The Truth About Oil Reserves

[tbone]

Executive Branch - POLITICS


Energy industry accuses Obama of misleading public about extent of untapped oil resources


By Jim Angle (http://www.foxnews.com/archive/author/jim-angle/index.html)
Published March 21, 2012
FoxNews.com
http://www.fncstatic.com/static/all/img/vp-overlay-96.pnghttp://a57.foxnews.com/video.foxnews.com/thumbnails/032112/640/360/396/223/032112_sr_angle.jpg (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/03/21/energy-industry-accuses-obama-misleading-public-about-extent-untapped-oil/#)



In almost every energy speech, President Obama (http://www.foxnews.com/topics/whitehouse/barack-obama.htm#r_src=ramp) makes this statement: "We've got 2 percent of the world oil reserves. We use 20 percent."
But there's more to those numbers than meet the eye.
"It's accurate but extremely misleading," says Dan Kish of Institute for Energy Research, which is supported by the industry. "What he is talking about is oil we already have found."
Misleading, he argues, because the president is pointing to "proven" reserves, which is some 21 billion barrels, but the U.S. is sitting on vast reserves of untapped energy that are far greater.
One federal agency says there's 10 times more -- 219 billion barrels more --, in what is called "technically recoverable" energy.

Another agency in the Energy Department says there's 20 times that much, or 400 billion barrels more, and some in the industry claim there's 60 times that amount, meaning some 1.4 trillion barrels in untapped resources.
That's energy the government knows we have but that has not yet been drilled for. Industry experts argue it's there for the taking.

"The trillion-plus barrels of oil in this country, more oil than in Saudi Arabia (http://www.foxnews.com/topics/saudi-arabia.htm#r_src=ramp), is not counted by the president, and I think that's misleading the American people," the former president of Shell Oil, said.


With those kinds of resources, the U.S. could continue at its current consumption rate for 200 years without any imports, Kish of IER said. "And add Canada (http://www.foxnews.com/topics/canada.htm#r_src=ramp) and Mexico (http://www.foxnews.com/topics/mexico.htm#r_src=ramp)? The numbers go off the chart."


But not everyone thinks we should be drilling more.

"We are addicted right now -- there's no question about that. But there's a question about how do we get off of that addiction," Erich Pica, president of Friends of the Earth, said.

The president prefers to emphasize weaning ourselves off of oil, which reduces the urgency to drill. And Pica and many other environmentalists agree.
"I don't think that it is a good decision for this country or for the globe, realistically, to push for maximum drilling," Pica said. "The atmosphere just can't hold that much carbon dioxide anymore."
Obama refers to the more limited number of proven reserves as a way to argue it would be futile to drill for more oil -- because it could never be enough to meet our needs.
"As much as we're doing to increase," Obama says, "we're not going to be able to just drill our way out of the problem of high gas prices."
"Some of us believe that the president is trying to suggest that we don't have adequate resource here in the United States (http://www.foxnews.com/topics/u.s.htm#r_src=ramp), which is just not true," says, president of the American Petroleum Institute, another industry group.
Analysts point out that proven reserves were 20 billion barrels back in 1944. But we've produced some 170 billion barrels since then, and proven reserves are still just over 20 billion.
In fact, one industry analyst says by tapping American oil along with Canadian resources and renewable energy, the U.S. could be self sufficient in just 12 years.










Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/03/21/energy-industry-accuses-obama-misleading-public-about-extent-untapped-oil/#ixzz1pnm6MsNA[/COLOR]

[Juice]

I would have read the article, but it said Fox News, so I didn't.

[tbone]

I'll change it to MSNBC "News".

[napolitano]

Don't they say fear sells? Well he will sell us fear to pay for his second term. I pray for that not to happen. Change. Lmao.hope.lol. what a joke. Only the tax paying people in this country should be allowed to vote. Why would someone who lives on food stamps and handouts from the government be allowed to vote when it affects me and not them. When you contribute you should have a say, when you choose not to contribute you shouldn't have a say. Drill and conserve. Multitasking.

[guspech750]

Don't they say fear sells? Well he will sell us fear to pay for his second term. I pray for that not to happen. Change. Lmao.hope.lol. what a joke. Only the tax paying people in this country should be allowed to vote. Why would someone who lives on food stamps and handouts from the government be allowed to vote when it affects me and not them. When you contribute you should have a say, when you choose not to contribute you shouldn't have a say. Drill and conserve. Multitasking.

I like you!!

Total BS what this administration is doing.


Sent from my iPhone
Eaton Swap + 4.10's = Wreeeeeeeeeedom!!

[1 Bad Merc]

I was just thinking the other day -when OBama was elected wasnt gas around $1.78 Gallon? Now I just went out the other day to fill up and it was around $4.38 a gallon. The price has more then doubled since the time he took office. Everything else has only gone up what -3-8% per year. If you just went up say 8% per year for 4 years you should still only be at 32% increase -not over double. Gas should really be about $2.3496 per gallon at 32%.

This is getting crazy -The government is not going to stop until we are all broke!

[Fosters]

I was just thinking the other day -when OBama was elected wasnt gas around $1.78 Gallon? Now I just went out the other day to fill up and it was around $4.38 a gallon. The price has more then doubled since the time he took office. Everything else has only gone up what -3-8% per year. If you just went up say 8% per year for 4 years you should still only be at 32% increase -not over double. Gas should really be about $2.3496 per gallon at 32%.

This is getting crazy -The government is not going to stop until we are all broke!

8% per year would end up around 36% difference from the beginning, as you would always increase from the previous year, but regardless...

What my beef is with these idiots is that they claim oh, if we don't do this, when the oil runs out it's gonna be much worse.

1. Oil is not going to run out in one day. It will gradually get harder to drill for as wells get depleted, but as it gets more and more harder to get to and supply gets lower, it will get more and more expensive to obtain. That's when other technologies WILL become the next most viable option. Necessity is the mother of all inventions, not government legislation.

2. It is absolutely asinine to restrict ourselves from using more expensive forms of energy on purpose for fear that we will run out of oil. Yes we will one day stop finding new wells and maybe even stop finding new ways to get at deeper oil, and thus eventually run out of oil, but that's not a reason to start paying more for our energy now. All that accomplishes is a lower standard of living for anyone using any kind of form of energy or dealing with any companies that use any kind of energy. If you look into your fridge, do you start drinking the top shelf scotch because of fear you're running out of budweiser? Do you start eating the prime rib steak because you might run low on hot dogs in the next 200+ years?

3. Look at who the advocates are and as always, follow the money. Solyndra is just the tip of the iceberg. Got cap and trade? Al Gore just so happens to have a carbon credit trading company... We gotta stop "subsidizing" oil companies (which it really isn't even a subsidy, it's depreciation on equipment/investments they're usually talking about that they don't like that it's being deducted), but we gotta subsidize GE and other solar/wind companies... Whenever you see a liberal mention oil subsidies, they always remember to mention record profits, but yet they never seem to remember to mention record taxes paid by Shell and ExxonMobil. God forbid you ask them about the $0 GE paid last year...

