-
-
Re: Big problem for Blighty (Fuel for thought)
I love it, all the best laid plans of mice and men.........The Treasury is facing a £637 million deficit after fuel sales dropped by one billion litres this year, the AA revealed.
Service stations in the UK sold 835 million fewer litres of petrol and 247 million fewer litres of diesel in January to March 2011 compared to the same period three years earlier.
The 15 per cent dip in petrol sales and the 6 per cent fall in diesel sales were caused by higher fuel costs and consumers tightening their belts.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz1RYFaQ2Ir -
Re: Big problem for Blighty (Fuel for thought)
Its only going to worse as well Chris
http://www.autocar.co.uk/CarReviews/...-Drive/258098/
Both Ford & Renault are almost to market with their 3 cyinder engined cars as well......i mean if you have a 25-30 mpg car & suddenly fuel rockets......if you trade to a 60-70 mpg car you saved your self £1600 a year.........now X that by 5 & you saved £7500!
Personaly i can't wait, get rid of all the F*cking 4X4's (Ok we be left with some but not many).
MikeComment
-
Re: Big problem for Blighty (Fuel for thought)
Of course we could all switch to driving Reliant Robins, 1970's tech but still got 50-70 mpg and with bike licence too. Got fridge or washing machine into back of 1 i had. Had friend who hit Ford Sierra with his , wrote off Ford (twisted chassis) , he just duct taped his wing/fender back on and drove home to fibre glass it back together.Comment
-
Re: Big problem for Blighty (Fuel for thought)
I think (Am not sure) but the average life of a production car is 6.8 years......thats from factory to scrap yard. Now if we get a collaspe in £/$ and peek oil we can see that move down to 4.5 years. as for your friends Ford, i wouldn't go out shopping with him.
MikeComment
-
Re: Big problem for Blighty (Fuel for thought)
I think we are going to see a major shift to fuel efficient vehicles soon. Better choices are out there now. They aren't all crude tiny boxes with wheels anymore. And you are correct Mega, a 1600 pound a year savings is a big deal. In the US, a lot of the working class got caught up in the big truck/SUV thing when gas prices were low. Now they are stuck driving beasts getting 12 mpg around town. Someone making only $20k year and driving 15k miles a year is sinking about 22% of his income into fuel alone! Which is absurd .
I think with time, people will slowly begin to sit down and do the math and figure out they can't continue the same lifestyle they used to have. I drive through lower middle class neighborhoods around here and count the number of homes with large trucks parked out front. Most have at least one, but many have two or even three.There is a lot of potential savings here if people will just wise up. In my area it seems to be the desire of every teenage boy to drive a 6000 lb 4x4, which is ridiculous. I think Americans have taken for granted cheap gas for so long that many can't see driving anything else. This will change by necessity.Comment
-
Re: Big problem for Blighty (Fuel for thought)
Originally posted by cmalbatros View Post
What I really like about this is the first car I had was loaned to me; it was an Austin 7 Ruby. Now that car was FUN!!!, but the Austin 7 engine went on the power the Reliant Robin, except that the best engine version was the original two bearing crankshaft. Wow! now that brings back memories.
As for bad fuel consumption; November 2006 I drove a 1 Ton van from Las Cruces to Houston and back and averaged 6.7 MPG. The US has a very long way to go before they catch up with the UK and the rest of the planet.Comment
-
Re: Big problem for Blighty (Fuel for thought)
I look at things a different way: Instead of the MPG of vehicles being too low, MAYBE FUEL PRICES ARE TOO HIGH. MAYBE THE COST OF LIVING FOR EVERYTHING IS TOO OUTRAGEOUS, especially in the UK.
Here is the answer: DETROIT.
