Fuel Price Increase [Merged]

[kennster]

mahal na mag-kotse.. pag nagcommute naman baka mahold-up.. no win situation na naman tyo! :mad:

[van_wilder]

hindi naman gobyerno natin ang may problema eh, lalong hindi ang mga oil companies... yun situation sa middle east... masmahal pa nga sa ibang bansa eh... pero ang problema ay mataas ang tax ng gas sa atin... dapat luxury items ang mataas ang tax hindi basic needs...

[cyberdoc95]

Hi Folks! I know that its still probably going to be 10-15 yrs away for cars utilizing new fuel source, but there is still hope for all these crises. First, when hybrid cars reach the rest of the globe, or second, actually shifting to a different source of fuel, hydrogen fuel that is!!

Read this article for further info.....



Tomorrow's petrol is a gas


Shell's first US hydrogen station is open now, reports John Vidal. But will we all be filling up soon?

Thursday November 11, 2004
The Guardian

It was billed as the "team of dreams" when in 2003 Shell, the world's second's largest oil company, linked with General Motors (GM), the largest car maker, to invest up to a billion dollars over 10 years to develop the world's "hydrogen economy". Yesterday, in a small ceremony near Washington DC, one of the fruits of the relationship was shown off.
In front of US department of energy and industry leaders, Shell opened its first American hydrogen service station. A prototype GM minivan powered by a fuel cell - a device that combines hydrogen and oxygen to make electricity - filled up with hydrogen at a conventional-looking pump and drove off into what some believe will be a cleaner, less oil-dependent future.

Car and chemical manufacturers as well as governments are pumping money into hydrogen and fuel cell vehicle research and the infrastructure for a hydrogen economy. New interest in what is called "tomorrow's petrol" follows President Bush's December 2003 decision to put hydrogen at the centre of US renewable technologies.

Jeremy Bentham, Shell's head of hydrogen, was upbeat. "The opening of this station marks a new phase of development of the infrastructure for the hydrogen economy. In the next few years, perhaps 2010 or 2012, fuel cell vehicles will be commercialisable. By 2050 we believe that hydrogen will be playing a significant role as an energy carrier, increasingly made from non-fossil fuels," he said.

The decision may be linked to September 11, American love of technology or US foreign oil dependency, but, says Bentham, it's also about making money.

Shell's Benning Road filling station in Washington is one of some 22 new stations for fuel cell and hydrogen-powered vehicles built in the past year, making about 90 worldwide, but critics say solving problems of producing, distributing and storing the gas will require hundreds of billions of dollars.

But the hydrogen/fuel cell route has serious scientific critics. A committee of the US National Academy of Sciences earlier this year said it will not solve energy problems, that fuel cell vehicles only marginally reduce greenhouse gases, and that there are big safety, cost and distribution barriers to overcome. "In the best case scenario, the transition to a hydrogen economy would take many decades, and any reductions in oil imports and carbon dioxide emissions are likely to be minor during the next 25 years," said the authors.

Dr Joe Romm, assistant energy secretary to Bill Clinton and now director of the Centre for Energy and Climate Solutions, was in charge of the US hydrogen programme for five years. He says the hydrogen economy is being overhyped, and touting it as a clean energy panacea is diverting money from simpler conservation technologies and kidding the public that hydrogen is "green" while the gas will most likely be produced using fossil fuels.

"GM have denigrated and downplayed hybrids [electric/petrol combination cars]. They see hydrogen as terrific PR. It makes them look like they are environmentally [friendly] while they stave off fuel economy regulations. I think it will be seen as a major blunder."

More than $7bn (£3.98bn) is earmarked by US, EU and Japanese governments and industry for hydrogen/fuel cell R&D. The US energy department is putting up $1.7bn; Japan $4bn over 15 years with a goal of 5m fuel cell vehicles by 2020. Nissan is committing $500m and DaimlerChrysler $1bn. GM says it wants to be the first car company to sell a million hydrogen/fuel cell vehicles while California's governor, Arnold Schwarzenegger, promises a $100m "hydrogen highway" with more than 200 stations by 2010.

"Pursue it or rue it," said one car industry executive this week.

"The momentum is growing," says Bentham. "It's facts, not fiction now. We actually have the nodes of a hydrogen economy. Investment is on a serious scale". He compares the nascent industry's situation with mobile telephony in the 1980s. "We're in the 'clunky' phase, but we know that this technology is going to be very attractive."

Producing hydrogen and handling large quantities are not the problem, he says. Shell alone produces 7,000 tonnes a day from its refineries and world annual hydrogen output is about 50 million tonnes and growing 10% a year. It is largely used to make nitrogen-based fertilisers and to convert low-grade crude oil into transport fuels.

Hydrogen can be extracted from biomass or even seawater, but the primary source today is natural gas - which is not as environmentally friendly as the car companies want people to think because it breaks down into hydrogen and greenhouse gases

Bentham says that in combination with a fuel cell engine, it is far cleaner than conventional fuel. "The energy content of a kilo of hydrogen is about the same as a gallon of petrol, but the efficiency of the fuel cell is far higher than the internal combustion engine," he says.

What is overlooked, says Romm, is that hydrogen is an energy carrier, not an energy source. "You use a lot of fossil fuels at the front end to get to hydrogen at the back end. It's discouraging for me as a clean energy advocate that people are putting claims out that aren't based on reality."

