“I fill my tank every time I use 10 gallons of gasoline. So for each tank of gas, I am gaining 50 miles of free driving. After six 10-gallon fill ups, I have gained 300 miles. Therefore, my 7th tank of gas, at $40, is “free.””

I’m not a Ph.D, so maybe that is my problem, but I do not see how anything would be free or gained in this. Please explain.

This just in –>

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
June 18, 2008
New research suggests that ocean temperature and associated sea level increases between 1961 and 2003 were 50 percent larger than estimated in the 2007 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report.

huh? it’s like this:

By slowing down, Dr. Cusumano has seen an increase in fuel economy from 25 mpg to 30 mpg. So, every 10 gallons of gas he uses, he can go 50 miles further. After 6 10 gallon fill ups, he has gone an extra 300 miles for the same amount of gas, so that tank full (10 gallons/300 miles) is ‘free’.

“Doesn’t it make sense to slow down, reduce fuel consumption, save money, reduce greenhouse gasses, and reduce the pornographic profits of those taking advantage of us?”

Yes it makes sense to slow down. However, everyone still has a surplus of money. Until we really feel pinched, we will slow down. Apparently, prices are not high enough for most people to care yet! It’s kind of like high prices at a ballpark. We all complain about it. However, a lot of us still go. Why? Because we are a fairly rich country and very few Americans know what poor really is.

“pornographic profits”

That is a subjective opinion. Do you know anything about the risks and costs involve in finding oil, drilling it, refining it, etc…I wouldn’t go through that trouble if I could not make that much money.

You are jealous that these oil companies are making so much money. Take a lesson in economics. Increase supply to drive the price down. The Republicans are trying to, but the Democrats are stopping them.

Whatever side of the battle you are on, there are trade-offs to whatever we do. Right now, we Americans are accepting high prices in the name of not opening up supply. If we want lower gas prices, we need to increase supply somehow. You cannot have everything.

“huh? it’s like this:

By slowing down, Dr. Cusumano has seen an increase in fuel economy from 25 mpg to 30 mpg. So, every 10 gallons of gas he uses, he can go 50 miles further. After 6 10 gallon fill ups, he has gone an extra 300 miles for the same amount of gas, so that tank full (10 gallons/300 miles) is ‘free’.”

Got it, thanks, hs. I didn’t read carefully enough or think it through and with the paragraph break where it was, I incorrectly took what I quoted as a stand alone statement.

How is it a Democrat or Republica problem that the oil companies will not explore and drill on the over 60 million acres that they already have leases on.

You Republicans are so guiliable to follow along like little sheep making this a political issue against Democrats because leases to drill are not being approved along the shore lines.

DRILL AND EXPLORE ON THE 60 MILLION+ ACRES THAT AREADY HAVE LEASES TO DRILL ON!!

There’s more of a guarantee that oil will be found in any of the places. THAT’S WHY IT IS CALLED oil drill EXPLORATION!! Stop being so guilible!

If the oil companies were serious about exploring for oil, they would get busy doing it.

Maybe the government should cancell those leases and allow someone else to have these leases and explore the land, and since it is such an important commody, I think that maybe the government should begin exploring and owning oil companies if oil is found instead of allowing oil companies to control the supply and demand aspects. After-all these leases are on Federal property!

Ha Ha!
Flipping and Flopping
and Flopping and Flipping.

(YouTube Video) McCain vs. McCain

“Providing additional incentives for states to permit [oil] exploration off their coasts would be very helpful in the short term resolving our energy crisis.” — John McCain, June 16, 2008

“But I also have to tell you, with those resources, which would take years to develop, it would only postpone or temporarily relieve our dependency on fossil fuels.” — John McCain, May 29, 2008

Hilarious.
Flipping and Flopping
and Flopping and Flipping.

(YouTube Video) McCain vs. McCain

“Providing additional incentives for states to permit [oil] exploration off their coasts would be very helpful in the short term resolving our energy crisis.” — John McCain, June 16, 2008

“But I also have to tell you, with those resources, which would take years to develop, it would only postpone or temporarily relieve our dependency on fossil fuels.” — John McCain, May 29, 2008

So, according to the Energy Information Administration of the U.S. Government, if we allow offshore oil drilling, we won’t get any oil until 2030, it will only increase the production in the US by 7%, and any impact on price will be insignificant. Whoopee.

http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/otheranalysis/ongr.html

I have a similar story to tell. It’s amazing what just a reduction of 5 MPH will do to fuel economy. My mileage is right at the point where buying a new vehicle is not really cost effective after you figure in all the extras you need to pay for.

My thesis is this; consumers will tend to absorb any price increases in gas as long as the almighty credit card is in their pocket. This situation is different than back in the 70’s. Credit is more readily available now and the stigma of having a huge credit card debt is less. I’d like to see a study on how credit card debt relates to gas prices.

