There are about 12,000 gas stations with the Exxon sign at the entrance, though the company owns about 2,220 of them. And Exxon plans to sell those over the next few years, Reuters reported.

Texas leads the states with the most company-owned gas stations with 190. Florida has 170, the Associated Press reported.

“We are in a very, very challenging market. Margins are reduced,” Exxon spokeswoman Prem Nair said in a statement. “We feel the best way for us to grow and compete is through our distributor network.”

Exxon stations may be everywhere but retail gasoline sales are only a small portion of the company’s revenues. And with gasoline costing 31% more than a year ago and crude oil prices at record levels, it’s also one of the most unprofitable.

This doesn’t mean we’ll stop seeing the ubiquitous blue signage across the country. Exxon will continue selling fuel to station owners who pay to use the company’s brand name.

Oppenheimer & Co. (OPY) analyst Fadel Gheit estimated the stations’ profit margin was between 10% and 15% (the company doesn’t release margins for its retail division), which is about one-third of its margin for crude oil production.

“I think the decision came that it’s more of a headache than it’s worth,” Gheit said.

Gas stations can’t pass higher prices onto consumers as easily as oil companies pass prices onto them. On top of that, car owners nationwide are taking serious steps to curb gasoline and energy usage, doing everything from using other forms of transportation to buying more fuel-efficient vehicles such as hybrids.

Exxon’s decision follows that of competitors Royal Dutch Shell PLC (ADR: RDS.A, RDS.B) and BP PLC (ADR: BP), who are also moving away from station ownership.

“They can actually point their attention to some other area where you can make money,” Jeff Lenard, a spokesman for the National Association of Convenience Stores, told The AP. “Retail is incredibly volatile. This way, they can (sell gasoline) wholesale and count on a fairly predictable income.”

Source: Exxon Plans to Sell 2,220 Profit-Squeezed Gas Stations

There’s a real “make-a-difference” philosophy at work out here that manifests itself in everything from our laws to our personal behavior. This philosophy fosters a “can-do” attitude that makes us believe that we can do almost anything – and that includes fighting back against the super-high energy prices that U.S. consumers are struggling with right now.

That’s why my wife and I are really excited to take on a personal challenge, of sorts.

Over the next 12 months, we’re going to try to shave 25% off our total energy and resources bills. This means that we’re going to make our house more efficient – and do the same with our cars.

But here’s the catch.

We’re going to try and achieve this goal with existing technology and, hopefully, without breaking the bank. That’s not because we aren’t seeking the maximum possible savings (we are); instead it’s because we believe we can do better with what we have, and through conservation.

Besides, we want to set an example – and create an energy-saving road map – that anyone can follow. We want to demonstrate that you don’t have to spend big bucks to buy the latest gadgets or invest in “bleeding-edge” conservation technologies. Common sense and careful, shrewd energy management can generate major savings in both expenses, and in energy.

This is something that our federal government just doesn’t seem to understand.

Not only did our federal government sponsor a trillion-dollar energy “pork fest” – with incentives to find, mine, drill or tap into more energy – it also mandated all sorts of things along the way. These initiatives are certain to encourage Big Business. But I believe the government would have seen much better results had simply encouraged both consumers and corporations alike to focus on energy conservation.

It gets worse. Now the government has an agriculture bill headed down the pipeline; the legislation looks promising, but by the time it gets through Congress it figures to have gotten so watered down that it will be virtually worthless.

Don’t get me wrong: I’m all for developing new, more efficient technology. Indeed, it’s necessary. But it’s also a long-term process, and what that’s very costly.

We should pursue that path, of course. But there’s another strategy that we should pursue in the meantime – conservation.

So it’s time to do our part.

Over the next 12 months, I’ll report on my family’s progress, the decisions we’re making and the technologies we’re using (as I said, we support technology-driven energy savings). And we’d like to hear about your efforts, too – assuming you, too, are interested in saving money and conservation like we are.

Hopefully, we’ll find methods and materials that we can all use. We’ll definitely let you know.

[Editor’s Note: Money Morning Investment Director Keith Fitz-Gerald will report back periodically on his domestic-energy conservation efforts.]

Source: A Pledge to Hedge: Money Morning’s Fitz-Gerald Makes Public Promise to Slash Private Power Use