Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Study: Shale Oil to Pressure World Prices
The National via Rig Zone ^ | July 06, 2012 | April Yee|

Posted on 07/09/2012 6:01:54 AM PDT by thackney

Oil unlocked from shale formations is set to create a supply glut that could push down crude prices, according to a new study.

Global production capacity at oilfields will increase by 17.6 million barrels per day (bpd) over the next eight years thanks in part to shale, the most significant increase in any decade since the 1980s, according to Leonardo Maugeri, a research fellow at Harvard Kennedy School's Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs.

"Contrary to what most people believe, oil supply capacity is growing worldwide at such an unprecedented level that it might outpace consumption," wrote Mr Maugeri, who is also a former senior vice president for corporate strategy and planning at Italy's Eni. "This could lead to a glut of overproduction and a steep dip in oil prices."

The United States and Iraq are forecast to lead the production increase through 2020, with Saudi Arabia, Russia and China contributing more modest additions. Pumping levels are forecast to decline in Iran, Mexico and the United Kingdom.

US producers of shale oil need crude to be priced only above US$50 to $65 a barrel for their operations to remain profitable.

The development of shale oil has already made North Dakota, home of the Bakken formation, a bigger oil producer than the Opec member Ecuador. Mr Maugeri writes that North Dakota and its neighbour Montana could become the equivalent of a large Gulf producing country within the US.


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: energy; oil; oilprices; oilshale; shale
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051 next last

1 posted on 07/09/2012 6:02:05 AM PDT by thackney
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: thackney

Great post Thack.
You are the FR authority on petroleum.

This is very positive news, if the global warming nuts will actually let us burn the stuff.


2 posted on 07/09/2012 6:05:06 AM PDT by nascarnation
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thackney

This can’t possibly be true, our dear leader told us so.

It must be because people are following dear leaders instruction to air up their tires.


3 posted on 07/09/2012 6:07:13 AM PDT by IMR 4350
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thackney
All this means is that the misanthropes who want to reduce the population of other people by 6.5 billion have to come up with a "scientific consensus" that the production of shale oil is bad.
4 posted on 07/09/2012 6:08:06 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum (Government is the religion of the sociopath.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thackney

Isn’t this what Obama is planning to do away with a second term?


5 posted on 07/09/2012 6:14:37 AM PDT by ClaudiusI
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thackney
There is still a built in hidden tax that the EPA is “Fining” gasoline producers for not putting in alcohol made form cellulose.
6 posted on 07/09/2012 6:18:27 AM PDT by mountainlion (I am voting for Sarah after getting screwed again by the DC Thugs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thackney
US producers of shale oil need crude to be priced only above US$50 to $65 a barrel for their operations to remain profitable.

This number is declining as the experience levels in extracting oil from various shale plays rises.

Of course, investment in R&D is lowering this price.

With the right leader, we could return to $30 per barrel prices within 10 years.....a price that would be far more stable than today's prices due to the reduction of imports from unstable countries.

7 posted on 07/09/2012 6:24:49 AM PDT by Erik Latranyi (When religions have to beg the gov't for a waiver, we are already under socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mountainlion

Just because it doesn’t exist doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be using it.


8 posted on 07/09/2012 6:25:54 AM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: thackney

My goodness...imagine that: more supply and prices fall. Man, is Obozo going to be PO’ed. By closing off ANWAR, off shore and deep water drilling and killing the Keystone project, he’s keeping the price of oil high so his OPEC friends can squeeze us dry. This hopey-changy thing kinda sucks.


9 posted on 07/09/2012 6:27:36 AM PDT by econjack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thackney
US producers of shale oil need crude to be priced only above US$50 to $65 a barrel for their operations to remain profitable.

I remember driving across Texas and Oklahoma years ago thinking about the wells that were pumping and those that were not. Then it hit me: that one is a $30 dollar well and that one is a $40 well.

That being said, I can see Obama cutting a deal with Saudi to increase OPEC production/lower oil prices in order to 1) make US shale production unprofitable, and 2) increase business activity due to cheaper fuels.

10 posted on 07/09/2012 6:27:42 AM PDT by OrioleFan (Republicans believe every day is July 4th, Democrats believe every day is April 15th.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mountainlion

Is it the doing of the EPA or Congress? I didn’t think the EPA had this authority.


11 posted on 07/09/2012 6:28:09 AM PDT by 556x45
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: ClaudiusI
Isn’t this what Obama is planning to do away with a second term?

Yes, he will. By decree of course, bypassing a Republican congress.

