Aren't High Gas Prices What Democrats Want?

[DarrinS]

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2012/02/22/arent_high_gas_prices_what_democrats_want_113206.h tml





Gas prices are spiking. That's great news, right? We have to wean ourselves off the stuff. At least that's what we've been hearing for years. Oil is dirty. We import it from nations that hate our guts (like Canada!). And moreover, we're running out. Oil is "finite." Finite much in the way water is finite.

So why aren't Democrats making the case that the spike in prices is a good thing? Isn't this basically our energy policy these days? How we "win the future"? If high energy prices were to damage President Barack Obama's re-election prospects, it would be ironic, considering the left has been telling us to set aside our "dependency" -- or, as our most recent Republican president put it, "addiction" -- for a long time.


If Democrats had their way, after all, we would be enjoying the economic results of cap-and-trade policy these days -- a program designed to increase the cost of energy by creating false demand in a fabricated market. As the theory goes, if you inflate the price of fossil fuels, the barbarians might finally start putting thought into how peat moss might be able to power a toaster.

In 2008, Steven Chu, Obama's (and, sadly, our own) future secretary of energy (sic) lamented, "Somehow we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe." The president, when asked whether he thought $4-a-gallon gas prices were good for the American economy, said, "I think that I would have preferred a gradual adjustment."

How gradual? Like, what, four years? Or is it eight?

Part of "figuring it out" surely had something to do with the recent decision by Obama to nix the Canadian Keystone XL pipeline project that would have pumped 700,000 barrels of oil per day into the United States. More oil just means more excessive, immoral, ugly energy use.

Well, get used to it. You can't take three steps without stepping over some potential 10-billion barrel reserve of dead organisms.

According to the Institute for Energy Research, there is enough natural gas in the U.S. to meet electricity demand for 575 years at current fuel demand, enough to fuel homes heated by natural gas for 857 years and more gas in the U.S. than there is in Russia, Iran, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and some place called Turkmenistan combined. Oil? The U.S. Energy Information Administration estimates that the United States could soon overtake Saudi Arabia and Russia to become the world's top oil producer. There are tens of billions of easily accessible barrels of offshore oil here at home -- and much more oil around the world.

Yes, gas prices have spiked an average of 14 cents a gallon in the past month and about 30 cents a gallon since last November, according to AAA. Oil prices jumped to a nine-month high -- more than $105 a barrel -- after the Iranians shut down their own energy exports to Britain and France so they could start a much-needed nuclear program, which is, no doubt, for wholly peaceful purposes.

Given the fungibility of commodities and the track record of civilization in the Middle East, we'll likely always have to deal with occasionally painful fluctuations in the price of energy, regardless of what we do at home -- drilling and new pipelines included. Still, fluctuations have a lot better track record than price controls.

Subsidizing quixotic green companies or creating carbon credits won't stop the rules of basic economics. If the gas crunch starts hitting the economy, it's doubtless that we will get an earful of populist hand-wringing and that we'll hear the administration once again blame wealthy speculators and nasty oil companies.

Yet in the end, high gas prices are part of the plan. This is what the administration wants.

[Winehole23]

Regardless of what Obama and the Democrats want, aren't oil prices globally determined?

[baseline bum]

Oil is "finite." Finite much in the way water is finite.

Wow, what an ignorant thing to write. As if it doesn't take millions of years for oil to be created. No surprise to see Darrin posting this garbage.

[TeyshaBlue]

Regardless of what Obama and the Democrats want, aren't oil prices globally determined?

It's fungible until a Dem is in office. Then, it's completely under the control of the DNC.

[DarrinS]

Wow, what an ignorant thing to write. As if it doesn't take millions of years for oil to be created. No surprise to see Darrin posting this garbage.

I think he was mocking the left. Think "Dublin Statement".

[hater]

Satan must have spiked the gas prices. He hates america :cry

[Winehole23]

http://www.ilr.cornell.edu/globallaborinstitute/research/upload/GLI_KeystoneXL_012312_FIN.pdf

[EVAY]

http://www.ilr.cornell.edu/globallaborinstitute/research/upload/GLI_KeystoneXL_012312_FIN.pdf



Great study to find. Thanks for the link, WH.

I had read some of the findings in other sources but had never seen the study itself.

The most important thing I read was that the group that was being used to inflate the jobs expectations was the Perryman Group.

Man, I know those folks. I used to work for an enormous corporation that continually employed that particular consulting company whenever we wanted to get a state or federal government to let us do something we wanted to do.

The guys are notorious for cooking their data. They have this template that says essentially (with only minor exaggeration)..."This project X will have Y level of economic benefit to Z governmental entity (fill in the blanks with whatever you want to prove), and thus it should be allowed because we are going to make everybody who lives here rich.

[Winehole23]

Great study to find. Thanks for the link, WH.via RealClear, which I check daily. They're pretty good about linking source material.

[ChumpDumper]

Part of "figuring it out" surely had something to do with the recent decision by Obama to nix the Canadian Keystone XL pipeline project that would have pumped 700,000 barrels of oil per day into the United States. More oil just means more excessive, immoral, ugly energy use.Not really. Most of that oil wouldn't be used in the US. It's oil to supply largely duty-free refined product exports. Oil companies want to maximize use of the refineries they aren't closing down for profitability reasons.

[Wild Cobra]

Regardless of what Obama and the Democrats want, aren't oil prices globally determined?
Yes, but it's based on supply vs. demand. In my view, Obama has proven he wants higher oil prices my these moratoriums he put in place.

[Winehole23]

even if Obama wants higher gas prices, he has no control over them.

[LnGrrrR]

Kinda crazy that gas might only last us another 500 years, to be honest. I certainly hope we learn to harness alternative energies by then. I don't think we have millions of years to wait for the next batch of oil.

Of course, I enjoyed that weaselly "at current demand". What's the current tread on oil consumption? Has it stayed stable recently?

[LnGrrrR]

I think he was mocking the left. Think "Dublin Statement".

