|
Gasoline prices..............
.......going down. Under $2/gallon on the street at some places here.
Election time must be coming up...........oops..........that happened last November. ;-) For Chuck:......gasoline - boats.........gasoline - tow vehicles. Just a preemptive strike to keep the head sheriff from interrogating me. ;-) |
Gasoline prices..............
On Thu, 11 Jan 2007 18:01:54 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote: On 1/11/2007 5:37 PM, JimH wrote: ......going down. Under $2/gallon on the street at some places here. Election time must be coming up...........oops..........that happened last November. ;-) For Chuck:......gasoline - boats.........gasoline - tow vehicles. Just a preemptive strike to keep the head sheriff from interrogating me. ;-) $2.29 here. No change. And to please our VP of Shameless Commerce, you need to work in the brand name of that cheap gas at least three times. You two are such neat guys! I'm sure you're quite proud of yourselves! -- ****************************************** ***** Have a super day! ***** ****************************************** John H |
Gasoline prices..............
$2.09.9 here, it's dropped back from $2.28.9 a month ago.
JimH wrote: ......going down. Under $2/gallon on the street at some places here. Election time must be coming up...........oops..........that happened last November. ;-) For Chuck:......gasoline - boats.........gasoline - tow vehicles. Just a preemptive strike to keep the head sheriff from interrogating me. ;-) |
Gasoline prices..............
"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message ... On Thu, 11 Jan 2007 17:37:13 -0500, "JimH" wrote: ......going down. Under $2/gallon on the street at some places here. Election time must be coming up...........oops..........that happened last November. ;-) For Chuck:......gasoline - boats.........gasoline - tow vehicles. Just a preemptive strike to keep the head sheriff from interrogating me. ;-) You obviously don't live in Connecticut. $2.49 and they act like they are doing us a favor. You see, here in the Nutcase....er, Nutmeg State, the Democrats who control the Legislature came up with this brilliant program - it's called Zone Pricing Policy. It was intended to level out the price of gasoline across the state so that the areas with higher income levels paid more than those with lower income levels. Of course what happened was exactly the opposite. Zone Pricing means that they can sock it to the rural parts of the state and keep the gas prices in the cities cheap. Hartford gas is about .11/15¢ cheaper for example and it's pretty much the same in other cities in the state. Move out of the city, bend over. And now that it's entrenched, it can't be changed because it's a money maker - um, I'm sorry - REVENUE ENHANCER which brings in tons of taxes for the treasury. And it makes money for the companies who retail the gas along with the distributors. So it can't be changed. This is the same bunch of bozos who figured that electricity would be cheaper if the Utility companies divested their power generating plants and purchased their energy on the open market passing the savings along to the customer. This brilliant stroke of genius caused a 50/75% increase in electricity rates in the past two years because they never figured that the generators of power would have to make money also. California did it and got screwed? Oh, well we're smarter than that - won't happen here. Dumbasses. Oh and get this. The latest is that the Legislature, 98% Democrats, is now working towards allowing the Utility companies to purchase back the generation plants they just sold - at a premium of course financed by.... Wait for it... Wait for it.... Tax subsidies to the Utility companies!!! Including state bonding to improve the plants!!! Brilliant!!! Unfortunately, it won't make the rates go down because...um...well... er...becasue. BUT, they won't go up in the future. We think. Maybe. Like hell they won't. And to think Ohio was once owned by Connecticut and called New Connecticut. Thank goodness you sold the land to folks who have reason and sponsor a great college football team. Teeheenyuknyuknyuk! |
Gasoline prices..............
I just paid 2.69... we're always screwed in CA with the supposed "special
formulation" only required here. Oh yeah, my last utility bill... $455. Yup, de-regulation has worked wonders here. --Mike "Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message ... On Thu, 11 Jan 2007 17:37:13 -0500, "JimH" wrote: ......going down. Under $2/gallon on the street at some places here. Election time must be coming up...........oops..........that happened last November. ;-) For Chuck:......gasoline - boats.........gasoline - tow vehicles. Just a preemptive strike to keep the head sheriff from interrogating me. ;-) You obviously don't live in Connecticut. $2.49 and they act like they are doing us a favor. You see, here in the Nutcase....er, Nutmeg State, the Democrats who control the Legislature came up with this brilliant program - it's called Zone Pricing Policy. It was intended to level out the price of gasoline across the state so that the areas with higher income levels paid more than those with lower income levels. Of course what happened was exactly the opposite. Zone Pricing means that they can sock it to the rural parts of the state and keep the gas prices in the cities cheap. Hartford gas is about .11/15¢ cheaper for example and it's pretty much the same in other cities in the state. Move out of the city, bend over. And now that it's entrenched, it can't be changed because it's a money maker - um, I'm sorry - REVENUE ENHANCER which brings in tons of taxes for the treasury. And it makes money for the companies who retail the gas along with the distributors. So it can't be changed. This is the same bunch of bozos who figured that electricity would be cheaper if the Utility companies divested their power generating plants and purchased their energy on the open market passing the savings along to the customer. This brilliant stroke of genius caused a 50/75% increase in electricity rates in the past two years because they never figured that the generators of power would have to make money also. California did it and got screwed? Oh, well we're smarter than that - won't happen here. Dumbasses. Oh and get this. The latest is that the Legislature, 98% Democrats, is now working towards allowing the Utility companies to purchase back the generation plants they just sold - at a premium of course financed by.... Wait for it... Wait for it.... Tax subsidies to the Utility companies!!! Including state bonding to improve the plants!!! Brilliant!!! Unfortunately, it won't make the rates go down because...um...well... er...becasue. BUT, they won't go up in the future. We think. Maybe. Like hell they won't. |
Gasoline prices..............
No change in Seattle.
JR JimH wrote: ......going down. Under $2/gallon on the street at some places here. Election time must be coming up...........oops..........that happened last November. ;-) For Chuck:......gasoline - boats.........gasoline - tow vehicles. Just a preemptive strike to keep the head sheriff from interrogating me. ;-) -- -------------------------------------------------------------- Home Page: http://www.seanet.com/~jasonrnorth |
Gasoline prices..............
My heating gas bill for this past month was $388.00 and it's been a
mild winter! Oh yeah, our electricity supplier,Ameren/CIPS has decided they need to raise electric rates by up to...55% They say they arn't making any money, but the CEO gets almost $24 mil. a year plus stock options, and various other perks.... Mike wrote: I just paid 2.69... we're always screwed in CA with the supposed "special formulation" only required here. Oh yeah, my last utility bill... $455. Yup, de-regulation has worked wonders here. --Mike "Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message ... On Thu, 11 Jan 2007 17:37:13 -0500, "JimH" wrote: ......going down. Under $2/gallon on the street at some places here. Election time must be coming up...........oops..........that happened last November. ;-) For Chuck:......gasoline - boats.........gasoline - tow vehicles. Just a preemptive strike to keep the head sheriff from interrogating me. ;-) You obviously don't live in Connecticut. $2.49 and they act like they are doing us a favor. You see, here in the Nutcase....er, Nutmeg State, the Democrats who control the Legislature came up with this brilliant program - it's called Zone Pricing Policy. It was intended to level out the price of gasoline across the state so that the areas with higher income levels paid more than those with lower income levels. Of course what happened was exactly the opposite. Zone Pricing means that they can sock it to the rural parts of the state and keep the gas prices in the cities cheap. Hartford gas is about .11/15¢ cheaper for example and it's pretty much the same in other cities in the state. Move out of the city, bend over. And now that it's entrenched, it can't be changed because it's a money maker - um, I'm sorry - REVENUE ENHANCER which brings in tons of taxes for the treasury. And it makes money for the companies who retail the gas along with the distributors. So it can't be changed. This is the same bunch of bozos who figured that electricity would be cheaper if the Utility companies divested their power generating plants and purchased their energy on the open market passing the savings along to the customer. This brilliant stroke of genius caused a 50/75% increase in electricity rates in the past two years because they never figured that the generators of power would have to make money also. California did it and got screwed? Oh, well we're smarter than that - won't happen here. Dumbasses. Oh and get this. The latest is that the Legislature, 98% Democrats, is now working towards allowing the Utility companies to purchase back the generation plants they just sold - at a premium of course financed by.... Wait for it... Wait for it.... Tax subsidies to the Utility companies!!! Including state bonding to improve the plants!!! Brilliant!!! Unfortunately, it won't make the rates go down because...um...well... er...becasue. BUT, they won't go up in the future. We think. Maybe. Like hell they won't. |
Gasoline prices..............