12 posted on 07/09/2012 6:29:23 AM PDT by VeniVidiVici (Congrats to Ted Kennedy! He's been sober for two years now!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: ClaudiusI
"Isn’t this what Obama is planning to do away with a second term?"

Shale oil is being pumped on state and private land. Obama can't touch it. What he can do is go after the fracking technique used to recover the oil from the shale.

13 posted on 07/09/2012 6:36:06 AM PDT by avacado
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: thackney

Good post, Thackney.
I’m in the Eagle Ford right now and some of our original facilities that were built only a year or so ago are at full capacity and we’re now going back in them adding additional stabilizers, coolers, storage capacity, etc.
Now...if we can just keep the communists in DC at bay and let us do what we do best, then yeah, we can drive that price down, especially as more experience comes into play, especially on those newer trends out there. There’s more oil right here in the USA than most people realize, but you’ll never hear about it out of DC on the lame stream media.


14 posted on 07/09/2012 6:41:43 AM PDT by lgjhn23
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thackney

Bump


15 posted on 07/09/2012 6:44:37 AM PDT by painter (Rebuild The America We love!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 556x45
Is it the doing of the EPA or Congress

The EPA probably couldn't tax by itself so I think it is something that Boama’s congress did and the EPA is over enforcing. Obama could stop it if he wanted to but he has seen no tax that he did not like.

16 posted on 07/09/2012 6:44:53 AM PDT by mountainlion (I am voting for Sarah after getting screwed again by the DC Thugs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: thackney

I tell anyone that will listen that we are in the biggest oil boom in the history of the world and prices should start reflecting that, dramatically.

I’m asking your honest opinion: Am I full of sh**?


17 posted on 07/09/2012 6:49:29 AM PDT by cuban leaf (Were doomed! Details at eleven.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thackney

Keep on drilling and Fracking...... Its a good thing for America. oBummer hates anything that is good for his aMerIka. But we need to take the White House back in 2012.


18 posted on 07/09/2012 6:52:15 AM PDT by ncfool (OMG 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thackney

Yes, more oil will drive prices down, but that doesn’t mean the Obama admin and his leftist flunkies are happy. They’ve painted themselves into a corner...an ideological one. In 2008 they blamed high gas prices on the Bush admin which caused distress for the middle class. But all the while the Obama team was for destroying oil-based economies and replacing them with that “wonderful” green technology. Which doesn’t exist or can’t work on a large scale. So now they have to pretend to be happy with lower gas prices while in reality they’re cursing all the shale-oil and frackers who’ve disproved the “peak oil” fallacy once again.


19 posted on 07/09/2012 6:53:29 AM PDT by driftless2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: driftless2

FWIW, Obozo and his amen chorus in the national media just completed a rally in Pittsburgh last week. One of the biggest “accomplishments” which they advertised was “most domestic oil production in U.S. history.” I’m serious. As if Obozo had anything to do with it.


20 posted on 07/09/2012 6:58:03 AM PDT by Vigilanteman (Obama: Fake black man. Fake Messiah. Fake American. How many fakes can you fit in one Zer0?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: OrioleFan

As much as I hate to admit it, I thnk $30/barrel is too low. I think the $50-65/barrel is right and will allow for needed reinvestment and good profit.


21 posted on 07/09/2012 7:06:30 AM PDT by WellyP (question!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Erik Latranyi

I LOVE IT

Just think what a massive global supply of 30 dollar oil would do to the economies of the middle east OPEC tyrants! Now we need to jack up the prices of food, machinery, and construction materials and watch those scumbags starve to death.


22 posted on 07/09/2012 7:12:47 AM PDT by mamelukesabre
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: WellyP

whatevver. IF they can do it for 30 bucks then the price should be 30 bucks. The lower the better...drive that damn OPEC to hell.


23 posted on 07/09/2012 7:17:08 AM PDT by mamelukesabre
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: cuban leaf

“..I tell anyone that will listen that we are in the biggest oil boom in the history of the world....”

I dunno about all of that, but I know about here in the Eagle Ford where I’m at. It kinda reminds me of what I read about the Alaska/Klondike gold rush in the late 1800s or so. Tons of activity going on...oil field traffic, drilling rigs and facilities going up everywhere all along the trend. You can see the effects on the local economies too: RV parks, hotels, restaurants, housing etc. being built and going up all along the trend. “Help Wanted” signs hanging out on a lot of em. It’s totally insane....I love this work, plus, it pisses off the communist DC liberals to no end that an average American might just be able to provide for his family and still maybe set a little aside for the future...despite their best efforts to see that he doesn’t. I would imagine the other newly discovered trends are, or will be, the same way.


