PDA

View Full Version : Crude Oil Over $90 per Barrel



Franco
12-22-2010, 03:26 PM
Welcome to the Obama/Salazar Energy Policy!

Refineries are running at 45 to 60 of capacity. Imported oil is up and yet the turds won't issue any new drilling permits for the western Gulf Of Mexico. They would rather offer welfare/unemplyment benefits to gulf oil workers than let them earn thier 90K plus per year working as roustabouts and roughnecks.

$3. per gallon at the pump and it will continue to rise. You can keep the change!

starjack
12-22-2010, 06:15 PM
Its bush fault he was a oil man you know.

dnf777
12-22-2010, 06:21 PM
Yes, we've seen record high oil and pump prices under Obama!

subroc
12-22-2010, 06:39 PM
Yes, we've seen record high oil and pump prices under Obama!

that's it? that's all you got?

where is your standard foaming at the mouth attack in the same manner as if it was a republican?

Julie R.
12-22-2010, 06:40 PM
Wonder why the talking heads never talk about the high and rising gas prices? Once upon a time, $3 a gallon was headline news, now it's barely mentioned. Or is it because the lefty media has worn out their tired old refrain that it's Bush's fault?. I mean, now we're deeply vested in Obamonomics.

Quit apologizing to filthy rich sheiks and monarchs that hate us: drill here, drill now, end the refinery moratorium and reduce gas taxes when the price skyrockets!

zeus3925
12-22-2010, 06:41 PM
in 1965 the official pump price was 35 cents a gallon. Incomes have gone up 10x since then. $3.50/gallon would be the equivalent price now.

Franco
12-22-2010, 06:44 PM
When we have massive reserves of oil and we are importing more instead of drilling domesticly, what are the consequences?

Price everywhere will go up!

The Fed attitude toward domestic oil production is bad politics. Are we really ready to see a skyrocketing of the cost of gas at the pump? That idea is just plain stupid!

subroc
12-22-2010, 06:44 PM
that is part of the left wing radical adminstrations plan. drive up the price of oil to make it unaffordable. force renewable technology that isn't cost effective on us.

Julie R.
12-22-2010, 06:44 PM
in 1965 the official pump price was 35 cents a gallon. Incomes have gone up 10x since then. $3.50/gallon would be the equivalent price now.

Yes but look how much of that pump price is taxes, and look how much more EVERYTHING costs when gas rises so steeply so fast. Apples to oranges. In 1965 the average American didn't need to spend almost half his gross monthly income for a roof over his head, either. When crude rises, so do heating bills, groceries, and everything that's transported between production and sale.

Franco
12-22-2010, 06:46 PM
in 1965 the official pump price was 35 cents a gallon. Incomes have gone up 10x since then. $3.50/gallon would be the equivalent price now.

and, in 1965 we didn't have;


War On Terror
Skyrocketing Cost for Healthcare
a SS crisis
15 trillion deficit
out of control Fed Government

want more?

subroc
12-22-2010, 06:51 PM
in 1965 the official pump price was 35 cents a gallon. Incomes have gone up 10x since then. $3.50/gallon would be the equivalent price now.

trying to tie the inflation rate to the cost of energy is not realistic. after 45 years have we gained any efficiencies in drilling? any synergies at all? the reason the price is climbing is political not based on inflation. it is OK if you lie to yourself, but no need to lie to the rest of us.

depittydawg
12-22-2010, 07:00 PM
Welcome to the Obama/Salazar Energy Policy!

Refineries are running at 45 to 60 of capacity. Imported oil is up and yet the turds won't issue any new drilling permits for the western Gulf Of Mexico. They would rather offer welfare/unemplyment benefits to gulf oil workers than let them earn thier 90K plus per year working as roustabouts and roughnecks.

$3. per gallon at the pump and it will continue to rise. You can keep the change!

Your first sentence says it all. Refinery's are idle. Plenty of oil everywhere but they don't make gas. Just another case of price manipulation. I fail to see where the story is here? Except that when prices sky rocket again, it will continue to build the case for developing alternatives. Got a like that.

Franco
12-22-2010, 07:10 PM
Your first sentence says it all. Refinery's are idle. Plenty of oil everywhere but they don't make gas. Just another case of price manipulation. I fail to see where the story is here? Except that when prices sky rocket again, it will continue to build the case for developing alternatives. Got a like that.

Unless the government had immediate plans to build a vast network of ALTERNATIVE fuel, then we have to live in the here and now! That here and now is our domestic resources for which the current Fed government is preventing.

Just thier playing politics in the Gulf Of Mex. tells me that are clueless to the burben that the unnessessary increase in the cost of gasoline affects the working class.

Cody Covey
12-22-2010, 07:59 PM
Your first sentence says it all. Refinery's are idle. Plenty of oil everywhere but they don't make gas. Just another case of price manipulation. I fail to see where the story is here? Except that when prices sky rocket again, it will continue to build the case for developing alternatives. Got a like that.
That may sound great on paper but unfortunately there are NO efficient alternative power sources here now. Yes we should be striving towards that but manipulation by the administration(or those this administration put in power) to raise gas prices is a great case for getting government out of the business of oil. Alternative energy isn't a reality no matter what libs would like us to think.

dnf777
12-22-2010, 08:15 PM
I saw that China has increased its oil consumption 225% since 1994. Does anyone have reliable data as to when China and India and other emerging economies with blossoming middle classes will plateau their oil consumption?

If we don't have that data, everything else is empty speculation.

Marvin S
12-22-2010, 08:30 PM
in 1965 the official pump price was 35 cents a gallon. Incomes have gone up 10x since then. $3.50/gallon would be the equivalent price now.

Income Tax = 2% 0f total income, SS maxed out @ $37?, they were called service stations, car cost $2400 (Mercury Comet SW cruised comfortably @ 80, 28 MPG). I could go on but hopefully you get the point. What has increased in cost & scope is government, & immensely so. I have the slips so can verify what's printed.

Hopefully gas goes up enough that my oil stock splits again & I can harvest some more profit :cool:.

depittydawg
12-23-2010, 12:46 AM
That may sound great on paper but unfortunately there are NO efficient alternative power sources here now. Yes we should be striving towards that but manipulation by the administration(or those this administration put in power) to raise gas prices is a great case for getting government out of the business of oil. Alternative energy isn't a reality no matter what libs would like us to think.

I see. So I guess my job and my paycheck that I cash every to weeks isn't real then? Alternative energy isn't the answer today. But it is under way. And it will become more of an alternative as time marches on. Meanwhile, it isn't the government that controls the price of oil / gas. It is the oil industry. There is plenty of oil out there available. There is plenty of refining capacity. Why are they running at 50%?

Franco
12-23-2010, 03:10 AM
I see. So I guess my job and my paycheck that I cash every to weeks isn't real then? Alternative energy isn't the answer today. But it is under way. And it will become more of an alternative as time marches on. Meanwhile, it isn't the government that controls the price of oil / gas. It is the oil industry. There is plenty of oil out there available. There is plenty of refining capacity. Why are they running at 50%?

When the government restricts oil production, they do have an impact of the cost. OPEC just raised prices last week because they know that domestic production in the USA is down and we have increased our demand for imported oil.

Our two biggest oil producing areas are Alaska and the GOM. The Feds stopped issuing new drilling permits in the gulf 8 months ago making us more dependent on imported oil and OPEC!!!

That's why prices will continue to increase.

badbullgator
12-23-2010, 07:26 AM
I see. So I guess my job and my paycheck that I cash every to weeks isn't real then? Alternative energy isn't the answer today. But it is under way. And it will become more of an alternative as time marches on. Meanwhile, it isn't the government that controls the price of oil / gas. It is the oil industry. There is plenty of oil out there available. There is plenty of refining capacity. Why are they running at 50%?