Funny how big business works. In my small business, I'm the LAST one to get
paid. --Mike "Tim" wrote in message ups.com... My heating gas bill for this past month was $388.00 and it's been a mild winter! Oh yeah, our electricity supplier,Ameren/CIPS has decided they need to raise electric rates by up to...55% They say they arn't making any money, but the CEO gets almost $24 mil. a year plus stock options, and various other perks.... Mike wrote: I just paid 2.69... we're always screwed in CA with the supposed "special formulation" only required here. Oh yeah, my last utility bill... $455. Yup, de-regulation has worked wonders here. --Mike "Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message ... On Thu, 11 Jan 2007 17:37:13 -0500, "JimH" wrote: ......going down. Under $2/gallon on the street at some places here. Election time must be coming up...........oops..........that happened last November. ;-) For Chuck:......gasoline - boats.........gasoline - tow vehicles. Just a preemptive strike to keep the head sheriff from interrogating me. ;-) You obviously don't live in Connecticut. $2.49 and they act like they are doing us a favor. You see, here in the Nutcase....er, Nutmeg State, the Democrats who control the Legislature came up with this brilliant program - it's called Zone Pricing Policy. It was intended to level out the price of gasoline across the state so that the areas with higher income levels paid more than those with lower income levels. Of course what happened was exactly the opposite. Zone Pricing means that they can sock it to the rural parts of the state and keep the gas prices in the cities cheap. Hartford gas is about .11/15¢ cheaper for example and it's pretty much the same in other cities in the state. Move out of the city, bend over. And now that it's entrenched, it can't be changed because it's a money maker - um, I'm sorry - REVENUE ENHANCER which brings in tons of taxes for the treasury. And it makes money for the companies who retail the gas along with the distributors. So it can't be changed. This is the same bunch of bozos who figured that electricity would be cheaper if the Utility companies divested their power generating plants and purchased their energy on the open market passing the savings along to the customer. This brilliant stroke of genius caused a 50/75% increase in electricity rates in the past two years because they never figured that the generators of power would have to make money also. California did it and got screwed? Oh, well we're smarter than that - won't happen here. Dumbasses. Oh and get this. The latest is that the Legislature, 98% Democrats, is now working towards allowing the Utility companies to purchase back the generation plants they just sold - at a premium of course financed by.... Wait for it... Wait for it.... Tax subsidies to the Utility companies!!! Including state bonding to improve the plants!!! Brilliant!!! Unfortunately, it won't make the rates go down because...um...well... er...becasue. BUT, they won't go up in the future. We think. Maybe. Like hell they won't. |
Gasoline prices..............
Mike wrote: Funny how big business works. In my small business, I'm the LAST one to get paid. --Mike Me too, Mike. me too.... |
Gasoline prices..............
Mike wrote:
I just paid 2.69... we're always screwed in CA with the supposed "special formulation" only required here. $1.95 at my corner station Oh yeah, my last utility bill... $455. Yup, de-regulation has worked wonders here. NG bill for Dec / 3000 s.f. house with two furnaces was $169 --Mike "Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message ... On Thu, 11 Jan 2007 17:37:13 -0500, "JimH" wrote: ......going down. Under $2/gallon on the street at some places here. Election time must be coming up...........oops..........that happened last November. ;-) For Chuck:......gasoline - boats.........gasoline - tow vehicles. Just a preemptive strike to keep the head sheriff from interrogating me. ;-) You obviously don't live in Connecticut. $2.49 and they act like they are doing us a favor. You see, here in the Nutcase....er, Nutmeg State, the Democrats who control the Legislature came up with this brilliant program - it's called Zone Pricing Policy. It was intended to level out the price of gasoline across the state so that the areas with higher income levels paid more than those with lower income levels. Of course what happened was exactly the opposite. Zone Pricing means that they can sock it to the rural parts of the state and keep the gas prices in the cities cheap. Hartford gas is about .11/15¢ cheaper for example and it's pretty much the same in other cities in the state. Move out of the city, bend over. And now that it's entrenched, it can't be changed because it's a money maker - um, I'm sorry - REVENUE ENHANCER which brings in tons of taxes for the treasury. And it makes money for the companies who retail the gas along with the distributors. So it can't be changed. This is the same bunch of bozos who figured that electricity would be cheaper if the Utility companies divested their power generating plants and purchased their energy on the open market passing the savings along to the customer. This brilliant stroke of genius caused a 50/75% increase in electricity rates in the past two years because they never figured that the generators of power would have to make money also. California did it and got screwed? Oh, well we're smarter than that - won't happen here. Dumbasses. Oh and get this. The latest is that the Legislature, 98% Democrats, is now working towards allowing the Utility companies to purchase back the generation plants they just sold - at a premium of course financed by.... Wait for it... Wait for it.... Tax subsidies to the Utility companies!!! Including state bonding to improve the plants!!! Brilliant!!! Unfortunately, it won't make the rates go down because...um...well... er...becasue. BUT, they won't go up in the future. We think. Maybe. Like hell they won't. |
Gasoline prices..............
Yeah, rub it in why dontchya!
--Mike "Animal05" wrote in message ... Mike wrote: I just paid 2.69... we're always screwed in CA with the supposed "special formulation" only required here. $1.95 at my corner station Oh yeah, my last utility bill... $455. Yup, de-regulation has worked wonders here. NG bill for Dec / 3000 s.f. house with two furnaces was $169 --Mike "Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message ... On Thu, 11 Jan 2007 17:37:13 -0500, "JimH" wrote: ......going down. Under $2/gallon on the street at some places here. Election time must be coming up...........oops..........that happened last November. ;-) For Chuck:......gasoline - boats.........gasoline - tow vehicles. Just a preemptive strike to keep the head sheriff from interrogating me. ;-) You obviously don't live in Connecticut. $2.49 and they act like they are doing us a favor. You see, here in the Nutcase....er, Nutmeg State, the Democrats who control the Legislature came up with this brilliant program - it's called Zone Pricing Policy. It was intended to level out the price of gasoline across the state so that the areas with higher income levels paid more than those with lower income levels. Of course what happened was exactly the opposite. Zone Pricing means that they can sock it to the rural parts of the state and keep the gas prices in the cities cheap. Hartford gas is about .11/15¢ cheaper for example and it's pretty much the same in other cities in the state. Move out of the city, bend over. And now that it's entrenched, it can't be changed because it's a money maker - um, I'm sorry - REVENUE ENHANCER which brings in tons of taxes for the treasury. And it makes money for the companies who retail the gas along with the distributors. So it can't be changed. This is the same bunch of bozos who figured that electricity would be cheaper if the Utility companies divested their power generating plants and purchased their energy on the open market passing the savings along to the customer. This brilliant stroke of genius caused a 50/75% increase in electricity rates in the past two years because they never figured that the generators of power would have to make money also. California did it and got screwed? Oh, well we're smarter than that - won't happen here. Dumbasses. Oh and get this. The latest is that the Legislature, 98% Democrats, is now working towards allowing the Utility companies to purchase back the generation plants they just sold - at a premium of course financed by.... Wait for it... Wait for it.... Tax subsidies to the Utility companies!!! Including state bonding to improve the plants!!! Brilliant!!! Unfortunately, it won't make the rates go down because...um...well... er...becasue. BUT, they won't go up in the future. We think. Maybe. Like hell they won't. |
Gasoline prices..............
