Florida gas prices may be at their lowest in three years as Americans take to the roads this Labor Day weekend, with the statewide average at $3.29 per gallon last Sunday and prices about 10 cents higher in Palm Coast as the weekend approaches, with a few locations in the $3.20 range.
Meanwhile the Flagler County Sheriff’s Office is cautioning drivers that the agency’s “DUI Taxi”–the hybrid vehicle that looks half like a taxi, half like a patrol car–and roadside message boards will be deployed across the county to remind residents to avoid driving drunk or stoned or recklessly. The sheriff’s Traffic/Motor Units will target speeding and aggressive driving in crash-prone locations.
Gas prices continue to seesaw, but in a downward trend. The state average had jumped 8 cents early last week only to reverse course and decline 9 cents by last weekend. Today, a gallon of regular unleaded was selling for $3.39 at most stations along State Road 100 in palm Coast, with a few stations at a few cents less than that. Palm Coast Parkway prices were not much different. But prices were sharply lower south of the Flagler-Volusia county line, with some stations offering $2.99 a gallon gas at some stations at the I-95-U.S. 1 interchange, according to Gas Buddy, the app, at $3.05 a gallon at Sam’s Club at LPGA Boulevard near 95.
“Low oil prices have kept pump prices in check,” said AAA spokesman Mark Jenkins. “Floridians planning to hit the road for Labor Day weekend are likely to find the lowest gas prices for the holiday weekend in three years.” Florida drivers paid $3.68 per gallon on Labor Day 2023 and $3.52 during the 2022 holiday weekend. The state average was $3.02 per gallon on Labor Day weekend 2021.
Oil was trading in the $75-a-barrel range this week, lower than for most of the year but not quite at the brief low of $68 a barrel last mid-December.
Labor Day weekend marks the end of summer. It will be packed with traffic, boating, and beach activities across Flagler County. That’s why the Flagler County Sheriff’s Office will be out in full force to ensure everyone remains safe while enjoying the holiday the Sheriff’s Office says, with operations called “Drive Sober or Get Pulled Over” and “Operation CARE.”
On the water, the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission and the sheriff’s Marine Unit will team up to conduct high-visibility patrols along the Intracoastal Waterway and canals to monitor for boaters under the influence and those who are not operating marine vessels safely. Deputies on all-terrain vehicles will also patrol Flagler County’s sandy shores and parking lots for suspicious persons, vehicles, or illegal activities.
Wherever they may be–in Flagler or elsewhere–authorities are encouraging residents to do their part in preventing crimes of opportunity by locking car doors and hiding valuables in the trunk, especially in beach access areas. Never leave your keys in your car, as you might find your vehicle missing after a day at the beach. Be aware of your surroundings and report any suspicious activity by calling 386-313-4911 so a sheriff’s deputy can investigate.
“Labor Day is a time for celebrating the hard-working spirit that makes America great,” Sheriff Rick Staly said. “That same spirit fuels our deputies to work hard to ensure everyone’s safety on the roadways and waterways while enjoying the holiday weekend. Help them help you by indulging in moderation so we can all return home safely. Don’t forget ‘See Something, Say Something,’ and drive and boat sober or get pulled over!”
Land of no turn signals says says
Have not seen $3.20 but wow what a deal.Gas was $3.02 Labor day 2021?What was it Labor Day of 2020?I don’t know exactly but I bet it was around $2.10.Hmmmmmm.
FlaglerLive says
US average price of a gallon in 2020 was $2.22, and in 2019, it was 2.56. In constant dollars, that would be $3.20 in 2019, and $2.71, so let’s not be too quick with the misinformation about those alleged golden years.
The dude says
I couldn’t buy toilet paper Labor Day weekend 2020, but that $2.20/gal gas was pretty sweet!
Ray W. says
On Labor Day of 2020, we were still partially locked down by Governor DeSantis’ executive order. Worldwide energy demand had plummeted. Crude oil prices dropped due to the reduced demand. Of course, gasoline prices were low. We were far worse off in 2020 than we are today, medically, socially and financially.
In February 2021, OPEC voted to cut crude production by six million barrels per day. Saudi Arabia voluntarily cut production by another one million barrels per day. Gas prices skyrocketed.
For comparison purposes, during the first OPEC embargo, OPEC cut overall production by 4.3 million barrels per day. Gas prices ramped up. We went into recession.
During the Iran Revolution, oil output dropped by 5.6 million barrels per day. Gas prices shot up. We went into recession.
During the Iran-Iraq War, worldwide extraction dropped by 4.1 million barrels per day. Gas prices shot up. We went into recession. This time it was called a “double-dip” recession because the two occurred so closely together in time.
