Research conducted by the RIA Novosti agency examined fuel pricing across 30 countries. The ranking captures two dimensions: the average price of 95 octane gasoline and how affordable that fuel is for residents, considering typical salaries. The data show that a lower price per liter does not automatically translate into greater affordability for households.
According to the study, Kazakhstan offers the lowest average price for 95th gasoline at 28.2 rubles per liter. Yet this affordability does not align with how accessible fuel is for the average resident. At this price, a typical worker could purchase about 1102.6 liters of gasoline per month, indicating that despite low unit costs, earnings limit full utilization of fuel at the pump in daily life.
Luxembourg leads the ranking in a different sense. Here the average price reaches 102.6 rubles per liter, allowing a resident to obtain approximately 2031.7 liters of fuel with an average salary. This illustrates how a higher price level can still translate into greater purchasing power when salaries are correspondingly higher, creating a different kind of affordability dynamic.
In the Russian context, a person would need to consider the overall wage when assessing affordability. If an average salary were spent entirely on fuel, a Russian resident could acquire about 1057.5 liters of gasoline. The study places Russia at the 13th position with an average price of 51.2 rubles per liter for the 95th octane fuel. The contrast highlights how price and income together shape actual access to fuel in daily life.
Romania appears further toward the middle of the affordability spectrum. While the price level sits mid-range, the amount of fuel accessible given the average income is relatively modest, with about 384.4 liters available per month. This example underscores that a moderate price does not guarantee broad household access when incomes are not correspondingly high.
The survey also tracks how fuel prices shifted in 2022. Notably, Russia stands out as the only country among those surveyed where petrol prices declined slightly from the prior year, dipping by about 0.1 percent. In most other countries, fuel costs rose during that period, reflecting varied macroeconomic forces, exchange rates, and domestic policy responses across different markets. These changes remind readers that fuel affordability is a moving target influenced by both market forces and earnings levels.
Overall, the report demonstrates that affordability is a two-sided issue: the nominal price per liter matters, but so does the typical income level, and the relationship between price and wages can move in opposite directions. For policymakers, drivers, and researchers, the key takeaway is that a low price does not guarantee high consumer purchasing power, while higher prices do not automatically mean poor accessibility if wages are sufficiently strong. The interplay between price and income ultimately determines how often drivers can fill up and how much fuel remains in household budgets.
— The study underscores how fuel affordability must be evaluated through a dual lens of price per liter and standard earnings rather than price alone. It invites readers to consider how wage growth, taxation, subsidies, and energy policy shape the real cost of fueling daily transportation needs across different economies.
- Behind the wheel can be read viber