View Single Post
Old 10-06-08, 05:58 PM
  #61  
grayloon
Senior Member
 
grayloon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Kingwood, Texas
Posts: 619

Bikes: 1983 Nishiki Cresta (original owner), 1987 Centurion Lemans RS, 1996 Gary Fisher X-Caliber, His and Hers Trek 800's, Schwinn beach cruiser woman's frame, and grandson's Huffy learner bike.

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Roody
Which brings us back to the notion that we should have people actually paying the full cost for energy--both because it's fair, and because high prices will encourage conservation.

I don't know about Atlanta, but gas prices have dropped a lot in Michigan since this thread started. Of course, everybody's so upset about the economy they don't even notice the lower gas prices!
I'm not sure what that would be. The market sets the price. Of late, speculators have caused some of the run up in price and, as they've backed out of the market, the price has dropped. From what I've read, local oil experts (there are many here) predict a drop to about $70 a barrel. They also predict a real increase, not one from speculation, to about $300. The immediate impact will be a drop in price, but a whopping increase over the next few years.

There are many costs associated with how we transport ourselves and use energy. Some are quantifiable, some may not be so easy to count. More tax on energy is one method of getting to the real costs. But, that's not something I'd support unless it was dedicated and not general revenue money.
grayloon is offline