Living Car Free - What are you doing about it...?

In todays news they announced that Governor Schwarzenegger was going to divert money away from mass transit and trains to help balance the budget shortfall. You can't win here in California! Just when you jump on mass transit because of cost and environmental issues they go after mass transit?

My truck is paid for, so I'll continue driving at a moderate pace.

Your truck will never be "paid for". Owning and operating your vehicle will still probably cost you around $15K per year on average.

When a spike in gas prices happens people become worried. That’s a natural reaction to economic conditions that hurt them. I also see those conditions as an opening for positive, not doom laden, discussions about oil descent pathways and the transition to where we would like to go, how we do it and what it might look like. For me that’s a positive.

I can only be encouraged as more people/communities discuss and then hopefully start to make a sustainable transition. My hope is as the culture of transition grows, together we share information and create a variety of design models. To me that’s a real positive too!

Interesting. I mostly tend to share your optimism. Historically, crisis events have tended to nudge humans into a positive direction somewhat more often than into a negative direction. But the consequences of our actions now extend so far into the future that it's harder for people to be nudged into any direction at all. Whether it's peak oil or global warming, it's hard for us to see that we should act now if we want to avoid catastrophes in the more distant future--even when there are dramatic indicators like hurricanes and rapidly rising gas prices.

In todays news they announced that Governor Schwarzenegger was going to divert money away from mass transit and trains to help balance the budget shortfall. You can't win here in California! Just when you jump on mass transit because of cost and environmental issues they go after mass transit?

Yeah that's bad news. Here in Lansing, the CATA bus company just lost a request for a new millage. This bus company was named the best in North America last year. I hope they can maintain their service. They just raised fares for the first time in almost 15 years, from $1.00 to $1.25.

The OP asked "What are you doing about it?" Something I wish I had done was help the bus company get their millage passed.

Offer as much advice as possible to people on transit and bike commuting options when they ask.

Many of the folks I've talked to about high prices blame one of the two main political groups for causing or at least not fixing the problem.

When I point out that we have the ability to solve this problem for ourselves, people look at me like I have three heads.

It's refreshing to come here and realize that there are some people that can use logic and foresight. It seems like the general public and the major political parties have serious problems with both these things.

Az

On a larger level that just the recent rise is gas prices I work on transition designs of peak oil descent pathways which make people feel positive and included in the transformation. From Bookchin’s vision of Post-Scarcity Anarchism to Jacque Fresco’s holistic design of sustainable cities to the reality of (Transition Towns (http://www.transitiontowns.org/) ) I find answers and comfort in giving people the tools to create more local sustainable ways of living and the design of the transition in a way that people will embrace it as a positive common journey.

I'd like to see you talk that way in a bar in Tacoma.

Your truck will never be "paid for". Owning and operating your vehicle will still probably cost you around $15K per year on average.
How do you arrive at this figure? I've just done some rough calculations based on moderate driving, vehicle insurance and vehicle repair and maintenance work. Using generous figures, it's coming out at one-third your estimate. I'm basing this on driving 18,000 kilometres a year (average in this part of Canada) at the current fuel prices and using a vehicle with average fuel economy. To get to $15,000 a year for a vehicle with no money owing, I'd have to drive a large sport utility vehicle with a hefty insurance policy and enough repairs to make my mechanic very happy. Or I'd have to drive a lot more than I can even imagine.

In todays news they announced that Governor Schwarzenegger was going to divert money away from mass transit and trains to help balance the budget shortfall. You can't win here in California! Just when you jump on mass transit because of cost and environmental issues they go after mass transit?
Too many interlocking problems all coming to a head at the same time is a prescription for a systemwide failure of government. I don't think the situation you described will be contained to California alone.

Offer as much advice as possible to people on transit and bike commuting options when they ask.

I think a lot of people just need help with a way of seeing possibilities; to discover a practical vision of the change they may feel is needed but that they can’t quite understand or have practical experience with. Isn’t a lot of this really just about neighbor talking to neighbor about solutions and teaching each other by example.

