If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The New York Times)   California requires their own special seasonal blends of gas that aren't the same as what the rest of the country uses, then complains about how high their gas prices are. Oh, and it doesn't help when the local refineries crap out   (nytimes.com) divider line 67
    More: Dumbass, Southern California, gas prices, high taxes, refineries, valero, gasoline, Valero Energy  
•       •       •

7409 clicks; posted to Main » on 07 Oct 2012 at 2:43 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2012-10-07 02:46:56 PM
4 votes:
This, along with other changes, dramatically improved the smog problem in LA.

As a kid, we had smog days at school where we weren't allowed out for PE or recess. You could see the smog hanging in the air. It was awful.

There's still a bit of smog, but it's much better today.
2012-10-07 03:16:31 PM
3 votes:

steamingpile: L.D. Ablo: This, along with other changes, dramatically improved the smog problem in LA.

As a kid, we had smog days at school where we weren't allowed out for PE or recess. You could see the smog hanging in the air. It was awful.

There's still a bit of smog, but it's much better today.

Did you ever stop to think that it may be due to factories being cleaner and nothing to do with car emissions? I know what has been preached to you for over two decades but they could be wrong.


OR(Get this...), it could be BOTH! Yep, car emission requirements sure could have contributed to less smog along with cleaner factories. I know it doesn't fit anybody's Farkgenda™ to have both answers be right, but I can guarantee you that while cleaner factories have helped contribute to less smog, there is no way that you can convince me that having cars burn less fuel, thereby putting less pollutants in the atmosphere isn't helping as well.
2012-10-07 02:56:45 PM
3 votes:
Also, for the most part, the Californians complaining about gas prices are not the same ones who demand gas blends that help control smog. Rather, the gas price complainers are more likely to be the ones saying "Smog schmog, I want my cheap gas!" Or put another way, Orange County.
2012-10-07 07:14:11 PM
2 votes:

badLogic: It cracks me up how people hate on California, I think it is mostly jealousy.


No, it is the batshiat insanery of your politicians and the fact you have 30 million+ people living in a desert draining water from watersheds of other states.
2012-10-07 05:54:50 PM
2 votes:
It cracks me up how people hate on California, I think it is mostly jealousy.
2012-10-07 05:39:06 PM
2 votes:
I say we just give everything south of sacramento back to mexico...
2012-10-07 05:00:50 PM
2 votes:

xl5150: 12349876: You don't know how the other half lives.

Sure I do. The summer after 11th grade my dad made me get a job for the entire summer to show me what it's like to have to work for a living. I had to spend 3 days a week working for $11 an hour (this was the mid 90s, so it was minimum wage back then). It taught me a valuable lesson about the working man, so I resent the remark that I don't know how the other half lives.



No, you don't.

$11 isn't minimum wage now and it sure wasn't back when you were in 11th grade. And you worked 3 days a week? Wow, what a sacrifice.

You're profile says Beverly Hills, it says you've never left CA, and you went to USC. So based on my powers of deduction I'm going out on a limb and say you've had every single opportunity left at your feet by your rich daddy, you probably didn't pay a dime of your own money for your education, and you were hired at a law firm owned by your daddy or one of his friends. You've spent your entire life with other entitled morons in your Beverly Hills bubble and you probably have $100s in parking tickets in a given week yet you try to haggle with cashiers at supermarkets (Whole Foods or Gelsen's)

Assuming you're not a troll you are an incredibly sheltered individual who has ZERO idea "how the other half lives."
2012-10-07 04:08:35 PM
2 votes:

Pray 4 Mojo: This just in:

California sucks.

That is all.


Sorry, can't hear you over the sound of how awesome we are.
2012-10-07 03:53:24 PM
2 votes:

xl5150: 12349876: The federal minimum wage for covered nonexempt employees is $7.25 per hour effective July 24, 2009.

Meh. There's not much you can do with $11 that you can't do with $7.25.


7.25 * 40 hours * 50 weeks = 14,500

11 *40 *50 = 22,000

7,500 a year makes a huge difference.
2012-10-07 03:14:09 PM
2 votes:

stiletto_the_wise: I struggle every two years to pass, because my car is so old


Minnesota dropped its emmission testing some years ago because the fails were almost entirely by the poor and their badly tuned shiat-piles.