Live better than in the UK- AND WITH CLEAR-TITLE TO THE HOME--- for the price of a few tankfuls of petrol. And if this isn't the shocker of our times, nothing is:
15038 Mayfield St, Detroit. Lovely and CLEAR-TITLE: 1470 square feet and $4400.oo (FORTY-FOUR HUNDRED BONARS).
650 Clairmont St, Detroit. Respectable and CLEAR-TITLE: 1680 square feet and price: $2000.oo (TWO-THOUSAND BONARS).
I think gold is beyond over-priced to-day. I think Europe is out-to-lunch. I think the UK needs an attitude-adjustment....
Transmitiendo desde la torre dorado, resplendiente y brilliante, muy alto por encima del edificio Fisher en el centro de Detroit, este es WJR 760 Detroit, ! LA GRAN VOZ de LOS LAGOS GRANDES !
Broadcasting from the the golden tower, gleaming and brilliant, high up atop the Fisher Building in downtown Detroit, this is WJR 760, THE GREAT VOICE of THE GREAT LAKES !
Bring your gun, and tell the gentry in England to f--- off.Comment
-
Re: Big problem for Blighty (Fuel for thought)
my 93 chevy cavelier still runs like a charm, 110000 on it, at 30mpg (paid 1400 for it in 04)Originally posted by Mega View Post
and the 91, (bought in y2k for 1000bux) with over 140, will burn rubber, take on most any honda, but only gets about 20, altho in city traffic it only has 2 throttle positions: idle and wide open (to beat the next light), as i typically spend more time waiting for traffic signals than actually rolling down the road.... life on a smaller island, eh?Comment
-
Re: Big problem for Blighty (Fuel for thought)
TWENTY-TWO % ( 22% ) of one's income at $20K per year and driving 15k per year, going for fuel alone????????????Originally posted by flintlock View Post
I think it's time for people to revolt, especially in the UK. I believe government is responsible for this; i.e, government taxes on fuel are bleeding people to death, and govn't planners are so arrogant as to demand people give-up driving. Imagine gov't trying to drive up land costs so as to force people to live in cities, in tiny apartments and force people to use public transit!
In British Columbia, the bastards in government are trying to bleed people to death too. Same story except the govn't is sticking it to people with traffic fines, ferry fares, and parking meter charges at hospitals--- even for the Emergency Room.
You wait until I get back to B.C; I will raise such a stink!
Can you imagine, 800 ( eight-hundred ) faxes per day going to the Solicitor for Motor Vehicles in BC, mostly faxes from the elderly, to try to get their "DRIVING PRIVILEGE" restored to them???????? And no-one says anything about this in the media or in the B.C. Legislature. Nothing on CFAX radio in Victoria about this. The only thing on the radio is eco-crap and preservationist crap.
Mega, I noticed that 75% of the people in the U.K. have woken-up and are now demanding speed limits of more than 70 MPH on motorways. This is from The Guardian in the U.K. on 22 June, 2011--- just days ago.
Imagine in British Columbia, speed limits on highways of 80 KPH, and strictly enforced! Yes, you read that correctly 80 KPH, or 50 MPH--- and on wide motorways. On two-lane highways, the speed limit is 50 KPH or 31 MPH. ( Now, you know why I despise the metric system because govn't has screwed the people with the metric system. ) Yes, the year is 2011, not 1911.
And I won't even begin to tell you what the bastards in the Provincial Govn't did with me in Victoria. Oh, you just wait until I get back to B.C! That fricken eco-crap all day and all night in the media when the real issues are not even mentioned. Not one word in the Legislature of B.C. either, about the important issues of the day.
Imagine, government making it impossible to drive a car! Taking me out of my own home, a citizen of Canada, and torturing me....... Oh, you just wait until I get back to B.C. If I have to run as an independent MLA for the B.C. Legislature myself, I will collect the 80 signatures, door-to-door, to do it.
