CA Station Sells Gas For $5 A Gallon

Gas prices in California are at an all-time high. The statewide average price for a gallon of regular is now 58 cents more per gallon, than the same time last year.

But, there is one place on the Central Coast where you can expect to pay more than $5 a gallon. The Americo gas station in the tiny coastal town of Gorda, about 40 miles south of Big Sur, is selling gasoline for $5.19 a gallon for regular, and $5.39 for premium.

Despite high prices, the local gas stop grabs customers, without any competition. And according to locals, the pain at the pump isn't over yet... as they plan to raise the prices another 20 cents in the coming weeks.

Keep Reading

Comments

[noamjunior]

can we all open our eyes and see the price of oil is directly related to the invasion of Iraq?
We invaded iraq to shut off the supply of Iraqi oil and drive up the price for the GOP's biggest contributors, exxonmobnil and cheveron

[SolarPowerGuy]

Hi there!


Nearly two decades ago, I chose to live close to work, rather than buy a big house in the ex-urban hinterlands. It was largely an environmental decision. I have cycled to work often, and I run many of my errands by walking. Our family does own two cars, a 1994 Honda Civic and a 2004 Toyota Prius, both with low mileage. I also have solar electricity, and I'm anxiously waiting for the arrival of plug-in hybrid cars.


So, what do I think of $5/gallon gasoline? IT'S ABOUT TIME, that's what I think. The only way to get overweight, SUV-brandishing Americans to conserve is to hit them in the pocketbook.


My only disappointment is WHO we're paying, and for what. We should have HIGHER TAXES on petroleum, and use the tax money to pursue the common good. Instead, we pay the world's oil barons -- so that their kings, princes, sheiks, shareholders and executives can live high on the hog.


I actually heard a fellow from the American Enterprise Institute talk some sense on an NPR radio program yesterday. He suggested that we should implement an oil tax which kicks in when oil drops below $60/barrel, to encourage conservation.


I like the general idea, though I would start with a $2.00/barrel tax at today's prices. The tax would ramp up to $3.00/barrel at the $100 price point, and would ramp up further at lower prices, to provide an effective price floor for oil at $60/barrel.


The AEI guy also didn't say where the money should go. I say, use a third of it to reduce the Federal debt.


Earmark another third to offset Gulf War II expenditures, until all debts for U.S. military activity in petroleum-exporting countries -- past, present and future -- are paid. That should discourage some of the war-mongering we've seen in recent years.


Use the last third to subsidize energy efficiency and renewables. We should buy actual ASSETS -- fluorescent or LED lights, hybrid car batteries, solar and wind farms, on-grid energy storage, rebates for smaller cars, etc.


Even though I'm a scientist, I say, don't worry much about funding more energy research. If incentives such as the oil tax encourage growth in the energy-efficiency and clean-energy sectors, the necessary research will by done -- by businesses. Meanwhile, there are plenty of things we can do RIGHT NOW to improve America's energy security, without harming the environment. I should know, I've implemented much of what is already available. The Petroleum Mafia just doesn't want YOU to find out.

[Amishguy]

Listen sir... While I do understand your point that we need conservation and that a high price would be a good way to force people to cut back. But this is hardly the right way to go about things right now.

While you are able to conserve by living close to work and biking some (most?) Americans just don't have that option. Many Americans are forced to commute because they can not afford to live near their job.

Now lets factor in kids... If you are a parent of one or more active children you can easily put hundreds of miles on your car each week picking up, dropping off, going to various sports games and so on those things aren't optional and last I checked they don't make many bikes with third row seating for all the cub scouts.

The bottom line is in many cases we simply can not conserve like we need to. We simply don't have any good alternatives. Hybrids are nice and all but you can't find any of those that are 10 years old and used. For many folks that is the only type of car they can afford. Not to mention the fact that hybrid technology is not at this point all that impressive in terms of fuel mileage or gas alternatives.

You sound like you are well off money wise but you seem to forget (maybe you have never known) how hard it is and how expensive it is to be poor. Going green is great but it costs a lot of green to happen and most people especially right now simply don't have the money to put in to it not matter how much they may want and need to do so.

Cheering for high gas prices is not something that is helpful. All that will do is continue to grow the bank accounts the richest, dirtiest, and most eco-hating group of people on this planet... the oil industry.

[SolarPowerGuy]

No, I'm not especially well off. I live in a middle-class neighborhood and I'm no wealthier than my neighbors. In fact my house, and my wallet, both need some work.


Where did I get the money to go Green, then? First of all, I saved it and spent it SLOWLY. I did the cheap-to-free stuff first, like choosing a small home near an employment center, wearing a sweater around the house in winter, etc. Then, compact fluorescent lights, and onward and upward. The hybrid car and the solar energy were purchased in just the last four years, at the end of a very long and gradual process.


