Local Gas Prices

[OmahaBen]

That's what the Powers That Be want us to think!

What also annoys me is that some alternative energy advocates are actually saying that they wish prices to remain high, as to discourage use! That's not helping the situation at all!

Put the tin foil hat down, please, for your own sanity.

[joeglow]

I made a trip up to sioux falls this past weekend --- Gas here when I left was around 3.56. In sioux falls it was 3.44 and at a Kum & Go outside Elk Point SD it was 3.33. I get back here and price has dropped to I saw 3.42 this morning

This morning's reports are showing $3.39-ish in the Millard area.

That run-up on Friday was an obvious attempt to boost the "suggested list price" here in the Omaha market. It didn't work, as some stations boosted, but not to the agreed-upon price, and some stayed low. If you look at the graphs, now that things have settled, it was very obvious what was going on!

Actually most experts say it was an increase to possible interruptions from the tropical storm bearing down on Florida. Now that we see it will cause no real damage, prices are coming back down.

But, that is not very conspiracy theorist-like.

[joeglow]

Isn't it pathetic that we think ±$3.40/g is somehow affordable all of a sudden?

That's what the Powers That Be want us to think!

They are making obscene profits and have us conditioned to the current still-outlandish prices.

The big thing is that they now know exactly where the "knee" or "kink" in the demand curve is, as this summer has shown that it occurs right around the $4.00 point. They can now use that factor to maximize their profits.

What also annoys me is that some alternative energy advocates are actually saying that they wish prices to remain high, as to discourage use! That's not helping the situation at all!

Really????? You really believe that? Then, why don't you invest in a couple of gas stations? After all, they are just a bunch of fat cats, living high on the hog, and setting artificially high prices to make even more money.

[OmahaJaysCU]

[Bugeater]

I'm actually steadfastly in that group, assuming that the cost is run up by real market conditions and not market manipulation. (For clarification, I would consider taxes market conditions as opposed to manipulation.) Best thing that could happen to this country is $10 gas.

It's pretty obvious to me that we the people, as a population, are not smart enough to A) elect leaders that will make any effective changes in our energy policy, and B) do anything on our own unless we simply can't afford to keep doing it the way we've always done it.

Just out of curiosity, what type of changes in our energy policy would you like to see?

[joeglow]

I'm actually steadfastly in that group, assuming that the cost is run up by real market conditions and not market manipulation. (For clarification, I would consider taxes market conditions as opposed to manipulation.) Best thing that could happen to this country is $10 gas.

It's pretty obvious to me that we the people, as a population, are not smart enough to A) elect leaders that will make any effective changes in our energy policy, and B) do anything on our own unless we simply can't afford to keep doing it the way we've always done it.

Just out of curiosity, what type of changes in our energy policy would you like to see?

-The kind that will NOT happen for 5-10 years at a minimum, even if his scenario played. Thus, Big E really wants to see the US economy fall right into the shitter, with about 30% unemployment.

[Omababe]

Actually most experts say it was an increase to possible interruptions from the tropical storm bearing down on Florida.

Okay then, how do Most Experts<tm> explain that this "pop" was the Omaha market only?

Let's look at the graph plotting Omaha's recent prices with Lincoln's and Des Moines'.



(This graph plots "regular".)

That storm was obviously bearing down only on the part of Florida that supplies gasoline to Omaha, and not the part that supplies gasoline to Des Moines and Lincoln, huh?

[almighty_tuna]

Sorry, I hosted an impromptu MotoGP race in the Mockingbird neighborhood and used up all the gas in the metro. My bad.

[joeglow]

Actually most experts say it was an increase to possible interruptions from the tropical storm bearing down on Florida.

Okay then, how do Most Experts<tm> explain that this "pop" was the Omaha market only?

Let's look at the graph plotting Omaha's recent prices with Lincoln's and Des Moines'.



(This graph plots "regular".)

That storm was obviously bearing down only on the part of Florida that supplies gasoline to Omaha, and not the part that supplies gasoline to Des Moines and Lincoln, huh?

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/stor ... t=1&f=1001

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080818/ap_ ... _prices_18

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080818/ap_ ... _prices_16

http://www.cnn.com/2008/BUSINESS/08/19/ ... cnn_latest

We are not talking rocket science here. This "pop" happened all over the country. However, if you honestly think you have cracked this case wide open, you have better contact the SEC. You do realize price fixing is illegal, right? Or, is the government and "Bushco" involved in all of this too?