The solution is simple actually. Erase the department of Energy, we were doing fine before Carter put it in. Let the free market decide when oil will be too expensive to buy. Someone will then invent a better battery and a better solar panel, without my tax dollars.

[sailsmen]

I would have read the article, but it said Fox News, so I didn't.

Do you believe Congressional Testimony or the Dept of the Interior?

WASHINGTON, DC, Jan. 31
01/31/2012
By Nick Snow
OGJ Washington Editor
Higher crude oil prices, breakthroughs in technology, and more access to prospective acreage are creating a US oil
production revival that is a major break from nearly 40 years of declining production, two experts told the US Senate
Energy and Natural Resources Committee on Jan. 31.
“We believe that by 2020, the United States will become the largest producer of hydrocarbons in the world, surpassing
Russia,” said Roger Diwan, partner and head of financial advisory operations at PFC Energy. Now that producers have
solved the problem of producing oil and gas from tight shale formations, the nation is on the verge of a golden energy era
which is reshaping the industry worldwide, he maintained.
“When you look at global oil and gas investment, the US has been the key destination in the last 10 years,” Diwan said.
“The global industry is making money all over the world, and investing it in the US.”
The scale of the opportunity to increase US oil production is greater than in most other countries over the next decade,
noted James Burkhard, managing director of IHS CERA Inc.’s global oil group.
“Indeed, the oil and gas industry in this country has attracted tens of billions of dollars of investment capital,” he said in
his written testimony. “In the United States, spending to develop oil and gas fields rose 37% from 2009 to 2010—from
$50.6 billion to $69.4 billion. Spending increased further in 2011.”
Howard K. Gruenspecht, acting administrator at the US Energy Information Administration, said the US Department of
Energy’s independent forecasting and analysis agency’s initial 2012 Annual Energy Outlook (AEO) reference case
forecasts 20% growth in US crude production over the next decade. Net petroleum imports are expected to drop from
49% of total US consumption in 2010 to 38% in 2020 and 36% in 2035 as a result, he said.
Gas export prospects
EIA’s initial 2012 AEO also projects that the US will become a net exporter of LNG by 2016, a net exporter of gas by
pipeline by 2025, and an overall net exporter of gas by 2021, he said in his written statement. “The outlook reflects
increased use of LNG in markets outside of North America, strong domestic gas production, reduced pipeline imports and
increased pipeline exports, and relatively low gas prices in the United States compared to other global markets,”
Recommend TOPIC INDEX
View Oil & Gas Journal articles by topic, A-Z
MOST POPULAR
Judge calls for BP to indemnify Transocean in
2010 gulf oil spill
Energen pursuing Permian basin liquids plays
Chesapeake cuts operated dry gas drilling rig
count
Cabot questions EPA plans to test water wells
in Pennsylvania
MARKET WATCH: Oil prices wobble; gas
prices climb
ALSO READ
Login - Register
HOME GENERAL INTEREST EXPLORATION & DEVELOPMENT DRILLING & PRODUCTION PROCESSING TRANSPORTATION
UNCONVENTIONAL OIL & GAS
US on brink of strong oil, gas growth, Senate panel told - Oil & Gas Journal
http://www.ogj.com/articles/2012/01/us-on-brink-of-strong-oil-gas-growth-senate-panel-told.html?cmpid=EnlDailyFebrua ry12012[2/2/2012 3:22:48 PM]
CHARLES LASER
Gruenspecht said.
“With increasing supplies, gas prices in the United States are down,” observed a fourth witness, Richard H. Jones, deputy
executive director of the Paris-based International Energy Agency. “Oil prices also are lower, with [West Texas
Intermediate] much lower than Brent crude. Prices here generally are lower than in other markets already.”
He noted that when IEA looks at global oil markets, it finds that prices have been relatively stable over the last year.
“Prices peaked at $120[/bbl] in April of last year, and they’ve been oscillating between $100[/bbl] and $120[/bbl] ever
since,” Jones told the committee. “We think the concern for disruption has put a floor under prices, and a ceiling is there
resulting from a fear of economic activity putting pressure on demand. The interplay of these two factors has kept the
price in this range, and we think it’s too high considering the availability of oil in this market.”
Diwan said PFC Energy expects liquids production growth outside the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries to
recover in 2012, led by the US, Canada, Colombia, Brazil, and Russia. More production from the Bakken and Eagle Ford
shales will help the US lead this liquids growth, he said in his prepared statement.
“There are several other shale areas that are just starting to be drilled, and if those prove as prolific, then our forecast is
likely to be raised,” he added. “We have also penciled in an end to output losses in the Gulf of Mexico after the Macondo
spill.”
Burkhard said application of advanced technology will be critical to future US oil and gas production growth, with fracing
and horizontal drilling at the heart of the US expansion and the debate about environmental impacts. “Questions about
water availability and quality, air pollution, cumulative land use, and the impacts on local communities need to be
addressed to ensure that oil and gas development meets environmental needs and enhances public trust,” he testified.

[sailsmen]

World-class formation developing into major source of onshore domestic energy,
benefiting nation, American Indian tribes, rural communities
05/19/2011
Contact: Kendra Barkoff (DOI) 202-208-6416
Jessica Robertson (USGS) 703-648-6624
Alex Demas (USGS) 703-648-4421
WASHINGTON, DC – Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar today announced that the U.S.
Geological Survey will update its 2008 estimate of undiscovered, technically recoverable oil and
gas in the U.S. portion of the Bakken Formation, an important domestic petroleum resource
located in North Dakota and Montana.
“The Administration supports safe and responsible oil and gas production as part of our nation’s
comprehensive energy portfolio,” Salazar said. “We must develop our resources armed with the
best science available, and with wells drilled in the Bakken during the past three years, there is
significant new geological information. With ever-advancing production technologies, this could
mean more oil could potentially be recovered in the formation.”
The 2008 USGS assessment estimated 3.0 to 4.3 billion barrels of undiscovered, technically
recoverable oil in the U.S. portion of the Bakken Formation, elevating it to a “world-class”
accumulation. The estimate had a mean value of 3.65 billion barrels. The USGS routinely
conducts updates to oil and gas assessments when significant new information is available, such
as new understanding of a resource basin’s geology or when advances in technology occur for
drilling and production.
The 2008 Bakken Formation estimate was larger than all other current USGS oil assessments of
the lower 48 states and is the largest "continuous" oil accumulation ever assessed by the USGS.
A "continuous” or "unconventional" oil accumulation means that the oil resource is dispersed
throughout a geologic formation rather than existing as discrete, localized occurrences, such as
those in conventional accumulations. Unconventional resources require special technical drilling
and recovery methods.
“The new scientific information presented to us from technical experts clearly warrants a new
resource assessment of the Bakken,” said USGS Energy Resources Program Coordinator Brenda
Pierce. “The new information is significant enough for the evaluation to begin sooner than it
normally would. It is important to look at this resource and its potential contribution to the
national energy portfolio.”
The 2008 USGS assessment showed a 25-fold increase in the amount of technically recoverable
oil as compared to the agency's 1995 estimate of 151 million barrels of oil. New geologic
models applied to the Bakken Formation, advances in drilling and production technologies, and
additional oil discoveries resulted in these substantially larger technically recoverable oil
volumes. About 135 million barrels of oil were produced from the Bakken between 1953 and
2008; 36 million barrels in 2008 alone. According to state statistics, oil production from the
Bakken in North Dakota has steadily increased from about 28 million barrels in 2008, to 50
million barrels in 2009 to approximately 86 million barrels in 2010.
“The Bakken Formation is producing an ever-increasing amount of oil for domestic consumption
while providing increasing royalty revenues to American Indian tribes and individual Indian
mineral owners in North Dakota and Montana,” Salazar noted. Interior agencies have been
working closely, for example, with the Three Affiliated Tribes (the Mandan, Hidatsa and Arikara)
and individual Indian mineral owners on the Ft. Berthold Reservation in North Dakota to
facilitate this development.
Technically recoverable oil resources are those producible using currently available technology
and industry practices. USGS is the only provider of publicly available estimates of undiscovered
technically recoverable oil and gas resources.
The new update effort will be a standard assessment task under the existing USGS National Oil
and Gas Assessment. It will begin in October 2011, at the start of the 2012 fiscal year.
Depending on funding, it is expected to take two years to complete. Drilling and production will
continue while the USGS conducts its assessment update.
For more information about the Bakken Formation, please visit the USGS frequently asked
questions that were developed after the 2008 resource assessment at