During the Kuwait War, worldwide oil output droppped by 4.3 million barrels per day. Gas prices shot up. We went into recession.
In 2001, coupled with the Dot.com bubble burst and 9/11, Iraqi oil production dropped by 2.1 million barrels per day. Gas prices shot up. We went into recession.
For the first time in the last 50 years, crude oil production was cut off by OPEC and gas prices shot up, yet we didn’t go into recession. Arguably, this is because Trump signed two bills dumping $2.9 trillion into our economy. And Biden signed multiple bills dumping another $3 trillion into the economy.
The nation, and the world with it, shut down shortly into the pandemic. Demand for gas dropped, as fewer people were driving. Gas prices sank. Then, OPEC cut off supply and gas prices shot up. Neither presidential administration bears responsibility for the gyrations in prices. There is nothing more to say. The answer will always remain the same.
But the gullible among us, the uneducable among us, will never go away. Misinformation, disinformation, inuendo, all are tools in their toolbox.
Dennis C Rathsam says
THANK YOU PRESIDENT TRUMP!
Laurel says
Dennis: Oh, nevermind.
T says
What he sould be prison for treason
T says
So gas is supply and demand when lockdowns happened nobody used and putin and suadi having oil barrel pricing so you learned something.
S. Peters says
Beginning of this week it was $3.29, overnight up to $3.39. Why? Flagler County Gas Price Gouging is getting old.
Palm Coast Vet says
I paid 2.99 in Daytona last week.
I am 67 and started my working life at a Shell station at 17. Gas was 21 cents a gal.
Prices always go.
Get over it.
Ed P says
VP Harris has not changed her values but now supports fracking after stating in 2019, she would end the practice. Her views on other positions have changed too. The adage of follow the money might be kind of a reason. No, not a pay off or anything nefarious. Simple oil economics.
The environmentalists hate fracking because of possible pollution and increased carbon emissions and possible earthquakes. ( not proven, just possible.) Did she join the chorus of fracking naysayers without looking at the economical impact? Maybe. I’m just speculating. A large faction of alternate energy believe if you keep oil prices high enough, you will “force” alternatives like green energy faster.
However, it is estimated that the generational economic and national security gains made over the past 15 years would effectively be eliminated if the US bans hydraulic fracturing technology use.
Reportedly, over just 5 years, We would shed millions of jobs, GDP would plummet by 1 trillion dollars and the US economy might fall into recession. The cost would be devastating. But, since the new Green deal was passed, well no need to stay on the band wagon and she needs Pennsylvania to win and fracking is huge there.
Are these number inflated and overstated? Maybe they are understated!
Let’s ask Ray W if it’s possible.
Ray W. says
Hello Ed P.
I repeat that when my older daughter and her husband began working for Mitsubishi in their heavy power division (combined cycle natural gas turbines), I began reading as about the natural gas industry. Before it all became monetized, one of my favorite sources was the annual International Gas Union report, commonly more than 300 pages in length. Now, I have to pay if I want to read it.
When my younger son began working for BNSF as a rail dispatcher, I began reading about the rail industry.
These two industries are complex in their own way.
Early on in my readings, I realized that fracking was here to stay. Yes, I would prefer a world in which we didn’t have to frack, but that world is far in the future. It isn’t what I want, but what I want is not all that important in the scheme of things. Perhaps Pogo is right and I am too sanguine for my own good.
As I commented on a couple of weeks ago, I recently watched a video-documentary/extended interview with Charif Souki, the Egyptian-born and Beirut-raised former CEO of Cheniere Energy, the nation’s largest exporter of crude oil.
One of his points was very simple. We need to feed eight billion people. Natural fertilizers permit us to grow enough food for three billion people. We desperately need enough synthetic fertilizers to feed the other five billion people. It takes a tremendous amount of energy to carve phosphates out of the hills and mountains of Morocco. The Maghreb is home to the vast majority (57 million of the overall 74 million metric tons) of the world’s phosphate reserves. It then takes a lot of energy to transport the raw phosphates to fertilizer factories. It takes energy to convert phosphates into a chemical form that can be used as one of the three parts of synthetic fertilizer.
This doesn’t account for the nitrogen aspect of synthetic fertilizer. Five percent of all extracted natural gas is chemically combined with nitrogen using the Haber Process to form ammonia for fertilizer. That doesn’t account for the actual energy consumed in that process. The next step is the Ostwald Process, which converts the ammonia into nitric acid.
Potassium is the third synthetic chemical is such fertilizers.
Once the fertilizer is produced, it must be loaded on freighters or trains for distribution all over the world. That takes energy, too.
According to Mr. Souki, 17% of all hydrocarbons extracted all over the world for energy are consumed just to make and distribute synthetic fertilizers and to grow and distribute food. If that is accurate, I don’t see that form of energy consumption going away. We will be extracting oil and gas for a long time for just one purpose.
Another point he raised was that Korean and Chinese companies were building factories in America. He claimed that America was reindustrializing because of cheap energy and government subsidies. Stop the fracking and the cheap energy goes away. I agree with Mr. Souki. I have repeatedly commented that when the fracking boom began, energy companies didn’t get just oil for their efforts. Huge quantities of natural gas came with it. He said what I have been saying. In 10 years, we went from the world’s biggest importer of hydrocarbons to the world’s biggest exporter of hydrocarbons.
Let’s get this out of the way before the gullible among us attempt to take over the comment thread. At one point in time, I opposed fracking. Then I learned more and more. Reason made me change my mind.
I have to think that Vice-President Harris, after nearly four years in office, and knowing now far more than she used to know, relied on reason to force her to change her mind on fracking. The “pestilential” partisan member of faction cannot accept that people grow and change.
As a younger man, I watched Ghandhi alongside most of us older commenters. And I read about him, too. The famous example was simple: In order to break the English stranglehold on the Indian economy, he advocated that everyone wear “homespun.” Later, he travelled to Great Britain to participate in a conference. He travelled by rail throughout England. He saw the devastation caused to the English clothing factories and the starving workers and their families. When he returned to India, he announced that the boycott of English clothing was over. When criticized for his changed stance, he stated: “I know more now.” That is my type of leader. Pragmatic and open to change. I respect those who follow reason to whatever end it takes them. The ideologically small-minded among us, those who cannot change, those who cannot learn, are the bane of our liberal democratic Constitutional republic.
The stupid among us do not accept change caused by people becoming smarter than they once were. Our leaders are criticized when they learn and change. How stupid that is. We must all learn and change. So, I repeat. How stupid that is to criticize people who know more than they did yesterday. Knowledge can be priceless. Learning to better use newly gained knowledge can never be called a bad thing. I repeat. How stupid it is to ever proclaim the act of becoming more learned bad. There is a reason Madison declared those who set aside partisan politics to produce a proposed Constitution “virtuous.” Our Constitution was called an experiment. The virtuous among us were supposed to learn and change as we grew into the incredibly complex nation we know today. And there is a reason why Madison declared those who couldn’t set aside partisan politics “pestilential.”
The world’s overall energy demands of all types are growing faster than is renewable energy projects, i.e., we are falling farther and farther behind. The EIA projects that average per day crude oil production this year will be over one million more barrels per day despite all the world is doing to cut reliance on crude oil. Mr. Souki’s point? There is right now no “transition” to clean energy. Every new source of clean energy is not added to reduce current reliance on dirty energy. Every new source of clean energy is added so that the ever-increasing demand for more new dirty energy is not as high.
Mr. Souki said what I have been saying for years. Seven of the world’s eight billion people want a Western lifestyle. That takes more and more energy, and population growth is not slowing enough. Worldwide electricity demand is growing faster than renewable energy can be added.
Steel, an energy hog, is being produced in America at tremendous levels. Mr. Souki pointed out that American factories can make steel more cheaply than it costs to import Turkish steel. Coking coal is an integral part of steel production. Maybe someday technological advances will reduce our reliance on burning coal to make steel.
Finally, in Mr. Souki’s estimation, the most immediate and easily adopted method to reduce energy demand is to reduce energy wastage.
In sum, I agree with Ed P on the havoc that would be visited on the economy had the Shale Revolution never occurred.
But I disagree with Ed P on the Green New Deal. That program can yield unimaginable gains, both economic and environmental. We need the Green New Deal. On that, there can be no argument. How it is to be implemented is ripe for argument.
Technological advance after technological advance keeps rolling in.
Graphene has been in development for decades. Graphene is one of science’s superconductors of electricity. Imagine conducting huge quantities of electricity without the heat generated by normal resistance to conduction. Imagine the economic gains from reduced losses of electricity from transmission over far distances. I recently read an article about a graphene sheet being bent 100,000 times with no increase in conductive resistance.
Two decades ago, companies began producing carbon-fiber core transmission lines with an aluminum weave around the core. The lines carry approximately twice the electricity as standard lines and they do not droop when heated by conduction resistance or by ultra-summer heat, as Mark Lane puts it. The Biden administration just deregulated the process of installing this new type of transmission line. Yes, the Bush administration should have deregulated the process. Obama and Trump, too. Each had the chance. Each failed us all.
A Wyoming mining company just announced finding one of the world’s largest deposits of rare earths. We are now on the verge of becoming a major force in the rare earths marketplace.
If Mr. Souki is right and conservation is the most immediate answer to our energy issues, then we need all the technological gains we can find and implement.
Laurel says
I’m still waiting for the monolith.
Ray W. says
Laurel, the monolith is right here in Flagler County hidden away in a high school library storeroom behind a huge pile of banned books.
Laurel says
Yeah…I see that.
Ray W. says
Hello, Ed P.
Perhaps it is again time to address the issue of causation.
You mention fracking and its alleged relationship to earthquakes.
This is a thought exercise.
Are there regions in the country that are predisposed to earthquakes? I don’t suppose any FlaglerLive reader would dispute the argument that California is a region predisposed to earthquakes, due to tensions between numerous tectonic plates, and that Florida is not predisposed to earthquakes.
But what of Oklahoma? I looked it up. There are a number of fault lines throughout Oklahoma, but they are not considered likely to cause a major earthquake of 6.0 in magnitude or greater in the near-term. But does that mean that levels of geologic tension exist now and have long existed? If geologic tension of whatever type has long existed in Oklahoma, then can it be argued that the region would be predisposed to an earthquake, but only of a minor type? I ask this because I am aware of a huge earthquake in 1812 that actually both reversed the flow of the Mississippi River for several hours due to an inland tsunami effect and rerouted the former course of the river in the area of the earthquake when normal flow resumed. That region is considered low in likelihood of earthquakes, yet an inferred 7.5 magnitude quake occurred in the region.
So, here is the question. If fracking were to occur in a region that has long-existing geologic tensions along fault lines, would thousands of minor quakes reduce the tensions, thereby lessening the already low probability of a larger earthquake? In other words, can fracking actually be good, in a geologic sense? I am not saying it would be. To me, the geologic forces that build up along a fault line are likely so great compared to the miniscule geologic forces released during a fracking episode that it is unlikely that fracking could delay a much larger earthquake, but until one studies that possible relationship, how could anyone build an argument that fracking is always a bad thing, geologically-speaking. Would thousands of minor earthquakes forestall a devastating larger earthquake?
From a causation perspective, the existence of fault lines in Oklahoma might best be considered the primary cause of the potentiality of earthquakes in areas of Oklahoma where fracking takes place. If there were no fault lines in Oklahoma, then fracking-caused minor earthquakes might best be considered the primary cause of the minor earthquakes. Since fault lines do exist in Oklahoma, and since tension between fault lines can build up over millennia, then fracking might best be considered a secondary cause of the thousands of minor earthquakes that occur in the area.
Using another example, no FlaglerLive commenter can dispute that it took years for our economy to recover from the Great Recession of 2007-09. By nearly every economic gauge, the American economy was in full health when former President Obama voluntarily handed political power over to incoming President Trump.
During the first 38 months of the Trump administration, the economy continued to grow; it remained in full health.
Then, the pandemic hit. Every nation in the world saw the upheaval of their economies. Nearly every nation went into recession.
So, what was the primary cause of the economic tumult? Was it the pandemic or was it the policies of the Trump administration prior to the pandemic? Again, I believe that nearly every FlaglerLive reader would argue that the pandemic was the primary cause of the economic disruption.
American economic policy “reacted” to the pandemic. Standard economic theory mandates that when an economy experiences a shock, stimulus spending is the most effective way to counter the shock. So, within four weeks of a complete shutdown of our lives, Congress passed a $2 trillion unfunded stimulus package. I write of this over and over again. The Senate voted 96-0! The House, in lockdown, passed the legislation by voice vote. President Trump signed it into law.
We immediately began injecting stimulus money as a reaction to the primary cause of the recession we immediately entered due to the effects of the pandemic.
In December 2020, Congress passed a second stimulus package, this time $900 billion. That money, too, immediately flowed into the now-recovering economy.
During the early months of the Biden administration, Congress passed another $3 trillion in unfunded stimulus money, but this time much of the money is to be parceled out over 10 years. None of these many different spending packages ever changed the fact that the pandemic was and is the primary cause of our economic upheaval.
As has happened so often in prior recessions, the infusion of unfunded stimulus funds into a cooling economy heated it to the point of triggering inflation. After waiting to assess the direction of the economic expansion, the politically independent Fed began raising lending rates to cool the overheated economy. But the economy kept running strong. Lending rates were raised again and again. Yet the economy kept running strong. Finally, more than three years after the unfunded stimulus spending started, there are signs of a consistent economic slowdown. The Fed Chair all but promised to lower lending rates in September.
All of these steps were reactions to the primary cause; they were not in and of themselves the primary cause. The only policy steps that were taken by either administration were secondary steps. Which companies were to get stimulus funds authorized during the Trump administration’s final nine months in office are minor effects on the overall economy.
The fault lines were created by the pandemic. Yet so many FlaglerLive commenters see administrative policies as the fault lines, as the major causes, of the problems our economy has overcome over the last three years. They aren’t now and they never were the fault lines.
The pandemic is at fault. Stop mistaking secondary causes for primary causes. They aren’t. See them for what they are. They are real problems, yes, and they deserve attention, but they are not primary causes.
No one will ever know what would have happened had former President Trump actually been elected in 2020. Had he been elected, would the $3 trillion in unfunded stimulus money never have been passed? Would our fragile economic recovery have been short-circuited if the additional funds had not been injected into the economy?
Who knows. The only economic model we have for this situation is the Great Depression. After three years of unprecedented stimulus spending under the New Deal, we voted a Republican House into power; it took office in 1937. The first thing the conservative House did was cut New Deal spending. The fragile recovery from Depression immediately collapsed and we went back into recession. This was, according to economists, the first example of a “double dip” recession.
That doesn’t prove that we would be in recession today had Trump been reelected. But we are not in recession today and it would be folly to argue that the policies of both administrations did not contribute to that fact. We have the strongest economic recovery in the world from the ill-effects of the pandemic due to the infusions into a struggling economy of trillions of dollars by both administrations. We are better off today than we were four years ago.
For the next few decades, economists will argue over the size and the effect of the stimulus packages, but it won’t be argued that the spending didn’t work as intended. The debt we have added from that spending will fall on our children’s shoulders and many of them will rightly resent us for it. As Fed Chairman Powell intuits, the debt if unresolved will in time become “unsustainable.”
The dude says
Good thing the orange Fat Elvis is committing to pay for IVF treatments then… no?
Ray W. says
Hello The dude.
Can it be argued that recent Florida legislation that permits minors to work longer hours was passed because we don’t have enough workers in Florida? How many decades were the laws limiting child labor on the books? They just now need to be changed? Why is that?
Why did Florida farmers plant fewer acres of crops this year? Farm bureau spokesmen say that farmers could not be certain they could find enough pickers when the crops ripened, so they planted less. Could it be that if we had more migrant pickers, Florida farmers would have planted more acres of crops? Will prices on produce rise because we don’t have enough migrant laborers?
Looked through that prism, then the promise to have either the government or insurance companies pay for IVF therapies seems consistent with the recognition by the Republican Party that America does not have enough workers to meet the needs of business. The fact that former President Trump announced that we need more “beautiful” babies is consistent with this argument. Yes, it is considered reasonable to believe that six million migrants entered the country since January 2021. American businesses, as of the August JOLTS report, presenting June jobs data, still have nearly 8.2 million unfilled posted job openings. We need more workers. We need more immigrants.
Land of no turn signals says says
Those “Constant dollars ” I would call Inflation due to the poor current health of this country.
Ray W. says
Unfortunately, Land of no turn signals, your intent appears garbled. I think you intend to address “poor current economic health”, but you typed poor current health.
Yes, when compared to health outcomes in other nations, our current medical health is often poor. When compared to economic health, we have the strongest post-pandemic economy in the world.
You have it backwards. Please correct your thinking on the issue. Your comment makes you appear gullibly receptive to those intentionally deceptive claims posted by the many “pestilential” partisan members of faction among us who seek to disinform and misinform.
BOB says
Staly needs gas money for all the cars sitting in hiding places with the engines running.
Laurel says
Land: Start watching money shows.
Flatsflyer says
I want to know why there is such disparity between different grades of gas. Use to to $.10 a gallon,the difference between regular an premium is now approaching $1.00 per gallon. Greed on the part of oil companies and service station operators is the only answer. Prove me wrong?
Ed P says
Industry claims it’s because of the change in consumer habits (demand). Premium fuels starting to fall back in 2012. As newer vehicles relied on lower octane less “premium” is being sold.
Remember the days when Sunoco had pumps allowing several different octane selections for a few pennies more per gallon?
Find a station selling kerosene and it’s above $7.00/gallon. Low volume, ie 1-5 gallons at a time.
FYI. Back in the early 1970’s prior to unleaded being widely used, you could find unleaded gas a few cents cheaper than leaded.