Starving Steve (Steve Jacobs)Last edited by Starving Steve; July 09, 2011, 03:42 PM.Comment
-
Re: Big problem for Blighty (Fuel for thought)
The problem is that crime there is pretty high. And a gun doesn't help you if you cannot stay awake 24 hours a day. Even if you can get a group of people sleeping in shifts while some stand watch (sounds very para military) you still have to have a way to get food,water and energy. This is why most of the survivalist types move to back country where the land is not quite Detroit cheap, but there is room to grow their own food, springs for water and power, and no armed neighbors with drug problems.Originally posted by Starving Steve View Post
You might want to consider that.Comment
-
Re: Big problem for Blighty (Fuel for thought)
simply a case of 'the overzealous enforcement of the letter of the law' as a means of 'revenue enhancement' merely being another unintended consequence of the liberal's vision known better as the nanny state....Originally posted by Starving Steve View Post
hows that workin out for miami? not too well apparently (it failed miserably out here too, but not before the contractor involved got paid _plenty_ before causing such a firestorm of protest the state had to scrap the plan) - and you'll _never_ guess who's financing em???? (see below ;)
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-0...ised-cash.html
Drivers Stopping Means Red-Light Cameras Don’t Yield Cash Goals
By Christopher Palmeri and Simone Baribeau -
Miami, which counted on $10 million in fines from motorists caught on camera running red lights, is planning to furlough some workers in part because penalties didn’t come close to forecasts as drivers began obeying the law.
Houston, where voters banned cameras in November, will receive about $10 million less than anticipated and faces a potential claim from supplier American Traffic Solutions Inc. for canceling a contract. The Los Angeles Police Commission voted last month to let its agreement with American Traffic expire, citing the expense.
Since cameras began spying on motorists in the late 1980s, they’ve faced lawsuits challenging their constitutionality, been banned in voter initiatives and restricted by legislation. That hasn’t stopped U.S. cities from deploying them: The number of municipalities with cameras has doubled to 539 since 2007, according to the Washington-based Insurance Institute for Highway Safety.
“This is about money and not about safety,” Ted Hollander, a Fort Lauderdale attorney who defends people charged with traffic offenses, said in an interview.[bn:WBTKR=RDF:AU]
Redflex Holdings Ltd. (RDF), [] a South Melbourne, Australia-based camera supplier, successfully defended itself against lawsuits challenging its product in 10 states last year and legislation that would ban them in six, according to its annual report.
An Arizona employee of the company was shot and killed while monitoring a speed-detecting camera in 2009.
Enforcement Battleground
“Photo enforcement is very much a battleground,” said Gary Biller, executive director of the Waunakee, Wisconsin-based National Motorists Association, a drivers’ rights organization.
The group’s website lists 10 reasons for opposing cameras, including that vehicle owners who get tickets in the mail may be forced to snitch on friends or family who borrowed their car.
Studies diverge on whether cameras, which have been endorsed by the World Health Organization and the National Safety Council, actually reduce traffic accidents.
A September 2007 review by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration concluded they reduced fatal side-angle collisions. It also said less-serious rear-end collisions increased as drivers braked after spotting cameras.
“These cameras are never installed as revenue generators,” said Charles Territo, a spokesman for American Traffic in Scottsdale, Arizona. “They are installed with the purpose of enhancing public safety.”
Cost-Neutral Contracts
Most contracts are “cost neutral,” Territo said.
“A city will never pay more in fees than the cameras generate,” he said. “If a camera is contracted at $4,000 a month and it generates $6,000, they pay $4,000. But if the cameras generate $2,000, they only pay that.”
In Florida, where legislation allowed cameras beginning last year, American Traffic donated $159,000 to state-level candidates and committees during the 2010 election cycle, according to the Florida Elections Division. The payments included $64,500 to Florida’s Republican Party and $37,500 to the Democratic Party.
The state, which splits camera revenue with cities, expects about a third less income than initially projected from the program, according to a March report from the Legislature’s research office.