[sailsmen]

How about the Bureau of Land Management?
From Bureau of Land Management

Oil Shale and Tar Sands
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Salazar Reforms Oil Shale Program--Department of Interior News Release, October 20, 2009

Federal Register Notice
New Oil Shale RD&D Lease Form
Fact Sheet on Oil Shale Program
Secretary Salazar's Letter to the Interior Inspector General
The United States holds the world’s largest known concentration of oil shale. Nearly five times the proven oil reserves of Saudi Arabia underlies a surface area of 16,000 square miles. The enormous potential of this domestic resource is a key to the Nation’s energy security and economic strength, and to the quality of life Americans enjoy today and hope to ensure for future generations.

More than 70 percent of American oil shale — including the thickest and richest deposits — lies on federal land, primarily in Colorado, Utah, and Wyoming. These federal lands contain an estimated 1.23 trillion barrels of oil — more than 50 times the nation's proven conventional oil reserves.

More than 50 tar sands deposits are found in eastern Utah, containing an estimated 12 to 19 billion barrels of oil. As oil prices rise, there is new interest in developing both of these domestic resources.

The BLM is working to ensure that development of federal oil shale and tar sands resources will be economically sustainable and environmentally responsible.
http://www.blm.gov/wo/st/en/prog/energy/oilshale_2.html

[sailsmen]

You can only have a proven reserve below an oil well. No drill oil well no proven reserv.
"Currently, the United States has 1,442 billion barrels of technically recoverable oil, but only about 20 billion barrels are considered proven oil reserves.[ii] That is partly because the federal government is denying access to hundreds of millions of acres oil-rich federal lands: the Alaskan National Wildlife Refuge, the Naval Petroleum Reserve-Alaska, federal waters off the Atlantic and Pacific coasts, at least 45 percent of the Gulf of Mexico, the Chukchi and Beaufort Seas, and oil shale on federal lands in Colorado, Utah, and Wyoming, to name a few. In the case of oil shale (an oil composed of kerogen), technology needs to be perfected to make its production viable, but this will not happen until the land is leased. Regrettably, the Department of Interior has stopped a leasing program Congress directed it to undertake."
http://www.instituteforenergyresearch .org/2012/03/13/exposing-the-2-percent-oil-reserves-myth/

[MyBlackBeasts]

The Gull Island oil reserve was drilled & capped decades ago. All we need to do is mount pumps & send to refineries. Its size is estimated at over 4 times larger than the Saudi reserves. BS EPA regs won't allow access.

Its all about power... You have to self inform as the propaganda mainstream media mouthpieces work tirelessly to mis-inform to reach the endgoal of their agenda.

We must all be good little citizens... (1984) :shake:

[TooManyFords]

You guys can argue all the oil reserves you want, but it won't bring the price of gas down until the oil companies step up and increase refinery production and build more refineries to process it.

Oh, and stop trading oil on the futures market.

[FrankJAG]

Oil companies are willing to step up, it's the bobama administration that is bogging down the permit approval process to drill and build refineries.
And I agree put a stop to the speculators.

[SC Cheesehead]

Oil companies are willing to step up, it's the bobama administration that is bogging down the permit approval process to drill and build refineries.
And I agree put a stop to the speculators.

Big +1 to both of the above.

[kernie]

You guys can argue all the oil reserves you want, but it won't bring the price of gas down until the oil companies step up and increase refinery production and build more refineries to process it.

Oh, and stop trading oil on the futures market.

Newt could do it!

Also you left out, Obama wants it high to ruin the country...:shake:


On a serious note though, wouldn't it be nice if news meant just that, news? Not, news from our angle, just the news, reporting just the plain true news would be good. It's getting to the point in the US that you just take the opposite of what you hear and it's probably closer to the truth.

CNN is who i tune to to hear about a news item stateside.

Not having to pump big bucks into the middle east would be nice, that's where eastern and central Canada gets most of it's oil from. We also have shale oil, mostly in Quebec {in eastern Canada} i think, they could certainly use the revenue. Obama is not stopping them.

:beer:

[FrankJAG]

CNN is Obama's lap puppy! Worst ever for liberally biased news.

[Fosters]

Oil companies are willing to step up, it's the bobama administration that is bogging down the permit approval process to drill and build refineries.
And I agree put a stop to the speculators.

spot on with the first one. The second one is only enabled because of the first; speculators are able to, well, speculate with oil against a shortage basically... The moment Washington says: "ok, go drill and build refineries" to the private sector, speculation will go down on its own.

[sailsmen]

You guys can argue all the oil reserves you want, but it won't bring the price of gas down until the oil companies step up and increase refinery production and build more refineries to process it.

Oh, and stop trading oil on the futures market.

Refineries are able to meet current demand. Due to the EPA requiring multiple fuels at different times of the year for different areas there can be a temp shortage while shifting over.

From EIA.GOV
U.S. Percent Utilization of Refinery Operable Capacity (Percent)

2000 85% to 96%
2005 81% to 97%
2008 83% to 89%
2010 80% to 91%
2011 80% to 90%.

Price controls in the long run always results in higher prices. Taking oil off the futures market in the long run will drive up the price of oil. Futures contracts cushion the daily spot market price.
Providing a product such as energy or that depends on energy to provie under long term contracts with out a futures market results in uncertainty requiring a higher price to provide the product.

