Grex Agora46 Conference

Item 183: $2 please!

Entered by albaugh on Thu Aug 28 18:59:41 2003:

Use this item to discuss / complain about the current high price of gasoline.
89 responses total.

#1 of 89 by albaugh on Thu Aug 28 19:01:23 2003:

Last night filled up at $1.88 ($1.889?) per gallon - Clark, Plymouth,
Michigan.  That is the highest I have ever paid for gas, by 10-15 cents.
We'll see if it drops back down significantly after labor day.


#2 of 89 by gull on Fri Aug 29 00:13:13 2003:

I'd complain, except that the price of gas really has very little effect
on my life.  My commute is short, and my vehicles are pretty fuel
efficient.  Also, it's still cheap compared to elsewhere in the world,
and   gas is still a bargain when you get down to it.  We subsidize
gasoline production in all kinds of ways that aren't reflected in the price.


#3 of 89 by i on Fri Aug 29 02:02:14 2003:

I drive a diesel econocar.  I last filled it up about 400 miles ago at
$1.53/gal (pretty high for diesel).  It's down below 1/2 full now, so i
probably'll have to refuel again in early-to-mid September.


#4 of 89 by mcnally on Fri Aug 29 02:11:06 2003:

  My personal level of concern over high gasoline prices has taken a nosedive
  since I moved to an island where it's impossible to drive (a car, at least)
  much more than 35 miles in any direction without running out of road..


#5 of 89 by russ on Fri Aug 29 02:25:48 2003:

Gas prices aren't too high.  IMHO, they won't be high enough
until the Hummer is no longer a viable product and a lack of a
hybrid drivetrain and grid-charging capability is a major
negative to consumers.


#6 of 89 by tod on Fri Aug 29 17:51:25 2003:

This response has been erased.



#7 of 89 by drew on Fri Aug 29 17:56:00 2003:

I want energy-for-transportation to cost the equivalent of half a cent a
gallon. It doesn't necessrily have to be available in the form of petroleum.
In fact, I prefer *much* more compact energy sources.


#8 of 89 by tod on Fri Aug 29 18:04:35 2003:

This response has been erased.



#9 of 89 by gull on Sun Aug 31 23:29:26 2003:

Re #3: What kind of car?  I'm guessing it's a VW, since they're the only
company I know of that sells small diesels in the U.S.


#10 of 89 by drew on Mon Sep 1 00:03:46 2003:

I'm thinking I shoulda insisted on diesel when getting my current car. 700
miles of range on the internal tankage?


#11 of 89 by i on Mon Sep 1 01:51:23 2003:

Re: #9/10
Ja, VW Golf TDI 5-speed.  I've never done 700 miles on a tankful, but i
do too much city driving to get >50MPG and fuel up amid errands, so i
can't vent & fully top off the tank.  On-line bragging suggests that
moderate-speed summer cruising on blue highways can squeak up to 1000
miles out of a tankful (65+ MPG).  My guess is that you could but it'd
be far more a stunt than practical driving.

Today, my sister told me that regular gas is still $2 at Metro Airport.


#12 of 89 by jep on Mon Sep 1 02:58:16 2003:

I saw gas for $1.76 a gallon in Holly today.  I think it's $1.88 here 
in Tecumseh.

I fill up my tank about twice per week, about 13 gallons per fillup.  
Gas is about 25 cents higher per gallon than it was a month ago, which 
means I'm spending about $6.50 more per week than I was.  That's an 
inconvenience, not a crisis, and I'm sure in another month the price 
will drop back to $1.60 per gallon or less.


#13 of 89 by glenda on Mon Sep 1 03:04:30 2003:

We paid $1.73 in Sault Ste. Marie yesterday.  It is between $1.79 abnd $1.89
in the Houghton area.


#14 of 89 by mcnally on Mon Sep 1 05:08:45 2003:

  In Ketchikan, AK, gas is $1.89 at the gas station and $1.62 or so at the
  boat docks.


#15 of 89 by tod on Mon Sep 1 15:01:03 2003:

This response has been erased.



#16 of 89 by bru on Mon Sep 1 23:38:19 2003:

I use the lowest octane, 1.76 a gallon today.


#17 of 89 by russ on Tue Sep 2 03:28:40 2003:

I found some 91-octane gasohol at $1.80 and filled the Taurus.


#18 of 89 by albaugh on Tue Sep 2 04:30:26 2003:

Gas in Plymouth seems to be down to $1.71 / gallon.  We'll see how much lower
it goes now that Labor Day has come and gone...