Tell me again why we actually need alternative energy. Are we running out of oil? Maybe it is to stop global warming.....
Drill baby drill and then make me some damn gas

dnf777
12-23-2010, 07:48 AM
Tell me again why we actually need alternative energy. Are we running out of oil? Maybe it is to stop global warming.....
Drill baby drill and then make me some damn gas

We started running out of gas the day Francis Drake struck oil in Titusville, Pa. The question is WHEN will we run out? As far as I know, most estimates have not taken into account the exploding demands that India and China are creating.

zeus3925
12-23-2010, 07:50 AM
Income Tax = 2% 0f total income, SS maxed out @ $37?, they were called service stations, car cost $2400 (Mercury Comet SW cruised comfortably @ 80, 28 MPG). I could go on but hopefully you get the point. What has increased in cost & scope is government, & immensely so. I have the slips so can verify what's printed.

Hopefully gas goes up enough that my oil stock splits again & I can harvest some more profit :cool:.

Mercury Comets were nerd cars!

2% of income? Marv I thought kite designers made more than that. You could have used the benefits of a union back then.:razz:

Buzz
12-23-2010, 07:55 AM
That may sound great on paper but unfortunately there are NO efficient alternative power sources here now. Yes we should be striving towards that but manipulation by the administration(or those this administration put in power) to raise gas prices is a great case for getting government out of the business of oil. Alternative energy isn't a reality no matter what libs would like us to think.

Someone should explain this to the Chinese.

Buzz
12-23-2010, 08:01 AM
Income Tax = 2% 0f total income, SS maxed out @ $37?, they were called service stations, car cost $2400 (Mercury Comet SW cruised comfortably @ 80, 28 MPG). I could go on but hopefully you get the point. What has increased in cost & scope is government, & immensely so. I have the slips so can verify what's printed.

Hopefully gas goes up enough that my oil stock splits again & I can harvest some more profit :cool:.


I don't know where a 2% tax rate comes from, but here is a memory refresher about rates in 1965:

http://i108.photobucket.com/albums/n3/davebezesky/1965taxrates.jpg

mjh345
12-23-2010, 08:06 AM
They should also explain it to Brazil, France etc

Roger Perry
12-23-2010, 09:16 AM
that's it? that's all you got?

where is your standard foaming at the mouth attack in the same manner as if it was a republican?

Ho Hum. Wake me up when gasoline hits $5.00 a gallon:rolleyes:

road kill
12-23-2010, 09:31 AM
Mercury Comets were nerd cars!

2% of income? Marv I thought kite designers made more than that. You could have used the benefits of a union back then.:razz:

How would you rate a Prius??

I asked a guy if there was a test you had to fail to get one of those.
He said "oh, no, anyone can get one!!":rolleyes:

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!


RK

mjh345
12-23-2010, 09:46 AM
I don't know where a 2% tax rate comes from, but here is a memory refresher about rates in 1965:

http://i108.photobucket.com/albums/n3/davebezesky/1965taxrates.jpg

You only have to go back a few years more and tax rates actually exceeded 90% at the top level. OUCH!!!

Buzz
12-23-2010, 10:21 AM
You only have to go back a few years more and tax rates actually exceeded 90% at the top level. OUCH!!!

You can get all the tax rate information you need right in this nifty publication!:cool:

http://www.taxfoundation.org/files/fed_individual_rate_history-20101220.pdf


When I get some free time, I was going to use consumer price index information to translate those tax brackets in 1965 into today's dollars. It should be interesting, at least to me.

CPI info here:

http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/data/CPIAUCSL.txt

I know conservatives want to take us back in time, the question is, do they want to go back to the 1920's or back to pre 1916 levels?

depittydawg
12-23-2010, 10:34 AM
I see. So I guess my job and my paycheck that I cash every to weeks isn't real then? Alternative energy isn't the answer today. But it is under way. And it will become more of an alternative as time marches on. Meanwhile, it isn't the government that controls the price of oil / gas. It is the oil industry. There is plenty of oil out there available. There is plenty of refining capacity. Why are they running at 50%?

When the government restricts oil production, they do have an impact of the cost. OPEC just raised prices last week because they know that domestic production in the USA is down and we have increased our demand for imported oil.

Our two biggest oil producing areas are Alaska and the GOM. The Feds stopped issuing new drilling permits in the gulf 8 months ago making us more dependent on imported oil and OPEC!!!

That's why prices will continue to increase.

Sorry Franco, much as I respect your opinions I'm seeing a lot of evidence that Drilling isn't the answer to America's energy needs.

http://www.ensec.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=166:can-us-drill-its-way-to-energy-security&catid=90:energysecuritydecember08&Itemid=334
In fact, many drilling advocates implicitly assume that the energy gained from increased drilling will be roughly linear: that is, doubling drilling effort is expected to eventually bring something like double the energy resources to market. In reality, the historical data give overwhelming and unequivocal evidence that the energy return on drilling in the United States will certainly be far less than this. For generations now, the energy return on increased drilling has been a quantitative relationship of sharply diminishing returns with increased drilling effort. In fact, for the last several decades, the relationship of drilling effort and energy return has been so unfavorable that there is little evidence that even vastly increased drilling will significantly increase U.S. domestic energy production. This stark fact must be incorporated into any strategic energy planning. To do otherwise is to put hope entirely before experience.

Conclusions



The macro relationship of drilling and energy production is quite clear, and can be summarized in three main points:

1. There is very little chance that even a great increase in drilling will significantly increase US domestic oil production. Given the extraordinary strategic and economic importance of oil, this a critically important point.

2. There is more hope for natural gas, with production likely to continue increasing for some time. However, unless you are a true believer that we are in a completely "new era", the statistical relationship of diminishing returns on increased drilling activity is likely to also sharply constrain the gains possible in the domestic production of gas. Whatever your optimism level regarding drilling, it is a robust conclusion that any significant increase in domestic energy supplies from drilling—or perhaps, more realistically, any deceleration of the rate of decline of domestic energy supplies from oil and gas that we have seen for nearly four decades—is likely to be dominated by the production of natural gas, far more than oil.

3. The reason for the diminishing returns on drilling effort is that the geologists know their business. Historically, the overall energy we gain from domestic drilling has shown essentially no response to increased drilling effort. This is because periods of high drilling activity generally open only marginal resources that do surprisingly little to increase overall national production.



These three points, which follow from a macroscopic look at drilling and production data, are important to keep in mind—for government policy makers, corporations, and investors—when deciding how to allocate capital for future energy needs.

The Optimist’s View - Could We Be In a New Era?



From the historical data, there is essentially zero evidence to suggest that even a very large increase in domestic drilling will bring substantially increased energy returns. The United States is unlikely to ever gain enough new domestic energy supplies from ramping up drilling to significantly change its dependence on imported energy; not at current rates of consumption.

The Technology Gambit - my words

But there is an optimistic view that, to play devil’s advocate, is at least worth characterizing. This optimistic view does, however, depend on the usually unjustified assumption that we are in a new era, where previous constraints no longer apply. This "new era" argument rests on the notion that technological advances like widespread horizontal (and other directional) drilling, deepwater gas production techniques, and other advances in oil and gas recovery—all of which can make formerly uneconomic gas reserves profitably recoverable—have substantially changed the rules of the game. There is a cultural element to this putative "new era" in the oil patch.

mjh345
12-23-2010, 10:39 AM
I know conservatives want to take us back in time, the question is, do they want to go back to the 1920's or back to pre 1916 levels?


If I get a vote then by all means I vote lets go pre 1916!!!