[sailsmen]

Example of price controls driving up price. Gov't freezes price when a hurricane approaches. Hurricane damage increases demand for products and the cost of delivering products.

The plywood mfg to meet increased demand must pay OT but since he cannot increase the price to cover the OT he cannot meet the increased demand.

Person who needs plywood and who ultimately determines what it is worth to them by electing to buy or not buy is prevented by law from buying plywood.

[88LTDCV351]

I remember when Bush was talking about letting them drill. However, they were saying that even if we drilled we wouldn't notice any savings at the pump. The oil companies know we are willing to pay $5+ more a gallon so why would they ever give us cheap gas again?

The only consolation is that the money might stay in the United States.

[FrankJAG]

Incorrect, prices went down overnight when Bush expedited the approval process. Things were booming down here in the Gulf.

[1 Bad Merc]

With the high deficits the Government is running I really dont believe they want the gas prices to go lower.

I am not exactly sure but I believe the taxes on gas are a percentage on a gallon of Gas instead of a fixed monetary amount. So if a gallon of Gas goes up in price then the Government makes more tax money! So in essence this is a tax increase without the lawmakers having to do anything!

There is no incentive really for them to do anything that would hurt the increased revenue they receive. I am surprised no-one brings up this point on any of the news shows.

[FrankJAG]

...I am surprised no-one brings up this point on any of the news shows.
What do you expect from the liberal loving media? They spew what Obama and his minions want's them to say.

[SC Cheesehead]

I remember when Bush was talking about letting them drill. However, they were saying that even if we drilled we wouldn't notice any savings at the pump. The oil companies know we are willing to pay $5+ more a gallon so why would they ever give us cheap gas again?

The only consolation is that the money might stay in the United States.


The price of a gallon of gas is based primarily on the cost of crude oil. Refining costs are relatively constant, and profit margin is typically in the 4% to 7% range.

Decrease the cost of crude, and the cost of a gallon of gas will go down.

Increased domestic drilling = increased supply of lower cost domestic crude. Guess what that translates into?

Will it happen over night? No. With exploration, project justification, planning, mobilization, construction, commssioning and start up, figure a minimum of five years, but if we don't start opening up areas for exploration and drilling now, we won't see those increased supplies - ever.

[tbone]

Newt could do it!

Also you left out, Obama wants it high to ruin the country...:shake:

CNN is who i tune to to hear about a news item stateside.


:beer:

Obama hates every carbon based fuel including natural gas. He wants energy prices to quote "necessarily skyrocket" as PROVEN HERE IN HIS OWN WORDS in the most famous of his stupid ideas.

You will not see this on your beloved CNN.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HlTxGHn4sH4

I can post dozens of videos and direct quotes from him proving that Obama hates oil, coal and natural gas.

Seriously, you have got to pop that "news network" bubble you live in.

[tbone]

If gas was less than $2.00 when Obama took office only 3 years ago, then why is he so incredulous that it could get down to that level again? What has changed so drastically? It can only be his insidious energy policies.

Obama's own Energy Secretary Chu testified that he wants the US to pay European prices. $10 per gallon!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ma1gwZYw1cY

[CBT]

Energy Secretary Steven Chu Grades Self ‘Higher Than an A-Minus’ on Handling of Gas Prices


http://michellemalkin.com/2012/03/20/steven-chu-gas/

Ever read or watched this guy? Complete idiot. How people fall into these jobs is mind boggling.

[kernie]

The price of a gallon of gas is based primarily on the cost of crude oil. Refining costs are relatively constant, and profit margin is typically in the 4% to 7% range.

Decrease the cost of crude, and the cost of a gallon of gas will go down.

Increased domestic drilling = increased supply of lower cost domestic crude. Guess what that translates into?

Will it happen over night? No. With exploration, project justification, planning, mobilization, construction, commssioning and start up, figure a minimum of five years, but if we don't start opening up areas for exploration and drilling now, we won't see those increased supplies - ever.


Good to see a sensible post!

:beer:

[CBT]

July 14, 2008:
President Bush lifted an executive order banning offshore oil drilling, and urged Congress to follow suit (http://www.webcitation.org/65gBgKxsy).
September 16, 2008:
The U.S. House of Representatives approved on a 236-189 vote legislation that would open waters 50 miles off the Pacific and Atlantic coasts to oil and natural gas development.
September 27, 2008:
The U.S. Senate by a 78-12 vote eliminated a 27 year ban on offshore drilling off the Atlantic and Pacific coasts of the United States.
And what effect did those three things have on gas prices?

U.S. city average price of unleaded regular gasoline
July 2008: $4.090 per gallon
December 2008: $1.689 per gallon
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics Data: U.S. city average: Gasoline, unleaded regular, per gallon (http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/APU000074714)
Gas prices dropped more than 50% (almost 60%) in just five months!
And that wasn’t the result of increased drilling, but merely the possibility of increased drilling (which brought speculation of future prices down, which brought down prices at the pump by more than 50% in just 5 months time.
Then what has happened under the Obama administration?
The return of the moratorium, and higher gas prices.

[SC Cheesehead]

Good to see a sensible post!

:beer:

All my posts are sensible, kernie! :D


BTW, we oughta be pursuing oil sands, and we aren't. Huge opportunity and we're just letting it slip by...:shake:

[Roadwarrior]

Don't they say fear sells? Well he will sell us fear to pay for his second term. I pray for that not to happen. Change. Lmao.hope.lol. what a joke. Only the tax paying people in this country should be allowed to vote. Why would someone who lives on food stamps and handouts from the government be allowed to vote when it affects me and not them. When you contribute you should have a say, when you choose not to contribute you shouldn't have a say. Drill and conserve. Multitasking.
:agree: those who received gov't help would very likely vote for a candidate who would offer the recipient a bigger "pay raise" of sorts at every election cycle. :shake:

[1 Bad Merc]

I just heard the other day that our Government along with the UK are going to open up the strategic oil reserves and release 60 million(?) barrels of oil into the market to try and get oil prices/gas prices down for election time. Analysts are saying this wont even put a dent in the prices and is just a political gesture with no real significance except to lower our reserves.

[tbone]

July 14, 2008:
President Bush lifted an executive order banning offshore oil drilling, and urged Congress to follow suit (http://www.webcitation.org/65gBgKxsy).
September 16, 2008:
The U.S. House of Representatives approved on a 236-189 vote legislation that would open waters 50 miles off the Pacific and Atlantic coasts to oil and natural gas development.
September 27, 2008:
The U.S. Senate by a 78-12 vote eliminated a 27 year ban on offshore drilling off the Atlantic and Pacific coasts of the United States.
And what effect did those three things have on gas prices?

