Red Reporter: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:





Sports world begins to sputter under weight of fuel prices

Oil hit another record high today, as did gasoline. Lately, it seems like it's news when crude oil doesn't set a new record high. It's about $125/barrel now. Only three or four years ago, OPEC was claiming their "target range" was about $25/barrel. They're a little off. Like, about $100 off.

Man, it looks like it's going exponential there. Makes you wonder if peak oil is here.

Whether we're at peak oil or not, it seems clear that we are now in an era of permanently higher oil prices. Which also increases the cost of food and other goods, since it takes energy to produce and transport them. Some experts are predicting gas will be $7 a gallon by the end of this year.

But if you think your fuel bill is bad...what about sports teams, that have to travel all over the state, even all over the country? USA Today has a special report on gas prices today, including an article on how it's affecting sports, from high school to the Hall of Fame.

 

Bill Papierniak, general manager of the Daytona Cubs of the Class A Florida State League, says the average round trip for his team is 200 miles. Teams may have to attract more fans to offset fuel costs, he says.

The Buffalo Bisons take $2 off the price of tickets for fans who take the Metro Rail train to the ballpark. The number of fans taking the offer is up 10% this season.

"It's the cost of gas," Bisons general manager Mike Buczkowski says. "It's also the rising costs of everything making people look for discounts."

The Bisons, who also play in the International League, take buses to Rochester, N.Y., and Syracuse, N.Y. They fly to Durham, N.C., and Richmond. Buczkowski says the cost of travel is up 15% from last season, which was up 15% from 2006.

"It's a concern," Buczkowski says. "We try not to pass that on to the customer because in the minors we are all about value."

Ticket prices already are set for the season, Richmond assistant GM Bill Blackwell says, "but of course in the supermarket green beans can go up every day."

Says Baldwin: "Everything we do is oil-based. The giveaways at the ballpark are plastic and that's oil-based. Hats aren't, but I have to put them on a boat, airplane or truck. So there's some derivative of an oil byproduct in everything."

(Actually, hats probably are oil-based. The ones they give away are likely at least partly synthetics, which are petroleum products.)

Some people actually think we'll have to relocalize sports. I doubt it will come to that, at least any time soon, but teams could have a lot of trouble offsetting higher fuel costs by attracting more fans, when the fans are also struggling with higher prices. People are already buying smaller cars and trying to unload their SUVs. They're moving closer to work. And when all else fails, they're paying the higher fuel and food costs by running up their credit card debt. Food banks are running out of food, because more people are asking for help while fewer people are donating food.

You're doing fine, you say? Great! Then you can help others less fortunate. Tomorrow, Saturday, May 10th, is Stamp Out Hunger Day. Postal workers will be collecting food for food banks all across the U.S.A. Gather up a few non-perishable food items (no glass containers, please), put them in a bag, and leave it out for your letter carrier. You can hang the bag from the mailbox or put it on the ground beside it. They'll pick it up and deliver it to a local food bank.

3 recs | Comment 40 comments | Add your comment

Read Related

Story-email Email | Print |

Comments

Display:

Sports is Sports is Sports

I love going to the Benals and Reds even thought they are perennial losers. I equally enjoy attending a UC or XU basketball game as well and it is a fraction of the cost. My wife and I still attend a few Walnut Hills Ladt Eagle soccer games each season which is great fun and costs almost nothing. As the economic crunch deepens I am less and less interesting in going to the pro games than college or HS. I went to some Florence Freedom games last year but I probably won’t this year because the drive, the cost to get into the game and park, the concessions are just not equal to the quality of the play/entertainment. If the economy continues to worsen it is inevitable that lower level professional sports will have to change their structure re: travel, tickets and player pay and/or go out of business.

BTW, I live in the Ghetto and if I leave food outside the local crackheads will have it before the postperson ever gets there!

Eeyore has more fun than a Reds fan.

by Madville on May 9, 2008 10:48 PM EDT reply reply   0 recs

sports
if I leave food outside the local crackheads will have it before the postperson ever gets there!

