Gasoline Prices

[AKsuited]

Keystone pipeline would have no effect on US gas prices. That oil would have been destined for export, not US refineries. Project cancellation is a political red herring.

Not so.

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/k...l-pipeline.asp

The Keystone XL pipeline was to transport oil from Alberta, Canada, to refineries in the United States.

Harry

[rangerreece]

Not so.

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/k...l-pipeline.asp

The Keystone XL pipeline was to transport oil from Alberta, Canada, to refineries in the United States.

Harry

You know...

If you start obfuscating the narrative with obvious facts on social media, your going to piss a lot of people off. Stop that!

[rangerreece]

At the risk of diving head first into the empty political pool... I am in fact legitimately confused about something. I am not understanding, how anyone that owns an expensive internal combustion engine on a BMW motorcycle, and belongs to an affinity group that celebrates and supports riding this form of technology, would advocate or support clearly stated policies and mandates that would eliminate the use of that technology. Is it madness?

If a zero emissions viable option was available, I would throw a leg over it in a heartbeat, but decades of development, and billions of dollars later, even Ewan and Charlie still have to drive a Mexican bongo bus through half of Latin America, claim it’s for “security” reasons, just to accomplish their time line and destination goal.

When gas prices, fines, and fees make riding for any reason, even commuting, so untenable, with no viable alternative waiting in the wings, how will this enhance our lives... or specifically, for us... our club?

[BC1100S]

At the risk of diving head first into the empty political pool... I am in fact legitimately confused about something. I am not understanding, how anyone that owns an expensive internal combustion engine on a BMW motorcycle, and belongs to an affinity group that celebrates and supports riding this form of technology, would advocate or support clearly stated policies and mandates that would eliminate the use of that technology. Is it madness?

It is possible to be an enthusiast and supporter of one thing while also being a supporter of another. Supporting one position does not mean one must exclude all others.
i. e. It is possible to be a gun enthusiast while still supporting measured gun control policies. It is possible to support wearing helmets while still supporting freedom to choose.

Further, technology development doesn't happen overnight. One must support current technologies in order to advance to better ones. I would opine that the electric cars and motorcycles made now are much better than they were 10 years ago. I know the battery in my phone lasts about 10 times longer than the 45 minutes it lasted in 2001.

Carry on......

[jr31]

It is possible to be an enthusiast and supporter of one thing while also being a supporter of another. Supporting one position does not mean one must exclude all others.
i. e. It is possible to be a gun enthusiast while still supporting measured gun control policies. It is possible to support wearing helmets while still supporting freedom to choose.

Further, technology development doesn't happen overnight. One must support current technologies in order to advance to better ones. I would opine that the electric cars and motorcycles made now are much better than they were 10 years ago. I know the battery in my phone lasts about 10 times longer than the 45 minutes it lasted in 2001.

Carry on......

Not really. Or not explicitly, anyway.

Supporting one position while eroding that position with regulation (NOT market activity) is neither support nor enthusiasm.

Want better electric car tech? Buy an electric car. Cannibalizing an existing, functional, and beneficial market (e.g., internal combustion) with regulation, credits, fees, offsets, virtue-signaling, or whatever, is certainly an approach; it’s just going to have a much more severe and totally artificial (inorganic) impact on the market you’re cannibalizing. You still can’t have your cake and eat it too.

As far as gun control (which is code for something other than gun control), that’s a simple no. One either supports the RKBA or not. Same with speech (INCLUDING objectionable time and place restrictions). “Gun control” begins at home. Don’t want one? Don’t get one.

Same operating premise as helmets. Supporting the CHOICE to wear a helmet is the opposite of supporting legislation to ensure people make the “right” choice. I wouldn’t ride a bike without a helmet if you paid me. Everyone should feel free to wear a helmet or not. What they should not do is expect someone else to pay for their medical care costs, including those incurred by making the arguably dumb decision not to wear one. But there again, big G demands we should be our brother’s keeper and that everyone should be admitted to a hospital in an emergency and receive care, irrespective of having what it takes (i.e., money) to compensate the service provider (e.g., hospital) for that service. That won’t work unless you force payment by another. If that other chooses not to pay, they’re going to jail. And if they resist going to jail for not paying, they’re going to get dead (faster with convenient “gun control”). That’s extortion.

[jr31]

As far as phones and tech go, how much money was Apple and Google making on each conventional phone sale while they were displacing that market? I think none. That was organic (or far more). Could have been that way with electric cars too, but instead, we have Mama Government telling us WTF to do. Great.

[BC1100S]

Ok, ok, we get it - you don't like government.

[Omega Man]

You guys need to watch the political ranting.
OM

[jr31]

You guys need to watch the political ranting.
OM

Apolitically, gas prices would be much more stable and lower.

