£1.40 a litre

vivatifosi

Wheezy wrote: »

That's cheap!

Average here is 1.29 for unleaded and 1.31 for diesel.

I should be able to get 1.26 somewhere according to petrolprices.com, but can't afford to drive there

The cheap price I can get is at a supermarket in the next town. If I go shop there - which I do sometimes - then I'll always fill up while over there. But then there's all that balancing whether its worth spending 10 minutes in a queue to save 2p a litre. Unless there's a genuine reason to do so, such as low fuel stocks, I hate queuing for petrol. Which is why my 5p off vouchers from Tesco's so often go unused:o.

A question for those living in London - how do you all fill up? For a big city anytime I drive there I hardly ever see a petrol station.

RenovationMan

I dunno if these points have been made already, I'm a little late on this thread and I only have the capacity to read the first and last page of a thread. Anyway...

1) Martin Lewis tells us to only fill up our tanks halfway because we would waste fuel transporting the fuel around with us.

2) The higher fuel bills are, the more people start becoming green and buying more efficient cars. An efficient car not only uses less fuel but produces less harmful emmissions - great for all of us.

3) The higher fuel bills are, the more people will start to drift back to communities where they live, work and go to school in the same eare, where they start using the high street and village shops more.

My sister and her family are a great example of how bad things are getting in regards to cars. She has a car, her husband has a car, her daughter has a car and now her son is learning to drive in anticipation of getting a car. They live in a 3 bed semi with space on the drive for 1 car and space in front of the house for another. The kids park wherever they can on the street, usually in front of other people's houses who also have parking problems. This is the same all over the country, with cars clogging up the streets.

I cant wait for petrol prices and insurance costs to drive people out of their cars and into their communities and onto public transport.

Bring - it - on!

lostinrates

Unleaded 124.9 - 132.9
Diesel 129.9 -135.9
LRP 27.9

No LPG in area

Graham_Devon

Really2 wrote: »

I most probably would not either, but no one is saying graham should cycle. (but ebike gets round the hilly problem)

He just took offence at the idea cycling is not as deadly as everyone thinks.

Took offence?

Bit strong.

You've said I have taken offence at suggesting I bike 40 miles each day on A and B road.

Then I've taken offence at you suggesting it's not as deadly as "everyone" thinks.

I'm just stating fact. Cycling on the A roads around here, with 6ft hedges, national speed limits, arctics and twists and turns, narrowower parts with no seperation lines everywhere is a recipe for serious injury or death.

That's not moaning. That's just realistic. Cycling in towns is a different ballgame altogether.

Being on an "e-bike" would make not a blind bit of difference.

Really2

Graham_Devon wrote: »

You've said I have taken offence at suggesting I bike 40 miles each day on A and B road.

Then I've taken offence at you suggesting it's not as deadly as "everyone" thinks.

I'm just stating fact. Cycling on the A roads around here, with 6ft hedges, national speed limits, arctics and twists and turns, narrowower parts with no seperation lines everywhere is a recipe for serious injury or death.

That's not moaning. That's just realistic. Cycling in towns is a different ballgame altogether.

Being on an "e-bike" would make not a blind bit of difference.

No one said get one, no one told you to cycle 40 miles a day, where did I say any of that?

You told me to "think about it" on bike deaths??? (is that not getting on the deffencive?)
Yes miles it may look difference as your average biker will not buy one to do 1000 miles a week, But hours traveling may make it look different, if I spend 60 mins on a road or a car or a bike are the dangerous not similar. You would cover more miles in the car but it is the time on/in each one that is relevent not distance.
You can die on/in either popping to the shops.

But no one has told you an ebike is a solution for you so what the hell are you getting on your high horse about?

As usually you have read what you want to read not what anyone has wrote.

We have stated other options to you as their are ones for 40 mile journeys but you have dismissed them and focused on bikes for some reason?????

As for moaning I did not say (again) you were moaning about bikes I was said you were moaning about fuel price but unwilling to do anything to change?

wotsthat

Graham_Devon wrote: »

How many of those 5 million cyclists are on national speed limit, twisty, hilly A roads with no cycle lane?

Think about it.

Quite a few I would have thought as it's difficult to cycle any distance without encountering these roads. With petrol at £1.40 (and being highlighted heavily in the media) there will be more cyclists about and less drivers.

People have different views about what's safe and what isn't based on the same data. My view is that, overall, as a country we'd be better off in many ways if people used cycles more and cars less. Of course there's no point in being the greenest and fittest person in the graveyard but all of life comes with risk and reward.

I find the bigger problem than the traffic is the state of the roads. They tend to be worse at the edges which encourages cyclists towards the middle of the road. A town local to me has painted lines on the insides designated for cycles but the surface is appalling. This will probably get worse before it gets better as local councils cut back on repairs.

abaxas

So....

Drive at 85 on the motorway = petrol costs you £1.40 a litre
Drive a 70 on a motorway = petrol costs you the £1.00 a litre in equivalent usage.

AD9898_2

Having read through this thread I am puzzled as why it's concentrating on cycling to work etc.. Without cheap oil feeding the economy just what are you going to be doing when you get to work ? Although fossil fuels are required for 95% of global transport. Cheap oil is required for every part of our lives.

From plastics, food, metal fabrication, mining. It even takes a cup full of oil to make a disposable nappy. So although transport is a significant issue, it is just one of the myriad of problems that we will face over the coming years.

Procrastinator333

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Better than that.....

I have a company fuel card.;)

If a company pays for an employees personal fuel, there are significant tax liabilities for the employee. I don't recall the detail, but the break even point for taking that option is something like 20,000 personal miles for a typical car.

So 1 of the following is true.

1) you are paying the tax and doing sub the break even point. Ooooppppss.
2) you are paying the tax and doing over the break even point. Blimey!
3) you are not paying the tax and while your company is at fault for not taking it, u would probably still be liable for it.
4) you are not declaring you use it for personal use. Naughty.
5) there is an exemption I am not aware of. If it is this one, please let me know as curious.

wotsthat

AD9898 wrote: »

Having read through this thread I am puzzled as why it's concentrating on cycling to work etc.. Without cheap oil feeding the economy just what are you going to be doing when you get to work ? Although fossil fuels are required for 95% of global transport. Cheap oil is required for every part of our lives.

From plastics, food, metal fabrication, mining. It even takes a cup full of oil to make a disposable nappy. So although transport is a significant issue, it is just one of the myriad of problems that we will face over the coming years.

Don't be puzzled - look at the thread title - '£1.40 a litre'. To me that would imply it's a thread about the cost of petrol. Some people have suggested ideas that might reduce the cost of motoring.

I don't think anyone is denying the fact that we have an oil based economy.