Some Californians Are Paying $5 For A Gallon Of Gas, Which Could Mean Trouble For 2020 Democrats, Candidate Says

From The Daily Caller


Some Californians Are Paying $5 For A Gallon Of Gas, Which Could Mean Trouble For 2020 Democrats, Candidate Says

Daily Caller News Foundation logo

Audrey Conklin Reporter

October 08, 2019 6:39 PM ET

  • Gas prices in California have soared to $5 in some areas, according to the Oil Price Information Service.
  • Republican candidate for California’s 50th Congressional District Carl DeMaio told the Daily Caller News Foundation that the price increase is due to “taxes, mandates and regulations” imposed by Democrats.
  • DeMaio added the burden of expensive fuel will “absolutely” have an impact on the next elections.

The average price of gas per gallon in California has skyrocketed to its highest level in five years, according to the Oil Price Information Service.

The average cost in the state soared to $4.18 while drivers in other areas are paying as much as $5 per gallon, CNN Business reported Tuesday, which could mean bad news for Democratic politicians vying for more regulations and higher taxes, Republican candidate for California’s 50th Congressional District Carl DeMaio told the Daily Caller News Foundation.

CNN Business pointed to refinery outages as the reason for the inflated prices. California has 15 oil refineries while the entire U.S. has a total of 135, according to the California Energy Commission and the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

But DeMaio told the DCNF that California Democrats and their policies taxes are to blame for the rising prices.

“That’s what Democrats like to blame,” DeMaio said. “‘Oh, it’s the industry. It’s the market. We had nothing to do with it.’ Spare me, you arsonist firefighter. You created the problem with your taxes, mandates and regulations. And now you come along saying, ‘It’s not our problem. It’s the private sector’s problem.’ This is how they escape responsibility for the problem.”

DeMaio added California’s increasing regulations and gas prices will “absolutely” have an impact on Democrats in the next elections, adding that Republicans could have saved seats in the state in 2018 had they made these issues the central focuses of their campaigns, but “they’re too ignorant to actually see the opportunity in front of them.”

Mandates and fees imposed by Democrats “add about $1.50 to every gallon of gas,” DeMaio, chairman for Reform California, which campaigns against tax increases, told the DCNF. He added later that California Republicans “have allowed [Democrats] to get off scot-free on this issue.”

Sales tax on gas in California increases as the underlying price of fuel increases. The state’s latest gas tax, which went into effect on July 1 and moved California to the No. 1 position for highest fuel prices in 2019, aims to produce $50 billion for transportation projects over the next 10 years, KCAL 9 reported. DeMaio is trying to repeal the gas tax.

Democratic California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed an executive order in September that will redirect the funds produced from the gas tax from roads and highways to railway systems.

Republican California Assemblyman Jim Patterson called a “theft of funds,” the California Globe reported.

DeMaio emphasized this point, saying the gas tax will keep increasing the cap-and-trade regulations that will, in turn, keep increasing the price of gas, and “none of those funds goes to roads.”

“They all go to their fetish for climate change and transit and bike paths and high-speed rail trains to nowhere,” he told the DCNF.

“This is a big regressive tax,” he added. “It’s a regressive cost of living that affects the working poor the most. Your limousine liberals from the Bay Area don’t worry about it. They have more than enough money to pay for the higher gas prices. They drive around in hundred-thousand-dollar electric cars.”

“It’s working families who are disproportionately hurt by the higher gas prices,” DeMaio continued. (RELATED: Here’s Why Californians Pay Way More For Gasoline Than Everyone Else)

California also produces the majority of its own fuel in accommodation with the state’s strict environmental rules, which include formulas specific to the state that are designed to reduce pollution. The formulas are also designed to change with the seasons to slow down evaporation, according to the California Air Resources Board.

As a result, when California refineries experience problems, the state is slow to replace lost production, the Los Angeles Times reported on April 10, citing Automobile Club of Southern California spokeswoman Marie Montgomery.

“It’s the regulations, the taxes, mandates and fees — all of those things combined — [increase gas prices by] $1 to $1.50 depending upon what point of the year you’re in. And when you take a look at that and say, ‘Oh, the reason why we have all these regulations is [because] it will improve air quality,’ I don’t think based on today’s technology that is anywhere near a credible statement,” DeMaio told the DCNF.

“If you take a look at what Democrats are doing on water policy and choking off the supply of water from places like Central Valley — the worst impact to air quality today is the dust that’s kicked up in Central Valley because we’re not allowing farmers access to water to keep their fields compact, and so nobody seems to be addressing why we have these regulations,” he concluded.

Patrick DeHaan, head of petroleum analysis at, said in a Tuesday tweet that he expects the state’s gas prices to fall soon.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Luke of the D
October 9, 2019 10:14 am

And PG&E is going to begin deliberate power outages today in response to the threat of fire… all because PG&E had to declare bankruptcy due to being accused of causing fires by the communist in power in Sacramento… so PG&E decided, if we are the reason for the fires and we cannot increase rates to pay for repairs, then we will simply shut off the power. Problem solved. Frankly, PG&E should simply close up shop, tear down their power lines and let the California commies live in the dark.

Reply to  Luke of the D
October 9, 2019 10:58 am

Kinda a case of the public getting what they wanted — there won’t be any powerline-caused fires.

Reply to  Luke of the D
October 9, 2019 11:33 am

SCE is planning to do the same thing with the threat of high winds in the forecast for the next couple of days. I feel sorry for those that will have their power shut off but they voted all those idiots in so they will reap what they sow. When will enough be enough for them?

AGW is not Science
Reply to  Kevin
October 9, 2019 11:50 am

Hoist by their own petard! Couldn’t happen to a nicer state!

