Cheaper gas is a thing Trump says but basically nothing the administration has done is leading to cheap gas. It's the inevitable result of demand declines and decades of domestic production capacity increases.
Interestingly one policy Trump actually controls: he has cut the rate of adding stocks to the Strategic Petroleum Reserve in half. From Dec '24 to Dec '25 they added only 19 million barrels, compared to the 40 million barrels added in the prior year, despite Trump campaigning on filling the SPR "right to the top". The last, and only, administration that has topped off the SPR was Obama.
Well, he has been looking like he's going to invade Venezuala for a little while now. If they do a Syria-esque takeover of the oil-producing regions there could possibly be cheaper gas for wherever that gas would get shipped.
You're gonna have to locate yourself for this comment to make any sense. Plenty of places still get snow regularly in winter, and nothing humans can do will change that
SF NIMBY aren't environmentalists, they are obstructionists.
Now for a true scotsmanism - actual environmentalists overwhelmingly support nuclear power, expansion of wind and solar, and geothermal where it is easy to get to, and not too destructive to drill for.
I've not surveyed the population that travels to burningman, but I doubt they are all against sustainable energy, but I've never been, so I don't know.
Environmentalist is a discipline, not a personality type.
Therefore, I have to say that a quick survey of the data shows that I am correct. Feel free to use an LLM agent to replicate this human analysis.
Environmentalists appear to be like Communists. Supposedly in favour of some idea, but it appears strangely that they keep doing the opposite thing. I'm sure Real Environmentalism Hasn't Been Tried Yet.
People complain about gas prices despite gas being so outrageously cheap compared to everything else. Gas first ticked over $1.79 in April 2004, not adjusted for inflation.[1]
Just goes to show that most people are parrots and not actually using their head when stating arguments.
It really is remarkable compared to any other consumer good. My 2002 Corolla has cost $20 to fill up since it was brand new. The benefits of empire I guess.
Meanwhile that same Suncor facility that is keeping gas prices low is also routinely and continually violating EPA and Colorado air quality standards. [0]
It is so bad that the state has implemented fence line monitoring. [1]
As someone who lives in Colorado, I'd be happy to see Suncor go. Especially now that I just learned the oil they're refining is Canadian tar sand oil.
Additionally, ICE sales have started recovering over the past few years now that EV subsidizes have started being phased out in most markets [0].
Even in China, most consumers "despite buying more EVs, are less interested in how their cars are powered, and more in their digital lifestyle integration" [0].
I like EVs but I think that in most markets they're at the same point today that hybrid cars were in the 2010s - proven, but still a difficult financial sell in the short term due to high upfront costs for consumers.
Edit: can't reply
> Which seems odd in an article claiming the global tide has turned against EVs
Becuase China is not the world. Most other markets have seen either a slowdown or a reversal in EV sales - especially following the reduction of EV purchase subsidizes in most markets.
It also highlights the fact that a large portion of customers are indifferent about ecological sentiment, and that EVs can only outpace ICE if their upfront cost or net-new features (in China's case, EVs tended to have better features than ICE cars sold domestically) outpace ICE vehicles.
Even Chinese automotive players (primarily SOEs that couldn't compete with private sector BYD) have been taking advantage of this market shift, become major ICE car exporters now [1].
> Additionally, ICE sales have started recovering over the past few years now that EV subsidizes have started being phased out in most markets
I think this is a false dawn. EV sales in Germany have rebounded strongly after the removal of subsidies [1].
"Germany was the largest contributor, with more than 434,600 new EV registrations and one of the strongest growth rates in the bloc, up 39.4% year-on-year"
EU EV sales are up in 2025 in comparison with 2024 [1]
"Battery electric vehicles accounted for 16.4% of newly registered cars in the EU during the first ten months of 2025, according to figures from the European Automobile Manufacturers’ Association (ACEA). That compares with 13.2% over the same period in 2024."
EVs seem to run $10-15k more than the equivalent ICE - I tried everything I could but couldn't make it worthwhile due to constraints on what is available and inability to get the subsidies.
So far, but it is hard to find good EVs on the used market. Sometimes you can, but at the moment I'm looking and there just are not many options at all.
