Econimics Nobel prize winners will tell you that gouging is the right thing to do (say like during Katrina). It means that the people who need supplies will have suppliers working to get them to them when it's timely. It also helps prevent hoarding and abuse of people who say "I'll just buy all the extras" so that the next dude in line has NOTHING to buy and one person walks away with far too much to use. Gas is really no different. In a sense, we are stuck with gas because it's been so damn cheap compared to anything else. If they price it beyond the Everyman to pay for comfortably, then their demand falls as does price. What I'm hoping for is that they screw up horribly and price themselves out of a market. Hard to do? Sure. Currently changing our policies and views toward alternative fuels? You betcha.

We have a short attention span. As soon as the Oil Cartel embargos were a thing of the past and gas was plentiful, cheap, and always in the pipeline, everyone went back happily humming along in their vehicles and let fuel mileage regulations go lax with nary a whimper.

Hopefully today, the populace is more educated, more capable of making their anger heard, and has more wisdom. I'm not certain of any of those things, but the Internet is a powerful force. If gas were 6 bucks tomorrow, would you go hoard it? Would you start looking for alternative transport? Curtail extracurricular activities? Probably. The only bad thing about this is that the States have almost no public transport facilities outside of major metro areas (and sometimes not even there). And I NEVER EVER like to be made to rely on a government supported and subsidized method of travel. It puts far too much power in the hands of government and we are already in a bad state with that concern.

I say let the oil companies get rich. It breeds the right kind of anger, indignation, and willingness to smack down those who would abuse the average joe and not think of our futures with their crap environmental policies and petrodollar economics.

And in case anyone missed it, they ran this years fuel competition:
http://news.com.com/2300-11389_3-6074867-1.html?part=rss&tag=6074867&subj=news
Most are concept/impracticle designs, but not all. And it's sponsored by Shell. Gotta love it. <img src="/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Vehicles have not gotten bigger and heavier, that is a common misconception. The >10mpg 70 Blazer I had could easily crush the biggest SUV's today.
Oil Companies are falling the same fate as most big companies where short term profit is most important to keep the stockholders happy, new product research and development takes a long time therefore the lowest priority. Companies like HP close their R&D and just resell other products, Microsoft's product has just gotten worse since 2000, Honda, Toyota, GM, etc just keep churning out the same old product with slightly different skin. Services like my cable internet are no faster today than 1998 when I first got it. Its going to take some garage tinkerer to come up with something new
Also its going to take a while to get crop production up to be able to support the extra needed to make it as well as slowly working out the gov subsidizing.

I hear ya, massacre and I generally agree with what you're saying. I don't think price controls work either. Free markets are generally the most efficient allocator of capital and investment and such, but that's only in a truly free and fair market.

Here in California, everyone thought electricity deregulation would drive down prices with competition and improve service. Uh-huh. What happened? Companies--Enron included--gamed the system by purposefully taking generating capacity offline during peak loads, pushing prices to outrageous levels and plunging people's homes and businesses all around the state into darkness. Is this what the public signed up for?

Here's my anti-Katrina gasoline example. I can't remember if it was in those reports I cited or in other ones, but there is similar evidence uncovered by the FTC that suggests that oil companies and independent refiners have similarly gamed the gasoline system. It's easier to do here in California, mostly because of our unique gasoline blend, limited pipeline access and tight refining capacity. There is evidence of slowing down refining, or even switching California refineries from California blends to non-California blends just when prices are peaking in California, higher than pretty much anywhere else in the country. In an ideal world, gasoline would go where it gets the highest price, right? Instead they moved to limit supplies even further and drive prices even higher. And yet they claim, "Hey, don't blame us. It's simply supply and demand."

In both cases I give, it's hard to prove and easy to justify the actions because you're working right on the edge. The generators are running at full capacity, the refineries are running at full capacity--of course unexpected events can lead to shortages...and higher prices.

I know that oil companies aren't the only ones to do these kinds of things all the time, but the sheer size of the oil/gasoline market means that billions of dollars are wasted by consumers on these shenanigans every year.

Agreed. I believe in a free market that's fair. We need stringent controls for corruption. I've always thought that any company convicted of corruption of any kind (environmental, market manipulation, damaging monopolistic practices) should have to forfeit profits for 5 years and all Officer/President/Board/Chair level employees be put in Jail for the same mandatory term as well as pay massive fines. All Publicly traded companies should have ZERO capability to contribute financially to politics and not be allowed any PAC/lobbying. Period.

This is a government for the people and by the people.... not for the corporation and by the market. Any proxy/3rd parties acting on behalf of said companies or receiving any benefit from them fall under same set of rules. And if they could pass that, they should limit industry involvement in any federal or local "planning" and if it's allowed at all, it's immediately public (unlike our energy policy "contributors"). Couldn't get anyone to start any businesses you say? Phooey I say right back. Plenty of market to go around and plenty of honest corporations mean that someone somewhere will get it done. If you make it so any government official convicted of corruption serves extensive sentences and forfeits all past earnings and pension, well, that's just icing on the cake. I doubt anything like all that would pass though....