JimH wrote: ......going down. Under $2/gallon on the street at some places here. Election time must be coming up...........oops..........that happened last November. ;-) For Chuck:......gasoline - boats.........gasoline - tow vehicles. Just a preemptive strike to keep the head sheriff from interrogating me. ;-) Gas isn't under $2.00 here yet, but close. I heard some world economy guru saying that he thinks it'll get down below $1.50. His reasoning is that the Arabs are getting ****ed at the Iranians and are leveraging them by lowering oil prices. Iran needs the high prices because they are in economic dire straits. |
Gasoline prices..............
Harry Krause wrote:
On 1/12/2007 6:20 AM, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 03:51:25 GMT, "Mike" wrote: Funny how big business works. In my small business, I'm the LAST one to get paid. I've been working with a guy I've known for years - he started up a mechanical engineering/machine shop that does custom fittings and highly specialized machined parts for all kinds of industries. He has some metallurgical expertise that's hard to find and some machinists who are absolute geniuses with a CNC machine. He pays himself $1 more than the highest paid employee he has. But that's not the modern American way. The CEO is supposed to earn 5,327 times what the production workers earn, and the production workers are supposed to be marginalized and then laid off so production can be moved to China, where labor costs 20 cents an hour and more money can go to the bigwigs back here and the overseers who run the Chinese sweatshops. Do you think the union pension plans have their members money sitting in a box somewhere? No, they have it invested in businesses, profitable businesses where the value of the company increases and the stock price goes up. *That's* the American way. And that's why we're fighting in Iraq: to protect the American way. :} Whether you like it or not we have to have a stable oil supply and since the whiners in the USA won't let us drill in our on backyard for oil we have to get it from someplace. |
Gasoline prices..............And a few tips on saving fuel
JimH wrote: ......going down. Under $2/gallon on the street at some places here. Election time must be coming up...........oops..........that happened last November. ;-) For Chuck:......gasoline - boats.........gasoline - tow vehicles. Just a preemptive strike to keep the head sheriff from interrogating me. ;-) Stock up. And maybe haul a few truckloads out to Washington. Just under $3 a gallon for 92-octane around here, although that is indeed down $1 from the summer of '06 pricing. This should be the "low point" of the year, or almost. The refineries need to begin emptying their wintertime, oxygenated formulations during the month of February. We will soon be hearing that the oil companies need to clobber us so they can "prepare for potential hurricanes" in the summer of '07. We will soon begin to hear that "summer driving season" is creating excess demand. We will soon begin to hear that emerging economies are outbidding us for imported crude. All the reasons we heard before explaining why a 10-cent per gallon increase in the price of crude at the wellhead must translate into a $1 increase in the price of refined products. As far as the election goes, it seems to me there was some guy from Ohio, last November, advising everybody that since the D's were in control of Congress that gas prices would go through the roof and that it was time to "sell all of your stocks". Can't quite remember who that was anymore, but I wonder if he still feels that way? You're from Ohio, Jim, so if you run into this guy whose name I can't remember you might ask him if he sold all of his stock... There are some steps one can take to reduce fuel consumption when boating. An item that will be appearing in one of our regional publications follows: ************* Easing the Pain at the Fuel Dock As we begin the 2007 boating year, there is probably no completely accurate way to predict what fuel prices will be in those late spring and summer months when most of us do the majority of our boating. Political tensions seem not have eased in some of the major oil-exporting areas of the world, emerging industrial nations are demanding increasing quantities of crude oil, and our North American refinery capacity continues to contract rather than expand. Crude oil futures could be an indicator, but we have recently observed that there does not appear to be a direct correlation between percentage increase in a barrel of crude oil and the percentage increase in the price of a gallon of fuel. If the past couple of years can be considered indicative, the oil companies are likely to go for the jugular vein during the "vacation driving season" (which is also the primary boating season) and back down to a more modest level of profit during the "winter heating season". Bless their hearts for the charity. Fortunately, most boaters have some very effective choices available that will not only reduce the amount of fuel we're required to purchase but can contribute to greater enjoyment of our boats in general. Some of these choices are becoming increasing practical, as even the steps that will result in only modest savings in the quantity of fuel consumed might pay off long before the end of the season when gas or diesel is being taken aboard at figures exceeding 50-cents a pint. Start with a simple tune-up: A properly tuned and serviced engine is essential for maximizing fuel efficiency. Dirty injectors, valves out of adjustment, or worn out sparkplugs and other gasoline engine ignition components overdue for replacement are increasingly likely to cost a boater more to ignore than to address and correct. Assuring the engine(s) is in optimum condition will dramatically improve the likelihood of trouble-free summer cruises. If fuel savings weren't incentive enough, a cleaner environment and the potential savings of any costs associated with being towed back to port should additionally inspire us all to be certain we are mechanically prepared for the months of summer fun ahead. It would be unwise to overlook the transmission when prepping for the season and attempting to be proactive about fuel costs. Transmissions that are just beginning to slip might or might not "make it" to the end of the season, but a slipping transmission will reduce the efficiency of the entire propulsion system and exert a notable and negative influence on a boater's annual fuel costs. What may be a moderate repair and expense now could easily become a major expense before fall or even prove to be the straw that breaks the back of a summer vacation cruise. The better repair shops get booked up pretty rapidly following the winter boat shows, so there is no time like the present to schedule mechanical maintenance services to save fuel and ensure more reliable operation. Bald is beautiful: Hair may look great on a movie actor or a runway model, but the "hair" that consists of marine organisms clinging to or trailing from the bottom of a boat is expensive as well as unsightly. Hitchhiking plants and animals increase frictional forces that impede a hull's progress through water. According to an exhaustive study performed by International Marine Coatings, a typically fouled bottom can decrease fuel efficiency by as much as 8%. The higher the cost of fuel climbs, the more frequently it becomes cost effective to haul out and clean the bottom. (Be sure to have the bottom cleaned by a permitted boatyard with facilities to filter and recycle the wash water). Reduce excess weight: Health clubs and gymnasiums are at their busiest each year during the month of January. Dietary indiscretions associated with the holidays and renewed dedication to fitness consistent with New Years' resolutions have greater numbers of us more conscious of our personal body weights. January is also a great time to check for unnecessary weight aboard our boats. On a small runabout, even an extra 200 pounds consisting of unused fishing tackle, too many redundant tools, etc can result in a notable decrease in fuel efficiency. Large cruisers would be less effected by the same 200-pounds, but have the capacity to stow perhaps a ton of stuff aboard that goes unused year after year. While it is a recommended practice to keep fuel tanks filled and thereby discourage internal condensation, during the busy summer season some boaters might be better advised to run with a bit less fuel and water. Vessels that might have, (for instance), 110-gallon fuel capacity but are routinely used in a manner that burns no more than 10-15 gallons per abbreviated outing would be more fuel efficient if filled only to about half capacity. The remaining 55 gallons of fuel would weigh it at well over 300-pounds, adding a significant percentage to the displacement of a smaller runabout. Condensation is less of an issue with water tanks, so there is little incentive for most short trip boaters to carry excess water. Every gallon of water not hauled around needlessly will save 8-pounds. A boater can use excess fuel capacity as a "hedge" against fuel prices. The past couple of summers, fuel prices have risen rapidly in the early portion of the season and then decreased very slowly in late summer and fall. A boater confident that prices will increase dramatically in the near future might be well advised to fill up, even at the risk of having excess weight aboard. Fuel purchased in a declining price environment can be brought aboard in smaller quantities- there's no point paying $4.25 per gallon this weekend for fuel that will be unburned next weekend when the price may have dropped to $3.95 As always, we must think of safety first when reducing weight. Tools and spares are important to have aboard, and each cruise should begin with a supply of fuel sufficient to provide prudent reserve while en route to the next refueling point. Check for a prop-er fit: A vessel's propeller(s) are critical factors when maximizing fuel efficiency. Propellers too large in