Gulf storms cause refinery interruptions, gas prices to spike

Have we ever hit $5/gallon? We could very well get there in the next month.

Views: 388

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Far'arned Retrogrumpalunkus #63 on August 31, 2012 at 12:37am

5 is about half of what it should be.  

Permalink Reply by Michelle Loomis on August 31, 2012 at 2:05am

that sucks. Biking to work is simply not an option for some of us.

Permalink Reply by Richard on August 31, 2012 at 2:48am

That is a very sad fact, and a very important reason to let our elected officials know our feelings on complete streets and equal infrastructure. Cars are important and not going away, but there is no reason that other forms of transit -- especially those that have an overwhelming positive impact on health, community, and even property value -- should not have a voice at the table.

Bicycle Advocacy Tips
http://www.bikeleague.org/programs/bikeadvocacy/advocacy_tips.php



Michelle Loomis said:

that sucks. Biking to work is simply not an option for some of us.

Permalink Reply by DanGer 8.2mi on August 31, 2012 at 2:48am

High gas prices effect bikers too. 

Permalink Reply by Far'arned Retrogrumpalunkus #63 on August 31, 2012 at 2:59am

Let auto drivers pay the true costs of their planet-destroying choices. 

Permalink Reply by Fran Kondorf on August 31, 2012 at 4:29am

Unfortunately that usually means a hike in food prices as well, what with the giant trucks and all.

Permalink Reply by Adam Herstein on August 31, 2012 at 4:49am

+1

Don't even get me started on those free-loading cyclists though... ;-)

James BlackHeron said:

Let auto drivers pay the true costs of their planet-destroying choices. 

Permalink Reply by Far'arned Retrogrumpalunkus #63 on August 31, 2012 at 5:12am

Indeed.

But perhaps people shouldn't expect to buy stuff out of season where items are grown half-way around the world and trucked to them at a cost of 10-100x the amount of fuel burned.

Ever heard of the phrase "buy local?"  It shouldn't be because of xenophobia/nationalism and so people who "look like you" are getting your money.  It has to do with the enviornmental costs of shipping crap halfway around the world.   The cost of energy goes into just about everything -but the further away something is shipped, often the more energy is needed to get it to you.

if the "true costs" of this globalization were paid, instead of it being subsidized by cheap oil there wouldn't be such of a trade imbalance, and folks would quit doing it so much -all the while helping save the planet.

Subsidized big-oil is killing us in more than one way.   Let the market fix the problem that government-subsidies of big-oil is causing.   Make people pay the TRUE COSTS of their planet-killing gasoline. Only then will true alternatives really become economically viable.   They will never seem viable as long as big-oil is being subsidized. 

Fran Kondorf said:

Unfortunately that usually means a hike in food prices as well, what with the giant trucks and all.

Permalink Reply by Far'arned Retrogrumpalunkus #63 on August 31, 2012 at 5:44am

For the same reason everyone uses the "but who will build the ROADS" argument whenever someone argues against an anti-statist. 

It's the default argument when anyone is supporting state subsidies.    My counter-argument to the ROADS-ROADS-ROADS mantra is that maybe they weren't such a great idea in the FIRST PLACE!

Build nice big wide roads and, sooner rather than later, millions of CARS will come to drive on them.

Build it, and they will come -stop building them, and they will find another, better way, to get around.  

h' said:

Why can gas prices never be mentioned without someone pointing this out, as if it never would have occurred to any of us?

Dan G er said:

High gas prices effect bikers too. 

Permalink Reply by S on August 31, 2012 at 5:56am

What would you suggest as a replacement for roads?  We've had over 2000 years of civilization, and no one has really come up with a better replacement.

James BlackHeron said:

For the same reason everyone uses the "but who will build the ROADS" argument whenever someone argues against an anti-statist. 

It's the default argument when anyone is supporting state subsidies.    My counter-argument to the ROADS-ROADS-ROADS mantra is that maybe they weren't such a great idea in the FIRST PLACE!

Build nice big wide roads and, sooner rather than later, millions of CARS will come to drive on them.

Build it, and they will come -stop building them, and they will find another, better way, to get around.  

h' said:

Why can gas prices never be mentioned without someone pointing this out, as if it never would have occurred to any of us?

Dan G er said:

High gas prices effect bikers too. 

Permalink Reply by Far'arned Retrogrumpalunkus #63 on August 31, 2012 at 6:03am

Bikes and peds don't really need much in the way of roads.    Bike "road" infrastruture costs but a fraction of percentage of what car infrastructure "roads" cost.   Pennies, if that, on the dollar.

In fact, they are so cheap that they could be built with private funds by the adjacent property owners that live nearby the road and need it anyhow.  Who builds the roads around the shopping malls?   It's not the State -but the shopping center, just like the parking lots that fill in the area between the roads. 

With a fraction of the money that is spent on helmet-campaigns by the helmet-manufacturers we could build roads with charity money or by holding a bake-sale.  There is no need to go crazy with all the massive roads built to carry cars, or all the controlled intersections needed to keep said car-operators from killing each other.  Those steel killing machines really are dangerous when there aren't enough controls on their movement and such controls are very expensive and complex.    Bicycles, not so much.

Bicycles can (and do) get away with just gravel paths.     In the city there could be nicer roads that are paved -but they'd last nearly forever if cars never drove on them so they'd be a one-time investment every century or so.

Permalink Reply by Far'arned Retrogrumpalunkus #63 on August 31, 2012 at 6:23am

It depends on what you call "local."

The midwest could feed Chicago and all the other large, medium, and small midwest cities and still be able to export food for the further-surrounding geographical areas.

But, I agree that Chicago-as-it-is is a blight on the planet.  There is no reason a city this size should ever exist.  

But we are here now.  How do we fix it?   Soylent Green isn't an option...

Clint H said: 

While the "buy local" argument sounds good, it also strikes me as woefully naive. 

RSS

Groups

© 2008-2016   The Chainlink Community, L.L.C.   Powered by

Disclaimer  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service