And, while the Prius cost me extra up-front, it's SAVING me big money! Your assessment of hybrid car technology is too pessimistic. Here's a repost of some math I shared here on HuffPo a few months ago:


Real-world, the Prius gets about 45 MPG (51 MPG in my hands, but that's a story for another day), and will need a $2,500 battery replacement after about 150,000 miles. A Prius-equivalent car (same interior size, same price, same performance) without the hybrid engine, such as a conventional Toyota Camry, gets 25 MPG. After you have driven 150,000 miles in the hybrid, you will have saved 2,667 gallons of gas. If gas costs $3.00/gallon, you save an even $8,000 by battery replacement time -- which is three times the cost of the battery itself.


I want to put this energy- and MONEY-saving technology in the hands of every American the next time they go to buy a car. In a few years, there will a healthy market for used hybrids. WHY don't you already know that hybrids will save you money? WHO doesn't WANT you to know?


The second thing I did to make going green affordable was -- I chose to have only one child. Yes, my expenses would be a good deal higher if I insisted on having more kids. Or, if I insisted on owning a Cub Scout Party Mobile and using it as my primary vehicle, like so many other befuddled families. My family of three did multi-day camping trips using the Civic, before the Prius came along.


It's curious to me how cars were SMALLER back when I was young, even though families were LARGER. Somehow, we did all right.

[oneofsixbillion]

Solar Power Guy...I agree with you...ITS ABOUT TIME. I live in a city, commute by bike or mass transit and say...what gas prices??? I made these decisions a long time ago, the writing has been on the wall for how long??? Oils is a finite resource the population is increasing and will continue to increase for at least 100 years. China and India want the same things we do. Estimates show that we will need another 2-3 PLANETS to give them the equivalent US level of consumption. Furthermore, there will soon be 7 BILLION people on the planet, and an estimated 10 billion by 2050. With finite resources, more people wanting them, and a planet in peril we need to start using our resources more wisely. Estimate show that 95% of what we purchase ends up in a landfill within 6 months. NOT GLUM..it green...money. Where there is WASTE there is profit. The new business model of the 21st century!

Amishguy- Your way of life as it is today... is over. Get used to it...it aint going back. If you really care about your kids and your kids kids you'll accept it and move on. You are going to have to start making changes whether you like it or not. Little Suzie and Bobby will survive without tap dance and soccer and so will you. Use the time to do things together. If you cant get an apartment closer to work, carpool with the guy at work who used his brain and bought a Prius before everyone wanted one. Get a bike, a back- pack, and a rack and use it as much as possible, you'll get in shape and save money. There are things you can do. Install LED lights, car pool. Necessity is the mother of invention. You just have to stop whining about having to change and just do it. That's life baby! The sooner you do the better off you will be.

[Tequilatarian]

I have been to that station several times when traveling up the coast from L.A.

It is so far from any other station, or any other small towns that might have a tow service, that you have to pay the high prices if you are anywhere near 1/4 tank. If you start driving down the coast. you soon realize that you haven't seen any gas for a while...and are relieved to see the Gordo station. $5.15 actually seems low for them.

[RogerHWerner]

I agree. I mean it's unfortunate that gas cost so much but Gordo is so far from anything...perhaps 90 miles from Carmel and even further from San Simeon (which is hardly on the path to any place). That said, anyone who have ever been to this part of California is in for real a treat. This is how California looked 35 years ago when I moved out here and I love making the trip between Monterey and San Luis Obispo (it's bittersweet really since California is nothing like ti was in the early 1970s and I can only imagine what it was like before than. I can't imagine what the station in Gordo must pay for gas to be delivered.

[Tequilatarian]

The drive is great!
Whenever I go to Northern California, I take the 5 to get their quickly, but take the 1 and 101 back to enjoy the coast. Takes longer (and has fewer rest stops) but is worth it.

[mmckinl]

Just the beginning folks ...

Driving season hasn't even started yet. Peak Oil is upon us and our 'leaders' haven't a clue.

We need to declare an energy emergency. Lower all posted speed limits by 20%. Embark on converting all personal transportation to battery electric vehicles while upgrading and expanding the electrical grid.

Battery electric vehicles cost less (-50%), cost less for maintenance (-90%) and cost less to fuel (60%). Such a move would decrease our trade deficit by 30% and improve our national security markedly as oil shortages would not bring our economy to a halt. The savings in transportation costs could then be used to help pay for the rising food costs.

[Klip]

5 bucks!
Wow- Cheney is getting richer by the hour!

[speckiegrrrl]

no. i am getting richer 'cause i own stock!!
hahahahahahaha

[Klip]

Locals should organize and burn the station down...

[maxfusion]

Uh, all of the locals in Gorda work at the station, or the restaurant. Seriously, highlighting the cost of fuel in Gorda is really silly. If you need fuel at that point of your Big Sur drive, you deserve to pay 5 bucks.