Second, why not open up a gas station if it is so easy to just collude to raise prices?

[S33]

You know, we can all speculate until we are blue in the face but it's not going to change anything. The only thing we can do is vote for policy makers who are interesting in diversifying our energy market and whom have visions of someday becoming foreign oil independent(and that doesn't mean when they run out).

That's the only thing I see that can do any good. Even if it doesn't bring down the price of gas it will have put people to work.

[Omababe]

This "pop" happened all over the country.

I don't really wish to argue, but no, this pop did not happen all over the country. Most volunteer observers did not see such a pop last Friday. The graphs above clearly show no such pop in Lincoln or Des Moines, and others have verified that it didn't occur in several named places. NYC, Baltimore, and New Haven, CT were cited as having no similar pop. Graphs for most other places are easy to view if somebody really wants to hunt for another area that had such a pop.

You do realize price fixing is illegal, right? Or, is the government and "Bushco" involved in all of this too?

No, I don't think we can blame Dubya for the Omaha pop last Friday.

The consensus among those I've talked to seems to be along these lines:

1. A certain number of people who have control of retail prices (nobody seems to know exactly who, station owners, maybe, distributors, maybe, regional managers maybe) decided to bump prices to a "suggested list price" of $3.59 on Friday.

2. Some agreed, but not all.

3. Some bumped their price, others did not, some did but not to the full $3.59.

4. Most backed off almost immediately when it was obvious that it didn't work!

5. There's a certain amount of cursing and finger-pointing going on among those whose brainy idea it was to go with $3.59!

All speculation, I admit, but it seems to fit the pattern we saw.

Was it price-fixing in the legal sense? Probably, arguably. IANAL.

Could a complaint be filed? Maybe, but the city/county attorneys have much bigger fish to fry. As we know, the AG is now chasing those who sell one kind of fuel as another.

Second, why not open up a gas station if it is so easy to just collude to raise prices?

Obvious reason here is that the attempted collusion did not work. Competition ruled.

One other data point that's been noted is that now, today, in Omaha, prices are lower than they are on the Iowa side, something that seldom happens. Do we have a mini gas war going on?

[joeglow]

I don't really wish to argue, but no, this pop did not happen all over the country. Most volunteer observers did not see such a pop last Friday. The graphs above clearly show no such pop in Lincoln or Des Moines, and others have verified that it didn't occur in several named places. NYC, Baltimore, and New Haven, CT were cited as having no similar pop. Graphs for most other places are easy to view if somebody really wants to hunt for another area that had such a pop.

EXACTLY. Which is why I am surprised you would accuse so many small business owners in Omaha of breaking Federal anti-trust laws with NO evidence. However, it is you versus the man right? You need some CHANGE. Some CHANGE you can believe in. However, I will look it up some for you. From your website, cities that had your so called "pop"

Akron
Bakersfield
Bridgeport
Chicago
Cincinnati
Dayton
Gary
Kansas City


Also, you should note that many MORE cities not listed above had a "pop" the day before Omaha (i.e Louisville, KY) or after (Quad Cities) also in speculation of the impact of the tropical storm.

You should also know there is NOTHING scientific about this web site. While I use it at times, it is only as accurate as how many people update it and how honest they are. Hardly something to hang your hat on when accusing people of breaking the law.

The consensus among those I've talked to seems to be along these lines:

1. A certain number of people who have control of retail prices (nobody seems to know exactly who, station owners, maybe, distributors, maybe, regional managers maybe) decided to bump prices to a "suggested list price" of $3.59 on Friday.

2. Some agreed, but not all.

3. Some bumped their price, others did not, some did but not to the full $3.59.

4. Most backed off almost immediately when it was obvious that it didn't work!

5. There's a certain amount of cursing and finger-pointing going on among those whose brainy idea it was to go with $3.59!

All speculation, I admit, but it seems to fit the pattern we saw.

Was it price-fixing in the legal sense? Probably, arguably. IANAL.

Could a complaint be filed? Maybe, but the city/county attorneys have much bigger fish to fry. As we know, the AG is now chasing those who sell one kind of fuel as another.

So, basically, your evidence is a bunch of friends who also hate paying high prices for gas who don't have a shred of evidence and have never looked at the financial statements of a gas station? Really? You honestly blame this nefarious group of cigar smoking, uber-rich, mysterious group of people? wow!!!!

