MercoPress, en Español

Montevideo, October 6th 2022 - 14:10 UTC



When talking fuel, Mexico and Argentina the better off; Colombia and Uruguay bottom of the list

Wednesday, January 8th 2014 - 05:34 UTC
Full article 22 comments

Taking as reference the ratio between the average salary and the price of gasoline in six Latam countries, Mexican and Argentine consumers are the better off when it comes to filling up the tank while for Uruguay and Colombia the ratio is the least favorable. Read full article


Disclaimer & comment rules
  • Anglotino

    Doesn't sound like a bad thing.

    Promotes fuel efficiency and alternatives. As well as bolsters public transport usage instead of car ownership.

    Jan 08th, 2014 - 09:40 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • ChrisR

    @ 1 Anglotino

    I have to disagree with you this time (the first I think) but this damaging cost of fuel does not encourage public transport per se because the transport is overpriced due to the cost of the fuel, which is not only taxed as an item in its own right it has IVA added to everything, including the tax.

    Transport of goods in Uruguay is by road, there are no goods trains. I think the technology and cost of operation defeated successive administrations.

    Anything with four wheels commands ridiculous prices because of the need for families to have transport. A 14 YO Citroen Saxo diesel was at the side of the road in Montevideo this week with a US$ 6,500 price tag on it. I have no doubt the owner will get that.

    So yes, the green agenda sounds nice when you live in a modern country like Oz and have a lot of money. Try Uruguay on a basic workers pay and see how far you get.

    The last rise of 10% (inc IVA) was a Pepe special. It seems even the head of ANCAP (the monopoly fuel supplier) did not know until Pepe dropped it out in passing when he was somewhere (not in the Administration Building).

    Jan 08th, 2014 - 11:07 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Pugol-H

    “Green agenda” by the sound of it (Octane) they are still using leaded petrol.

    Converting to un-leaded, with engines designed for it, would increase the fuel efficiency of vehicles by 25-30% for a start.

    Jan 08th, 2014 - 04:12 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Elena

    1@, 2@ Agreed.

    I think most countries, Uruguay between them, would benefice greatly from investment on infraestructure and alternative energy so high prices on oil would not slow their economic development, but this isn´t easy to do as it takes capital and research but oil is becoming harder to obtain, so probably more countries will try to use alternative energy.

    Jan 08th, 2014 - 06:54 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • ChrisR

    Uruguay does not use leaded petrol, not for domestic consumers anyway.

    Plus thay are all above 83 RON but I haven't bothered with the cetane rating because I do not use a oiler.

    Jan 08th, 2014 - 09:59 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Elena

    I don´t remember talking about leaded petrol, its the one used back in the 20´s ?

    It doesn´t really matter the octane rating, usually when oil has a high price gasoline follows, alternative use of energy makes sense at present and in the future not only because of of the well being environment but also because the actual world economy is still dependent on oil derivative products for energy.

    Jan 09th, 2014 - 12:45 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • ChrisR

    @ 6 Elena

    It must be your translator but leaded petrol was used in Europe until fairly recently and is still available for special applications. And of course small airplane fuel (100LL) is leaded to prevent serious engine damage.

    “It doesn´t really matter the octane rating, usually when oil has a high price gasoline follows”

    This of course is not true. What matters is the type of crude as to the YIELD of aromatics with sweet crude being among the best and heavy crude being the worst (but best for other applications).

    And if you are not bothered about octane try running a modern, high performance car, on 83 RON and see where that will get you.

    As far as alternative means of powering cars they are all too expensive and do more damage to the environment. Ask yourself why Toyota won’t answer questions about the manufacturing process of their Prius batteries, a car that has just had the PETROL engine size increased to deal with all the complaints that the thing would not keep up with the traffic.

    Jan 09th, 2014 - 09:53 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Elena

    7@ I agree with most of what you say, but I think you miss my point, it wasn´t about the practical performance of oil products on cars, but about how high prices on oil can affect consumers because the world economy still depends on the energy generated by it. hence why I said the development and use of alternative energy makes sense and not only for concerns about the environment.