Reply to  Kevin
October 9, 2019 1:10 pm

Look carefully at the maps of the outages. They avoid the highly populated, Democrat infested areas.

Nicholas McGinley
Reply to  Philip
October 9, 2019 9:21 pm

I think that may have initially been the case, but only because of where the fire danger was initially declared to be high.
It appears the planned outages are widening dramatically, and include some part of some big cities and populous counties.
And so far it is northern CA., but fire weather is just as common if not more so in the southern and coastal portions of the state.
It is now expected to last for days and to effect millions of people.
See here:

Some people will die without power, simply because of needed medical devices.
But this will darken traffic and street lighting, and cut off power to critical care facilities and other important buildings and businesses.
And it is not some isolated incident or one time event…it is the plan going forward for anyplace with fire weather…which can and often does last for many days and at times for weeks on end!

Bill Parsons
Reply to  Nicholas McGinley
October 9, 2019 10:50 pm

All the towns east and west of Chico on the WSJ map are rated at “extreme” risk of fire, and are presumably being disempowered. Hard to believe! Predictions are for 5 days and nights without electricity, everything in northern Cal… shut down. Schools offices and businesses closed. Stop lights out. Potentially billions of dollars lost.

(or your own favorite news source)

That’s a fixable problem. Trump should and will jump on it and make it a teachable moment – not a sneering point.

Reply to  Luke of the D
October 9, 2019 12:43 pm

PG&E is not blameless. Yes, they were held liable for failing to maintain the power lines as required by contractual obligation. They were collecting rate fees to cover these operational costs. They did not spend the money to maintain the power lines as promised. When the damage occurred due to their negligence it is wholly on their shoulders. They have no business coming to ask for a rate hike to cover costs they had already planned for and collected dollars for.

Roger Knights
Reply to  Rocketscientist
October 9, 2019 4:27 pm

“They did not spend the money to maintain the power lines as promised.”

I’ve read that PAGE&E tried to get approval to go farther onto property owners’ lots and cut back threatening branches and trees, but homeowners set up a howl and blocked them. I.e., intimidated the regulators or the courts, I assume.

Reply to  Rocketscientist
October 10, 2019 3:20 am

Rocket: PG&E is not blameless, true, but if they play it right…. This morning I see PG&E suggesting that the system wasn’t built for this weather. They are one short step from blaming AGW! What can CA pols like Gavin say to that?! PG&E can play a green trump card, which is an uber trump card in CA, and Gavin can’t respond with the truth- the weather hasn’t changed, the system was built to take the wind but not overgrown trees and limbs that were planned to be cleared. We may have the pleasure of watching an “Emperor’s new clothes” redux, where nobody in CA can say the obvious truth.

Gary Wescom
Reply to  Luke of the D
October 9, 2019 1:08 pm

Of course, we should all remember that PG&E’s financial problem is from the California Reverse Condemnation law. PG&E is assigned deep pocket status if their equipment is in any way associated with a fire or other disaster by this law. It probably made sense to legislators when it was first passed. After all a $1,000,000 charge would amount to a one time charge of $0.17 to each of PG&E customer. Yea! Free Money!
The way this is law written, it does not matter if the associated PG&E equipment was in perfect working condition. If a drunk driver hits a PG&E power pole and sparks start a fire, PG&E is still on the hook for fire costs. Moreover, PG&E is also open to claims from insurance companies to recover the money they paid out on fire insurance claims as well as punitive claims.
So.. This great idea for Free Money sorta bites the big one when the charges jump from $1M to $30B. That is no longer pennies per customer!
California placed itself between a stupid rock and a stupid hard place. Failure of the investor owned utilities would cost the state many times more than $30B to either take over their operation or to try to split them up into municipal agencies that are in no way capable of taking on the responsibility. (Municipal utilities can be quite successful provided their is adequate planning, financing, regulatory approval, inter-agency agreements established, etc. – Simply telling a small town they are on their own so they had better get with the program is not going to work well.)
As for turning off power, one of the current punitive law suits is about PG&E not turning off power during a high wind event. It is a California Public Utilities Commission rule now.

Nicholas McGinley
Reply to  Gary Wescom
October 9, 2019 1:46 pm

So at the same time fire risk is high, people have no power and are largely incommunicado!
What could go wrong?
These wind events can last for days and even weeks!
That is one fine state to move out of and not look back.

Reply to  Luke of the D
October 9, 2019 3:08 pm

Tesla scrambling to tell owners to charge up before the week-long blackouts…


Reply to  Luke of the D
October 10, 2019 6:41 am

Sitting in the dark fuming about it. What will this cost Californian’s? 400-500 million?

Nicholas McGinley
Reply to  Grant
October 11, 2019 8:56 am

Estimates are in the billions, and this is not a one time event, by any means.
Oh, and now I see that there are fires anyway.

October 9, 2019 10:15 am

Its OK folks, don’t hyperventilate.

California is clement, beautiful weather, perfect most of the year for pedaling one’s bicycle to work. Oh wait… if you live close enough, make a bazillion dollars a month for a studio, and are otherwise happy being packed elbow-to-jowl with one’s neighbors. Otherwise, you’re too far from work. Commute really sucks.

But you COULD be using an electric car! That’s what the high taxes are supposed to be encouraging!

Except PG&E ensures that all homeowners who have installed solar systems in the last 5 years cannot generate their own power when the grid cuts out. That … ain’t… very… smart.

OK, back in my pen.
Just Saying,
GoatGuy ✓

Walter Sobchak
Reply to  GoatGuy
October 9, 2019 10:43 am

Serves ’em right to suffer.

California tumbles into the sea:

Reply to  Walter Sobchak
October 9, 2019 2:49 pm

Slightly fewer than 50% of us did not vote for this mess. It does not serve us all right to suffer. A huge minority here has essentially no voice in the government. Many ballots don’t even get a Rep or Libertarian, Dem only.