#19 of 89 by gull on Tue Sep 2 15:02:51 2003:

Re #11: Cool.  I'd like to get a different car to replace my Civic, and
a diesel would be great.  I think one of my main criteria ("quieter than
the Civic on the highway") rules out anything VW makes, though.


#20 of 89 by jaklumen on Tue Sep 2 23:03:57 2003:

Wow-- it's still about $1.85 here.


#21 of 89 by other on Wed Sep 3 04:44:30 2003:

I've filled my gas tank literally about 40 times since 9 August.  Prices were
noticeably lower today, after the holiday weekend.  However, I made a point
yesterday of keeping a steady pace of about 70mph, and actually got in over
150 miles before needing to switch to the reserve tank.


#22 of 89 by albaugh on Wed Sep 3 20:45:47 2003:

Down to $1.67 in Plymouth.


#23 of 89 by i on Thu Sep 4 00:53:35 2003:

Re: #19
I've no idea how quiet a Civic is.  However, it's a fair rule of thumb
that the diesel car is loudest (compared to a gasser) at the lowest 
speeds and quietest at high speeds.


#24 of 89 by gull on Thu Sep 4 03:02:12 2003:

With the Civic it's not so much the engine noise that's troublesome,
it's the road noise.  It's nice enough on asphalt, but we have a lot of
concrete freeways with rough surfaces around here.


#25 of 89 by i on Sun Sep 7 22:43:02 2003:

IHB diesel fuel is about 30 cents cheaper than gas right now.


#26 of 89 by glenda on Sun Sep 7 22:59:08 2003:

We just filled up the tank in Findlay, OH at $1.54/gal, there were places at
$1.53 but we didn't feel like fighting traffic to get to the other side of
the street.  Spending all day on your feet at a Ham radio swap will do that
to you.  We noticed that the first gas station after we passed the Michigan
state line was $1.79.  It was still $1.54 on the Ohio side.


#27 of 89 by gelinas on Mon Sep 8 00:35:36 2003:

I realised how bad off we were in I saw gas at $1.76/gal and thought, "What
a bargain."  I know better.


#28 of 89 by drew on Mon Sep 8 05:54:40 2003:

The derivative seems to be well under the zero mark now, at least.


#29 of 89 by albaugh on Fri Sep 12 17:30:04 2003:

The Clark station in Plymouth listed Unleaded at $1.59, but then it seems to
have gone out of business (it might be getting taken over by Sunoco).  
Today I paid $1.69 in a Sunoco in Westland that used to be Clark.


#30 of 89 by rcurl on Fri Sep 12 17:42:32 2003:

Clark closed a large number of stations, or rather sold them to new
managers, some of which I have never heard of before.


#31 of 89 by keesan on Fri Sep 12 23:35:17 2003:

Jim says he is now spending as much as $1/month on gasoline taking me to the
hospital twice a week.  I hope eventually to be back on a bike.  Normally he
only has to buy gasoline once a year (for two trips to Detroit).  How does
the average American's gasoline bill compare to what is spent on food (some
of which is also subsidized, esp. if you eat cows).


#32 of 89 by klg on Sat Sep 13 01:27:07 2003:

Plan on the car for quite a while.


#33 of 89 by goose on Sat Sep 13 04:39:16 2003:

Sindi would freak at my monthly petrol bill....


#34 of 89 by slynne on Sat Sep 13 08:56:30 2003:

I probably spent $30-$40 a month on gas


#35 of 89 by gelinas on Sat Sep 13 12:52:06 2003:

(So far this year, I've spent $804.02 on gas: $493.77 for the Saturn and
$310.25 for the van.)


#36 of 89 by keesan on Sat Sep 13 14:13:31 2003:

What we find strange is when people build expensive large houses 50 miles from
where they work, which are designed to use minimal energy (solar, etc.) and
then use more energy getting there than in heating a house in town.  A friend
of ours interested in zero-energy houses (they generate as much as they use,
or more, he has a windmill and solar panels), lives 12 miles from town and
drives it every day while his wife commutes to the Detroit area to teach about
how to use less energy in architecture.  This is temporary (for the past 30
years or so) until they move to an intentional community (where he will still
probably have to drive everywhere).  They have not bothered to insulate their
farm house since it is temporary (they heat it anyway) but the refrigerator
runs off the solar panels.  People focus on one thing at a time.


#37 of 89 by katie on Sat Sep 13 18:19:02 2003:

I spend about $10 per day on gas.


