Petrol Price crisis......

[roKWiz]

I would imagine quite a few new caravans will be sitting gathering dust for a while.

[roKWiz]

Originally Posted by Franco Cozzo

Basically all that's going to happen is in 15-20 years time is that Melbourne is going to have an outer slum ring of the reffo suburbs where it's all poorly planned out cheap housing and no services where the 'working poor' exist who have various degrees but can't find work in their fields and work in cash in hand service jobs/gig economy and then the nicer inner parts of Melbourne suburbia where the affluent live and you'll just be one or the other while the 'most liveable city' award only considers the inner 5km radius around the CBD conveniently ignoring the huge hobo camp that Flinders Street Station is.

I'm currently out and about right now in one of the new fledgling reffo suburbs

You mean just like $ydney.

[FTE217]

Originally Posted by naddis01

Wow, unpopular opinion. I guess when you live in the country and don't have the median $600k home loan or have your work/life balance sorted so you don't have to pay childcare then paying a little more for things isn't really noticed.

That's a win for country living.

It applies no matter where you live as a big win once passed those usual young family cost and mortgage burdens (that you deal with anyway for the fam is your fam struggle street or not)......
Lets get it in perspective.

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by kypez

You mean like almost every major city in the world?

Yep, but Melbourne's very own version of the caste system,

I'm currently sitting in the northern suburbs in a massive paddock where there's a housing estate in the works under those high voltage power lines and no rail or freeway infrastructure nearby.

[GASWAGON]

IRs up another .5% this arvo.

Another quick PetrolSpy check is showing some Melbourne western suburbs with 91 @2.39!

[Ben73]

Originally Posted by naddis01

I really don't get the obsession with the petrol price 'crisis'. If you do 15000km/yr @ 13L/100km and the price of fuel goes up by $1/L you will be paying an extra $2000/yr. Are you really going to put your life on hold over an extra $2000? Yeah it sucks paying more and no one wants to pay more than necessary but really...

If any other cost went up by $2000 a year everyone would be blowing up. Even if you can afford it, suddenly paying a lot more for something and getting nothing in return is not what most people will call a good deal.

I haven’t changed how much I drive, but I’m annoyed when I see the price at a service station.

Im looking for the silver lining. I’m hoping these prices will drop the prices of used V8s since I want one. So far there seems to be very little change in prices. Everything is still double the price it was 3 years ago.

Originally Posted by Franco Cozzo

Yep, but Melbourne's very own version of the caste system,

I'm currently sitting in the northern suburbs in a massive paddock where there's a housing estate in the works under those high voltage power lines and no rail or freeway infrastructure nearby.

We need better railways and public transport. This is such a big problem. If you like driving you should like public transport and areas where you don’t need a car for every single task. The less cars on the road the better it is for people driving.

[kevino]

Gee I enjoy your posts Big Damo/Franco.

Your comments about inner city radius 5 km suburbs.

Now in Brisbane these suburbs voted green in the Federal election.

These inner city suburbs get.....

Green pedestrian bridges across the Brisbane river enabling people to walk
Brisbane river fast and slow ferry services.
Improved frequent rail services
Very frequent cheap bus services

Option options dont need to use a car.....

Compared to me in the regions (Gold Coast suburbia)

1.5 km walk to 1 hourly bus service 6am/6pm
9 km drive or 3.3km walk plus bus to rail


Ya gotta love the inner city elite.
They probably dont even buy petrol.

[BENT_8]

Originally Posted by naddis01

I really don't get the obsession with the petrol price 'crisis'. If you do 15000km/yr @ 13L/100km and the price of fuel goes up by $1/L you will be paying an extra $2000/yr. Are you really going to put your life on hold over an extra $2000? Yeah it sucks paying more and no one wants to pay more than necessary but really...

Lol, I understand that you have a Raptor on order and are in denial of just how much more it'll cost to run on 98 compared to your current Ranger but soon enough you'll be looking for that .5c cheaper offering that currently has us mere mortals drawn like moths to light.

[naddis01]

Thanks for your concern but I think I'll be ok.

[BENT_8]

Originally Posted by naddis01

Thanks for your concern but I think I'll be ok.

I genuinely hope so, because when a litre of 98 hits $3+ you wont be able to give it away.