John Endicott
Reply to  Monster
October 10, 2019 9:24 am

Living in a blue state, I can sympathize with the minority that did not vote for this mess. The majority that did, however, I have no sympathy for. They’re reaping what they sowed. It’s just a shame that others will have to suffer along side them.

Derek Wood
Reply to  Walter Sobchak
October 10, 2019 2:19 am

Walter Sobchak, Sublime! A perfect fusion of guitar and brass. I’ve dug out my copy, and the deck is warming up as I write!

Bryan A
Reply to  GoatGuy
October 9, 2019 12:12 pm

That’s because the Solar/Batteries can back feed into the de-energized lines effectively reenergizing them to 12,000 or 21,000 volts. Unless the homeowners (or solar generation owners, some homeowners don’t actually own the solar generation system) have the necessary automatic switches installed as part of their system. Most opt not to because back feeding into the grid was supposed to be one of the perks, spinning your meter backwards.

Reply to  Bryan A
October 9, 2019 2:11 pm

Exactly right Bryan. The inverters have “anti-islanding” technology built in. (So not to create islands of power.) When the inverter no longer “sees” utility power it shuts down. This protects out lineman from arch-flash and electrocution. But the owner is in the dark.

Reply to  PatrickH
October 9, 2019 6:01 pm

I also thought that grid connected inverters need a reference frequency for regulation, no frequency no go.

Reply to  Bryan A
October 9, 2019 8:52 pm

where are you going to get 12,000+ volts from in a home solar system?

Mark Luhman
Reply to  yarpos
October 9, 2019 10:12 pm

Back feed through the transformer, transformers work both ways. The step down transformer from the power line of main feed is normal 7000 volts three phase the transformer reduce it to 240 two phase for homes often 220 three phase for businesses. If you back feed the transformer from you solar system of emergence generator the 240 two phase or 220 three phase will be stepped up to 7000 volts three phase. A utility worked was killed in North Dakota in eighties or the nineties due to an improperly install backup generator. The utility worker was trying to repair down powerlines after a blizzard. I have said step down transformer in my back yard the 7000 volts three phase lines(there are three of them is buried between my neighbors house and mine) feed the transformer on the corner of my lot. To my knowledge the is not an easement there where the feed lines run. There is in the back of my lot where the transformer sits and it feeds my and all my neighbors houses 220 volts two phase. Also in the easement the sanitary sewer run through there as does the cable TV and phone lines, present they are replacing the phone cable and there are a number of holes through out neighborhood where the easement are.

Reply to  Bryan A
October 10, 2019 4:41 am

its surprising how many new pv homeowners DO think theyre going to have power when theres a blackout
without isolated systems or batteries in place.
in Aus IF I ever installed solar it would be stand alone and old acid batteries
some areas are refusing to allow you to do stand alone at all OR still wanting to charge 150 or so a quarter for service charges for a service you do not use.

on the fuel prices?
guys I laugh
due to tax and oilco gounging our aussie petrol in my town went from 1.39 a LITRE to 147.9 recently
theres 4.5 litres to a gallon
our closest smallish town for at least some decent prices for food and access to pharmas and services is 50km away better town is 100km
so to go to either I am paying 25 to 50 round trip in fuel alone in a V6 holden Jackaroo.
and thats about the same fuel use as my older V6 stationwagon holden used to require.
anything smaller wont fit stockfeed hardware or 6 very large dogs

Reply to  ozspeaksup
October 10, 2019 5:00 am

Hi oz

I’m in Brisbane. 2 weeks ago I paid $1.75 per litre…. about $7.80 per gallon!
The government is making a mozza on the GST component on fuel prices!
10% GST means that the government was raking in about $7 every time someone filled up a small car (42 litre tank capacity). It’s criminal!

Grant Willetts
Reply to  wal1957
October 12, 2019 4:32 pm

Yes, but 10% GST is far less than the combined wholesale and retail taxes that were paid. You will that more than half of the tax (including excises) is state taxes and the rest Federal. QLD had cheaper fuel than most of the country for decades because the state fuel excises were much lower than elsewhere. After Labor was eventually returned to power when Sir Joh was gone, they, the QLD Labor government, began dramatically increasing the excise and state taxes and this has continued until today. Consequently, your fuel prices are quite high. Probably close 90c of that $1.75 is actually government revenues, and of which only 10% is GST.

Federal Excises as of October 2018 (not indexed with the introduction of the GST until being reinstated by Abbott in late 2014):

A$0.416 per litre on unleaded petrol fuel (including standard, blended (E10) and premium grades)
A$0.416 per litre on diesel fuel (ultra-low sulphur/conventional)
A$0.134 per litre on liquified petroleum gas used as fuel (autogas or LPG as it is commonly known in Australia).
A$0.081 per litre on ethanol fuel for use as fuel in an internal combustion engine (which can be reduced/removed with grants)
A$0.041 per litre on biodiesel (which can be reduced/removed with grants)
Note: Gasoline for use as fuel in an aircraft is taxed at $0.03556 per litre.

In addition, all fuels are subject to 10% Goods and Services Tax (GST).

For the Qld government take on fuel, you can search for that yourself. Either way, we pay a bucket load of tax on fuel in Australia and only around 25% of that money is reinvested into road infrastructure.

Hans Erren
October 9, 2019 10:19 am

1.20 euro per litre is cheap in Europe

Reply to  Hans Erren
October 9, 2019 11:12 am

7$/gallon in Sweden.
A country very depending on cars, our politicians are insane – I truly believe that.

