Stephen Schork says the rising prices are based more on investor momentum than anything else, and that there’s plenty of oil on the market.(Photo courtesy of the Federal Highway Administration)
Oil and gasoline prices are going up this summer. Lester Graham reports, it appears the higher prices are not caused by lower supplies.
Transcript
The Energy Information Administration’s new short-term energy outlook says gasoline prices will average about $2.92 this summer– hitting $3.00 or more in some regions. That’s about 50-cents a gallon higher than last summer.
The outlook also predicts oil prices to average $82 a barrel this summer. But, oil already hit $86 a barrel this week.
Stephen Schork with The Schork Report says… the government projections were put together about a week ago… and didn’t really anticipate the investors driving prices up this week.
“So this rally that we are seeing and this upward buy is based more on investor momentum than it is on underlying fundamentals. There’s plenty of oil on the market right now.”
The government says prices should remain relatively stable but rising… although is notes uncertainty over crude oil price forecasts remains high.
Getting to work is now the second biggest expense for most Americans, after housing. (Photo courtesy of the Federal Highway Administration)
Planners say people are being forced to spend too much money to get to and from work. The government sees that problem in regions around the country and is ready to spend millions of dollars to plan improvements. Julie Grant reports.
Transcript
Planners say people are being forced to spend too much money to get to and from work. The government sees that problem in regions around the country and is ready to spend millions of dollars to plan improvements that put jobs and housing closer together… or at least give people more transportation options to get to work. Julie Grant reports.
Dwayne Marsh says for decades, the department of Housing and Urban Development has built housing in one part of a community, while the Department of Transportation invested in another — with no coordination.
“I THINK THAT BECAUSE THE RESPECTIVE AGENCIES WEREN’T IN TIGHT ALLIANCE, THERE OFTEN WOULD BE REGULATIONS THAT WERE AT CROSS PURPOSE.”
That’s one reason why highways often bypass rural communities entirely and split inner-city neighborhoods in two.
Marsh works in a new office within HUD that’s working to integrate housing planning with Department of Transportation, as well as the Environmental Protection Agency.
“NOW WE’RE WORKING REALLY HARD TO ELIMINATE THOSE BARRIERS, SO WHEN COMMUNITIES GET FEDERAL DOLLARS THEY CAN BE USED IN A SYNCHRONOUS WAY.”
The three agencies have 140-million dollars in grants for local governments and regions around the country to do better planning.
And HUD has done something no one can remember it doing before: it’s gone on tour — to Seattle, Denver, Cleveland, and elsewhere. Before HUD starts doling out the planning money, Marsh says they want to hear the vision local communities have for sustainable development.
“YOU KNOW, I’M SNARKY ABOUT THE WHOLE THING ABOUT SUSTAINABILITY.”
Ned Hill is Dean of the college of Urban Affairs at Cleveland State University. He says sustainability means so many different things to different people.
To him, sustainable goes beyond environmental effects.
“AT THE FOUNDATION OF ANY SORT OF SUSTAINABILITY IS HAVE AN ECONOMY THAT’S SUSTAINABLE. AND IN THE OLDER INDUSTRIAL CITIES, OUR FIRST CHALLENGE IS TO RELOAD THE ECONOMY.”
In many of those older cities, as people have moved farther into the suburbs, they’ve started new businesses close to where they live. Hill says that’s why in areas like Cleveland, the central city is no longer the central business district.
Highways have been built to connect the different suburbs – and people are driving all over the place to get to work in those suburbs.
But, getting to work is now the second biggest expense for most Americans, after housing.
Shelley Poticha doesn’t think that’s a sustainable model. She’s director of that new HUD sustainability office.
Poticha says the regions where people have to drive the farthest to get to work –and spend the most to get to work—also have the highest numbers of foreclosed homes.
“THE REGIONS THAT FARED THE BEST WERE THOSE THAT HAD A PATTERN OF LAND USE THAT MADE IT POSSIBLE FOR PEOPLE TO GET TO WORK WITH OUT HAVING TO DRIVE.”
Poticha points to regions like Denver, where they plan a 100 miles of commuter rail, and bus rapid transit lanes, linking the 32 communities surrounding Denver proper. She says Denver wants to use this new federal grant money to design urban villages around those transit stations. So instead of acres of parking lots, there could be a grocery and other retail stores.