U.S. city average price of unleaded regular gasoline
July 2008: $4.090 per gallon
December 2008: $1.689 per gallon
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics Data: U.S. city average: Gasoline, unleaded regular, per gallon (http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/APU000074714)
Gas prices dropped more than 50% (almost 60%) in just five months!
And that wasn’t the result of increased drilling, but merely the possibility of increased drilling (which brought speculation of future prices down, which brought down prices at the pump by more than 50% in just 5 months time.
Then what has happened under the Obama administration?
The return of the moratorium, and higher gas prices.

Exactly. The cost of a barrel went from $150 to $35. Gasoline should have come down even more. More proof that Oblamer has no idea whatsoever on what he is saying and doing.

Gingrich's ideas would work perfectly. Some people should know a few facts and figures before they make stupid comments.

[Ozark Marauder]

May I put forth this proposition:

Gold price when Obama took office: 835.00 per ounce
Gas price when Obama took office: 1.89 avg. price

Yesterday:
Gold price: 1650.00
Gas price avg: 3.78

Does anybody else but me see this correlation?

Reasons for high gas prices:

1. Stimulus: a trillion
2. The borrowing of 40 cents on the dollar (deficit spending). $50,000 a second, yes a second.
3. The Fed buying treasury bonds by just printing worthless fiat currency, monetizing the debt. Artificially keeping interest rates low. Thanks Richard Nixon for taking the U.S. off the Gold Standard in 1971.
4. the pricing of a barrel of oil is in Dollars.

Since the price of gas has doubled, I submit that it hasn't doubled, but the worth of the U.S. Dollar has lost its value.

Solutions? Balanced Budget, flat tax, term limits, have currency partially backed (25% to start) by precious metals.

Just my opinion or did I just hijack this thread......:D

OZ

[sailsmen]

Using Secretary Salazar's figure of 1.23 Trillion Barrels of just Shale Oil at $70 per barrell and a low 14% Federal Royalty rate equals $12+ Trillion in Royalty payments to the Federal Gov't. In addition you have the lease sales plus the tax at the pump.
In addition there is also Natural Gas and Oil.
Liberals HATE fossil fuel more than they Love Gov't spending money? Ohh, that's right it's not a love of Gov't spending money it is a hatred of those who have money becasue they got it through "unfair" means and it must be taken from them to redistribute.

The only way the Federal Gov't can get Royalty payments from Solar and Wind is if it says it owns the Sun and the Wind.

From EIA.Gov;
"Taxes

Taxes on crude oil production

Most States impose a severance tax when oil (or gas or another natural resource) is produced from property within their territory. It is generally a percentage of the sale price and thus varies with markets. In 1996, States collected a total of about $3.3 billion in severance taxes on oil and gas production. For Alaska, the State by far the most dependent on oil production activity, severance taxes account for about half of all State tax revenue. In other large producing States, severance tax revenue is important but is less than 10 percent of total tax revenue.

Royalties are not taxes but fees paid to landowners, whether private or public. (As noted earlier, private ownership of mineral rights is unique to the United States.) Payment of royalties is universal, part of a standard contract to produce oil or gas from a given property. The amount of the royalty percentage is part of the negotiation process and thus varies with boom and bust cycles in the industry. Generally, oil royalties are about 1/7 (some 14 percent) of the sale price. Royalty agreements with the Federal government have generally required a higher royalty payment. In 1996, the Federal government collected approximately $3 billion in royalties on oil and gas production from Federal property, including Federal offshore areas.

Excise and Other Taxes

U.S. import tariffs on oil are generally modest, except on gasoline. They are a fixed level per unit and thus become more important at low overall market prices. Depending on the density of the oil, crude oil and fuel oils pay 5.25 cents per barrel (for heavier quality) and 10.5 cents for lighter oils. Transportation fuels, such as gasoline and jet fuel, pay 52.5 cents per barrel, or 1.25 cents per gallon.

Excise taxes are an important source of revenue to the taxing authority, whether the authority is the Federal, State, or local government. Among oil products, highway fuels are by far the most heavily taxed. Federal excise taxes on gasoline are 18.3 cents per gallon and on diesel fuel are 24.3 cents. In addition, the Federal government collects a fee of 0.1 cents per gallon to finance the Leaking Underground Storage Tank Trust Fund. Furthermore, State taxes on gasoline vary from less than 10 cents per gallon to about 40 cents, averaging about 22.6 cents per gallon in early 1998. Taxes on diesel used as a highway fuel show a similar range and also average 22.6 cents per gallon. These data for State taxes include "excise" taxes as well as other taxes, such as sales taxes that some States impose on gasoline and diesel. State excise taxes alone, as of early 1998, average about 18 cents per gallon.

Gasohol, a blend of 10 percent ethanol and 90 percent gasoline, may also be subject to a different excise tax rate. The Federal tax on gasohol is 13 cents per gallon, or 5.3 less than the rate of tax on gasoline. Nine States also provide preferential excise or sales tax treatment for gasohol, ranging from 1 cent per gallon (Connecticut, Iowa) to 15 cents per gallon (Ohio.)

Excise taxes account for almost all of the difference between prices for gasoline in the United States and prices in our foreign trading partners, such as Europe and Japan. When the price of gasoline in the United States is $1.10 per gallon, for instance, excise taxes account for about 40 cents, or 36 percent of the total; the pre-tax price is about 70 cents. At the same time, the price in Germany, for instance, might be $3.00 per gallon, with taxes accounting for some $2.30, or some 77 percent of the total; the pre-tax price is about the same as that in the United States: 70 cents per gallon. Similar examples can be constructed from other International Energy Agency data."

[tbone]

You're right (Ozark). Obama has destroyed faith and value in the dollar as well. I'm surprised he hasn't put his face on hundreds yet. Maybe he's waiting to put it on a TEN THOUSAND DOLLAR bill. We'll be needing 'em.

[CBT]

Using Secretary Salazar's figure of 1.23 Trillion Barrels of just Shale Oil at $70 per barrell and a low 14% Federal Royalty rate equals $12+ Trillion in Royalty payments to the Federal Gov't. In addition you have the lease sales plus the tax at the pump.
There is also Natural Gas and Oil.

The only way the Federal Gov't can get Royalty payments from Solar and Wind is if it says it owns the Sun and the Wind.


Too bad, because the sun will be around for billions of years and if I'm not mistaken is probably THE best option due to energy density blah blah blah, the problem lies in how do you store it? You can't fill barrels with sunshine.

[SC Cheesehead]

Too bad, because the sun will be around for billions of years and if I'm not mistaken is probably THE best option due to energy density blah blah blah, the problem lies in how do you store it? You can't fill barrels with sunshine.


:bs:

I've got two 55 gal barrels in my back yard that I fill with sunshine every day.

I empty 'em every night, though. Stuff has a limited shelf life...

[CBT]

:bs:

I've got two 55 gal barrels in my back yard that I fill with sunshine every day.

I empty 'em every night, though. Stuff has a limited shelf life...

I'll fill somethin' of yours with sunshine, Sunshine. :cool:

[Fosters]

Incorrect, prices went down overnight when Bush expedited the approval process. Things were booming down here in the Gulf.