Whether it's peak oil or global warming, it's hard for us to see that we should act now if we want to avoid catastrophes in the more distant future--even when there are dramatic indicators like hurricanes and rapidly rising gas prices.

I think we need to be optimistic in order for us, as individuals/neighborhoods/cities, to be able to move forward with a kind of certainty that we can creatively address the challenges of sustainability in a way that will allow us to live within the limits set for us by Nature. I don’t care for the negative alternative of the world’s largest nations fighting over dwindling supplies and the ravages of an unpredictable climate.

I think we need to be optimistic in order for us, as individuals/neighborhoods/cities, to be able to move forward with a kind of certainty that we can creatively address the challenges of sustainability in a way that will allow us to live within the limits set for us by Nature. I don’t care for the negative alternative of the world’s largest nations fighting over dwindling supplies and the ravages of an unpredictable climate.

Kim Stanley Robinson said something like, "The situation is so serious that we cannot afford the luxury of pessimism." So, to answer the OP's question, the first thing to "do about it" is to see it as a problem that has a solution, even if we don't yet know what the solution is.

It's becoming clear to many people (of many different political beliefs and parties) that the solution is going to be pretty drastic, or pretty radical. Meaning that we might have to make changes that go to the core of how we do things. In other words, maybe we'll have to do even more than find new energy sources. But even thinking this is kind of scary, and fear is often what leads back to pessimism and inaction.

From what I understand, oil futures are a hedge against a falling dollar. And the dollar has been falling against other currencies (Can. $, Euro, GBP) since crude oil's rise.

Yes and no. Most people don't have any place to actually store the oil at the end of the month when the contracts are up. Most speculators work on short term fluctuations in value and currency to make a buck, but at the end of the month when all the contracts are settled, only people that can take possession of the oil want to be holding the contracts.

There are some exceptions however. For example, airlines have the capacity to speculate in a more long term fashion by buying up tons of fuel (not raw crude) ahead of time.

I'd like to see you talk that way in a bar in Tacoma.

Tacoma is a big city...try Redneckville, Carolinas...:injured:

Aaron:)

Yes and no. Most people don't have any place to actually store the oil at the end of the month when the contracts are up. Most speculators work on short term fluctuations in value and currency to make a buck, but at the end of the month when all the contracts are settled, only people that can take possession of the oil want to be holding the contracts.

There are some exceptions however. For example, airlines have the capacity to speculate in a more long term fashion by buying up tons of fuel (not raw crude) ahead of time.

One can trade futures & commodities online. Only a small handful of the people (more like investment banks, hedge funds and the like) are able to take actual delivery of corn or wheat or oil or whatever else the commodity is. (ADM, refiners, ethanol plants, etc) . I've never really gotten into it, as it seems a bit convoluted to me....

Yeah that's bad news. Here in Lansing, the CATA bus company just lost a request for a new millage. This bus company was named the best in North America last year. I hope they can maintain their service. They just raised fares for the first time in almost 15 years, from $1.00 to $1.25.

The OP asked "What are you doing about it?" Something I wish I had done was help the bus company get their millage passed.

Just writing a letter to your local city councilman or mayor could help. Showing up at a town council meeting can be good, you can get to actually see the people, and meet them. Also, it's never too late to do something!

One can trade futures & commodities online. Only a small handful of the people (more like investment banks, hedge funds and the like) are able to take actual delivery of corn or wheat or oil or whatever else the commodity is. (ADM, refiners, ethanol plants, etc) . I've never really gotten into it, as it seems a bit convoluted to me....

I am agreeing with you in the post you quoted. Sorry, maybe I wasn't clear. I am firmly in the camp that speculators ARE NOT increasing the price of oil, because how could they without taking delivery of it? It is plain and simple: there is more global demand than there has ever been before (emerging markets like China are suddenly using WAY more oil) and production is not increasing as fast as demand.

Think back to econ 101 everybody. What happens when demand increases faster than production?

I am agreeing with you in the post you quoted. Sorry, maybe I wasn't clear. I am firmly in the camp that speculators ARE NOT increasing the price of oil, because how could they without taking delivery of it? It is plain and simple: there is more global demand than there has ever been before (emerging markets like China are suddenly using WAY more oil) and production is not increasing as fast as demand.

