Oil & Gas companies aren't interested in the prices going back down. It is like the cost of water. It is something that we essentially need to function and those guys know it. They will get whatever price they feel they need to get and no one will stop them.


What you need to know is that prices wouldn’t go by as much if more drilling and energy infrastructure was allowed to be built and that our economy would be better off for it.
You / we need to know the real reason why prices go up and down over the long term.

----------


## venture

> What you need to know is that prices wouldn’t go by as much if more drilling and energy infrastructure was allowed to be built and that our economy would be better off for it.
> You / we need to know the real reason why prices go up and down over the long term.


So you are essentially saying we can open it all up, let them drilling to their hearts content, and even though we hear that it'll help lower energy costs in reality we are just going to keep the forced priced increase lower than what they originally would be?

If that's the case, what's the point? That's when we need to start pushing more (and improved) hybrid vehicles that would only use a couple gallons every few hundred miles. Of course I have a feeling if we do that, they are just going to turn around and charge $15/gal to make up for the drop in demand. IOW, we are in a no win situation.

----------


## Martin

> You'd think with all the advances in technology since then we'd have a plethora of gas powered cars that got at LEAST 48 MPG.


it's not that the technology isn't there, it's just that current emissions and crash impact standards make that level of efficiency more  difficult to obtain. -M

----------


## windowphobe

> it's not that the technology isn't there, it's just that current emissions and crash impact standards make that level of efficiency more difficult to obtain.


As the young folks say, THIS.

That little Chevy Sprint weighed less than 2000 lb.  Subcompacts today carry around 2500 lb or more, mostly to convince people that they can drive into bridge abutments and survive.   Every mid-sized "family" sedan weighs at least 3100 lb; minivans are invariably over 4000 lb.   Neither the Congress nor the EPA can override the laws of physics -- but they'll never stop trying.

----------


## greatdane

"They" are predicting prices to increase by as much as another 20 cents.  Just since my post *yesterday* that same 7-11 I referred has gone up another 9 cents, topping the $4 mark.  That is for non-ethanol fuel.  I understand the summer fuel blend excuse it happens every year, as do increases around holidays.  I am just miffed at the amount of increase.  Seriously, going from 3.29 April 27 to 4.03 May 17 seems excessive to me.  Gas in Dallas is 3.29, Little Rock is as low as 3.19, Albuquerque 3.33, Wichita 3.65.  Why so high in OK?

----------


## venture

> "They" are predicting prices to increase by as much as another 20 cents.  Just since my post *yesterday* that same 7-11 I referred has gone up another 9 cents, topping the $4 mark.  That is for non-ethanol fuel.  I understand the summer fuel blend excuse it happens every year, as do increases around holidays.  I am just miffed at the amount of increase.  Seriously, going from 3.29 April 27 to 4.03 May 17 seems excessive to me.  Gas in Dallas is 3.29, Little Rock is as low as 3.19, Albuquerque 3.33, Wichita 3.65.  Why so high in OK?


News tonight is saying the refineries impacted are the main suppliers for us...so we get it the worst.

----------


## ou48A

> So you are essentially saying we can open it all up, let them drilling to their hearts content, and even though we hear that it'll help lower energy costs in reality we are just going to keep the forced priced increase lower than what they originally would be?
> 
> If that's the case, what's the point? .


The point is to avoid another deep recession or something worse. 


We now live in a world economy and should expect to pay reasonably close to the going world rates.
That’s why IMHO we should be pushing far harder for duel fueled vehicles (NG - gasoline).

 Eventually NG will be exported in far greater amounts than we would ever likely use for transportation. This would cause NG to go up….The good news is that we have very large deposits of NG in the US off shore and in Canada. Drill baby drill will work very well for NG but we have to be able to build pipelines and associated facilities

----------


## venture

> The point is to avoid another deep recession or something worse. 
> 
> 
> We now live in a world economy and should expect to pay reasonably close to the going world rates.
> That’s why IMHO we should be pushing far harder for duel fueled vehicles (NG - gasoline).
> 
>  Eventually NG will be exported in far greater amounts than we would ever likely use for transportation. This would cause NG to go up….The good news is that we have very large deposits of NG in the US off shore and in Canada. Drill baby drill will work very well for NG but we have to be able to build pipelines and associated facilities


Or we evolve completely away from it as much as we can. In the Fusion power thread I attempted to bring this up, but you seemed to dodge it.

There is technology available that can be advanced towards more electric car usage. In pavement recharging technology existing that can keep cars powered as they travel on interstates for example. As we move electrical generation away from oil/gas towards Fusion, additional fission plants (potentially), and wind fields that would reduce the demand we have for oil/gas for transportation. 

So sure, we can sit there and go to dual fueled vehicles which is a good minor step. Much like hybrids were a good first step there. We can still do better, which probably will require the Fed coming down and doing forceful mandates - not these decades long plans. The sooner we break any reliance on oil/gas the better off we'll be.

----------


## ou48A

> Or we evolve completely away from it as much as we can. In the Fusion power thread I attempted to bring this up, but you seemed to dodge it.
> 
> There is technology available that can be advanced towards more electric car usage. In pavement recharging technology existing that can keep cars powered as they travel on interstates for example. As we move electrical generation away from oil/gas towards Fusion, additional fission plants (potentially), and wind fields that would reduce the demand we have for oil/gas for transportation. 
> 
> So sure, we can sit there and go to dual fueled vehicles which is a good minor step. Much like hybrids were a good first step there. We can still do better, which probably will require the Fed coming down and doing forceful mandates - not these decades long plans. The sooner we break any reliance on oil/gas the better off we'll be.


We should evolve away from crude oil usage it as much as we can….. but as long as there is oil production due to the cracking process there will always be gasoline. I’m pretty sure the physics of the cracking process can’t be changed very much or by enough to not still have large amounts of gasoline. We have still got to do something with it. 

Baring a major break though with electric cars they are far more expensive and are not really very practical for most people. There are also limits to what the electric power grid will support.

Right now the most cost effect fuel we have that can displace gasoline is NG. Right now nothing else even comes close. That’s why dual fueled vehicles are the most cost effective and practical alternative. Even if only 25% of commuters used NG for their commutes it would displace significant amounts of oil. 