Yup... that was the main catalyst that drove the prices to the sub 2 dollar per gallon range when Obama took office...


The oil companies know we are willing to pay $5+ more a gallon so why would they ever give us cheap gas again?

simple: competition.

Everyone balks at the record profits they make. That is just the politics of envy at work. Look at the profit margins which is MUCH more important than the profit.

Example: If I make a pencil for 1 penny and sell it for 1.01, but I only sell 1,000,000 of them per year, my profit = 1 million, but my profit margin is very high.

If I make a car for 20,000 dollars and sell it for 20,001, but I am GM and sell 1 mil cars per year, I make the same million bucks as in the scenario above, but now my profit margin is a lot smaller.

In which scenario do you think there's room for competition to come in and undercut me? Obviously the first. If you look at the oil industry however, it's not that the "record profits" are realized because of a scenario akin to the first example, but they are more along the lines of the second - very low profit margin, but a very high volume/demand/etc. If the oil companies were making super high profit margins, someone would come in and sell oil/gas for just a bit less to gain marketshare.

The profit margin for the oil industry is typically under 10% - as Sailsmen pointed out, probably in the 4-7% range.

Now take a look at the government's share. Federal taxes per gallon of gas = 18c. State taxes are in the 20-60c range, probably average in the 40s. That's overall 60c per gallon in taxes. Even at $4/gallon, that's 15% of the price (compare that with the profit margin under 10%), before even taking into account the corporate taxes the oil companies are paying.

At the end of the day, blaming the oil companies for high gas prices, when government makes a LOT more money per gallon of gas sold than the oil company, and when government is artificially restricting supply, is very foolish.

[sailsmen]

Stop, stop, stop all the Facts and Truths! The Politics of HATE rely on falsehoods to drive the emotion of HATE. Hate is an easy to sell for you never run out of it.

[Chevyguy]

The Bakken Shale agan.......

Read this line carefully it's from the first post


One federal agency says there's 10 times more -- 219 billion barrels more --, in what is called "technically recoverable" energy.

"Technically recoverable" means that they will not touch it unless the global price for oil is solidly above say $150 a barrel. When oil was under $100 none of these projects are remotely profitable.

Using the logic of this article Saudi Arabia could have 345345 Trillion barrels of oil which is "Technically recoverable"

[Cheeseheadbob]

Winner, winner, chicken dinner...:beer:


Oh, and stop trading oil on the futures market.

[tbone]

Yup... that was the main catalyst that drove the prices to the sub 2 dollar per gallon range when Obama took office...



simple: competition.

Everyone balks at the record profits they make. That is just the politics of envy at work. Look at the profit margins which is MUCH more important than the profit.

Example: If I make a pencil for 1 penny and sell it for 1.01, but I only sell 1,000,000 of them per year, my profit = 1 million, but my profit margin is very high.

If I make a car for 20,000 dollars and sell it for 20,001, but I am GM and sell 1 mil cars per year, I make the same million bucks as in the scenario above, but now my profit margin is a lot smaller.

In which scenario do you think there's room for competition to come in and undercut me? Obviously the first. If you look at the oil industry however, it's not that the "record profits" are realized because of a scenario akin to the first example, but they are more along the lines of the second - very low profit margin, but a very high volume/demand/etc. If the oil companies were making super high profit margins, someone would come in and sell oil/gas for just a bit less to gain marketshare.

The profit margin for the oil industry is typically under 10% - as Sailsmen pointed out, probably in the 4-7% range.

Now take a look at the government's share. Federal taxes per gallon of gas = 18c. State taxes are in the 20-60c range, probably average in the 40s. That's overall 60c per gallon in taxes. Even at $4/gallon, that's 15% of the price (compare that with the profit margin under 10%), before even taking into account the corporate taxes the oil companies are paying.

At the end of the day, blaming the oil companies for high gas prices, when government makes a LOT more money per gallon of gas sold than the oil company, and when government is artificially restricting supply, is very foolish.

I took the time to explain this on here some time ago, but certain members on the left just couldn't seem to grasp the concept and went on the attack. It doesn't fit the agenda that their leader laid out for them.

[sailsmen]

The Bakken Shale agan.......

Read this line carefully it's from the first post



"Technically recoverable" means that they will not touch it unless the global price for oil is solidly above say $150 a barrel. When oil was under $100 none of these projects are remotely profitable.

Using the logic of this article Saudi Arabia could have 345345 Trillion barrels of oil which is "Technically recoverable"

WRONG!

From Wikki - "The production cost of a barrel of shale oil ranges from as high as US$95 per barrel to as low US$12 per barrel. The industry is proceeding cautiously, due to the losses incurred during the last major investment into oil shale in the early 1980s, when a subsequent collapse in the oil price left the projects uneconomical."

From CNNMoney -"By Ken Sweet, contributing writerFebruary 25, 2011: 3:47 PM ET


NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- For consumers, the return of $100-a-barrel oil is nothing but bad news. But investors see an opportunity: They're piling into unconventional energy stocks, betting that high oil prices could translate into big profits for some smaller U.S.-based oil companies.

In fact, companies that specialize in extracting crude from oil shale and oil sands are posting the biggest gains among energy companies this year.

363Email Print Chesapeake Energy (CHK, Fortune 500) has seen its stock jump 30% this year. Shares of small-cap GeoResources (GEOI) are up nearly 40%. Abraxas Petroleum (AXAS), which pulls oil out of the shale in the Rocky Mountains, has had a 27% runup.

"These [oil shale] companies basically start printing money once oil is above $90 a barrel," said Fadel Gheit, an oil industry analyst with Oppenheimer & Co.
Analysts and investors think these unconventional energy outfits could benefit the most if oil remains in the neighborhood of $100.

North America has massive crude oil reserves locked up in oil shale and oil sands, which are geological formations that contain large amounts of oil that is extremely expensive to extract.

The Bakken oil shale field in North Dakota has an estimated 4.65 billion barrels of crude, according to the U.S. Geological Service. The oil sands in Alberta, Canada make up the world's second-largest amount of proven oil reserves, behind Saudi Arabia.

This oil is more difficult and costly to extract because it isn't in liquid form initially - it's locked up in rocks and sand. And even after drillers get the petroleum out of this solid material, the oil then requires extremely high amounts of refining to make it usable.


0:00 /01:25Oil companies begin Middle East evacs
When oil went above $100 a barrel for the first time in summer 2008, the economics of pulling oil from the ground changed dramatically, according to analysts. That made oil sands and oil shale economically viable for energy companies, so the industry shifted enormous resources into that technology.

The Bakken oil shale field is now producing around 350,000 barrels a day, up from 93,000 barrels a day only four years ago, said Ron Ness, president of the North Dakota oil council.

Democrats urge Obama to tap oil reserve
The cost to recover this oil was around $90-$95 a barrel three or four years ago. Now it costs about $60-$75 a barrel, thanks to advances in technology and an increase in production.