Obvious reason here is that the attempted collusion did not work. Competition ruled.

One other data point that's been noted is that now, today, in Omaha, prices are lower than they are on the Iowa side, something that seldom happens. Do we have a mini gas war going on?

-So, in one breath you talk about this super secret group of people colluding, but then in the next breath talk about competition. Just admit that people hate paying the prices, feel powerless and want (or NEED) some ultra conspiracy to blame. It can't be anything as simple as wars in oil producing countries, hurricanes, speculators or OPEC. It HAS to be something straight out of X Files.

[OmahaBen]

That's what the Powers That Be want us to think!

One other thing about this: The "Powers That Be" that you are likely referring to (the big, faceless, oil men in the smoke filled room) do not own the gas stations themselves. As I have pointed out to you numerous times, the oil companies make their money from crude oil, not refined products.

An individual gas station makes pennies/gallon in gas.

But if you want to believe in collusion, go ahead. But it will only make your arguements look ridiculous.

[Omababe]

I give up.

You win

[Big E]

Just out of curiosity, what type of changes in our energy policy would you like to see?

There's probably an endless list I could come up with given enough time, but I'll give brevity a shot during this brainstorm:
(These are just general ideas and I'm not trying to pen airtight legislation here, so keep that nitpickery to yourselves.)

1) Energy and Transportation policy need to be more closely linked. Development, particularly housing, needs to stop with the god damn sprawl to eternity. Density, public transit, etc... think San Fran/European density as opposed to NYC uber-density, MANDATE THIS AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL, and tie funds to it, similar to drinking ages and BAC levels. Just building the same houses the way we do now only closer together would alleviate the problem.

2) Tax the snot out of gas guzzlers that are for non-commercial uses: ie, the Soccer-Mom-in-an-Excursion Tax.

3) Tax the snot out of gas, to the tune of $.50 - $1 per gallon. The only thing that adjusts behavior for most Americans is how something hits their pocket book. Besides, as we have already seen, when people demand less the cost goes down, so a $1 tax per gallon might actually only show up as a $.50-$.60 increase at the pump.

4) Alternative fuel development. REAL focus on this, not half-assed placate the tree huggers mamby pamby legislation. WIND WIND WIND.

5) Come up with candidates for POTUS that don't mock their opponents when they suggest inflating your tires to use less gas.

6) New residential/commercial/office should require solar, geothermal, blah blah blah. Require new development to generate no less than 50% of their own energy, or some other magic number. Industrial would have to be looked at separately.

7) Go for offshore drilling. Heck, drill straight through a polar bear in ANWR. BUT BUT BUT.... for every barrel you pull out of the ground domestically you must reduce purchasing foreign oil by 5 barrels. (Again, some magic number is in there somewhere.)

8 ) Bring back vehicle inspections, and get POS vehicles off the road. Why the American automakers aren't the strongest loudest lobby in all of ever for this I will never, ever understand.

Those are the biggies I came up with off the top of my head. I'm sure I can come up with more as time goes by, and would be more than happy to discuss them in greater detail after the usual suspects get their shots in.

[joeglow]

1) Energy and Transportation policy need to be more closely linked. Development, particularly housing, needs to stop with the god darn sprawl to eternity. Density, public transit, etc... think San Fran/European density as opposed to NYC uber-density, MANDATE THIS AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL, and tie funds to it, similar to drinking ages and BAC levels. Just building the same houses the way we do now only closer together would alleviate the problem...

-Translation: I enjoy living right on top of my neighbor. I enjoy not seeing nature. I like having NO peace and quiet. I don't have kids so I don't give a damn about them having a place to play, safe trip to school, etc. Essentially, government should force everyone to live how I want to live.

2) Tax the snot out of gas guzzlers that are for non-commercial uses: ie, the Soccer-Mom-in-an-Excursion Tax..

-Soooo, you really want a child tax. We have a Blazer that does not fit the GOVERNMENT mandated number of car seats for 3 kids. Thus, when we have a 3rd kid, we should get taxed up the arse? This is essentially like saying "tax this group because I am not in it."

3) Tax the snot out of gas, to the tune of $.50 - $1 per gallon. The only thing that adjusts behavior for most Americans is how something hits their pocket book. Besides, as we have already seen, when people demand less the cost goes down, so a $1 tax per gallon might actually only show up as a $.50-$.60 increase at the pump...