Bypass the middle man! :-D

I don’t go to pro games very often. It’s wicked expensive, and such a hassle. I like minor league games. It’s so much more laid-back at minor league games. Parking is usually free, tickets are cheap, and they are happy to see you, rather than treating you like a possible terrorist.

All Things Bubba: Because how can you not love a baseball player named Bubba?

by BubbaFan on May 10, 2008 6:25 AM EDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

another view

There is a possibility that sports teams could benefit from high prices. Higher fuel prices means people are going to take their vacations closer to home.

Kings Island is expecting to have a better year than normal because of it, and I wouldn’t be surprised if the Reds do, too. That is, if they ever stop sucking.

by Daedalus on May 10, 2008 3:59 PM EDT reply reply   0 recs

Could be

Maybe even if they don’t stop sucking. Paul Daugherty points out that the Cubs don’t have trouble putting buns in the seats, losers though they are.

All Things Bubba: Because how can you not love a baseball player named Bubba?

by BubbaFan on May 10, 2008 4:34 PM EDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

but it's "cool" to be a reds fan

in the cincy area, it’s only cool to bash the reds, not actually go to games

by Daedalus on May 10, 2008 7:15 PM EDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

Why isn't it cool to be a Reds fan?

With all the history the team has and everything…

All Things Bubba: Because how can you not love a baseball player named Bubba?

by BubbaFan on May 10, 2008 8:47 PM EDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

The cubs have over 7 million people locally to draw from.

And although White Sox are somewhere in Chicago too, they only draw fans on the cubs day off. Plus there are a couple million more or so folks in the out lying regions around Chicago as well for them pull into a game now and then. St.Louis also sells out almost every game, but there is literally nothing else to do in St. Louis.

Eeyore has more fun than a Reds fan.

by Madville on May 10, 2008 6:19 PM EDT reply reply   0 recs

the st. louis zoo is cool

The Dusty Path to the World Series!*

*Note this is not an endorsment of Dusty Baker.

by justin007000 on May 13, 2008 2:52 PM EDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

Oh there is this arch thing


Seen one arch – seen ‘em all.

Eeyore has more fun than a Reds fan.

by Madville on May 10, 2008 6:23 PM EDT reply reply   0 recs

Curious

They could only afford half a McDonald’s?

All Things Bubba: Because how can you not love a baseball player named Bubba?

by BubbaFan on May 10, 2008 8:46 PM EDT to parent up reply reply   3 recs

rec'd

they probably get that all the time.

If you don't get a good-night kiss, you get Kafka dreams.

by Charlie Scrabbles on May 11, 2008 1:15 AM EDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

Haha!

I don’t really drive! Yay for mooching rides off your other driving friends!

People Don't Kill People. Burning Couches Kill People.

by crolfer on May 11, 2008 10:57 PM EDT reply reply   0 recs

And Osama

All Things Bubba: Because how can you not love a baseball player named Bubba?

by BubbaFan on May 12, 2008 12:54 AM EDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

Don't drive, don't smoke

What do ya do?

(Hey, remember the 80’s? ...guess not)

by Brendanukkah on May 12, 2008 11:30 AM EDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

waste my time on the interwebs of course

People Don't Kill People. Burning Couches Kill People.

by crolfer on May 12, 2008 4:42 PM EDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

goody goody two shoes

In the end, life and business are about human connections. And computers are about trying to murder you in a lake. And to me the choice is easy.

by chandrathan on May 12, 2008 4:52 PM EDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

At least he's AdamAnt about it

"Hard being everybody’s hero, I suppose." - Buck O'Neil on Willie Mays

by Slyde on May 12, 2008 4:58 PM EDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

i fucking love adam ant.

Everybody's a jerk. You. Me. This jerk.

by andromache on May 12, 2008 5:55 PM EDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

This might be the question of our time...

What are we going to do with our oil based economy when (now that) oil is no longer plentiful?

I suppose you already have a general idea of what I am going to say: organize new economies based upon more local production and ecologically sustainable resources.