I say this not all tongue in cheek. Let's eliminate the IRS, and go to a VAT, consuption tax, flat tax or something simpler and more efficient

david gibson
12-23-2010, 10:42 AM
We started running out of gas the day Francis Drake struck oil in Titusville, Pa. The question is WHEN will we run out? As far as I know, most estimates have not taken into account the exploding demands that India and China are creating.

francis drake discovered oil in titusville, pa?

did you forget your medicine today??? ;-) j/k

it was edwin drake, and he just is credited with the first commercial oil well.

<<<<<<<

"347 Oil wells are drilled in China up to 800 feet deep using bits attached to bamboo poles.
1264 Mining of natural oil seeps in medieval Persia is witnessed by Marco Polo on his travels through Baku.
1500’s Seep oil collected in the Carpathian Mountains of Poland is used to light street lamps.
1594 Oil wells are hand dug at Baku, Persia up to 35 meters (115 feet) deep.
1735 Oil sands are mined and the oil extracted at Pechelbronn field in Alsace, France.
1815 Oil is produced in United States as an undesirable by-product from brine wells in Pennsylvania.
1848 First modern oil well is drilled in Asia, on the Aspheron Peninsula north-east of Baku, by Russian engineer F.N. Semyenov.
1854 First oil wells in Europe are drilled 30- to 50-meters deep at Bóbrka, Poland by Ignacy Lukasiewicz.

Oil historians in the USA give credit for the first modern commercial oil well to Colonel Edwin L. Drake. His well reached a depth of 22m (72-ft). It was drilled in “Oil Creek” near the town of Titusville, slightly east of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA and started producing oil on August 28,1859. There were no automobiles in those days; the main market for petroleum was for medicine. It was called Rock Oil and sold for about $40 a barrel, which is about the same as a barrel of oil costs today, so it would have been worth a lot of money in 1859."
>>>>>>>>>

mjh345
12-23-2010, 10:52 AM
.
. It was called Rock Oil and sold for about $40 a barrel, which is about the same as a barrel of oil costs today, so it would have been worth a lot of money in 1859."
>>>>>>>>>

I wish oil cost $40 today

depittydawg
12-23-2010, 11:01 AM
That may sound great on paper but unfortunately there are NO efficient alternative power sources here now. Yes we should be striving towards that but manipulation by the administration(or those this administration put in power) to raise gas prices is a great case for getting government out of the business of oil. Alternative energy isn't a reality no matter what libs would like us to think.

Two things will always weigh heavy on Government subsidizing in a modern world. Energy and Transportation. These are fundamental requirements for economic activity. US government policy is NOT the reason for escalating energy costs. In fact, it dwarfs the actual costs of energy delivered by all means of production. Here is a good graphic on what that impact it.
http://awesome.good.is/transparency/web/1012/subsidize-this/flat.html

Here is a pretty good analysis of what the true cost of gasoline might be.
THE REAL PRICE OF GASOLINE
125
Low estimate: $5.60/gallon
High estimate: $15.14/gallon
W/price spike: $15.37/gallon
http://www.icta.org/doc/Real%20Price%20of%20Gasoline.pdf

Buzz
12-23-2010, 11:19 AM
Two things will always weigh heavy on Government subsidizing in a modern world. Energy and Transportation. These are fundamental requirements for economic activity. US government policy is NOT the reason for escalating energy costs. In fact, it dwarfs the actual costs of energy delivered by all means of production. Here is a good graphic on what that impact it.
http://awesome.good.is/transparency/web/1012/subsidize-this/flat.html

Here is a pretty good analysis of what the true cost of gasoline might be.
THE REAL PRICE OF GASOLINE
125
Low estimate: $5.60/gallon
High estimate: $15.14/gallon
W/price spike: $15.37/gallon
http://www.icta.org/doc/Real%20Price%20of%20Gasoline.pdf



I would like to see how they arrive at those subsidy numbers. For example, do subsidies to oil include military spending to keep oil shipments flowing around the globe?

Cody Covey
12-23-2010, 12:40 PM
I see. So I guess my job and my paycheck that I cash every to weeks isn't real then? Alternative energy isn't the answer today. But it is under way. And it will become more of an alternative as time marches on. Meanwhile, it isn't the government that controls the price of oil / gas. It is the oil industry. There is plenty of oil out there available. There is plenty of refining capacity. Why are they running at 50%?

You quoted me and yet still had to make shit up to make a point? Where did I say there are no alternative energy jobs? I said there are no efficient options. I then said that we need to be pursuing making these better more efficient options.

The fact remains that saying we shouldn't drill or refine more oil because we should be using alternative energies makes no sense because those energies aren't available in a way that makes it a viable option.

depittydawg
12-23-2010, 01:43 PM
You quoted me and yet still had to make shit up to make a point? Where did I say there are no alternative energy jobs? I said there are no efficient options. I then said that we need to be pursuing making these better more efficient options.

The fact remains that saying we shouldn't drill or refine more oil because we should be using alternative energies makes no sense because those energies aren't available in a way that makes it a viable option.

Now who's making shit up. I never said we shouldn't drill. On the contrary, drill to your hearts content. It won't make a bit of difference. That's what the data says.

road kill
12-23-2010, 01:44 PM
Now who's making shit up. I never said we shouldn't drill. On the contrary, drill to your hearts content. It won't make a bit of difference. That's what the data says.
Then why is the price of crude going up???


RK

depittydawg
12-23-2010, 01:52 PM
Then why is the price of crude going up???


RK

From what I have learned and heard, I'd say the price of crude is pretty much dictated by supply side manipulation by OPEC. There is little that can be done in the near or long term by changing domestic production rates. That's what the data indicates. Since there is little we can do to impact the market price of crude, the biggest challenge for America is to reduce consumption rates.

Buzz
12-23-2010, 01:53 PM
Then why is the price of crude going up???


RK


Because a lot of people think the price is going to go up and they are buying futures either to make money off of selling the oil later at a higher price, or they are hedging against paying more later on.

road kill
12-23-2010, 01:54 PM
From what I have learned and heard, I'd say the price of crude is pretty much dictated by supply side manipulation by OPEC. There is little that can be done in the near or long term by changing domestic production rates. That's what the data indicates. Since there is little we can do to impact the market price of crude, the biggest challenge for America is to reduce consumption rates.


So, if we drilled, wouldn't we solve that supply side issue?

In fact, wouldn't the mere threat of drilling cause those greedy bastards to let more crude flow to market?

I thought so..........

RK

menmon
12-23-2010, 02:01 PM
It's great for Houston! Us Houstonians love it when gas prices get above $3.

subroc
12-23-2010, 02:39 PM
From what I have learned and heard, I'd say the price of crude is pretty much dictated by supply side manipulation by OPEC. There is little that can be done in the near or long term by changing domestic production rates. That's what the data indicates. Since there is little we can do to impact the market price of crude, the biggest challenge for America is to reduce consumption rates.

why? if nothing can be done anyway why reduce use?

Cody Covey
12-23-2010, 03:35 PM
How would OPEC's manipulation affect domestic prices beyond what we buy from foreigners? Wouldn't our domestic oil be completely outside the scope of OPEC, or am I completely ignorant on the issue?

Buzz
12-23-2010, 03:59 PM
How would OPEC's manipulation affect domestic prices beyond what we buy from foreigners? Wouldn't our domestic oil be completely outside the scope of OPEC, or am I completely ignorant on the issue?


Most people don't realize that oil produced domestically doesn't just get sold here. I goes onto an almost completely integrated world market just like almost every other drop that gets produced world wide. The big oil producers are international companies...

If you're bored sometime, this is a good read. The figures he refers to in the text are at the end of the document.

http://nordhaus.econ.yale.edu/documents/iew_052909.pdf


A really simplified look at it was done by Rachel Maddow. It's entertaining, and she slaps both sides equally. I don't agree with everything she says here but she's on the right track.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c0--Q9_KmAY


Another interesting factoid is that US oil use has pretty much peaked and is projected to gradually decrease for all of time. On the other hand, oil use in places like China and India is exploding. I believe that the sensitivity of oil prices to demand and it's effect on transportation costs will put a sever limit or crimp in a "global economy" going forward. I'm probably completely off base...