Ah, so he decided to mock the left by making a moronic statement.

Personally, I just think it makes him look moronic.

[Wild Cobra]

even if Obama wants higher gas prices, he has no control over them.
No direct control. However, if he continues to aide rebel revolutionaries, reducting Middle East oil, and continues to reduce US oil production, well... less supply equals higher prices.

[Winehole23]

Has Obama reduced US production? Link, please.

[Wild Cobra]

Has Obama reduced US production? Link, please.
U.S. drilling moratorium to take bigger output bite (http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/07/08/us-oil-spill-moratorium-forecast-idUSTRE6664TD20100708)

Oil production next year is expected to be cut by 82,000 barrels per day, or almost 30 million barrels total, due to delayed or canceled drilling caused by the moratorium, the Energy Information Administration said. That is 17 percent more from the 70,000 bpd in lost output the agency predicted just last month.

Monthly production losses could reach nearly 100,000 bpd by December 2011, the EIA said.

As a result, the moratorium will end a recent pattern of yearly increases in U.S. oil production, as according to EIA data total output from both onshore and offshore next year will fall by 26,000 bpd to 5.37 million bpd.

[CubanMustGo]

Funny thing about 'supply vs. demand' ... the US is now a large net exporter of gasoline. In fact, in 2011 it (and other refined fuel) was our largest export. Plenty of supply, right? http://online.wsj.com/article/APf917509ee61344a38638e2c08bc47090.html
Kind of knocks that old argument about there not being enough refining capacity in the US out of the park, don't it?

and US oil production, after years of constant decline under GWB, has steadily risen since Obama came in office:
http://www.chron.com/business/energy/article/N-American-oil-output-could-top-40-year-old-peak-2193837.php

http://ww1.hdnux.com/photos/06/16/61/1633372/3/628x471.jpg

Next false argument, WC?

[johnsmith]

My thoughts on this remain the same......I don't fucking care who has to do it, and I don't care whose "fault" it is (and I don't really fault anyone because they are playing in the system given to them).........but someone make this shit fucking cheaper!!!!

[FuzzyLumpkins]

http://www.ilr.cornell.edu/globallaborinstitute/research/upload/GLI_KeystoneXL_012312_FIN.pdf

lol


This paper is primarily concerned about jobs, but the findings below also shine light on another claim made by the industry—that KXL will get the US further on the road to energy independence. The idea of energy independence clearly resonates with the American public, and the paid advertisements depicting Canadian Tar Sands as the source of “ethical oil” (and therefore a better option than oil from dictatorships like Saudi Arabia) plays to that sentiment. But KXL is a global project driven by global oil interests. Tar Sands development has attracted investment capital from
oil multinationals—with Chinese corporations’ stake getting bigger all the time.1 If approved, KXL will almost certainly be constructed by temporary labor working with steel made in Canada and India. Much of the Tar Sands oil will be refined in Port Arthur, Texas, where the refinery is half-owned by Saudi Aramco, the state-owned oil company of Saudi Arabia.2 And a good portion of the oil that will gush down the KXL will, according to some studies, probably end up being finally consumed beyond the territorial United States.3 Indeed, the oil industry is also trying to build another pipeline, Enbridge’s proposed Northern Gateway, to carry Tar Sands oil across British
Columbia for export to Asian markets, although this pipeline also faces serious public opposition. Clearly, Tar Sands oil and energy independence really do not belong in the same sentence.

[boutons_deux]

"make this shit fucking cheaper!!!!"

Trust blindly the fucking unregulated free market's fucking invisible hand, offers the perfect solution to all problems.

[RandomGuy]

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2012/02/22/arent_high_gas_prices_what_democrats_want_113206.h tml


Institute for Energy Research, there is enough natural gas in the U.S. to meet electricity demand for 575 years at current fuel demand, enough to fuel homes heated by natural gas for 857 years

"Institute for Energy Research"

Do I even have to bother looking that one up?

Let me guess, it is a think-tank with a definite point of view that probably says that renewables suck, bla bla bla, fossil fuels good yada yada yada.

It is probably the kind of website that provides juuuusst enough sciency and economic-y arguments that sound good at first glance, but don't stand up to actually critical thinking.

Let's try some quick critical thinking about just this one bit.


"... there is enough natural gas in the U.S. to meet electricity demand for 575 years at current fuel demand, enough to fuel homes heated by natural gas for 857 years ..."

This is a lie.

1. Natural gas supplies have to do both supply electricity AND heat.
2. Technically recoverable gas is not economically recoverable.
3. Consumption for heating and electricity WILL go up as energy demand does.

The author, or the Institute quoted, took the total amount of ALL gas, neglecting #2, then divided that by a single use, neglecting #1, and that current use would never change, neglecting #3.

Either the Institute for Energy Research is incredibly stupid about energy because the three above aspects of real-world energy usage didn't occur to them, or they know about these and deliberately left them out of their calculations, i.e. lying.

WHich is do you think Darrin, lying or stupid?

[RandomGuy]

as for the rest of the turd:


fluctuations have a lot better track record than price controls.

Subsidizing quixotic green companies or creating carbon credits won't stop the rules of basic economics

No Democrat that I have heard or read about on energy policy wants specific "price controls". That is a strawman.


I would be all for raising gasoline taxes to fund new infrastrcture. Gas taxes haven't been raised in almost two decades, and our underfunding on infrastructure needs is just going to get worse until it is addressed.

We have a long history of subsidizing industries and letting free market innovation take over. We are almost to the point where subsidies for renewables will not be needed, and I would like to give that industry a bit of a boost by taxing dead-end fossil fuels a little bit more, and gradually phase out both the subsidy and tax. (note that this will actually extend the time where we will have the fossil fuel bridge, so it will actually prolong our ability to use fossil fuels)

Lastly, the author of the OP, like most people who like to fashion themselves as free-market avengers, probably doesn't understand economics as well as he purports.