Bryan A
Reply to  Hans Erren
October 9, 2019 12:18 pm

1.2 Euros per litre is
1.2 x 3.785 4.54 Euros per gallon
At current exchange $1.1 per Euro $4.99 per gallon

Mike O
Reply to  Hans Erren
October 9, 2019 12:22 pm

I paid $.91 per liter in Calgary. Canadian dollars! It was $1.34/liter across the line in British Columbia.

Reply to  Mike O
October 9, 2019 2:18 pm

Gasoline about $2.20 a gallon around Nashville Tennessee. It’s been around that for months despite Supply disruptions from Venezuela, Iran, Libya, and attacks in the Persian Gulf. Thank you fracking. Oh and we are exporting for the first time in decades.

Not bragging ….really. Just pointing out that Environental extremists did their very best to stop this as we all know. Had they succeeded we would be at the economic meet of these nasty regimes.

David Chappell
Reply to  Hans Erren
October 9, 2019 8:34 pm

Hong Kong US$8.70 per US gallon

Tractor Gent
Reply to  Hans Erren
October 10, 2019 1:17 am

About £1.30/l here in the UK, which equates to about $6 per US gallon. I never thought US prices would ever approach European prices, but here we are. I think CA is a bit of an outlier though.

Reply to  Tractor Gent
October 10, 2019 5:56 am

Yes, California is an outlier. Here in the state of Indiana gas prices over the past 2 weeks have been between about $2.20 & $2.50 a gallon. I filled up over the weekend for $1.24 per gallon using my rewards points from the grocery store. Our gas prices have stayed pretty much between $2.00 and about $2.75 for the past several years with the occasional spike up for a day or two that get closer to $$2.90 per gallon.

Reply to  Hans Erren
October 10, 2019 11:03 am

Definitely. 1,20 euros/L is a garage sale here (Portugal).
Current cheap diesel: 1,44 €/L ($6/US gal)
Current cheap petrol 95: 1,56 €/L ($6,51/US gal)

October 9, 2019 10:24 am

Yes this article condemns the taxes and it should be widely circulated.
However, that control freaks from Moonbeam Obama to Moonbeam Brown all want gas prices to soar.
They hate cars.

Reply to  Bob Hoye
October 9, 2019 10:47 am

Most of them ( the Moonbeams ) don’t tolerate a moment’s thought of how bad it could get if/when the entire civilization breaks down. The rest of them are malevolent enough to pray for that. To whom they pray ?

Reply to  Bob Hoye
October 9, 2019 10:51 am

They only SEEM to hate cars. Look at the California economy in total and they really seem to hate working class people most. Look at the actions the legislature has taken over the years. Whether is mining/resource extraction, agricutlture, manufacturing, etc. good blue collar jobs have taken a huge hit by the state’s onerous regulatory state. Families with children, or anyone starting out for that matter, also don’t fare well. I’d call it Pied Piper social policy.

AGW is not Science
Reply to  Bob Hoye
October 9, 2019 11:53 am

They hate cars, except for their own. They don’t want the “Little People” to be driving, so that *they* can have unclogged roads all to themselves as they live their “more equal than others” lifestyles, ala Animal Farm.

Reply to  AGW is not Science
October 9, 2019 4:19 pm

Oh, the politicians hate cars, according to them, but they are forced to use them because of the importance of their work. That’s also why all the bills associated with their driving will be paid for by the taxpayer, not the politician.

It’s a sacrifice they willingly make to serve the citizenry. You’re welcome.

Reply to  AGW is not Science
October 9, 2019 9:00 pm

Funny how California has been a major centre for actvities where people burn “fossil fuels” just for fun. Over the decades it has been a mecca for hot rodding, drag racing, circuit racing, desert racing, skydiving etc. It amazes me that these havent been banned outright.

James Beaver
Reply to  Bob Hoye
October 9, 2019 1:00 pm

Oh, I think they have no problem with cars per se. They just don’t like it when the hoi polloi can afford to drive cars and trucks. The rich prefer that the roads are wide open for their SUVs and expensive sports cars.

Reply to  Bob Hoye
October 9, 2019 8:04 pm

Well, if California is ever going to improve their air quality, they will have have a large reduction in the number of gas/diesel vehicles…I’m not talking about CO2 – I mean real pollution. The natural climate there plus all the pollution from cars/trucks creates a huge mess…

October 9, 2019 10:26 am

So it will drive Californians to drive smaller, fuel efficient cars!

Reply to  griff
October 11, 2019 5:45 am

No, it will drive the smart ones to move out of California. The only problem with that is they will then vote for the exact things that ended up driving them out of CA in their new states of residence.

J Mac
October 9, 2019 10:41 am

‘Lay down with dogs, get up with fleas.’

Joel Snider
October 9, 2019 10:42 am

Hell, if Trump executive-ordered the power back on in Northern California after a week or so of third-world progressive oppression, that might gain him a little of that popular vote the Dims are trying to impose in place of the electoral system.

And all he has to do is point to the progressives being exactly who they are.

Javert Chip
Reply to  Joel Snider
October 9, 2019 12:14 pm

PG&E is legally required to clear brush around power lines; one of the problems is regulators may not have properly funded PG&E to do this.

Turning power back on just causes other problems (example: your house burns down).

For a state that brags about being the world’s 7th largest economy (remember, most Asian imports enter the USA through the west coast…), its living conditions are looking more and more primitive: electricity black-outs, poop outs, low vaccine rates, third-world communicable diseases, periodic water rationing, poor primary/secondary schools

Joel Snider
Reply to  Javert Chip
October 9, 2019 3:26 pm

‘PG&E is legally required to clear brush around power lines’

As I understand it, the regulators actually killed efforts to clear away the kindling.
All green agenda policies.

