Jump to content
Create New...
  • 💬 Join the Conversation

    CnG Logo SQ 2023 RedBlue FavIcon300w.png
    Since 2001, Cheers & Gears has been the go-to hub for automotive enthusiasts. Join today to access our vibrant forums, upload your vehicle to the Garage, and connect with fellow gearheads around the world.

     

  • Blake Noble
    Blake Noble

    Gas prices to hit $4 mark this Spring

    G. Noble

    Editor/Reporter

    CheersandGears.com

    Friday, 10th February, 2012

    If you're waiting for the sting of high gas prices to go away soon, you may be in for one hell of a long wait. Gas prices are back at a national average of $3.48 a gallon -- a whole 36 cents more than the average during February of last year -- and are set to climb an entire 60 cents or more by May.

    Tom Kloza of the Oil Price Information service expects prices to top out at $4.05 a gallon, although some markets could see prices go even further beyond that. "I think it's going to be a chaotic spring, with huge price increases in some places," said Kloza.

    Of course, gas prices do tend to rise somewhat going into the warmer months because of increased demand. Refiners also switch to seasonal formulas which can tack on an extra 15 cents a gallon according to Brian Milne of Televent DTN, an energy tracking service.

    It's been about five years since we last witnessed national average prices reach these levels. In 2008, average prices climbed to a record-setting $4.11 a gallon. We came dangerously close to toppling that record last April with the national average going up to $3.98, but prices starting dropping soon thereafter.

    With the current economic climate in the U.S. unstable, we can't help but to wonder what effects these near record prices will ultimately bare.

    Source: USA Today

    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments

    we have an economy/nation built on debt...selling to ourselves will only propagate this debt, once prices rocket, our remaining wealth that has been made will leave quickly, and what we have left will only be what we haven't taken from the land yet, or that can't leave/move in an efficient manner.

    i see another +10% increase in commodity prices coming.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Stupid. No reason for it. At least if it happens and things continue to go well @ work, I'll be driving a company econobox 4 days back and forth, then break out the Jeep the other 3 days... which will prevent me from panicking unnecessarily and trading it for something I really do not want.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Hahaha so true Olds he can't do a thing but open strategic oil reserves to lower gas by just a few tenths. Meanwhile the Iranians can raise havoc with just 2 or 3 PT boats. But if it goes up very high it'll sink him.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I wonder how much of it is psychological though (my guess is a lot) I drive a 14mpg car and fill up 3 - 4 times a month. So at most this is a $36 increase per month in my fuel costs. For someone driving a Cruze Eco, the difference in fuel costs per month are about $10.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    It's OK though, even at $5/gallon, he could afford to drive that "sick" GT500 he tried out at the D.C. Auto Show.

    I did think it was a cool thing to do when he only visited displays of the Big 3 and snubbed foreign brands... haha they were pissed.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I wonder how much of it is psychological though (my guess is a lot) I drive a 14mpg car and fill up 3 - 4 times a month. So at most this is a $36 increase per month in my fuel costs. For someone driving a Cruze Eco, the difference in fuel costs per month are about $10.

    Let's see, I drive an SUV that gets 16-18mpg and I fill up once a week....so at $3/gallon it's about $45/week, $4/gallon it's about $60/week....$15 difference...about 3 cups of coffee. Not a big deal to me.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Predictions of gas prices beyond a week or so have been about as accurate as weather predictions beyond a week or so. How many articles can we look up that would say we should be at $5+/gal or more by now?

    • Agree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Personally We need to demand that the government take away the speculation that Ex Prez Bush allowed. Speculation in oil and gas is hurting not helping this country. Only a few really get ahead on this.

    Speculation is bad for this country and the world. We do not need to have the rich few use the stock market as their own personal gambling casino.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Yeah we gotta wake up to China's growing demand, soon the world production will be eclipsed by demand. No matter how much reserves we have they will not stay within our borders it will be sold to the highest bidders. We do need a strategic national energy policy and very soon lest we end up with future collapse and Martial Law.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    It gets hard to be a car lover when it starts to get hard to afford them..

    And since the government won't step in- the talk about 5 dollar gas is very real.....

    Just build a woodgasifier and start driving around for free.