Marvin S
12-23-2010, 05:28 PM
http://i108.photobucket.com/albums/n3/davebezesky/1965taxrates.jpg

My memory didn't serve me well - but here are some figures from 1965 tax return - on $10,812 of total income paid $1,133.60 in federal income tax. Itemized with $109 in charitable deducts, RE tax 219.20 on a new 3 bdrm 1 1/2 bath house (20K value), State income tax $221. HC was not an item, we paid the bill. In fact, the price of HC has been driven up by having someone else pay for it.

How about a FICA chart?


You can get all the tax rate information you need right in this nifty publication!:cool:

http://www.taxfoundation.org/files/fed_individual_rate_history-20101220.pdf


When I get some free time, I was going to use consumer price index information to translate those tax brackets in 1965 into today's dollars. It should be interesting, at least to me.

CPI info here:

http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/data/CPIAUCSL.txt

I know conservatives want to take us back in time, the question is, do they want to go back to the 1920's or back to pre 1916 levels?

Just how do you know that, I personally want a tax system that doesn't have the government at the time picking the winners & losers. I don't believe that hard to understand, & I do consider myself a fiscal conservative.


I say this not all tongue in cheek. Let's eliminate the IRS, and go to a VAT, consuption tax, flat tax or something simpler and more efficient

Flat tax is most fair & least subject to manipulation.


This "new era" argument rests on the notion that technological advances like widespread horizontal (and other directional) drilling, deepwater gas production techniques, and other advances in oil and gas recovery—all of which can make formerly uneconomic gas reserves profitably recoverable—have substantially changed the rules of the game. There is a cultural element to this putative "new era" in the oil patch.

Dippity - I have a little bit of training in this arena. There are 3 levels of reserves - Proven, Probable & Possible with corresponding tax rates, Proven being highest rate.

It's somewhat of a chess game, your kind want to place areas off limits & have succeeded, my kind believe that production is held back to gain negotiating advantage in order to force those areas open. Why would a major make a 2 bil investment knowing that throwing an area open by buying off the correct bureaucrat would make their investment look stupid?

But in the meantime, I'm playing, look at DNR which I have owned since it was a struggling infant, took a lot out @ $4 gas but still own considerable with a cost basis of $,98. & they take a lot of that nasty CO2 off the books. I personally hope gas goes to $5, just watch the economic engine shut down then. But before that I'd like to ID those who have these poorly thought out theories so they can be the ones last in the soup lines :razz:.

Uncle Bill
12-23-2010, 05:45 PM
Wouldn't that be a hoot, Marvin?

"But before that I'd like to ID those who have these poorly thought out theories so they can be the ones last in the soup lines :razz:."

That goes for so many of the left's ideas...gun control the most obvious.

Or the 'community organizer' from planned parenthood having to make a choice about the fetus in her womb.

Or the atheist in a foxhole under bombardment.

Or the SFN crowd that just keeps demanding from the providers, well after the providers can no longer comply...ie the students in England and California...etc.etc.etc.

And they wonder why Atlas is shrugging?

UB

Mike W.
12-23-2010, 06:04 PM
You guys need to not fight it and buy some energy stocks.

Uncle Bill
12-23-2010, 06:24 PM
You guys need to not fight it and buy some energy stocks.


I believe Marvin is still in that game, but I've long ago bailed on the entire stock market. I've lost a small fortune in oil, yen, euros, and all the other commodities that require constant vigilance. The dot-com era was also a wake-up call for me. Hard to find a reliably honest broker that wasn't more interested in what he was making. They rank right up there with trial lawyers in my experiences.

Settled in with a pocket full of 'rands and leafs back when they were being spat upon...around that $350 range. Also ventured into several bags of pre '65 silver when it was going for a couple of grand. So my kids might get into some of my retirement bucks after all, which will come as a big surprise to all of us because I always told them I'm spending their inheritance. Besides, they enjoy these family get togethers around the holidays. We haul out the coins and play Texas hold-em for fun. But I've recently gotten more demanding of the count when we finish.:rolleyes:

UB

zeus3925
12-23-2010, 07:14 PM
How about a FICA chart?


Here ya go, Marv.

http://www.ssa.gov/oact/progdata/taxRates.html

depittydawg
12-23-2010, 09:19 PM
So, if we drilled, wouldn't we solve that supply side issue?

In fact, wouldn't the mere threat of drilling cause those greedy bastards to let more crude flow to market?

I thought so..........

RK

Drilling only solves the supply side problem if you can extract enough oil. The data suggest this is not possible.
http://www.ensec.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=166:can-us-drill-its-way-to-energy-security&catid=90:energysecuritydecember08&Itemid=334

Can The United States Drill Its Way to Energy Security?
SUNDAY, 14 DECEMBER 2008 00:00 TIMOTHY D. KAILING
Those who advocate increased oil and gas drilling generally, and quite reasonably, assume that increased drilling will result in significantly increased production of oil and gas. Drilling is certainly one of the rate-limiting steps to the eventual production of oil and gas. But beyond this crude notion that more is better, the innumerate naďveté of many energy projections is staggering.

In fact, many drilling advocates implicitly assume that the energy gained from increased drilling will be roughly linear: that is, doubling drilling effort is expected to eventually bring something like double the energy resources to market. In reality, the historical data give overwhelming and unequivocal evidence that the energy return on drilling in the United States will certainly be far less than this. For generations now, the energy return on increased drilling has been a quantitative relationship of sharply diminishing returns with increased drilling effort. In fact, for the last several decades, the relationship of drilling effort and energy return has been so unfavorable that there is little evidence that even vastly increased drilling will significantly increase U.S. domestic energy production. This stark fact must be incorporated into any strategic energy planning. To do otherwise is to put hope entirely before experience.

Why is There Essentially No Correlation Between Drilling and Energy Production?

But why, then, is there essentially no apparent energy return on increased drilling in the US historical data in the last half century?

The reason is that in a significantly depleted, "mature" petroleum region like the United States, there are severely diminishing returns on increased drilling effort. Why this is the case is really quite simple: petroleum geologists, apparently, know their business. For a nonrenewable resource, a relationship of severely diminishing returns is exactly the relationship expected if geologists are generally able to prioritize the exploitation of both new and existing reserves. In times of low energy prices, the base rate of drilling is low, but it is concentrated on the best prospects, and so the return on drilling effort is greater. In contrast, when high prices encourage more drilling, they generally open up relatively small, inaccessible, and otherwise marginal reserves and, because of this, increased drilling has remarkably little effect on the regional production numbers. This means that, for a significantly depleted region like the United States, increased drilling has very little impact at all on the strategic energy picture.

Gerry Clinchy
12-23-2010, 09:24 PM
Even more critical for some people right now is the cost of heating oil. In recent years heating oil has been almost the same price as gasoline.

Heard an ad on the radio yesterday ... advising people to reduce their thermostats to 65 during the day, and 60 while sleeping. They said every degree you reduce your thermostat will save you 2% on your electric bill. People used to keep their homes at 70 ... that would save about $80 if they kept it at 60 instead. Not sure that's a lot of consolation to people who use electric heat to the tune of $300/mo.

Wonder if Al Gore is wearing his sweater and reducing his heat to 65?

Franco
12-24-2010, 06:30 AM
Most people don't realize that oil produced domestically doesn't just get sold here. I goes onto an almost completely integrated world market just like almost every other drop that gets produced world wide. The big oil producers are international companies...




That's not completely accurate. There are a number of independent domestic oil companies that sell directly to Texas and Louisisna refineries at market price. These are companies with under 3 billion market cap that specialize in drilling in the gulf. These smaller oil companies are also the ones doing 100% of the drilling on land for oil, something the big conglomerates aren't interested in.