[Sprintey]

Originally Posted by Franco Cozzo

What do you mean 'coming'? There's been big social problems around Melbourne for the past decade, while it continually hides under 'most liveable city' bull**** title, there's been a HUGE increase in the amount of homeless people calling the CBD home in that time, massive amounts of violent crime in the less affluent outer suburbs that no one seemed to notice until it happened in Brighton.

It's probably the death of what was once a much more egalitarian Australian society, that's what you might be seeing.

What replaces it is what you get everywhere else - the big metropolises and their slums. Postwar Australia was apparently quite 'equal' - 1/4 acre blocks, a Holden or Falcon, mum at home, Dad's single wage provided, suburbia. It was apparently boring, so we swapped it for what we have today.

The most liveable city marketing is bull****, for sure. I try to never go into the city unless I absolutely have no choice (like Gandalf said of Mordor). It was very cool to go to Melbourne back in the 90's (they had TISM after all), but more recently I've had clients say their city has changed and they no longer want to live there + corona = hey presto, big moves of many who can to the regional areas.

[Adamz Ghia]

Originally Posted by BENT_8

I genuinely hope so, because when a litre of 98 hits $3+ you wont be able to give it away.

It’s not going to bother him, people who buy Raptors aren’t going to skimp on fuel. Anyway, he doesn’t get it, he’s just looking at the cost of fuel and nothing else, and good in him. If he can afford to ride this out that’s great, no point wishing him to be poorer than he is.

I’m lucky enough to be able to afford to ride this out also, but I also haven’t forgotten where I’ve come from, and I know what this is doing to some people. My mum is single income, pays 40% of her income in rent, so everything going up is kicking her in the backside hard. Lucky she has us three kids to help otherwise she’d be screwed.

[BA-XT]

If you are looking at new cars surely hybrid is the way to go. The Kia Sorento is a large SUV turn as real world fuel economy of 6.5/100km. Range is 1000km.

Petrol is 2.39 here in Wyndham Vale. Thankfully me and my wife only do about 6,000-8,000km a year. The days of 1.50c fuel are gone

[Adamz Ghia]

If the Republicans retake the house and senate in November are they able to increase US oil output over Biden?

[T3rminator]

Brent and WTI back around $100, there are reports it may have dropped below 100, but oilprice.com shows its hovering around $100. Will we see a change at the pumps soon?

And anyone remember how oil price was in negative territory in early 2020? They were paying traders to take it off the tanks at the time

[Bossxr8]

Originally Posted by Adamz Ghia

If the Republicans retake the house and senate in November are they able to increase US oil output over Biden?

I don't think it will have much effect. Unless they can get a big enough majority to be able to pass new laws.

Biden is hell bent on destroying american oil production to pander to the green extremists. If they could pump more oil, prices would come down. But he'd rather say it's all Putins fault, despite oil prices surging months before the invasion. He is going to Saudi Arabia soon to ask them to pump more oil to bring prices down. So having them pump more oil is somehow a win for the green side, because shipping it halfway across the world in a heavily polluting ship is better for the environment than pumping it in the usa.


They will try to counter by saying the oil industry isn't interested in pumping more oil in the usa, but why would they? The biden administration is just putting roadblock after roadblock in front of them, and by them not doing it and oil prices soaring increases their profits, all while turning the consumer against Biden. Win win for them.

[kypez]

Originally Posted by T3rminator

Brent and WTI back around $100, there are reports it may have dropped below 100, but oilprice.com shows its hovering around $100. Will we see a change at the pumps soon?

And anyone remember how oil price was in negative territory in early 2020? They were paying traders to take it off the tanks at the time

Even at Negative prices we paid $1 a litre. Now, with a war to blame things on, the Saudi's need to make up for the time they gave their wares away for free with Interest

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by kypez

Even at Negative prices we paid $1 a litre. Now, with a war to blame things on, the Saudi's need to make up for the time they gave their wares away for free with Interest

Maybe the next Middle Eastern country we need to dispose of its dictatorship, I wouldn't mind having all their resources - for free.

[kypez]

Originally Posted by Franco Cozzo

Maybe the next Middle Eastern country we need to dispose of its dictatorship, I wouldn't mind having all their resources - for free.

Probably better to "free" Venezuela. They sell fuel for about 5 cents a litre there. The Saudis are 10 times that price!