The idea is that people won’t have to drive to work and then drive to the store. Instead, they can take mass transit, and get their shopping done and not have to drive all around.
Poticha says that can help reduce pollution and help families to save money.
Dwayne Marsh says the Obama administration is sending a clear message: improving the economy is dependent on transportation options, housing affordability and a cleaner environment:
“AND BECAUSE THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT PLAYS A ROLE IN ALL OF THOSE ACTIVITIES, WE NEED TO BE FOSTERING INNOVATION COMING FROM LOCAL COMMUNITIES THAT CAN TAKE ON SOME OF OUR TOUGHEST NATIONAL PROBLEMS. AND WE CERTAINLY DON’T WANT TO BE AN IMPEDIMENT TO THAT CREATIVITY.”
Marsh says his HUD office will work with the Transportation Department and the EPA to help – instead of getting in the way – of local areas’ creative solutions.
Some experts in the study say the U.S. could reduce emissions by up to 11% in the next 40 years - just by building housing closer together. (Photo courtesy of the National Renewable Energy Laboratory)
When the Senate picks up debate on
the climate change bill, we’re sure to
hear a lot about how power plants and
cars are contributing to the problem.
But a new study finds that we should
also be considering where we live. Julie
Grant reports that living in the suburbs
can create extra carbon emissions:
Transcript
When the Senate picks up debate on
the climate change bill, we’re sure to
hear a lot about how power plants and
cars are contributing to the problem.
But a new study finds that we should
also be considering where we live. Julie
Grant reports that living in the suburbs
can create extra carbon emissions:
Most Americans live in or near big cities – but those in the suburbs have to drive a lot.
The National Research Council completed a study for Congress. It finds that building housing closer together near urban centers could reduce the amount people drive. That would save energy and cut greenhouse gas emissions.
Marlon Boarnet is a professor at the University of California, Irvine. He was on the study committee.
“The best evidence out there leads us to believe that people who live in more dense development do in fact drive less. And we feel that the evidence can conclude that that’s a causal relationship.”
Even if single-family homes were built closer together, it would mean less greenhouse gases.
Some experts in the study say the U.S. could reduce emissions by up to 11% in the next 40 years – just by building housing closer together.
The South Shore Commuter Rail Line runs between South Bend, Indiana and Chicago. The line's reaching its 100th birthday, and as it does, its ridership is near a 50-year high. It serves many sizable towns, such as Hammond and Gary, but commuters from smaller towns, suburbs and even rural areas drive to, and sometimes cram, the rail lines' stations. (Photo by Shawn Allee)
More and more people who live in
suburbs have been climbing onto commuter
trains over the past few years. They’ve
got every reason to: they’re fighting high
gas prices, traffic congestion, or even big
road construction projects. But oddly enough,
cars remain a problem even when people choose
commuter rail. Shawn Allee found
that out first hand when he checked out one
system:
Transcript
More and more people who live in
suburbs have been climbing onto commuter
trains over the past few years. They’ve
got every reason to: they’re fighting high
gas prices, traffic congestion, or even big
road construction projects. But oddly enough,
cars remain a problem even when people choose
commuter rail. Shawn Allee found
that out first hand when he checked out one
system:
I’ve just got into a parking lot in a commuter rail station in Northwest
Indiana. This rail line runs from towns like Gary and Hammond Indiana to
Chicago, where there are a lot of jobs.
Anyway, officials with the rail line tell me parking happens to be one of the
biggest complaints. I’m here to check it out, and I gotta tell you I’ve been
driving past hundreds of parked cars, and I haven’t been able to see an
open spot yet.
Okay, finally found one.
(sound of door slamming)
Shawn Allee: “Getting a parking spot in this station took a lot longer than I
expected. This commuter here, Celia Ramirez, says she has the same
problem. What’s it usually like?”
Celia Ramirez: “It’s a dread, because I don’t know where to park.
Sometimes I park where I’m not supposed to park, on the residential
streets.”
Allee: “And then you’re taking your chances.”
Ramirez: “Yes, of getting a ticket.”
Allee: “In fact there are signs all around us right now that pretty much
warn you not to do that.”
Ramirez: “And I break that rule.”
