Why a greater co$t difference between gasoline grades?

I think dagosa just likes to use the word “fungible”… ;-]

@texases Thanks for pointing out the flaws and inaccuracies in dagosa’s arguments, no doubt inspired by Al Gore and the Tides Foundation who bribe Canadian natives to block pipelines. In case anyone is interested, in many European countries gasoline is called “BENZINE”.

A major university has done a “wells to wheels” analysis and the “dirtiest” (most carbon) oil by far comes from the Brea area in California, as well as the Orinoco region of Venezuela. The light Nigerian crude generates so much carbon in its production with spill and gas flaring and transportation, that it comes out about the same as the heavier oil sands crude, which arrives in the US with most of the contaminants removed.

The EPA itself studied and stated that oil sands crude made no significant difference it the carbon generation.

With respect to the water used, this water is cleaned up and recycled in the process. Only a small amount of make-up water is needed. Similarly a power station reuses its cooling water as well.

Most of the world’s remaining crude oil is of the heavier variety. I’m all in favor of electric cars if the cost comes down, the range goes up and dagosa can prove that the electricity generated to run them comes from a non-carbon generating source. Between 50 and 60 percent of US power is generated with fossil fuels which generate CARBON DIOXIDE (CO2), especially coal fired plants.

As an energy consultant as well as a member of the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) I have an interest in both forms of motive power and welcome the developments in electric cars. Most of us, however, will not live long enough to see electric cars as a mainstream form of transportation.

The low oil prices have as much to do with a battle between Middle East oil and the potential markets of the world developing competing oil sources like tar sands oil deposits as anything else. To minimize the profit from these hard to extract oil, OPEC is doing it’s usual bate and switch tactics to try control this effort. Rather then just listen to a supporter of “oil anything at any costs”, do the research your self. Don’t believe me, don’t believe anyone else. The solution is not to continue this war of the different worlds by supporting one fossil fuel extraction over another, but to continue to not support any additional extraction that does move us backwards in the conservation of natural resources. And the major retort to this is…who cares what Canada does with their fresh water ?

@‌Docnick
The usual argument vs electric cars continues to bring in oil and coal fired plants but continues to neglect the polution saved by not burning oil in the cars the replace and the continued development of non polluting sources. It is much more efficient to run cars on electricity from oil fired plants then burn the oil in cars. It’s the mix of the energy sources that makes the EV a desired alternative. And yes, through your efforts and those of oil corporation supported entities, it will be a long time before electric cars are the norm.
As an energy consultant for whom ? No automotive company is interested in producing an eletric car that needs little Maintenance, one of the primary incomes of the automobile and parts industry. They do it grudgingly and only at the “requests” of state regulations. That is why a car like the very good EV spark by GM will not be on sale to anyone outside of CA and Oregon (if I have my states right) that you my good friend are a member of SAE with all due respect, makes you as bias as me a former educator arguing for public education. With both have our own agenda. I argue though, that everyone educate themselves before the “vote” for alternatives.

@Docnick‌
Correction…benzene is not benzine

http://www.greatlakes.org/document.doc?id=1425

@dagosa You are no one to judge what, if any, agenda I have. In fact, my only agenda is the most efficient use of our resources. Electric fork lift trucks are superior to fossil fried ones. For years, milk delivery vans in England were electric vehicles.

So, if we want to minimize CO2 generation, the quickest way is to drive smaller, more fuel-efficient vehicles. And the new EPA fuel efficiency standards will really tax the industry, just as they did when first introduced in the 70s.

Continued development in batteries is taking place all over the world, with China spending the most at this time. You can actually buy an inexpensive electric car in China; it’s made by a very large battery company. The quality probably won’t meet our expectations, but that’s beside the point.

I find it both amusing and sad that we now apparently view $2.64/gallon to be “low” prices. It was only 10 years ago that TV news was pointing out that gas stations were having to replace their electric price signs because the dollar digit could only display a 1. I used to be able to fill my tank for 12 bucks on a bad day. The current prices are lower than they were 6 months ago, but they are not low.

