Gasoling Prices by State

[TCHB]

Gasoline prices state-by-state
PLUS:
• Best and worst gas mileage cars
• Gas prices set to surge past $2
California tops the list. North Carolina has the cheapest gas.
New York (CNN/Money) -- The average price for regular gasoline surged to a record high of $1.93 a gallon, up from $1.77 per gallon a month earlier, according to AAA.
A year earlier, the average price of a gallon of regular gasoline was $1.50.
California leads the nation at $2.25 a gallon for regular, followed by Nevada at $2.22 and Oregon at $2.21.
The AAA's Daily Fuel Gauge Report is based on a survey of over 60,000 self-serve stations. The prices below are averages for each state as of May 12, 2004.
In a separate report Monday, the federal government's Energy Information Administration put the average national price for a gallon of gasoline at $1.94 per gallon.
State Regular Mid Premium Diesel
California $2.25 $2.39 $2.43 $2.47
Nevada $2.22 $2.34 $2.43 $2.27
Oregon $2.21 $2.33 $2.37 $2.20
Hawaii $2.18 $2.30 $2.35 $2.29
Washington $2.17 $2.25 $2.36 $2.24
Arizona $2.12 $2.21 $2.34 $2.20
New York $2.03 $2.17 $2.21 $1.89
Idaho $2.01 $2.13 $2.18 $2.11
Wisconsin $2.01 $2.08 $2.18 $1.80
Alaska

[058]

With crude at $53/barrel and rising expect gas to go to $3.00+/gal. World demand is exceeding the current supply.

[Infomaniac]

Oklahoma is $1.89 gal

[Back Forty]

I just saw $2.14 for Diesel here in S.W. Ohio.
:eek:
The cheapo grade gas was $1.96 :idea:
Turbo Blue is over $4/gal.

[MagicMtnDan]

With crude at $53/barrel and rising expect gas to go to $3.00+/gal. World demand is exceeding the current supply.
If that's the case, and I hesitate to accept it as the sole or even main reason for the meteoric rise in prices, then why doesn't ANYONE have a plan? No one in the world seems to be very concerned about the implications of extremely high gas prices.
And of course the Democrat tree-huggers want nothing to do with drilling for oil in the precious areas that no one can get to because they won't let anyone drive a motorized vehicle there :mad:

[BeaverJ]

$1.88 in NW Arkansas, for this minute...........

[david_396]

Boycott one Gas Distributor for a whole week. Be it Shell, Mobil eExon etc.
Gas prices rose 10 cents in one day here. $2.35 per gal for regular.
A year os so an e-mail went around to not by gas on a Tuesday or something like that. Need to pick em off one distributor at a time :lightsabe

[Havasu Cig]

Boycott one Gas Distributor for a whole week. Be it Shell, Mobil eExon etc.
Gas prices rose 10 cents in one day here. $2.35 per gal for regular.
A year os so an e-mail went around to not by gas on a Tuesday or something like that. Need to pick em off one distributor at a time :lightsabe
All you would do is hurt the dealer not the oil company. The dealers keep their margins fairly consistent. The oil company dictates the price the dealer pays.

[572Daytona]

I just filled up the Suburban at $1.81 a gallon in Georgia

[99 232 baja]

In michigan it is $1.94 for reg. unleaded , it was $2.04 three days ago and rising!

[Krazy K]

Here in Portland, regular at Chevron is going for about $2.05
Arco, where i buy gas, is $1.93
10-9-04

[switchin'addiction]

I just put 30 gallons of 87 octane at 1.89/gal. in my Bronco. Almost 60 bones.

[Unforgiven]

$2.47 a gallon for reg.. :idea: .. but STARBUCKS coffee is still 4 bucks a cup :confused:

[Squirtin Thunder]

It was $2.09 in Bullhead City this morning.

[Lightning]

There was a healine on CNBC right now that says San Diego is the highest in the country.

[NashvilleBound]

$2.47 a gallon for reg.. :idea: .. but STARBUCKS coffee is still 4 bucks a cup :confused:
LMAO.....must be a cA thing:) Just paid $1.83 a gallon for 87

[rsoscia]

2.19 at Sams Club in Chino Hills.... 1.88 for a slice of there pizza... 1.50 for a 1/4 hot dog with a coke

[Unforgiven]

LMAO.....must be a cA thing:) Just paid $1.83 a gallon for 87
it's a funny thing out here...we bitch about price of gas BUT the price of coffee ain't shit :hammerhea

[OMEGA_BUBBLE_JET]

$1.78 on the way to work this morning in Houston.
Omega

[HavasuDreamin']

$1.88 for 87 octane here in Indianapolis. Saw it as cheap as a $1.83 yesterday. What a deal. :hammerhea :lightsabe

[wildbillg]