The cost of producing hydrogen from renewable sources, he says, is between $10 to $20 a gallon of petrol equivalent. "They tell you that the future is pollution-free but for the next few decades you will have to subsidise research into hydrogen and fuel cells.

"No alternative energy vehicle makes much sense in the US for 20 years at least. Of all of them, the fuel cell car is the least likely and most implausible."

Shell says the claim that it's just good PR is too cynical. "There was a lot of hype in the late 1990s. But it is a very realistic view that by 2010-2012 vehicles will be commercialisable," says Bentham.

"Whether they will be mass-produced depends on governments and car manufacturers."

[ssaloon]

Originally posted by ILuvDetailing
I highly doubt that there will be a rollback or if there is one it would be minimal (a couple of centavos maybe?) cuz all the major oil players are still "covering for their losses". BS!!!

well, for refiners like shell and petron, malaki pa rin ang margin nila kasi di naman mashadong mataas ang crude prices compared to that of refined products which are directly imported by caltex and some other players. yan ang palugi talaga ang benta.

mataas parain kita nil petron kasi may buffer pa rin sila na $3-$5 eh.

say crude oil is $49/barrel. refining cost is somewhere around 2-3 bucks lang. compare this to importing refined diesel * $55/barrel + $2 premium from trader, mas mura parin talaga.

[ssaloon]

and just to add to my previous post, excise tax exempt ang crude imports, customs duties lang ang babayaran, so less tax payments on the part of crude importers also, which can constitute to lower product cost sa kanila, hence higher profit.

[qman]

tumaas na naman ang presyo ng krudo? tsk tsk tsk

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++
Oil firms say price hike warning 'factual,' not 'blackmail'

Posted 07:58am (Mla time) Feb 06, 2005
By Abigail Ho
Inquirer News Service

THE WARNING from oil firms that fuel prices will increase if their value-added tax (VAT) exemptions are lifted is "factual" and not a form of blackmail, an oil industry executive said Saturday.
Reacting to Senator Manuel Villar's remark on Friday that oil firms were airing threats of higher oil prices to prevent the lifting of their VAT exemptions, Fernando Martinez, chair of the Independent Philippine Petroleum Companies Association (IPPCA), said the lawmaker did not seem to know what he was talking about.

"That's not blackmail. That's factual. He is so wrong. He doesn't seem to get it," Martinez said in a phone interview.

In a position paper submitted to the Senate committee on ways and means, the IPPCA had warned that the price of the socially sensitive diesel would increase by P2.59 a liter and that of unleaded gasoline by P2.94 a liter should oil firms be subjected to a 12-percent VAT rate.

Roberto Kanapi, Shell general manager for external affairs, said: "Shell

will increase product prices effective 12:01 a.m. tomorrow (Sunday) as follows: gasoline, 40 centavos a liter; diesel and kerosene, 30 centavos a liter; and LPG (liquefied petroleum gas), 40 centavos a kilo.

"This increase is the start of a more frequent review of product prices to reflect market conditions. Discounts to the transport sector will remain."

Martinez said independent oil firms and even the major players of the oil industry had never hidden the fact that should their VAT exemptions be lifted, consumers would have to shoulder the added cost.

He said the warning of higher pump prices had been aired starting from the hearings at the House of Representatives in December up to the time that the lifting of the oil firms' VAT exemptions was approved by the chamber last week.

Now, with hearings being conducted at the Senate, oil firms are airing the same warning of having to pass on the tax burden to consumers, he said.

[cyberdoc95]

Parang so many things are happening in just a short period of time. Too much so soon!! Ang kinatatakutan ko lang nito if hindi na makaya pa ng mga Pilipino at magkaka-social unrest out of desperation. That could be even worse! Dahil sa sobrang pag-increase ng lahat ng bilihin at milyon-milyon ang hindi halos makakain dalawang beses isang araw, baka hindi na makayanan ng sambayanan especially when hindi sanay sa drastic changes ang mga Pinoy.

Hopefully naman,dahan-dahan na muna ang Arroyo administration kasi parang sobra ang measures na ginawa,although kailangan din itong gawin. Pero they have to take into consideration ang makakaya ng Pinoy. Baka the next thing na lang mangyari, mag-mass breakdown na then mag-unrest na ang buong Pilipinas kagaya ng nangyari sa Chile ba yun or Argentina(?)...Tapos nag-collapse ang ekonomiya...Sana naman hindi ito mangyari sa Pilipinas..Huwag naman..

[falken]

Damn the OPEC members for being so greedy, and damn bush for going into Iraq.

[ssaloon]

magpagas na kayo. nagtaas na shell kagabi. petron and caltex later today...

[cyberdoc95]

[SIZE=3]
Oil prices may increase next month[/SIZE]
ABS-CBN NEWS
Wednesday, February 23, 2005 2:26 PM

The Department of Energy announced Tuesday that oil prices might increase next month.

Energy Undersecretary Peter Abaya said the price increase could reach over $5 per barrel for finished gasoline and $2 per barrel for finished diesel.

The energy department made the announcement after the Dubai Crude, which is used by Shell and Petron companies, increased by $1 in the world market.

According to the oil companies, the increased value of the Dubai Crude in the world market would be equivalent to 35 centavos per liter.

Meanwhile, transport groups announced that if another oil price increase would take effect next month they will be forced to ask for another fare increase.
abs-cbnNEWS.com