I don’t think they are particularly low or high right now. What was the price of gasoline in 1979? I seem to remember about $2/gallon or so.

When I got my license and first car as a high school kid in the 80’s I had a minimum wage job that paid $3.35/hour and a gallon of gas was about a buck, give or take. Today minimum wage is $9something/hour and a gallon of gas is about 3 bucks, give or take. Seems like not much has changed in 30 years.

@Docnick‌
I am not offended by being identified with my own self interest. As a matter of fact, I respect people the most who disagree with me if they actually do have a self interest they believe in and fight for.

Newer EPA fuel efficiency standards SHOULD tax the automobile industry. The automobile is a major pollutant and has a responsibility not to. The ICE is a much bigger profit maker then an electric car and the auto industry has a vested interest in it. They also have a responsibility for the air we breath. By taxing the industry, polution and economy standards are huge contributors to more reliable and economic cars. The EPA makes no regulations without the input of the auto industry relative to their ability to meet them. If you don’t like epa standards, you have a right to elect those who feel the same way.

I reality, proponents of EPA standards are disappointed they aren’t strong enough.

As far as batteries are concerned, lithium is not the answer. It is too expensive and unsafe in it’s present form. It’s just the expensive alternative needed to keep EV cars on a slow track to acceptance.

As far as gas prices are concerned, if it stays at three dollars your scenario holds true…but how long will that be ?

What was the price of gasoline in 1979? I seem to remember about $2/gallon or so.

More like 74 cents per gallon https://youtube.com/watch?v=qFM_zJDGKbU which works out to be around $2.50 in today’s money.

So basically, today we think “cheap” gas is the same price as insanely expensive gas was during the manufactured oil crisis of the 70’s.

http://www.randomuseless.info/gasprice/gasprice.html
Gas and oil is not predictable short term, but as you can see, it does have tendencies. I ain’t stay’n down forever. Enjoy while you can but always plan for expensive energy when it occurs and always buying products that are most efficient if you can to prepared for that time. When Nat gas was a big cheap alternative for many in our state, most jumped on board from oil. Now, delivery charges from the same providers has made it just as expensive locally. Hopefully it settles down like other areas. This is why, instead of p,aying games of jumping from one fossil fuel to another, we have always felt best spending money on insulation for the house instead of converting from oil and buying smaller more efficient cars and supporting measures to make them more that way. The same goes for gasoline and jumping from one polluting source to another.

Just to throw into the mix, electric cars are only as clean as the power plant tech used to make the electricity, and the manufacturing tech used to make and transport the batteries. (there are of course transportation costs in making conventionally-fuelled vehicles too)

Computer-managed vehicles with catalysts and feedback loops are very clean these days, in many cases likely more so than running an electric car where the power plant is coal-fired, or in some areas diesel powered, and let’s not even get started with nuclear waste disposal for areas served by nuke plants.

Wells to wheels efficiency of electric cars can be very similar to gasoline powered cars. There are losses at every stage of conversion and transport. The electric motor may very well be 92% efficient but the controller that provides AC to the motor has losses, too. Battery charging has losses as well as battery discharge.

Run the numbers from a modern coal plant and you are slightly better than gas powered transportation. Natural gas, slightly worse. The comparisons of CO2 emissions follow that efficiency calculation pretty well, too. Nuke, hydro, wind and solar have essentially no CO2 emmissions but then comparing bio-diesel to those nets nearly zero CO2 as well. 100% Ethanol, is a net gain in CO2 because it is distilled.

Too complicated a set of circumstances to just say electric cars are “greener” a a wave-of-the-hand truism. Exactly like saying electric cars can replace all personal transportation, too.

The cenex in Alex has a $1 price diff going on. E85 is $1.49 which works out to a 40% discount vs e10. When gas hits $2, it will be a 50% diff. Gotta like that. All stations in mpls are at about a 50 cent diff now. The cenex folks in alex are stubborn I suppose. 1 station had a 10 cents diff. Now that’s not nice