Luke of the D
Reply to  Joel Snider
October 10, 2019 5:38 am

You are both correct: PG&E is legally required to clear brush per laws and regulations to prevent fires, yet they have been denied the ability to do so by courts and new regulations. There is literally nothing PG&E or SoCal can do about this. They are stuck between customers who badly need their services and a government which hates them dearly. They can’t repair the power lines or clear the brush because the communists in Sacramento won’t let them, yet they cannot produce electricity without theoretically causing fires (which has never actually been proved, yet is the absolute belief of the same communists who are stopping them from clearing the brush). It is a catch 22. And the sad part is, it is the poor people of California who are going to suffer the worst.

Javert Chip
Reply to  Luke of the D
October 10, 2019 8:12 am

It’s truly a ridiculous situation, but I don’t feel too bad for Californians – they keep voting for idiots/Democrats.

At some point, you get what you deserve.

Nicholas McGinley
Reply to  Luke of the D
October 11, 2019 9:00 am

And once turned off, they have to inspect every inch of the system prior to re-energizing.
This is a real mess for those affected.

Don Perry
Reply to  Joel Snider
October 9, 2019 12:56 pm

No, if there were to be a fire, it would be all Trump’s fault and there would be another charge place on his articles of impeachment. Best to just let the leftists eat each other alive over this.

Joel Snider
Reply to  Joel Snider
October 9, 2019 1:50 pm

Okay – fair points, given that the kindling is already set up to burn – same as the case here in Oregon, although it rains more here.

Then adapt the messaging strategy to illustrate how the forest has been primed to burn – which THEN resulted in power being shut off for a week.

Because there WILL be fires, power shutdown or no shutdown – and they WILL be blamed on AGW (and by extension, Trump) – and then exploited.

Reply to  Joel Snider
October 9, 2019 3:58 pm

How about declaring a national emergency, sending in the troops to clear out deadfall and trim trees near power lines, ordering the power to be restored, and saying, ‘THAT’S how you do it. Get a clue.”

Then laugh at the temper-tantrums dems would throw.

October 9, 2019 10:46 am

Where I live, the 3rd world part of this Utopian paradise called Kalifornia, you can’t even get gas for $10/gallon from a gas station. Why? Mandated power outages. You need electricity to pump the stuff out of a tank. I guess they want us prepared for the “carbon-free” power the Kowtown Kremlin has mandated.

Joel Snider
Reply to  Лазо
October 9, 2019 2:25 pm

They’re just getting you used to it. Welcome to the shape of things to come.

Roger Knights
Reply to  Лазо
October 9, 2019 4:32 pm

” You need electricity to pump the stuff out of a tank.”

One no-regrets adaptation measure should be to require gas stations to have an emergency generator hookup for their gas pumps.

October 9, 2019 10:59 am

If it’s any consolation to those in CA paying $5/gal for gas, I’m paying a little over $2/gal, which is just slightly less.

J Mac
Reply to  icisil
October 9, 2019 1:31 pm

I feel your pain, icisil! We were warned!
“You can’t drill your way to low gasoline prices!” Barackward Hussein Obama. I’m sooooo glad the geologists and petro-engineers told the little socialist community activist “Frack That!”

Mark Broderick
October 9, 2019 11:18 am

The climate has been changing for 4.5 billion years……
When the climate STOPS changing, then I’ll start worrying !

Kevin McNeill
October 9, 2019 11:19 am

Here in British Columbia at the moment gas is, in the hinterlands, $1.33 a litre, which is $5.36 CAD per US gallon ($3.50 USD). The government blames the oil companies for gouging when the real cause is taxes plus the cost of doing business, i.e. land costs, municipal taxes, etc.

Reply to  mwhite
October 9, 2019 12:01 pm

I’m already paying nearly that much in California. While the first 300 KWH per month are only about 0.22 per KWH, the next 900 KWH per month are 0.28 per KWH and beyond that it’s about 0.48 per KWH. Electricity and natural gas are about the only consumer goods whose price increases as the quantity purchased increases, or at least that’s what the silly regulations in California require …

Reply to  co2isnotevil
October 9, 2019 1:16 pm

I will crank up my Tesla coil and beam you some $0.11 per KWh (as much as you want) Tennessee electricity.

Javert Chip
Reply to  co2isnotevil
October 9, 2019 1:27 pm


I live in FL, have 10kW photo-voltaic on roof, and track my electric usage pretty closely because I’m an ex-CFO who enjoys playing with the numbers. All-electric house is 2,800 sq-ft, A/C 24/7/365, irrigation system & pool.

1) 12 months of my actual kWh usage, net of solar I generate, annual electric bill is about $1,000

2) Same 12 months of actual kWh usage priced at full-FPL retail would be $3,057 (FPL is about $0.11/kWh)

3) Running that same actual monthly kWh usage (1519-3211 kWh/mo) through your pricing numbers yields an annual electric bill of $7,566.

Needless to say, you have my deepest condolences.

I lived in CA when I retired in 2012; immediately took 5 days to relocate to FL; BY END OF 1ST WEEK I’D DONE EVERYTHING NECESSARY TO QUALIFY AS A (low tax paying0 FL RESIDENT (FL has no income tax; I’m still receiving tax-free deferred income)

Sometimes even the frog in the pot realizes the water temperature is increasing…

ps: Net of tax-credits and FPL rebate, my 10kW system cost $3,200.

Nicholas McGinley
Reply to  Javert Chip
October 9, 2019 11:51 pm

Can you post info on where you got it?
Does that include everything?
Unfortunately, I do not have FPL, I have LCEC…lower rates, but no rebates for solar or anything else.