    Jan 09th, 2014 - 06:20 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • redp0ll

    Yes, Elena alternative energy does make sense for my country, even though Chris doesn't agree but we can go into that further on this or another thread

    Jan 10th, 2014 - 12:27 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Elena

    9@ redpoll: of course :-) It makes sense for Uruguay and most countries too.

    Jan 10th, 2014 - 12:45 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • ChrisR

    @ 9 redp0ll & @ 10 Elena

    Redpoll, you were quite rightly incandescent when the corruption of Pluna was revealed together with the UD$ 300M cost (but there is more being hidden, we all know that). The cost of fuel is the direct effect of the Pepe government who despite the Vasquez legacy is fast running out of money due to the profligate spending on all manner of “social” programmes, none of which have a lasting effect because they are giving money to these lazy sods instead of enforcing them to work for it.


    Consider “of course :-) It makes sense for Uruguay and most countries too” WHY?

    Please name ANY alternative energy source that is as efficient as what we were doing before Kyoto? Just ONE!

    You cannot, because there is not even ONE that when considering cost to build, maintain and overall life costs against output. Remember, direct to the user and before Kyoto.

    The windmill idea is a non-starter except for somewhere like the Falklands and even there it is only 40% and of course it serves an intelligent, understanding populace of less than 3,500.

    The real problem here is that the charlatans have overtaken the science and frightened all the poorly educated (in science and technology) population of the world into believing it’s all going to end in the next century or so.

    I cannot see that because of the strides by science in many areas of new technology as long as the likes of Al Gore and company are kept well away from what they see as a honey pot.

    The UK is slowly reversing this nonsense and the additional, unwarranted costs that they load the taxpayers with. One electricity supplier is already reducing prices due to the recent cuts in subsidies of these fanciful ideas that go back to the wooden windmills of the middle-ages.

    So, why spend double or treble what is needed to have these useless devices?

    Jan 10th, 2014 - 10:33 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • redp0ll

    Che Quijote, You have an obsession with windmills!
    The bike you ride is maybe called Rosinante??
    Before the grid was extended almost everyone here had a windmill called a churrinche to provide light in the country districts with current stored in a battery. As you say you can store electricity in the grid on a national scale,so what's our battery?
    The hydraulic reserves in Rincón de Bonete.
    So put a fifth reversible turbine at that dam and possibly at Baygorria too.
    The technology of pumped storage is nothing new,so use it utilize excess power from the w ind farms.
    95 per cent of our hydraulic resources flow only partly used into the Plate as opposed to Spain where the figure is around 20 per cent.
    You go on about efficiency. I ask what powered the Industrial Revolution? Wasn't that the steam engine which had a 15 per cent efficiency
    Correct me if I am wrong
    Some bed time reading about the resistance to technology. “Below The Mill Dam ”by Kipling

    Jan 10th, 2014 - 04:40 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • ChrisR

    @ 12 redp0ll
    “The bike you ride is maybe called Rosinante??”

    I will tell you what my Argentine neighbour, who has a BMW GS1100 (about 85 bhp) called it after he rode it for less than 15 minutes, it’s “a fire breathing dragon”.

    Back to topic. Neither of you answered my question I see. It’s difficult for the simple reason nothing has been invented or developed that eclipses the existing technologies.

    You are correct about the 15% (or so) efficiency of the vacuum engine. This used steam to condense in the cylinder which created a vacuum to suck the piston so strictly speaking it wasn’t a steam engine as we know them.

    James Watt’s engines were double that with a pressure above the piston and a separate cold water condenser opened by valving which made use of the condensate vacuum without losing heat.

    BUT, they were the first of their type and we have had from 1776 to improve things apart from windmills. :o).

    Do you really want to go back to individual village stations like CHP units? They are only just in the embryonic state in Sweden who boast of an amount of power being generated until you check. Guess what you find? That it WILL be available when they have worked out the details and built the equipment! And they got an award for this BOAST!