24 posted on 07/09/2012 7:19:14 AM PDT by lgjhn23
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Vigilanteman

Oh, they’ll certainly take all the undeserved credit for lower gas prices, but if Obama gets back in, expect him to continue his agenda of demonizing “fossil fuels” and the oil producers. Actually, the Obama admin and all his leftist flunkies thought the public would eagerly embrace green technology i.e. a lower standard of living to “save the world.” It turns out most average Dems do not want to give up their huge cars or grand lifestyles for some Marxist plan anymore than consevative Republicans. So Obama is straddling a very narrow fence. Lower gas prices means more votes but supporting cheap oil means alienating his leftist buddies. What to do.


25 posted on 07/09/2012 7:32:21 AM PDT by driftless2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Erik Latranyi
This number is declining as the experience levels in extracting oil from various shale plays rises.

Yes, as the results of decades of experience with hydraulic fracturing combined the use of horizontal steerable directional drilling and multi-lateral taps, it has declined down to the relatively low numbers in the article, $50 ~ $65.

With the right leader, we could return to $30 per barrel prices within 10 years....

You are dreaming without knowledge.

26 posted on 07/09/2012 8:00:27 AM PDT by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: IMR 4350

Forget what dear leader has told us. A number of nuts on FR have told us the same thing. Once we get past the subject of shale oil, there is deep oil to be discussed. The more oil, the better, and there is a lot of it.


27 posted on 07/09/2012 8:06:21 AM PDT by pallis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: thackney
You are dreaming without knowledge.

I know you are knowledgeable about the industry. I am in it as well.

What most fail to consider is the impact of abundant domestic natural gas on the demand for oil, hence the price.

28 posted on 07/09/2012 8:09:22 AM PDT by Erik Latranyi (When religions have to beg the gov't for a waiver, we are already under socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: cuban leaf
I tell anyone that will listen that we are in the biggest oil boom in the history of the world and prices should start reflecting that, dramatically.

I’m asking your honest opinion: Am I full of sh**?

In my opinion, the first is an overstatement, but a boom is starting non-the-less.

The second is false. What you are missing is that the fields like Eagle Ford, Bakken, Wolford and the other tight formations like shale are recoverable today because of the high price of oil. It if falls dramatically, so will the drilling and then production rates.

29 posted on 07/09/2012 8:10:05 AM PDT by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: thackney

I had heard a long time back that for fracking to be worthwhile, oil would have to be priced at more than $30 a barrel. Did that figure increase?


30 posted on 07/09/2012 8:16:59 AM PDT by cuban leaf (Were doomed! Details at eleven.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: WellyP

Agreed.


31 posted on 07/09/2012 8:35:04 AM PDT by OrioleFan (Republicans believe every day is July 4th, Democrats believe every day is April 15th.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Erik Latranyi
What most fail to consider is the impact of abundant domestic natural gas on the demand for oil, hence the price.

In that context, not just increasing oil supply but reducing demand via changing fuels used by many, your number in today's dollars may be correct but I believe it will take decades.

Unless the gas is converted economically to a gasoline replacement without modification of the vehicle engines, the change over to natural gas will take decades. There are far too many gasoline engine vehicles that are not going to be replaced in ten years. Even if the supply of CNG service stations and vehicles became abundant, most people could not afford the switch without getting value for their current vehicle or continuing to run it until it dies.

If everyone wants a CNG car, who will buy your used gasoline car? How fast would a significant portion of the US ~250 million autos be replaced? Maybe 100 months to replace a 1/3 of them?

32 posted on 07/09/2012 8:57:22 AM PDT by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: cuban leaf
I had heard a long time back that for fracking to be worthwhile, oil would have to be priced at more than $30 a barrel.

You were not told a truth. We have been hydraulically fracturing wells since 1949.

It isn't the process that justifies the cost, it is the formation. At low prices ($30), it cost too much to go after tight formations like the Bakken and Eagle Ford. Drilling and completing the wells would cost more than they would produce.

33 posted on 07/09/2012 9:00:51 AM PDT by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: thackney

Thank you. That is why I posted to you in the first place.