[boutons_deux]

"for gasoline taxes to ..."

dissuade oil consumption, esp oil for transport (70% of consumption).

[DarrinS]

as for the rest of the turd:

No Democrat that I have heard or read about on energy policy wants specific "price controls". That is a strawman.




Jimmy Carter did. I'm old enough to remember how that went.

[George Gervin's Afro]

even if Obama wants higher gas prices, he has no control over them.

Obama wants to destroy America

[ChumpDumper]

Jimmy Carter did. I'm old enough to remember how that went.That was Nixon. Carter started dismantling the controls for oil.

You failed again.

[boutons_deux]

GAS PRICES FACT: Republican Politicians Oppose Ending Taxpayer Handouts To Big Oil |

Every Republican presidential contender and nearly every Republican member of the House and Senate has signed a pledge to oppose ending taxpayer handouts to Big Oil — handouts that will add up to more than $40 billion over the next ten years. In addition, Republicans have repeatedly voted in lockstep to block efforts to repeal the tax giveaways to Big Oil. President Obama, however, remains undaunted and has once again included repeal of these wasteful giveaways in his budget for 2013.

http://thinkprogress.org/green/2012/02/23/431214/gas-prices-fact-republican-politicians-oppose-ending-taxpayer-handouts-to-big-oil/

[johnsmith]

GAS PRICES FACT: Republican Politicians Oppose Ending Taxpayer Handouts To Big Oil |

Every Republican presidential contender and nearly every Republican member of the House and Senate has signed a pledge to oppose ending taxpayer handouts to Big Oil — handouts that will add up to more than $40 billion over the next ten years. In addition, Republicans have repeatedly voted in lockstep to block efforts to repeal the tax giveaways to Big Oil. President Obama, however, remains undaunted and has once again included repeal of these wasteful giveaways in his budget for 2013.

http://thinkprogress.org/green/2012/02/23/431214/gas-prices-fact-republican-politicians-oppose-ending-taxpayer-handouts-to-big-oil/

Totally relevant.

[DarrinS]

That was Nixon. Carter started dismantling the controls for oil.

You failed again.



piss off, ankle biter

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presidency_of_Jimmy_Carter




In 1977, Carter convinced the Democratic Congress to create the United States Department of Energy (DoE) with the goal of conserving energy. Carter set oil and natural gas price controls, had solar hot water panels installed on the roof of the White House, had a wood stove in his living quarters, ordered the General Services Administration to turn off hot water in some federal facilities, and requested that all Christmas light decorations remain dark in 1979 and 1980. Nationwide, controls were put on thermostats in government and commercial buildings to prevent people from raising temperatures in the winter (above 65 degrees Fahrenheit = 18.33 °C) or lowering them in the summer (below 78 degrees Fahrenheit = 25.55 °C).

[ChumpDumper]

piss off, ankle biter

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presidency_of_Jimmy_Carterlol you failed to read your own article.

In 1973, during the Nixon Administration, the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) reduced supplies of oil available to the world market, in part because of deflation of the dollars they were receiving as a result of Nixon leaving the gold standard and in part as a reaction to America's sending of arms to Israel during the Yom Kippur War. This sparked the 1973 Oil Crisis and forced oil prices to rise sharply, spurring price inflation throughout the economy and slowing growth. The U.S government imposed price controls on gasoline and oil following the announcement, which had the effect of causing shortages and long lines at filling stations for gasoline....

....One related measure approved by Congress during the presidency of Gerald Ford, the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975, gave Presidents the authority to deregulate prices of domestic oil, and Carter exercised this option on July 1, 1979, as a means of encouraging both oil production and conservation. Oil imports, which had reached a record 2.4 billion barrels in 1977 (50% of supply), declined by half from 1979 to 1983.

[RandomGuy]

Jimmy Carter [instituted oil price controls]. I'm old enough to remember how that went.

http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/picture.php?albumid=212&pictureid=1467


August 15: U.S. Government institutes Phase I price controls. Invoking the powers granted to the president by the Economic Stabilization Act of 1970, President Richard Nixon orders 90-day nationwide freeze on all wages, prices, salaries and rents.
September 22: OPEC directs members to negotiate price increases to offset the devaluation of the U.S. dollar.
November: U.S. Phase II price controls begin. Plan is to allow for gradual 2-3 percent annual price increases, however, domestic petroleum prices remain at Phase I levels.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1970-1979_world_oil_market_chronology

[RandomGuy]

piss off, ankle biter

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presidency_of_Jimmy_Carter

He set them because they were annually reviewed by the executive branch starting with Nixon.

As noted, he also abolished them.

[Winehole23]

Jimmy Carter did. I'm old enough to remember how that went.


Date of Birth: April 30, 1969 (42)Remembered the price controls from when you were eight but forgot all about the Carter deregulation when you were ten. Looks like your memory has been getting worse for quite some time.

[DarrinS]

He set them because they were annually reviewed by the executive branch starting with Nixon.

As noted, he also abolished them.


So, this previous point has been addressed.


No Democrat that I have heard or read about on energy policy wants specific "price controls". That is a strawman.



Instead of "price controls", how about "reasonable profits"?


http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/house/205085-dems-propose-reasonable-profits-board-to-regulate-oil-company-profits




Six House Democrats, led by Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio), want to set up a "Reasonable Profits Board" to control gas profits.

The Democrats, worried about higher gas prices, want to set up a board that would apply a "windfall profit tax" as high as 100 percent on the sale of oil and gas, according to their legislation. The bill provides no specific guidance for how the board would determine what constitutes a reasonable profit.

The Gas Price Spike Act, H.R. 3784, would apply a windfall tax on the sale of oil and gas that ranges from 50 percent to 100 percent on all surplus earnings exceeding "a reasonable profit." It would set up a Reasonable Profits Board made up of three presidential nominees that will serve three-year terms. Unlike other bills setting up advisory boards, the Reasonable Profits Board would not be made up of any nominees from Congress.