Think back to econ 101 everybody. What happens when demand increases faster than production?

I understand S & D. Just not sure it alone can account for $127 barrel prices and gas prices zooming from $3.20 to $3.80 in one week.

One can trade futures & commodities online. Only a small handful of the people (more like investment banks, hedge funds and the like) are able to take actual delivery of corn or wheat or oil or whatever else the commodity is. (ADM, refiners, ethanol plants, etc) . I've never really gotten into it, as it seems a bit convoluted to me....

That's what I-Shares is for.

See - stock ticker OIL - happily I found it when Oil was $106 a barrel.

For those pushing hybrids as an alternative to "paid for" here... keep in mind that a large portion of the total lifetime energy footprint of a car is the up-front manufacturing cost. So building new cars is energy-inefficient. The small mileage boost doesn't offset the energy costs of manufacturing - making steel and plastics, molding and forging, transporting raw materials and finished product.

Keep your car running until it falls apart, and take good care of it to delay that time as long as possible. And the fewer miles you put on it, the longer you can keep it. But imho, swapping for a hybrid is just a typically American, consumerist approach to the problem, a feel-good rather than a real solution.

For those pushing hybrids as an alternative to "paid for" here... keep in mind that a large portion of the total lifetime energy footprint of a car is the up-front manufacturing cost. So building new cars is energy-inefficient. The small mileage boost doesn't offset the energy costs of manufacturing - making steel and plastics, molding and forging, transporting raw materials and finished product.

Keep your car running until it falls apart, and take good care of it to delay that time as long as possible. And the fewer miles you put on it, the longer you can keep it. But imho, swapping for a hybrid is just a typically American, consumerist approach to the problem, a feel-good rather than a real solution.
You're preaching to the choir on this one. :)

Except you forgot to mention the disposal problems at the end of the car's (so-called) "useful life." Also, you don't have to keep your car until it's falling apart. You can sell it to somebody who needs it and replace it with a hybrid bicycle instead of a hybrid car.

Keep your car running until it falls apart, and take good care of it to delay that time as long as possible. And the fewer miles you put on it, the longer you can keep it. But imho, swapping for a hybrid is just a typically American, consumerist approach to the problem, a feel-good rather than a real solution.

True, but in the long run we will need things like walkable communities with better transit options to get about. Right now we don't have that, and it will take a while before that sort of thing becomes a common reality.

There are strong movements to change these land use patterns, but it obviously takes a long time to change something that's so ingrained. I have the impression that Southern California is one of the worst examples of this pattern anywhere. Other than moving to a totally different region, I don't know if you'll ever find any good solutions.

I have to agree with you there. In San Diego I saw them putting the plow to wild areas of 5 miles by 5 miles all at one time for one development. Now it's etched in asphalt. I also saw limits on how much water was available.

That's one reason I now go by the handle "Artkansas". :D

I understand S & D. Just not sure it alone can account for $127 barrel prices and gas prices zooming from $3.20 to $3.80 in one week.
$129 today. But where is the money going? Since it is crude, some refiner pays who $129? A speculator who bought it from the Saudis for much less? Someone here on the internet must have a breakdown of how much goes to which player? The funny thing is that for something like this with little inventory and huge throughput supply ( stuff that has been pumped out of the ground ) and demand ( stuff that gets used ) are always very close to each other. We can't burn stuff we don't have and there isn't room to pump stuff that no one wants to burn. There is a huge cost to having a tanker pull into port to deliver stuff and no where to put it because the storage tanks are all full. So supply, out of the ground, rarely exceeds demand by very much. If the peak oilers are right and the rate at which it can be pumped is much less than the rate at which people burn it then we'd see shortages very quickly. The pumpers seem to be keeping up with the burners don't they?

One of the waddlers stopped me in the hall on the way in- " We're all going to be riding bikes soon if gas goes over $4.00." She seems to have trouble just walking down the hall. I can't imagine her pedaling- maybe one of those trikes with an oversized seat. Less than a year ago she would call me the crazy bicyclist. "You're crazy to be out riding your bike with all those cars." People are beginning to think things I didn't think they'd think.