-I don't care about this, so long as you agree to lock in current spending on social programs. This WILL destroy the economy and throw a LOT of people further down the economic scale.

4) Alternative fuel development. REAL focus on this, not half-assed placate the tree huggers mamby pamby legislation. WIND WIND WIND.

I agree.

5) Come up with candidates for POTUS that don't mock their opponents when they suggest inflating your tires to use less gas..

-I am more concerned with candidates for POTUS who can come up with better ideas than inflate your tires and get tune ups.

6) New residential/commercial/office should require solar, geothermal, blah blah blah. Require new development to generate no less than 50% of their own energy, or some other magic number. Industrial would have to be looked at separately.

-Fine, but kiss your precious locally owned businesses good bye. The costs associated will drive up building costs to the point that small businesses cannot afford them.

7) Go for offshore drilling. Heck, drill straight through a polar bear in ANWR. BUT BUT BUT.... for every barrel you pull out of the ground domestically you must reduce purchasing foreign oil by 5 barrels. (Again, some magic number is in there somewhere.).

-I agree. This is VERY important. Not because I want to see us continue to use oil, but because we need it to bridge the gap to that point.

8 ) Bring back vehicle inspections, and get POS vehicles off the road. Why the American automakers aren't the strongest loudest lobby in all of ever for this I will never, ever understand.

-Growing up, we had many of the POS because we could not afford anything else. Do you expect the government to start funding cars for poor, or do we just say f 'em?

Those are the biggies I came up with off the top of my head. I'm sure I can come up with more as time goes by, and would be more than happy to discuss them in greater detail after the usual suspects get their shots in.

-NUCLEAR NUCLEAR NUCLEAR!!!!!!!!!

[DTO Luv]

I don't know how you equate "living on top of one another" with bad schools. To be honest I'm sick of the how much the government spends to perpetuate the way you live. It's a two way street. One that we're finding out we can't afford to keep paving. (I just used up all of my writing degree on that one.)

[joeglow]

I don't know how you equate "living on top of one another" with bad schools. To be honest I'm sick of the how much the government spends to perpetuate the way you live. It's a two way street. One that we're finding out we can't afford to keep paving. (I just used up all of my writing degree on that one.)

Who said anything about quality of schools? I said the ability to walk to school, which is something my kids could not do in a downtown setting. However, I am sick of paying taxes for a school that my kids will never use. That is life.

[DTO Luv]

Your kids can't walk to school if they lived DTO? Wow you're ignorant. There's and elementary school and High school DT. I have brothers at both. I regularly see kids walking to school. A friend of my mom's, her and her son walk from by Little Italy to Liberty.

[joeglow]

Your kids can't walk to school if they lived DTO? Wow you're ignorant. There's and elementary school and High school DT. I have brothers at both. I regularly see kids walking to school. A friend of my mom's, her and her son walk from by Little Italy to Liberty.

Of course I would let my high school kid walk to school. However, I would not let my 3rd grader walk through downtown to go to school. Sorry if you see that as ignorance. However, as we have seen on this page, you arrogantly demand everyone live the life you want.

[Big E]

-Translation: I enjoy living right on top of my neighbor. I enjoy not seeing nature. I like having NO peace and quiet. I don't have kids so I don't give a darn about them having a place to play, safe trip to school, etc. Essentially, government should force everyone to live how I want to live.

Stop being such a drama queen all the time. You act like the only way to build neighborhoods is four houses per mile or 100 story condo towers.

There's all kinds of density that can be achieved without piling 10 stories next to 10 stories next to 10 stories. My neighborhood in south Baltimore was CRAWLING with kids that all managed to play in the FOUR parks (including Fort McHenry) within walking or biking distance from their front doors, and all managed to get to school safely a few blocks away. Why? Because they were walking by the homes of other people who had kids that were doing the same thing. Build an entire city on the scale of even BlueStone's Little Italy and you are 90% of the way there.

For the record, I met more people and made more friends in that neighborhood in the first 6 months than I did in any of the suburbs I've lived in ever total. Urban neighborhoods are just more conducive to socializing. (If you haven't ever lived in one, zip it, because you don't know what you're talking about.)

And let me see if I follow: bulldozing, sodding and paving Douglas and Sarpy counties is somehow getting you closer to nature? Wouldn't a more dense population actually preserve some of that nature?

