my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Community   » Film-Yak   » Gas Prices in your area (Page 35)

This topic comprises 55 pages: 1  2  3  ...  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  ...  53  54  55

Author Topic: Gas Prices in your area Mike Blakesley Film God Posts: 12767 From: Forsyth, Montana Registered: Jun 99 posted 05-01-2008 11:30 PM                        Passenger train travel is on the rise, but there are huge areas of the country it doesn't serve. Look at amtrak.com for a route map and you'll see what I mean. The high-speed train is the Amtrak Acela which is only in the East, I think. (Could be wrong on that.) We used to have passenger service thru here, two trains a day but it ended about 25 years ago. There's currently a move afoot to get it restored from Washington state as far as Billings (bringing it to within 100 miles of here...it's a start). East of Billings, passenger trains would have to compete with coal trains...we get about 25 to 35 coal trains thru here every day. It's crazy. There's plenty of railroad track that's in fine condition, but it's not been kept up to passenger standards...meaning the trains would roll over it just fine, but the ride could be rough. BNSF ran an Employee Appreciation Special (pulled by a steam engine!) through here a few years ago...I got to ride from here to Glendive on it. It was lots of fun, but there were some definite rough patches.  |  IP: Logged Stephen Furley Film God Posts: 3059 From: Coulsdon, Croydon, England Registered: May 2002 posted 05-02-2008 12:35 AM                     quote: Leo Enticknap And also extra adults. I reckon that if one person travels from York to London (for example), the difference between the cost of the petrol and a rail ticket is not much. But if you've got three or four people going, then you're looking at £50 for the petrol or £250 for train tickets. It's rather different with adults, where it's normally just an economic issue; you get a large 'quantity discount' when you transport several people by car. With babies and young children they will probably go free, or at low cost, but you've got the bother of getting them, plus buggies, supplies of nappies, feeding equipment, toys etc. onto and off buses or trains, up and down footbridge stairs while trying to make sure that those old enough to walk don't wander off on their own. Adults, except in certain cases of disability, can generally get themselves, along with any luggage, shopping etc. on and off. quote: Mike Blakesley The high-speed train is the Amtrak Acela which is only in the East, I think. (Could be wrong on that.) I believe there are plans for a high speed line in CA, but the Acela is only Boston-Washington D.C. I've seen it at Newark, but never been on it. It generally seems to be carrying a fair number of people when I've seen it, maybe three quarters full, but it's expensive. and not very fast; there's only a small part of the journey where it runs at its maximum speed. 'High speed rail' these days generally means a top speed of around 300km/h, about 186 mph, that's the speed of the TGV in France, the recently opened high speed line to the Channel Tunnel in the UK and, I think, the Japanese trains. There are plans to go faster than this in both China and Spain, and probably elsewhere. However, running at these speeds generally means building a new line from scratch rather than upgrading an existing one, and is very expensive. If you're not going to do this then you don't get much benefit from a train like the Acela, because it's running well below its maximum speed for most of the time. I think it reaches 150mph, but only for a small part of the journey, somewhere between New York and Boston. If you're not going to build a high speed line, then you generally get more benefit by running slower speed conventional trains, maybe 100 or 125 mph, but easing the worst of the speed restrictions along the route. Strengthening or reconstructing a weak bridge to remove a 20mph limit, or putting in a few extra loops to allow passenger trains to pass slower freight ones can be done at relatively low cost, and achieve a greater benefit than running trains like the Acels, but running them at well below their maimum speed for most of the time.  |  IP: Logged Scott Jentsch Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1061 From: New Berlin, WI, USA Registered: Apr 2003 posted 05-02-2008 12:17 PM                        It amazes me that we are so poor when it comes to mass transit in the U.S. My brother came back from Europe 20 years ago on a backpacking trip, and he was bragging about how easy it was to get around Switzerland, Germany, etc. by train. We're not any closer to improving mass transit now in many areas than we were then! The Wisconsin DOT is looking at spending $1.9 billion on expanding I-94 south of Milwaukee to eight lanes from the current six. Not a single penny is devoted to bolstering mass transit so that they won't be having to add even more lanes 10-20 years from now. We have an Amtrak line that goes from downtown Milwaukee to downtown Chicago. I've taken it a few times, as well as the Metra commuter rail line that comes from Chicago and ends in Kenosha. Getting to downtown Chicago isn't much faster (the train takes 1 hour 29 mins and Google Maps shows the trip to be 1 hour 45 mins in good traffic, which is hit-and-miss), but it's a lot less stressful, and you don't have to deal with parking once you're there. The $21 fare is a little steep, but I think it's worth it. The Amtrak train could go faster, but not on the rails they are currently using. They are freight rails and not suitable for higher speeds. I would have to think that even if just a miniscule portion of that $1.9 billion were used to improve that line and encouraging people to use it for commuting and travel, maybe we wouldn't need those extra lanes after all. Cities that have efficient, safe, and convenient methods of public transportation are very fortunate.  |  IP: Logged Derrick Huggins Film Handler Posts: 27 From: Gotham City Registered: Feb 2008 posted 05-02-2008 12:21 PM                    we are about at 3.80 for reg 3.90 for mid and 4.10 for 93 octane.  |  IP: Logged Scott D. Neff Theatre Dork Posts: 919 From: San Francisco, CA Registered: Oct 1999 posted 05-02-2008 02:24 PM                        I filled up my teeny VW Golf yesterday at $3.99 /gal for low grade 87 octane. The 13 gallons for my 14 gallon tank cost me about $52.00 --- FOR A VW GOLF. I'm sad now that when gas was $0.89 a gallon I was too poor to ever fill up the tank. I only ever put $5.00 at a time in it. Oh what I'd give to fill up my car for $11.50. To think that by 2010 we'll be paying $5.00 -- it'll be no wonder that people stop taking road trips.  |  IP: Logged William T. Parr Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 823 From: Cedar Park, TX Registered: Nov 2000 posted 05-02-2008 04:10 PM                     Around Austin I ve seen $3.48 for regular, $3.62 for mid and $$3.80 for premium. Diesel has been $4.15 in most places  |  IP: Logged Rene Ferron Film Handler Posts: 52 From: New Brunswick, Canada Registered: Feb 2008 posted 05-02-2008 08:19 PM                     Here it's 1.276 per Liter so about 4.83$ a gallon if my calculation is correct. That is for regular.  |  IP: Logged Joshua Waaland Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 800 From: Cleveland, Ohio Registered: Dec 1999 posted 05-03-2008 08:53 AM                     quote: Scott Jentsch I would have to think that even if just a miniscule portion of that $1.9 billion were used to improve that line and encouraging people to use it for commuting and travel, maybe we wouldn't need those extra lanes after all. Anyone remember the early 90's movie Singles? This was what the main character was trying to tell the city officials in the movie. He had come up with a mass transit train idea and they shot it down saying people loved their cars too much. Fast forward 15 years to now and that same plot may not work in the film. With gas prices so high many people would opt for a train rather than their cars especially when you can leave home for work later because there is no traffic to contend with.  |  IP: Logged Paul Turner Expert Film Handler Posts: 115 From: Corvallis, OR, USA Registered: Apr 2001 posted 05-03-2008 04:30 PM                     Is anyone running a diesel engine on waste vegetable oil? I did a search before posting this but may have missed previous posts, so pardon me if it's been covered. There is a lot of noise about how biofuels are going to starve the planet. However, waste vegetable oil is in a bin behind every restaurant. It doesn't eliminate the need for regular diesel, but on my last ten gallons of diesel, I got almost 900 miles. If you're into dumpster diving with a pump, it costs about 2 hours per 20 gallons on a good night. I can also buy unfiltered used oil at $1 a gallon and oil filtered to 2 mics at $2 a gallon. The technology is old and reliable and a self-installed kit is about $1500. The downsides: --Nothing is free. How much is your time worth? In actuality, it usually just doubles your mileage with some work when you factor in filters and the need to change out old fuel lines. --Certain engines will go thru injector pumps faster. (Fords eat about one a year on vege, whereas a Mercedes will go 200k on the same injector). --Lower power. You feel it on hills, but cruising along at 80mph, it's great. --It's messy. You need to have a place to filter it where you won't mind vege oil all over the place. The good news is when you do spill it, hit it with Simple Green and hose it off. Even with 25 people running waste vegetable oil cars/trucks in our town of 55k, there is more than enough oil to go around. Some of you may be using fryers in your theaters so you can move your old oil into your fuel tank. I have fun with it. As handy as theater people have to be, this seems like a no-brainer for some of you.  |  IP: Logged Mark Gulbrandsen Resident Trollmaster Posts: 16657 From: Music City Registered: Jun 99 posted 05-03-2008 06:14 PM                     Gas dropped 2 cents a gallon from $3.359 to $3.339 here in Bountiful at Smiths. $67.00 to fill the Hummer but thats 2 weeks worth of to and from work for my wife. Mark  |  IP: Logged Tim Reed Better Projection Pays Posts: 5246 From: Northampton, PA Registered: Sep 1999 posted 05-03-2008 11:08 PM                       That's really cool, Paul!  |  IP: Logged Bruce McGee Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1776 From: Asheville, NC USA... Nowhere in Particular. Registered: Aug 1999 posted 05-04-2008 11:39 AM                     Regular is running around $3.60 here in God's Country. I heard my FIRST bitching gas buyer at the pumps yesterday. He was all but screaming about how the prices are killing him. All 18 pump islands were in use, and all people noticed the yelling. I have stopped driving my 1985 Olds Toronado, and my 1983 Ford truck with its large V8 engine. (INSERT: Phil Hill of Cootville has SEEN this truck!!!) I'm now driving my 4-cylinder old Mercedes 190E. It gets good mileage. On diesel being so high, Diesel fuel is not as difficult to refine as gasoline is. So, WHY is it so much more expensive? It's $4.30 here. My local trucker friends are being slammed with costs. One trucker friend has parked his rig for now. He cant afford to run the thing.  |  IP: Logged Richard May Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1057 From: Floral Park, NY USA Registered: Aug 2004 posted 05-04-2008 12:54 PM                     Wow. The price of regular here today just hit $3.97. $4.27 for premium. Last week regular was $3.59. Let's hear it for the oil companies.  |  IP: Logged Mark Hajducki Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 500 From: Edinburgh, UK Registered: May 2003 posted 05-04-2008 06:09 PM                     (GBP) £1.059 / litre which works out as (USD) 7.90$ / US gallon. It doesn't help that the Scotland's only refinery, and a pipeline supplying 1/3 of the UK's oil, was shutdown for 48 hours due to industrial action.  |  IP: Logged Leo Enticknap Film God Posts: 7474 From: Loma Linda, CA Registered: Jul 2000 posted 05-06-2008 01:59 AM                        Still cheaper there than here. £1.09 is about the lowest you can now find in York or Leeds. I was in London over the weekend, where £1.12 appears to be about the norm for standard unleaded.  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 55 pages: 1  2  3  ...  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  ...  53  54  55

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.