Before ending the program, a waiver system was developed to help these folks, until nearly all the results were either a pass or a waiver, so what's the farking point? 

Most of the old testing stations were sold off and turned into quick-lube joints.
2012-10-07 03:08:59 PM
2 votes:
an it also doesn't help that it's an election year, and republicans own alot of the oil companies.
2012-10-07 03:06:44 PM
2 votes:

onyxruby: Why can't we simply have one formula across the country and standardize on it? Get the EPA to approve a formula of blah and leave it at that. This kind of thing is entirely the kind of self wrought insanity that needs to end.


Cause down here in the South, we ain't lettin a bunch of West Coast Lieberals dictate how we can or can't polute our air.

/Freedom!
2012-10-07 02:54:36 PM
2 votes:
Surprisingly, when you have the 9th largest economy in the world, you can affect production and distribution.
2012-10-07 02:54:26 PM
2 votes:

Pray 4 Mojo: This just in:

California sucks.

That is all.


Living in SoCal.

All I can say is:

This is news?

Our governor is nicknamed Moonbeam. The idiots in this state re elected him after he screwed things up in the 70's.
Looking to move out of here as soon as it is practical.
2012-10-07 02:50:47 PM
2 votes:
This just in:

California sucks.

That is all.
2012-10-07 02:49:13 PM
2 votes:
Yep, we're paying for the ability to see more than half a mile and not breathe in carbon particles all day, and it's worth the price. (That is, it's worth the price differential relative to other states.)
2012-10-07 02:47:29 PM
2 votes:
The reason that it is galling right now is that gas is up 75 cents since Monday.
2012-10-08 04:49:51 PM
1 votes:

Pray 4 Mojo: badLogic: Honest Bender: badLogic: It cracks me up how people hate on California, I think it is mostly jealousy.

Envy =/= Jeealousy. They are envious.

I stand corrected. I could not imagine living any where other then Sonoma County, even though I don't really care for wine. I recall reading a few years back that Sonoma has the most moderate weather in the country. Not to hot in the summer and not freezing in the winter.

Are people still posting here?

It's not envy... or jealousy. Odds that are good that I lived in CA longer then either of you... 34 years as a resident... and still work in CA about 90% of my year. I know from experience. It sucks... and it sucks hard.


Well do this 48 year resident, and the state, a favor then and move the fark out and don't come back, As I recall, you're the freeloader that does everything he can to avoid paying his fair share in maintaining the infrastructure here.
2012-10-08 10:35:29 AM
1 votes:

Mikey1969: steamingpile: L.D. Ablo: This, along with other changes, dramatically improved the smog problem in LA.

As a kid, we had smog days at school where we weren't allowed out for PE or recess. You could see the smog hanging in the air. It was awful.

There's still a bit of smog, but it's much better today.

Did you ever stop to think that it may be due to factories being cleaner and nothing to do with car emissions? I know what has been preached to you for over two decades but they could be wrong.

OR(Get this...), it could be BOTH! Yep, car emission requirements sure could have contributed to less smog along with cleaner factories. I know it doesn't fit anybody's Farkgenda™ to have both answers be right, but I can guarantee you that while cleaner factories have helped contribute to less smog, there is no way that you can convince me that having cars burn less fuel, thereby putting less pollutants in the atmosphere isn't helping as well.


ooh... I want in on this...

I bet it's outsourcing manufacturing that solved that California smog problem. Don't believe me? Look at all of the smog where the manufacturers went to... China.

/sweep the problem under the rug, problem solved.
//thanks China for being our rug.
2012-10-07 10:54:07 PM
1 votes:

steamingpile: Did you ever stop to think that it may be due to factories being cleaner and nothing to do with car emissions? I know what has been preached to you for over two decades but they could be wrong.


Other sources have been cleaned up as well. But really, most of it was cars.

xl5150: The population of LA city itself is 3.8 million. Throw in the rest of the metro area around LA and you're closer to 13 million.