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by kypez

Probably better to "free" Venezuela. They sell fuel for about 5 cents a litre there. The Saudis are 10 times that price!

I'd support it, either one is good to me.

I reckon we could roll Saudi Arabia's government and ice all its elites in 2 weeks tops, make up some excuse like we did for the Iraq war, maybe something about their war in Yemen.

[Bossxr8]

Originally Posted by Franco Cozzo

Maybe the next Middle Eastern country we need to dispose of its dictatorship, I wouldn't mind having all their resources - for free.

The USA had a good relationship with the Saudi's. Until Biden called them murders for killing that journo. Justified, but they won't see it that way and will screw him by not increasing oil supply. He should know not to **** off people who can make life difficult for him.

Apparently he will go over there next week to beg for more oil supply, and they will laugh at his request. No one in the oil industry is going to lift a finger to help someone hell bent on destroying them. High oil prices are a win win for them. They get to reap the profits, all while their enemy is being slaughtered in the polls by americans losing their minds over the price of gas.

Not to mention the Saudi military is chock full of the latest US weaponry they give them. The USA sends billions of dollars of stuff over there, because they use them as the balance of power in the middle east.

[PooDog]

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

I don't think it will have much effect. Unless they can get a big enough majority to be able to pass new laws.

Biden is hell bent on destroying american oil production to pander to the green extremists. If they could pump more oil, prices would come down. But he'd rather say it's all Putins fault, despite oil prices surging months before the invasion. He is going to Saudi Arabia soon to ask them to pump more oil to bring prices down. So having them pump more oil is somehow a win for the green side, because shipping it halfway across the world in a heavily polluting ship is better for the environment than pumping it in the usa.


They will try to counter by saying the oil industry isn't interested in pumping more oil in the usa, but why would they? The biden administration is just putting roadblock after roadblock in front of them, and by them not doing it and oil prices soaring increases their profits, all while turning the consumer against Biden. Win win for them.

You've got to wonder though the longer oil producing countries continue with these inflated prices the more pressure they put on people to buy EV,s and the more incentive for manufacturers to develop more EV,s and each time someone buys an EV that's a customer lost for good ......they're in effect sh#tting in their own nest

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

The USA had a good relationship with the Saudi's. Until Biden called them murders for killing that journo. Justified, but they won't see it that way and will screw him by not increasing oil supply. He should know not to **** off people who can make life difficult for him.

Apparently he will go over there next week to beg for more oil supply, and they will laugh at his request. No one in the oil industry is going to lift a finger to help someone hell bent on destroying them. High oil prices are a win win for them. They get to reap the profits, all while their enemy is being slaughtered in the polls by americans losing their minds over the price of gas.

Not to mention the Saudi military is chock full of the latest US weaponry they give them.

Saudi Arabia is 'our man' in the Middle East, they're the one the West backs against Iran, those two are the oil rich superpowers of the Middle East, who both hate each other and fight proxy wars against each other hosted by all those other ****ty Middle Eastern countries.

They're also the ones who lots of the 9/11 hijackers came from, go figure.

They sell us oil, they buy our weapons, in return we let them keep their little 'kingdom' where they oppress their own population.

They aren't holding up their end of the bargain IMO, even if they have American weapons doesn't mean they know how to use them and they won't be as motivated to fight like Ukrainians are, they'll all hop on boats and try head to the first Western country with social welfare programs like the UK, it'll be the same as Afghanistan when the Taliban rocked up after the West pulled out, they all dumped their guns and ran for the airport begging to be taken away

Vote 1 Franco - bringing cost of living down

[Bossxr8]

Originally Posted by PooDog

You've got to wonder though the longer oil producing countries continue with these inflated prices the more pressure they put on people to buy EV,s and the more incentive for manufacturers to develop more EV,s and each time someone buys an EV that's a customer lost for good ......they're in effect sh#tting in their own nest

Yeah it's an interesting strategy. In one way it's just going to accelerate the decline in oil consumption. On the other hand, they can afford to do it for a while at least, because the total global car park of vehicles would probably be what, 99% internal combustion?

How many years will it take for EV's to become more predominant than ICE? 2-3 decades?