Strong national leadership on this issue would help. Nobody else in the world has as much natural gas potential as the USA. If we displace a decent percentage of our crude oil usage with NG we can become a net exporter of crude oil and its products in a world market that will need our expensive crude/ products.

This would significantly strengthen our national economy and our ability to influence world events.

This is not to say we shouldn’t be working on cheaper energy alternates…. But basic laws of economics mean that high energy prices cause serious economic turmoil on the consuming end. It’s better to be a producer of energy.

----------


## venture

What is to keep Chesapeake and other major NG producers from just rocketing up the price of NG to keep it comparable to Oil to where there is no advantage? If we have so much supply than the price shouldn't really jump all that drastically. Would it be something that the Fed would need to step in and regulate pricing until the market is well adjusted to the switch in our primary fuel for cars?

----------


## ou48A

> What is to keep Chesapeake and other major NG producers from just rocketing up the price of NG to keep it comparable to Oil to where there is no advantage? If we have so much supply than the price shouldn't really jump all that drastically. Would it be something that the Fed would need to step in and regulate pricing until the market is well adjusted to the switch in our primary fuel for cars?



The trading markets basically set the price for Chesapeake and other major NG producers.
We have far more NG than oil + crude oil is much easier and much cheaper to ship across the oceans.
Even if NG is roughly the same price as crude per BTU it’s a national advantage to use more NG gas as a transportation fuel. As I said we could export the excess crude. This is an area where we have a huge potential economic advantage over China and most other low cost producers.
We have tried regulating NG nationally and it was a dismal failure.

----------


## OKCisOK4me

My mom is in Flagstaff visiting the sister and her kids and it's $3.59 there.  

I guess the answer is, take your vacation outside of Oklahoma this summer!

----------


## ou48A

> My mom is in Flagstaff visiting the sister and her kids and it's $3.59 there.  
> 
> I guess the answer is, *take your vacation outside of Oklahoma this summer*!


Maybe so……refining is still somewhat a regional industry and when the outage occurs in your region it’s going to impact you more than if it was nearly a half a continent away.

----------


## SOONER8693

> "They" are predicting prices to increase by as much as another 20 cents.  Just since my post *yesterday* that same 7-11 I referred has gone up another 9 cents, topping the $4 mark.  That is for non-ethanol fuel.  I understand the summer fuel blend excuse it happens every year, as do increases around holidays.  I am just miffed at the amount of increase.  Seriously, going from 3.29 April 27 to 4.03 May 17 seems excessive to me.  Gas in Dallas is 3.29, Little Rock is as low as 3.19, Albuquerque 3.33, Wichita 3.65.  Why so high in OK?


Almost a dollar more in Oklahoma than surrounding states, I'm calling BS on any explanation. The "forces" that be have chosen for whatever reason to hose the gas buying public of this state. Should be criminal and treated as such.

----------


## SoonerDave

I know that when price spikes (large or small) happen, it renews the call for alternative fuels, but the problem with the alternatives is that once you cull away the hype from the reality you find out that there really aren't extensive, practical mass fuel alternatives. When GM solicited battery proposals for their Volt, they received a boatload of great proposals from lots of great green startup-type companies, but guess what - they were all just variations on essentially the same technology. 

The explanations behind all of this don't make it down through regular media, because it starts to get into discussions about physics and technology limits that aren't overcome just because a senator or Hollywood type or *insert favorite pundit here* says they should. You have to figure out a way to get X amount of energy from mechanism Y, and right now the closest thing we can get in practical terms are the semi-electric hybrids and CNG vehicles. 

Fuel cell technology is extremely promising conceptually, but those implementations are primarily hydrogen based, and no one has quite yet posited a way to roll out a slew of micro H-bombs on the roads bouncing around at 70mph and sometimes hitting each other. Fusion is very intriguing, but practical implementations are still years away (there's an example of a skunkworks project here. Fuel cell technology is very intriguing, but its so expensive that its unlikely to get past what are termed "niche" applications. Though I'm loathe to use Wikipedia for a reference for nearly anything, I'll grant myself an exception for what seems to be a pretty decent general article on the subject here. The point is not to dismiss them, and not that we _shouldn't_ pursue them, but just temper expectations. Reality is often an ugly obstacle. 

I remember a lecture back in Engineering school at OU that talked about the maximum available energy from various sources, and how back then the prof was talking about (and this isn't a quote, its a paraphrase) "these are the physics limits we face right now." He was talking about how great it was to consider solar, wind, and all the other forms that are popular to discuss, but the physical limits of those technologies were pretty sobering. Mind you, this transcended politics. This was about how we turn the discussions about alternative energies into something  useful, and its a darned sight more difficult than it seems. The battery notion with the Volt is just a contemporary manifestation of that very same notion - at some point, no matter how badly we want an alternative to work, the physics is sometimes the biggest roadblock. 

Sorry for the diversion.

----------


## Just the facts

You are right Venture.  We will just export whatever amount is necessary to keep prices up.

----------


## LandRunOkie

The US has been a net importer of petroleum since WWII.  The recent ramp up in domestic oil production due to fracking, offshore, and waste water wells has only decreased imports.  US producers do not have the ability to set oil prices globally.

----------


## mkjeeves

U.S. exports of gasoline, diesel and other oil-based fuels are soaring, putting the nation on track to be a net exporter of petroleum products in 2011 for the first time in 62 years.

A combination of booming demand from emerging markets and faltering domestic activity means the U.S. is exporting more fuel than it imports, upending the historical norm.

According to data released by the U.S. Energy Information Administration on Tuesday, the U.S. sent abroad 753.4 million barrels of everything from gasoline to jet fuel in the first nine months of this year, while it imported 689.4 million barrels.

That the U.S. is shipping out more fuel than it brings in is significant because the nation has for decades been a voracious energy consumer. It took in huge quantities of not only crude oil from the Middle East but also refined fuels from Europe, Latin America and elsewhere to help run its factories and cars.

As recently as 2005, the U.S. imported nearly 900 million barrels more of petroleum products than it exported. Since then the deficit has been steadily shrinking until finally disappearing last fall, and analysts say the country will not lose its "net exporter" tag anytime soon.