Add the San Francisco Bay Area and that's another 7 million, that's 2/3rds the state population right there.

Offhand it seems from reading the papers most of the whining about California gas prices is from out of state.
2012-10-07 10:21:38 PM
1 votes:

ScottRiqui: wildcardjack: I'm trying to separate my income from location so I can take the advice of Tom Waits, which is to spend some time in New York, but leave before it makes you hard, and some time in LA, but leave before it makes you soft.

Wasn't that actually a line from Baz Luhrmann's "Sunscreen"?


"Live in New York City once, but leave before it makes you hard.

Live in Northern California once, but leave before it makes you soft."


Now I have to listen to Tom Waits until I find the reference. See if it's before or after Sunscreen.
2012-10-07 10:04:34 PM
1 votes:

wildcardjack: I'm trying to separate my income from location so I can take the advice of Tom Waits, which is to spend some time in New York, but leave before it makes you hard, and some time in LA, but leave before it makes you soft.


That was San Francisco that makes you soft. LA just makes you pretentious.
2012-10-07 08:58:18 PM
1 votes:
So basically, the 3.8 million people who live in the greater LA area dictate how much the 38,000,000 in the rest of the state pay for gas. Wait a minute... thats 1% and 99% !! Where have I heard this before?
The only pictures I've ever seen of smog in California have been of the LA basin. The smog in LA forced Cali legislature to force the refineries to make special blends to reduce the smog; special blends = higher prices, old refineries = breakdowns = higher prices, therefore LA smog = higher gas $$
I say make the 1%ers pay their fair share!!
Side note, in 2010 I paid $4.85 a gallon in Bridgeport, CA a one horse town in the Eastern Sierras during a hiking trip, no smog there. Seems very unfair.
2012-10-07 08:19:03 PM
1 votes:

xl5150: o5iiawah: $150/week is about $7.500/yr.

Thats a trip to Oktoberfest for 4 days with about $4000 leftover. If you dont want yours, can I has?


I don't think anyone making $7-something an hour will be taking any trips to Oktoberfest. That was precisely my point. For people who make plenty of money, that extra $150 a week is discretionary. For people who are low-wage earners, it's not going to raise them above the level they currently are.


It can if applied smartly. In the real world, we sometimes experience $500-$1,000 setbacks. broken tooth, blown tires, oops phone bill, you name it. What is a nuisance for some who set money aside can be a disaster for a low income earner if they dont have any money in reserve to deal with rainy days. Is $150/wk going to bring someone from poverty into the country club? No, but it gives them breathing room for when life throws curveballs. As long as they arent pissing the money away on booze and lotto tickets, that breathing room can make all the difference between stroking a check and going to a payday lender or pawn shop with the lawnmower.
2012-10-07 08:16:25 PM
1 votes:

Trocadero: jtown: HempHead: Mithiwithi: Minimum: The idiots in this state re elected him after he screwed things up kept Prop 13 from totally screwing things up in the 70's.

What exactly did Jerry Brown screw up in the 70's, anyway?

Ahhhh, yes, Prop 13, allowing Warren Buffet to only pay $300/yr in property taxes for his mansion in Laguna Beach while the state goes broke. 

[www.instablogsimages.com image 585x389]

You realize that Prop 13 helps the non-wealthy far more than the wealthy, right? If Buffet had to pay $300,000/year in property tax on his mansion, he wouldn't even notice. If my grandpa had to pay "adjusted" taxes on his property/home that he bought/built in the early 60s, it would have consumed about 50% of his combined pension and social security income at the peak of the market. Just because he happened to build his house in an area that became very popular after he arrived and helped build it up. How on earth would that have been fair?

If you want people to put down roots and build a community, you can't punish them for creating a community where other people want to live. The increased property values and increased tax base are a direct result of the people who arrived first who created a desirable environment.

Except they extended it to commercial property owned by non-human corporate entities. Yes, it helped out seniors and other fixed income folks immensely, but the unintended side effects have screwed over almost everyone else. There's a reason many towns refuse to zone for housing, which causes scarcity, which raises prices up the wazoo...