"Bakken has been a great resource for us, and as the technology has developed, we can now extract for a lot less than we used to," Ness said.

Analysts expect that oil will remain above $70 a barrel for the foreseeable future - about what it costs these companies to produce a barrel of oil. And the recent turmoil in Libya and the Middle East makes drilling for North American oil sands and oil shale even more attractive.

"The economies of scale are just starting to work for the non-conventional oil companies," Gheit added."Lower oil prices favor drilling outside the U.S., and higher oil prices favor drilling inside the U.S."

"Technically recoverable oil resources are those producible using currently available technology and industry practices."

Sailsmen -
I remember when "deep water oil" was not "economically feasable". As a deck hand I towed the first purpose built offshore oil rig, the "Mr. Charlie". Got a picture of it on the wall in front of me.

A firm I owned a part of did work on the Thistle Field Paltform "A", at the time the largest and highest valued man made structure that many said could not be economically built. The engineering proposal is on my desk.

I worked on LOOP, an offshore oil port that many said could not be built economically. I have a picture of it in front of me.

[Fosters]

I took the time to explain this on here some time ago, but certain members on the left just couldn't seem to grasp the concept and went on the attack. It doesn't fit the agenda that their leader laid out for them.

At that point I usually ask them, if it really is that big of a profit margin and there's no competition and undercutting going on (and there's some big cartel/conspiracy of keeping the price high), I ask what's keeping them (those who claim these things) from entering the oil business, selling us gas cheaper at what they deem is a fair profit/profit margin, and put Shell, Exxon/Mobil, BP, etc out of business. Basically, what's stopping them from starting a "good" company to fight the "evil" ones...

Hell, I know if I saw an industry with a ridiculously high profit margin, I know I'd want to go in it and start some kind of business...

[1 Bad Merc]

At that point I usually ask them, if it really is that big of a profit margin and there's no competition and undercutting going on (and there's some big cartel/conspiracy of keeping the price high), I ask what's keeping them (those who claim these things) from entering the oil business, selling us gas cheaper at what they deem is a fair profit/profit margin, and put Shell, Exxon/Mobil, BP, etc out of business. Basically, what's stopping them from starting a "good" company to fight the "evil" ones...

Hell, I know if I saw an industry with a ridiculously high profit margin, I know I'd want to go in it and start some kind of business...

Government and EPA regulations stop alot of companies from trying to compete in the US. It is almost impossible to build a new refinery in the US to compete with current Oil companies. You could try to import gas/deisel fuel from other places but then you have extra transportation costs as well as storage costs. Currently most large storage complexes are filled with crude oil and there are even ships sitting off the coasts waiting to unload when any type of space becomes available. You would probably have to use the current distribution pipelines to ship your product and they are controlled by the oil company subsidiaries. Not sure you will get a good price from them to ship your product.

Alot of hurdles/costs to overcome to try and take on some of the oil giants here.

[tbone]

At that point I usually ask them, if it really is that big of a profit margin and there's no competition and undercutting going on (and there's some big cartel/conspiracy of keeping the price high), I ask what's keeping them (those who claim these things) from entering the oil business, selling us gas cheaper at what they deem is a fair profit/profit margin, and put Shell, Exxon/Mobil, BP, etc out of business. Basically, what's stopping them from starting a "good" company to fight the "evil" ones...

Hell, I know if I saw an industry with a ridiculously high profit margin, I know I'd want to go in it and start some kind of business...

They like to demonize the profits of health insurance companies too. Their margins are also in the single digits. But the lefts mantra is "let's destroy them and the quality of care they are able to provide so everyone shares in the misery of socialized medicine EQUALLY".

[Fosters]

They like to demonize the profits of health insurance companies too. Their margins are also in the single digits. But the lefts mantra is "let's destroy them and the quality of care they are able to provide so everyone shares in the misery of socialized medicine EQUALLY".

Well it's not fair that those evil bastards that work have better stuff than the poor victims that don't! :(

/sarcasm

[Ozark Marauder]

May I put forth this proposition:

Gold price when Obama took office: 835.00 per ounce
Gas price when Obama took office: 1.89 avg. price

Yesterday:
Gold price: 1650.00
Gas price avg: 3.78

Does anybody else but me see this correlation?

Reasons for high gas prices:

1. Stimulus: a trillion
2. The borrowing of 40 cents on the dollar (deficit spending). $50,000 a second, yes a second.
3. The Fed buying treasury bonds by just printing worthless fiat currency, monetizing the debt. Artificially keeping interest rates low. Thanks Richard Nixon for taking the U.S. off the Gold Standard in 1971.
4. the pricing of a barrel of oil is in Dollars.

Since the price of gas has doubled, I submit that it hasn't doubled, but the worth of the U.S. Dollar has lost its value.

Solutions? Balanced Budget, flat tax, term limits, have currency partially backed (25% to start) by precious metals.

Just my opinion or did I just hijack this thread......:D

OZ

UPDATE:

A very interesting article yesterday, didn't get much play anywhere.....but posted your information....

https://goldsilver.com/news/saudi-arabia-and-china-team-up-to-build-a-gigantic-new-oil-refinery-is-this-the-beginning-of-the-end-for-the-petrodollar/

The world is changing Bros, get prepared.....We as a nation, definitely need to look to our nations natural resources for our own energy....should be a no-brainer, but we all have realized that there are no brains in our government. I just hope it's not to late for our kids and grand kids.

OZ

[tbone]

Great article. That's why Obama has to print so much monopoly money.
We're in deep ****.

[sailsmen]

Twice in the past 2 years major importers of oil have tried to reach an agreement to trade oil in something other than US Dollars. Both times they could not reach an agreement.
The moment oil is no longer traded exclusively in dollars the USA Gov't begins to collapse. New Greece will replace the name USA.

But doesn't Gov't spending and printing money generate wealth??? Just look at Cuba and North Korea and Germany post WWI. Ohh, but Obama/Reid/Pelosi are smarter than all who RULED before them!

[MyBlackBeasts]

The price of a gallon of gas is based primarily on the cost of crude oil. Refining costs are relatively constant, and profit margin is typically in the 4% to 7% range.

Decrease the cost of crude, and the cost of a gallon of gas will go down.

Increased domestic drilling = increased supply of lower cost domestic crude. Guess what that translates into?

Will it happen over night? No. With exploration, project justification, planning, mobilization, construction, commssioning and start up, figure a minimum of five years, but if we don't start opening up areas for exploration and drilling now, we won't see those increased supplies - ever.

Yes the cost of crude does influence the cost of a gallon of gas but it is not the most influencing factor. Suppy & demand is. This is why even though crude was at a record high a while back yet price per gallon was dropping. As the economy was down, people drove less, supplies increased so the economy could not support the higher price per gallon even though crude was $120+ so down it came.

This is why all Bush had to do was discuss increasing US drilling and opening strategic reserves and immediately gas started dropping.