"It looks like a trend that could stay in place for the rest of the decade," said Dave Ernsberger, global director of oil at Platts, which tracks energy markets. "The conventional wisdom is that U.S. is this giant black hole sucking in energy from around the world. This changes that dynamic."

So long as the U.S. remains the world's biggest net importer of crude oil, currently taking in nine million barrels per day, it isn't likely to become energy independent anytime soon. Yet its growing presence as an overall exporter of fuels made from crude gives it greater influence in the global energy market. 

U.S. Nears Milestone: Net Fuel Exporter - WSJ.com

----------


## ou48A

> I know that when price spikes (large or small) happen, it renews the call for alternative fuels, but the problem with the alternatives is that once you cull away the hype from the reality you find out that there really aren't extensive, practical mass fuel alternatives. When GM solicited battery proposals for their Volt, they received a boatload of great proposals from lots of great green startup-type companies, but guess what - they were all just variations on essentially the same technology. 
> 
> *The explanations behind all of this don't make it down through regular media, because it starts to get into discussions about physics and technology limits that aren't overcome just because a senator or Hollywood type or *insert favorite pundit here* says they should.* You have to figure out a way to get X amount of energy from mechanism Y, and right now the closest thing we can get in practical terms are the semi-electric hybrids and CNG vehicles. 
> 
> Fuel cell technology is extremely promising conceptually, but those implementations are primarily hydrogen based, and no one has quite yet posited a way to roll out a slew of micro H-bombs on the roads bouncing around at 70mph and sometimes hitting each other. Fusion is very intriguing, but practical implementations are still years away (there's an example of a skunkworks project here. *Fuel cell technology is very intriguing, but its so expensive that its unlikely to get past what are termed "niche" applications*. Though I'm loathe to use Wikipedia for a reference for nearly anything, I'll grant myself an exception for what seems to be a pretty decent general article on the subject here. The point is not to dismiss them, and not that we _shouldn't_ pursue them, but just temper expectations. Reality is often an ugly obstacle. 
> 
> I remember a lecture back in Engineering school at OU that talked about the maximum available energy from various sources, and how back then the prof was talking about (and this isn't a quote, its a paraphrase) "*these are the physics limits we face right now." He was talking about how great it was to consider solar, wind, and all the other forms that are popular to discuss, but the physical limits of those technologies were pretty sobering*. Mind you, this transcended politics. *This was about how we turn the discussions about alternative energies into something  useful, and its a darned sight more difficult than it seems*. The battery notion with the Volt is just a contemporary manifestation of that very same notion - *at some point, no matter how badly we want an alternative to work, the physics is sometimes the biggest roadblock.* 
> Sorry for the diversion.


Very good post. particularly the bolded part.
As you indicate its the physics that are the biggest roadblock no matter hard we wish or hope

----------


## LandRunOkie

The reporter in the video you linked to gave a legitimate reason for the conflicting numbers.  Environmentally conscious fuel consumers like those in Europe are electing to import the refined products rather than doing their own refining.  Probably because of the environmentally hazardous byproducts of refining operations.  The US will not become a net crude exporter in the foreseeable future.

----------


## ou48A

> We will just export whatever amount is necessary to keep prices up.


If we are paying global prices in a global economy why shouldn’t they be allowed to export their products?

----------


## ou48A

What do I pay for in a gallon of regular gasoline? - FAQ - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

 The national average retail price of a gallon of regular gasoline in March 2013 was $3.71. The four main components of the retail price and approximate shares of the total price were:

 1.Crude Oil: 63%. The cost of crude oil as a share of the retail price varies over time and among regions of the country. Refiners paid an average of about $98.00 per barrel of crude oil, or about $2.34 per gallon, in March 2013.
 2.Refining Costs and Profits: 16%
 3.Distribution, Marketing, and Retail Costs and Profits: 10%
 4.Taxes: 11%. Federal excise taxes were 18.4 cents per gallon and state excise taxes averaged 23.47 cents per gallon

----------


## mkjeeves

> The reporter in the video you linked to gave a legitimate reason for the conflicting numbers.  Environmentally conscious fuel consumers like those in Europe are electing to import the refined products rather than doing their own refining.  Probably because of the environmentally hazardous byproducts of refining operations.  The US will not become a net crude exporter in the foreseeable future.


There are no conflicting numbers. Crude oil imports and exports are a sub set of petroleum products imports and exports. We net export petroleum products. Any way you want to look at it, we don't import or produce one barrel of oil, crack it and export two barrels of products from that one barrel of oil.   Assume we import 5 barrels or crude and produce 5 barrels of crude. We crack that and export 6 barrels of gasoline, diesel and other products. We net imported crude since we didn't export any of it but we net exported products because we shipped out more barrels than we shipped in.




> The US will not become a net crude exporter in the foreseeable future.


Which may or may not be irrelevant depending on what the argument is, pollution, oil consumption or other, since crude imports and export totals don't take into account how much crude we cracked and shipped out.

OU48 spoke once about exporting crude and products, at other times about crude but I believe his point was we export oil and oil products and will continue to do so more and more if we switched to NG. Personally, I think as a matter of natural interest, security and pollution control, we should move to other alternatives for our own use and limit oil products exports. Keep the resources here to secure our economy, energy and oil product needs in the future. Don't take on the pollution for other countries.

Not only that, we heavily subsidise oil, thus when we ship it out, we heavily subsidise oil in the countries we ship it to. That's beyond stupid.

----------


## LandRunOkie

> There are no conflicting numbers. Crude oil imports and exports are a sub set of petroleum products imports and exports.


Nope.  The process of refining is what makes petroleum products petroleum products.  Crude oil is not a petroleum product.  I agree that we shouldn't be refining Europe's oil.  Just another example of oil companies not being forced to account for environmental costs.

----------


## mkjeeves

Okay. I'll let OU48 make his own argument but it seems to be essentially the same...the more we switch to NG, the more oil products we have to export and the more power we have in the both the crude market and oil products market. 