You realize that landlords often times pass their property tax bills onto their tenants? If Prop 13 weren't around, tenant's rents would have jumped at least 50% between 2002 and 2008, never mind standard rent increases. That's a formula for disaster for tenants.
2012-10-07 07:52:40 PM
1 votes:

xl5150: An extra $150 a week? What can you really do with that?


$150/week is about $7.500/yr.

Thats a trip to Oktoberfest for 4 days with about $4000 leftover. If you dont want yours, can I has?
2012-10-07 06:26:43 PM
1 votes:

HempHead: Mithiwithi: Minimum: The idiots in this state re elected him after he screwed things up kept Prop 13 from totally screwing things up in the 70's.

What exactly did Jerry Brown screw up in the 70's, anyway?

Ahhhh, yes, Prop 13, allowing Warren Buffet to only pay $300/yr in property taxes for his mansion in Laguna Beach while the state goes broke. 

[www.instablogsimages.com image 585x389]


You realize that Prop 13 helps the non-wealthy far more than the wealthy, right? If Buffet had to pay $300,000/year in property tax on his mansion, he wouldn't even notice. If my grandpa had to pay "adjusted" taxes on his property/home that he bought/built in the early 60s, it would have consumed about 50% of his combined pension and social security income at the peak of the market. Just because he happened to build his house in an area that became very popular after he arrived and helped build it up. How on earth would that have been fair?

If you want people to put down roots and build a community, you can't punish them for creating a community where other people want to live. The increased property values and increased tax base are a direct result of the people who arrived first who created a desirable environment.
2012-10-07 06:11:48 PM
1 votes:
How ironic that a regulation designed by Tree Huggers ends up as profit for oil companies.
2012-10-07 05:26:41 PM
1 votes:
wait until we label monsanto out of our state this election

then wait for us to complain about how expensive non gmo food is
2012-10-07 05:08:26 PM
1 votes:

Minimum: Pray 4 Mojo: This just in:

California sucks.

That is all.

Living in SoCal.

All I can say is:

This is news?

Our governor is nicknamed Moonbeam. The idiots in this state re elected him after he screwed things up in the 70's.
Looking to move out of here as soon as it is practical.


As someone who escaped in '99, I'm rooting for you.

/GET OUT
2012-10-07 05:00:54 PM
1 votes:

onyxruby: drjekel_mrhyde: I think it has something to do with our multiple climates and hilly areas

Would it really be that hard to come up with one blend that worked in urban ares and the rest? Economies of scale dictate that if your only making one thing your going to make it cheaply.

Establish a more environmentally friendly flavor for California and then standardize the nation on that one formula. Everyone wins with a more environmentally friendly blend and cheaper prices as your no longer beholden to artificial monopolies.


STOP

MAKING

SENSE
vpb [TotalFark]
2012-10-07 04:58:42 PM
1 votes:

meintx2001: redlegrick: At the risk of sounding like a no-good, tree-hugging, liberal communist socialist, I can kinda see why California wants to go with electric cars. It's constant and consistent irregardless of the other energy sources used to generate it.

Except for when they hit rollIng brown and black outs. Just wait until the price of electricity jumps up as usage goes up. Like any other fuel, it's price can change.


Even though the rolling blackouts were caused by a price fixing scheme by private power generators and electricity isn't generated using with oil.
2012-10-07 04:56:21 PM
1 votes:

xl5150: 12349876: You don't know how the other half lives.

Sure I do. The summer after 11th grade my dad made me get a job for the entire summer to show me what it's like to have to work for a living. I had to spend 3 days a week working for $11 an hour (this was the mid 90s, so it was minimum wage back then). It taught me a valuable lesson about the working man, so I resent the remark that I don't know how the other half lives.

12349876: I'm in the gas station convenience store from time to time because the big stores don't sell Mountain Dew Throwback, and you'd be surprised how many people are getting gas. One guy the other day used a roll of nickels and a few high value coins to get 5 bucks of gas

Then it's on them to work and make themselves marketable so that they can demand more for their services. I don't feel bad for anyone who sits around moaning about their situation and doesn't do anything to improve it.