I'm aware of the shenanigans and the utilities lobbied HARD for deregulation... Ma Bell has nearly come back together again and our Internet connectivity fell behind by a lot in the last 5 years. The country who invented it is nowhere near the top in getting it to it's people. It's like half of the people in the united states not having TV, only worse because the Internet is so much more than TV ever could be.

Our problem is that we let too much of this go on. Political campaign funding and lobbying reform is truly the first major step and the rest would probably fall in line quickly. Otherwise, I'm afraid we are headed for a PHRASECENSOREDPOSTERSHOULDKNOWBETTER. regime and a police state. Many argue that we are already in that state and just in denial.

What I continue to find amazing is how the public trust continues to be violated and seemingly nobody gives a damn. Makes me want to run for office. <img src="/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

If you run, you've got my vote, but I think you're being too light on the perpetrators... how about any white collar embezzling/theft/fraud/whatever, that exceeds $100,000 being a mandatory death sentance... let's get the terms "public trust" and "general welfare" to mean something good for a change <img src="/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />.

Troy

Hehe... well, I don't know that theft is the equivalent of death. I think that forced repayment of all income ever generated plus forfeiting any retirement, etc. and say a dozen or so years behind bars might deter some people though (especially if you change incorporation laws to make Board and C level culpable for fraud and corruption). I am quite certain you aren't alone in your sentiment, however. There are a lot of people who face a bleak financial future due to the Enron's and MCIs of the world.

If you could figure out a way to penalize shareholders of note (institutional and primary owners, mainly) when a company goes fraudulent/monopolistic/corrupt then you might see a change of voting and policy. I know if I was a mutual fund manager, I'd have a real hard time investing in a company that could cost me my portfolio if it turned belly up. <img src="/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Ethanol has one major problem (right now), which is it takes more than 1 BTU of energy from fossil fuels (oil) to produde 1 BTU's worth of Ethanol. That's not going to change with a corn-based production process. Sugar cane is a FAR better Ethanol production source.

I've read a lot of interesting view points in this thread, and even learned some things about ethanol production. I guess my thought with the original post was that too many people seem too comfortable with this country's energy consumption the way it is. That's scary to me. The other day on the Today show (IIRC) they had a piece about solar panels becoming standard on some new houses in So. California. Yeah, it costs about $18K more to build them like that, but average electric bills instead of being $200 to $300 a month are more like $50 to $100. That seems like $18K well spent when the lower environmental impact is factored in.

I didn't mean to give the impression that corn based ethanol was the end all be all solution for gas. I didn't really think about all the fossil fuels needed to produce it. But the fact that the government is talking about E85 being available at 25% of the gas pumps in this state within the next 20 years just seems like the legislation is not seeing a problem with energy consumption as it is now. Someone from my hometown is running for Congress and in a TV add says, "I think we need to increase our ethanol production so we can end our dependence on foreign oil". How misguided is that? The sad truth, at least in my state, is that I think most people would nod their heads in agreement with that statement, not realizing that it is only a partial solution to the problem. But I suppose the candidate that says publically, "I think we need to develop hydrogen engines for cars so we can cut out all this petroleum and corn based fuel crap" would not get elected in Iowa. Maybe if we could get the Green Party revitalized...

Again, it comes down to "my dollar is my vote". I buy ethanol, because it's the best option available for the car I drive. When I get a house, I'd like to put in solar panels and maybe even a wind turbine in the back yard. I can see it now, "But honey, it really does look cool!"

I just get nervous that I'll have to tell my grandchildren stories about what trees were like... <img src="/images/graemlins/frown.gif" alt="" />

Okay, just some side notes... Solar is still a fairly toxic process. Hydrogen is technically a fuel transport, not really a source unless you are using fossil generated fuel. Mainly it's a clean way to burn stored energy produced via other methods like Nuclear/Wind/Solar/Coal/NG/Gas plants.

When you get a house, look into using all the latest tech: http://blogs.zdnet.com/emergingtech/?p=239 With geothermal, instant hot water heaters, solar, and a combination of Low-E glass and good insulation, you might not pay anything for energy. In fact at some point, it's very likely that we will be producing our own energy on an ad hoc basis and only purchasing supplemental energy on the open market for both our home and our cars.

Right now the single biggest impact you can have is to cut your energy consumption. Then buy the highest mileage cars you can. Then get your home upgraded (or built) with the latest technology where you can pay for it over many years of useful life. Some of the latest gear has a really reasonable ROI. All of the above are voting with our dollars.

SOLAR is TOXIC??? Educate me... I wasn't aware of this <img src="/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" />.

Troy