We should be thankfull for the cheap price we are paying in the United States.......
Read this and then think about what YOUR paying for gas...... :hammer2:
In the United States last week, gasoline was averaging about $1.76 a gallon for regular unleaded, with some motorists in California paying more than $2.
The average price of gasoline in Britain was $5.38 a gallon, a bargain compared with the Netherlands, where it was $5.69 a gallon. In Germany it was $5.01. The French got away with paying $4.78.
The reason for the higher prices in Europe is predictable: taxes. When currency and measurements are converted, the $5.38 that Britons were paying for gas last week included $4.16 in taxes. Rates are similar across Europe.
In the United States, each gallon is taxed 18.4 cents by the federal government, and with state taxes added on, Americans pay an average of 27 cents extra.
SOOOOOOO
Do we really have it THAT bad now that you have something else to think about? :2purples:

[NorCal Gameshow]

$2.47 a gallon for reg.. :idea: .. but STARBUCKS coffee is still 4 bucks a cup :confused:
:D :D :D yeah, but the starbucks is gonna last longer :D :D :D
$2.21 today in no-cal

[Freak]

If that's the case, and I hesitate to accept it as the sole or even main reason for the meteoric rise in prices, then why doesn't ANYONE have a plan? No one in the world seems to be very concerned about the implications of extremely high gas prices.
And of course the Democrat tree-huggers want nothing to do with drilling for oil in the precious areas that no one can get to because they won't let anyone drive a motorized vehicle there :mad:
MMD since your question about a "plan" is enormous this is going to be long.....LOL
No one in the world seems to be very concerned about the implications of extremely high gas prices.
The oil companies have quietly acknowledged the seriousness of the
situation. The problem is the public does not want to hear it. Now it is in the news more and more almost daily.
For instance, in a February 1999 speech to oil industry leaders, Arco
chairman Mike Bowlin stated, “The last days of the age of oil have begun.”
Similarly, in a 2003 paper posted on the Exxon-Mobil Exploration website,
company president Jon Thompson stated:
By 2015, we will need to find, develop and produce a volume of new
oil and gas that is equal to eight out of every 10 barrels being
produced today. In addition, the cost associated with providing this
additional oil and gas is expected to be considerably more than what
the industry is now spending.
In late 1999, Dick Cheney stated:
By some estimates, there will be an average of two-percent annual
growth in global oil demand over the years ahead, along with,
conservatively, a three-percent natural decline in production from
existing reserves. That means by 2010 we will need on the order of
an additional 50 million barrels a day.
To put Cheney’s statement in perspective, remember that the oil
producing nations of the world are currently pumping at full capacity but are
unable to produce much more than 80 million barrels per day.
Sure, lately OPEC says they will pump more but the price does not seem to go down. What does that tell you. It tells me they are just saying they will pump more.
Cheney’s statement was a tacit admission of the severity and imminence as
the possibility of the world raising its production by such a huge amount is
borderline ridiculous.
A report commissioned by Cheney and released in April 2001 was no less
disturbing:
The most significant difference between now and a decade ago is the
extraordinarily rapid erosion of spare capacities at critical segments
of energy chains. Today, shortfalls appear to be endemic. Among the
most extraordinary of these losses of spare capacity is in the oil
arena.
Not surprisingly, George W. Bush has echoed Dick Cheney’s sentiments.
In May 2001, Bush stated, “What people need to hear loud and clear is that
we’re running out of energy in America.”
George and Dick are securing one of the last large reserves for you and I right now.
Russia knows. They have a very large field and they are upping their military budget by 37% in 05.
then why doesn't ANYONE have a plan?
If we find a massive amount of political will, unprecedented bipartisan
and international cooperation, gobs of investment capital, a slew of
technological breakthroughs, and about 25-50 years of peace and prosperity to implement the changes, we might be able to produce the energy equivalent of 3-4 billion barrels of oil from alternative sources. That is about as much oil as the entire world consumed per year prior to World War II! But it is only about 10 percent of what we need currently, and an even smaller percentage of what we will need in the future. Remember more and more people are borne every day and to keep our current economy going we need to produce 250k jobs PER MONTH.
The problem is no combination of alternative forms of energy of them can replace oil, no matter how much we wish they could.
All the optimism, ingenuity, and desire in the world can’t change the fact two
plus two is four.
None of the alternatives can supply us with enough energy to maintain
even a modest fraction of our current consumption levels. Even in the best case scenario, we will have to accept a drastically reduced standard of living.
To survive, we will have to radically change the way we get our food, the way we get to work, what we do for work, the homes we live in, how we plan our families, and what we do for recreation. Dan did you know that each tire on your truck/car has 16qts of oil in it.
Put simply, a transition to these alternatives will require a complete
overhaul of every aspect of modern industrial society. Unfortunately, complex
societies such as ours do not undertake radical changes voluntarily or
preemptively. Nor do they attempt to solve their problems by simplifying or
downsizing things. Instead, as Joseph Tainter explains in The Collapse of