Javert Chip
Reply to  Nicholas McGinley
October 10, 2019 8:18 am


1) I had my 10kW system installed in Dec, 2013
2) Federl tax credits at that time were 30% of total cost; I believe this drops significantly in tax year 2019 or 2020
3) FPL also paid a rebate based on size of system, up to 10kWh max (my rebate was $20,000); this rebate is required by the FL legislature and is renewed (or not) on an annual basis – I don’t know the status of the current FL rebate mandate on FPL

I’m willing to list my vendor, but don’t know if that “advertisement” will pass review by the moderators…

My vendor was Brevard Solar

Nicholas McGinley
Reply to  Nicholas McGinley
October 11, 2019 8:54 am

That rebate from FPL is what made this economical for you.
Without that, on top of the Federal tax credit, the math is far different.
I could save a lot of the money involved by doing the work myself, but even with that, I have not been able to put together a set of numbers that would make more sense that paying for the power and keeping the money invested.
It seems like it should be possible to make solar work, but it is really the subsidy that makes all the difference, unfortunately.
Best deal on panels I have found is from a big box home store bought online with a 10% discount offer coupon they send me in the mail a few times a year

October 9, 2019 11:25 am

“CNN Business pointed to refinery outages as the reason …”

The refinery outage is definitely an issue, but the reason is because State regulations put in place by Democrats require special gas in California (which BTW also reduces gas mileage offsetting any smog reduction), preventing balancing supply and demand with gasoline refined out of state.

In addition to preventing California from imposing it’s own falsely justified fuel economy standards, the administration should terminate the states ability to impose it’s own standards on the required properties of gasoline, again for reasons of enabling free market forces to apply for interstate commerce, which is actually for the common good. Modern automotive computer controls do more for reducing smog than any gasoline formulation can accomplish.

AGW is not Science
Reply to  co2isnotevil
October 9, 2019 11:59 am

Well said. Time for Kalifornia to become part of the USA again, instead of continuing to try to extend its ridiculous, out of control, and mostly pointless regulations to other states by refusing to play along.

Bryan A
Reply to  co2isnotevil
October 9, 2019 12:25 pm

We drove from Sonoma County, up the Sacto Valley and through Oregon into Seattle Wa. Filled up twice in Ca and once in Or. Ca Gas got us an average of 21-24 MPG into Oregon while Oregon Gas got us 33 MPG into Seattle.
CA gas sucks for mileage.

Reply to  co2isnotevil
October 9, 2019 12:57 pm

California gasoline does indeed have lower energy content. If you fluff up ice cream with air you go to the Big House. If you do the same for gas in California you go to the State House. And do not forget the ongoing multi-billion dollar contamination problem from the ill advised additive MBTE. And now that Newsom has stolen the money promised for roads expect congestion to rise causing even more problems.

Reply to  Rob_Dawg
October 9, 2019 4:23 pm

They’re spending lots of money on roads, but most seems to be for pay to play and/or carpool lanes which do little to relieve congestion anyway. Also, MTBE has been giving way to ethanol which contributes to lowering the energy content of gasoline.

Reply to  co2isnotevil
October 9, 2019 1:43 pm

One issue in CA with new cars having better smog/emission control systems obviating the need for gasoline additives to control emissions is that most Californians do not drive newer vehicles.
Most of CA private vehicles would not pass safety inspection in many eastern states.

Reply to  Rocketscientist
October 10, 2019 6:52 am

Victor David Hansen said that the average paid for a vehicle in his Fresno district is about $6500.00, but it’s due to high cost of living and poor wages.

Reply to  co2isnotevil
October 10, 2019 9:43 am

Can someone explain more? It does not seem possible that I am paying $2.50, and CA is paying $5.00.

Is CA supplied by regional refineries? Is it true as per CNN that most or all had coincidentally recently had temporary shut-downs?

If a few or all shut down, wouldn’t the gas companies source from neighboring regions in an effort to compete on price?

Right? For so long, we had been getting oil from the Middle East, but the refinery business is local?

Reply to  TheLastDemocrat
October 10, 2019 2:00 pm

It’s because we have idiotic leadership that’s bought into the global warming scam, hook, line and sinker and wants to drive energy prices higher, moreover; the malfeasance is not limited to the price of gasoline.

We do pay higher gas taxes than in most states and we have a special blend of gas we must use to mitigate smog arising from older ICE’s, most of which are no longer on the road. Because of the special blend (with more ethanol and less energy per gallon), when refineries in California shut down, we can’t replace the fuel with fuel refined in other states. This was allowed once before, but required a special act by the Governor to temporarily allow it.

To be fair, the $5.00 gas is in places like Tahoe where it’s always up to $1 more per gallon then at gas stations less than 100 miles away (or even closer with more savings across the state in Nevada). This is because there’s almost no competition in the mountain areas and the few stations that exist tend to collude on pricing. Recent prices in the state vary widely between about 3.79 and 4.99 per gallon.

Nicholas McGinley
Reply to  TheLastDemocrat
October 11, 2019 9:02 am

Most of the differences in gas prices in the US is because of taxes.
There are big differences from one county to the next in many areas, like here in Florida.
Still, overall Florida is a low tax state for gas, compared to many states.

michael hart
October 9, 2019 11:34 am

A few quick conversion sums, and in the UK $6.10 seems to be about the going rate.
These kind of questions/answers lie at the root of why the US is still wealthier than most of the rest of the world.

Make the basics, especially energy, more expensive and we all end up being poorer. This was Economics 101 forty years ago. We live in an age of increasing economic ignorance, and yet they are proud of it in many Universities today.

October 9, 2019 12:06 pm

Good for Carl. He can use the press because he has an uphill battle in the 50th. The man has been relentless about attacking the regressive gas taxes, pension boondoggles and a host of other issues in San Diego for many years. He gave up a, lucrative, gig in San Diego talk radio to make this run at congress. I’m not in the 50th district but I will be contributing to his campaign.