34 posted on 07/09/2012 9:11:25 AM PDT by cuban leaf (Were doomed! Details at eleven.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: thackney
"Contrary to what most people believe, oil supply capacity is growing worldwide at such an unprecedented level that it might outpace consumption," wrote Mr Maugeri, who is also a former senior vice president for corporate strategy and planning at Italy's Eni. "This could lead to a glut of overproduction and a steep dip in oil prices."

PEAK OIL!

Where are the sky-is-falling Peak Oil idiots now? Nowhere to be found. For sure.

If we can EVER get the general public to understand that twin facts that we are awash with oil and than man can't impact global climate very much, it would just crush the ability of the New World Order elites to implement Agenda 21 in the USA.

In the meantime, the MSM continues to brainwash the masses, even in the face of these facts: copious oil supplies and an world climate generally unaffected by man's impact.

Thank you for a most informative and timely post!!!!

35 posted on 07/09/2012 9:19:13 AM PDT by Freedom_Is_Not_Free (REPEAL OBAMACARE. Nothing else matters.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Freedom_Is_Not_Free

There is a significant difference between no oil available, and no cheap oil available.


36 posted on 07/09/2012 9:37:08 AM PDT by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: thackney
If everyone wants a CNG car, who will buy your used gasoline car?

You can already buy conversion kits all day long.

Looks like a potential cottage industry either installing the kits or selling turnkey converted used cars.

37 posted on 07/09/2012 9:50:51 AM PDT by ROCKLOBSTER (Celebrate Republicans Freed the Slaves Month.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: ROCKLOBSTER

The price of the conversion kits, combined with a lack of refueling infrastructure, makes that a rather limited option compared to fleet of vehicles in the US.

Many people (including myself) drive a vehicle worth less than the cost of an installed conversion kit.


38 posted on 07/09/2012 12:32:05 PM PDT by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: ROCKLOBSTER

Some number comparisons to see what I mean.

Here is a recent article talking about prices of conversion kits and fuel costs.

http://investing.businessweek.com/research/stocks/news/article.asp?docKey=600-201206190001KRTRIB__BUSNEWS_14040_38064-1&params=timestamp%7C%7C06/19/2012%2012:01%20AM%20ET%7C%7Cheadline%7C%7CCNG%20vehicles%20will%20get%20more%20rebates%20under%20Oklahoma%20Corporation%20Commission%20plan%20%5BThe%20Oklahoman%2C%20Oklahoma%20City%5D%7C%7CdocSource%7C%7CKnight%20Ridder/Tribune%7C%7Cprovider%7C%7CACQUIREMEDIA%7C%7Cbridgesymbol%7C%7CUS;CHK&ticker=CHK:US

I’ll pick the following to make an example.

$10,000 conversion kit.

$3.50 gasoline cost.

$1.50 CNG cost for equal energy to gasoline.

I only get 14 mpg in my truck and drive about 12,000 miles per year.

Than mean just under 860 gallons of gas per year at $3,000 cost per year.

If I switched to CNG, my cost would be $1,285 for a savings of $1,715 per year.

It will take nearly 6 years just to break even on cost, assuming I would keep the 5 year old truck that long.

And for me, there are not enough CNG stations available, so it would take about 3 more years to pay for the home refueling unit.

The fuel cost savings are significant, but so are the expenses to convert. The market is still too early form most peoples economics to work.


39 posted on 07/09/2012 12:50:37 PM PDT by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: thackney
I am pro business and am not at all fond of interference, but there's a “but” coming: we cannot allow OPEC, the EPA or any other entity to derail the success of domestic production. It is critical to national security and I am absolutely sick of having to kowtow to Middle Eastern terrorist states in order to continue to have fuel.

Put a floor on the domestic price, at $70.00 per barrel. Do not allow OPEC to undermine domestic production via lowballing as occurred in the eighties oil bust. If there is excess then sell it spot on the world market. If spot on the world market rises above this floor, manage the increase to minimize market disruption. This wild seesawing is horribly counterproductive, calm it down.

“Fungibility” and rampant speculation has wrecked our economy just as badly as excessive regulation has. Allow this to take root and the economy benefits.

40 posted on 07/09/2012 1:08:54 PM PDT by RegulatorCountry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thackney

12,000 miles per year is well below average. Try 15,000 to 20,000 and the payback period improves considerably. This is for private individual use also. High annual mileage fleets with gasoline engines should be incented to convert. Use this windfall, support it. Benefit. We need all the help we can get and this is a literal godsend.


41 posted on 07/09/2012 1:14:36 PM PDT by RegulatorCountry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: thackney
$10,000 conversion kit.