I guess it takes a PhD to come up with a term like “pornographic profits”.

Sorry to burst your bubble, Doctor, but conservation alone won’t solve our energy deficict. What we need is action to reverse the decline in US energy production that’s been taking place over the last few decades, thanks in large part to those beknighted environmentalists. We need to start building nuclear power plants, clean coal plants, and start drilling for oil in ANWR, and our coastal waters.

I don’t believe we can become energy independent, barring future development of an economically viable alternative fuel, but we could at least add to global supplies and ease the upward pressure on oil prices.

By the way, since you live in St Charles and write about driving on several highways, does this mean you moved West and are now forced to DRIVE greater distances to shop or work? Following your conservation creed, shouldn’t everyone who lives more than a short distance from their employer (or mass transit like MetroLink) move to cut their commute and thus save energy? It’s the patriotic thing to do.

Anyone who believes that the oil companys would lower the cost of gas if they were allowed to drill offshore or in Anwar should just stand on their head and spin. I have three thoughts for you. Conservation, alternative methods and more fuel efficient vehicles. Wake up America. The days of cheap energy are over.

Follow D Walker and Lisa 12’s advice and government will control every thing from cradle to grave,but they will cut down considerably on the time between,and what time you have will be as a robot,so be sure to vote Communist-Democrat
LS

Folks, we’ve been through this before. A generation ago we had gas lines, darkened streets, increased prices, and energy blackmail. The Spendocrats and Republicants postured, accused, and excused until the country adjusted and then went back to business as usual. Ideology trumps reason and party trumps nation on these pages just as it does in D.C. Alone, conservation, increased domestic production, alternative fuels, and renewable sources will not solve the crisis. All together, they are a start. France gets 80 percent of its electricity from nuclear power. Brazil just completed a twenty year program toward energy independence. China and Cuba have signed agreements to begin drilling for oil just over the horizon from Florida. Yet, the best we can do in the USA is play partisan “gotcha” with this critical issue. Just as George Washington warned, partisan politics has ruined our ability to govern ourselves. Too bad.

Fortunately, a few people are doing what Dr. Cusumano describes: driving slower or less. The problem is that it is just a few. There has been a measurable decline in US oil/gas usage in the past couple of months, but this is a very small drop. Higher gas prices have had some effect on demand, as the free-marketers on these blogs would suggest. If these high prices continue for a few years, the effect on our fuel demand will be more significant, as SUV’s become less common & greater thought is given to modes/methods of transportation. This will still only have a limited effect on our overall oil needs. Government action is necessary to build & promote mass transit options and promote development of alternative fuels. Why are the conservatives so rabidly opposed to public investment in alternative fuels, but completely supportive of public support of oil & gas exploration?? The large oil corporations are the most profitable companies in the history of the world, but they can’t continue their business without subsidies?? Why can’t we collect the royalties they owe for taking oil from public lands? They have been given a free ride as they rise to the absolute top of the stock exchanges! They can stand on their own feet for a while while we give a boost to the upstart companies who are trying to find sustainable alternatives to meet our needs.

Dr. Cusumano’s Ph.D. is obviously not in logic or economics. His statement that, “So for each tank of gas, I am gaining 50 miles of free driving. After six 10-gallon fill ups, I have gained 300 miles. Therefore, my 7th tank of gas, at $40, is “free,” is the most illogical statement that I have read on these blogs in some time. The fallacy of Dr. Cusumano’s statement lies in his assertion that his 7th tank of gas is “free”. In fact his 7th tank of gas was not “free,” but $40. What I mean is that the good doctor’s 7th tank of gas did not magically appear in his gas tank. He paid for it.

In the true sense of economics what the doctor did achieve is greater utility for each tank of gas through improved fuel efficiency. But each tank of gas is still $40.

By the way, gas just hit $4 a gallon in the St. Louis yesterday. Has Dr. Cusumano been getting his gas in Illinois for the last month?

Mombo, I agree. Time to end welfare for oil companies!

I’ve been pondering this thought: Maybe our favorite Alaska expert can verify whether this is accurate or not. Bear with me, this may take some space

I was pondering the mineral rights leases that various owners have on Federal (public) land. In other words, I own a piece of that land. It’s my understanding that every Alaskan citizen gets a royalty check annually from the Alaskan state government for their share of the oil leases at Prudhoe Bay and other locations. In other words, in Alaska, they really do understand that the public lands in that state (and there is a LOT of public land in Alaska) belong to the citizens of that state.

By extension, then, shouldn’t there be a change in the law that requires the leaseholders to pay a market value for their mineral leases on public land in the lower 48? And that I (and you) would then be able to truly profit from the exploitation of those mineral leases?

I wonder what something like THAT would do to the federal treasury?

I agree with some of the other comments here: The near complete lack of long term planning and long term thinking is what has gotten us ‘here’ on the subject of gas and energy pricing. I also agree with the sentiment that, for the most part, prices aren’t really high enough to hurt enough to lead us to really change our habits. Does that mean I WANT to see $10 gas? Not at all. It does mean, however, that it might have to actually get there to wake us up enough to actually behave differently.

buddy, don’t be dissin’ our fine professor here. His use of quotation marks around the word “free” regarding his 7th tank of gas shows his proper understanding of both logic & economics. He could have just have easily said that his last 300 miles of driving were “free”. Both statements would mean essentially the same thing, and clearly make his point that changing your driving habits can easily save significant gas & money. This is what is referred to as the “low hanging fruit” of energy conservation. Things such as this can be done immediately & with relatively little or no expense to implement.

hs-
I’m certainly no expert on this, but you’ve touched on one of the big debates Congress has had in the past year. Oil drillers have agreed to, as part of their leases on public lands, pay the government with “in-kind” payments. What this means, as far as I understand, is that they are to give a certain amount of the oil they extract to the government as payment for the access to lands. This oil can be sold at a market rate or used to fill up our National Petroleum Reserve (in Louisiana salt mines). These payments have been forgiven for a number of years for many companies (called “royalty relief”). The Republicans have forcefully argued that we should not ask oil companies to pay for access to public lands. This is part of the “big oil subsidy” that is referred to so often.

We should all live in huge 30,000 square foot mansions like John Edwards and Al Gore. We should drive around in armored limos and huge SUVs like Al Gore and John Edwards. Oh sorry, it wasn’t Edwards SUV, it was his wife’s. Then again, we should all send our kids to super-expensive private schools for the ultra-elite, like Al Gore amd The Obamamessiah went to and where they send their kids.

Great post Tim. It seems as though these democrat-commies want to leave it all up to our hypocrite politicians. I have always wondered that if all these alternative resources are so good then why isn’t the private sector doing something about it? What I hear from all these lefties is that the “government” should spend our money to help with alternative sources. How very socialist of you lefties!

The mere appearance of the United States dumping these environmental whackos and drilling would be the first step in correcting these prices. Let’s face it though. The lefties, who claim to care so much for the poor, love these high prices. Go figure! So many of you lefties no so little about economics and the futures market. Why try to explain to deaf ears? As your heroes Al and John Edwards play huge hypocrite you want the family trying to make ends meet to pay more for fuel. How wonderfully compassionate of you guys.

I have to point out one more thing to the silliness of this “fact” that your boys are spreading that it will take 10 years before a drop of gasoline gets to your gas tank. That silly statement is nothing more than a blatant lie and your wonderful brothers in the media carry this LIE as fact. Facts are that it could be brought to market as quickly as one year but could take as long as 3 years.

Tim, you need to leave Al Sharpton alone. He is too busy right now fighting his tax problems. I am sure of cours that this will be publicized as a right-wing racist witch hunt. I will be willing to bet money on that one!

superdave: I have to point out one more thing to the silliness of this “fact” that your boys are spreading that it will take 10 years before a drop of gasoline gets to your gas tank. That silly statement is nothing more than a blatant lie and your wonderful brothers in the media carry this LIE as fact. Facts are that it could be brought to market as quickly as one year but could take as long as 3 years.

superdave, I have no idea where you’re getting your information (Faux News?), but the Department of Energy of the U.S. Government has a very different assessment!!!

http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/otheranalysis/ongr.html
The projections in the OCS access case indicate that access to the Pacific, Atlantic, and eastern Gulf regions would not have a significant impact on domestic crude oil and natural gas production or prices before 2030. Leasing would begin no sooner than 2012, and production would not be expected to start before 2017. Total domestic production of crude oil from 2012 through 2030 in the OCS access case is projected to be 1.6 percent higher than in the reference case, and 3 percent higher in 2030 alone, at 5.6 million barrels per day. For the lower 48 OCS, annual crude oil production in 2030 is projected to be 7 percent higher—2.4 million barrels per day in the OCS access case compared with 2.2 million barrels per day in the reference case. Because oil prices are determined on the international market, however, any impact on average wellhead prices is expected to be insignificant.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
“You know, I’m sure I’ve taken a position on it on the past. I have to find out what my position was. Brian, would you find out what my position is on contraception” — John “Double-Talk Express” McCain, March, 2007

MercMan: Sorry to burst my bubble? Where did I suggest that conservation alone will fix the energy crisis? What I wrote is that we can individually and immediately do something to save money, gas, greenhouse gasses, etc.

Also, I live close to where I work. 370/270/70 are relatively close to each other in North County/St. Charles. These happen to be the highways I travel. And I drive a small, fuel efficient car…and consciously chose to do so five years ago, well before the price of gas was so outrageous.