#38 of 89 by happyboy on Sat Sep 13 23:59:02 2003:

i have gas right now.


#39 of 89 by lowclass on Sun Sep 14 01:46:13 2003:

        ...and I have plenty I'm willing to share.


#40 of 89 by tod on Sun Sep 14 06:42:48 2003:

This response has been erased.



#41 of 89 by keesan on Sun Sep 14 15:45:35 2003:

Jim is spending $4/week on parking at the hospital when he gives me rides
there and stays all day.  And $1/month for the gasoline to get there.  The
wheelchair use is free.

What would it have to cost for gasoline before people would take the proposed
new train from Ann Arbor to Lansing instead of driving?  Let's assume $10
round trip for the train (or was there also a proposed ticket cost?).


#42 of 89 by cmcgee on Sun Sep 14 17:10:03 2003:

Actually, the Lansing transit authority dropped the idea for that train about
a year ago.  Preliminary estimates of the cost to run it compared to the
number of trips people said they were interested in taking it were just too
high.  And mind you, that's what people _siad_ they were interested in, not
what they would actually do.  In transit people usually express far more
interest in theory than they demonstrate once the service is in place.  

In this case, people didn't even express interest in the service.


#43 of 89 by lynne on Sun Sep 14 17:41:27 2003:

I fill my tank whenever it says it's empty (but it generally has at least 
3-4 gallons left), which probably averages once every 3-4 weeks.  It's a
small tank, though, so it runs me about $10-15.


#44 of 89 by slynne on Sun Sep 14 18:56:12 2003:

The population in SE Michigan is just too spread out to make a train 
like that worth while. Plus commuter trains only work well if there is 
good public transportation at one's destination. 

Gas would have to get really expensive, like over $10 a gallon, before 
I would be willing to take the bus to work if the fares and schedules 
remain what they are now but, of course, if gas prices were to rise so 
would the bus fares. On the other hand, if gas prices were to get to 
$10 a gallon, there would be a lot more people taking the bus so they 
might have more convenient schedules which would increase the liklihood 
of me taking the bus. 

If gas prices were to get to $5 a gallon, I would probably try to 
carpool. I also would considier replacing my car with a hybrid or I 
might consider buying a moped or something. 



#45 of 89 by gelinas on Sun Sep 14 20:07:27 2003:

A few years back, my car would be deadlined from September to December
(while waiting for me to come up with the scratch to repair it).  I found
it just as fast to walk from Arborland to downtown as to wait for the
convenience of AATA.  Since AATA doesn't service Scio Township, I also found
it just as fast to walk from Zeeb to downtown.  And before that, the trip
from Arborland to Plymouth Road Mall went as fast on foot as on the bus.

I realised that I can get anywhere in Ann Arbor on foot in two hours,
which is about what it takes to meet the bus schedule and ride all over
everywhere to get any where.

Until public transportation can offer what *I* consider a reasonable
schedule, never mind fare, I'll walk or drive myself.


#46 of 89 by slynne on Sun Sep 14 21:01:08 2003:

It takes me an hour door-to-door to get from my house to work via the 
bus which is from Ypsi to Ann Arbor so it isnt too bad as far as AATA 
goes. However, it is 4 times longer than it takes me to drive. 

It is too bad this area cant support a rapid transit system. I mean, if 
there were some way to get from my house to work via public 
transportation in 1/2 hour rather than 1 hour, I would probably do it 
now even though it would double my commute time. 


#47 of 89 by russ on Sun Sep 14 22:21:43 2003:

If it was my commute, I'd have to figure the time and hassle to
get from home to the train station and back at both ends.  If
it was more than 10 minutes or so to walk, the time for the
train would probably equal or exceed the time to drive; so long
as time is my most precious asset, that would weigh heavily.


#48 of 89 by keesan on Sun Sep 14 23:28:33 2003:

Jim says he can bike to Ypsi faster than the bus.  His housemate (6'5") used
to do it in 45 minutes door to door.  No waiting time.  Some time in the next
few years there is supposed to be a bike path from A2 to Ypsi that should cut
the time considerably as you don't have to wait for as many cars to get out
of the way so you can continue.  I probably bike only about 2 miles an hour
in downtown Ann Arbor and maybe 4 in the near suburbs because of cars.


#49 of 89 by happyboy on Mon Sep 15 00:22:48 2003:

i can vouch for that.  i use to bike from the hosp area to
downtown ypsi in about 45 min instead of taking the bus


#50 of 89 by glenda on Mon Sep 15 00:23:52 2003:

When I get out of class at 7:00 or 7:30 and the gets me home after 9:00 (with
a 35-45 minute wait in all weathers at Arborland), and it only takes me 8-12
minutes to drive it, depending on traffic; I am sure you can guess which route
I am taking.