If we increase US crude production, build a few refineries, increase supply then per gal price will drop & they will make the $$ on volume vs. high demand/low supply.

Politics also is a big influence to commodity costs. That is the major reason since His Royal Highness King Barry was corrinated the costs of commodities have skyrocketed. Look at gold, look at copper - have you seen the jump in the price of wire??? A roll of 12-2 Romex at building supply store has jumped 400% in 2.5 years.

The economics of energy costs are simple but not as simple as "high crude cost = high gas cost".

Leave it to say if we don't reverse this mess & continue as is, we are a short distance from complete economic meltdown (which is his agenda). :shake:

[MyBlackBeasts]

July 14, 2008:
President Bush lifted an executive order banning offshore oil drilling, and urged Congress to follow suit (http://www.webcitation.org/65gBgKxsy).
September 16, 2008:
The U.S. House of Representatives approved on a 236-189 vote legislation that would open waters 50 miles off the Pacific and Atlantic coasts to oil and natural gas development.
September 27, 2008:
The U.S. Senate by a 78-12 vote eliminated a 27 year ban on offshore drilling off the Atlantic and Pacific coasts of the United States.
And what effect did those three things have on gas prices?

U.S. city average price of unleaded regular gasoline
July 2008: $4.090 per gallon
December 2008: $1.689 per gallon
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics Data: U.S. city average: Gasoline, unleaded regular, per gallon (http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/APU000074714)
Gas prices dropped more than 50% (almost 60%) in just five months!
And that wasn’t the result of increased drilling, but merely the possibility of increased drilling (which brought speculation of future prices down, which brought down prices at the pump by more than 50% in just 5 months time.
Then what has happened under the Obama administration?
The return of the moratorium, and higher gas prices.

Yep, you are correct sir! see post #54

[MyBlackBeasts]

All my posts are sensible, kernie! :D


BTW, we oughta be pursuing oil sands, and we aren't. Huge opportunity and we're just letting it slip by...:shake:

Yes, oils sands would be a great pursuit. Even better would be taking 60 minutes to mount a pump on the already drilled & capped Gull Island reserve and in a week we would have increased supplies (at a crude price not controlled by opec!) hitting the refineries. At the same time start building a few new refineries and BAM! We are at $1 gallon and the economy would take off... :banana:

[MyBlackBeasts]

I just heard the other day that our Government along with the UK are going to open up the strategic oil reserves and release 60 million(?) barrels of oil into the market to try and get oil prices/gas prices down for election time. Analysts are saying this wont even put a dent in the prices and is just a political gesture with no real significance except to lower our reserves.

True as it is an empty threat. If King O says it, no one believes it will happen. The exact opposite of when Bush said it.

[MyBlackBeasts]

May I put forth this proposition:

Gold price when Obama took office: 835.00 per ounce
Gas price when Obama took office: 1.89 avg. price

Yesterday:
Gold price: 1650.00
Gas price avg: 3.78

Does anybody else but me see this correlation?

Reasons for high gas prices:

1. Stimulus: a trillion
2. The borrowing of 40 cents on the dollar (deficit spending). $50,000 a second, yes a second.
3. The Fed buying treasury bonds by just printing worthless fiat currency, monetizing the debt. Artificially keeping interest rates low. Thanks Richard Nixon for taking the U.S. off the Gold Standard in 1971.
4. the pricing of a barrel of oil is in Dollars.

Since the price of gas has doubled, I submit that it hasn't doubled, but the worth of the U.S. Dollar has lost its value.

Solutions? Balanced Budget, flat tax, term limits, have currency partially backed (25% to start) by precious metals.

Just my opinion or did I just hijack this thread......:D

OZ

Yep, see post #54.

[MyBlackBeasts]

Too bad, because the sun will be around for billions of years and if I'm not mistaken is probably THE best option due to energy density blah blah blah, the problem lies in how do you store it? You can't fill barrels with sunshine.

Which is why wind & solar are favorites of the progressive left. They are unattainable ideas which then can be used, by forcing them on the public, to then CONTROL the public. Its all about POWER... Not energy.

[MyBlackBeasts]

Yup... that was the main catalyst that drove the prices to the sub 2 dollar per gallon range when Obama took office...



simple: competition.

Everyone balks at the record profits they make. That is just the politics of envy at work. Look at the profit margins which is MUCH more important than the profit.

Example: If I make a pencil for 1 penny and sell it for 1.01, but I only sell 1,000,000 of them per year, my profit = 1 million, but my profit margin is very high.

If I make a car for 20,000 dollars and sell it for 20,001, but I am GM and sell 1 mil cars per year, I make the same million bucks as in the scenario above, but now my profit margin is a lot smaller.

In which scenario do you think there's room for competition to come in and undercut me? Obviously the first. If you look at the oil industry however, it's not that the "record profits" are realized because of a scenario akin to the first example, but they are more along the lines of the second - very low profit margin, but a very high volume/demand/etc. If the oil companies were making super high profit margins, someone would come in and sell oil/gas for just a bit less to gain marketshare.

The profit margin for the oil industry is typically under 10% - as Sailsmen pointed out, probably in the 4-7% range.

Now take a look at the government's share. Federal taxes per gallon of gas = 18c. State taxes are in the 20-60c range, probably average in the 40s. That's overall 60c per gallon in taxes. Even at $4/gallon, that's 15% of the price (compare that with the profit margin under 10%), before even taking into account the corporate taxes the oil companies are paying.

At the end of the day, blaming the oil companies for high gas prices, when government makes a LOT more money per gallon of gas sold than the oil company, and when government is artificially restricting supply, is very foolish.

Correct. The oil company's high profits are the same % profit as most industries, just more 0's. Instead of overhead of $1m & a 3% profit of $30,000 they have OH of $100b & a 3% profit.

Also, their recent record high profits was not from high gasoline costs. It was from the international crude production they produced at the recent record high crude pricing - only they don't set the price, OPEC sets the price, they just enjoyed the benefits (for a change).

[MyBlackBeasts]

Stop, stop, stop all the Facts and Truths! The Politics of HATE rely on falsehoods to drive the emotion of HATE. Hate is an easy to sell for you never run out of it.

:rofl::rofl::rofl:

[MyBlackBeasts]

They like to demonize the profits of health insurance companies too. Their margins are also in the single digits. But the lefts mantra is "let's destroy them and the quality of care they are able to provide so everyone shares in the misery of socialized medicine EQUALLY".

Yes, which is why you never listen to what they say, watch what they do:

SS - Progressive power grab
Medicare - Progressive power grab
Welfare - Progressive power grab
Healthcare - Progressive power grab
It is all about POWER. The more dependants created = more guarrantied votes for them. This is why Barry stated the Dem party no longer needed the working man's vote. They have not been the party of the working man for decades but now the dependant class is so large they can say it with out hiding it. If they suceed in getting Obama-care thru it will suck the major portion of the middle class on the addicting public teat = votes & power for ever!!!