My opinion is the same though, NG can be a transition and some help to ease dependence on oil but our primary focus needs to be on moving as much of our needs as we can to electric, natural gas and wind generated now and whatever we can do to move beyond that as fast as possible in the future. And as I said, we need to stop the oil companies from taking profits by letting the world crap their pollution on us and we need to keep as much of the resources at home as possible to drive down domestic prices and secure our future needs.

----------


## RadicalModerate

> that sounds good in theory, but since fuel prices affect the whole supply chain and therefore affect the price of pretty much anything you buy, you're affected whether you personally use or not. -M


Would you please refrain from making statements like that that make too much sense to be believed or tolerated?
(j/k . . . =)

It's almost like slapping up a bumper sticker with something along the lines of 
"Everything You Ever Owned Came By Truck
Including Your Bicycle"

Did I say "bumpersticker"?  Sorry . . . it implies bias.

(jsyk: Even the thought of $4.00 a gallon gas totally sucks in an unjustifiable manner.)

----------


## Servicetech571

Anybody else notice that traffic isn't any lighter despite the higher gas costs?

----------


## kevinpate

> Anybody else notice that traffic isn't any lighter despite the higher gas costs?


Hadn't noticed. After a there and back again run to Mobile for elder son's graduation late last week and weekend, I haven't had much interest in being in a car this week (pricing changes arose after I got back and enjoyed hermit status.)

----------


## Just the facts

> If we are paying global prices in a global economy why shouldnt they be allowed to export their products?


They should be able to.  I just prefer that we work to make the product obsolete.  I agree that we will never have an alternative fuels economy.  We either live with oil, and all the pros and cons that come with it, or we rescale our built environment to humans, and not machines with humans in them.

----------


## RadicalModerate

> They should be able to.  I just prefer that we work to make the product obsolete.  I agree that we will never have an alternative fuels economy.  We either live with oil, and all the pros and cons that come with it, or we rescale our built environment to humans, and not machines with humans in them.


Music by which to meditate
on Skyrocketing Gas Prices
While awaiting with wonder
approaching Tornadoes . . . 

did I say "tornadoes"? i meant Toronados. sorry . . .

----------


## pw405

current prices are a problem due to a refinery that is having trouble... we are almost as high as CA:

----------


## Just the facts

Nm

----------


## venture

> If we are paying global prices in a global economy why shouldn’t they be allowed to export their products?


So then isn't "energy independence" nothing but a load of horse crap? I mean if we are going to forever linked to the global economy, then the actions of others countries will also impact our gas/oil needs and prices. If we were truly trying to get energy independent wouldn't that entail dumping oil and gas as the primary fuel for our economy?

----------


## LandRunOkie

Energy independence is a marketing slogan created by the o&g industry PR and marketing departments.  It serves two main purposes.  It is an emotional appeal to people's patriotism and plays on their fears of oil client states in the mid-east.  And it is designed to reinforce complacency among would be activists and critics who would be in favor of aggressive public investment in renewable energies if they knew the truth.

----------


## bluedogok

Gas prices are very market specific, much of the time it is dependent upon how many distributors there are in a specific market. Gas in Austin was almost always 7-10 cents more expensive than in the San Antonio area. The prices here in Denver were between 3.35-2.45 just two weeks ago and now around 3.75 that last time that I got gas last week. When you get out in the smaller towns of the Central Texas Hill Country or the mountains here it can be from 15-40 cents higher than in the cities like Austin or Denver.

----------


## bretthexum

4.30-4.40 here in Minneapolis.  Brutal.  

Can sit and piss and moan about it - or just go on with life.  I pick the second  :Smile:

----------


## OKCRT

> 4.30-4.40 here in Minneapolis.  Brutal.  
> 
> Can sit and piss and moan about it - or just go on with life.  I pick the second


Just seems kinda fishy that everytime a holiday come up gas prices go up and everytime a prez election rolls around gas prices go down.

----------


## RadicalModerate

> Just seems kinda fishy that everytime a holiday come up gas prices go up and everytime a prez election rolls around gas prices go down.


Tell that to the locals who were so PO'd about Lake Hefner being closed--after being filled for a movie shoot--that they made up their minds to drive to Canton Lake to fish in honor of Memorial Independence Day.

----------


## bombermwc

The B.S. this time is that several local refineries are having issues at the same time, reducing the inventory to  days instead of the normal 22 or something. So supply/demand on that one. But don't we think we should come up with a way to keep multiple refineries from being down at the same time? That's the same crap that caused the first spike several years ago. More than one was allowed offline for more than a year. There should be some coordination between them to keep the market from taking such a hit.

----------


## RadicalModerate

Yesterday, for the first time in my life, I paid over $4.00 per gallon for gasoline.
How long will we be plagued by the legacy of George W. Bush?!  (j/k)

----------


## ou48A

> The B.S. this time is that several local refineries are having issues at the same time, reducing the inventory to  days instead of the normal 22 or something. So supply/demand on that one. But don't we think we should come up with a way to keep multiple refineries from being down at the same time? That's the same crap that caused the first spike several years ago. More than one was allowed offline for more than a year. There should be some coordination between them to keep the market from taking such a hit.


When you have a government that lets the nation be so impacted by environmental activists that a new refinery hasn’t been built in about 35 years you’re going to have bigger imbalances in the system, less margin for supply disruptions and less competition.
 That’s just basic common sense.

----------


## Just the facts

But fuel usage peaked in 2005 and has been going down every sense.  Are we exporting gasoline?

On edit, I checked and yes we are exporting a record amount of gasoline, so won't extra refining capacity just be exported?

----------


## ou48A

> But fuel usage peaked in 2005 and has been going down every sense.  Are we exporting gasoline?
> 
> On edit, I checked and yes we are exporting a record amount of gasoline, so won't extra refining capacity just be exported?


Where are the refineries located that export most of the refined products?

Because there is very limited shipping capacity they can only ship limited gasoline supplies into the areas where the current refinery outage are and much of what gets shipped is shipped by slow barges up the Mississippi river…..

----------


## rezman

> Yesterday, for the first time in my life, I paid over $4.00 per gallon for gasoline.
> How long will we be plagued by the legacy of George W. Bush?!  (j/k)


As opposed to the legacy of obama ...Your joking, ..... Right?