...$11 an hour (this was the mid 90s, so it was minimum wage back then)

When was mininum wage EVER $11 an hour???

that is all
2012-10-07 04:34:45 PM
1 votes:

12349876: xl5150: 12349876: On a weekly basis it's 290 vs. 440. That's a 50% difference. Think of how your life would be changed with a 50% pay raise. All of our lives would be changed drastically. Even Mitt Romney's.

My point is that there's not much difference between a pittance and a slightly larger pittance. An extra $150 a week? What can you really do with that? And that comes out to $7500 a year, which is less than I spent on our last weekend trip to Santa Barbara.

You're right, it is more. But my point, which is that it's not a significant amount of money, is also right. I mean, I could offer you a penny and then DOUBLE the offer. Wow! A 100% improvement! Would you be so excited about that too?

Yes. Let's take that money per month. 1160 vs. 1760. Let's assume you're spending 1/3 your income on rent. So that's 385 and 585. I live in a pretty low cost of living area, and even there at 385 you're going to need a roommate/workingspouse or live in the ghetto. At 585, you can live by yourself in a decent safe area. HUGE DIFFERENCE


Give it up. He is a known troll who likes to pose as an unsympathetic person of wealth with no concern for others
2012-10-07 04:17:52 PM
1 votes:

Honest Bender: Pray 4 Mojo: This just in:

California sucks.

That is all.

Sorry, can't hear you over the sound of how awesome we are.


I don't think that's "awesome" you're hearing.

www.femtalks.com
2012-10-07 04:13:33 PM
1 votes:

12349876: Yes. Let's take that money per month. 1160 vs. 1760. Let's assume you're spending 1/3 your income on rent. So that's 385 and 585. I live in a pretty low cost of living area, and even there at 385 you're going to need a roommate/workingspouse or live in the ghetto. At 585, you can live by yourself in a decent safe area. HUGE DIFFERENCE


xl5150 argues just to argue. He does it in every damn thread. I don't think he agrees with a single person ever. Save your breath.
2012-10-07 04:09:24 PM
1 votes:

Pray 4 Mojo: I just bought one of these:

[images.dealerrevs.com image 480x360]

$150 doesn't even fill it up and it gets about 13mpg.

Love it.


But where are the weapons and the push bar? Then it would be worth it.

I use one of these for transportation:

img.photobucket.com

(with titanium trucks and semi-hards) and it costs me an ice coffee, made at home, to power it. Ta-Da!

/no emissions unless I have bean burrito, so bonus!
2012-10-07 04:08:08 PM
1 votes:

xl5150: 12349876: On a weekly basis it's 290 vs. 440. That's a 50% difference. Think of how your life would be changed with a 50% pay raise. All of our lives would be changed drastically. Even Mitt Romney's.

My point is that there's not much difference between a pittance and a slightly larger pittance. An extra $150 a week? What can you really do with that? And that comes out to $7500 a year, which is less than I spent on our last weekend trip to Santa Barbara.

You're right, it is more. But my point, which is that it's not a significant amount of money, is also right. I mean, I could offer you a penny and then DOUBLE the offer. Wow! A 100% improvement! Would you be so excited about that too?


Yes. Let's take that money per month. 1160 vs. 1760. Let's assume you're spending 1/3 your income on rent. So that's 385 and 585. I live in a pretty low cost of living area, and even there at 385 you're going to need a roommate/workingspouse or live in the ghetto. At 585, you can live by yourself in a decent safe area. HUGE DIFFERENCE
2012-10-07 04:07:37 PM
1 votes:

onyxruby: Why can't we simply have one formula across the country and standardize on it? Get the EPA to approve a formula of blah and leave it at that. This kind of thing is entirely the kind of self wrought insanity that needs to end.


I think it has something to do with our multiple climates and hilly areas
2012-10-07 04:00:42 PM
1 votes:

xl5150: 12349876: 7,500 a year makes a huge difference.

Not really. Especially on a week-to-week basis.