Franco
12-24-2010, 06:35 AM
It's great for Houston! Us Houstonians love it when gas prices get above $3.



Same here in Lafayette except for when the production is done internationally. It is the smaller oil companies in Hosuton that are taking it in the shorts. Houston has a number of companies that deal internationally. However, like La. there are a number that produce only locally and they are being prevented from drilling as well. Not to mention the vast layoffs south of Houston. Your area is experiencing the biggest layoffs since the mid-80's.

If you think Obama and Salazar are doing your area a favor, you are mistaken.

Buzz
12-24-2010, 09:50 AM
That's not completely accurate. There are a number of independent domestic oil companies that sell directly to Texas and Louisisna refineries at market price. These are companies with under 3 billion market cap that specialize in drilling in the gulf. These smaller oil companies are also the ones doing 100% of the drilling on land for oil, something the big conglomerates aren't interested in.


If you read the sentence of mine that you quoted you will note that I stated that oil goes onto an almost completely integrated oil market.

If you read the paper I put a link to about how oil markets work, you'll find this statement from the author:


I begin with some technical details. In this discussion, I will consider the polar case of a 100 percent integrated world market and recognize that it is oversimplified and only 99.8 percent accurate. However, 99.8 percent is pretty close to 100 percent, so the analysis of the pure case is very close to the more complete truth.

Those smaller driller/producers you speak of. Do they sell at a price that is significantly different from what they can get on the world market? If not, how is it that they are not working as part of that market? Granted, the idea of a completely integrated market leaves out nationalized oil markets like the one in Venezuela, but with the size of the world market, how does leaving them out change anything. The USA doesn't have a nationalized industry and that's why more production here has little effect on what we actually see in prices at the pump here. The effect that these small producers have on the world market is less than the effect that a gnat has when perched on an elephant's arse.

I wonder if anyone can answer a question for me. How is it in any way an advantage to the oil industry to greatly increase exploration and production in a way that pushes down the price of a finite commodity? There is only so much of the stuff, so in the end, lower prices just lower their profits and decreased the amount that they can ultimately make on that finite amount of stuff. The same goes for oil refiners. How is it in any way in their best interest to invest in vastly increased refining capacity? If the laws of supply and demand actually govern, then how is it their interest to spend money that in the short term will only reduce the price of what they produce, thereby reducing their profits?

Bueller?

It's in the shorter term interest of an individual company to have the capacity to produce more when there is a shortage in the market and they could actually sell more now instead of someone else producing and selling it. But is it in the interest of the overall market?

menmon
12-24-2010, 09:57 AM
You guys need to not fight it and buy some energy stocks.

Can't lose owning Exxon! You need to look at the retirement homes of my buddies that either worked at Exxon and bought the company stock or the ones that listened to their buddies and bought the stock.

Buzz
12-24-2010, 10:01 AM
Can't lose owning Exxon! You need to look at the retirement homes of my buddies that either worked at Exxon and bought the company stock or the ones that listened to their buddies and bought the stock.

I have owned Exxon for years, probably will be holding it and buying more with my dividend as we go...

depittydawg
12-24-2010, 10:12 AM
I have owned Exxon for years, probably will be holding it and buying more with my dividend as we go...

Chevron has been one of the best money makers for me since I started investing. It is my preferred oil stock. Although I used to buy and sell Apache a lot. Wish I would have just held it over the last decade... :(

Franco
12-24-2010, 10:31 AM
If you read the sentence of mine that you quoted you will note that I stated that oil goes onto an almost completely integrated oil market.

If you read the paper I put a link to about how oil markets work, you'll find this statement from the author:



Those smaller driller/producers you speak of. Do they sell at a price that is significantly different from what they can get on the world market? If not, how is it that they are not working as part of that market? Granted, the idea of a completely integrated market leaves out nationalized oil markets like the one in Venezuela, but with the size of the world market, how does leaving them out change anything. The USA doesn't have a nationalized industry and that's why more production here has little effect on what we actually see in prices at the pump here. The effect that these small producers have on the world market is less than the effect that a gnat has when perched on an elephant's arse.

I wonder if anyone can answer a question for me. How is it in any way an advantage to the oil industry to greatly increase exploration and production in a way that pushes down the price of a finite commodity? There is only so much of the stuff, so in the end, lower prices just lower their profits and decreased the amount that they can ultimately make on that finite amount of stuff. The same goes for oil refiners. How is it in any way in their best interest to invest in vastly increased refining capacity? If the laws of supply and demand actually govern, then how is it their interest to spend money that in the short term will only reduce the price of what they produce, thereby reducing their profits?

Bueller?

It's in the shorter term interest of an individual company to have the capacity to produce more when there is a shortage in the market and they could actually sell more now instead of someone else producing and selling it. But is it in the interest of the overall market?

Then why even bother drilling domesticlly, why not just export the entire industry?

With the USA cutting production it only makes sense for OPEC to cut production and raise prices.

Read the current WSJ online, there is an article about possible $4 plus per gallon by Spring. Want to guess which political party will get the blame for it? Could be the one cutting USA production!

All the while adding to unempolyment by elimination great paying jobs. Jobs that create energy for the here and now! There is an infinite supply but we haven't gotten anywhere near the end of that supply. Until we do, we don't need to raise the cost of living by 10-20% in skyrocketing gasoline & diesel cost.

Buzz
12-24-2010, 11:13 AM
Don't worry. The world economy cannot sustain $4/gal gas. Like I said last time it hit $4, the economy will collapse and so will oil prices.

When gas was $4/gallon I was out shopping for a pick-up with a big V8 in it. Everyone told me I was crazy. I got a $40k truck for $27k and only had to put $4 gas in it for a summer, next thing you knew it was down closer to $2.

Buzz
12-30-2010, 10:37 AM
Just ran across this interesting information about prices and demand:


World oil demand declined in Q3-2010, in line with the slower pace of the recovery and efforts in China to improve energy efficiency. Global demand increased 0.4mb/d, just somewhat stronger than its average increase of 0.33mb/d during 2000-2007. For the year as a whole, oil demand is projected to average 87.3mb/d, about 1% above the 2007 pre-crisis peak. Despite the slower demand growth and still ample spare capacity, the price of oil has risen—from $76/bbl in Q3-2010 to $81/bbl (as of October 28, simple average of Brent, Dubai and WTI)—partly reflecting the depreciation of the US-dollar and financial investor interest.


http://blogs.worldbank.org/prospects/category/tags/world-oil-demand

caryalsobrook
12-30-2010, 12:52 PM
Don't worry. The world economy cannot sustain $4/gal gas. Like I said last time it hit $4, the economy will collapse and so will oil prices.

When gas was $4/gallon I was out shopping for a pick-up with a big V8 in it. Everyone told me I was crazy. I got a $40k truck for $27k and only had to put $4 gas in it for a summer, next thing you knew it was down closer to $2.

Simple question. Do you think that the US economy can sustain $4.00 gas today and if not do you think alternative energy TODAY will sustain a healthy US economy?

Furthermore given $4.oo gas, who do you think will have the best economy, those who produce the oil or those who either can't or won't produce the oil?

Buzz
12-30-2010, 01:22 PM
Simple question. Do you think that the US economy can sustain $4.00 gas today and if not do you think alternative energy TODAY will sustain a healthy US economy?

Furthermore given $4.oo gas, who do you think will have the best economy, those who produce the oil or those who either can't or won't produce the oil?



My answers to questions #1 and #2 is no. Although I've been associated with the energy business most of my life and I believe that there is much more promise for alternative energies in the future. One big problem is that with current technologies there is only one fuel that is useful for transportation. The greatest advantage to plug in hybrids etc is that it brings other sources into the mix for transportation applications. Although I spent a number of years designing electric drive systems for vehicles in an earlier life, I remain very skeptical but hopeful.