Well, you can guess spillover parking around the rail station in Hammond ticks off
the neighbors.
To make matters worse, a lot of the commuters, they don’t even in live in Hammond.
They’re from towns or suburbs even farther out.
In fact, the local government and The Northern Indiana Commuter Transportation
District don’t always agree on how to solve the problem.
John Parsons is the rail line’s marketing director.
John Parsons: “We have over 700 spaces in Hammond. Unfortunately, we
need more. But the residents in the area are reluctant to expand parking.”
Shawn Allee: “How difficult is it to convince towns to do that, especially if
they feel that they’re creating parking for people outside of their area?”
Parsons: “It’s a difficult problem. For one thing, we’re a tax-exempt
organization and what we’re doing is acquiring residential property that
currently pays taxes and that property’s no longer on the tax rolls.”
Now, this particular rail line had a growth spurt a few years ago. It’s lightened up,
but parking’s still an issue.
So, just imagine pressure other rail lines have, especially ones that saw double-digit
growth over the past year.
The situation’s familiar to transportation experts.
Joe Schwieterman teaches at DePaul University.
He says, when it comes to parking, suburban commuter rail is often behind the ball.
“The ridership is surging on our transit system, and parking spots, you
know, it’s a five a five-year process. If we start now, we have new spots you
know, in 2013. Clearly that’s not fast enough to tap into that new market.”
So, is there a way out of the parking – commuter rail conundrum?
Schwieterman says one idea is to add bus service that branches out from stations.
But not all towns can afford it, or they don’t have enough riders to justify buses.
So, Schwieterman says some commuter rail lines are stuck.
They advertise that they’re a cheap, convenient alternative to driving. And when gas
prices rise, people take that advice.
“It’s a bad idea to encourage floods of people to take public transit if you’re
not ready to accommodate them. You lose them for life, frankly, if it’s a bad
experience.”
Still, Schwieterman says you can look at the parking problem two ways.
Sure, you can shake your head because suburban stations’ parking lots fill up.
But, at least for now, those drivers aren’t clogging roads and spewing even more
pollution on their way to work.
Landowners who are opposed to the beltway say no matter which route it follows, it'll be cutting through prime farmland. Proponents of the beltway say the highway is needed to support the already fast-growing suburbs.
(Photo by Rebecca Williams)
As suburbs grow, politicians and city planners often promote new highways as a way to ease congestion and encourage more economic growth. Rebecca Williams reports on the struggle between local officials who want to encourage that growth and people who worry a new highway will fuel more sprawl:
Transcript
As suburbs grow, politicians and city planners often promote new highways as
a way to ease congestion and encourage more economic growth. Rebecca
Williams reports on the struggle between local officials who want to
encourage that growth and people who worry a new highway will fuel more
sprawl:
The Census Bureau says commutes to work are getting longer in the nation’s
biggest cities. Demographers say that’s because people are moving
out farther and farther from their jobs in search of more house for the
money or a quieter way of life. More people moving out to the fringes of the suburbs
means more pressure on two-lane roads and more congestion.
New highways are one of the tools local officials reach for when traffic
gets worse. People living in the fast-growing suburbs west of Chicago have
been debating a proposed new highway nicknamed the Prairie Parkway. The
four-lane beltway would connect these outer suburbs.
Jan Carlson is the Transportation Commissioner for Kane County, about 40
miles from downtown Chicago. He’s been looking forward to the beltway since
plans were unveiled five years ago:
“If you listen to the complaints, as I do, of people stuck in traffic and if
you consider the many economic advantages that moving that traffic brings to
us, it appears to me that the greater good is to move forward with the
project.”
Carlson says he knows new highways can rapidly speed up development in an
area, but he points to census data that show his county and others nearby
are already among the fastest-growing in the nation without a new highway:
“I am not one of those who subscribes to the theory that if you don’t build
it, they will not come.”
Jan Carlson says the new highway will make the local economy stronger,
bringing in much needed jobs to the suburbs, but many people are strongly opposed to the
beltway. Marvel Davis lives on a farm that’s been in her family for 170 years. Some of
her farmland lies within a corridor that the state has set aside for the proposed beltway.
“I tell people that’s the way sprawl happens. You think, well I’ve lost
that field to the farm, so the first guy that comes along and offers you
$50,000 an acre, your temptation is going to be pretty great, isn’t it?”