diameter or too aggressively pitched will overload an engine and reduce the effective horsepower achieved. Props that are undersized can allow an engine to turn beyond its maximum rated RPM, (with almost certain catastrophic results), and will not efficiently propel the boat. A propeller is placing the proper load on the engine if the RPM can be brought to the maximum rating of the engine, but no more, at wide open throttle. If a vessel is fit with a propeller of proper diameter and pitch, it is then very advisable to check the prop at each haulout. Hitting a chunk of drift, going aground, tickling an "uncharted" rock, and other common boating experiences can take a toll on a prop. Deviations too small for most boaters to notice with a casual glance can make a propeller several percent less efficient than if it were corrected. Propellers are surprisingly serviceable, but must be serviced properly. One of the more accurate means of measuring how well a prop conforms to its manufactured standards is with the use of a computer designed to convert the shape of a prop to digital information. (In the Seattle area, this service is available at Seattle Propeller on Westlake Avenue). Propellers are serviced to conform to a variety of classes of accuracy, and with a computerized scan system a prop can be brought up to the elusive "S" class, or effectively perfect. Operate efficiently: Even boaters unwilling to spend a dime on tuning up, hauling out, hauling off, or proper propping can begin saving on fuel costs almost immediately. Certain operating decisions, many of them specific to various types of hulls, can improve fuel efficiency and range. Vessels with planing hulls will normally realize best fuel economy at either dead slow (where few people selecting a planing hull will want to spend much time) or at the speed where the boat rises above the bow wake to get up onto a plane. The least fuel efficient speeds are typically those near WOT, as well as that awkward point in the curve where the boat is attempting to get up onto plane and is "pushing a wall of water" ahead of it. Some owners of planing hulls have reported that switching from a 3-bladed prop to a 4-bladed prop will get the boat up onto a plane at a lower engine RPM, but the switch can result in slightly less boat speed near WOT. Vessels with displacement or semi-displacement hulls will operate most efficiently if not pressed beyond theoretical hull speed. The formula for calculating theoretical hull speed for boats in general multiplies the square root of the waterline expressed in feet by a factor of 1.34. For example, a boat with a 36-foot waterline would have a square root of 6, and when multiplied by 1.34 the theoretical hull speed would be 8.04 knots. It is certainly possible to exceed theoretical hull speed, particularly with a semi-displacement hull, but extracting that extra knot or two involves pushing that same wall of water along the surface that makes runabouts inefficient at slower speeds. Dropping back to hull speed might make very little difference in elapsed time, but show up as a nice savings at the fuel dock. High tech assistance: Fuel meters can be very cost effective. With real-time reports of the number of gallons per hour being consumed, a boater can experiment with minor changes in speed or trim and instantly evaluate the results. Some active boaters with high horsepower engines would probably recover the cost of fuel flow meters in a surprisingly short period of time. Another component worthy of consideration is an autopilot, particularly for boaters making long course runs in open water. The best helmspeople will fall off a compass course by several degrees in either direction, and the rest of us will deviate by even greater amounts. All of that wandering around adds additional distance to a course, and with a powerboat that additional distance means fuel consumed unnecessarily. A decent autopilot will help save on fuel costs, (a line of reasoning I intend to pursue in upcoming discussions with my wife). Be ready to redefine: When fuel prices shot skyward in the summer of 2006, there were some who thought that pleasure boating would fall off substantially. For the most part, that hasn't been the case. Chatting with boating friends and acquaintances revealed that more of us took shorter cruises, stayed an extra day on the hook here or there without necessarily pressing on to a new destination each afternoon, and made other minor adjustments. One Seattle-area boater observed, "We have decided that instead of feeling that we just must race to Desolation Sound and back every summer, we're going to take it a little slower and spend some years in the San Juan and Gulf Islands instead. It's easy to forget how much there is to see and do closer to home. We'll be darned if the price of fuel will take us off the water, and if going a little slower and staying a little bit closer to home some years is the adjustment we need to make then we are happy to do so." |
Gasoline prices..............
wrote: On Thu, 11 Jan 2007 17:37:13 -0500, "JimH" wrote: ......going down. Under $2/gallon on the street at some places here. I paid 2.42 the other day on the road, it is 3.09 on the water. You can shop around and do a little better and you can certainly spend more if you don't. (Lee County Fl.) Seeing that I trailer my boat[s] to the lake, I usually fill before before getting to the lake. in the small boat, I will only use 7-10 gal. for a day. When I was taking my old 27' Chris Craft up and down the ohio, I carried about 5 steel "jerry cans" on board so I wouldn't have to fill at a dock. I've never filled at a dock, and really don't plan on it. |
Gasoline prices..............And a few tips on saving fuel
Chuck Gould wrote:
JimH wrote: ......going down. Under $2/gallon on the street at some places here. Election time must be coming up...........oops..........that happened last November. ;-) For Chuck:......gasoline - boats.........gasoline - tow vehicles. Just a preemptive strike to keep the head sheriff from interrogating me. ;-) Stock up. And maybe haul a few truckloads out to Washington. Just under $3 a gallon for 92-octane around here, although that is indeed down $1 from the summer of '06 pricing. This should be the "low point" of the year, or almost. The refineries need to begin emptying their wintertime, oxygenated formulations during the month of February. We will soon be hearing that the oil companies need to clobber us so they can "prepare for potential hurricanes" in the summer of '07. We will soon begin to hear that "summer driving season" is creating excess demand. We will soon begin to hear that emerging economies are outbidding us for imported crude. All the reasons we heard before explaining why a 10-cent per gallon increase in the price of crude at the wellhead must translate into a $1 increase in the price of refined products. As far as the election goes, it seems to me there was some guy from Ohio, last November, advising everybody that since the D's were in control of Congress that gas prices would go through the roof and that it was time to "sell all of your stocks". Can't quite remember who that was anymore, but I wonder if he still feels that way? You're from Ohio, Jim, so if you run into this guy whose name I can't remember you might ask him if he sold all of his stock... There are some steps one can take to reduce fuel consumption when boating. An item that will be appearing in one of our regional publications follows: ************* Easing the Pain at the Fuel Dock As we begin the 2007 boating year, there is probably no completely accurate way to predict what fuel prices will be in those late spring and summer months when most of us do the majority of our boating. Political tensions seem not have eased in some of the major oil-exporting areas of the world, emerging industrial nations are demanding increasing quantities of crude oil, and our North American refinery capacity continues to contract rather than expand. Crude oil futures could be an indicator, but we have recently observed that there does not appear to be a direct correlation between percentage increase in a barrel of crude oil and the percentage increase in the price of a gallon of fuel. If the past couple of years can be considered indicative, the oil companies are likely to go for the jugular vein during the "vacation driving season" (which is also the primary boating season) and back down to a more modest level of profit during the "winter heating season". Bless their hearts for the charity. Fortunately, most boaters have some very effective choices available that will not only reduce the amount of fuel we're required to purchase but can contribute to greater enjoyment of our boats in general. Some of these choices are becoming increasing practical, as even the steps that will result in only modest savings in the quantity of fuel consumed might pay off long before the end of the season when gas or diesel is being taken aboard at figures exceeding 50-cents a pint. Start with a simple tune-up: A properly tuned and serviced engine is essential for maximizing fuel efficiency. Dirty injectors, valves out of adjustment, or worn out sparkplugs and other gasoline engine ignition components overdue for replacement are increasingly likely to cost a boater more to ignore than to address and correct. Assuring the engine(s) is in optimum condition will dramatically improve the likelihood of trouble-free summer cruises. If fuel savings weren't incentive enough, a cleaner environment and the potential savings of any costs associated with being towed back to port should additionally inspire us all to be certain we are mechanically prepared for the months of summer fun ahead. It would be unwise to overlook the transmission when prepping for the season and attempting to be proactive about fuel costs. Transmissions that are just beginning to slip might or might not "make it" to the end of the season, but a slipping transmission will reduce the efficiency of the entire propulsion system and exert a