I'd prefer you go first on the question #3. Who profits most in the oil producing economies?

caryalsobrook
12-30-2010, 01:59 PM
My answers to questions #1 and #2 is no. Although I've been associated with the energy business most of my life and I believe that there is much more promise for alternative energies in the future. One big problem is that with current technologies there is only one fuel that is useful for transportation. The greatest advantage to plug in hybrids etc is that it brings other sources into the mix for transportation applications. Although I spent a number of years designing electric drive systems for vehicles in an earlier life, I remain very skeptical but hopeful.

I'd prefer you go first on the question #3. Who profits most in the oil producing economies?

I certainly would agree with your answers to #1 and #2. The only problem is defining the length of "future" Whoever can do that will profit the most.

As to your squestion of who will profit the most, I can think of two answers. Those that produce, adapt and adjust to the situation the best will profit the most. Those that don't won''t.

I will give you a quote that produces a different result. "I had rather see everybody poor than see someone rich" This country has to make the choice.

Franco
12-30-2010, 02:33 PM
I think we can all agree that our Energy Policy has been a complete failure.

Biggest failure is that we have had zero effective long term planning in weening the USA off of fossil fuels. For instance, we CNG yet here we are in 2011 and there is no availability to consumers in the vast parts of our country.

We have also failed as consumers with our love affair with gas guzzlers.

Caryalsobrook is correct; that those that produce, adapt and adjust to the situation will profit the most.

Just one reason I think the current administrations hostillity towards oil companies is dangerous. Oil companies will just operate in the countries that appriciate what they do for thier economies.

Buzz
12-30-2010, 02:49 PM
Just one reason I think the current administrations hostillity towards oil companies is dangerous. Oil companies will just operate in the countries that appriciate what they do for thier economies.

I don't have any illusions of them being as friendly as the Bush Administration, but the BP spill sure didn't help matters. And, after 8 years of Bush, look what happened in 2007/2008.

T. Mac
12-30-2010, 03:52 PM
And if the US economy can withstand $4/gal gas, can it withstand $5
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/40854459#40854459

Franco
12-30-2010, 03:57 PM
I don't have any illusions of them being as friendly as the Bush Administration, but the BP spill sure didn't help matters. And, after 8 years of Bush, look what happened in 2007/2008.

Buzz, elaborate on the Bush 07/08. As I recall, the price at the pump back then was around $2.20 per gallon.

The BP leak is a political football. The press grossly over-estimated the amount spilled and the effects of the dispersants.

My barber, who I saw this monring fishes the Grand Isle area. The area hardest hit by the leak. He said that there is no evidence of any leak and that fishing has never been better. And, for all the thousands of fish that have been tested, there are no traces on contamination!

troy schwab
12-30-2010, 04:13 PM
Just ran across this interesting information about prices and demand:




http://blogs.worldbank.org/prospects/category/tags/world-oil-demand

Buzz,
You are surprised by this....... I told you this was coming back when we discussed inflation, and you pretty much said I was crazy. Guess a big fat I told you so is in order...... and BTW, this is INFLATION.... just the start of it. Hold your purses ladies!

Buzz
12-30-2010, 04:20 PM
Buzz, elaborate on the Bush 07/08. As I recall, the price at the pump back then was around $2.20 per gallon.



Here is what I was able to dig up on the internets. Go to the link and scroll down to chart #4 for a graph of oil price vs. time. Did you think the big spike in oil prices came after that unfriendly Obama administration came into office? I remember the time frame well, as I was shopping for my truck at the time.

http://www.fin.gov.on.ca/en/budget/fallstatement/2008/08fs-annex2.html


Oil prices fell from a record intra-day high of $147.27 US per barrel on July 11 to less than $70 US per barrel in mid-October 2008. Weaker demand from Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries is expected to continue to be more than offset by strong consumption in non-OECD countries. Limited global surplus capacity will likely keep oil markets relatively tight and oil prices vulnerable to major supply disruptions over the forecast horizon. A significant amount of volatility still exists in oil markets, and analysts’ projections for 2009 range from a high of $130 US per barrel to a low of $78 US.

caryalsobrook
12-30-2010, 04:24 PM
Nice discussion abd nobody calling anyone stupid or idiots:)

Let me ask this question. How does it help the environment or the US to send 600 billion a year to the Arab countries for oil when we don't even drill for our own here.

Oh a second question. Who can justify the Dept. of Energy to the tune of 16 bill a year when its primary mission when it was created during the Carter Admin. was to decrease our dependence on foreign oil. Just for clarity sake our dependence went from roughly 25% to about 70%.

Buzz
12-30-2010, 04:27 PM
Buzz,
You are surprised by this....... I told you this was coming back when we discussed inflation, and you pretty much said I was crazy. Guess a big fat I told you so is in order...... and BTW, this is INFLATION.... just the start of it. Hold your purses ladies!


Nope, fuel and food prices don't figure into inflation calculations, although high fuel cost will drive up other prices. I still think you're crazy, your term not mine.;-)

Cody Covey
12-30-2010, 05:47 PM
Nope, fuel and food prices don't figure into inflation calculations, although high fuel cost will drive up other prices. I still think you're crazy, your term not mine.;-)
Don't you think there is a reason those aren't calculated. Correct me if I'm wrong but they used to be?

caryalsobrook
12-30-2010, 05:50 PM
Nope, fuel and food prices don't figure into inflation calculations, although high fuel cost will drive up other prices. I still think you're crazy, your term not mine.;-)

I never have looked how they calculated inflation. Interesting that they don't figure in food and fuel. I wonder how they justify that. Food, shelter, utilities and transportation, the 4 most important items in a family's budget, all highly dependent on fuel.
You know how they came up with that Buzz?

david gibson
12-30-2010, 06:15 PM
It's great for Houston! Us Houstonians love it when gas prices get above $3.

we do? i dont. not all of us are milking their incomes from obscene oil co. profits. i have my own business and have to watch every penny. i. prefer low oil prices thank you

imagine that. a liberal excited over huge oil profits. LOL! actually, not LOL. just SAD.

Franco
12-30-2010, 06:35 PM
Here is what I was able to dig up on the internets. Go to the link and scroll down to chart #4 for a graph of oil price vs. time. Did you think the big spike in oil prices came after that unfriendly Obama administration came into office? I remember the time frame well, as I was shopping for my truck at the time.

http://www.fin.gov.on.ca/en/budget/fallstatement/2008/08fs-annex2.html

Buzz, that link doesn't show the cost per barrel pre 2008.

The price per barrel was highest and out of control in the late Summer/Fall prior to the Presidential election. Also, the price of a barrel doesn't directly affect nor dictate the price at the pump because the price is driven by speculators. Many of which lost billions buying futures at $127. per barrel.

Price at the pump was highest nationally right after Katrina in late 05. Went up to $4. per gallon for short while based on the fact that half of the USA production is in the Gulf Of Mexico.

By 2006-07 prices at the pump varied from $2.20 - $2.60. per gallon. Then just prior to the election, everything went bonkers. Price per barrel went through the roof but, gas was never anywhere near $3. per gallon! The markets were in chaos; financial, energy, auto industry. As if orchestrated by a clandestine cartel of investors wanting to control the election or perfect storm.

This is the first time since late 2005 that the price at the pump has reached $3. per gallon. And, it is not stopping there!

Will complete financial chaos give the Federal Government more power? I hope not!

Our policy is so stupid. We have an abundance of oil to drill for. If the damn Feds weren't so greedy and misdirected, we would already have an alternative to gasoline! Our government has clearly demonstrated that they are not serious about making alternative fuel a reality! They would rather send a couple of hundred-million home in pork projects, buying votes than doing what is right or smart.