I just attended a presentation yesterday where the speaker outlined the crisis of the US. Basically the US consumes a whole lot but doesn’t have many natural resources within its boundaries. We do, however, have the biggest military in the world. You put those two together and it wouldn’t appear that a non-violent solution to the energy crisis is on the current horizon, especially seeing that over 70% of the oil reserves are in the Mid-East and about 8% are in Venezuala. The US has had little troubling justifying recent interventions in those regions (Iraq 1, Afghanistan, Iraq 2, the US supported attempted coup against the democratically elected Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez in 2002) and I fear some version of this will continue, even if Obama or Clinton is our president (see Clinton, Bill and NAFTA)

Hey, why wait til it gets worse? Lets start working together now to fix the problem.

Tanzen!

by Verka Serduchka on May 12, 2008 8:41 AM EDT reply reply   0 recs

I don't disagree

that youth are crucial to making the world a better place. Just don’t leave it all up to them to fix the mess that generations of folks have been making.

Tanzen!

by Verka Serduchka on May 12, 2008 2:03 PM EDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

If that's true...

China and India are going to kick our butts, since they have a lot more children than we have.

All Things Bubba: Because how can you not love a baseball player named Bubba?

by BubbaFan on May 12, 2008 6:00 PM EDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

You mean...

...how many Chinese children does it take to make an iPod?

All Things Bubba: Because how can you not love a baseball player named Bubba?

by BubbaFan on May 12, 2008 6:37 PM EDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

By "Chinese children" you mean...

...”Chinese children’s souls,” right?

by Fat Vegas Alan on May 12, 2008 11:24 PM EDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

I think you're right

We actually were one of the richest countries in the world in natural resources. Heck, that’s why we became a world power. It wasn’t freedom, democracy, Christian values, or the American Way. It was taking over a continent full of unexploited resources.

Before 1972 or thereabouts, we were Saudi Arabia, with so much oil we had our own OPEC-like organization to control prices. (The Texas Railroad Commission. It’s what gave OPEC the idea. Pretty funny that we now denounce them as a cartel, as if there’s something wrong with that. We started it!)

Globalization lets us take other people’s resources, now that we’ve used our own. Kinda like a greedy kid who wants to eat everyone else’s desert, because he’s already eaten his own.

I think we will eventually switch to more local economies, and renewable energy…but it won’t be easy. No matter how much ingenuity we have. Look at all the civilizations that have collapsed in the past. Easter Island, the Maya, Rome, Crete, etc. They were all just as ingenious as we are…but it wasn’t enough.

In particular, there is no energy source on the horizon that matches oil. Past energy transitions were difficult, but thermodynamically, they were going the right way. Coal is a better energy source than wood, oil is better than coal, etc. And still, the transition resulted in two world wars and lots of lesser conflicts. This time, we will be going the wrong way – to a poorer energy source, whether it’s nuclear, wind, solar, etc. More of our economy will be devoted to extracting energy, which means less will be available for other things. That means we will all be poorer. (Heck, I’d go so far as to say we already are.)

But I’m pretty sure there will always be sports. It might take the Yankees three days on the train to get to St. Louis, like in the old days, but there will always be sports.

BTW, who was the speaker?

All Things Bubba: Because how can you not love a baseball player named Bubba?

by BubbaFan on May 12, 2008 5:49 PM EDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

His name was Augusto Caesar.

he is a Dominican economist who has been living in Venezuela and Central America.

With regards to the transition to renewable energy sources: You are absolutely right about the challenge here. I think the key is also changing the system that these resources are currently energizing. Capitalist economies, by defintion, must continually expand. Thus, one of the many fundmental contradictions of this mode of production is that we have a mode of production that requires ever more energy in a world of finite ecological resources. Eventually, something has to give. I am skeptical of the sustainability of “green capitalism” for this reason.

In life, members of Project Mayhem have no name. In death, his name was Robert Paulson.