Complex Societies, when faced with large-scale problems, complex societies
(such as ours) tend to gravitate towards increasingly complex solutions, which
ultimately make the original problems much worse.
The fact that alternative energies are incapable of replacing fossil fuels
seems to be an extremely tough pill to swallow for almost everybody except
physicists and engineers. In my experience, everybody else insists that with
enough political will, ingenuity, and elbow grease, we can somehow make the
transition to alternative fuels.
I’m sorry, folks, but we can’t. Without mammoth amounts of fossil fuels,
there is simply no way we can run a society that even comes close to
resembling what we are accustomed to for more than a handful of (super-rich)
people. The physics of renewable energy are absolutely pathetic compared to
the physics of fossil fuels! The numbers just don’t add up, no matter how
much we wish they would.
If you’re thinking of sending me an email telling me to “go to hell”
because you’re positive that, with enough “American ingenuity,” alternative
energies can take the place of fossil fuels, don’t bother. Filling my inbox with
hate-filled vitriol is not going to change the laws of thermodynamics.
Our economy and the current monetary system:
This is where things start to get scary. In order to understand why, you
need to have a basic understanding of how money and energy interact.
Our monetary system works as long as there is an excess of embodied
energy constantly entering the economy. For the past 500 years, we’ve had a
constantly expanding base of energy with which to fuel our economy.
This excess of embodied energy enabled people to pay interest on their
loans. Paying interest is what keeps the system churning. If there isn’t an
excess of embodied energy entering the system, however, I won’t be able to
find enough extra embodied energy to pay the bank the $6.00 of interest I owe on my $100 loan. The bank then can’t make a new loan to you. You are then unable to buy the hamburger from the local hamburger joint. The hamburger joint then goes out of business and defaults on its loan to the bank.
The bank is then unable to make loans to other people. These people are then unable to buy goods and services or pay their employees. The process just keeps compounding itself until the whole system dissolves.
The whole process resembles dominoes precariously arranged in
constantly enlarging, interconnecting circles. The larger the circles get, the
more dangerous the system becomes. Why won’t miraculous developments in alternative energy prevent this system from collapsing? It’s simple: once interest is charged, a perpetual growth machine is created. This perpetual growth machine requires an energy supply that is constantly expanding. Once the energy supply stops expanding, the machine implodes.
Why aren’t the experts and governments addressing this issue?
As you can see, dealing with the oil crisis requires much more than just
finding a replacement for oil. It requires replacing a growth-based monetary
system with a steady-state system. Few people in the modern world have any
experience implementing or dealing with such a system. None of the so-called
“experts” you see on television or read in the papers have any idea how to
address this. Naturally, they can’t bring themselves to admit they have no idea
how to handle this problem, so they simply deny its existence.
I firmly believe the collapse of modern economics will precede the
collapse of the oil supply. Once the banks realize energy production is
peaking, it’s “game over,” because everybody in the banking world knows
without excess energy the whole system collapses.
One of the reasons governments cannot bring themselves to plan or
prepare for the oil shortage is because they understand the enormity of the problem.
On the other hand, people who insist governments address the shortage by
launching super-sized alternative energy programs are, most often, clueless.
Fine, but what if space aliens or angels come
down and give us an alternative source of
energy that easily replaces oil and can supply
a constantly increasing amount of energy?
Wouldn’t that prevent a collapse?
No.
The US dollar is the reserve currency for all oil transactions in the world,
hence the term “petrodollar.” In short, this means that whenever anybody buys
oil, anywhere in the world, they have to pay with dollars. Thus, the wealth
from all oil transactions cycles into the US economy. The strength of the US
economy is now entirely dependant on the strength of the petrodollar as the
US manufacturing and industrial base has been dismantled and shipped to
China, India, Mexico, and the Philippines. The petrodollar is one of the few
things we have left with which to support our economy.
If such an alternative source of energy came online, oil purchases would
drop, the petrodollar would collapse, and the US would descend into
economic anarchy. The US would react (probably preemptively) to the
widespread implementation of this alternative by plunging the world into a
series of currency-wars unlike anything we have ever imagined.
If you wondered why the Bush administration was so amazingly
determined to go to war, now you know: according to the map they are
reading from, we’re going to be fighting oil wars, currency wars, or both.
Unfortunately, the US is truly wedded to oil, with little possibility of an
annulment or divorce. As they say, “till death do us part.”
Sure you say their are plenty of oil fields yet to come online. Well...
According to a January 2004 report in Petroleum Review, the
discovery rate for mega projects (those which contain more than 500
million barrels or about a one week supply) has now dwindled to
nothing. In 2000, 16 mega projects were discovered. In 2001 there
were 8 new discoveries. In 2002 there were 3 new discoveries. In
2003, there were NONE. What does that tell you???