----------


## RadicalModerate

> As opposed to the legacy of obama ...Your joking, ..... Right?


Yes.  I thought that j/k was CyberEsperanto for "just kidding" . . .
Speaking of refineries . . . Oklahoma used to have refineries at Wynnewood, Cyril, Ardmore and Cushing.
Maybe others too. Perhaps Ponca City.  But they were pretty old even thirty years ago and may not have refined gasoline.
(i hauled oil for asphalt paving mix from three of the five mentioned)

----------


## ou48A

Oklahoma has five operating petroleum refineries with a combined daily capacity of more than 500,000 barrels per day, about 3 percent of the total U.S. operating capacity.

• ConocoPhillips Co., Ponca City: 198,400 barrels per day

• Holly Refining and Marketing Co., Tulsa (East): 70,300 barrels per day

• Holly Refining and Marketing Co., Tulsa (West): 85,000 barrels per day

• Valero Refining Co. Oklahoma, Ardmore: 85,000 barrels per day

• Wynnewood Refining Co., Wynnewood: 70,000 barrels per day

Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration

----------


## Bellaboo

> Yesterday, for the first time in my life, I paid over $4.00 per gallon for gasoline.
> How long will we be plagued by the legacy of George W. Bush?!  (j/k)


It must be Bush's fault !!!

----------


## OKCTalker

> Oklahoma has five operating petroleum refineries with a combined daily capacity of more than 500,000 barrels per day, about 3 percent of the total U.S. operating capacity.
> 
> • ConocoPhillips Co., Ponca City: 198,400 barrels per day
> 
> • Holly Refining and Marketing Co., Tulsa (East): 70,300 barrels per day
> 
> • Holly Refining and Marketing Co., Tulsa (West): 85,000 barrels per day
> 
> • Valero Refining Co. Oklahoma, Ardmore: 85,000 barrels per day
> ...


Great information. Two questions: 
Q1: Are these refineries producing gasoline for local consumption in Oklahoma? 
Q2: What is their current production as a percentage of either recent production or total capacity?

----------


## rezman

> Yes.  I thought that j/k was CyberEsperanto for "just kidding" . . .
> Speaking of refineries . . . Oklahoma used to have refineries at Wynnewood, Cyril, Ardmore and Cushing.
> Maybe others too. Perhaps Ponca City.  But they were pretty old even thirty years ago and may not have refined gasoline.
> (i hauled oil for asphalt paving mix from three of the five mentioned)



Yeah,... I don't spend enough time in cyber world to know all of the langueese, or textspeak as it were  ...... Carry on.

----------


## Bellaboo

Also a refinery in Thomas -

Ventura Refining and Transmission, Ventura R. & T. Thomas 14,000 bbl/d (2,200 m3/d)

----------


## ou48A

> Also a refinery in Thomas -
> 
> Ventura Refining and Transmission, Ventura R. & T. Thomas 14,000 bbl/d (2,200 m3/d)


You’re correct, I forgot about that one…..and I have driven by it many times too!

----------


## Dubya61

> Great information. Two questions: 
> Q1: Are these refineries producing gasoline for local consumption in Oklahoma? 
> Q2: What is their current production as a percentage of either recent production or total capacity?


I was always under the impression that refineries provided their product to the nearest stations, regardless of branding.  From a business perspective, it only makes sense for Oklahoma refineries to sell their product without incurring shipping costs as much as possible.

----------


## Anonymous.

Put 30 bucks in yesterday. Trying to hedge against the prices going lower soon and give me enough gas for about half a tank. I paid around $4.50 gallon for premium.

----------


## Just the facts

> Put 30 bucks in yesterday. Trying to hedge against the prices going lower soon and give me enough gas for about half a tank. I paid around $4.50 gallon for premium.


It might be time to implement dollar cost averaging.  Buy the same dollar amount every 7 days.  In weeks where you run low (because of higher prices) cut back on driving until gas day.

----------


## bombermwc

Where's that commuter line when you need it.....

----------


## Martin

fwiw, the place closest to my house is down a dime from what it was a few days ago. -M

----------


## Just the facts

> Where's that commuter line when you need it.....


It is still 10 years out.

----------


## LandRunOkie

> When you have a government that lets the nation be so impacted by environmental activists that a new refinery hasnt been built in about 35 years youre going to have bigger imbalances in the system, less margin for supply disruptions and less competition.


It's not unheard of for the oil industry to stage their own protests and rallies, in which they bus in employees (link).  In fact there was a memo leaked from the API, the main oil lobbyist group, that describes how and why to set up these staged protests.

----------


## metro

I want to hear all the liberals praising the administration for the high gas prices pushing us closer to alternative energy.

----------


## kevinpate

> I want to hear all the liberals praising the administration for the high gas prices pushing us closer to alternative energy.



 :Dance:  :Pink Elephant: 

There. Feel better?  No? 
 :Pat Head: 
How 'bout now?

----------


## Jim Kyle

> fwiw, the place closest to my house is down a dime from what it was a few days ago. -M


The 7-11 nearest my house (NW 122 and Council) dropped its price by ten cents between 10 a.m. and 6 p.m. yesterday. Still high, but I like the direction it moved...

----------


## kelroy55

> I want to hear all the liberals praising the administration for the high gas prices pushing us closer to alternative energy.


Need some cheese with that whine?

----------


## ou48A

> It's not unheard of for the oil industry to stage their own protests and rallies, in which they bus in employees (link).  In fact there was a memo leaked from the API, the main oil lobbyist group, that describes how and why to set up these staged protests.


For every incident like that there are probably a thousand coming from the radical environmentalist.
Some of which are the type that burn down big homes and vehicles in the name of the environment or it could be the type that keep projects tied up in our legal system for more than a decade driving up the associated cost of many projects that only lowers your/our standards of living by making you/us pay more for needed products and services. This drives jobs to more friendly business countries costing us even more.

----------


## ou48A

> Need some cheese with that whine?


It is a FACT that (can be seen on youtube) that the leader of this administration has indicated that he wants higher electrical rates and higher gasoline prices. No amount of spin by you or by anyone else can ever change or excuse this fact of history. 