The bill would also seem to exclude industry representatives from the board, as it says members "shall have no financial interests in any of the businesses for which reasonable profits are determined by the Board."

According to the bill, a windfall tax of 50 percent would be applied when the sale of oil or gas leads to a profit of between 100 percent and 102 percent of a reasonable profit. The windfall tax would jump to 75 percent when the profit is between 102 and 105 percent of a reasonable profit, and above that, the windfall tax would be 100 percent. The bill also specifies that the oil-and-gas companies, as the seller, would have to pay this tax.

Kucinich said these tax revenues would be used to fund alternative transportation programs when oil-and-gas prices spike.

"Gas prices continue to rise, creating a hardship for the American people," he said. "At the same time, oil companies are making record profits gouging their customers. This bill would tax only the excess profits and create forward-thinking transportation alternatives."

Specifically, he said the money would be used to fund a tax credit on the purchase of fuel-efficient cars and set up a grant program for mass transit programs when oil-and-gas prices are high.

The bill does not estimate the size of these grants or the amount of money that might be collected through the tax.

Co-sponsoring the bill are five other Democrats: Reps. John Conyers Jr. (Mich.), Bob Filner (Calif.), Marcia Fudge (Ohio), Jim Langevin (R.I.), and Lynn Woolsey (Calif.).

[MannyIsGod]

:lol

[TeyshaBlue]

http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/picture.php?albumid=212&pictureid=1467
Originally Posted by 1971 timeline, world oil markets

August 15: U.S. Government institutes Phase I price controls. Invoking the powers granted to the president by the Economic Stabilization Act of 1970, President Richard Nixon orders 90-day nationwide freeze on all wages, prices, salaries and rents.
September 22: OPEC directs members to negotiate price increases to offset the devaluation of the U.S. dollar.
November: U.S. Phase II price controls begin. Plan is to allow for gradual 2-3 percent annual price increases, however, domestic petroleum prices remain at Phase I levels.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1970-1979_world_oil_market_chronology

Remember the "WIN" buttons? :depressed

[boutons_deux]

Perry: Gingrich Can Lower Oil Prices Just By Talking About It

if the perception is Newt Gingrich could be the next president of the United States, that will have a worldwide affect, I will suggest to you, on the price of oil. And people who watch these markets and people who deal with these markets understand, that when you see the type of approach that he’s talking about — opening up federal lands and waters, opening up that pipeline from Canada, clearly giving incentives to drill in America for domestic energy, and then an all of the above policy, whether it’s wind or nuclear or whatever it might be — that will have a dampening affect on the cost of oil in particular and the other energy prices as well.

http://thinkprogress.org/green/2012/02/23/431246/perry-gingrich-magic-gas-prices/

Stoopid is BAAAACK!! :lol :lol :lol

[Winehole23]

lol you failed to read your own article.
happens with striking regularity

[boutons_deux]

Once Again, Speculators Behind Sharply Rising Oil and Gasoline Prices

http://www.truth-out.org/sites/default/files/gas022212t.jpg

the price of oil and gasoline has leaped far beyond conventional supply and demand variables. Financial speculators are piling into the market, torquing the Iranian fear factor into ever-higher prices.

"Speculation is now part of the DNA of oil prices. You cannot separate the two anymore. There is no demarcation," said Fadel Gheit, a 30-year veteran of energy markets and an analyst at Oppenheimer & Co. "I still remain convinced oil prices are inflated."

Consider that light, sweet crude trading on the NYMEX changed hands at $79.20 a barrel just four months ago, but soared past $106 a barrel Tuesday afternoon, partly on news that Iran would halt shipment of oil to Britain and France. But those countries already had stopped buying Iranian oil. And Didier Houssin, the International Energy Agency's director for energy markets and security, said that "there are alternative supplies that can make up for any loss of Iranian exports," The Wall Street Journal reported.

Still, oil's price shot up because it trades in financial markets, where Wall Street firms and other big financial players dominate the trading of oil, even though they have no intention of ever taking possession of the oil whose contracts they are trading.

Since oil prices are the biggest component in the price of gasoline, pump prices are soaring. AAA said Tuesday that the nationwide average price for a gallon of gasoline stood at $3.57, compared with $3.38 a month ago and $3.17 a year ago. It takes about $6 more to fill up the tank than it did this time last year — and last year's gasoline-price surge helped take the steam out of the economic recovery.

Defining what percentage of today's high oil and gasoline prices is due to excessive speculation, driven by Iran fears, is something of a guessing game.

"I put the Iran security premium at about $8 to $10 (a barrel) at this point, which still puts crude at about $90 or $95," said John Kilduff, a veteran energy analyst at AgainCapital in New York.

The fear premium is the froth above what prices would be absent fears of a supply disruption_ somewhere in the $80 to $85 range for a barrel of crude oil. It means that even with the extra cost put on oil from Iran fears, prices are at least another $10 higher than what demand fundamentals would dictate.

Why? Financial speculators.

What should the price of oil be if left to conventional supply and demand market fundamentals? Canada's the largest supplier of imported oil to the United States, which now actually produces more than half of the oil it consumes. Production and delivery costs for a barrel of oil from Canada are about $75 a barrel. The market-fundamentals cost for a barrel of oil is in that ballpark; above that, speculation sets the prices.

"It's as simple as that,"

http://www.truth-out.org/print/12828

[DarrinS]

Lol


Ka_tjPLJwVI

[RandomGuy]

So, this previous point has been addressed.

Instead of "price controls", how about "reasonable profits"?


http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/house/205085-dems-propose-reasonable-profits-board-to-regulate-oil-company-profits

Translation:

"I can't even man up and admit I was talking, yet again, out of my ass."

Go sit in the corner with Cosmored.

[Nbadan]

ummmfff...

http://editorialcartoonists.com/cartoons/SteinE/2012/SteinE20120224_low.jpg

[Wild Cobra]

ummmfff...

http://editorialcartoonists.com/cartoons/SteinE/2012/SteinE20120224_low.jpg
LOL...

