Cheap Gas – Big Problem

Guest Post by Eric Peters

Expect gas prices to go up – a lot.gas-lead

Soon.

Not because of dwindling supply. If anything, there is too much oil. From a certain perspective.

Whether oil is abiotic (produced by geothermal or other such processes rather than via the decay over time of organic matter) and so – heresy! – renewable or simply because it is now possible to get at oil located in places where it was formerly not accessible (or at least not economically accessible) the market is swimming in oil.

There are tankers full of it parked off the Texas coast, waiting to unload. The line is long because prices are low. And prices are low because supply is high.

Good, right?

Very bad.

From a certain perspective… .

The government’s perspective.gas-prices-today

It has been hard-selling high-mileage (and high cost) cars. Not only hybrids but also conventional cars dressed out with elaborate fuel-saving equipment such as direct injection (a much more complicated system than relatively simple electronic port fuel injection), turbochargers (now being used in every type of car, even family cars) and intricate/elaborate transmissions (automated manuals, CVTs; transmissions with eight and nine speeds).

There is no market demand for any of this.

It is demanded by the government.

Not directly, but it doesn’t matter – because the end result is the same: We pay more for equipment we don’t need that doesn’t make the car perform any better but does make it cost more to buy and (often) much more to repair.

All because of government’s mania about fuel efficiency.

Which makes no sense when gas is $2 a gallon – and 50 cents of that, at least is taxes.

In real (inflation adjusted) terms, gas is a cheaper today than it was in 1965.

When Lyndon Johnson was president, regular cost about 31 cents per gallon. Today, more than 50 years later, it costs 26 cents (inflation adjusted).

It is among the handful of necessary things that cost less today than in the past. Food, rents – all cost much more than they used to. Toyota Prius hybrid

But not fuel.

Because supply has increased. Or access to supply.

Either way, it costs less.

Yet the government issues increasingly hysteric fatwas – regulatory edicts such as Corporate Average Fuel Efficiency mandatory minimums – that only make economic sense if gas prices are higher now than they were 50-something years ago.

Much higher.

At least $4 a gallon.

Otherwise, why would any economically literate person choose to spend thousands extra to buy a “fuel efficient” car when it would cost him less to buy a less “efficient” one that’s also larger or more powerful or simply more fun to drive?

Exactly.

Which explains why hybrids and electric cars – the leading edge of the spear, so to speak – are selling poorly and why big trucks and thirsty crossover SUVs are selling well.arrow

This no doubt infuriates the government – the government bureaucrats who are behind all the fatwas.

They have already jacked up the CAFE mandatory minimum to 35.5 MPG and are looking to almost double it, to 54.5 MPG.

This is the energy policy equivalent of the idiocy in New York outlawing the selling of soda over a certain number of ounces.

People just buy two smaller bottles instead.   

With regard to cars, people want size and power and capability and as long as gas is inexpensive, fuel economy is a tertiary consideration, if it is considered at all.

Meanwhile, the government is more obsessed with fuel economy than ever. Well, as regards our “efficiency” with fuel. The Dear Leader’s 4 MPG limo will not be swapped for an armored Prius; there will be no Tesla-ized electric tanks or solar-powered B52s.

The fatwas continue.dear-leader-car

This creates perverse – and conflicting – incentives.

In order to placate the government while also pleasing customers, the car industry has its engineers burning the midnight oil trying to figure out how to design engines that produce V8 power out of four cylinders – in order to get four cylinder mileage – which leads to heavily turbocharged/direct-injected and very small engines whose long-term reliability is questionable and whose repair costs are certain to be economically catastrophic.

This is already the case with transmissions – the automated manual, CVT and eight/nine-speed boxes that began appearing about ten years ago in mass market market cars and which are now in widespread use in new cars of every type and price. Some are not repairable; other cost so much to replace (or rebuild, if that’s even possible) that it’s not worth repairing or rebuilding them.

So the car gets thrown away.cheap-gas-2

And the only reason these centrifugal bumble-puppy transmissions are being installed in cars is to eke an extra MPG or two out of the drivetrain. In order to placate the government and its MPG fatwas.

Meanwhile, gas stays cheap.

Which is a huge problem – for the government.   

The beetle-like men (and women, if you want to call them that) who inhabit the bureaucracies of the federal government are most concerned about the effect of inexpensive fuel. To them, it is a catastrophe. The very last thing they want is abundant, inexpensive energy.johnson

That means no energy “crisis” – less for them to do. Less justification for them and their fatwas.

They have managed to contort the car market but the energy market isn’t cooperating. The price signals – inexpensive energy – are at odds with high-cost “efficient” cars.

There is only solution. The cost of energy must go up.

And it will.

Because if it doesn’t the government’s fatwas will look increasingly demented to the hoi polloi (that’s us) who may begin to wonder out loud why the government is pushing $40,000 “efficient” cars when gas costs less today than it did when LBJ was president.