In some case there were other factors but please know that 10 of our past 11 economic recessions were first preceded by rising oil prices. To want high energy prices is tantamount to wishing suffering on the people and those are the thoughts and wishes of stupid crazy people whose opinions are pretty worthless and a waste of time!

----------


## Just the facts

So the answer is simple.  Defeat Obama by not using gasoline.  Adopt a lifestyle that removes gasoline, or any other fuel, from being used against you.  Remember when Coach Red Beaulieu neutralized the Waterboy by refusing to play offense.

----------


## venture

> When you have a government that lets the nation be so impacted by environmental activists that a new refinery hasn’t been built in about 35 years you’re going to have bigger imbalances in the system, less margin for supply disruptions and less competition.
> That’s just basic common sense.


Umm. Permit was signed by the Administration this past year for a new refinery in North Dakota. So things are moving to allow them again.




> It is a FACT that (can be seen on youtube) that the leader of this administration has indicated that he wants higher electrical rates and higher gasoline prices. No amount of spin by you or by anyone else can ever change or excuse this fact of history. 
> 
> In some case there were other factors but please know that 10 of our past 11 economic recessions were first preceded by rising oil prices. To want high energy prices is tantamount to wishing suffering on the people and those are the thoughts and wishes of stupid crazy people whose opinions are pretty worthless and a waste of time!


Interesting news article today in the Oklahoman about demands from the NG industry wanting more permits to start exporting as much liquid natural gas as possible because the prices are much higher on the international market. Which then leads us back down the road of oil prices being high because of the global market you defend. So I guess it is only a matter of time until the NG prices equalize and the cost savings from NG goes up in smoke. 




> So the answer is simple.  Defeat Obama by not using gasoline.  Adopt a lifestyle that removes gasoline, or any other fuel, from being used against you.  Remember when Coach Red Beaulieu neutralized the Waterboy by refusing to play offense.


That would be all too easy and would hurt this Oil/NG buddies. I definitely respect your position on this considering you work in the industry I believe, yet are free thinking still to know we do have to make changes.

----------


## kelroy55

> It is a FACT that (can be seen on youtube) that the leader of this administration has indicated that he wants higher electrical rates and higher gasoline prices. No amount of spin by you or by anyone else can ever change or excuse this fact of history. 
> 
> In some case there were other factors but please know that 10 of our past 11 economic recessions were first preceded by rising oil prices. To want high energy prices is tantamount to wishing suffering on the people and those are the thoughts and wishes of stupid crazy people whose opinions are pretty worthless and a waste of time!

----------


## mkjeeves

> It is a FACT that (can be seen on youtube) that the leader of this administration has indicated that he wants higher electrical rates and higher gasoline prices. No amount of spin by you or by anyone else can ever change or excuse this fact of history. 
> 
> In some case there were other factors but please know that 10 of our past 11 economic recessions were first preceded by rising oil prices. To want high energy prices is tantamount to wishing suffering on the people and those are the thoughts and wishes of stupid crazy people whose opinions are pretty worthless and a waste of time!


Aren't you the guy calling for higher natural gas prices in other threads? Which way is it, the suffering of the people or the energy industry? Please make up your mind.

----------


## ou48A

> Aren't you the guy calling for higher natural gas prices in other threads? Which way is it, the suffering of the people or the energy industry? Please make up your mind.


It’s really pretty simple. 

You don’t what prices so high that they hurt the people….but you don’t want prices so low that they hurt the industry or they will stop drilling and set the stage for future price spikes that will hurt the people.
I have seen this cycle several times.

----------


## Just the facts

Higher NG prices?  The code word for that is "rebound".  Also, I don't work in the fuels industry at all.  In fact, I try to use those products as little as I can.

----------


## ou48A

> 


A real intellectual and educated response.LOL

----------


## ou48A

> Umm. Permit was signed by the Administration this past year for a new refinery in North Dakota. So things are moving to allow them again.


Yes it been permitted but it hasn’t been built yet, and that’s what I indicated.
For many years the permitting process for major projects has taken way to long

----------


## ou48A

> Interesting news article today in the Oklahoman about demands from the NG industry wanting more permits to start exporting as much liquid natural gas as possible because the prices are much higher on the international market. Which then leads us back down the road of oil prices being high because of the global market you defend. So I guess it is only a matter of time until the NG prices equalize and the cost savings from NG goes up in smoke.


I don’t defend the global market, I just recognize its reality rather I like it or not.

----------


## kelroy55

> A real intellectual and educated response.LOL


It's an appropriate response to a whiny post.

----------


## mkjeeves

> Higher NG prices?  The code word for that is "rebound".  Also, I don't work in the fuels industry at all.  In fact, I try to use those products as little as I can.


I don't think anyone thought you work in the fuels industry. 

The code words are supply vastly exceeds demand and the market manipulators haven't been able to overcome that.

----------


## Just the facts

Venture79 is right.  Any extra capacity would be exported, not used to drive down prices here in states.  Of course, OU48A is right also.  The oil companies want to charge us as much as they can but just low enough to keep us from finding something else to use.

----------


## ou48A

> Venture79 is right.  Any extra capacity would be exported, not used to drive down prices here in states.  Of course, OU48A is right also.  The oil companies want to charge us as much as they can but just low enough *to keep us from finding something else to use*.


Is there anything else as efficient and practical to use….?

Lots of energy poor nations and many others have spent billions and employing many very smart people to work on this problem for several decades. They haven’t managed to find a solution and there are trillions to be made… 

Let’s not be so ridiculous to think the oil companies are blocking the world from coming up with a replacement fuel.

----------


## Larry OKC

Noticed yesterday when mother and I were running errands that EVERY 7-11 that we saw from Moore, Southside, to where I live near NW 50th & Portland (found out from a co-worker, it was the same in Yukon) ALL had the same $3.79 price at least a dozen locations. Very unusual. While I think pricing for all of a particular chain should be the same within a geographic area, most of the time 7-11 prices can vary from one side of town or even stations within blocks from each other, by as much as a nickel or dime. May just be a coincidence, but it was the same day it was reported in the paper that the Gov had declared a state of emergency in numerous counties because of the tornados and it triggered the anti-gouging law. it may be a PR move on 7-11s part to head off any talk of price-gouging during this time. Even though they can still legally raise prices up to 10% more than what they were before the declaration. Which means at $4/gallon they could still legally raise the price another 40 cents. But good news and hope the lowering trend continues and we at least get back to the $3.09 I paid a month ago.