And, if anyone wants a simple answer, this administration is at war with the oil producers. What do you think thier policy of not issuing new drilling permits in the GOM will do to the working man? If we want cheaper gasoline/diesel, we are going to have to drill for it ourselves!

Buzz
12-30-2010, 07:20 PM
Buzz, that link doesn't show the cost per barrel pre 2008.

The price per barrel was highest and out of control in the late Summer/Fall prior to the Presidential election. Also, the price of a barrel doesn't directly affect nor dictate the price at the pump because the price is driven by speculators. Many of which lost billions buying futures at $127. per barrel.

Price at the pump was highest nationally right after Katrina in late 05. Went up to $4. per gallon for short while based on the fact that half of the USA production is in the Gulf Of Mexico.

By 2006-07 prices at the pump varied from $2.20 - $2.60. per gallon. Then just prior to the election, everything went bonkers. Price per barrel went through the roof but, gas was never anywhere near $3. per gallon! The markets were in chaos; financial, energy, auto industry. As if orchestrated by a clandestine cartel of investors wanting to control the election.

This is the first time since late 2005 that the price at the pump has reached $3. per gallon. And, it is not stopping there!

Will complete financial chaos give the Federal Government more power? I hope not!

Our policy is so stupid. We have an abundance of oil to drill for. If the damn Feds weren't so greedy and misdirected, we would already have an alternative to gasoline! Our government has clearly demonstrated that they are not serious about making alternative fuel a reality! They would rather send a couple of hundred-million home in pork projects, buying votes than doing what is right or smart.

And, if anyone wants a simple answer, this administration is a war with the oil producers. What do you think thier policy of not issuing new drilling permits in the GOM will do to the working man? If we want cheaper gasoline/diesel, we are going to have to drill for it ourselves!

You have to scroll down to figure 4 to see prices/barrel pre-2008. Here it is:
Now I'm going to have to find the national average gas price chart, I bet one exists. I clearly remember paying $100 to fill my 26 gallon tank. It was OVER $4/gallon here in South Dakota. But right now I'm going to go watch a movie with the family before continuing with this thread. Both Democrats and Republicans have been giving lip service to getting off the oil since I can remember. But I have only been paying attention since I got my driver's license back in 1976.


http://www.fin.gov.on.ca/en/budget/fallstatement/2008/images/annex2-chart4.gif


Edit: That only took a couple of minutes. Here is a link to average US gas prices over the last 6 years. It looks like they peaked at about $3 just after the hurricane.

http://www.GasBuddy.com/gb_retail_price_chart.aspx?city1=USA Average&city2=&city3=&crude=n&tme=72&units=us

Buzz
12-30-2010, 07:23 PM
I never have looked how they calculated inflation. Interesting that they don't figure in food and fuel. I wonder how they justify that. Food, shelter, utilities and transportation, the 4 most important items in a family's budget, all highly dependent on fuel.
You know how they came up with that Buzz?


It has been awhile, but as I recall the reason was that food and energy costs are too volatile. Watch the price of tomatoes this winter after the cold weather down south! I suppose this weekend I'll look at my old economics book to see what they say about it. Looks like I'll be snowed in for the last weekend of pheasant season in South Dakota. :(

Here is a plot of %change in commodity prices from the previous year since 1993. We did not see such huge fluctuations in our overall cost of living so there must be some method to their madness.

http://www.princeton.edu/~pkrugman/commodity_cpi.PNG

Franco
12-30-2010, 08:00 PM
You have to scroll down to figure 4 to see prices/barrel pre-2008. Here it is:
Now I'm going to have to find the national average gas price chart, I bet one exists. I clearly remember paying $100 to fill my 26 gallon tank. It was OVER $4/gallon here in South Dakota. But right now I'm going to go watch a movie with the family before continuing with this thread. Both Democrats and Republicans have been giving lip service to getting off the oil since I can remember. But I have only been paying attention since I got my driver's license back in 1976.


http://www.fin.gov.on.ca/en/budget/fallstatement/2008/images/annex2-chart4.gif


Edit: That only took a couple of minutes. Here is a link to average US gas prices over the last 6 years. It looks like they peaked at about $3 just after the hurricane.

http://www.GasBuddy.com/gb_retail_price_chart.aspx?city1=USA Average&city2=&city3=&crude=n&tme=72&units=us

When you find that graph, you will see that the price at the pump does not match the cost per barrel.

Again, the price at the pump was the highest in September 05 because of the concerns for damaged refineries located within the path of Katrina. It took another short-term leap prior to the election but, not as high as 9/05.

The timing by OPEC to cut production and raise prices comes at a time when our Feds won't issue any new drilling permits in the GOM! An area we get half of our oil production from.

I do expect Obama to start issuing new permits prior to the next election so that his bad policy won't be used against him and it will sound great to his Hip Hop base. He will use percentages like; we've incresed new drilling production in the gulf by 500%! Well, when there has been zero new production and now you are allowing some, those percentages are deceiving!

Price at the pump has to continue going up with the current policy.

mjh345
12-30-2010, 08:29 PM
Buzz, that link doesn't show the cost per barrel pre 2008.

The price per barrel was highest and out of control in the late Summer/Fall prior to the Presidential election. Also, the price of a barrel doesn't directly affect nor dictate the price at the pump because the price is driven by speculators. Many of which lost billions buying futures at $127. per barrel.

Price at the pump was highest nationally right after Katrina in late 05. Went up to $4. per gallon for short while based on the fact that half of the USA production is in the Gulf Of Mexico.

By 2006-07 prices at the pump varied from $2.20 - $2.60. per gallon. Then just prior to the election, everything went bonkers. Price per barrel went through the roof but, gas was never anywhere near $3. per gallon! The markets were in chaos; financial, energy, auto industry. As if orchestrated by a clandestine cartel of investors wanting to control the election or perfect storm.

This is the first time since late 2005 that the price at the pump has reached $3. per gallon. And, it is not stopping there!

Will complete financial chaos give the Federal Government more power? I hope not!

Our policy is so stupid. We have an abundance of oil to drill for. If the damn Feds weren't so greedy and misdirected, we would already have an alternative to gasoline! Our government has clearly demonstrated that they are not serious about making alternative fuel a reality! They would rather send a couple of hundred-million home in pork projects, buying votes than doing what is right or smart.

And, if anyone wants a simple answer, this administration is at war with the oil producers. What do you think thier policy of not issuing new drilling permits in the GOM will do to the working man? If we want cheaper gasoline/diesel, we are going to have to drill for it ourselves!

Franco your memory of price at the pump is seriously flawed

Franco
12-30-2010, 09:06 PM
Franco your memory of price at the pump is seriously flawed



Show me;-)

Buzz
12-30-2010, 09:19 PM
Show me;-)

The link is under the red text in my post above. You missed it I guess. It's under the price/barrel curve for crude.

mjh345
12-30-2010, 09:30 PM
Show me;-)

You say this is the first time since 2005 that it has hit $3/gal.
I was driving quite a bit all over the country in 2008 and it was above $3 for most of the year and above $4 for a good part of it.
That is just for starters. Gotta run do a birthday cake thing, but I can give you more later

Franco
12-30-2010, 09:35 PM
The link is under the red text in my post above. You missed it I guess. It's under the price/barrel curve for crude.



That graph supports my comments.

I said the price at the pump spiked before the Presidential election, which it did at $4.12 national average. But within three months was back down to $2.60 per gallon. And, the prices averaged in the range I stated $2.20 -$2.60. Give or take a dime depending on your area.

It also supports what I said about the price at the pump does not go up and down in unison with the price per barrel.

According to your graph, there was no big jump in price right after Kartina. That may have been a gulfcoast situation because we had gas rationing and $4. plus at the pump for the two months after.