    I foresee the gas price spector coming up everytime our economy starts to move in the right direction... and then stumbling... ripples in China/Inda... gas falling slightly... economy ramping up... China/India economy ramping up... gas prices go up... economy stumbling cycle for quite some time, at least until we can uncouple our economy from the problem. I'm not suggesting getting off gasoline, but some other solution.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites



    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Support Real Automotive Journalism

    Cheers and Gears Logo

    Since 2001, Cheers & Gears has delivered real content and honest opinions — not emotionless AI output or manufacturer-filtered fluff.

    If you value independent voices and authentic reviews, consider subscribing. Plans start at just $2.25/month, and paid members enjoy an ad-light experience.*

    You can view subscription options here.

    *a very limited number of ads contain special coupon deals for our members and will show

  • Posts

    • Personally I think GM is too late to the Hybrid party and rather than spend and write off all the billions of dollars on their EVs that are actually selling well, they should have stayed the course and not followed Stupid Ford and Idiot47. GM has a 'handful of hybrids' coming - but are they the ones you want? I do not see GM actually doing well in this space as they are already too far behind.
    • On a more positive note, travel related stuff ... A historic milestone was achieved by Cunard Line within the last week.  When she was built, Queen Mary 2 (QM2) was too big to transit the Panama Canal.  The same was true for other supersized passenger ships.  In the interim, new larger locks were engineered and put into service. https://travelweekly.com.au/queen-mary-2s-first-transit-through-panama-canal-on-way-to-australia/ I saw the QM2 enter San Francisco Bay in 2007 because I was living out West.  It came in on a Sunday and I spent the weekend south of the city and near SFO.  I went there in a rented 2007 Monte Carlo costing less than $25 a day and stayed at one of the cheap chain hotels near SFO costing about $50 a night, which was ridiculously cheap even then. The ship went around South America and sailed northward up the Pacific.  As such, it's not a trip they would be making too often with the QM2. QM2 transited the Panama Canal for the first time just days ago.  She is headed to Los Angeles AND San Francisco.  To clarify the article's headline, Australia is just its next leg - this is the full world cruise.  She was last in Los Angeles in 2006 when she saluted her namesake Queen Mary and last in San Francisco in 2007 and seeing the passage under the Golden Gate Bridge was unforgettable.  These were the only visits to these ports.  With the new Panama Canal locks, her visiting the North Pacific Ocean and its major ports is much more likely to be on future world voyages. In the Panama Canal transit, the nail biter was supposedly going under the Bridge of the Americas - the one with the curved top.  I saw this YouTube with passengers cheering and motorists up above honking. I blame my parents for this!  They took us across the Atlantic a time or two too many when we were kids and this fascination began.
    • WTF kind of article is this? Piss-poor grammar and sentences. "By the time the odometer ticked past that 160,000 kilometre mark, equivalent to 160,000 kilometres, 99,000, the pack still retained over 90 percent of its original net capacity." Then it jumps to 91% remaining capacity somehow...? And when jumping to 91% capacity remaining, I don't think they did any math at all. See below for a paragraph that shouldn't be made as evidence of anything. As an engineer, this kind of "facts" should infuriate you.  "Battery health statistics can sound abstract until you translate them into the range figure you see on your dashboard. In this case, the Volkswagen ID. 3 Pro S started life with a usable pack of 77 kWh, and independent testing recorded an initial real world range of 77 k and 272 miles on a full charge. After the long term trial, the car still had 91% of its battery capacity, a figure that aligns with separate reporting that the Volkswagen ID 3 retained 91% battery capacity in a 160,000 kilometre test. In practice, that meant the car lost only around eight miles of usable range, a change small enough that you would struggle to notice in daily driving." 272 x .09 = 24.5 miles. Theoretically losing 9% would lose the owner about 25 miles of range, not 8 miles. It is now a 248-mile range EV.  This looks like some garbage AI-generated article.  Just for the record, I'm not saying that EVs don't have good battery management and degradation. I'm just saying this article was an embarrassing example to stand by.
  • Who's Online (See full list)

    • There are no registered users currently online
  • My Clubs

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

Hey there, we noticed you're using an ad-blocker. We're a small site that is supported by ads or subscriptions. We rely on these to pay for server costs and vehicle reviews.  Please consider whitelisting us in your ad-blocker, or if you really like what you see, you can pick up one of our subscriptions for just $1.75 a month or $15 a year. It may not seem like a lot, but it goes a long way to help support real, honest content, that isn't generated by an AI bot.

See you out there.

Drew
Editor-in-Chief

Write what you are looking for and press enter or click the search icon to begin your search