----------


## Just the facts

> Quote Originally Posted by Just the facts
> Venture79 is right. Any extra capacity would be exported, not used to drive down prices here in states. Of course, OU48A is right also. The oil companies want to charge us as much as they can but just low enough to keep us from finding something else to use.
> 			
> 		
> 
> Is there anything else as efficient and practical to use.?
> 
> Lots of energy poor nations and many others have spent billions and employing many very smart people to work on this problem for several decades. They havent managed to find a solution and there are trillions to be made 
> 
> Lets not be so ridiculous to think the oil companies are blocking the world from coming up with a replacement fuel.


Personally, I use the most efficient machine known to man for most of my local needs, but I digress.  I am simply making the point that if gasoline cost $5 or $6 per gallon other fuels would then become economically viable, profit motive would kick-in, economies of scale would be achieved, barriers to entry would be reduced, and gasoline would find itself obsolete at any price.

----------


## ou48A

> Personally, I use the most efficient machine known to man for most of my local needs, but I digress.  I am simply making the point that if gasoline cost $5 or $6 per gallon other fuels would then become economically viable, profit motive would kick-in, economies of scale would be achieved, barriers to entry would be reduced, and gasoline would find itself obsolete at any price.


Yes if gasoline cost $5 or $6 per gallon other fuels would then become economically viable but history has shown this to be a very flawed thought, because it would send the US and likely the world economy into a very serious economic recession. Its already happened at much lower levels several times.

The fact is that there is no replacement except for NG that wont do very serious economic damage. A very poor economy creates a very tight energy research budget situation. If you kill the economy you would drive down crude oil prices that would in turn bankrupt most of those other fuels that you just think you want.

----------


## venture

> Yes if gasoline cost $5 or $6 per gallon other fuels would then become economically viable but history has shown this to be a very flawed thought, because it would send the US and likely the world economy into a very serious economic recession. It’s already happened at much lower levels several times.
> 
> The fact is that there is no replacement except for NG that won’t do very serious economic damage. A very poor economy creates a very tight energy research budget situation. If you kill the economy you would drive down crude oil prices that would in turn bankrupt most of those other fuels that you just think you want.


So essentially you are saying the Oil and NG industry has the country/world economy hostage and nothing we can do about it?

We definitely have replacements already, but there are many taboos around them. Wind and Nuclear could easily move in and start reducing power generation from Oil/Gas products. Of course the big one comes to replacing it in transportation, which we don't have it yet. Once the power grid is able to support it, vehicles can be moved to be mostly electric with in road charging systems (already exists). The solution isn't as easy when it comes to air and sea.

----------


## Just the facts

We could do that Venture but it would be super expensive.  I prefer just living closer to what I need.  Our grandparents were smart enough to put the kitchen and bathroom inside the house but if we applied development techniques to the home we would spread each use all over the lot and TVs in bedroom would be banned because that is mixed-use.  Eating popcorn while watching TV would require a zoning change.  Sleeping on the sofa would get you a fine from code enforcement.

----------


## Martin

...down another 10 cents today. -M

----------


## ou48A

> So essentially you are saying the Oil and NG industry has the country/world economy hostage and nothing we can do about it?
> 
> We definitely have replacements already, but there are many taboos around them. Wind and Nuclear could easily move in and start reducing power generation from Oil/Gas products. Of course the big one comes to replacing it in transportation, which we don't have it yet. Once the power grid is able to support it, vehicles can be moved to be mostly electric with in road charging systems (already exists). The solution isn't as easy when it comes to air and sea.



When it comes to (cars) transportation gasoline or NG is the cheapest fuel and therefor brings the most prosperity to man. There really are not any affordable replacement fuels that can meet even a fraction of the demand.

One thing that may hold NG prices somewhat in check is that it cost about $6 on top of the base price to process raw NG into LNG for export and as NG prices raise electrical generators will switch back to coal as some are already doing. Higher prices would mean more drilling increasing the supply and we still have massive untapped NG deposits.

We should be doing more with our nuclear power generation in my view. They say the new designs are far safer.
 But one of the biggest problems with nuclear and on many other energy projects is how activist drive up their cost by delaying tactics. This cost each of us money. They can keep a project tied up in our courts for more than 10 or more years…. We need new laws that speed the process along. Even Obama agrees with that thought on some projects.

Certainly where it’s practical we should conserve and look for affordable alternatives. If a cheaper alternative could be found I would be for it since it would advance man’s prosperity and ability’s to conquer other problems.

----------


## ou48A

Attention Venture79 :Smile: 

Wow, this author from the green radical publication “The Energy Collective” really gets the reality of renewable energy’s
. 
It’s a good read with lots of truth.
Examining the Prejudices of Renewable Energy Zealots | The Energy Collective

----------


## Larry OKC

> I suspect 7-11 probably mandated this fixing due to the disaster.  They don't want there to be any room for accusations.  Just stick to one price for everyone, regardless of market pricing for now.  Just my speculation.


Agree. Noticed that none of the other stations had followed 7-11s lead, but would think at some point they will have to to stay competitive. Unless 7-11 is selling it below cost (illegal under Oklahoma law, as nearly all retailers & wholesalers are required to make at least a 6% profit on every item they sell), it will be obvious that the others can follow suit and stop gouging folks (not legally of course).




> ...down another 10 cents today. -M


Noticed that too and it is encouraging esp with the holiday weekend coming up. granted it isn't back down to the $3.09/gallon it was a month ago, but it is at least going in the right direction.

----------


## OKCisOK4me

Saw $3.69 at 7 Eleven on NW 39th & Ann Arbor today so its getting closer to where gas was the last time I filled up ($3.55).

----------


## Jim Kyle

Same price at NW 122 & Council, also Britton Rd and Hefner. That's three consecutive days of dropp[ing ten cents/day...