We won't even discuss what I have to go through if class or work gets done
after 9:00pm.


#51 of 89 by keesan on Mon Sep 15 02:03:48 2003:

How often does that particular bus run?  I thought they ran every 30 min or
1 hour.  The wait sounds awful particularly in cold weather, outdoors.


#52 of 89 by glenda on Mon Sep 15 03:50:50 2003:

Starting at 7:00pm the entire bus system goes to once an hour.  I have to take
the 7 to Arborland and transfer to the 4.  During the day the schedule has
them arriving at Arborland 15 minutes apart.  After 7 it becomes 35 minutes
with the 7 usually running on time or a bit early and the 4 running late which
often means 45-50 minutes to wait.  The last 4 is scheduled for Arborland at
9:30.  The last 7 from WCC is at 10 with no connecting bus of any sort.  Up
until a few months ago you were just dropped at Arborland as the 7 went out
of service at that time and you were stranded or had to pay an extra $3 for
the night ride taxi.  Now you can take the 7 to the bus garage on S Industrial
and catch the 6 to downtown.  The 4 stops about 3 blocks from my house.  The
closest the 6 gets is State St, close to a mile and gets there around 11:00.
Not a fun walk during the best of weather at that time of night.  In bad
weather it is horrid.  I drive!  If STeve has to take the car he damn well
better be back in town early enough to pick me up.  I shudder when I think
that we supposedly have a good mass transit system compared to others.


#53 of 89 by cmcgee on Mon Sep 15 16:29:44 2003:

WCC is not part of the Ann Arbor service area.  It's outside, in (I think)
Ann Arbor Twp.  You get the service that is paid for by the places you are
getting on and off the bus.  If you were going to school inside the city
limits, you would be able to get a cheap ($2) cab ride home if the line buses
were not running.  

I wish there were some magic way to get local funding for transit.  However,
at current population densities, even within the city, things aren't what you
expect from an "urban" area.  If height limits on buildings continue, we
probably won't ever see that density.  So w will be stuck with low-density,
low demand service levels.  


#54 of 89 by glenda on Mon Sep 15 16:37:23 2003:

It is not a $2 cab ride anymore, it was raised to $3.  Arborland is inside
the city.  If I were to take the cab from WCC I would have to pay meter rates.

Even during the morning when the 4 runs every 15 minutes it takes me about
45 minutes to make the trip I can drive in about 7.  AATA can usually get me
where I need to go, close to the time I need to be there (if it is between
the hours of 8am-9:30pm), but at the cost of a big chunk of my time and,
usually for where I go, more money than I would be spending on gas to drive
myself.  I use it as a backup plan, not a main means of getting around.  My
schedule is too full to spend 8-10 times more time to ride than to drive.


#55 of 89 by cmcgee on Mon Sep 15 17:36:44 2003:

Yeah, in general, an urban bus moves at 12 mph over its route.  That counts
stops, loading and unloading, making connections, etc.  You can almost always
drive faster than that.  

Where buses become effective is when the time to park at either end of the
trip is added in.  I often take the bus because the time to find parking, and
then walking to my destination is an extra 10-15 minutes on my door-to-door
time.  

It also saves me serious ;money because, about once a month I arrive
downtown with insufficient change, or I need to be there more than 2
hours. 

Has anyone tried the Link?  It runs every 8 to 10 minutes in a barbell shaped
route between Forest and Hill and the Ann-Ashley parking structure.  The "bar"
part of the route is from 4th and Liberty to North U and State.  At each end,
it does a clockwise loop.  

I tried it last Friday night to get between North Main and the Diag area,
hopping on and off as I pleased.  It's free until the end of September.  

Worked pretty well on Saturday afternoon too.  Coop, library, Red Hawk,
etc are all easy to get to.  




#56 of 89 by tod on Mon Sep 15 17:41:01 2003:

This response has been erased.



#57 of 89 by gelinas on Mon Sep 15 20:25:03 2003:

(In addition to the slower average speed, the bus takes a longer route between
almost any two points than a car would.)

Someone tried to sell me a lottery ticket the other day.  When I refused, he
asked if I gambled.  I replied that I do, but I didn't elaborate:  I play
parking-meter roulette.  If I have the change, I feed the meter.  If I don't,
sometimes I pay City Hall.