I have to agree with you there. In San Diego I saw them putting the plow to wild areas of 5 miles by 5 miles all at one time for one development. Now it's etched in asphalt. I also saw limits on how much water was available.

That's one reason I now go by the handle "Artkansas". :D
I'm so jealous. I'd like to go by "Roodichigan" but it sounds dorky.

Were you "Calvinifornia" when you lived in San Diego?

I understand S & D. Just not sure it alone can account for $127 barrel prices and gas prices zooming from $3.20 to $3.80 in one week.
Well, I'll outline the best argument I've found in favor of speculation as the main factor in the current oil price spike.

Everybody's talking about peak oil all of a sudden in the mainstream investment world. If most of the refiners were recently convinced by peak oil arguments, they might all run out at the same time and buy lots of oil on the spot market. That would drive the spot price up and feed back into expectations for even higher prices in the future.

The weakness in that argument is that irrational speculative buying by refiners would be short lived. It would have to end when they run out of storage capacity. Additionally, refiners (like other commercial participants in the commodities markets) are presumed to have the best and most current information about the prevailing supply and demand conditions.

^^^^They know Bush was in Saudi Arabia begging the king for more oil and not getting it. The Saudis claim to have reserve supplies or excess capacity, but they have been either unable or unwilling to produce it. They know we're itching to bomb Iran and boycott Russia, and we're not real crazy about Venezuela.

I think the speculation is based more on fear than greed.

...One of the waddlers stopped me in the hall on the way in- " We're all going to be riding bikes soon if gas goes over $4.00." She seems to have trouble just walking down the hall. I can't imagine her pedaling- maybe one of those trikes with an oversized seat...
She may have been just joking around for now, but the fact is that bike riding is a wonderful way for heavy people to start exercising. It's gentle on the joints and you can start at a really comfortable pace. Biking by itself won't make anyone skinny but it sure is a good easy way to increase vitality and overall fitness.

Well, I'll outline the best argument I've found in favor of speculation as the main factor in the current oil price spike.

Everybody's talking about peak oil all of a sudden in the mainstream investment world. If most of the refiners were recently convinced by peak oil arguments, they might all run out at the same time and buy lots of oil on the spot market. That would drive the spot price up and feed back into expectations for even higher prices in the future.

The weakness in that argument is that irrational speculative buying by refiners would be short lived. It would have to end when they run out of storage capacity. Additionally, refiners (like other commercial participants in the commodities markets) are presumed to have the best and most current information about the prevailing supply and demand conditions.

I suspect it's about a shift in the supply/demand relationship, not speculation. Since OPEC came to power in the 1970s, the price of oil has been largely controlled by oligarchical supply-side controls. The OPEC producers agreed to production caps in order to keep supply down, thus raising prices. Historically, Saudi Arabia, with its massive production, has been the real controller. But, as well-documented in the book Twilight in the Desert, Saudi Arabia may be hitting peak production and no longer have surplus left! If that's true (and it certainly is just about everywhere else), then oil prices are set no longer by supply, but rather by the ever-growing demand.

Another thing to consider is Hubbert's Peak, aka Peak Oil. Hubbert theorized that, for any given oilfield, once about half the available oil has been extracted, productivity will go into inevitable decline, regardless of whatever new technologies might be introduced to tap the rest. Hubbert devised his theory in the 1950s, and predicted the peak in American oil production within one year (1970). Just a few years after America passed peak production and went into decline, we had the OPEC crisis. Why? Because suddenly we were truly dependent on foreign oil, facing rising demand and falling supply. And Hubbert's theory scales, from a single well right up to the entire globe. At whatever point we've used half the available petroleum reserves (which we may be facing already), then oil production will go into inevitable and irreversable decline. No amount of political bluster, high technology, or warfare will change that.

If Peak Oil is really the primary cause, then we can expect prices to go nowhere but up, and SHARPLY up. And this lands on America even worse, because oil is traded in dollars, and the debt-driven weakness of the dollar makes it relatively more expensive to us, and less expensive to those using stronger currencies like the Euro or the Yen.