----------


## bluedogok

Here in Denver I saw a station with the same price for unleaded and diesel, been a long time since I have seen that. Gas in Louisville was about 20 cents higher yesterday than it was here in Denver.

----------


## amandagall5

Spent today driving from OKC to Vicksburg MS, the lowest price I saw was 3.19, plenty of places in the 3.20 to 3.30 range.

----------


## Larry OKC

Paid $3.44 (members price) at the Sams on Memorial & N. Penn, this past Saturday. Went to the Sams on I-40 between Meridian and MacArthur and they were $3.66. Friday after work, noticed two Duos (along 10th, between Portland and MacArthur) @ $3.46 (IIRC), cash only. Thought I found a real bargain at the Murphy/Walmart @ 23rd & MacArthur ($3.26) but the station is closed with no pumps...which I didn't notice as a went inside to put the money on the Walmart GAS CARD...

----------


## Anonymous.

Filled up another $30 @ 4.19 last night. (Premium)

Refuse to go full tank at these prices!

----------


## kelroy55

Was in N Dallas again today and paid 3.34 at Circle K

----------


## Anonymous.

Thread is dead, must mean gas prices are coming down.

Filled up just over $4 for premium the other day.

First full tank in a while.

----------


## venture

Looks like things are settling some. East side Homeland in Norman, which is pretty high most of the times, is $3.53 for the cheap stuff - though they are also 100% gasoline as well.

GasBuddy has South Carolina the cheapest still at 3.18. 

OKC Metro Overall...


Looks like we are back to almost where we were a year ago and have a few weeks until things start going back up.

----------


## law

I don't know why you continue to complain. The gas is theirs, they own it, they can charge whatever they want (emergencies not included of course). Just pay the price if you want to go somewhere.

----------


## bluedogok

Up here diesel was 13 cents cheaper than unleaded, just a strange sight to see.

----------


## SSEiYah

$3.34 at Oncue this morning at SW 59th and Western.

----------


## Larry OKC

the stations near that intersection on along the same price point. I filled up at the Santa Fe Walmart Sat night for $3.31 (prepiad gift card). A co-worker said that a station out on Council & NW 10th was $3.29 last week? But still see prices up there...as much as $3.70 at a station near my apt at NW 50th & Portland

----------


## Larry OKC

Yesterday, there were 3 stations posted on GasBuddy.com that were under $3/gal ($2.99) I am sure there are more but just not listed. of the 15 lowest posted, all were $3.10 or less. Great news for the holiday weekend.

----------


## BBatesokc

Heard they may start going back up with the unrest overseas.

----------


## SOONER8693

There's always unrest "overseas", somewhere.

----------


## Jim Kyle

Talk about volatile pricing! This morning I topped off the tank on my van, at Sam's on NW Highway, for $3.049/gallon. I came straight home, and went with my wife in her car back to Sam's to top off its tank -- and the price had risen to $3.099 in just half an hour!

Meanwhile the 7-11 near my house is at $3.189, and the 7-11 two miles south of it is at $3.089. All these, BTW, are for unleaded E10.

----------


## Larry OKC

*Jim*, not nnice, but that is only a nickel increase. I have seen it happen while I was at the station. Used to be when they got a delivery but now, it is when they get a phone call. And we aren't paying for what we are pumping out of the ground but the possible replacement cost. that is why typically if oil is on an upward trend, gas prices jump up (nickel/dime a gal). But if on a downward trend, they float down (a penny or two at a time). This came from a former Shell oil exec. What other product is priced this way? None that I can think of. Prices are usually determined by a companies set mark-up based on the price they paid sitting on the shelf.

Have always felt that every store in the same geographic area should basically have the same price (7-11. Walmart, whatever). No reason for gas prices (and only gas prices) to be different from one 7-11 to another. Esp if they are on the same street and almost within sight of each other!

----------


## Just the facts

Gasoline prices go up because the gas station owner has to be able to pay for the next tanker truck load, not the fuel they have in their tanks now.  They go down based on competition.

----------


## PhiAlpha

CNG holding strong at $1.10 avg

----------


## Larry OKC

JTF: exactly, that is what I said, you are paying for the possible replacement cost. It shouldn't be that way. There should be a law against it.

----------


## Just the facts

> JTF: exactly, that is what I said, you are paying for the possible replacement cost. It shouldn't be that way. There should be a law against it.


How do you expect them to pay for the replacement gasoline if it cost more?

If you open a gas station on the first day your storage tank is empty.  You have to buy a tanker full of gasoline to put in it.  They don't give you the gasoline for free and then you send them a check AFTER you sell it.  You have to pay for the gas before you can sell it to someone else.  Then that process repeats every 7 to 10 days as long as you stay in business.  If prices increase too fast some stations operating on the fringe can't cover the price increase and go out of business.

----------


## bluedogok

Most gas stations are independent franchises or franchise groups and most have very thin margins on gasoline, between what they pay the fuel distributor and taxes there isn't that much left. They make the bulk of their profit from the things inside the store.

----------


## Larry OKC

> *How do you expect them to pay for the replacement gasoline if it cost more?*


What if it doesn't cost more? Do the people that were charged more get a refund? I expect them to pay for it by charging more when they actually get it and sell it. Just like they do with everything else in the store. It used to be that they only changed the prices when they actually got a delivery. Now it can change multiple times during the same day with no delivery. And they should calculate how much of that new delivery is actually in the ground instead of assuming 100% of it is at the higher rate. In other words if the tank is half empty when they get a new delivery, you do your markup of the 50% at the lower rate, and your markup of the 50% at the higher rate and set your price somewhere in the middle. 

IIRC, under the decades old Oklahoma law, a retailer or wholesaler can charge no less than a 6% profit on what they sell. However that 6% can be based on the lowest price invoice in the past 30 days. In essence they can still sell stuff as a loss leader even if their price went up. FOr example, if at some point in the last 30 days, the per unit price of the widget was $1, they can't charge less than $1.06. But if the latest shipment comes in and the per unit cost has doubled to $2, if they wanted to, they could still sell it for the $1.06 instead of $2.12.

----------


## Plutonic Panda

Study: Drivers not changing habits because of higher gas prices | News OK

----------