[Bossxr8]

Originally Posted by Franco Cozzo

Saudi Arabia is 'our man' in the Middle East, they're the one the West backs against Iran, those two are the oil rich superpowers of the Middle East, who both hate each other and fight proxy wars against each other hosted by all those other ****ty Middle Eastern countries.

They're also the ones who lots of the 9/11 hijackers came from, go figure.

They sell us oil, they buy our weapons, in return we let them keep their little 'kingdom' where they oppress their own population.

They aren't holding up their end of the bargain IMO, even if they have American weapons doesn't mean they know how to use them and they won't be as motivated to fight like Ukrainians are, they'll all hop on boats and try head to the first Western country with social welfare programs like the UK, it'll be the same as Afghanistan when the Taliban rocked up after the West pulled out, they all dumped their guns and ran for the airport begging to be taken away

Vote 1 Franco - bringing cost of living down

It used to be a US President had the power to get them to increase supply. Not this time round though. They see Biden as an absolute clown, with his destructive New Green Deal plan that was completely insane.

[Polyal]

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

It used to be a US President had the power to get them to increase supply. Not this time round though. They see Biden as an absolute clown, with his destructive New Green Deal plan that was completely insane.

Why on gods name should it be in the hands of one person, whether Biden, Trump, that other clown Borris etc

[GasoLane]

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

It used to be a US President had the power to get them to increase supply. Not this time round though. They see Biden as an absolute clown, with his destructive New Green Deal plan that was completely insane.

I realise that Biden is not on your Christmas card list, neither is Snopes (if you can point me to a better investigative source I'd be grateful) but you could at least check a few things before going off on a rant.

(And no, Biden is not my favourite US President, but he's got to be better than the other option at the time.)


Newsweek reported:

Brett Hartl, the government affairs director at the Center for Biological Diversity, also noted more drilling permits were approved in the first year of Biden’s presidency than during his predecessor’s first 365 days.
The center found the Biden administration approved 3,557 permits for oil and gas drilling on public lands last year, outpacing the Trump administration’s first-year total of 2,658.

“As an environmentalist, I wish the administration would crack down on fossil fuel drilling much, much more,” Hartl told Newsweek. “I think in the long run, it’s super harmful.
But it’s just not factually accurate for the industry to complain, ‘We’re so helpless’ when they’ve been given a huge green light over the last year and they’re sitting on thousands and thousands of permits to drill. What are they waiting for?”
https://www.newsweek.com/have-biden-...uction-1686104


CBS News.

"U.S. producers reluctant to drill more oil, despite sky-high gas prices" https://www.cbsnews.com/news/oil-pro...as-fed-survey/


Associated Press

"Biden tells oil refiners: Produce more gas, fewer profits" https://apnews.com/article/russia-uk...62635a9a65364c

[Sprintey]

Oil copped a wedgie of 9% or so overnight, on recession fears.

We are trying to recession our way into blissful low prices lol

[Bossxr8]

Originally Posted by GasoLane

I realise that Biden is not on your Christmas card list, neither is Snopes (if you can point me to a better investigative source I'd be grateful) but you could at least check a few things before going off on a rant.

(And no, Biden is not my favourite US President, but he's got to be better than the other option at the time.)


Newsweek reported:

Brett Hartl, the government affairs director at the Center for Biological Diversity, also noted more drilling permits were approved in the first year of Biden’s presidency than during his predecessor’s first 365 days.
The center found the Biden administration approved 3,557 permits for oil and gas drilling on public lands last year, outpacing the Trump administration’s first-year total of 2,658.

“As an environmentalist, I wish the administration would crack down on fossil fuel drilling much, much more,” Hartl told Newsweek. “I think in the long run, it’s super harmful.
But it’s just not factually accurate for the industry to complain, ‘We’re so helpless’ when they’ve been given a huge green light over the last year and they’re sitting on thousands and thousands of permits to drill. What are they waiting for?”
https://www.newsweek.com/have-biden-...uction-1686104


CBS News.