There are 28 class-action lawsuits in Florida against municipalities related to the cameras, said Michael Popok, a partner with Weiss, Serota, Helfman, Pastoriza, Cole & Boniske in Coral Gables, Florida, who represents six cities.
Warning Signs
“If it was really about the money, we’d hide the cameras,” Popok said. “There are big signs warning people that they’re there.”
The lawsuits had a “slightly chilling effect” on the rollout, leading to the lower revenue, said Amy Baker, the Florida Legislature’s chief economist. Territo disagreed, saying 80 communities in the state use cameras.
Miami planned for $10 million from 32 cameras installed this year. Instead, projected revenue is less than $2 million, Mayor Tomas Regalado said in an interview. The shortfall will contribute to a $15 million projected fiscal 2012 budget deficit that may force the city to give employees unpaid days off one day a week.
Miami based its estimate on tickets issued at comparable intersections in other cities, Regalado said. Visibility of the cameras and news coverage led to fewer violations, a 25 percent reduction in accidents and less revenue.
“They worked too well,” Regalado said.
Goldman Investment
American Traffic, which supplied Miami’s cameras, had 19 cities sign up in the first six months of this year, Territo said. The closely held company received an investment in 2008 from Goldman Sachs Group Inc. (GS), which remains a stakeholder.
Redflex’s stock plunged 30 percent on May 10 after shareholders rejected a takeover offer from Macquarie Group Ltd. and Carlyle Group, a private-equity firm. On June 17, Carlyle announced it had withdrawn as an investor in Redflex. The firm, which held a 12 percent stake in February, didn’t respond to a request for comment.
Los Angeles has seen a 62 percent reduction in red-light- related collisions at its 32 camera-monitored intersections since 2004 and no increase in rear-end crashes, according to a report Chief Charlie Beck gave the Police Commission last month.
The program would cost the city $2.3 million over three years if American Traffic is kept as the contractor at the same intersections, the report said. Territo said the estimate includes costs not directly tied to cameras and that the contract could be structured so the city doesn’t lose money.
Lapsed Contract
The five-member commission voted unanimously June 7 to let the contract expire. During a public meeting, it cited the department’s $41 million deficit, potential changes in California law that could increase the program’s expenses and the City Council’s boycott of Arizona-based companies over the state’s immigration law.
Houston, which raised almost $16 million in fiscal 2010 with red-light monitors, stopped ticketing in November after residents voted to turn off its 70 cameras by amending the city charter. The city received about $10 million less than expected because of the ban, according to budget documents.
That loss was “one of numerous factors” contributing to a budget deficit for fiscal 2011, which ended June 30, said Janice Evans, a spokeswoman for Mayor Annise Parker.
A judge ruled last month that the vote, where 53 percent of residents favored stopping the cameras, wasn’t valid and couldn’t be used to end American Traffic’s contract.
The company maintains Houston must honor its agreement, Territo said. The city hasn’t decided whether it’s going to resume the program, Evans said.
The unpopularity of red-light cameras has spawned a business in alerting drivers when they may be photographed. Radar detectors linked to satellites and centralized databases can tip off motorists before the shutters snap.
“Public opinion is awful on the cameras,” said Aaron Thomas, a marketing manager at Escort Inc., a West Chester, Ohio-based maker of warning devices. “Everyone’s looking for a solution to get around them.”
To contact the reporters on this story: Christopher Palmeri in Los Angeles at cpalmeri1@bloomberg.net; Simone Baribeau in Miami at sbaribeau@bloomberg.net.Comment
-
Re: Big problem for Blighty (Fuel for thought)
How much are women in the US?
MikeComment
-
Re: Big problem for Blighty (Fuel for thought)
The increases in electric rates will be mitigated by huge improvements in efficiency.
I have been checking the electricity use of my new Panasonic air conditioner and heat pump for the last 10 days.