It will likely happen after the election. Especially if Trump wins the election. The same people who despise cheap energy also despise Trump.

$4 per gallon fuel would be just the ticket to derail his presidency.

And not only that.


Subscribe
Notify of
guest
13 Comments
JIMSKI
JIMSKI
September 14, 2016 1:39 pm

Cue Red Barchetta Rush

KK
KK
September 14, 2016 1:45 pm

Use it up. Your grandchildren will curse you.

Screw those Indians and their 7 generation thinking.

We’re Americans and we are exceptional!

Let’s blow through all that ancient sunlight as fast as we can.

Gotta go drive to the minimart for some cigs and beer.

TC
TC
September 14, 2016 1:47 pm

I mostly agree with the article… though I’m enjoying my turbo and direct injection. Great mileage and fantastic torque. Turbos are much more reliable now (though we’ll see if any of these little turbo gas engines make it to 200k miles…)

mohammed weizel
mohammed weizel
September 14, 2016 2:18 pm

The model t got 25mpg. My f150 gets 18. Progress.

Rdawg
Rdawg
  mohammed weizel
September 14, 2016 3:36 pm

Model T: 2.9 liter displacement, 22 horsepower, 83 ft-lb torque, 1500 lb weight. 0.0147 hp/lb.
F150: 2.7 liter (ecoboost), 325 horsepower, 375 ft-lb torque, 4300 lb weight. 0.0756 hp/lb.

5.1x improvement in power-to-weight ratio at nearly 3/4 the mileage.

Progress.

Coalclinker
Coalclinker
  Rdawg
September 14, 2016 6:40 pm

Nope, not really progress! The F150 stickers for around $45000.
The F150 has 2 fuel pumps. The little one costs about $500 to replace, and the “big” one tucked underneath the intake will run you about $2000 to replace. Both parts are made in China, so it won’t be long before it fucks up.
The F150 has a 6 speed transmission also is chock full of Chinese electronics; when it fucks up that will cost you thousands to replace.
Now, a Ford Model A (a BIG improvement of the Model T) originally cost around $475 in the early 1930’s. In today’s silver price, that would be under $6500 . It has none of the expensive components mentioned. It doesn’t even have a mechanical fuel pump.
A car that has none of the above Chinese bullshit is actually affordable to most Americans while the new F150 certainly is not. Once the car bubble finance racket blows up I predict very few $45000 vehicles will sell at all, much less the elcheapo $20000 junk.
Soon people will wish they could buy a Ford Model A, with taller gearing, hydraulic brakes, and air conditioning plus a few more improvements developed up to around 1973.

Iconoclast421
Iconoclast421
September 14, 2016 3:13 pm

The price of oil is like the pig in the python. A several year spike of high oil prices takes years to filter on through the rest of the economy. By the time the effects are fully absorbed, oil could very well be back up above $100 a barrel again, creating yet another vicious cycle of malinvestment. A lot of demand was destroyed during the price spike of 2010-2014. A great deal of that demand simply isnt coming back. There are going to be less cars because of services like Uber help eliminate the marginal need for transportation. And then there is smartphones and VR, which also reduce the need for transportation. In a healthy economy, raw population growth would offset these “efficiency gains” resulting in a steady increase in consumption. But this is not a healthy economy. There is still population growth, but no real gains in per capita energy consumption once you subtract the top 1%.

ChrisNJ
ChrisNJ
September 14, 2016 4:07 pm

All this CAFE crap is just crony-capitalism that the big 3-4 want to happen because it keeps the 3rd world competition away from north america.
Otherwise we could get a good copy of a 1997 chevy silverado for a fraction of the $35-50K they want for one today.

starfcker the deplorable
starfcker the deplorable
September 14, 2016 5:06 pm

Jim, who wrote this. Is this one of Eric’s? I want to dig in a little, but i’d like to know whom i’m addressing.

starfcker the deplorable
starfcker the deplorable
  Administrator
September 14, 2016 10:59 pm

Thanks, Jim. Eric, i couldn’t agree more that government has gotten way out of hand issuing decrees about gas mileage. I don’t think a president Trump is going to let a lot of this kind of thing stand, none of it went through congress. My read is that gas prices are going to go down, significantly. The middlemen are in a somewhat precarious position, that racket may not survive. I think that government has a much stronger hand with the middlemen, and the producers hate them, too.

Suzanna
Suzanna
September 14, 2016 7:21 pm

Well, we will have to adapt.
Meanwhile, please allow me to register that I am sick to death of
crappy fall-apart miserable Chinese products. Nothing against the
Chinese mind you…but I will warn you…do NOT eat China farmed
fish.

Bea Lever
Bea Lever
  Suzanna
September 14, 2016 11:09 pm

susanna

Do not eat anything from China. You have to be careful at the store because fish could be labeled “Wild Caught” and when you turn the bag over it says-wild caught in the USA-processed in CHINA??? WTF? Why would you send fish caught here all the way to china to be put in a plastic and sent right back here? I don’t trust that at all.