Is it? Will I be able to get parts for it 15 years from now? Will I be able to repair it myself? (I have rebuilt engines before, and I'm planning to replace the transmission in my truck myself this year, so DIY ability is important to me). There have been headlines recently about how unreliable Tesla is.
Transmissions on EVs are generally single stage speed reduction so yes in the extremely rare chance you need to repair it you can. The motors are way harder to repair but they're similarly way less likely to need repair. Other part availability will vary by brand just like with ICE cars/trucks there's nothing magically less available if we're looking at new parts, older common parts there's a bit of a difference just from the designs being newer so there's a smaller population of junked cars to pull random EV pumps off of the way you can with some old car parts.
It's the most popular vehicle in the world by most metrics, so I don't think you need to be concerned about parts. Especially if comparing to any other EV available in the US. Also extremely reliable. Don't trust clickbait headlines, look at consumer reports and satisfaction.
Might be location dependent I had a lot of options last time I was poking around when my current gas car started making potentially expensive sounding noises earlier this year. (they stopped so I'm fine again /s)
There are a lot of "it depends" in the math, it takes somewhere around 60-80k miles to break even on the $10k difference. Most new car owners only keep the car for around 30,000 miles (leases are often 3 years, max of 32,000 miles). And so far EVs are not holding their value as well as ICE cars so a few more miles. Long term EVs are a lot cheaper, but for the new car buyer they don't make financial sense yet. (new car buyers also get a warranty so additional costs are cheap - $600 for oil changes over that time if they buy the most expensive dealer package, and a lot less if they go elsewhere)
Yeah, that's why that poster said "upfront" costs. EVs are like 10+ times cheaper than ICE cars in the long term, but we're making our children pay most of the costs of the ICE version, so it's cheaper for us. Yay for us, I guess?
That's why it's at the same point as Hybrids were 15 years ago. Yet Hybrids have now largely replacing traditional ICE. I think a similar trend will happen for EVs as well within 10-15 years once the current generation of cars are replaced.
Hybrids are useful for people without garages though - the total market is much larger than for EVs, which are pretty exclusively a product for homeowners, and usually not the only vehicle either. EVs will always be a niche unless the charging infrastructure problem is solved.
I agree with your overall point (and I'm pretty confident improved infrastructure will fix the problem for non-homeowners... eventually), but I didn't understand this part:
> usually not the only vehicle either
It doesn't seem like EV or not would make a difference for whether to have more than one vehicle? My wife and I have shared one car, first ICE and now EV, for more than a decade and it didn't make a difference in our habits.
There's no real reason with modern EVs unless you really love road trips, but I feel like I very rarely meet or hear of EV owners who don't own more than one vehicle. That's probably less of a thing now that most new EVs have decent range.
As climate change effects become undeniable and older hard heads die off, people will less and less be interested in fossil fuels.
Oil and Gas doesn't even want to make investments that trump is pushing, because all those green subsidies and programs will likely come roaring back in a few years. The government may be gerrymandered and senate locked into a tight battle between red and blue, but consumer sentiment is purely popular vote. The trend is pretty clear that consumers want to get away from fossil fuels.
That Suncor refinery is in a bit of a fight with the state over environmental pollution. Cheap gas certainly helps improve the political situation for that particular refinery.
My brother in law used to work for a refinery. He always said that politicians attacked them in the media all the time, but when the refinery wanted to expand they never had problems getting all the permits needed.
People love to hate on the oil companies (and there is good reason to do so), but they love cheap gas far more than that.
I meant more regionally. In areas where the cost of living is higher, gas costs more. Likewise, cheaper parts of the country have cheaper gas. Pretty easy to spot the trend. Here in socal its something like 4-5/g.
Last time Trample was in office, the price of oil literally went negative - like lets put this crap back in the ground, we don't need all this energy. Small minded negative sum thinking destroys economic activity. King Krasnov squatting in office past his lease would actually be fantastic for averting carbon dioxide going into the atmosphere. Sure we'd be burning more coal, as a proportion. But so much less energy overall as our society devolves. And plenty of free time for people to improvise steam engines, cars that run off of woodgas, and whatnot.