Reply to  john
October 9, 2019 12:51 pm

I wrote an article about the group, based in OREGON behind this crap.

Ed MacAulay
October 9, 2019 12:25 pm

So how are all the electric cars doing? Seems easier to store gas for an ICE than battery for an emergency

Rod Evans
October 9, 2019 12:59 pm

Here in the UK we are paying $7.50 /imperial gallon roughly $6.000/gallon US (exchange rate based on $1.25/£.
Over 80% of that charge is tax, yet still the Greens want to ban fossil fuel, despite it being the largest single tax earner, paying the public sectors’ salaries, paying for the NHS, paying for the left wing teachers, who are the main group supporting the idea children should hold climate change demos, rather than waste teachers time being taught anything.
Go figure as you say in the USA.

Reply to  Rod Evans
October 9, 2019 4:12 pm

Ban fossil fuels. Initiate a mandatory ‘public transportation support tax’ that generates more tax income than the current petrol fuel tax, arguing that people are saving even more money by not having a car, and using public transportation instead. Then use that revenue for whatever you want.

Nothing is impossible when you have the unfettered ability to tax.

October 9, 2019 1:02 pm

What happens if the greens actually win, and fossil fuels are banned, were will the greens get the money to repair the roads? Transportation system?? Oil doesn’t just make oil companies money, it repairs and builds so much of our infrastructure!

The state’s latest gas tax, which went into effect on July 1 and moved California to the No. 1 position for highest fuel prices in 2019, aims to produce $50 billion for transportation projects over the next 10 years,

Reply to  Sunny
October 9, 2019 1:53 pm

If the watermelons win, which I hope and expect they will not – but if they do, you won’t need roads – no cars. Or trucks delivering food or ‘essential’ iPhone Q49s.
Or people to use those roads.
The few surviving slaves will walk to their fields or forests, except those picked out as concubines.
And our Glorious Elite will probably fly everywhere, using personal ornithopters, powered by liquidised redundant slaves.
Paradise! ummm /Sarc. Oddly enough.
Yet this seems to be the aim of the XR revolutionaries, whose plan was published on WUWT months ago – yet London’s Met police are still treating these folk with very gentle kid gloves.


October 9, 2019 1:23 pm

You’d think that expensive fuel would cause problems politically, but it won’t. California is used to paying through the nose for energy, houses, etc. A couple of extra bucks for evil gasoline won’t even make a blip.

October 9, 2019 2:18 pm

Many people don’t realize California has highest poverty rate of any state if adjusted for cost of living.

David Segal
October 9, 2019 2:41 pm

I don’t understand why anyone should be surprised at these high cost of living charges are associated with climate change. Increasing costs of using fossil fuel is actually the aim of climate change policy. Obama made that clear years ago. People have deluded themselves into thinking that as technologies advance non fossil fuel solutions become cheaper. Reality paints a different picture. Fortunately democracies give states and countries the opportunity to expunge themselves of these zealots. If people then decide to vote them in then frankly they get what they deserve. You either hang around and live with the consequences or move.

Gunga Din
October 9, 2019 3:08 pm

California, you get what you pay vote for. Time to pay up.
(Or reconsider who you voted for.)

Gunga Din
October 9, 2019 3:19 pm

Here in the US, when your gas receipt is printed out, it does not separate out the price of the gas itself and the the Federal and State sales tax. Just the total price.
I’d like to see those taxes listed separately.
That might wake a few people up.

October 9, 2019 4:25 pm

In the 1990s mafia members were convicted of getting cheap gas from New Jersey and somehow selling it in NY without paying the NY taxes on it. Not sure how they did it but such price discrepancies between states Is a receipt for criminal schemes. You see this lots in Canada with cigarettes being sold out of someone’s trunk at lower prices because they get around the tax somehow ( using illegal imports or Indian reservations as suppliers ).

Nicholas Mcginley
Reply to  Stevek
October 9, 2019 9:13 pm

In some places farmers and other users of large amounts of diesel motor fuel try to get around the high tax rate on motor fuel by substituting a similar product sold as home heating oil, which is equivalent but taxed at a far lower rate.
There are people that go around testing the fuel in gas tanks to try to catch this practice and punish the people who do it. Apparently there is some additive blended in to identify which is which…a colorant perhaps?

Reply to  Nicholas Mcginley
October 9, 2019 11:03 pm

In the UK farmers get ‘red’ diesel for tractor use which has a lower tax rate than diesel sold in gas stations for ordinary car users. It is about half the price per gallon.
Customs and Excise officers occasionally attend markets and other events and test farmers’ pick-ups and SUVs to see whether they are using red diesel for non-agricultural uses.

October 9, 2019 5:39 pm

In woe-derful california, gas is over $4 a gallon because

(1) California imports its oil from Saudia Arabia (instead of drilling for our own) and we know what happens in Saudi Arabia doesn’t stay in Saudia Arabia.

(2) Four refineries that rely on Saudi oil are down for “unscheduled” maintenance

(3) California is having to import gas from other fly-over states to meet demand

But don’t worry, prices will drop by Thanksgiving when they go back up because of increased Thanksgiving driving, but be assured they’ll go back down again before Christmas when they go back up again because of increased holiday driving, but rest easy they’ll go back down again until Spring break when they go back up again because of increased spring break driving, but reset easy they’ll go down again till June when California raises excise taxes on gasoline again to new heights!

And all those gasoline taxes, in Gov Newsom’s wisdom , he’s not gonna spend it on roads, he’s gonna spend it to keep the Crazy Train alive!