But given these factors, I really don't think speculation is the problem now. I think a shift from supply-controlled prices to demand-controlled prices is the problem.

That's what I-Shares is for.

See - stock ticker OIL - happily I found it when Oil was $106 a barrel.

21+/- % return -- not bad

I have to agree with you there. In San Diego I saw them putting the plow to wild areas of 5 miles by 5 miles all at one time for one development. Now it's etched in asphalt. I also saw limits on how much water was available.

That's one reason I now go by the handle "Artkansas". :D

Last year we were loosing over an acre a day in the big city just to the north of me. Three decent sized dairy farms have shut down and been sold. The one that torked me off was when the plowed under a pecan orchard and dairy farm to put up a WM supercenter...the old WM is sitting empty less than a mile down the road:notamused:

Aaron:)

...But given these factors, I really don't think speculation is the problem now. I think a shift from supply-controlled prices to demand-controlled prices is the problem.
Yes, in the long term the fundamentals are pretty clear, but I wonder... the monthly contract settlement was just a few days ago on May 20 I think. That means the next reality check is almost a full month into the future. A month, that's a long time when everything is so unsettled. After seeing the action in the last few days, I'm wondering just how crazy things could get in the next couple of weeks.

How do you arrive at this figure? I've just done some rough calculations based on moderate driving, vehicle insurance and vehicle repair and maintenance work. Using generous figures, it's coming out at one-third your estimate. I'm basing this on driving 18,000 kilometres a year (average in this part of Canada) at the current fuel prices and using a vehicle with average fuel economy. To get to $15,000 a year for a vehicle with no money owing, I'd have to drive a large sport utility vehicle with a hefty insurance policy and enough repairs to make my mechanic very happy. Or I'd have to drive a lot more than I can even imagine.

Whoops, I messed up. I meant about 15% of income. This is estimated from the fact that Americans (I don't know about Canada) spend 20% of their income on private automobile ownership and operation.

I'm curious. You drive for your business of taking photos, right? Do you think you'll have to raise your prices or add a surcharge because of the increased fuel costs? It seems to me that higher gas prices are going to feed into inflation even more than they already have.

Unfortunately, in my branch of the photography business there's already a buyer's market with too many photographers and not enough customers. I license images to book and magazine publishers and for the most part it's a business where the customer sets the price they'll pay. There's often a little room for negotiation, but no photographer that I know of is able to simply raise their prices. Most of my sales are of stock images, which means there is usually a long delay between the cost of production and any income generated.

Your truck will never be "paid for". Owning and operating your vehicle will still probably cost you around $15K per year on average.

I don't know where you come up with your guess of $15K per year cost for a vehicle. That's way more than I spend on my 1992 Toyota 4x4 pickup, purchased used in 2002 for $9,500. I paid cash, so no finance charges. This is a business vehicle, so I track costs. The back of my truck is sometimes my hotel room to help control my overall travel costs.

In 2007 I drove 18,195 miles.
Gasoline 773.34 gallons, $2,358.31 (average $3.05/gallon, average 23.53 mpg)
Other expenses $2,340.87, including $166.36 oil, $931.37 repairs, $1192.14 insurance, $51 registration. No included is depreciation, which I'd have to dig out of my tax return.

In 2006 I drove 14,088 miles. Gasoline averaged $2.76/gallon and totalled $1744.78, with other expenses $2076.97.

Gas costs are running ahead of other costs so far this year, but still only a bit more than 50% of total operating costs. Do I like paying more at the pump? Of course not, but as many others have stated here and elsewhere we still pay much less in the USA than most countries in the world. In the long haul, higher fuel costs are probably a good thing in forcing our profligate society to reconsider priorities. In the short run, lower income folks who have to drive long distances to work because of outrageous housing costs are getting shafted.

Around town I walk or bicycle to run errands.

Besides biking to work when the weather permits, I keep my Bonneville around 2k rpm when accelarating which in turn lets me get 25-27 mpg. It also gives people more time to see my share the road plates :)

I'm making more money...

-D