#58 of 89 by mary on Mon Sep 15 23:13:38 2003:

The AATA serves me well.  It is how I get to work and back, in 10 minutes,
door to door, saving probably $1000.00 a year in parking stickers and
gasoline.  Taking the bus also makes it dead easy to enjoy Farmer's Market
on Saturday mornings, attend Art Fair, and get to Ypsi to meet John for
dinner and drive home together, in one car.

I took the AATA into consideration when planning our last move.  I like
the service that much. 


#59 of 89 by slynne on Mon Sep 15 23:59:28 2003:

To be fair, I took AATA into consideration when planning my last move. 
It was important to me to live near a bus line as a backup in case my 
car broke down. This is one reason why I think it is a good idea to 
spend tax dollars on public transportation


#60 of 89 by cmcgee on Tue Sep 16 00:02:54 2003:

re 57:  Yes, commuter lanes are good, but the bus needs to be an express bus,
not making many local stops, for that to work.  

Even better are bus-only lanes, with buses having the right-of-way over
individual vehicles.  When the bus can scoot down the median of the highway,
right past all the fender-benders and stalled cars, in its own lane, bus
riders get better service than drivers.

It is however, extremely difficult to convince streets and roads folks to give
away a lane of asphalt to buses.  


#61 of 89 by gull on Tue Sep 16 00:15:36 2003:

Re #56: I think people in Michigan regard carpool lanes as some sort of 
communist plot.

In Minneapolis, buses were allowed to use the shoulder on some stretches 
of freeway.  I got in the habit of doing a right head check before 
exiting, even if I was in the rightmost lane, just in case there was a 
bus over there.


#62 of 89 by slynne on Tue Sep 16 15:33:59 2003:

If you are going to bother building giving away a whole lane of traffic 
for busses, you might as well go whole hog and build a trolley or 
something. 


#63 of 89 by remmers on Tue Sep 16 15:57:10 2003:

Indeed.  Maybe we should never have dismantled the interurban
railway system.


#64 of 89 by tod on Tue Sep 16 16:51:38 2003:

This response has been erased.



#65 of 89 by cmcgee on Tue Sep 16 17:03:34 2003:

Actually trolleys are counter-productive.  With a bus-lane, once the bus
leaves the congested primary road, the route can be set to meet the rider's
needs.  Neighborhood route changes with rubber-tired buses are much easier
to implement than with tracks or overhead-wire infrastructure.  


#66 of 89 by tod on Tue Sep 16 17:17:30 2003:

This response has been erased.



#67 of 89 by rcurl on Tue Sep 16 17:31:45 2003:

San Francisco has a mix of buses, wheeled buses with overhead wires,
and tracked trams with either overhead wirers or third rails. The
mix seemed to me to work very well (though I still heard complaints
fromlong-time residents about the services). 


#68 of 89 by other on Wed Sep 17 04:21:48 2003:

Some states expressly permit motorcyclists to use restricted lanes, in 
recognition of their comparable efficiency.


#69 of 89 by gull on Wed Sep 17 13:42:12 2003:

In California electric cars also qualify for the HOV lanes.


#70 of 89 by gull on Wed Sep 17 17:57:27 2003:

Scientists offer fix for SUVs 

Fuel-efficient vehicle is based on Explorer 
September 17, 2003

BY TOM AVRIL
KNIGHT RIDDER NEWSPAPERS

PHILADELPHIA -- Vilified by critics as gas-guzzling road hogs. Defended
by families who crave space for kids and soccer gear. 

How to defuse the cultural flashpoint that is the SUV? 

Tuesday, a team of scientists suggested a way: Build a big car with the
appetite of a little one. 

The Union of Concerned Scientists unveiled a blueprint for the Guardian,
a vehicle the group said would get up to 36 m.p.g. -- a 71-percent
improvement over the Ford Explorer it's based on. 

The modifications -- all using available technology -- would cost more
up-front, but would pay for themselves after five years, said David
Friedman, an engineer who codesigned the Guardian. 

The better mileage would not come at the expense of engine power, he said. 

"All of the technology is in the hands of the automakers," Friedman
said. "The problem is they're not giving it to the average consumer." 

An automotive trade group dismissed the report as repackaged ideas that
are impractical or have been rejected by consumers as too expensive. 

"Let's see them build it if they can," said Eron Shosteck, spokesman for
the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers. "Their vehicle may look good
on paper, but we have to make vehicles that drive on pavement."