Even though the temperatures have been around 80F (27C) and 90 to 95 F (30 to 35 C) every day, and I have left the air conditioner on continuously set at 75F (24 C), the air conditioner has used 130 watts per hour, 3 yen, 3 cents, 2 pence per hour. Drastic improvement over my 15 year old Sharp, which was the most energy efficient at the time, but still used triple the electricity. This is to air condition an entire 650 square foot apartment with three outer walls.
Therefore, the cost of air conditioning my entire apartment is under a dollar a day.
What they did to increase efficiency is to increase the size of the compressor slightly.
I switched to LEDs, so they use 1/10th the electricity of incandescents.
New refrigerator uses 1/3 the electricity of the old one, so now runs about about 10 yen, 10 cents, 7 pence per day.
The new TV also uses half the electricity, about 130 watts, of the old one, so saves about half a kilowatt a day.
Changing from a desktop to a laptop cut electricity use by a kwh per day, more than 100 watts to 10 for the MacBook air.
So
Lights -2 kwh per day
refrigerator -2 kwh per day
TV -0.5
Computer -1 kwh per day
So all together say 5 kwh less per day used by these appliances directly, which is 5 kwh less of nonsense heat for the air conditioner to remove. (It is as if while having the air conditioner on I had a space heater turned on inside the apartment for 5 hours a day, and now have turned that off) The air conditioner has a lot less heat to remove.
The real problem is the peak demand for only a few hours a day for a few weeks a year in the summer. To deal with that, the electric companies have to maintain a lot of extra capacity they otherwise do not use. That costs a huge amount of money. On Oahu, the electric company was planning to build three new power plants over the last 20 years, but electricity use did not increase as expected, and so those plants were not built.
Even if in the winter the waste heat from appliances would help to heat the house, it is much more efficient to use saved electricity to run a heat pump, even in cold climates. My winter heating bill has been comparable to my summer cooling bill, so I expect to be able to heat the apartment for about 3 yen, 3 cents, 2 pence per hour. The electric rate in Japan is about 30 cents per hour, depending on use. Actually, we are about to get smartmeters, and so electricity will be 30 yen during the day but 10 yen at night. Therefore, actually, at night, when it is regularly around freezing for three months out of the year in Tokyo, the heating bill will be 1 yen, 1 cent, 1 pence per hour.
This exists here and now and does not require anything to be invented. We just need manufacturing rollout.
Unless you really have to replace something because it breaks, it might be good to hold off replacing the refrigerator etc. just a couple of years while these become available abroad more commonly. I searched online and these really do not seem to be available outside Japan quite yet.
All my appliances were 15 years old and either rattling, or in the case of the TV, actually died.
The TV was $1,500, compared to $6,000 for the old one.
The LEDs were $200 dollars for 10.
The superefficient refrigerator was $1,200, $200 more than a regular one of the same size.
The superefficient air conditioner/heat pump was $1,500, about $500 more than a regular one.
So for an added cost of $200 for the LEDs, $200 for the refrigerator, and $500 for the air conditioner, let's say an added cost of $1,000, my annual electric bill will drop from say about $1,000 to $500, a savings of $500 annually over the next 10 to 15 years.
In other words, for an investment of about $100 per year, I save $500... a 500% return on investment, no tax.
I also got the landlord to lower the rent by $1,500 a year, so I have cut expenses by $2,000 per year with no change in standard of living.Comment
-
Re: Big problem for Blighty (Fuel for thought)
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/26/us/26cable.html
Mooncliff, I found this article troubling. Talk about an energy drain.Comment
For a concise, readable summary of iTulip concepts developed over the past 16 years and a vision of a challenging next decade and how to navigate it, read Eric Janszen's book "Post Catastrophe Economy".
Join the discussion of today's events with a wide range of professionals with an interest in economics and finance. Register to join our 50,000 plus member registered community from 78 countries today.
Subscribe to iTulip Select for access to the longest running, deep, accurate, and unvarnished macro economic trends analysis and forecasting available, since 1998.
- If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Working...
Tweet
Comment