Soooo, you really want a child tax.

Yes, or at the very least repeal the credits, but that has nothing to do with an energy policy or even relevant to what I was talking about. We can go into that more at another time if you'd like.

We have a Blazer that does not fit the GOVERNMENT mandated number of car seats for 3 kids. Thus, when we have a 3rd kid, we should get taxed up the arse? This is essentially like saying "tax this group because I am not in it."

The most technologically advanced civilization on the history of the planet can't figure out how to manufacture a vehicle that will fit three car seats and get more than 15 MPG? Maybe I should hate America. Give me a break.

I don't care about this, so long as you agree to lock in current spending on social programs. This WILL destroy the economy and throw a LOT of people further down the economic scale.

I'm game. I actually think there's a way to eliminate welfare, social security and medicaid and almost every other program designed to subsidize the people that just don't feel like workin, God bless 'em. (People that legitimately can't are a different story.) But again, that has nothing to do with energy policy so we can go into that somewhen else, too.

-I am more concerned with candidates for POTUS who can come up with better ideas than inflate your tires and get tune ups.

Because free and easy is just stupid, I suppose?

Fine, but kiss your precious locally owned businesses good bye. The costs associated will drive up building costs to the point that small businesses cannot afford them.

Chicken Little much?

When every building project is required to have those materials, there will be competition in the marketplace, innovation and economics of scale. We recently put a new roof on a 26,000 sqft facility. We're adding 8K more as I type this. We looked seriously at installing solar panels as part of this project. The biggest drawback was not cost (which was well down the list, actually). It was availability and service post installation. Hopefully we're not too far from the day when I can head down to the hardware store and buy a solar panel.

Please conveniently overlook the savings of 50% or more of the energy bills, as well.

Growing up, we had many of the POS because we could not afford anything else. Do you expect the government to start funding cars for poor, or do we just say f 'em?

So you just skipped over the part about density and public transit.

NUCLEAR NUCLEAR NUCLEAR!!!!!!!!!

Figure out how to do it without giving everyone 12 eyeballs and I'm sold.

[joeglow]

Figure out how to do it without giving everyone 12 eyeballs and I'm sold.

How is it the liberal's wet dream of France can support such a huge percentage of their power needs from nuclear? Name the last nuclear disaster in the US (and by disaster, I mean something that was NOT prevented by the safeguards installed in said nuclear plant).

[nebugeater]

Look like we are in for a Friday morning jump in price. May of the stations that I pass by that were at 3.39 yesterday evening were at 3.59 this AM coming in to work. One station with an automatic sign that has numbers that are on a scroll and back-lite was changing as I drove by. I guess that adds new meaning to watching the prices go up!

[icejammer]

Oil jumped over $5 per barrel yesterday, that's why so many (but not all) have raised prices overnight. I still paid $3.39 this morning.

[nebugeater]

Oil jumped over $5 per barrel yesterday, that's why so many (but not all) have raised prices overnight. I still paid $3.39 this morning.

MY tank was basically full. I paid 3.34 yesterday at noon.

[Big E]

So if the oil companies don't control the price of gas OR the price of oil, and the gas that is at the pump right now had its price established back when it was refined, and no one is screwing anyone, and there was no shortage in the refined gas supply and no jump in demand overnight, how come the price of gas at the pumps jumps IN LOCK STEP with the price of oil that is technically still in the ground somewhere on the other side of the planet? There was no change in supply OR demand from yesterday to today, which is what we've been told is the only reason the price of oil/gas adjust in a free market.

I'm not a card carrying conspiracy theorist, but if you believe that someone, somewhere, somehow is not |expletive| the general public - collusion or otherwise - you need to have your head checked.

[icejammer]

Because you price your product (in this case, gas) according to what you expect to pay to replace it. Certainly gas is not the only commodity or product that this happens to.

At least that's what I've been told...

[Big E]

Because you price your product (in this case, gas) according to what you expect to pay to replace it. Certainly gas is not the only commodity or product that this happens to.

At least that's what I've been told...

If Station A has a contract of X gallons signed on Day 1 when oil was $120 barrel, and Station B signed it on Day 100 when oil was $150 a barrel, who should have the lower prices in a free market on Day 101? If I'm Station A I'm leveraging my position against Station B to drive traffic. We don't see this, because every gas station moves in lock step with the one across the street. You might see pennies in differences, but you should be seeing something resembling a 20% discount from one to the other. Ever seen one station at $3.50 and the one across the street at $2.80?