Hell, you could get a used CNG F150 for that. (cngvehicles.net)

Most places have NG pipelines for heating, including gas stations. It's only a matter of time before they buy their own commercial compressors and start filling vehicles.

Right now, the home setup looks like the way to go.

42 posted on 07/09/2012 1:23:55 PM PDT by ROCKLOBSTER (Celebrate Republicans Freed the Slaves Month.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: thackney

That is a valuable distinction.


43 posted on 07/09/2012 2:12:07 PM PDT by Freedom_Is_Not_Free (REPEAL OBAMACARE. Nothing else matters.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: RegulatorCountry
Put a floor on the domestic price, at $70.00 per barrel.

Tell me what that means in execution. Are refineries "required by law" to purchase domestic oil "if available" even if cheaper imported is available?

Oil from every source is not equally available at all facilities. Crude oil in general is fungible, but as we have seen with the Keystone XL pipeline, transportation can be significantly limited in places.

44 posted on 07/10/2012 4:42:16 AM PDT by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: RegulatorCountry
12,000 miles per year is well below average. Try 15,000 to 20,000 and the payback period improves considerably.

15~20k is farther above the 13,500 national average than I am below it.

verage Annual Miles per Driver by Age Group
http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ohim/onh00/bar8.htm

nd the payback period improves considerably.

But my 14 mpg is a greater ratio below the average than my mileage. If you use national averages for both values, the payback time gets worse, not better.

High annual mileage fleets with gasoline engines should be incented to convert.

Many fleet service vehicles like garbage trucks, UPS, etc are already changing to CNG or LNG. We don't need to spend taxpayer money to give them reasons to save their own money in fuel.

45 posted on 07/10/2012 4:56:19 AM PDT by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: ROCKLOBSTER
$10,000 conversion kit.

Hell, you could get a used CNG F150 for that. (cngvehicles.net)

Maybe a ten year old CNG pickup. Pretty slim choices at $10k.

http://cngvehicles.net/autos_asearch.php?te_mode=table&te_asearch=true&auto_type=&te_obField=sort_order&te_obDir=DESC&locationID=&yearMade=|&price=10000&make=&model=

46 posted on 07/10/2012 5:03:17 AM PDT by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: thackney
Maybe a ten year old CNG pickup. Pretty slim choices at $10k.

Why, doesn't it work anymore? A pickup is a pickup.

A ten year old CNG pickup blows the doors off a brand new $3.50 gas guzzler.

I never understood why people buy new cars anyway, just to see them radically depreciate the second they drive them off the lot.

47 posted on 07/10/2012 6:31:26 AM PDT by ROCKLOBSTER (Celebrate Republicans Freed the Slaves Month.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: thackney
Even if the supply of CNG service stations and vehicles became abundant, most people could not afford the switch without getting value for their current vehicle or continuing to run it until it dies.

That is the grey area......how rapidly will CNG be adopted.

It is looking very promising here in the Marcellus/Utica as many cities have committed to slowly convert their bus/trash/snow vehicles to CNG. Many local delivery groups have done the same for their trucks.

But, you are correct. Time will tell.

48 posted on 07/10/2012 6:33:16 AM PDT by Erik Latranyi (When religions have to beg the gov't for a waiver, we are already under socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: ROCKLOBSTER
Why, doesn't it work anymore? A pickup is a pickup.

A ten year old CNG pickup blows the doors off a brand new $3.50 gas guzzler.

I tend to buy new vehicles and maintain them until they have almost no resale value. I'm not interested in buying someone else's worn out problems. I buy very basic vehicles. My full size truck in 2008 cost $15k. Dollars per mile is my criteria on long term use.

New F150 are getting ~20 mpg. Updating my past calculation to 15,000 miles per year and 20 mpg only stretches the payback out farther. Getting close to seven years without buying a home refueling system.

49 posted on 07/10/2012 7:12:09 AM PDT by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: ROCKLOBSTER
Why, doesn't it work anymore? A pickup is a pickup.

A ten year old CNG pickup blows the doors off a brand new $3.50 gas guzzler.

I tend to buy new vehicles and maintain them until they have almost no resale value. I'm not interested in buying someone else's worn out problems. I buy very basic vehicles. My full size truck in 2008 cost $15k. Dollars per mile is my criteria on long term use.

New F150 are getting ~20 mpg. Updating my past calculation to 15,000 miles per year and 20 mpg only stretches the payback out farther. Getting close to seven years without buying a home refueling system.

50 posted on 07/10/2012 7:12:31 AM PDT by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson