Gas Prices = Apprehension for Next Season?

[andyzee]

Uhm....what is wrong with a 2k+ square foot house? :blink:

Nothing wrong with it, it's great, but I'm not going to shed a tear for someone that owns one crying about energy costs. Obviously, I don't own.

 

[YardSaleDad]

Uhm....what is wrong with a 2k+ square foot house? :blink:

What's wrong with an a SUV.

 

[andyzee]

What's wrong with consuming fuel like there's no tomorrow? :lol:

 

[ckofer]

Carpooling will make better sense than ever. It's not just about personal budgets, it's about finding a lifestyle that uses less energy per person.

 

[drjeff]

Uhm....what is wrong with a 2k+ square foot house? :blink:

There's nothing wrong with them, and actually many of the newer 2000+ sq. Ft. houses built with higher insulation amounts and energy efficient construction materials will not only cost less per sq. ft. to heat over that 50 year old 1400 sq. ft. house with 1950's/60's windows and insulation levels and furnaces, but will cost less outright also.

I will say that personally 3 years ago now, my wife and I put a substantial addition onto our existing circa 1980 cape. That addition basically added new outer walls/windows and a roof to the entire house and those new outer walls/roof were built with a much greater amount of insulation than the previous outer walls. On top of that we replaced the 20 year old furance with a larger, modern high efficiency model, and even though my sq. footage increased by basically 50%, my total oil consumption in the 3 winters since the addition/renovation work was done has been between 55 and 65% of what it was pre-addition/pre-renovation. Just because a house is big, doesn't necessarily mean that it's more expensive to heat compared to a smaller house, a huge amount of it has to do with what it's built with.

 

[deadheadskier]

That is a tad excessive. Ignorant or delusional? Wow. No need for ad hominem attacks to support your view point. I do not have massive amounts of income and my home mountain is 240 miles round trip. But I am not overly concerned with $4 gas no more than I was at $3 gas. I still drive my 35-40 MPG fuel efficient non-hybrid vehicle. My total gas costs for a ski season may add up to $1000 next year (this year it will be just under $800) but it is part of the cost of skiing. I don't do a lot of other things so I can ski. Gas becomes too expensive to me when it is cheaper to spend the night rather than do a back to back day trip which will be the case at $6 per gallon gas when I will become concerned. Five grand seems kind of high for a home heating cost estimate. We have an 1800+ square foot home and will probably spend about $1500 for heating this winter assuming a 20-25% increase.

I think the average skier will probably be able to take this year's increase in stride. Not saying a lot of folks won't be effected, there will be plenty of folks feeling the pinch at the pump and making changes. But I think most folks won't make too many adjustments. Long term, I think in a few years we could see some massive changes. Their are opportunities and challenges for ski areas in this environment and I suspect the smaller areas further away from metro areas will feel the pain the worst.

That did come out as harsh. Maybe for some, the rise in cost won't cause them to bat an eye, but to think that for a large percentage of the skiing population that energy costs won't have a major affect on their decisions regarding skiing IMO is somewhat delusional. It will result in fewer skier days for many people. I plan to ski just as much, but in saying that, I'll probably often times settle for Tenney as its close instead of going to Stowe/Jay unless I know conditions will be very good.

As for heating a home, 5 grand isn't too far from the truth for those using oil. The average Maine home uses 900 gallons of oil a year. Heating price today is $4.41, so $3969 total annual cost. Some speculators are suggesting near $6 a gallon heating oil price by winter, which gets you north of $5 grand.

If you're heating a 1800sf home for $1500 next winter, you're doing very well compared to most with homes of a similar size. A lot depends on how efficient homes are due to construction materials as Dr. Jeff points out, but the picture is pretty scary for a lot of people, especially the elderly on fixed incomes and no option to move.

 

[frozencorn]

Worried? You bet. Even with a 33 mpg mazda, the wallet is light these days on gas.

That being said, I'd be more worried and depressed not skiing because of gas, so it won't be an issue because I won't let it be. Just need to work vigilantly at getting pre-season deals and freebies to make up for Mr. Mobil and Co.

 

[Warp Daddy]

I am Absolutely concerned about the situation for everyone on the Macro level . IMO The pain that is to come will be unlike what has been experienced in several decades.


WE for the past 30 years have always owned Two fuel efficient vehicles and i have several buddies to carpool with for local daytrips .Our one week long trip will not be altered that much since we have family in the region

We fortunately have always lived below my income /revenue and invested a considerable % and are debt free ( a lifestyle choice i made as a child of a child of the great DEPRESSION ) , so at this point it is a PIA but will only effect skiing on the sub-optimal days. I will continue to opt for Quality not Quantity

 

[skiadikt]

just had my first $60 fill up on my subaru outback~27-28mpg. pretty scary considering that at the start of ski season last year, my fill ups were just starting to break $40.

 

[GrilledSteezeSandwich]

just had my first $60 fill up on my subaru outback~27-28mpg. pretty scary considering that at the start of ski season last year, my fill ups were just starting to break $40.

I drive an Impreza and my fill-ups are over $50 now..

 

[Greg]

Nothing wrong with it, it's great, but I'm not going to shed a tear for someone that owns one crying about energy costs. Obviously, I don't own.

Out first ~1,000 square foot house built in 1929 was far less efficient than our current ~2,400 square foot house built in 2005.

What's wrong with an a SUV.

Nothing. And I also do not believe that folks who own them don't have a right to be upset about rising fuel costs. When we bought our Grand Cherokee in 2004, we never expected gas prices to be $4.25. We also have a 2000 Cherokee and have made the decision to buy a more fuel-efficient car to replace that one in the next year or so.

