Exxon sold off all their stations in California to another operator maybe five or six years ago who rebranded them as Valero. I think what you're seeing is this continuing in the wake of the ExxonMobil merger and retail-operation shakeout.
What we need is an equillibrium that keeps oil prices high enough for Big Oil to keep exploration rolling forward in sixth gear but not so high that it destroys the saleability of the commodity they're looking for. That's what markets are all about, as long as they work. At $60/barrel we won't run out of oil in any of our lifetimes.
I think we're nearing the point in terms of battery efficiency, longevity, and maybe even cost where electric cars could be useful and a whole lot of fun. Even the GM EV1 was a tremendous engineering achievement and with the later batteries a very useful vehicle (I tried to get one for a while, but by that time GM was doing their level best to destroy all evidence they'd ever existed.) If hybrids do nothing more than help phones and laptops push battery technology to the point a real engineless EV is cost-effective, they'll have been useful.
Note that I'm no enviroloony, I think most of the global-warming-alarmist arguments are based on false premises but they've got a vested interest in keeping the UN grants coming.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/m...9/ixworld.html
Just got back from a drive around and through Southern California - and if you went around with a magic wand and zapped every fuel-burning car on the road and made them run on Beano you'd still have gridlock, the problem isn't CO2 or oil or Suburbans it's just too many cars, which unless you're going to stack people up like Manhattan or Hong Kong (a lifestyle in which I have no interest in participating) and push them into trains really translates to too many people.
(Disclaimer: Yeah, I've got some ExxonMobil and ChevronTexaco stock. Not enough. If I had enough ExxonMobil stock I'd be posting this over on the Gulfstream owners' board, wherever that is...)