What happened to it being Bush's fault?

[boutons_deux]

dubya actually made gas cheaper by invading Iraq (which paid for itself with the oil) and causing democracy to bloom in the Middle East

[Wild Cobra]

dubya actually made gas cheaper by invading Iraq (which paid for itself with the oil) and causing democracy to bloom in the Middle East
If you want to believe that....

[boutons_deux]

Gas Spike Takes $5 Billion From The 99 Percent And Gives It To Big Oil

Since the beginning of the year, the price for gasoline increased 29 cents per gallon. If that average increase holds true through the end of March, it will translate to $5.8 billion in additional profits for the big five.

http://thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/big_oil_figure11.png

http://thinkprogress.org/green/2012/02/29/434623/gas-spike-takes-5-billion-from-the-99-percent-and-gives-it-to-big-oil/

====

The oilcos, certainly playing heavily in the oil speculation game, will push up the price of oil, restrict gasoline refining and export refined oil, to keep the $100Bs pouring in. They're dreaming about declining oil production and skyrocketing oil/gasoline prices.

[boutons_deux]

More Drilling Won’t Lower Gas Prices

http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2012/02/img/drilling_gas_prices_chart1.jpg

It hasn’t worked yet. There are currently more oil rigs operating on U.S. lands and waters than in the rest of the world combined, production is at an eight-year high, and the most recent “Short-Term Energy Outlook” from the Energy Information Administration projects production to continue growing at least through 2013 based on current activity. By the end of President Obama’s recently issued five-year drilling plan, fully 75 percent of our undiscovered, technically recoverable offshore reserves will be open to drilling. All that additional activity hasn’t stemmed the recent gas price spike.
If oil companies wanted to increase production, they could. In March 2011 the Department of the Interior released a report revealing two-thirds of oil-and-gas companies’ offshore leases and more than half of their onshore leases are not being produced.

http://thinkprogress.org/romm/2012/03/01/435330/more-drilling-wont-lower-gas-prices/

[Winehole23]

http://www.kztv10.com/story/30058660/gas-prices-dropping

[Winehole23]

dropped boutons and DarrinS in one fell swoop.

thanks, Obama!

[ElNono]

$1.92/gallon here in NJ for regular... :tu

[boutons_deux]

dropped boutons and DarrinS in one fell swoop.

thanks, Obama!

whinewhore, just another victim of The Great Boutons' bitch slapping.

the Saudis, BigOil's cherished allies, are driving the game and driving US drillers into bankruptcy, not US drillers.



Goldman Sees 15 Years of Weak Crude as $20 U.S Oil Looms

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-09-17/goldman-sees-15-years-of-weak-crude-as-20-u-s-oil-looms-on-glut



KKR’s Samson Resources Files Bankruptcy as Shale Bet Sours

Oil and gas driller Samson Resources Corp. filed for bankruptcy in Delaware Wednesday night, undone by a collapse in energy prices and billions in debt that KKR & Co. and other investors piled on to fund a 2011 takeover.

Tulsa, Oklahoma-based Samson and its owners were stung by the price drop that put money into the pockets of consumers through lower gasoline and heating costs, while driving other producers, such as Sabine Oil & Gas Corp. and Quicksilver Resources Inc., into Chapter 11. Samson’s filing is among the biggest energy bankruptcies in the U.S. this year, but it probably won’t be the last.

The shale-oil driller is, in a way, a victim of its own success. Samson and other producers have rushed to use hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling to tap previously hard-to-reach oil and gas deposits in shale formations, triggering a production boom that helped send prices tumbling.

http://assets.bwbx.io/images/iH6Yl6iefHVA/v2/-1x-1.png

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-09-17/kkr-s-samson-resources-files-bankruptcy-as-shale-bet-sours

[boutons_deux]

$1.92/gallon here in NJ for regular... :tu

I saw 2.02 here in SA, but Costco and others still at appx 2.07. the volatility has some stations way above that trying claw in some pennies before being forced down under 2.10.

[boutons_deux]

in SA, I bought gas in the low 1.70s earlier in '15, for the price of oil in the mid-40s, as it is now, so BigOil is not selling gas as low as it could be, not passing on the savings from the low price of oil.

[pgardn]

in SA, I bought gas in the low 1.70s earlier in '15, for the price of oil in the mid-40s, as it is now, so BigOil is not selling gas as low as it could be, not passing on the savings from the low price of oil.

And I have bought gas much cheaper than the cost per barrel would indicate. It's not as simple as you portray it.

[boutons_deux]

And I have bought gas much cheaper than the cost per barrel would indicate. It's not as simple as you portray it.

don't be coy, garden-splain how the price of gas is detached (at least downward) from the price of oil. Seems like when the price of oil goes (say) up, we see it in the price of gas, but not in the other direction.

[tlongII]

[FONT=arial][SIZE=3]

whinewhore, just another victim of The Great Boutons' bitch slapping.

the Saudis, BigOil's cherished allies, are driving the game and driving US drillers into bankruptcy, not US drillers.


Wrong! The US drillers are driving the Saudi's into increasing production and cutting prices.

[boutons_deux]

Wrong! The US drillers are driving the Saudi's into increasing production and cutting prices.

wrong, SA kept pumping above demand, creating the glut, which drove down the price. SA wanted kill the weak, marginal US frackers, and it worked. Fracking and frackers have busted.

[TeyshaBlue]

SA, as has been pointed out multiple times, reacted to the significant increase in US production.

[boutons_deux]

SA, as has been pointed out multiple times, reacted to the significant increase in US production.

as all smart people know, SA reacted to the increase in US fracking oil (and reduced US importing of SA oil) by strategizing to kill off US frackers.

[TeyshaBlue]

That's exactly what I said.
Sometimes you argue just to hear your head rattle. :lol

[boutons_deux]

That's exactly what I said.
Sometimes you argue just to hear your head rattle. :lol

I said it much better.