Davis says even though construction on the beltway isn’t expected to begin
until 2009, she’s seen a lot of new buildings spring up. She says it’s true
the area’s already growing, but she thinks the prospect of a new highway
might be encouraging more growth:
“So which comes first, the chicken or the egg? If word goes forth this
road’s going to happen and you come in with all kinds of developers, it’s
almost like a self-fulfilling prophecy.”
And urban planners agree it really is a chicken and egg relationship. It’s
hard to say which comes first. Highways speed up the pace of growth. And
growth causes a need for more highways.
Bill Klein is the director of research with the American Planning
Association. He says new highways do ease traffic congestion, but only for
a short time, before those highways get packed with people driving out to
their new homes in the suburbs.
“It’s very difficult to build your way out of sprawl. The more highways you
build, the more sprawl you get. Intellectually we’ve known this stuff for a
good long time but sometimes the political will to do anything about it is
the bigger problem.”
In the case of the Prairie Parkway, there is a political heavyweight in the
parkway’s corner. US House Speaker Dennis Hastert has been promoting the
concept of an outer beltway in his district since he went to Congress in the
late 1980’s. Just last year, Speaker Hastert earmarked 207 million dollars
for the beltway in the federal transportation bill.
Landowner Marvel Davis suspects the beltway might not go forward if it
weren’t for the Speaker’s support. She says if someone could show her the
beltway was in the country’s best interest, she’d support it.
“But if I’m going to lose my farm and my community to make a few people
multimillionaires then I’m not willing to do it.”
Marvel Davis says she knows she could make a lot of money if she sold her
land to developers, and she did actually sell more than 100 acres recently.
But she sold it to her county’s forest preserve for half of what she could
get from a developer.
Even though it’s years away, the promise of a new highway is sharply
dividing these communities. Whether or not they see growth as a good thing,
almost everyone agrees a new highway will speed up the pace of that growth.
Because mobile homes can be transported they're not taxed the way permanent homes are. They're taxed like vehicles (when they're bought and sold). Mobile home owners pay a small tax for the small plot of land they sit on. (Photo by Chris McCarus)
Some officials are saying mobile home owners don't pay their fair share of taxes. Mobile home advocates disagree. (Photo by Chris McCarus)
Mobile home parks like this one in mid-Michigan offer a housing option for low income families. (Photo by Chris McCarus)
People who live in mobile homes might be seeing their property taxes going up. Some government officials say it’s an attempt to tax for the services used and to discourage mobile home parks from sprawling across former farm fields. But others wonder if higher taxes aren’t a form of discrimination against this kind of affordable housing. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Chris McCarus reports:
Transcript
People who live in mobile homes might be seeing their property taxes going up. Some government officials say it’s an attempt to tax for the services used and to discourage mobile home parks from sprawling across former farm fields. But others wonder if higher taxes aren’t a form of discrimination against this kind of affordable housing. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Chris McCarus reports:
(sound of expressway traffic)
The Capital Crossings mobile home park sits on rolling farmland near an Interstate highway. The residents of the 15 homes have moved here either to retire or to make the 30 minute daily commute to nearby Lansing, Michigan. And more mobile homes are being pulled in.
(sound of construction)
Workers are building porches and attaching the skirting between the ground and the house. It’s supposed to show permanence, like a foundation. But mobile homes are not permanent. And mobile homes are not taxed the same way as other houses. They’re taxed like vehicles. Taxed when they’re purchased. Taxed when they’re sold. Still there are no property taxes on the homes. Only on the tiny lots on which they sit.
Some government officials say the $3 a month that these park residents have been paying for property taxes don’t cover the costs of police and fire protection or other government services. They want a tax hike to give local governments more money. Dave Morris is a farmer and the local township supervisor.
“We all have to pay our fair share for services such as sheriff, ambulance, fire department as well as schools. Schools is a big issue of course. And they aren’t paying their share. That’s all.”
But advocates for affordable housing say hiking taxes on mobile home residents is more likely just an attempt to discourage that kind of housing. They say zoning mobile homes out of existence has been tried, but taxing them out is a new idea. Higher taxes will likely lead to mobile home parks closing.”