"U.S. producers reluctant to drill more oil, despite sky-high gas prices" https://www.cbsnews.com/news/oil-pro...as-fed-survey/


Associated Press

"Biden tells oil refiners: Produce more gas, fewer profits" https://apnews.com/article/russia-uk...62635a9a65364c

https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidbl...h=7bac64f21b89




During an interview with Brazil’s Agencia Estadio news service this week, I told the reporter that one of the reasons why I characterized the Biden energy policies as “confused” in a recent story is because we so often see the President saying one thing in public as his appointees in the federal bureaucracy are doing the opposite. We have seen this phenomenon take place repeatedly this year, as Mr. Biden has frequently called for the domestic industry to produce more oil and gas, refine more gasoline and ramp up exports of liquefied natural gas to Europe, while his agencies continue to hold up permitting, issue restrictive new regulations, and issue rulings that directly inhibit companies’ ability to get their business done.

It happened again this week, when the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced it may soon issue a ruling declaring that vast parts of the Permian Basin are in “non-attainment” status under the agency’s ozone regulations. If such a declaration is made, it will constitute a direct governmental assault on what is by far America’s most active and productive oil-producing region and its second most-productive natural gas area. The Permian currently accounts for fully 43% of total U.S. daily oil production and is home to almost 40% of the nation’s active drilling rigs according to the Enverus daily rig count.

Thursday’s decision by the Supreme Court of the United States in the West Virginia v. EPA case is not expected to impact the agency’s ability to set standards on ozone levels and enforce them. If anything, it seems likely the agency, at least under a Biden presidency, will seek to become more aggressive in this realm as a backdoor means of continuing to force coal-fired power plants out of business and, as in this case, hamper the domestic oil and gas industry.

PROMOTED




Placing the Permian Basin in non-attainment status would force a significant reduction in the region’s rig count, severely limiting the domestic industry’s efforts to increase U.S. oil production at a time when the global oil market is already severely under-supplied. Thus, while the President claims to want to “work like the devil” to lower gasoline prices and Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm claims Mr. Biden is “using every tool” at his disposal to do so, the EPA is working to create the exact opposite impact.

The EPA’s announcement comes just a week after Secretary Granholm summoned a group of refining company CEOs to Washington, D.C. where she urged them to somehow increase their refining efforts, despite the fact that her own Energy Information Administration (EIA) reports that the industry is already running at a historically high 95% capacity. It also comes after both Granholm and the President himself have repeatedly called for the domestic industry to increase production levels of oil and gas to try to mitigate high prices for gasoline and diesel at the pump.


So, which is official administration policy? Does President Biden want more oil production and more gasoline to be refined from it, or are the actions by his agencies, now directly targeting the nation’s most prolific oil-producing region, his real goal?

To Texas Governor Greg Abbott, the answer seems obvious. “The EPA’s process could interfere in the production of oil in Texas which could lead to skyrocketing prices at the pump by reducing production, increase the cost of that production, or do both,” The Governor wrote Biden this week. “Your administration’s announced action is completely discretionary. Thus, you have the power to stop it.”


Governor Abbott is correct to point out that the President has the power to rein his regulators in, but, as the Wall Street Journal points out, Mr. Biden appointed Joe Goffman, another of the many anti-fossil fuel activists that now hold senior posts at his various agencies, to head up EPA’s Office of Air and Radiation on an acting basis. That appointment might have been made with this specific policy action in mind.

So, here we have a crystal clear example of a “tool” that Mr. Biden has available to him to positively impact consumer costs on gasoline. All he has to do is issue an order instructing Mr. Goffman and the EPA to stand down. The clear history of this presidency indicates no one should hold their breath waiting for that to happen.

This is the Biden Green New Deal plan, and high prices at the pump are a fundamental piece of it.





He says one thing, while actively working to block the oil industry on the other hand. This is widely know, I don't know why you keep saying this isn't happening. His actions clearly show he is trying to rid the USA of polluting gas and oil. They oil producers want to drill more, but they continually have roadblocks placed in front of them.

[PooDog]

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

Yeah it's an interesting strategy. In one way it's just going to accelerate the decline in oil consumption. On the other hand, they can afford to do it for a while at least, because the total global car park of vehicles would probably be what, 99% internal combustion?

How many years will it take for EV's to become more predominant than ICE? 2-3 decades?

Yep it's an interesting balance of greed and self preservation.....there's a lot of EV,s coming out in the next year most pretty pricey , these new BYD full EV,s out of China hitting our shores soon don't look to bad and are priced competitively.....it will be interesting to see whether there will be a time when they realize they're losing customers.....oil prices could go the other way?.....who knows, then there's only the greenie governments left to battle with