(the real problems being that other countries will continue growing, destructionist policies set things up so that return of economic activity is even more polluting, and a moribund economy makes responding to climate change chaos much harder)
Yes, as it should be. Currently at Lake Mead with temperatures 15 degrees above average, and Washington state is getting a foot of rain, and the midwest is about to have a 40-50 degree temperature swing. This is climate change, and we are too late.
Meanwhile, some EV owners smugly recharge their vehicles from carbon burning facilities that then transmit hundreds of miles before it even gets to them, on top of all the manufacturing and battery associated environmental costs.
Some reports[0, Table 1] show these coal fueled 'electric' cars are about equivalent to a ~30mpg ICE car all in, but of course at least the ICE driver is paying a motor fuel tax, meanwhile the smug EV owner is paying only a tiny amount of tax on electric utilities. Thus the externalities look way worse for the coal powered electric driver.
Of course, if you fuel off of something like solar or natural gas you can do far better, but a lot of people are just stopping at the point they have electric and then patting themselves on the back as superior.
The neat thing about electric cars is that they get cleaner as the grid gets cleaner. If you bought an EV in 2015 (when this report was published) and were worried about the grid mix, I have good news for you. Electricity production from coal in the US is in the process of falling off a cliff, dropping to 15% of the electricity mix in 2023 from over 30% in 2015. https://wolfstreet.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/US-electri...
> Of course, if you fuel off of something like solar or natural gas you can do far better, but a lot of people are just stopping at the point they have electric and then patting themselves on the back as superior.
I don't think making up a smug EV owner is a very substantial comment. I haven't. met anyone who thinks like this. I imagine most people with electric vehicles would be happy if their energy came from cleaner sources.
Yes that's why the #1 EV company king in the US was embedded with the candidate who had practically a campaign line of bringing back coal, and a large portion of his customers were enthusiastic about this.
Yeah Elon is a dangerous dumbass, and people that support Trump voted to burn the planet. Doesn't really change that most EV owners are environmentally conscious, and if anything, had a strong backlash to Elon's dive into backwards politics
EV owners are a dominating reason why Trump came into power. The incredible increase in value of Tesla allowed Elon to buy twitter, and his manipulation of twitter was arguably what pushed the scale just over a balance.
Coal power is only about 20% of the US power generation at this point so it's not all or even most of a hypothetical EV's power source. So even where it is used 30 MPG is still actually pretty good gas mileage as well especially for their weight and size.
"And it’s because Buc-ee’s is happy to break even at their massive gas pump array in Johnstown so long as you also walk inside and overspend on beef jerky, neck pillows and beaver-themed sleepwear."
So gas is cheaper, but you are spending more. This is not a story about gas prices, this is a story of consumer manipulation, dark patterns, monopolistic practices, etc.
I said "monopolistic practices", I did not say it was a monopoly.
"In 2019, shortly after Buc-ee's opened their first store in Alabama, the company was sued for "setting unfair pump prices", because they were selling gasoline to the customers for less money than it costs to buy and transport it to a retail outlet. While it is common within the United States for larger gas station chains to use a pricing strategy where gas is used as a loss leader to draw customers and encourage the sale of other goods, the practice is banned under Alabama state law."
A loss leader isn't a monopolistic practice. They can be related, for example video game consoles can be loss leaders, to build demand for a monopoly on games for that specific console. But that relies on the sticky market effect from a customer owning a particular console, whereas the loss leader on gas has to convince the customer to visit the store every time.
If anything that Alabama law seems a bit questionable. As long as gas stations have card readers where you don't even have to go in the store, converting gas customers to convenience store customers seems like quite the uphill battle to me.
(modulo the surveillance issues of using payment cards)
I've noticed its faster to get the full bucees experience with a tesla instead of trying to park a normal car hit the bathrooms, get drinks and junk food then get in line for gas. Also as a side note they are the only places I've seen mercedes benz charging stations that look mostly abandoned. Last time I was there people were using those spots to park ICE vehicles.
> This is not a story about gas prices, this is a story of consumer manipulation, dark patterns, monopolistic practices, etc.
Meh. Snacks are expensive at every gas station; it's the market-decided price of convenience, not "monopolistic practices". Just get gas cheaper at Buccees and then get snacks cheaper at your nearby market if you want to optimize for price, nobody is stopping the money-conscientous consumer from doing that.
reply