John McIlwain is with the Urban Land Institute. He says as mobile home parks become more expensive to operate, their owners will sell off to subdivision or big box store developers.
“The numbers are going to be so attractive that the people who own mobile home parks are going to be much more interested in selling the land to a housing developer than in continuing to run the mobile home park. So in time the parks are probably going to disappear on their own anyway and trying to raise the taxes on them specifically is simply going to make that day come earlier.”
In Michigan there is a proposal to raise the taxes on mobile home sites four times higher. State Senator Valde Garcia says the $3 a month that mobile home park owners pay for each home site is not nearly enough.
“What we are trying to do is really change the tax structure so it’s fair to everyone. The system hasn’t changed in 45 years. It’s time we do so but we need to do it in a gradual manner.”
Senator Garcia’s colleagues in the state house have voted to raise the tax to $12 a month. He’d like to raise it to at least $40 a month. The mobile home park industry has hired a public relations firm to produce a video criticizing the tax increase.
“Site built homes pay sales tax only the materials used in their homes and don’t pay tax on resale. Manufactured home owners pay sales tax on materials, labor, transportation profit of a home and they pay sales tax every time a home is resold. ”
The two sides don’t agree on the math. Tim Dewitt of the Michigan Manufactured Housing Association says $3 a month sounds low because it doesn’t show hidden costs. The biggest cost comes when park owners have to pay the higher commercial property tax instead of the lower homestead tax. Dewitt says the park owners then pass the tax to the home owners whose average family income is only about $28,000 a year.
“That’s our worst fear. It could put people who could least afford any type of tax increase into a tough position.”
15 million people live in mobile home parks around the country. And different local governments have tried to find ways to increase taxes on mobile home parks. But Michigan is one of the first states to propose hiking taxes this much. State Senator Garcia says he is not trying to hurt the mobile home industry or make life harder for mobile home park residents. He dismisses the idea that he’s being pressured by wealthier constituents who don’t like to see the mobile home parks being developed.
John McIlwain of the Urban Land Institute says a bias against mobile home parks is part of the mentality that leads to sprawl. When people from the city and the suburbs move a little further into rural areas they want the look and feel of suburbia.
“The mobile home parks are no longer things that they want to see. And so they find ways to discourage those mobile home parks. The ones that are there try to see if they can be purchased, turned into stick built housing or otherwise discourage them and encourage them to move on elsewhere.”
But often the people who move in also want the shopping centers, restaurants and conveniences they once had instead of the mobile home parks.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Chris McCarus.
Go into any store these days and chances are you’ll find a bargain: buy two shirts and get one free… or buy a burger and get another one half-price. Retailers market their products with attractive deals because they know it works. Great Lakes Radio Consortium commentator Julia King thinks it’s time to use that marketing magic to get more of us to “buy into” public transportation:
Transcript
Go into any store these days and chances are you’ll find a bargain: buy two shirts and get
one free… or buy a burger and get another one half-price. Retailers market their products
with attractive deals because they know it works. Great Lakes Radio Consortium
commentator, Julia King, thinks it’s time to use that marketing magic to get more of us to
“buy into” public transportation:
A couple years back, my smallish Northern Indiana town got an honest-to-goodness
PUBLIC BUS. Progressive types started walkin’ a little taller, a little prouder – because,
well, when you have a BUS it means you live in a place where somebody cares.
Our bus is such a good thing, in fact, that people hate to talk about the one little problem:
(whisper) nobody ever rides it. Okay, that’s not exactly true. Last Tuesday, my
neighbor’s friend thought she saw someone in the very last row on the right hand side.
I’m just BARELY exaggerating. There are really only two kinds of people who ever get
on our bus: hardcore greenie tree-huggers… and those who have no other form of
transportation.
So, now, with tight government budgets and higher gas prices, some cost-conscious
citizens are rightly taking a closer look at our not-so-public public transportation.
In a letter to a local paper, one man put it this way: “I would prefer not having taxpayers’
dollars go literally up in fumes.” He suggested we have two choices: put the bus out of
its misery, or get more people to RIDE it.
According to the American Public Transportation Association, we could reduce our oil
dependence by about 40% – almost the amount we import from Saudi Arabia in a year –
if Americans would use public transportation for just 10% of our daily travel.