    On an important note the grid does not store energy but allows the use of energy from many sites simultaneously. Just remember that if all the hydro and thermal electric stations are removed from the grid what happens? You get a permanent BsAs effect!

    Hydro power is by far the best example of “free” electricity, apart from the cost of building the scheme, the cost of maintenance, the cost of staffing, etc. So Stevie’s “free energy” is still a pipe dream, as it always will be in this universe (unless dark matter proves a source of power as some think it will).


    Can someone give way please?

    Jan 11th, 2014 - 04:10 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • redp0ll


    Jan 11th, 2014 - 06:27 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • ChrisR

    Part 2

    From my time in GEC I am not too sure that you can reverse a generating turbine to make it a successful pump (for reasons to do with the blade shape) but you could have another waterway with a dedicated motor turbine with the blades looking “toward” the downstream “supply”.

    “The technology of pumped storage is nothing new, so use it utilize excess power from the wind farms”

    If only we could but the problem is not excess electricity it is NO electricity when “the winds don’t blow”.

    Perhaps a better use of wind farms would be as pumping energy ONLY and leave the existing hydro power installations as they are or increase the capacity because the “pumps” could work any time that the windmills managed to stuff power in the lines without having to have standby power stations for when the useless things are standing idle. That way, even when the reservoir was pumped full, no consumers would suffer the BsAs effect!

    I knew we would get the answer if we worked together!

    Now watch Stevie claim it for himself.

    Jan 11th, 2014 - 09:34 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • redp0ll

    Oh fokk it. Had along reply to you Chris but went over time and it got wiped. It would be nice to sit down and discuss your ideas over a drink,not all of which I agree with.
    But I dont go to Montevideo very often and even less out east.
    Stevie You really must get your ducks in a row mate. There is only one natural “lake”in Scotland and its nowhere near Dunoon
    Holy Loch is not a lake but an inlet of the sea.
    Brace up laddie and as an expat learn summat about the country you purport to live in.

    Jan 12th, 2014 - 03:52 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • ChrisR

    @ 16 redp0ll
    “It would be nice to sit down and discuss your ideas over a drink,not all of which I agree with.”

    That would be good, if we could!

    It doesn't matter if you disagree with my ideas as long as we both keep an open mind: I'll soon convert you!!! :o)

    Better still, who knows, you might change MY mind.

    Jan 12th, 2014 - 08:14 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • redp0ll

    Good A frank exchange of views over a jar instead of slagging of the opposition as happens increasingly on these threads is a much better way of resolving different ideas

    Jan 12th, 2014 - 09:47 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Elena

    Well it seems both of you had an interesting debate I will only add my due.

    While is true geography and climatic conditions can affect the effectivity of alternative energy powered by either wind, sun or water, it´s also true the use of this energy sources alog with the traditional can help to lower actual energy prices. Or at least that has been the experience of ppl using solar heaters for their homes in some countries.

    But anyway, I respect the ppl that put in question the long time effectivity of alternative energy, but I don´t see why that should be a reason for others to not use them if it works well enough for them.

    Jan 13th, 2014 - 07:19 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • redp0ll

    Interesting point Elena. Yes solar panels for household heating and power production seem to be very popular here but I haven't investigated the economics of that

    Jan 13th, 2014 - 12:26 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • ChrisR

    @ 19 Elena @ 20 redp0ll

    Good point about solar heaters if you mean water pumped through a modern multi-tube panel to heat washing and domestic water. In fact I have been considering one for my own casa but have yet to find one that is constructed properly, they seem to be home made and not very well thought out.

    Where I live on the coast there is always plenty of heat from the sun including infra-red which works equally well for water but not at all what you want for electrical panels. I have to admit that these panels are really bad value to the planet when you consider what they are made from and the energy needed to form the reactive cell. Up to now it is a fact that the electricity obtained from the panel to exhaustion is much less than that needed to make the thing. This may change in due course if / when scientists develop new reactive agents.

    Jan 13th, 2014 - 01:13 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • redp0ll

    When you find one let me know!

    Jan 13th, 2014 - 10:21 pm - Link - Report abuse 0

Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!