So California keep ahold of your ankles and keep smiling 🙂

Nicholas McGinley
October 9, 2019 9:09 pm

I was just reading more about this planned power outage, and it became clear that this is not a one off event, but is instead the plan going forward for dealing with weather conditions that occur regularly, multiple times per year, over a large portion of the most populous state in the country.
In other words, they will be doing this whenever fire weather conditions will be present, seemingly from now on.
When Santa Ana conditions occur in the highly populated parts of the state, it seems they will be cutting off power for the duration.
I suspect, but am not yet sure, that the consequences of this policy will prove catastrophic, potentially far worse than an occasional fire in some typically remote location.
And it will not prevent any but a small subset of fires.
At the same time, it will be hugely disruptive to millions of peoples lives, and so when fires do occur, which they inevitably will, they will occur in conjunction with people who have had their power cut off and presumably much if not all means of communication also cut of, curtailed and disrupted.
I am all but certain this will be completely intolerable, as well as perhaps being even more dangerous than fires by themselves.
Again, these conditions can persist for long periods of time and extend throughout much of the entire state and do so regularly and persistently.
Are they really going to just cut off the electricity from now on, any and everyplace fire weather (high wind, low humidity, dry soil and low vegetation moisture lelvels0 occurs in the state of California…forever?
What is the plan to fix this?
Or is this the fix?
I expect that what will happen is that the utility is granted an exemption from the lawsuits that have necessitated this policy.
Those of us who live where power has been cut off due to storms knocking out power lines and other power transmission and distribution infrastructure know how incredibly disruptive and awful it is not to have power.
We simply can not do without it and proceed with our lives as if it is not happening.
In the mean time, I am looking at the stock price of the companies that manufacture, sell, and install home generators. they typically spike when large hurricanes and ice storms cause or are expected to cause widespread outages…but this is different.
This appears to be a long term plan for a state with 65,000,000 people whenever a common weather condition arises. That is a lot of people who will be absolutely desperate for power in their homes and businesses.
This is a big story, and is not getting much attention…yet.
In fact, this could wind up being the biggest political hot potato in a very long time, and could cause a realignment of political power in a state with a huge Democratic congressional representation.
Am I making more of this than it really is?

Bad things happen when power is cut, including an occasional and severe riot.

October 9, 2019 11:05 pm

Do I feel sorry for the electric car users?

Steve Richards
October 10, 2019 3:35 am

In the uk, most electricity is delivered by underground cables. Overhead cables are used to feed power to very small numbers of houses located in the countryside.
Yes, I underground is more expensive but much more reliable.

Reply to  Steve Richards
October 10, 2019 9:57 am

The ecological / environmental disturbance is MUCH greater when installing underground cables and equipment compared to overhead lines (as long as there are no fires caused by overhead lines.) Repairs and maintenance costs much more / takes longer when issues arise on underground cables. All high voltage underground equipment can only be worked on under an outage while overhead wires can be worked on while they are energized; keeping continuous service to customers. All customers would have to retrofit their electrical panels to receive an underground service instead of an overhead service. Who would pay for all of this? The solution for now would be to do planned outages when weather events come up until all lines are cleared of overgrowth and dead fall. Arc flashes happen every day due to balloons, large birds of prey, vehicle accidents, and weather events.

Reply to  Steve Richards
October 11, 2019 7:38 am

Apples & oranges in many respects — UK (or Europe) isn’t America. Far greater distances to cover. Faults/problems are much easier to locate (visually) than when underground, and easier to repair/reset.

Nicholas McGinley
Reply to  beng135
October 11, 2019 8:47 am

There are also engineering as well as cost issues.
Overhead lines are air insulted and cooled.
Lines in conduits must be insulated.
My understanding is that it would be hugely expensive and challenging to bury all the power infrastructure in the US.

Wiliam Haas
October 10, 2019 4:49 am

The majority of voters in California do not care about paying more taxes or the state wasting their money on climate change and a high speed rail system connecting Bakersfield and Fresno because they keep re electing the democrats who keep wasting their money and increasing their taxes.

Thomas Englert
Reply to  Wiliam Haas
October 11, 2019 9:44 am

Maybe it’s the non-citizen voters, homeless voters, and other welfare voters that live off the free handouts who keep voting in the Dems.

That’s millions of votes for free stuff (paid for by the working population).

October 10, 2019 7:16 am

Of course $5 gas is just phase one of the multi-phase approach of liberal plans. They all know to phase them in limit full backlash from the otherwise controlled commoners. Media consultants can better handle the situation in explaining it too with distractions and bambi pictures and their favorite photo tactic of evil tailpipes.

October 10, 2019 7:48 am
Joel O'Bryan
October 10, 2019 10:05 am

“Spare me, you arsonist firefighter.”

Great analogy about Democrats. I’ll use this in the future.

Create the conditions that caused the calamity, then claim to be the solution when the public cries out for help.
Same thing for the PG&E power outages. Climate Change policy crippled PG&E over the years to reduce investments in transmission infrastructure maintenance to pay for renewable energy investments. They create the climate that then brings problems as the problem build up until eventually during a dry season wind storm you get a catastrophic fire.

The real threat we face is from the Democrat’s Climate Change policies.

Rudolf Huber
October 10, 2019 12:40 pm

Yellow vests have gone to the streets in France because of fuel prices. Voters do generally know that its taxes and those who rule us that are responsible for high prices but most are just too sluggish to do anything but complaining at family dinner. Up to a point. When it gets hard to hold whatever standard one is used to, people start to wake up.

October 10, 2019 6:09 pm

The price of top tier gasoline in Spokane during the first weekend of this month was $2.85/gallon.

Steven Fraser
October 10, 2019 7:01 pm

Without trying, found Regular at $2.19/gal today in Plano,er Tx.

Verified by MonsterInsights