27 cents a mile

Page 1 of 5  
Bought some gasoline. Divide the numbers. Turns out to be about 27 cents a mile, to make my 18 MPG truck move. Ouch!!!!!
Won't be doing much home repairing, if I have to go for parts.
Christopher A. Young Learn more about Jesus www.lds.org .
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sunday, October 7, 2012 7:59:30 PM UTC-4, Stormin Mormon wrote:

I'd rather pay the 27 cents as opposed to carrying all my tools and supplies for a mile on foot.

Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
As with every business, the only options include driving less, or rasing prices.
Christopher A. Young Learn more about Jesus www.lds.org .
On Sunday, October 7, 2012 7:59:30 PM UTC-4, Stormin Mormon wrote:

I'd rather pay the 27 cents as opposed to carrying all my tools and supplies for a mile on foot.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Oct 8, 4:24 am, "Stormin Mormon"

9mpg???!! Get a properly designed truck instead of American shit, Or even a diesel engined one. That's the sort of mileage you get from a truck that carries 16 tons in Europe.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Monday, October 8, 2012 9:19:17 AM UTC-4, harry wrote:
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 10/8/2012 8:51 AM, Pavel314 wrote:

Harry as usual has no clew... :(
'98 Chebby 2500 4x4 8-ft 5.3L gets 15-18 on hard roads; the '99 1500 SB 2WD does better but it's just the 5.0L, too...
What goes for a PU over there generally is a toy over here...and, of course, absolute mileage numbers any more are affected on the mpg basis by the percentage of ethanol owing to the lower Btu content/unit volume.
--
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Will you be voting against the $5.00 gasoline president we now have? The one who used executive order to prevent drilling for oil?
Christopher A. Young Learn more about Jesus www.lds.org .
I have a 2008 F-150 with a V-6 and automatic trans that gets around 14, but I rarely carry heavy loads.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I really think you should read a bit before spouting off like that. The current problem in CA is because of refinery problems the REFINERIES are having. Has nothing whatsoever to do with Obama. Other problems are with pipelines that "suddenly" have such diminished capacity that oil stacks up in OK and cannot reach the refineries it is supposed to go to. Some of that has to do with a fairly small portion of the Keystone system, and now Indian tribes are in an uproar because of attempted eminent domain expropriation of their lands. Really funny how all those things suddenly pop up just before elections ...
--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The current problem in CA is a refinery issue but gas doubling in Obama's term has nothing to do with power outages or fires in CA. Remember, he *wants* $4 gas.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload


So happy you have a direct line to Obama's plans ... (that was sarcasm).
Any president who really, really wants energy to be expensive is out of his mind. Any president who wants energy costs to reflect all the expenses, and lets different forms of energy compete on a level playing field, is doing the world (not just the US) a favor.
--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

If you stupid lefties would only listen, he'll tell you what he wants to do. You can't listen any better than you can read, or think, though.

Yet you vote for him anyway.

Idiot.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The thinking among some on the left is if you make fossil fuels artificially higher in price while you funnel massive government subsidies into alternative energy they will start to look financially feasible.
We hear a lot about the $2 billion that oil gets in tax breaks but they don't like to talk about the $90 billion wind and solar get in breaks and subsidies..
Obama has sad many times this is his policy.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Oct 8, 8:56 pm, snipped-for-privacy@aol.com wrote:

OIL is making huge profits historically.......
wind and solar have yet to be profitable
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The "subsidies" are normal accounting. Not that this is an excuse to keep them but it's really the small companies who bare a huge risk that get them.

A good reason to abandon them, commercially anyway.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@aol.com writes:

Yep, Obama has this crazy notion that wind and solar are renewable resources that can reduce _some_ of our dependency on fossil fuels.
What a cut up.
He tried to subsidize one of our solar panel makers, but couldn't out do the Chinese.
Still, I see more and more solar panels where I live.
Pretty cool, and money better spent than buying more military hardware or subsidizing some foreign country to buy more of our weapons.
--
Dan Espen

Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

It can't work, so it is a rather stupid idea.

Solyndra was a *dumb* idea that never would have attracted private financing. The Chinese have little to do with it.

I saw more and more solar panels twenty-five years ago. Stupid people are timeless and everywhere.

Fool.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Most of that is the government subsidy. I keep looking at solar here, trying to make it a reasonable pay back time. When Florida was giving me 4 bucks a watt and the feds were giving me 30% it seemed almost reasonable (8-9 year payoff) but Florida ran out of money and the deal was gone before I could order it.
Collectors are getting cheaper now so I am looking again. I do believe it will work eventually. Unfortunately all of those people who bought $8 a watt collectors will never see a payoff.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Cheap fuel has led to it being wasted. (By the likes of stupid vehicles in the USA) Once it's gone, it's gone. It really needs to be $8/ gallon.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Han wrote:

Absolutely. Let's "level the playing field" by eliminating all subsidies for so-called "green energy." Heck, just yesterday a firm that got $150 million grant to develop batteries furloughed all its workers.
Japan learned two decades ago that when the government begins picking winners and losers, the only pick losers.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

at the height of the gulf oil spill few would of wanted drilling in their area. dont forget the coastal areas are major tourism draws, tourism crashed during the spill......
the value of tourism is way more than some wells
obama gets blamed for way too much......
and romney made his bucks exporting jobs overseas, is that the kinda president we need??
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.