[bogtrotters]

Yup., you're right. But it's still $3.60-ish down the Coast.

[speckiegrrrl]

typical violent fascist lib mentality

[thegreatgiginthesky]

typical corporate commie pole smoker

[NeverRepublican]

Did you connect the dots yet? Figured ot the topic? Red Meat Production uses ALOT OF GAS AND ENERGY IN THIS COUNTRY.

Again...just to vast of an idea for your little mind???

[mmckinl]

It will take a lot more than swearing off red meat to get us out of this mess.

[karrezza]

you be surprised... do the math and calculate how much gas and carbon meat production does.. and it will make a huge difference.

[TimmySlagle]

"Red Meat Production uses ALOT OF GAS AND ENERGY IN THIS COUNTRY."

Got news for you, ALL food production uses a lot of gas and energy in this country. (That's why we can produce so much on so little land with minimal manpower.)

If you really want to save the earth, just stop eating. We won't miss you.

[NeverRepublican]

Hey...that was great. But Red Meat production by far is the MOST UN-EFFICIENT use of resources for end product.

On so Little land? Might want to chek that stat and find out how much MEAT we import from other land sources outside of the country. US ownership of land to grow meat.

WASHINGTON, Oct. 30, 2007 - The U.S. Department of Agriculture's Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) today announced that the country of Chile will be allowed to export poultry and poultry products, processed in certified establishments within Chile, to the United States effective December 3, 2007.

http://www.fsis.usda.gov/News_&_Events/NR_103007_01/index.asp

We aren't growing all our meat here in this country.

[NeverRepublican]

Thirty-three countries are eligible to import meat and poultry products to the U.S. In 2002, meat and poultry product imports were 3.8 billion pounds (1.7 million metric tons).

That's as of 2002.

http://www.fsis.usda.gov/Fact_Sheets/Importing_Meat_Poultry_Egg_Products/index.asp

Lots of gasoline up in smoke.

[Quadspect]

War, and capture of our government, is merely business at its best, to that mentality.

[Quadspect]

That is to say, there are people in power who literally apply, through our polity, the belief, not that "Commerce is war," but that their entitlement to infinite wealth and power is applied through literal bloodletting and shakedown rackets.

[TimmySlagle]

"Commerce is war,"

Spare me your ignorance. Commerce is the polar opposite of War. Countries that trade freely, never go to war with each other.

On the other hand, wars tend to start, when commerce stops. Most every war in History, started with a trade embargo.

[NeverRepublican]

What trade embargo did we have with Iraq?...Vietnam? Korea? Is this Bill O'Reilly??!!!!

[Paul]

California is always leading the nation.

Gasoline needs to be $7 or $8/gal permanently.

Only then will we stop driving cars and start building a decent mass transit system.

Suppose you never needed a car to get wherever you wanted to go in the US? Imagine what you could do with the money now spent on car payments, insurence, gasoline and repairs. It would be a boon to the economy, stop us form importing too much fireign oil and we could get out of the middle east because it would no longer be in the national interest.

When are going to hear this from one of the candidates?

[factbased]

Permanently? Considering that during the current Republican administration, gas prices nearly tripled, another one could do the same and blow past your $7-8 price. No matter who's in charge, the price you cite is going to seem cheap in the not so far off future.

I'm very much on board with the idea mass transit! London and Paris are so easy and cheap to get around in and between, for instance.

[Paul]

Bring it on. The sooner we scrap all the cars the sooner life improves. I live in LA and have just about enough of 20 mph average freeway speeds. Luckily I can now take the train to work.

Much better.

[TimmySlagle]

"Suppose you never needed a car to get wherever you wanted to go in the US?"

Yes, and suppose that friendly Space Aliens came to earth, and would use their transporter machines to whisk us anywhere in the Universe that our hearts desired.

Both scenarios are equally likely. There is no form of public transit that is as fast, reliable or convenient as car ownership. That's why people abandionned Public Transit when cars became affordable. Even places with decent public transit like Chicago or New York still have high rates of car owwnership.

And your math is off on the economic benefit of public transit. Public transit cannot exist without generous subsidies, usually paid from Transportation budgets raised from gasoline taxes and license fees.

Truth is, it would be cheaper to own a car if there was no Public Transit, and Public Transit would be more expensive if there were no private cars. A thinking man would recognize thgis as proof, that Public Transit actually harms an economy.

[NeverRepublican]

Commit yourself....your ill...mentally ill.

[johnmorgan]

"Public transit cannot exist without generous subsidies..."

Our highways cannot exist without generous subsidies. Our military cannot exist without generous subsidies. It's time to subsidize excellent public transport, and stop subsidizing the military-industrial complex. It would cost a lot less than our war in Iraq.