Tanzen!

by Verka Serduchka on May 13, 2008 8:28 AM EDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

Wow

An economist who understands the world is finite, and that god is not going to put more oil in the ground, no matter how much money you bring to the cashier’s window? Amazing.

Okay, there are some. Like Kenneth Boulding, who famously said, “Anyone who believes exponential growth can go on forever in a finite world is either a madman or an economist.”

I share your skepticism of “green capitalism.” We cannot keep expanding forever.

There’s a saying in Russia now, that goes something along the lines of, “Everything Marx told us about communism was wrong. Everything he told us about capitalism was right.”

All Things Bubba: Because how can you not love a baseball player named Bubba?

by BubbaFan on May 13, 2008 5:45 PM EDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

Really?

Natural resources certainly played a large role in our ascendancy, but I think you’re underselling political and social elements that are unique to the U.S. Relatively transparent governance and especially a culture that promotes entrepreneurship were absolutely critical in our growth.

Just looking at today’s economy, I think it’s clear that most of the largest U.S. companies thrive due to their technological ingenuity or marketing wizardry, rather than a windfall of natural resources.

by ken on May 13, 2008 10:09 AM EDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

I think you're wrong on that

We were born on the third base and thought we hit a triple.

The technological ingenuity is a result of our natural resources, not the cause. Complexity – social and technological – has an energy cost. Without that base of cheap energy, it’s simply not possible to support complex technology, no matter how ingenious you are.

If you’re really interested in this topic, I highly recommend Tainter’s The Collapse of Complex Societies. It’s a bit coneheaded, but fascinating.

All Things Bubba: Because how can you not love a baseball player named Bubba?

by BubbaFan on May 13, 2008 5:39 PM EDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

i am hopeful that a new energy will come along and save the day

i like traveling and that is becoming more and more expensive weather flying or driving.

The Dusty Path to the World Series!*

*Note this is not an endorsment of Dusty Baker.

by justin007000 on May 13, 2008 2:55 PM EDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

it did

It was called nuclear. But a bunch of guitar players in the 70s decided we shouldn’t use it.

by Red Menace on May 13, 2008 8:46 PM EDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

Nuclear...

...is probably the best option, thermodynamically speaking. But it’s not as good as oil, and it’s not because of the tree-huggers. Many other countries went nuclear…and found that it was just too expensive.

There’s a resurgence of nuclear now…but the costs are proving pretty brutal.

I think one thing most people don’t realize is that even “alternative” energy is dependent on some extent on fossil fuels. It takes a heck of a lot of energy to manufacture concrete, steel, aluminum, glass, silicon, copper, etc. And most of it is coming from fossil fuels.

It doesn’t apply just to nuclear. It goes for wind, solar, geothermal, etc. too.

Some have called this “receding horizons.” The talking heads say, “This technology will be competitive when oil is $40 a barrel.” Then oil is $40 a barrel…but the costs of the technology in question have gone up along with oil, so “the energy of the future” is perpetually in the future.

All Things Bubba: Because how can you not love a baseball player named Bubba?

by BubbaFan on May 13, 2008 10:39 PM EDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

"It's pronounced 'nucular'"

Honest question – which countries went back on nuclear due to cost? France relies on nuclear as their biggest power source (79% as of ‘04). And Japan, which understandably has strong reservations about nuclear power, receives a third of its energy via nuclear. Both countries are pushing the rest of the G8 for to reduce carbon emissions by developing more nuclear plants.

The economics will tilt in nuclear’s favor so long as the right incentives, like a cap-and-trade, are put in place. From the WSJ article you cite: “On the other hand, if Congress decides to tax greenhouse-gas emissions, that could make electricity from nuclear plants more attractive by raising costs for generators that burn fossil fuels. Nuclear plants wouldn’t have to pay the charges because they aren’t emitters.” As for the construction costs, it looks like the cost increases would apply to any type of new power plant because the commodity markets affecting all types of construction (cement, steel, etc.) are at record-highs. Moreover, the nuclear industry is the beneficiary of generous loan guarantees and other federal (and even some state) subsidies designed to alleviate these kinds of cost uncertainties.