You know, radio stations hand out cash and concert tickets to attract listeners; television
stations lure viewers with home makeovers; cola companies entice customers with
everything from free soda to a chance at a BILLION dollars.
What do bus riders get for their trouble? Hmmm? Oh yeah – more trouble. If it’s hot, or
cold, or raining, and there’s a comfortable car ten feet away in the garage, taking a bus is
work.
In large cities, where drivers compete for rare and costly parking spaces, public
transportation offers tangible rewards in the way of convenience and affordability. But in
communities with plenty of space and manageable traffic – if you have a car – the only
reasons to ride a bus are long-term, big picture, goody-goody reasons like ozone
reduction, energy conservation and curbing global warming.
Here’s where the public sector can use a little private-sector know-how. Catchy jingles,
cash prizes, gift certificates at shops along the bus routes, maybe chocolate…
riders need something in the here and now. Like anything else Americans buy, public
transportation is a product. It’s time to start selling it.
Host Tag: Julia King can be found riding the bus… alone… in Goshen, Indiana. She
comes to us by way of the Great Lakes Radio Consortium.
If it feels as if your commute to work is taking longer, it probably is. The Census Bureau reports the average drive time continues to increase. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham reports:
Transcript
If it feels as if your commute to work is taking longer, it probably is. The Census Bureau reports
the average drive time continues to increase. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester
Graham reports:
According to the Census Bureau, most of the longest commutes are on the east and west coasts.
But the second longest average travel time to work – clocking in at nearly 33 minutes – is
Chicago. And travel times are getting longer, mostly because of urban sprawl. Workers are
moving farther away, and in some cases corporations are moving from downtowns into the
suburbs. Phillip Salopek is with the U.S. Census Bureau.
“Average travel time has been increasing. There was an increase in average travel time between
1980 and 1990. There was a more significant increase in travel times between 1990 and 2000.”
The Census Bureau also found some of the cities with the longest commute times tend to have a
higher rate of workers who have turned to public transportation, with New York, Chicago, and
Philadelphia topping the list.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, this is Lester Graham.
Transportation experts say new toll lanes are needed to relieve traffic congestion around major cities. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham reports:
Transcript
Transportation experts say new toll lanes are needed to relieve traffic congestion around
major cities. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham:
The experts say it would be a market-based solution. If you want to avoid heavy traffic,
you can pull your car into a voluntary toll lane and pay for the privilege of going faster.
Rob Atkinson is with Progressive Policy Institute, and is one of the experts who testified
before a congressional committee about the idea.
“You would expand those highways and add a couple lanes in each direction, but those
lanes would be tolled. So if you don’t want to pay the toll, you can just stay in the regular
lanes and actually you’d be a lot better off because there’d be people who would move from
those lanes – the free lanes – over to the tolled lanes. So it’s sort of one of those win-win
situations.”
Atkinson says gasoline taxes and other fees don’t pay the full cost of roads, so an alternative
such as voluntary toll lanes would help get closer to paying the actual cost of commuting.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, this is Lester Graham.
The Canadian government is taking its battle against climate change to the streets. It’s committing more than $3 million to programs intended to get Canadian drivers off the road. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Karen Kelly reports:
Transcript
The Canadian government is taking its battle against climate change to the streets. It’s
committing more than 3 million dollars to programs intended to get Canadian drivers off the road.
The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Karen Kelly reports:
The ‘Walk to Work Challenge’ in Calgary is one of 21 new programs sponsored by the federal
government. Many will educate Canadians about the link between driving and greenhouse gas
emissions. Other programs plan to reduce vehicle idling and increase car pooling.
In Calgary, city officials are offering prizes and discounts for people who start walking to work.
Transportation specialist Ron Shaver says that if you provide incentives, people will change their
behavior.
“If people find an activity that’s not a challenge for them to participate in, if they’re pursuing it
over an extended period of time, it will become the new norm.”
Shaver says Calgary tried a similar program four years ago, when a major bridge was closed
down. He says many people who adopted commuting alternatives then are still using them.
For the Great Lakes Radio Consortium, I’m Karen Kelly.
Stephen Schork says the rising prices are based more on investor momentum than anything else, and that there’s plenty of oil on the market.(Photo courtesy of the Federal Highway Administration)