[RandomGuy]

Regardless of what Obama and the Democrats want, aren't oil prices globally determined?

Yes. Yes they are.

scott could probably opine, shoudl he care to.

[RandomGuy]

as all smart people know, SA reacted to the increase in US fracking oil (and reduced US importing of SA oil) by strategizing to kill off US frackers.

Partially. There is also the fact that they are running an increasingly sizable budget deficit. They have lots of fiscal reserves to be sure, but they are victims of the resource trap.

Most other oil producers are in the same boat, with budgets supported by oil revenues. Don't cry for me Venezuala.....

[pgardn]

don't be coy, garden-splain how the price of gas is detached (at least downward) from the price of oil. Seems like when the price of oil goes (say) up, we see it in the price of gas, but not in the other direction.

Well I've seen the opposite happen as well.
splain it?

[boutons_deux]

Partially. There is also the fact that they are running an increasingly sizable budget deficit. They have lots of fiscal reserves to be sure, but they are victims of the resource trap.

Most other oil producers are in the same boat, with budgets supported by oil revenues. Don't cry for me Venezuala.....

can't find it now, but it seems like 2018 is when the Gulf States $$$ reserves will run out.

found it http://www.cnbc.com/2015/08/26/saudi-arabia-hangs-on-with-cheap-oil-but-for-how-long.html

[boutons_deux]

Falling Oil And Gasoline Prices Bring Back Memories Of Right-Wing Media Hypocrisy


With global crude oil prices at their lowest point in seven years, and gasoline prices approaching their lowest point of President Obama's term of office, Media Matters remembers Fox News' hypocritical coverage of the relationship between presidential policy initiatives and fuel and energy markets.

http://cloudfront.mediamatters.org/static/uploader/image/2015/12/15/12.15_gas_buddy.png


Right-Wing Media Have A History Of Spinning Oil, Gasoline Prices To Attack President Obama

Limbaugh Claims To Have A "Dirty Little Secret" About Oil Prices.

On the January 20 edition of Premiere Radio Networks' The Rush Limbaugh Show, host Rush Limbaugh told listeners what he falsely claimed was the "dirty little secret" behind low oil prices -- a struggling economy. Limbaugh claimed, "One of the leading, or primary, reasons why the price of oil is down, and gasoline, is demand. Demand is down. And the demand is down because the U.S. economy is in the tank." The reason, why more people weren't talking about it, he asserted, is because, "You won't find very many experts acknowledge this because it contradicts the idea that the economy is roaring back." [Premiere Radio Networks, The Rush Limbaugh Show, 1/20/15 (http://mediamatters.org/blog/2015/01/20/rush-limbaughs-gasoline-conspiracy-depends-on-t/202197)]

MSNBC'S Rachel Maddow Unmasks Fox News' Flip-Flop On Gasoline Prices.

On the October 29, 2014 edition of MSNBC's The Rachel Maddow Show, host Rachel Maddow reported on gasoline prices falling to a four-year low. Maddow highlighted a scoop from Media Matters showing that Fox has "bent over backwards to blame President Obama anytime gas prices go up," only to confusingly question whether or not low gas prices might actually be bad for the economy. Surprisingly, this was not the first time Fox tried to portray decreasing gas prices as a bad thing. In May 2012, Fox Business personalities Melissa Francis and Stuart Varney suggested that lower gas prices were "a sign of a weakening economy." [Media Matters, 5/9/12 (http://mediamatters.org/blog/2012/05/09/fox-now-asking-is-the-drop-in-gas-prices-a-bad/184835); MSNBC, The Rachel Maddow Show, 10/29/14 (http://mediamatters.org/video/2014/10/29/msnbcs-rachel-maddow-blasts-foxs-hypocrisy-on-g/201374)]

Fox's Stuart Varney Uses Turmoil In Iraq To Blame Obama For Rising Gasoline Prices.

On the June 13, 2014 edition of Fox News' Fox & Friends, co-host Brian Kilmeade and Fox Business host Stuart Varney discussed the impact of turmoil in Iraq on the global oil market. Varney used the opportunity to attack President Obama for the withdrawal of American combat troops from Iraq from 2009 through 2011, stating, "Let me make this very clear, we are all paying for the president's policy mistakes. The retreat in Iraq, the chaos in Iraq, will be paid for by us at the pump." [Media Matters, 6/13/14 (http://mediamatters.org/blog/2014/06/13/fox-uses-iraq-violence-to-blame-obama-for-risin/199715)]

2012 Was A Year Of Gasoline Price Fibs On Fox.

In 2012, like most years, average U.S. gasoline prices fluctuated according to global market conditions, seasonal changes in demand, and other contributing factors. At the beginning of the year, as gas prices rose, Fox launched a relentless campaign to falsely blame President Obama's energy and environmental policies for the price spike. In May, as gas prices began to fall, Fox questioned if low gas prices might actually be a bad thing and "a sign of a looming global economic crisis." One Fox News analyst even expressed hope that gasoline prices would "stay close to five dollars in November" because increased pressure on American consumers might help Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney win the 2012 election. [Media Matters, 12/29/12 (http://mediamatters.org/blog/2012/12/29/2012-a-year-of-gas-price-fibs-on-fox/191943)]

Economists Bash Fox's "Ridiculous" Gasoline Price Fable.

In October 2012, Fox News criticized President Obama's accurate statement during the second Presidential debate that gasoline prices only appeared to have doubled during his presidency because they plummeted in the weeks before his inauguration due to the broader economic downturn he inherited from the Bush administration. Fox had advised Republican nominee Mitt Romney to misleadingly claim that Obama's policies were responsible for the price increase, but economists and gasoline market experts refuted those claims. In fact, a FoxNews.com report blaming Obama for price increases cited two experts who did not pin blame for higher gas prices on Obama, and one stated "President Obama was right" about the recession, not his policies, lowering gasoline demand. [Media Matters, 10/17/12 (http://mediamatters.org/research/2012/10/17/conservatives-remain-in-denial-after-obama-burs/190708);10/22/12 (http://mediamatters.org/research/2012/10/22/how-conservative-media-wrote-romneys-energy-att/190828#gasprices); 10/23/12 (http://mediamatters.org/blog/2012/10/23/economists-shoot-down-fox-news-ridiculous-gas-p/190878)]

Fox Blames Obama Administration For Increasing Gas Prices In 2012.