[Paul]

So you are saying the US does not have the know-how or will to do this?

Ever been to Europe? Gas there is $8/gal but you can go from one place to another on public transit. If we had a system like that I would get rid of my car in a heartbeat.

What is the cost of importing oil? Looks like trillions to me since we invaded Iraq. Who is paying for that?

Cars and the fuel that runs them are becoming less and less affordable every year to the average family.

Cars are the past. Public transit is the future. And the future is better.

[Jeff1958]

Little Timmy Slagle wrote, "Truth is, it would be cheaper to own a car if there was no Public Transit, and Public Transit would be more expensive if there were no private cars. A thinking man would recognize thgis as proof, that Public Transit actually harms an economy."

Am I the only one who sees the abject stupidity above?

[kardwell]

Los Angeles has a mass transit plan in the works that should materialize sometime near 2016...the same year the US is slated to colonize Mars.

[Paul]

I live in Ventura and commute to Northridge by train for less than it costs to drive. No more 45 mile commute one way, no more traffic jams and I put less than 3000 miles on my car now.

The future is here and its better without cars.

[SILVANUS]

Greed.

[BPCentrisAmerican]

Corporate owned Exxon stations are charging the highest prices, as much as a buck more for premium in my state, BP ranks 2nd. I have seen 2 Exxon stations in my area go out of business in the last 4 months; I hope to see a whole lot more. I wouldn’t use their swell in my lawn mower, I had a real bad experience with their crappy fuel when I was in college, and never used it since. If you really want to bring Exxon to it’s knees, than don’t use it, you have a choice, and it’s bad for your vehicle anyway, real shit. I do drive a fuel-efficient car, a VW Jetta and I love it. BMW performance, 36 miles to gallon at 80 mph, 26 mph in city traffic, 20 valve overhead cam 5 cylinder, all for 17 grand. I thought about a turbo diesel, but considering diesel is $1.50 a gallon more than regular, not to mention the $21,000 vehicle cost, the numbers just don’t add up. I feel the same way about Hybrids, my cousin owns a Toyota and the mileage was great until winter came along, he would not believe me when I warned him that battery replacement could be as at much as $7,000 at 80,000 miles, any savings in fuel is canceled out. If you want make a green statement fine, if you want to save money, any sub-compact on the market will do.

[Taan]

While we flail away at Big Oil and the humongous salaries of top execs, we always forget who owns these corporate giants. It's the shareholders. They are the beneficiaries of the elevated gas prices. But we don't hear of these folks picketing, writing letters to editors and congress and threatening to boycott their own interests. It's convenient when you can take your share earnings and turn it around to pay for the higher fuel costs. Rather than complain to the choir, next time you come across a petroleum outfit stockholder, put his feet to the fire with the facts.

[Quadspect]

An obscene proportion of corporate profit lands in the pockets of CEO's, with shareholders ending up being out-moxied.

[NeverRepublican]

To all the Meat Eaters...

"Meat requires much more fossil fuel to produce than vegetables and grains. How much more? About 145 times more for beef than for potatoes. The reason for this is simple: Cattle consume 14 times more grain than they produce as meat. They're food factories in reverse. So it takes a lot more water, land, and of course, energy to produce that meat. In short, the more meat you eat, the more gas you waste."

Cut back your meat consuption...America. Yea right.

http://bicycleuniverse.info/transpo/beef.html......Interesting ideas.

[HBeachbum]

Blow it out your ass, freak. Why are you vegetarians always trying to make your swill taste like meat? Hmmm? Enjoy your tofu as I savor my ribeye.

[NeverRepublican]

I'm not a vegitarian dip ass. Fish is still decent. Do a little research about RED MEAT and MEAT PRODUCTION and maybe you could learn something...let me guess...you were the class clown. American diets fucking suck in this country...and the health care system can vouche for that. But eat what you want....meat is nothing more than steroids and antibiotics. Enjoy! Soon enough your colon will be bloated and your shit will smell similar to your thoughts.

[NeverRepublican]

Oh and by the way clown...the topic is gas and gas prices...if you could connect the dots you might find that MEAT PRODICTION USES A VAST AMOUNT OF GASOLINE...A little too much for your small mind??

[Klip]

HBeachbum-
I'm not suprised that you are unemployed...you sound like a buffoon

[cdnnewsjunky]

An open topic? What the hell, the moderators must be sleeping. This site is becoming like an online newspaper. Actually maybe worse than an online newspaper, at least they have a letters to the editor section in online newspapers. I think the popularity of this site is on borrowed time.

[Quadspect]

Are you speaking tongue-in-cheek? I was worrying about the detraction from the serious purpose of this website by former running dialogues in which commentators merely flung crude insults at each other. Exchange of information and serious opinion... I'm glad to see that!