notable and negative influence on a boater's annual fuel costs. What may be a moderate repair and expense now could easily become a major expense before fall or even prove to be the straw that breaks the back of a summer vacation cruise. The better repair shops get booked up pretty rapidly following the winter boat shows, so there is no time like the present to schedule mechanical maintenance services to save fuel and ensure more reliable operation. Bald is beautiful: Hair may look great on a movie actor or a runway model, but the "hair" that consists of marine organisms clinging to or trailing from the bottom of a boat is expensive as well as unsightly. Hitchhiking plants and animals increase frictional forces that impede a hull's progress through water. According to an exhaustive study performed by International Marine Coatings, a typically fouled bottom can decrease fuel efficiency by as much as 8%. The higher the cost of fuel climbs, the more frequently it becomes cost effective to haul out and clean the bottom. (Be sure to have the bottom cleaned by a permitted boatyard with facilities to filter and recycle the wash water). Reduce excess weight: Health clubs and gymnasiums are at their busiest each year during the month of January. Dietary indiscretions associated with the holidays and renewed dedication to fitness consistent with New Years' resolutions have greater numbers of us more conscious of our personal body weights. January is also a great time to check for unnecessary weight aboard our boats. On a small runabout, even an extra 200 pounds consisting of unused fishing tackle, too many redundant tools, etc can result in a notable decrease in fuel efficiency. Large cruisers would be less effected by the same 200-pounds, but have the capacity to stow perhaps a ton of stuff aboard that goes unused year after year. While it is a recommended practice to keep fuel tanks filled and thereby discourage internal condensation, during the busy summer season some boaters might be better advised to run with a bit less fuel and water. Vessels that might have, (for instance), 110-gallon fuel capacity but are routinely used in a manner that burns no more than 10-15 gallons per abbreviated outing would be more fuel efficient if filled only to about half capacity. The remaining 55 gallons of fuel would weigh it at well over 300-pounds, adding a significant percentage to the displacement of a smaller runabout. Condensation is less of an issue with water tanks, so there is little incentive for most short trip boaters to carry excess water. Every gallon of water not hauled around needlessly will save 8-pounds. A boater can use excess fuel capacity as a "hedge" against fuel prices. The past couple of summers, fuel prices have risen rapidly in the early portion of the season and then decreased very slowly in late summer and fall. A boater confident that prices will increase dramatically in the near future might be well advised to fill up, even at the risk of having excess weight aboard. Fuel purchased in a declining price environment can be brought aboard in smaller quantities- there's no point paying $4.25 per gallon this weekend for fuel that will be unburned next weekend when the price may have dropped to $3.95 As always, we must think of safety first when reducing weight. Tools and spares are important to have aboard, and each cruise should begin with a supply of fuel sufficient to provide prudent reserve while en route to the next refueling point. Check for a prop-er fit: A vessel's propeller(s) are critical factors when maximizing fuel efficiency. Propellers too large in diameter or too aggressively pitched will overload an engine and reduce the effective horsepower achieved. Props that are undersized can allow an engine to turn beyond its maximum rated RPM, (with almost certain catastrophic results), and will not efficiently propel the boat. A propeller is placing the proper load on the engine if the RPM can be brought to the maximum rating of the engine, but no more, at wide open throttle. If a vessel is fit with a propeller of proper diameter and pitch, it is then very advisable to check the prop at each haulout. Hitting a chunk of drift, going aground, tickling an "uncharted" rock, and other common boating experiences can take a toll on a prop. Deviations too small for most boaters to notice with a casual glance can make a propeller several percent less efficient than if it were corrected. Propellers are surprisingly serviceable, but must be serviced properly. One of the more accurate means of measuring how well a prop conforms to its manufactured standards is with the use of a computer designed to convert the shape of a prop to digital information. (In the Seattle area, this service is available at Seattle Propeller on Westlake Avenue). Propellers are serviced to conform to a variety of classes of accuracy, and with a computerized scan system a prop can be brought up to the elusive "S" class, or effectively perfect. Operate efficiently: Even boaters unwilling to spend a dime on tuning up, hauling out, hauling off, or proper propping can begin saving on fuel costs almost immediately. Certain operating decisions, many of them specific to various types of hulls, can improve fuel efficiency and range. Vessels with planing hulls will normally realize best fuel economy at either dead slow (where few people selecting a planing hull will want to spend much time) or at the speed where the boat rises above the bow wake to get up onto a plane. The least fuel efficient speeds are typically those near WOT, as well as that awkward point in the curve where the boat is attempting to get up onto plane and is "pushing a wall of water" ahead of it. Some owners of planing hulls have reported that switching from a 3-bladed prop to a 4-bladed prop will get the boat up onto a plane at a lower engine RPM, but the switch can result in slightly less boat speed near WOT. Vessels with displacement or semi-displacement hulls will operate most efficiently if not pressed beyond theoretical hull speed. The formula for calculating theoretical hull speed for boats in general multiplies the square root of the waterline expressed in feet by a factor of 1.34. For example, a boat with a 36-foot waterline would have a square root of 6, and when multiplied by 1.34 the theoretical hull speed would be 8.04 knots. It is certainly possible to exceed theoretical hull speed, particularly with a semi-displacement hull, but extracting that extra knot or two involves pushing that same wall of water along the surface that makes runabouts inefficient at slower speeds. Dropping back to hull speed might make very little difference in elapsed time, but show up as a nice savings at the fuel dock. High tech assistance: Fuel meters can be very cost effective. With real-time reports of the number of gallons per hour being consumed, a boater can experiment with minor changes in speed or trim and instantly evaluate the results. Some active boaters with high horsepower engines would probably recover the cost of fuel flow meters in a surprisingly short period of time. Another component worthy of consideration is an autopilot, particularly for boaters making long course runs in open water. The best helmspeople will fall off a compass course by several degrees in either direction, and the rest of us will deviate by even greater amounts. All of that wandering around adds additional distance to a course, and with a powerboat that additional distance means fuel consumed unnecessarily. A decent autopilot will help save on fuel costs, (a line of reasoning I intend to pursue in upcoming discussions with my wife). Be ready to redefine: When fuel prices shot skyward in the summer of 2006, there were some who thought that pleasure boating would fall off substantially. For the most part, that hasn't been the case. Chatting with boating friends and acquaintances revealed that more of us took shorter cruises, stayed an extra day on the hook here or there without necessarily pressing on to a new destination each afternoon, and made other minor adjustments. One Seattle-area boater observed, "We have decided that instead of feeling that we just must race to Desolation Sound and back every summer, we're going to take it a little slower and spend some years in the San Juan and Gulf Islands instead. It's easy to forget how much there is to see and do closer to home. We'll be darned if the price of fuel will take us off the water, and if going a little slower and staying a little bit closer to home some years is the adjustment we need to make then we are happy to do so." Thanks for an excellent, informative post. -- Stan -- ÐÏࡱá |
Gasoline prices..............
JimH wrote:
......going down. Under $2/gallon on the street at some places here. Election time must be coming up...........oops..........that happened last November. ;-) For Chuck:......gasoline - boats.........gasoline - tow vehicles. Just a preemptive strike to keep the head sheriff from interrogating me. ;-) $2.79 here, it's a bargain though, just wait a decade or two. Lowering the price is easy, just use less of it, nobody is forcing anyone to buy gas. |
Gasoline prices..............
Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 03:51:25 GMT, "Mike" wrote: Funny how big business works. In my small business, I'm the LAST one to get paid. I've been working with a guy I've known for years - he started up a mechanical engineering/machine shop that does custom fittings and highly specialized machined parts for all kinds of industries. He has some metallurgical expertise that's hard to find and some machinists who are absolute geniuses with a CNC machine. He pays himself $1 more than the highest paid employee he has. Friends of mine own a machine shop and it's the same way. They've got some real talent there, it's the sort of thing I enjoy doing, but there's no way they can afford to pay me what I can make elsewhere. Too bad really, we're all competing with people overseas whos cost of living is a fraction of ours. |
Gasoline prices..............
On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 22:21:53 GMT, James Sweet
wrote: Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 03:51:25 GMT, "Mike" wrote: Funny how big business works. In my small business, I'm the LAST one to get paid. I've been working with a guy I've known for years - he started up a mechanical engineering/machine shop that does custom fittings and highly specialized machined parts for all kinds of industries. He has some metallurgical expertise that's hard to find and some machinists who are absolute geniuses with a CNC machine. He pays himself $1 more than the highest paid employee he has. Friends of mine own a machine shop and it's the same way. They've got some real talent there, it's the sort of thing I enjoy doing, but there's no way they can afford to pay me what I can make elsewhere. Too bad really, we're all competing with people overseas whos cost of living is a fraction of ours. Check the outsourcing post 'over there' and you'll see why it's so cheap to do so. -- ****************************************** ***** Have a super day! ***** ****************************************** John H |
Gasoline prices..............
"James Sweet" wrote in message news:rPTph.34$My1.33@trndny03... JimH wrote: ......going down. Under $2/gallon on the street at some places here. Election time must be coming up...........oops..........that happened last November. ;-) For Chuck:......gasoline - boats.........gasoline - tow vehicles. Just a preemptive strike to keep the head sheriff from interrogating me. ;-) $2.79 here, it's a bargain though, just wait a decade or two. Lowering the price is easy, just use less of it, nobody is forcing anyone to buy gas. Work and life forces people to buy gas. If we had built lots of nuclear plants over the last 20 years, our demand on foreign oil would be almost zero. Thank a lot of the enviros for the oil problems. |
Gasoline prices..............
Calif Bill wrote: "James Sweet" wrote in message news:rPTph.34$My1.33@trndny03... JimH wrote: ......going down. Under $2/gallon on the street at some places here. Election time must be coming up...........oops..........that happened last November. ;-) For Chuck:......gasoline - boats.........gasoline - tow vehicles. Just a preemptive strike to keep the head sheriff from interrogating me. ;-) $2.79 here, it's a bargain though, just wait a decade or two. Lowering the price is easy, just use less of it, nobody is forcing anyone to buy gas. Work and life forces people to buy gas. If we had built lots of nuclear plants over the last 20 years, our demand on foreign oil would be almost zero. Thank a lot of the enviros for the oil problems. And don't forget to thank Three Mile *ISLAND* (boating tie-in for JimH) and that catastrophic meltdown in Russia for demonstrating that nuclear power has some very scary aspects attached. Can you name even one state that is willing to accept the nuclear waste generated anywhere else? Does it make sense to manufacture something that will be immensely deadly for tens of thousands of years after its brief initial productive use? We've got a case of creeping death over in Eastern Wa right this very minute. Failing containment tanks on the Hanford Nuclear Reservation are allowing radioactive waste to migrate toward a nearby watershed and could potentially render much of the North Pacific unusable as a source or food for human beings. Send a few hundred tankers up from California if you think nuclear waste is no big deal. We'll fill em up for you, free of charge. :-) At one time, we almost had a series of nuclear plants built here in Washington State. Known as the WPPS (or "woops" project). The project went into default, and cost a lot of bondholders a bunch of dough. The facts are the the project didn't fail due to "enviro" opposition, but rather because it became apparent that when the projects were completed they would not be able to produce electricity at a competitive price. I'm pretty "green", without being ridiculous about it. I think we need to make prudent use of our natural resources, including oil. We own a hybrid car and one 4-cylinder conventional. We endeavor to not use energy foolishly, and will turn the heat and lights off when we leave the house for even a few hours. However, we do own a boat....... and nobody who owns a boat that doesn't rely strictly upon sails or oars can get too far up on a high horse regarding the careful use of fossil fuel. |
Gasoline prices..............
On 12 Jan 2007 16:58:14 -0800, "Chuck Gould"
wrote: Calif Bill wrote: "James Sweet" wrote in message news:rPTph.34$My1.33@trndny03... JimH wrote: ......going down. Under $2/gallon on the street at some places here. Election time must be coming up...........oops..........that happened last November. ;-) For Chuck:......gasoline - boats.........gasoline - tow vehicles. Just a preemptive strike to keep the head sheriff from interrogating me. ;-) $2.79 here, it's a bargain though, just wait a decade or two. Lowering the price is easy, just use less of it, nobody is forcing anyone to buy gas. Work and life forces people to buy gas. If we had built lots of nuclear plants over the last 20 years, our demand on foreign oil would be almost zero. Thank a lot of the enviros for the oil problems. And don't forget to thank Three Mile *ISLAND* (boating tie-in for JimH) and that catastrophic meltdown in Russia for demonstrating that nuclear power has some very scary aspects attached. Can you name even one state that is willing to accept the nuclear waste generated anywhere else? Does it make sense to manufacture something that will be immensely deadly for tens of thousands of years after its brief initial productive use? We've got a case of creeping death over in Eastern Wa right this very minute. Failing containment tanks on the Hanford Nuclear Reservation are allowing radioactive waste to migrate toward a nearby watershed and could potentially render much of the North Pacific unusable as a source or food for human beings. Send a few hundred tankers up from California if you think nuclear waste is no big deal. We'll fill em up for you, free of charge. :-) At one time, we almost had a series of nuclear plants built here in Washington State. Known as the WPPS (or "woops" project). The project went into default, and cost a lot of bondholders a bunch of dough. The facts are the the project didn't fail due to "enviro" opposition, but rather because it became apparent that when the projects were completed they would not be able to produce electricity at a competitive price. I'm pretty "green", without being ridiculous about it. I think we need to make prudent use of our natural resources, including oil. We own a hybrid car and one 4-cylinder conventional. We endeavor to not use energy foolishly, and will turn the heat and lights off when we leave the house for even a few hours. However, we do own a boat....... and nobody who owns a boat that doesn't rely strictly upon sails or oars can get too far up on a high horse regarding the careful use of fossil fuel. Hey Chuck, your three mile island and chernobyl comparisons are crap. Just ask the French, who somehow manage to get about 80% of their energy from nuke power. -- ****************************************** ***** Have a super day! ***** ****************************************** John H |
Gasoline prices..............
Chuck Gould wrote: Can you name even one state that is willing to accept the nuclear waste generated anywhere else? Jersey? |
Gasoline prices..............
Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 03:51:25 GMT, "Mike" wrote: Funny how big business works. In my small business, I'm the LAST one to get paid. I've been working with a guy I've known for years - he started up a mechanical engineering/machine shop that does custom fittings and highly specialized machined parts for all kinds of industries. He has some metallurgical expertise that's hard to find and some machinists who are absolute geniuses with a CNC machine. He pays himself $1 more than the highest paid employee he has. The problem is that he is the business owner. I could pay myself $8.00 and hour but, at the end of the year, my personal income tax bill would be well over $100K if I took my profit as retained earnings. He's probably an S-corp, too so if he's profitable, the money has to go somewhere. -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
Gasoline prices..............
JohnH wrote: Hey Chuck, your three mile island and chernobyl comparisons are crap. Just ask the French, who somehow manage to get about 80% of their energy from nuke power. -- ****************************************** ***** Have a super day! ***** ****************************************** John H What's this? Are the French suddenly back on the good guy side of the ledger? :-) Two comments: 1. What do the do with the waste? Is it really all that safe, or have they luckily so far avoided paying the piper? 2. Until we invent cars, trucks, trains, and BOATS that run efficiently on electricity and storage batteries we will still need to import most of our energy for transportation needs. I don't think we burn that muh crude oil to generate electricity as it is. |
Gasoline prices..............
The problem is that he is the business owner. I could pay myself $8.00 and hour but, at the end of the year, my personal income tax bill would be well over $100K if I took my profit as retained earnings. He's probably an S-corp, too so if he's profitable, the money has to go somewhere. The money probably goes back into the business. Good CNC machines can get extremely expensive very quickly and shops need to keep adding more machines as they grow and upgrading older machines to compete with everyone else. |
Gasoline prices..............
Chuck Gould wrote: 1. What do the do with the waste? Is it really all that safe, or have they luckily so far avoided paying the piper? Sell it to Iran or N. Korea? |
Gasoline prices..............
On 12 Jan 2007 19:16:46 -0800, "Chuck Gould"
wrote: JohnH wrote: Hey Chuck, your three mile island and chernobyl comparisons are crap. Just ask the French, who somehow manage to get about 80% of their energy from nuke power. -- ****************************************** ***** Have a super day! ***** ****************************************** John H What's this? Are the French suddenly back on the good guy side of the ledger? :-) Two comments: 1. What do the do with the waste? Is it really all that safe, or have they luckily so far avoided paying the piper? 2. Until we invent cars, trucks, trains, and BOATS that run efficiently on electricity and storage batteries we will still need to import most of our energy for transportation needs. I don't think we burn that muh crude oil to generate electricity as it is. But we do burn a lot of natural gas, which is home grown, and could be used to power many of the vehicles you mention. As to waste, go read this: http://russp.org/nucfacts.html It's not overly long. -- ****************************************** ***** Have a super day! ***** ****************************************** John H |
Gasoline prices..............
On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 23:21:08 -0500, wrote: On 12 Jan 2007 19:16:46 -0800, "Chuck Gould" wrote: 2. Until we invent cars, trucks, trains, and BOATS that run efficiently on electricity and storage batteries we will still need to import most of our energy for transportation needs. I don't think we burn that muh crude oil to generate electricity as it is. Actually with a big nuclear componant, hydrogen might start making sense. It takes a lot of energy to separate hydrogen but a nuke has a lot of energy. You are right, what to do with the waste is a problem. Worth reading: http://russp.org/nucfacts.html -- ****************************************** ***** Have a super day! ***** ****************************************** John H |
Gasoline prices..............
Dan wrote:
Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 03:51:25 GMT, "Mike" wrote: Funny how big business works. In my small business, I'm the LAST one to get paid. I've been working with a guy I've known for years - he started up a mechanical engineering/machine shop that does custom fittings and highly specialized machined parts for all kinds of industries. He has some metallurgical expertise that's hard to find and some machinists who are absolute geniuses with a CNC machine. He pays himself $1 more than the highest paid employee he has. The problem is that he is the business owner. I could pay myself $8.00 and hour but, at the end of the year, my personal income tax bill would be well over $100K if I took my profit as retained earnings. He's probably an S-corp, too so if he's profitable, the money has to go somewhere. There is a simple reason for this. Wages are subject to FICA taxes up to around 95k a year, and there is no limit to the Medicare Tax. By taking a reasonable wage, and then taking the rest of business profits as dividends, you legally avoid paying the addiontal taxes. |
Gasoline prices..............
Mike wrote:
Yeah, rub it in why dontchya! $1.88 this morning :-) --Mike "Animal05" wrote in message ... Mike wrote: I just paid 2.69... we're always screwed in CA with the supposed "special formulation" only required here. $1.95 at my corner station Oh yeah, my last utility bill... $455. Yup, de-regulation has worked wonders here. NG bill for Dec / 3000 s.f. house with two furnaces was $169 --Mike "Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message ... On Thu, 11 Jan 2007 17:37:13 -0500, "JimH" wrote: ......going down. Under $2/gallon on the street at some places here. Election time must be coming up...........oops..........that happened last November. ;-) For Chuck:......gasoline - boats.........gasoline - tow vehicles. Just a preemptive strike to keep the head sheriff from interrogating me. ;-) You obviously don't live in Connecticut. $2.49 and they act like they are doing us a favor. You see, here in the Nutcase....er, Nutmeg State, the Democrats who control the Legislature came up with this brilliant program - it's called Zone Pricing Policy. It was intended to level out the price of gasoline across the state so that the areas with higher income levels paid more than those with lower income levels. Of course what happened was exactly the opposite. Zone Pricing means that they can sock it to the rural parts of the state and keep the gas prices in the cities cheap. Hartford gas is about .11/15¢ cheaper for example and it's pretty much the same in other cities in the state. Move out of the city, bend over. And now that it's entrenched, it can't be changed because it's a money maker - um, I'm sorry - REVENUE ENHANCER which brings in tons of taxes for the treasury. And it makes money for the companies who retail the gas along with the distributors. So it can't be changed. This is the same bunch of bozos who figured that electricity would be cheaper if the Utility companies divested their power generating plants and purchased their energy on the open market passing the savings along to the customer. This brilliant stroke of genius caused a 50/75% increase in electricity rates in the past two years because they never figured that the generators of power would have to make money also. California did it and got screwed? Oh, well we're smarter than that - won't happen here. Dumbasses. Oh and get this. The latest is that the Legislature, 98% Democrats, is now working towards allowing the Utility companies to purchase back the generation plants they just sold - at a premium of course financed by.... Wait for it... Wait for it.... Tax subsidies to the Utility companies!!! Including state bonding to improve the plants!!! Brilliant!!! Unfortunately, it won't make the rates go down because...um...well... er...becasue. BUT, they won't go up in the future. We think. Maybe. Like hell they won't. |
Gasoline prices..............
"Chuck Gould" wrote in message oups.com... Calif Bill wrote: "James Sweet" wrote in message news:rPTph.34$My1.33@trndny03... JimH wrote: ......going down. Under $2/gallon on the street at some places here. Election time must be coming up...........oops..........that happened last November. ;-) For Chuck:......gasoline - boats.........gasoline - tow vehicles. Just a preemptive strike to keep the head sheriff from interrogating me. ;-) $2.79 here, it's a bargain though, just wait a decade or two. Lowering the price is easy, just use less of it, nobody is forcing anyone to buy gas. Work and life forces people to buy gas. If we had built lots of nuclear plants over the last 20 years, our demand on foreign oil would be almost zero. Thank a lot of the enviros for the oil problems. And don't forget to thank Three Mile *ISLAND* (boating tie-in for JimH) and that catastrophic meltdown in Russia for demonstrating that nuclear power has some very scary aspects attached. Can you name even one state that is willing to accept the nuclear waste generated anywhere else? Does it make sense to manufacture something that will be immensely deadly for tens of thousands of years after its brief initial productive use? We've got a case of creeping death over in Eastern Wa right this very minute. Failing containment tanks on the Hanford Nuclear Reservation are allowing radioactive waste to migrate toward a nearby watershed and could potentially render much of the North Pacific unusable as a source or food for human beings. Send a few hundred tankers up from California if you think nuclear waste is no big deal. We'll fill em up for you, free of charge. :-) At one time, we almost had a series of nuclear plants built here in Washington State. Known as the WPPS (or "woops" project). The project went into default, and cost a lot of bondholders a bunch of dough. The facts are the the project didn't fail due to "enviro" opposition, but rather because it became apparent that when the projects were completed they would not be able to produce electricity at a competitive price. I'm pretty "green", without being ridiculous about it. I think we need to make prudent use of our natural resources, including oil. We own a hybrid car and one 4-cylinder conventional. We endeavor to not use energy foolishly, and will turn the heat and lights off when we leave the house for even a few hours. However, we do own a boat....... and nobody who owns a boat that doesn't rely strictly upon sails or oars can get too far up on a high horse regarding the careful use of fossil fuel. And the WPPS bond holders were screwed by the courts and states. Being one of the class. A set of states enters into the bond agreement and then decide that was not legal? BS, they have lots of attorneys on staff to review it. The Russian meltdown was a crappy design and 3 mile island leaked nada. The containment vessel did it's job. Hanford and we have friends who are engineers there was a bad design in a bad location for military waste. Move it to desert land and the waste we are talking about is not copius quantities. Coal mining and coal fired plants release about 17 tons of Uranium into the atmosophere every year, plus all the mercury and other heavy metals and causing acid rain. Plus how many deaths a year from coal mining and oil drilling (exclude war)? Nuclear is the only thing we have going for us to reduce oil usage and supply us with clean energy. How much oil is in that boat that runs on wind power? Lots! sails, resin, etc. And most are not complaining about just oil wasting on recreation. Most burn very little oil for boating compared to the rest of their lifestyle. Commuting to work, heating, cookiing and the supply of food to cook takes lots of oil. Supply that energy to heat and cook via electric from nuclear plants or wind power or water power and there will be a huge reduction of oil usage! YOu could even supply most of the commuting power via small 80 mile range pure electric vehicles. Pure electrics now use more energy than hybrids. Line loss and charging losses add up to big numbers. Nuclear, which we have about a 300 million year supply of fuel for, would allow us those inefficiencies and still be a viable source of energy and transportation. |
Gasoline prices..............