On March 5, 2012 Media Matterspublished two video compilations revealing how Fox's coverage of the gasoline market changed during the Bush and Obama administrations. In 2008, during President Bush's final year in office, Fox News hosts and guests claimed that spikes in gas prices were the result of marketplace factors, not the fault of the White House. In 2012, as President Obama began his re-election campaign, Fox News' coverage changed dramatically as the network increasingly blamed Obama's economic, energy, and environmental policy decisions for high gas prices. [Media Matters, 3/5/12 (http://mediamatters.org/blog/2012/03/05/flashback-fox-news-on-gas-prices-in-2008/157979)]

Fox Blamed Obama For Change In Gas Prices From 2009 Through 2012.

In February 2012, Fox falsely suggested that Obama's energy policies were to blame for the recent increase in gasoline prices, without explaining that prices were low in January 2009 because the recession slashed American consumer demand. On the February 16, 2012 edition of Fox & Friends, co-host Steve Doocy claimed gas prices offered an "opportunity to disrupt" the positive economic narrative coming from the Obama administration. On the same broadcast, guest-host Juliet Huddy asked if rising prices were "enough to derail [Obama's] return to the office." Fox contributor Eric Bolling replied, "Well it better be. What else matters?" Fox also repeatedly aired variations of the following graphic:

http://mediamatters.org/research/2015/12/15/falling-oil-and-gasoline-prices-bring-back-memo/207510

:lol

[CosmicCowboy]

Back to the OP, only high oil prices make alternative renewable energy economically feasible. Despite all the cross fingered unenforceable pledges made in Paris last week, all those countries will keep using oil and gas for their energy needs as long as it remains cheap.

[boutons_deux]

Back to the OP, only high oil prices make alternative renewable energy economically feasible. Despite all the cross fingered unenforceable pledges made in Paris last week, all those countries will keep using oil and gas for their energy needs as long as it remains cheap.

When there is the inevitable battery/energy storage breakthrough(s), EVs and FCVs will destroy the transport fuel market in industrial countries first, then in non-industrial countries. Same with distributed solar + storage destroying the centralized electricity monopolies, cartels.

wind and solar are already competitive with coal and almost natural gas for electricity generation.

The biggest obstacles to renewables are BigCorp politics, not price or technical.

[CosmicCowboy]

If

If

When

Wind and solar are NOT currently competitive with natural gas.

[boutons_deux]

Wind Electricity To Be Fully Competitive With Natural Gas by 2016, Says Bloomberg New Energy Financehttp://thinkprogress.org/climate/2011/11/14/367883/wind-electricity-competitive-natural-gas/

and if your gassy buddies start prefer to sell LNG to foreign customers, the domestic price will increase towards the world price, making wind an even better source.

If the wind and solar tax credits get extended 5 years, wind will explode as fast as can be installed. If GE, etc can use lattice towers for much higher nacelles and bigger props, even more areas than now, with current monotubes, will be able suitable for turbines.

[boutons_deux]

btw, this looks very interesting for re-fueling coal plants

Metal Powder: the New Zero-Carbon Fuel?

http://spectrum.ieee.org/energywise/energy/renewables/metal-powder-a-zerocarbon-fuel-with-promising-properties

[Wild Cobra]

Regardless of what Obama and the Democrats want, aren't oil prices globally determined?

And the exchange rates of currencies.

[boutons_deux]

And the exchange rates of currencies.

both are driven by traders

[DMX7]

Back to the OP, only high oil prices make alternative renewable energy economically feasible. Despite all the cross fingered unenforceable pledges made in Paris last week, all those countries will keep using oil and gas for their energy needs as long as it remains cheap.

You mean as long as it remains materially cheaper than the alternative....

[CosmicCowboy]

You mean as long as it remains materially cheaper than the alternative....

yes

[boutons_deux]

If

If

When

Wind and solar are NOT currently competitive with natural gas.

Not IF, but WHEN. $Bs being poured into energy storage tech. BigOil's future is only little more rosy than BigCoal's.

[DMX7]

Oil is a finite resource. It's not going to last forever though. Hopefully people realize that.

[CosmicCowboy]

Oil is a finite resource. It's not going to last forever though. Hopefully people realize that.

Well, duh. And as it becomes more scarce and it has to be sourced in more and more expensive locations (deep water, arctic, tar sands) it will become more expensive and alternative energies will achieve economic parity or dominance.

[DMX7]

Well, duh. And as it becomes more scarce and it has to be sourced in more and more expensive locations (deep water, arctic, tar sands) it will become more expensive and alternative energies will achieve economic parity or dominance.

I'm not sure energy companies are really preparing for the future with that in mind, at least not in any meaningful way.

[boutons_deux]

Oil is a finite resource. It's not going to last forever though. Hopefully people realize that.

More immediately, peak "cheap, easy" oil has already been passed.

[CosmicCowboy]

I'm not sure energy companies are really preparing for the future with that in mind, at least not in any meaningful way.

I know Exxon has spent a buttload on Hydrogen research. They tend to focus on transportable fuels as opposed to stationary/random generation fuels like wind and solar.

[DMX7]

They told us the strategy of "Drill, baby, drill" would leave to great economic prosperity and undermine the economic power of the OPEC and the Middle East. That hasn't worked out too well...

[boutons_deux]

They told us the strategy of "Drill, baby, drill" would leave to great economic prosperity and undermine the economic power of the OPEC and the Middle East. That hasn't worked out too well...

Repugs are ALWAYS wrong

[CosmicCowboy]

They told us the strategy of "Drill, baby, drill" would leave to great economic prosperity and undermine the economic power of the OPEC and the Middle East. That hasn't worked out too well...