Furthermore, depending on which direction the price of oil goes after Day 100, that replacement gas would affect Station A's pricing before Station B's, due to the fact that Station A would need gas prior to Station B. Again, we don't see this in our "free market".

Someone is |expletive| me, and I'm not even getting a handy for my troubles.

[Big E]

Oil jumped up $6 yesterday and the cost of gas went up roughly $0.10/gal (by my anecdotal observations) overnight.

Oil is down $4.50 today. Anyone care to wager we see any of that $0.10 back by Saturday afternoon?

[Uffda]

By the end of the day it was down a total of $6.59 (a record).... as I drove by a station close to work it was at $3.59 compared to $3.37 this morning.

So if it was forced up by the $5.62 climb (also a record) yesterday -- I am with Big E --- I don't think we will see a 20 cent drop by tomorrow (Sat) afternoon.

I understand stations have to raise their price to cover the cost when gas goes up although I don't totally understand the quick rise as the quick decline isn't there.

[joeglow]

Because you price your product (in this case, gas) according to what you expect to pay to replace it. Certainly gas is not the only commodity or product that this happens to.

At least that's what I've been told...

-EXACTLY. I know this because I made a 300% return in less than a year 2 years ago in a copper stock because the exact same thing happened. Lets say a company buys a unit of copper for $20 and spends a month transporting it, turning it into wire and shipping it out. At that point, copper is $30. If they sold it for $25, everyone and their mom would buy ALL the copper, and drive straight to the producer to sell it back to them for $30 a unit. Thus, it should be obvious why the price reacts the way it does.

[freedomfighter]

I am surprised more citizens of Omaha are not pushing to do something about gasoline prices. We need to drill for oil, including ANWR. Please feel free to comment on this post about the items below:

You can learn more about ANWR at ANWR.org

You can sign a petition to drill here, drill now, at

http://www.americansolutions.com

You can appeal to congress at
http://www.callbackcongress.com/

You can also support Congress members who are pushing to vote on drilling. See link below:

dontgomovement.com/

[the1wags]

Drilling for more oil is not the answer. The oil companies have drilling options on thousands of acres and don't. It's beyond time to think about options besides oil.

[freedomfighter]

Drilling for more oil is not the answer. The oil companies have drilling options on thousands of acres and don't. It's beyond time to think about options besides oil.

If drilling for oil is not the answer what is? Alternative energy is not cost efficient or effective. Oil is used in everything from plastics, to asphalt to roof shingles. The rest of world drills for oil, so should we.

As far as land, the oil companies are required to lease thousands of acres of land just to prospect in one acre. Even then, some oil is not worth drilling for do to its poor quality or inaccessibility.

[thenewguy]

If little Timmy in Kuwait jumped off a bridge, should we too?

Oil is not an infinite resource. We need to think of our children.

(I laid the bait. )

[freedomfighter]

If little Timmy in Kuwait jumped off a bridge, should we too?

Oil is not an infinite resource. We need to think of our children.

(I laid the bait. )

Oil is fare more infinite than the alternatives. In fact, oil is renewable. See http://www.ls9.com/technology/

[thenewguy]

yeah, oil IS renewable...if you wait a few million years. Oil takes far longer to renew itself than for us to be able to perfect alternative forms of energy. You work for OPEC or something?

[thenewguy]

...and i can't foresee man-made oils catching on, for various reasons. 1) oil companies who drill and are reaping huge profits would bolster it in government, and 2) it's still "dirty" energy and there's a lot of momentum behind using cleaner energy.

[freedomfighter]

...and i can't foresee man-made oils catching on, for various reasons. 1) oil companies who drill and are reaping huge profits would bolster it in government, and 2) it's still "dirty" energy and there's a lot of momentum behind using cleaner energy.

Thats a bunch of huff and puff propaganda.

When it comes to gasoline, government reaps more money in taxes than oil companies do in profits.

http://www.taxfoundation.org/blog/show/1140.html

The alternative energies often end up being far more dirty because they are labor intensive.

[almighty_tuna]

The alternative energies often end up being far more dirty because they are labor intensive.

Are you saying that the harder I labor, the less green I become? Holy |expletive|!! I'm going to park it on the couch and save the earth!