On Sat, 13 Jan 2007 20:19:12 GMT, "Calif Bill"
wrote: "Chuck Gould" wrote in message roups.com... Calif Bill wrote: "James Sweet" wrote in message news:rPTph.34$My1.33@trndny03... JimH wrote: ......going down. Under $2/gallon on the street at some places here. Election time must be coming up...........oops..........that happened last November. ;-) For Chuck:......gasoline - boats.........gasoline - tow vehicles. Just a preemptive strike to keep the head sheriff from interrogating me. ;-) $2.79 here, it's a bargain though, just wait a decade or two. Lowering the price is easy, just use less of it, nobody is forcing anyone to buy gas. Work and life forces people to buy gas. If we had built lots of nuclear plants over the last 20 years, our demand on foreign oil would be almost zero. Thank a lot of the enviros for the oil problems. And don't forget to thank Three Mile *ISLAND* (boating tie-in for JimH) and that catastrophic meltdown in Russia for demonstrating that nuclear power has some very scary aspects attached. Can you name even one state that is willing to accept the nuclear waste generated anywhere else? Does it make sense to manufacture something that will be immensely deadly for tens of thousands of years after its brief initial productive use? We've got a case of creeping death over in Eastern Wa right this very minute. Failing containment tanks on the Hanford Nuclear Reservation are allowing radioactive waste to migrate toward a nearby watershed and could potentially render much of the North Pacific unusable as a source or food for human beings. Send a few hundred tankers up from California if you think nuclear waste is no big deal. We'll fill em up for you, free of charge. :-) At one time, we almost had a series of nuclear plants built here in Washington State. Known as the WPPS (or "woops" project). The project went into default, and cost a lot of bondholders a bunch of dough. The facts are the the project didn't fail due to "enviro" opposition, but rather because it became apparent that when the projects were completed they would not be able to produce electricity at a competitive price. I'm pretty "green", without being ridiculous about it. I think we need to make prudent use of our natural resources, including oil. We own a hybrid car and one 4-cylinder conventional. We endeavor to not use energy foolishly, and will turn the heat and lights off when we leave the house for even a few hours. However, we do own a boat....... and nobody who owns a boat that doesn't rely strictly upon sails or oars can get too far up on a high horse regarding the careful use of fossil fuel. And the WPPS bond holders were screwed by the courts and states. Being one of the class. A set of states enters into the bond agreement and then decide that was not legal? BS, they have lots of attorneys on staff to review it. The Russian meltdown was a crappy design and 3 mile island leaked nada. The containment vessel did it's job. Hanford and we have friends who are engineers there was a bad design in a bad location for military waste. Move it to desert land and the waste we are talking about is not copius quantities. Coal mining and coal fired plants release about 17 tons of Uranium into the atmosophere every year, plus all the mercury and other heavy metals and causing acid rain. Plus how many deaths a year from coal mining and oil drilling (exclude war)? Nuclear is the only thing we have going for us to reduce oil usage and supply us with clean energy. How much oil is in that boat that runs on wind power? Lots! sails, resin, etc. And most are not complaining about just oil wasting on recreation. Most burn very little oil for boating compared to the rest of their lifestyle. Commuting to work, heating, cookiing and the supply of food to cook takes lots of oil. Supply that energy to heat and cook via electric from nuclear plants or wind power or water power and there will be a huge reduction of oil usage! YOu could even supply most of the commuting power via small 80 mile range pure electric vehicles. Pure electrics now use more energy than hybrids. Line loss and charging losses add up to big numbers. Nuclear, which we have about a 300 million year supply of fuel for, would allow us those inefficiencies and still be a viable source of energy and transportation. Lots of those folks don't want to hear about coal waste. I wonder why the waste doesn't seem to overwhelm the French? |
Gasoline prices..............
Lots of those folks don't want to hear about coal waste. I wonder why the waste doesn't seem to overwhelm the French? They just pour a sauce over it and eat it? |
Gasoline prices..............
On Sat, 13 Jan 2007 22:35:35 GMT, "RG" wrote:
Lots of those folks don't want to hear about coal waste. I wonder why the waste doesn't seem to overwhelm the French? They just pour a sauce over it and eat it? Chuckle.. |
Gasoline prices..............
Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 21:16:29 -0500, Dan wrote: Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 03:51:25 GMT, "Mike" wrote: Funny how big business works. In my small business, I'm the LAST one to get paid. I've been working with a guy I've known for years - he started up a mechanical engineering/machine shop that does custom fittings and highly specialized machined parts for all kinds of industries. He has some metallurgical expertise that's hard to find and some machinists who are absolute geniuses with a CNC machine. He pays himself $1 more than the highest paid employee he has. The problem is that he is the business owner. I could pay myself $8.00 and hour but, at the end of the year, my personal income tax bill would be well over $100K if I took my profit as retained earnings. He's probably an S-corp, too so if he's profitable, the money has to go somewhere. That's why God invented accountants. And I'm fortunate to have a good one! -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
Gasoline prices..............
Animal05 wrote:
Dan wrote: Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 03:51:25 GMT, "Mike" wrote: Funny how big business works. In my small business, I'm the LAST one to get paid. I've been working with a guy I've known for years - he started up a mechanical engineering/machine shop that does custom fittings and highly specialized machined parts for all kinds of industries. He has some metallurgical expertise that's hard to find and some machinists who are absolute geniuses with a CNC machine. He pays himself $1 more than the highest paid employee he has. The problem is that he is the business owner. I could pay myself $8.00 and hour but, at the end of the year, my personal income tax bill would be well over $100K if I took my profit as retained earnings. He's probably an S-corp, too so if he's profitable, the money has to go somewhere. There is a simple reason for this. Wages are subject to FICA taxes up to around 95k a year, and there is no limit to the Medicare Tax. By taking a reasonable wage, and then taking the rest of business profits as dividends, you legally avoid paying the addiontal taxes. True, but then I would have to live on under $95K throughout the year and take he rest as income in a lump sum. -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
Gasoline prices..............
Animal05 wrote:
$1.88 this morning :-) $2.899 this morning. (blue state) |
Gasoline prices..............
Could do like the religious snake oil salesman, "reverend Ike" did back
in the late 70's. he had a $30,000 a year salary and an unlimited expense acct. Dan wrote: Animal05 wrote: Dan wrote: Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 03:51:25 GMT, "Mike" wrote: Funny how big business works. In my small business, I'm the LAST one to get paid. I've been working with a guy I've known for years - he started up a mechanical engineering/machine shop that does custom fittings and highly specialized machined parts for all kinds of industries. He has some metallurgical expertise that's hard to find and some machinists who are absolute geniuses with a CNC machine. He pays himself $1 more than the highest paid employee he has. The problem is that he is the business owner. I could pay myself $8.00 and hour but, at the end of the year, my personal income tax bill would be well over $100K if I took my profit as retained earnings. He's probably an S-corp, too so if he's profitable, the money has to go somewhere. There is a simple reason for this. Wages are subject to FICA taxes up to around 95k a year, and there is no limit to the Medicare Tax. By taking a reasonable wage, and then taking the rest of business profits as dividends, you legally avoid paying the addiontal taxes. True, but then I would have to live on under $95K throughout the year and take he rest as income in a lump sum. -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
Gasoline prices..............
-rick- wrote:
Animal05 wrote: $1.88 this morning :-) $2.899 this morning. (blue state) I forgot to mention it was premium. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:36 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com