Buzz
12-31-2010, 12:48 PM
That graph supports my comments.

I said the price at the pump spiked before the Presidential election, which it did at $4.12 national average. But within three months was back down to $2.60 per gallon. And, the prices averaged in the range I stated $2.20 -$2.60. Give or take a dime depending on your area.

It also supports what I said about the price at the pump does not go up and down in unison with the price per barrel.

According to your graph, there was no big jump in price right after Kartina. That may have been a gulfcoast situation because we had gas rationing and $4. plus at the pump for the two months after.



The price per barrel was highest and out of control in the late Summer/Fall prior to the Presidential election. Also, the price of a barrel doesn't directly affect nor dictate the price at the pump because the price is driven by speculators. Many of which lost billions buying futures at $127. per barrel.

Price at the pump was highest nationally right after Katrina in late 05. Went up to $4. per gallon for short while based on the fact that half of the USA production is in the Gulf Of Mexico.


By 2006-07 prices at the pump varied from $2.20 - $2.60. per gallon. Then just prior to the election, everything went bonkers. Price per barrel went through the roof but, gas was never anywhere near $3. per gallon! The markets were in chaos; financial, energy, auto industry. As if orchestrated by a clandestine cartel of investors wanting to control the election or perfect storm.

This is the first time since late 2005 that the price at the pump has reached $3. per gallon. And, it is not stopping there!



Franco, I hate to be a nit picker, but the reason I went searching for this stuff in the first place is the comments by you that I bolded in the quote above. Prices hit $4 per gallon here before the presidential election, and it was closer to 3 after Katrina. In fact, looking at the curve at the link I provided shows that prices have been in the $3 range a few times. After Katrina the prices had nothing to do with the supply of crude, it was more an issue with refineries being shut down.

Franco
12-31-2010, 01:43 PM
Franco, I hate to be a nit picker, but the reason I went searching for this stuff in the first place is the comments by you that I bolded in the quote above. Prices hit $4 per gallon here before the presidential election, and it was closer to 3 after Katrina. In fact, looking at the curve at the link I provided shows that prices have been in the $3 range a few times. After Katrina the prices had nothing to do with the supply of crude, it was more an issue with refineries being shut down.

And, if you were to read my post, I said the same thing except for the price after Katrina. I was the one that brought up the reference "prior to the Presidential elections"!

However, cost of gas at the pump may not have gone up nationally but across the gulf coast it did after Katrina. We had rationing.

As far as gas averaging above the $3. range, not around here. It's been inthe mid $2's except for prior to the election!

But understand, your agruement is but a smoke screen. The real issue is our energy policy and the people in charge of our energy.

Roger Perry
12-31-2010, 02:56 PM
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- The former president of Shell Oil, John Hofmeister, says Americans could be paying $5 for a gallon of gasoline by 2012.
In an interview with Platt's Energy Week television, Hofmeister predicted gasoline prices will spike as the global demand for oil increases.

http://money.cnn.com/2010/12/27/markets/oil_commodities/index.htm?hpt=T2

Looks like gas prices could be going through the roof in a few years.

Buzz
01-05-2011, 10:25 AM
I thought this was interesting. Listening to Republicans you would never know that drilling activity in the US is at a 23 year high right now.

http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/97786/20110105/gas-prices-gasoline-5-us-oil-drilling-opec-crude-output-spare-capacity-profits.htm


As of the last trading day of 2010 the light, crude prices had risen as much as 15 percent above prices on the corresponding day of the previous year. Analysts broadly attributed the considerable rise to factors like improved macro economic outlook globally, the fall in the value of the U.S. dollar and strong inventory figures. However, conservative think tanks in the U.S. maintained that Obama administration's drilling policies have led to a spike in prices.

Must Read

China's J-20 stealth fighter pictures leaked
Which among Spain, Portugal and Italy can hold its debts the longest?

They argue that Obama administration's actions like cancelling permits in states like Utah and Montana, delaying of offshore leasing, imposition of moratorium on offshore oil and gas drilling and the call for higher taxes on oil company profits have all fuelled the gasoline price boom.

CALLS FOR MORE DRILLING

As gasoline prices are rising in the U.S. there are increasing calls for expediting drilling. However, it has been pointed out that U.S. oil drilling was going at a 23-year high during the last year. Starr Spencer, writing in Platts, said US oil drilling returned to late 1987 levels in 2010. Citing the Baker Hughes rig count, he wrote that in the last week of the year the US oil-directed rig count rose to 771 rigs, which surpassed the all-time high over the last 23 years.

There are many who argue that frenzied drilling aimed at holding gas prices back is not the right thing to do and that these will only help Big Oil to fatten their bottom lines. "Not surprisingly, we are hearing this from incoming Republicans who will now be running the U.S. House of Representatives. They are eager to find any excuse to support the agenda of the oil industry, which is to have increased access to land for drilling purposes and to preserve lucrative tax breaks and subsidies," says Tyson Slocum, Director of Public Citizen’s Energy Program.

M&K's Retrievers
01-05-2011, 10:53 AM
I thought this was interesting. Listening to Republicans you would never know that drilling activity in the US is at a 23 year high right now.

]

As long as we import a single barrel, we are not drilling enough. Next step is to get rid of coal and increase production of natural gas.

Buzz
01-05-2011, 10:55 AM
As long as we import a single barrel, we are not drilling enough. Next step is to get rid of coal and increase production of natural gas.

Why would you get rid of coal?

Blackstone
01-05-2011, 01:46 PM
Although I've been associated with the energy business most of my life and I believe that there is much more promise for alternative energies in the future. One big problem is that with current technologies there is only one fuel that is useful for transportation. The greatest advantage to plug in hybrids etc is that it brings other sources into the mix for transportation applications. Although I spent a number of years designing electric drive systems for vehicles in an earlier life, I remain very skeptical but hopeful.

Electric vehicles like Volt & Leaf are the 1st steps in reducing the use of oil products for transportation. If they are commercially successful, pickup truck and vans will follow in a couple of years. Unfortunately, big trucks that are used to transport goods over the road are a ways away from utilizing alternative fuels. The associated transportation costs are the biggest factor in the rising cost of food & goods.

The next leap in vehicle fuels technology will be hydrogen. I don’t think that alternative is really that far away. Hydrogen vehicles are where all the auto manufacturers are trying to get to. We already produce enough hydrogen to support 1 mil. Vehicles. We just need the infrastructure to support them.

M&K's Retrievers
01-05-2011, 02:10 PM
Why would you get rid of coal?

Coal is not near as clean burning as natural gas in generating electricity and natural gas can be used in cars, buses, semis, etc. once a decent delivery system can be made.

Blackstone
01-05-2011, 02:39 PM
Coal is not near as clean burning as natural gas in generating electricity and natural gas can be used in cars, buses, semis, etc. once a decent delivery system can be made.

CNG is not the future for transportation. It has limited availibilty, and requires significantly larger tanks to support the high pressures needed for compression. Plus, the conversion is expensive. It can work for taxis and buses in urban areas. However, it's not a viable alternative for semis that travel over the road.

M&K's Retrievers
01-05-2011, 02:52 PM
CNG is not the future for transportation. It has limited availibilty, and requires significantly larger tanks to support the high pressures needed for compression. Plus, the conversion is expensive. It can work for taxis and buses in urban areas. However, it's not a viable alternative for semis that travel over the road.

Hence my saying they need to develop a delivery system for highway use.The main use is generating electricity.

Blackstone
01-05-2011, 03:59 PM
Hence my saying they need to develop a delivery system for highway use.The main use is generating electricity.

That is highly unlikely to happen. The short term goal is electrification, and the long term goal is hydrogen. In all likihood, no one will be willing to invest in a CNG system for over the road use when they will have to do it all over again when hydrogen becomes viable.