Not sure i understand your argument. It certainly precluded The Middle East from ever again using oil as an economic weapon like they did in the 1973 embargo.

[boutons_deux]

Not sure i understand your argument. It certainly precluded The Middle East from ever again using oil as an economic weapon like they did in the 1973 embargo.

:lol

Saudi Arabia has been weaponizing oil as a weapon to shake out the US frackers as competitors. 100s of them have gone out of business.

[CosmicCowboy]

:lol

Saudi Arabia has been weaponizing oil as a weapon to shake out the US frackers as competitors. 100s of them have gone out of business.

So? The oil and wells are there. The small fry will get swallowed up by the big guys. There are currently THOUSANDS of wells in the US that have been drilled while prices to drill are cheap but not fracked and put into production. The oil and gas is still there.

[Winehole23]

Back to the OP, only high oil prices make alternative renewable energy economically feasible. Despite all the cross fingered unenforceable pledges made in Paris last week, all those countries will keep using oil and gas for their energy needs as long as it remains cheap.You have to look at the trend. Parity may not be as far away as you think. The global trend of investment will continue to bridge the gap.

http://fs-unep-centre.org/sites/default/files/attachments/key_findings.pdf

[Winehole23]

pertinent stats here: https://www.lazard.com/perspective/levelized-cost-of-energy-analysis-90/

[boutons_deux]

So? The oil and wells are there. The small fry will get swallowed up by the big guys. There are currently THOUSANDS of wells in the US that have been drilled while prices to drill are cheap but not fracked and put into production. The oil and gas is still there.

The carbon needs to stay in the ground, extract no more than absolutely necessary, and certainly export none of it, crude or refined.

[boutons_deux]

pertinent stats here: https://www.lazard.com/perspective/levelized-cost-of-energy-analysis-90/

what are? :

This analysis does not take into account potential socialand environmental externalities (e.g., the social costs of distributed generation,"

[Winehole23]

true, it does not. but it does give factual context to CC's glib generalization about the feasibility of alternative energy.

[boutons_deux]

true, it does not. but it does give factual context to CC's glib generalization about the feasibility of alternative energy.

conservatives are always self-interestedly wrong

[Winehole23]

Congress gives solar and wind energy a big shove, extends tax credits another 5 years:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-12-17/what-just-happened-to-solar-and-wind-is-a-really-big-deal

[Winehole23]

conservatives are always self-interestedly wrongget over yourself.

not everyone who disagrees with you is a conservative; not everyone who disagrees with you is wrong.

[Winehole23]

a few years back you predicted Big Oil and Repugs would smother alternative energy in its cradle. as usual, you were wrong.

[boutons_deux]

Congress gives solar and wind energy a big shove, extends tax credits another 5 years:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-12-17/what-just-happened-to-solar-and-wind-is-a-really-big-deal

was picking up some panels yesterday. My vendor said yes, extended, but at less than current 30% and decreases, and phases out completely. (BigOil subsidies have run for decades with no end in sight)

In exchange for the wind/solar boots, the $100Bs made by BigOil by exporting Human-Americans' natgas and crude oil don't phase out.

Dems and America got fucked by Repugs/BigOil again.

[CosmicCowboy]

conservatives are always self-interestedly wrong

lmao. As far as I can tell I'm the only one in here with solar panels on his roof.

[boutons_deux]

lmao. As far as I can tell I'm the only one in here with solar panels on his roof.

mine aren't on roof, they're on 8" monotubes and 2-axis trackers

[FuzzyLumpkins]

lmao. As far as I can tell I'm the only one in here with solar panels on his roof.

supposedly obtained through welfare, fatty.

[CosmicCowboy]

Typical pussy post from the forum loser. I paid $9,000.00 out of pocket. Probably more than your net worth.

[boutons_deux]

Typical pussy post from the forum loser. I paid $9,000.00 out of pocket. Probably more than your net worth.

and CPS rebate paid you back well over half of that. CPS will with my solar project. The downside is that CPS pays, no, CREDITS, you only $0.016 per KwH fed into their network, a credit which doesn't rollover beyond a calendar year.

(vs $what?

"CPS will buy the power at a guaranteed rate that it has refused to disclose." http://www.expressnews.com/news/energy/article/CPS-paying-more-than-LA-for-solar-power-sources-4649393.php.

And publically owed utility that keeps fundamental business secrets from the public )

[CosmicCowboy]

Nope I was $9,000 out if pocket after rebates and tax credits.

Upside as an early adopter is CPS pays me a lot more for energy fed into the system.

[Winehole23]

https://www.facebook.com/KHOU11/photos/a.449177369061.236260.369116414061/10154603291044062/?type=3&theater

[TDMVPDPOY]

doesnt govt collect more in taxes if gas prices increases? ...lmao

[boutons_deux]

doesnt govt collect more in taxes if gas prices increases? ...lmao

no, gas is Federally taxed stupidly at a stupidly low fixed pennies per gallon, not a percentage.

BigOil's Congressional whores had nothing to with this taxing scheme. :)

cheap gas means more gallons consumed, means more tax revenue.

[TDMVPDPOY]

no, gas is Federally taxed stupidly at a stupidly low fixed pennies per gallon, not a percentage.

BigOil's Congressional whores had nothing to with this taxing scheme. :)

cheap gas means more gallons consumed, means more tax revenue.

at leasts america doesnt have GST and excise tax :( a tax on fkn tax...double taxing

[boutons_deux]

at leasts america doesnt have GST and excise tax :( a tax on fkn tax...double taxing

Oz doesn't have any domestic oil (your Arckaringa Basin shale oil is uneconomic, like much shale oil anywhere), so has to spend AU$ to go buy US$ to go buy oil.

Discouraging gas (and coal) consumption with tax is a reasonable policy.

USA should do the same but BigOil make US govt policy.

[ducks]

No they want satires down names changed defund police