[Motodan]

I do believe this thread mirrors that of the Livery Stable Blacksmiths Association's dialog of 1898. Change can be difficult for some, regardless the prevailing system.

[PGlaves]

OPEC+ is meeting right about now to decide whether and how much to restrict or not restrict their global crude oil production. Once the results of these decisions combine with the production of non-OPEC nations the short term global supply of crude oil will be known. The varying price of crude oil will combine with the estimates of global demand to fine tune momentary refinery capacity and activity in the United States and in other countries across the globe. Then US refined products become split between those planned to be exported and those retained in the market for domestic sale and consumption depending on price and transportation competition among the refining countries. Then the various products of refining: petrochemicals, toluene, kerosene, home heating oil, aviation fuel, diesel engine fuel, gasoline, and other refinery products will vary depending on their individual demand and pricing from the consumers and competing refiners. Add in transportation costs, station overhead costs, the variation in state and local taxes and the competitive prices for soft drinks and convenience store food and you get an approximation of what gas prices will be. Good luck.

[rangerreece]

I do believe this thread mirrors that of the Livery Stable Blacksmiths Association's dialog of 1898. Change can be difficult for some, regardless the prevailing system.

This actually demonstrates the converse of my question; (thanks for posting that). When the last cultural and technological revolution occurred, the technology replacing horses and carriages was far superior than the “current and present” option at that time. Government and industry only had to change prevailing paradigms. (People still ride horses to this day, no one is preventing Amish or Mennonites, or equestrian enthusiasts from using/owning horses.)

For an electric motorcycle to replace my current option it would have to have the following capabilities:

-300 mile range
-60 second recharge for less than $18
-Capable of maintaining speeds of 90 mph or greater (capabilities not legal speed limit) while carrying a passenger and full luggage.
-200,000 miles per unit before replacement.
-Affordable on my income. (Middle class)
-Low maintenance costs (I think the electric bikes may have a leg up on this one already)

If there is an electric option out there that can meet these milestones could someone point me in the right direction?

And, while I’m thinking about it... wasn’t unleaded gas and catalytic converters supposed to fix the emission problems back in the 80’s? (Both used by my current ride).

And if personal transportation is replaced by less capable electric options will the government apply the same standards to:

Helicopters, planes... all planes commercial and military, tanks, Jeep’s, warships, (non nuclear) president’s motorcade, Air Force One, Air Force Two, etc. etc. etc. and... to make this work we literally have to force every other nation to adopt a zero emission policy too.

Gas prices are going up, it’s only going to hurt the low income working American... and affinity clubs oriented around ICE vehicles.

Based on the explanations given to my question, I’m sticking with madness as the only rational explanation; barring a pending logical explanation.

And again, just a reminder, I would buy an electric bike today if it could “replace” my current option or even come close. Remember in Jurassic Park, when the grandchildren needed to be rescued, the grandfather ensured gas powered Jeep’s were on hand to save the day... and helicopters.

[Omega Man]

All this “green” or energy saving gas price increasing/decreasing may have to be first figured out how to be done without crossing an ocean-

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-43714029

OM

[jr31]

This actually demonstrates the converse of my question; (thanks for posting that). When the last cultural and technological revolution occurred, the technology replacing horses and carriages was far superior than the “current and present” option at that time. Government and industry only had to change prevailing paradigms. (People still ride horses to this day, no one is preventing Amish or Mennonites, or equestrian enthusiasts from using/owning horses.)

For an electric motorcycle to replace my current option it would have to have the following capabilities:

-300 mile range
-60 second recharge for less than $18
-Capable of maintaining speeds of 90 mph or greater (capabilities not legal speed limit) while carrying a passenger and full luggage.
-200,000 miles per unit before replacement.
-Affordable on my income. (Middle class)
-Low maintenance costs (I think the electric bikes may have a leg up on this one already)

If there is an electric option out there that can meet these milestones could someone point me in the right direction?

And, while I’m thinking about it... wasn’t unleaded gas and catalytic converters supposed to fix the emission problems back in the 80’s? (Both used by my current ride).

And if personal transportation is replaced by less capable electric options will the government apply the same standards to:

Helicopters, planes... all planes commercial and military, tanks, Jeep’s, warships, (non nuclear) president’s motorcade, Air Force One, Air Force Two, etc. etc. etc. and... to make this work we literally have to force every other nation to adopt a zero emission policy too.

Gas prices are going up, it’s only going to hurt the low income working American... and affinity clubs oriented around ICE vehicles.

Based on the explanations given to my question, I’m sticking with madness as the only rational explanation; barring a pending logical explanation.

And again, just a reminder, I would buy an electric bike today if it could “replace” my current option or even come close. Remember in Jurassic Park, when the grandchildren needed to be rescued, the grandfather ensured gas powered Jeep’s were on hand to save the day... and helicopters.

Nice.