Motorists aren’t buying ‘end of pipeline’ theory
The recent article in The News explaining why gasoline prices are higher in Buffalo sounded like the same old smoke screen. This explanation that it’s because Buffalo is at the end of two transmission lines is bunk to me. You mean to tell me that Buffalo is the only city in the whole 48 contiguous states that is at the end of a pipeline? That every other city in the country is either at the beginning or in the middle of a line and that all the other pipelines just dead end in the middle of nowhere? I doubt it.
Does this rationale apply to other supply lines? Does a home at the end of a water line pay more per gallon than one closer to the treatment plant? Does someone at the end of a natural gas line pay more per cubic foot of gas? Does a home that’s farther from a sewage treatment plant pay a higher rate because of distance? Does a home at the end of a power line pay more per kilowatt hour? Of course not. So why does this only apply to gasoline?
The fact that the pipe diameter decreases from 10 inches to 6 inches at Rochester is just basic hydraulics. It was designed that way because the demand is less after that location. When a water line leaves the treatment plant, it’s huge; maybe 60 inches in diameter. Is it still that size when it reaches the last customer? Of course it isn’t because the demand is less. I see no reason why the laws of hydraulics would be repealed just because there’s gasoline in the line.
And this revelation that prices are lower in Pennsylvania is hardly a news flash. I found that out 50 years ago the first time I drove over the state line. You can thank New York State taxes for that.