This year the NRC has received 15 new applications for construction of new nuclear plants, with many of them containing two reactor units.

by ken on May 14, 2008 10:15 AM EDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

France is kind of a special case

They went heavily into nuclear even though it was more expensive. I think that will prove to be very smart. They built their nuclear infrastructure when oil was cheap…even though it wasn’t “economic.” They took a long-term view, which we seem to be incapable of taking. We only think to the next election cycle (or the next quarterly report).

Japan, too, has taken the long view, driven by the energy crisis of the ‘70s. Still, they’ve had all kinds of problems with their nuclear plants. Safety issues and the like. Their nuclear program was at its height in the ‘70s and ‘80s, and has fallen back since then.

Nuclear power plants have been built all over the world. Including developing countries were environmentalists aren’t an issue, but cost is. If it were cheaper to build more nukes, they would. But instead, they are building more coal and diesel and natural gas powered plants. Even in countries where they are suffering shortages of coal, etc.

The economics will tilt in nuclear’s favor so long as the right incentives, like a cap-and-trade, are put in place.

I don’t think economics matters, on the back slope of Hubbert’s Peak. What matters is thermodynamics. Cost doesn’t matter. Energy does. And I think Kyoto and all the other global warming stuff is going to go out the window.

We saw a little hint of that after Katrina. There were gasoline shortages, and Bush temporarily suspended EPA regulations to allow more polluting gasoline. If there are actual energy shortages – and I think there will be – environmental concerns will end up pretty far down the list of our priorities.

But yes, there is a lot of interest in nuclear again. Like there was during the last energy crisis. I’m sure there will be a lot more nuclear plants built. What I’m saying is that it won’t be enough to replace fossil fuels.

As for the construction costs, it looks like the cost increases would apply to any type of new power plant because the commodity markets affecting all types of construction (cement, steel, etc.) are at record-highs.

Exactly. Like I said, “receding horizons” applies to everything, not just nuclear. That is why I think we will be facing energy shortages.

David Goodstein, physicist and vice-provost of CalTech, has some some calculations on how many nuclear power plants it would take to replace the energy we get from fossil fuels.

The largest practical nuclear plant is roughly 1 gigawatt. It would take an almost unimaginable 10,000 of those to replace the 10 terawatts of fossil fuel we consume worldwide today. And then the known reserves of uranium would only last a decade or two at that burn rate.

Right now, there are about 400 nuclear power plants in the world. Can you imagine how difficult it would be to build 10,000 of them? China fixing up Beijing for the Olympics caused price spikes, even shortages and hoarding, of steel and cement.

All Things Bubba: Because how can you not love a baseball player named Bubba?

by BubbaFan on May 14, 2008 6:33 PM EDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

Interesting

This is something I’m trying to learn more about, and through some stuff at work I’ve begun educating myself on nuclear issues. I may check out that Goodstein book. I’m rec’cing the thread.

by ken on May 15, 2008 12:51 PM EDT to parent up reply reply   0 recs

I'm working on processing Raccoon feces into a enviromentally friendly fuel source.

however , it does appear that I’ll need about 70 million raccoons on the farm to provide enough energy for southwestern Ohio. But it is cheap shit.

Eeyore has more fun than a Reds fan.

by Madville on May 12, 2008 11:29 AM EDT reply reply   0 recs


User Tools

Welcome to the SB Nation blog about Cincinnati Reds.
Ad-medium-smq

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Small
Griffey

Recent FanPosts

Vada_small
Adam Dunn - Our favorite whipping boy
Small
BA predicts Reds to pick Crow.
Small
Attendance
Happyhanukkah_small
Hug-of-War of Ohio
Small
How about Holliday?
Small
One ticket to tonight's game
Redandblue_small
Volquez profile
Anime_small
Jeff Keppinger
African15b_small
.410 Good Buddy

Post New FanPost All FanPosts Carrot-mini


Ad-banner-faketeams
Site Meter