#71 of 89 by gull on Wed Sep 17 17:59:18 2003:

I'd like to see details.  Actually, what I'd really like to see is
someone take up the challenge and build a prototype.  Eron Shosteck may
turn out to be right, but the condescending tone of his remarks annoys me.


#72 of 89 by tpryan on Wed Sep 17 18:24:52 2003:

        Would a manufacturer, like Ford, allow the purchase of as 
many of the common components as needed for a production model?
Unique frame, body, doors, windows, etc would add to the cost 
of a totally new vechile.


#73 of 89 by rcurl on Wed Sep 17 18:46:59 2003:

SUVs also are also more prone on turning over than "cars". I read that new
rules will require that they be lower, which will also reduce the
disproportionate damage to "cars" in collisions. 



#74 of 89 by keesan on Wed Sep 17 22:43:26 2003:

When visiting a friend in a Chicago suburb, his car was averaging 12 miles
per hour going home on the highway.  The interurban train was much faster but
cost more.  Ann Arbor has plenty of population density and could support a
much better transit system if more people used it.


#75 of 89 by tod on Wed Sep 17 22:50:00 2003:

This response has been erased.



#76 of 89 by jaklumen on Thu Sep 18 06:34:50 2003:

resp:68 I wonder if that's true for Washington-- I remember that they 
could use the express lanes at least in the Seattle area.


#77 of 89 by tod on Thu Sep 18 06:35:31 2003:

This response has been erased.



#78 of 89 by gull on Thu Sep 18 14:27:12 2003:

Re #72: I think the best course would be to buy a production model
vehicle and then modify it.  Yes, the cost will be higher for a one-off,
but that's expected for a prototype.  I'm more curious if they can meet
their 36 mpg target figure with a real vehicle.


#79 of 89 by jaklumen on Thu Sep 18 23:37:48 2003:

remind me what HOV stands for again?  Highway (something) Vehicle?


#80 of 89 by cmcgee on Thu Sep 18 23:55:37 2003:

High Occupancy Vehicle lane


#81 of 89 by jaklumen on Fri Sep 19 02:37:53 2003:

thanks-- I knew I did not have that right at all.  Makes much more 
sense now.


#82 of 89 by russ on Fri Sep 19 04:05:34 2003:

UW-Madison has already gotten about 40 MPG out of a Ford Explorer.
http://www.cae.wisc.edu/~vehicle/moolander.htm


#83 of 89 by gull on Fri Sep 19 14:03:17 2003:

If you read carefully, those are *estimated* values, based on a
mathematical model.


#84 of 89 by tpryan on Fri Sep 19 21:09:40 2003:

        I'm not just talking about prototype, but a production model,
to use as much of high volume production model to get common parts
as the best price.  Instead of paying for all the engineering on 
parts that are not part of the fuel efficency plan.


#85 of 89 by albaugh on Sun Sep 21 19:08:28 2003:

Still at $1.68 at Meijer.  It should have gotten back down into the 50's or
even 40's by now.  Is this like tidal erosion?


#86 of 89 by cmcgee on Sun Sep 21 22:33:03 2003:

$1.46 in rural Lansing-Flint area yesterday.  Same in Lansing.


#87 of 89 by gelinas on Mon Sep 22 03:25:27 2003:

I paid $1.52/gal in Garden City yesterday, and saw $1.57 in Ann Arbor today.


#88 of 89 by gull on Tue Sep 23 14:33:50 2003:

Yeah, I noticed yesterday that the price of regular unleaded had finally
fallen back below the cost of diesel.  Diesel has been $1.599 at Meijer
on Carpenter Road for around a month now.

(I have a gasoline-powered car and a diesel-powered van, so I tend to
notice both prices.)


#89 of 89 by jep on Wed Sep 24 02:14:47 2003:

When we visited Washington DC last week, I drove from the hotel to the 
Metro station, paid $3/day to park, and rode the train to whatever we 
wanted to see.  This was fabulous for us.  I had no business driving 
in Washington DC anyway.  How would I find parking?  I didn't need to 
anyway; the Metro went everywhere we wanted to go, within a 3 or 4 
block walk.  It was a very pleasant way to travel.  The next time we 
go to DC, we're going to fly or take the train and depend entirely on 
the Metro.

It's good we didn't do that this time, since we had to flee the 
hurricane while we were there.  I expect we'll have better luck next 
time with the weather.

In Roanoke, Virginia I bought gas for $1.36.  Throughout Ohio and also 
back in Ann Arbor, I paid about $1.59.  


There are no more items selected.

You have several choices: