Modern Vespa

Am I alone in thinking that the more the cost of fuel goes up the more people will reconsider the vehicle they choose to ride and drive.
It seems that only when it directly affects you, like it does when you pay for your increased road tax and fuel do you sit up and take notice.
I for one am glad that sales of large cars ( not just 4 x 4's ) are going down and sales of scooters,bikes and small cars are going up but isn't it a shame that it's taken a huge hike in the cost of petrol, diesel and showroom tax for people to ask the question - do I really need that size car anymore ? You can broadcast as many "Global Warming" messages as you like but hit a motorist in the pocket and whallop they'll start to look around for an alternative apart from those who simply don't care or who can afford it of course. Most of us can't.
Public Transport isn't really a viable alternative if you value your right to travel where and when you want to and to travel alone if you wish. In the UK it is often more expensive than driving per mile.
So if it takes an increase in the cost of fuel for more of us to drive a smaller car or turn to two wheels I think it's a blessing albiet an expensive one.
I'm interested in what you all think.
Regards Bill and the Scabby ET4 and his VW Fox - 45 mpg.

More damage is done to the Ozone layer by the methane that comes out of the earths population of cattle than is caused by CO2 from vehicle exhausts.

I have 5 cars, 3 boats, 3 houses, a vespa and I think they should turn off the electricity to your house, cause I need more energy.

I also have two boys and one wife (for now).

This post smacks of a political agenda. Get off your high horse and go ride your scooter. Who cares what the cost is of gas? Factor in the energy it took to transport your scooter to you, make the tires that need replacement every 3k, not to mention the special clothing and the energy costs of those jackets, helmets, gloves etc. Most of us live in countries where we are able to choose what we ride/drive. Would you have it another way?

By the way, my solar array allows me to get a small check each quarter from our electricity provider. I ride my bike more then my scooter and my wife takes public transportation to and from her job. I use local produce and goods whenever possible and always think green.

That is my part of the "discussion"

I'm not kidding, I think I'm the only person on this board who has bought a Vespa for the "fun" of it and not because it gets 423.696 mpg.

But I do feel guilty I don't have any room for a compost pile.

Don't be so mardy, paddylamb. He was only trying to start a discussion on oil usage. It's not gonna last forever, is it? We shouldn't just think about what we use because, until something else comes along, that's all we've got. The poster is thinking about conservation of oil. He didn't know your wife takes public transport, did he? Lighten up.

Here's the problem I see with the attitude that gas prices change thinking: Its only limited to how long it takes for people to find ways to realign themselves with a new economy. What that means is people will learn to forego other things in order to fund their fuel needs. Once they figure out how to do that, they'll go right back to using fuel without much thought.

Secondly, I don't see any sign of an oil shortage. Only measures of not having it due to influences upon governments. The difference being that while it does exist, we're limiting ourselves by how much we extract from the ground. And in this day and age we can do it very environmentally consciously. That's in thanks (in part) to those who do believe in things I don't agree with.

Economies adjust. Economies can do that because people are creative. They have the freedom to operate mostly on their own terms. The problem as I see it is we tend to accept a certain level of cost for one thing or another and only adjust or react to that cost once it rises above what we think is fair or can afford. That's a huge key here. Collectively it has less to do with a belief in global warming introduced by human activity than it does with the costs rising above what we think is reasonable.

Some believe the rising cost of fuel is going to change things. I'm not so sure. What I can see however is that its opened up new creativity to supply power in one form or another to accomplish the same tasks. Or refined those processes. The idea of wind energy means some pristine lands have to be set aside for wind farms for example. Or take away agrarian acreage. Either way you have to use space (surface area) to accomplish the same thing.

I think a large key has been in moving further away from our jobs. I'm not against urban sprawl because I can see the reasons we got to where we are (pardon the pun). But did we let it happen or were we forced into it?

No, I believe this is nothing more than the latest segmental economic bubble created by rendering socialistic economic priciples upon near free capitalistic economies. Nothing more than the laws of supply and demand which have been futzed with by one confused Fed chariman(Greenspan) and another (Bernanke)whose not even sure yet what he's supposed to be doing.

The natural inclination of economy and market is capitalism in spite of levels of governmental controls. Those controls only work over the long term if they manage the playing field so that anyone willing to invest in their own futures is not bogged down by taxation for programs which otherwise would not reproduce and return something into the economy and market. Businesses that can grow. Production by people who are trained in their own chosen fields.

I wrote all that to explain why I think this economy will adjust to the cost of oil one way or the other. That the price of gas has little long term affect on what people do because how they adjust and how long it takes for them to get comfortable with the new ways of things (prices) is about how long it'll take for the economy to adapt. The People are the economy and no govt or pet influences have been able to restrict their deepest needs and wants. If they want cheap fuel its really not the cost at the pump which determines its value to them. Its really how much of a percentage of their budget they're willing to accept to pay for it. When their incomes adjust (increase through one method or another) they'll use them as they see fit (again). Unfortunately that's really how most people seem to think.

My question to back to you is this;

If we adapted to an unlimited source of fuel that was environmentally conscious, would you still be inclined to conserve?

Harv

Hardly

A little perspective may be in order...

I bought my scooter long before gas prices were the issue they are now. And, there were a lot of people on scooter forums long before I finally arrived.

Did I use good fuel economy as a justification?...Well, yes, especially to the little woman , but I bought my scooter just because I wanted a scooter.

Of course, I'm twice as happy now that I'm saving all that gas.

Bought my Vespa for FUN

@ roadbum. If oil were displaced by some other fuel that was cheaper, then the price of oil would eventually go up as more people switched to the cheaper fuel. I think that using what we have sensibly, and let's not forget that we don't just use oil to get around but for plastics and such, then it could also benefit our children and their children.

Uh, if demand goes lower, then prices drop in order to sell more of X. If X's price went up instead of down as demand decreased, that would more quickly decrease the demand of X. So how would less sales of X equate to economic stability for the seller?

Answer: It wouldn't. The economic stability of the seller would steadily decrease until the price/value dropped to less than product Y and seemed better to consumers' minds that they would return to buying product X.

In a free economy no one has to buy anything at any price.

In a non capitalistic economy where people have no choice but to buy a thing, the govt would limit choices and supply.

Harv

my decision to get a scooter was based almost 100% on the environment, the price of gas, and not wanting to drive a car when i:

a. usually ride alone, never have a chance to carpool
b. go and average of five miles in every direction
c. am in college, and will reap the monetary benefits of not owning a car immediately.

so...i sold my car last week. it's the bus, biking, or scooting everywhere i need to go, and i'll rent a car if i need to go on a long trip. i know most of the people in this forum have scooters in addition to cars, but i'm lucky enough to be able to rely on one as my main transpo!

i hope i will inspire some other broke college students to do the same!

I'd nominate this as the most intelligent post I've read in any forum ever, although my own motivations and beliefs might not completely coincide with Harv's.

Yes, consumers will adjust in order to compensate for the higher cost of fuel, and eventually the decline in the value of our money will return all of this to a more level playing field.

Although most of us would like to believe that some modern Utopia is possible, it is clear that many/most of us are willing to surrender our freedoms in exchange for something else. I, for one, would never think of owning an SUV, but I don't harbor any ill will towards those who want them. Where I take offense, though, is when it becomes a mandate that those offensively large vehicles be replaced by small, fuel-efficient death traps.

good question. human nature says no.

Same question goes for our pottable water supply.

Here is another way to help for all you google fans:

http://www.blackle.com/

fun

Many thanks Louisiana Geezer. The issues at hand, the price of fuels, are much more complex than simple supply and demand. Environmentally for instance. The awareness of the costs of freedom are an advantage to us. We have the freedom to operate in such ways as to lessen our effects on the world around us. We would be very limited in what we could do [ in those respects]in any other forms of govt I'm aware of. Again, many thanks.

Harv

@ roadbum. Yes, normally the price of a commodity would go down if demand went down. However, if there were an alternative supply for vehicles that went mainstream then, EVENTUALLY, as I said, oil and petrol prices would increase as there would be less demand because would be less production as it would cost more relatively to extract it and not be so proftiable and the price would increase. If you still want to be riding an internal combustion engined scooter in the future, think about it.

I would like to say I would, but how honest would that be? Its one thing to want to do something and another to do it.

Thanks

Harv

My father runs a plumbing company that must use trucks with engines large enough to haul heavy equipment and tools. There is no cost effective alternative "green" option for him.

Since his fuel tab has been skyrocketing, he is getting closer and closer in having to decide...Do I stay in business or do I let some of my employees go.

No, you're wrong about that. Production would decrease to an acceptable consumer price level until that level became unprofitable. That price level would have to be below the cost of the competition's product in order to sell any of company A's product. Else you move the consumer to the competition's product more quickly. After which the operation would be abandoned. Equipment would be sold off to either fund a new venture or simply left to rot. The viable equity would be applied to a better income producing venture as soon as possible. This is capitalism. Put another way: The price can't rise above demand and still expect to move off the "shelves". A company would have to either refine the process of making the product or find other ways to reduce its internal costs in order to remain profitable and in the market. You can't keep selling something above the price people are willing to pay for it. Very quickly they will find alternatives to that product which meet their needs or wants at a price they find acceptable.

Harv

Harv

Many businesses have just gone ahead and significantly raised their prices/fees.

I didn't have shit either when I was your age.
Work and study hard and maybe some day you'll be able to afford two Vespas.

There are only a few grocers here in town that offer PRIME beef for sale, and this only in small quantities. With Prime Filets priced at more than $20/lb, it doesn't go flying off the shelves; in fact, the smart buyer who had been planning his visits to any of these stores in the early mornings could often take advantage of the older steaks being "reduced for quick sale" - until they got smart. Now you must phone a day ahead and place your order for the prime cuts you want.

This isn't exactly what might happen to gasoline in the decades ahead, but it will be priced as Harv says... so as to warrant providing it for the few who still use it.

@ roadbum...err, that's exactly it. What do you think has happened to old scooter parts? Or look at the price of new exhausts etc. The price of new scooter parts ought to be coming down. Are they? It's not so easy as simple supply and demand.

Exactly, case in point:
http://www.agoravox.com/article.php3?id_article=8360

and whoever has the most shit when he dies, wins?

williamvillage, I agree that the cost of fuel does moderate people's behaviour and it many cases it is not a bad thing.

Land Rovers, Hummers and so on, many owners don't strictly own their vehicles, they are often bought with credit. Put that with rising prices in every area (underpinned by increasing oil prices) those vehicles are being sold because of the cost of running them is extreme.

Therefore you are correct, anecdotally I see many more motorbikes and cycles on the street in London these days as opposed to cars, many more people using the buses in the evenings too. On a personal level I like it. Roads are clearer, less danger of being squashed by Range Rover Sport, and people chat to you at the lights.

The odder thing here is taxi drivers in London and how they deal with the rising costs of fuel. Taxi drivers here are furious because no one is taking a taxi, so they threatened to strike for a day unless they can pass on fuel costs to customers. I hope that someone pointed out to them that you cannot strike successfully unless someone wishes to use your service, and if that person cannot afford it, denying it to them anyway seems a little perverse....

*coffee all over the keyboard*

It really becomes a slippery slope to to say one form of transportation is better than another because of fuel usage. Isn't a 250 scooter rider using more gas/oil than a 50 cc? Are they less "eco-minded"? Would you condemn anyone who purchases a MP3 or one of the new 300 cc's? Couldn't the electric scooter owner feel the same about gas powered scooter owner?
For many people a scooter is not an option for various reasons.
High fuel cost affect us more than just our gasoline bills. Food costs rise as well as whole goods, manufacturing and services, especially those that are dependent directly on oil consumables.
I purchased my first scooter (Honda Elite) over 25 years ago it was just for fun. When I recently purchased my Vespa gas prices were a factor but so was the fun factor, I enjoy riding just for riding sake. Sometimes even I go for a ride, just to ride!

Just my 2 cents worth

Very well said +1

My feeling tells me that "conserve" does not fit into this scenario. If a necessary resource is in unlimited supply, you don't have to (and therefore won't) conserve it.

Take air for an example (and let's leave pollution out for now, we were talking about consumption).

To put your question into a more realistic background, just look 40 or so years back, how the US auto industry and the buyers reacted to "unlimited" supplies and low prices of fuel. Who cared?

That said, I also bought my Vespa for fun. Fuel efficiency was not an important aspect. Fuel injection and a catalytic converter were, however. I do care about the quality of the air I breathe.

An interesting point. I think I may be able to address it reasonably.

This "hobby" is a very limited segment of the overall scooter spectrum. People who enter into vintage scooters or scooter parts in general know that there are only a few producers. You have a choice of three or four product manufacturers for say, mufflers. So if you need one you're limited to either not buying one or choosing one of the few available.

Secondly, if everyone thought the price was out of line, the producers would have to choose between cutting their costs somehow or dropping the prices as far as they could and still remain in business. Parts of the FLY 150 is made in China. Or they could fold the product line. Even in a small demand specialty market the consumer dictates what's reasonable to pay for the product.

Since scooters are discretionary income vehicles not normally associated with western culture's idea (or viability) as four season use vehicles, scooterists who buy top line Vespas can afford the price of the parts as a rule. We know producers' margins are slim and hey, it won't break the bank to pay what keeps them in business tomorrow. Even so, there are limits even to that thinking.

Thanks for the great discussion

Harv

bought my GTS for fun, still riding a car with 245 bhp - and still paying the tax on fuel! and we are talking about EUR 1,70 per liter benzine here in the netherlands! it's not the high oil price it's the taxes making the fuel expensive - about 62% on benzine and 50% on diesel!!!!!!!!!

You got my point. Thank you.
I'll leave it at that.

Harv

i bought my scooter for fun and don't particularly care about its (lack of) fuel consumption.

i do, however, agree with williamvillage that the price of fuel will play a part in people's choice of vehicle. i'd be happy to see fewer 4x4s on the roads of london as they intimidate me more than any other type of vehicle when i'm on my vespa.

when i was younger i always owned moderately fast cars (lancia beta spyder, saab 900 turbo etc), and paid a lot for car insurance as a result. i saw insurance as a kind of tax on driving pleasure. and i was prepared to pay. fuel cost are the current equivalent.

Can I thank you all for your very well articluted arguements and comments and I'd like to thank Roadbum for a very well thought out and presented commentary.
In case you were wondering I bought my Vespa for fun and commuting but cost was never a factor as I've been riding bikes for 20 years so I guess to carry on riding was second nature to me.
As far as I'm concerned the more two wheelers on the roadS the better.
Thanks again to all of you.
Bill and the scabby ET4

Pulled up to the pump at my Shell station today. The guy before me had spent $83.64. Slipped in the debit card and filled her up with premium. $7.32 Good to go for another 2 weeks

I'm saying thank you because I'm grateful for eveyones input. In no way am I closing the conversation. I think it's just being polite.
Regards Bill and the polite but scabby ET4

Wonder Machine...I ride into Nottingham from the west everyday. Yeah, alright, Kam didn't say lorries but if 4 x 4's scare yer shouldn't be on the road.

While I'm at it how can my observation be political when I have no agenda ......... I need that one to be explained.
A very confused Bill

Don't worry about it. You asked a great question to which many of us gave salient answers. Sometimes its hard to divide the prime directive from the ancillary documentation in one's mind. lol No one of us is immune from muckijng things up trying to remember all the little details. Sometimes things just come to mind out of order.

All the best

Harv