 

[tjf67]

It more getting me pissed off than anything else. How many years has the public been clammering for alt energy and now we are in this position. Those f'rs in washintgon need a good bitch slapping and may be then they would listen.

 

[Greg]

It more getting me pissed off than anything else. How many years has the public been clammering for alt energy and now we are in this position. Those f'rs in washintgon need a good bitch slapping and may be then they would listen.

Alternative energy/technology is not the immediate answer. I'm not sure what is, but come on....you don't think there is enough incentive for alternative energy already? The government shouldn't need to mandate anything. The American entrepreneurial spirit should really be all that is needed. But until then, we as a society are dependent on petroleum products and that's going to be the case for the near term, bottom line.

 

[Moe Ghoul]

I'm not concerned..higher gas prices are incentive for me to quit wasting time and money at the bars and dining out and setting more money away for ski season. Alot of my ski days are to Blue mountain which is only 18 miles away so it's a maximum of 2 gallons round-trip. I mainly ski in Vermont and New York early and late season..5 trips up north total last season so the impact of higher gas prices should only cost me a few hundred dollars more. But I make one income for just myself. People making 1 or 2 incomes for a family of 4-6 people are going to have it the toughest with the higher gas prices as most of these people drive SUVs..and are already shelling out a small fortune for lift tickets, equipment and food. Plus it's not just higher gas prices..the prices of everything else will rise. For me I'm confident that my ski season will be mad steezy yo..but I think less diehard skiers and those with less disposable income are going to ski less..making the ski areas less crowded and less profitable leading to some more ski resorts joining NELSAP

I barely drive anywhere on the offseason. I'm in the same camp, less meals out, and being a smarter buyer will save enough money to more than compensate for higher fuel costs for me next season. I can take advantage of weekday discounts, I rarely ski weekends locally. Blue knocks $10 off the daypass for various reasons. Ski club member, Men's day, business card day, etc. So that subsidizes my fuel cost.

 

[andyzee]

Out first ~1,000 square foot house built in 1929 was far less efficient than our current ~2,400 square foot house built in 2005.



Nothing. And I also do not believe that folks who own them don't have a right to be upset about rising fuel costs. When we bought our Grand Cherokee in 2004, we never expected gas prices to be $4.25. We also have a 2000 Cherokee and have made the decision to buy a more fuel-efficient car to replace that one in the next year or so.

Bottom line, we need to stop whining and need to start conserving. Simple as that. All t

 

[deadheadskier]

Alternative energy/technology is not the immediate answer. I'm not sure what is, but come on....you don't think there is enough incentive for alternative energy already? The government shouldn't need to mandate anything. The American entrepreneurial spirit should really be all that is needed. But until then, we as a society are dependent on petroleum products and that's going to be the case for the near term, bottom line.

I agree with what your saying, however Washington does have at least some influence. They could open up more areas for exploratory drilling. I'm not saying it's the right thing to do, but legislation does have some affect on our energy supply. Same goes for Nuclear Power Plant construction. There hasn't been any new facilities constructed in the US in 30 years. Again, I'm not saying it's the right thing to do, but a lot of red tape stands in the way with that option.

 

[Greg]

I agree with what your saying, however Washington does have at least some influence. They could open up more areas for exploratory drilling. I'm not saying it's the right thing to do, but legislation does have some affect on our energy supply. Same goes for Nuclear Power Plant construction. There hasn't been any new facilities constructed in the US in 30 years. Again, I'm not saying it's the right thing to do, but a lot of red tape stands in the way with that option.

Tell the NIMBYs and environmental extremists that. We're getting close to the political line here.

 

[deadheadskier]

Tell the NIMBYs and environmental extremists that. We're getting close to the political line here.

I need to buy a MTB so I can chase them out of the woods where their hugging trees and knock some sense into them. :lol:

 

[2knees]

can i ride a moped to vermont in the winter? with my skis strapped to my back?

 

[Geoff]

I agree with what your saying, however Washington does have at least some influence. They could open up more areas for exploratory drilling. I'm not saying it's the right thing to do, but legislation does have some affect on our energy supply. Same goes for Nuclear Power Plant construction. There hasn't been any new facilities constructed in the US in 30 years. Again, I'm not saying it's the right thing to do, but a lot of red tape stands in the way with that option.

This isn't an oil price problem. It's the collapse of the US dollar that has caused the problem If you are buying oil paying Euros, the prices have not gone up anywhere near as much.

...so blame the government for lousy fiscal and monetary policies. You can't spend more than you make for two generations and not expect to pay the piper at some point. Until congress comes close to balancing the budget through some mix of tax increases and spending cuts, it's just going to get worse. The next president won't be able to do a thing about it since congress controls the money.

The market will do the right thing with the soaring energy prices. SUVs will vanish. People will stop heating with oil. People will start using public transporation. People will telecommute instead of commuting hundreds of miles per week. People will tighten up their homes to make them more efficient. Even at $5/gallon, gasoline and diesel are still the most cost effective way to achieve personal transportation. If things keep going up, hydrogen starts becoming a more economical alternative. You can burn coal, use hydro, or nuclear to make hydrogen and you can pipe it wherever you want.

The short-term impact on eastern ski resorts is pretty worrying. $5.00/gallon will cause a pretty big drop in skier visits. If I were in the ski business in northern New England, I'd be taking a hard look at how to get people up to my resort and transport them around my resort without automobiles. The metro-NYC market has a train option but the train is expensive (because it's mostly empty all the time) and has a lousy schedule (contributing to it running empty). The answer is probably bus service. What you really need is a big population of skiing bus drivers. You drive the bus up on a Friday evening, ski on comp tickets, and drive the bus back to the flatlands on Sunday evening. There are an awful lot of charter bus companies with equipment that is lightly used in the winter. You could make it work.