On a weekly basis it's 290 vs. 440. That's a 50% difference. Think of how your life would be changed with a 50% pay raise. All of our lives would be changed drastically. Even Mitt Romney's.
2012-10-07 03:46:31 PM
1 votes:

xl5150: $11 an hour (this was the mid 90s, so it was minimum wage back then)


You can't be serious, can you?

The federal minimum wage for covered nonexempt employees is $7.25 per hour effective July 24, 2009.

http://www.dol.gov/dol/topic/wages/minimumwage.htm
2012-10-07 03:39:56 PM
1 votes:

snocone: GodsTumor: Just another reason to get one of these...

[imageshack.us image 276x183]

Yes it is.
Big Coal loves you long time.

/ownership is much less sociopathic


So much this ^. I still don't get how people think electric cars are the answer. Where the f#$* do you think electricity comes from ? Oh yeah that's right Californians don't care because they won't allow new power generation facilities to be built in their state but will import the hell out of PNW hydropower and drive up our prices.
2012-10-07 03:35:27 PM
1 votes:

pedrop357: Given that the vast majority of cars on the road are fuel injected (nearly all are port injected no less) with all the requisite computer control over fueling, why do we need oxygenated fuel at all?

Any car with an oxygen sensor whose feedback is used to control the fueling process adjusts for oxygen density differences continuously. The only thing that oxygenated fuel does for fuel injected cars is cause the computer to increase injector duty cycle (more fuel) to compensate. Some cars have the added benefit of losing top end power because of injectors that are near the edge of their limits with non-oxygenated fuel and simply can't flow more fuel to make up for the extra oxygen.

Maybe someone else can explain how oxygenated fuel makes any emissions difference in any computer controlled fuel system that uses O2 sensor(s) for feedback (probably ~80+% of the cars on the road today).


Or you could look it up. Wouldn't it be crazy if you were connected to a computer network where this kind of information was available at your fingertips?

Try searching under "oxygenated fuel"
2012-10-07 03:34:58 PM
1 votes:

L.D. Ablo: As a kid, we had smog days at school where we weren't allowed out for PE or recess. You could see the smog hanging in the air. It was awful.

I remember those days well. We had to play (without running, so we didn't die of teh azmuh) inside. I'm in NorCal now, so I have to put up with tree pollen and the dreaded cottonwood instead.

steamingpile: L.D. Ablo: Did you ever stop to think that it may be due to factories being cleaner and nothing to do with car emissions? I know what has been preached to you for over two decades but they could be wrong.


My Mother retired from the Air Resources Board. The only job in the US she ever had. Every time they'd manage to give new recommendations to either factories or for car emissions, she'd get death threats as people who were against improving air quality would start handing out the phone numbers for everyone at ARB. It was a combination of factors causing smog and no one wanted to fix it, not the car manufacturers, the drivers of those cars or the factory owners/managers. If the levees are crumbling, you don't patch just one section, you have to do your best to fix everything. Same with air quality and SoCal's smog (which has improved dramatically - I was down there just 4 or 5 months ago and was delighted with the results.)

detroitdoesntsuckthatbad: As a reminder to all Californians considering a move to the north: Oregon is terrible and rains all the time.


You left out the freaky, kid-killing religious extremists known as Oregon City Followers of Christ Church and the occasional former member who will speak out about weird teachings and fatal shenanigans. The relative tolerance of fatal child neglect for "religious freedom" is one of the scariest things about Oregon IMO. I'll stay in Overpriced stuff but year round growing season, no tolerance for "faith healing" that kills others and lovely weather land, thanks.
2012-10-07 03:28:56 PM
1 votes:

xl5150: Meh. It costs me just about $100 to fill each of my (2) cars, and the same is true for both of my wife's cars. To be honest, I don't really notice a fluctuation. Whether it costs $89 one day or $120 another day, it's pretty much the same. I think gas prices would have to get up to about $15 or $20 a gallon if I was really going to notice.


You don't know how the other half lives.

I'm in the gas station convenience store from time to time because the big stores don't sell Mountain Dew Throwback, and you'd be surprised how many people are getting gas. One guy the other day used a roll of nickels and a few high value coins to get 5 bucks of gas. My experience is that those going inside (as opposed to pay at the pump) are more likely to be getting 20 bucks or less than 50 bucks or more.
2012-10-07 03:28:03 PM
1 votes:

iheartscotch: It doesn't help that there hasn't been a new refinery built in the us in at least 30 years; and there's a lot more demand for gas. Not only that; but many refineries have been closed for one reason or another.


Plenty of existing refineries have been expanded since they were built, though. There's no reason to go through the whole rigmarole of environmental impact studies on a new site when there's plenty of room to expand on the existing site.

"Capacity has also been added to existing refineries through upgrades or new construction. The most recent examples include:

* In 1998, Orion Refinery massively upgraded and reopened a refinery in Norco, Louisiana, which was a small, simple refinery that originally opened in 1967. (It is now owned by Valero.)
* Valero opened a "new" and very sophisticated refinery in 1983 in Corpus Christi, Texas, on the site of a simple refinery that originally opened in 1975."

Source
2012-10-07 03:23:56 PM
1 votes:
Meh. It costs me just about $100 to fill each of my (2) cars, and the same is true for both of my wife's cars. To be honest, I don't really notice a fluctuation. Whether it costs $89 one day or $120 another day, it's pretty much the same. I think gas prices would have to get up to about $15 or $20 a gallon if I was really going to notice.
2012-10-07 03:20:14 PM
1 votes:
Why does California have a so called "Winter blend gasoline"? There's no winter here in California.
2012-10-07 03:19:43 PM
1 votes:

The Beatings Will Continue Until Morale Improves: onyxruby: Why can't we simply have one formula across the country and standardize on it? Get the EPA to approve a formula of blah and leave it at that. This kind of thing is entirely the kind of self wrought insanity that needs to end.

People in flyover country don't need the expensive blends that urban areas need because of the amount of vehicle traffic.



onyxruby has a point though, in that it probably wouldn't be as expensive of a blend if it was the only one they made for the US. Now, whether or not that new price was lower than the average paid now for the different blends is a different matter...
2012-10-07 03:19:03 PM
1 votes:

TomD9938: Minnesota dropped its emmission testing some years ago because the fails were almost entirely by the poor and their badly tuned shiat-piles.


Which is my biggest problem with vehicle emissions programs. Apparently being poor means you get to pollute. It's like letting people get waivers to burn their trash in their front yard because garbage service costs too much.
2012-10-07 03:18:55 PM
1 votes:

Mithiwithi: Minimum: The idiots in this state re elected him after he screwed things up kept Prop 13 from totally screwing things up in the 70's.

What exactly did Jerry Brown screw up in the 70's, anyway?


Ahhhh, yes, Prop 13, allowing Warren Buffet to only pay $300/yr in property taxes for his mansion in Laguna Beach while the state goes broke. 

www.instablogsimages.com
2012-10-07 03:17:29 PM
1 votes:

Mithiwithi: Minimum: The idiots in this state re elected him after he screwed things up kept Prop 13 from totally screwing things up in the 70's.

What exactly did Jerry Brown screw up in the 70's, anyway?


Linda Rondstat
2012-10-07 03:15:25 PM
1 votes:

stiletto_the_wise: steamingpile: L.D. Ablo: This, along with other changes, dramatically improved the smog problem in LA.

As a kid, we had smog days at school where we weren't allowed out for PE or recess. You could see the smog hanging in the air. It was awful.

There's still a bit of smog, but it's much better today.

Did you ever stop to think that it may be due to factories being cleaner and nothing to do with car emissions? I know what has been preached to you for over two decades but they could be wrong.

Even if it did have something to do with car emissions (debatable), the smog reduction would have to be attributed to stricter emissions testing, and not gasoline regulations. I struggle every two years to pass, because my car is so old, it was never designed to meet the ridiculous smog figures CA demands.


They run in parallel. Smog comes from unburned hydrocarbons coming from older cars and higher volatility gasoline that has to be avoided in warm weather. Oxidized gasoline also reduces unburned HC. California's blends are some of the most aggressive because of the issues peculiar to their region.
2012-10-07 03:14:59 PM
1 votes:
I'm trying to separate my income from location so I can take the advice of Tom Waits, which is to spend some time in New York, but leave before it makes you hard, and some time in LA, but leave before it makes you soft.
2012-10-07 03:12:53 PM
1 votes:

redlegrick: At the risk of sounding like a no-good, tree-hugging, liberal communist socialist, I can kinda see why California wants to go with electric cars. It's constant and consistent irregardless of the other energy sources used to generate it.


Except for when they hit rollIng brown and black outs. Just wait until the price of electricity jumps up as usage goes up. Like any other fuel, it's price can change.
2012-10-07 03:12:22 PM
1 votes:

GodsTumor: Just another reason to get one of these...

[imageshack.us image 276x183]


Yes it is.
Big Coal loves you long time.

/ownership is much less sociopathic
2012-10-07 03:09:24 PM
1 votes:

onyxruby: Why can't we simply have one formula across the country and standardize on it? Get the EPA to approve a formula of blah and leave it at that. This kind of thing is entirely the kind of self wrought insanity that needs to end.


People in flyover country don't need the expensive blends that urban areas need because of the amount of vehicle traffic.
2012-10-07 03:08:39 PM
1 votes:
It doesn't help that there hasn't been a new refinery built in the us in at least 30 years; and there's a lot more demand for gas. Not only that; but many refineries have been closed for one reason or another.

This is what happens when oil companies yield to the will of the EPA. They see that the price of oil will go up as a consequence of the refinery closing.

Oil is at $89 per barrel; that's less than $2 a gallon. Add in taxes; processing and shipping and a gallon of gas costs anywhere from $2.50 - $2.90 to produce. In some cases; we pay $5 a gallon. Some of that is oil futures; but what is the rest? Pure profit.

/ I know there are other factors; but, most of the remainer is profiteering
2012-10-07 03:06:49 PM
1 votes:

Minimum: Pray 4 Mojo: This just in:

California sucks.

That is all.

Living in SoCal.

All I can say is:

This is news?

Our governor is nicknamed Moonbeam. The idiots in this state re elected him after he screwed things up in the 70's.
Looking to move out of here as soon as it is practical.


I dunno if it's news... I just like saying it.

/California sucks.
2012-10-07 02:58:31 PM
1 votes:
Why can't we simply have one formula across the country and standardize on it? Get the EPA to approve a formula of blah and leave it at that. This kind of thing is entirely the kind of self wrought insanity that needs to end.
2012-10-07 02:56:01 PM
1 votes:

steamingpile: L.D. Ablo: This, along with other changes, dramatically improved the smog problem in LA.

As a kid, we had smog days at school where we weren't allowed out for PE or recess. You could see the smog hanging in the air. It was awful.

There's still a bit of smog, but it's much better today.

Did you ever stop to think that it may be due to factories being cleaner and nothing to do with car emissions? I know what has been preached to you for over two decades but they could be wrong.


Stop thinking and start citing.
2012-10-07 02:52:57 PM
1 votes:

L.D. Ablo: This, along with other changes, dramatically improved the smog problem in LA.

As a kid, we had smog days at school where we weren't allowed out for PE or recess. You could see the smog hanging in the air. It was awful.

There's still a bit of smog, but it's much better today.


Did you ever stop to think that it may be due to factories being cleaner and nothing to do with car emissions? I know what has been preached to you for over two decades but they could be wrong.
2012-10-07 02:52:31 PM
1 votes:
At the risk of sounding like a no-good, tree-hugging, liberal communist socialist, I can kinda see why California wants to go with electric cars. It's constant and consistent irregardless of the other energy sources used to generate it.
2012-10-07 02:49:18 PM
1 votes:
Or we can be pragmatic and just switch to the winter blend a couple weeks sooner. I doubt that'll break the environment.
2012-10-07 02:09:19 PM
1 votes:
Well excuse us for breathing
vpb [TotalFark]
2012-10-07 01:58:31 PM
1 votes:
Lots of places have oxygenated gas during part of the year.
2012-10-07 01:35:54 PM
1 votes:
this story gets printed twice a year.
WHY is this not the most boring REPEAT of all time???
 
Displayed 67 of 67 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report