So do you still think we have an oil shortage or is it just something made up by politicians, oil companies and stock traders to make more money for themselves?
Quote from the article below.
DUBAI (Reuters) - OPEC believes oil prices are too steep, after setting a fresh record high above $70 a barrel, and the rise is not justified by market fundamentals, a senior OPEC delegate said on Tuesday.
The delegate said there was no shortage of crude oil supply and that OPEC giant Saudi Arabia and other producers had pledged in the past to keep markets well supplied.
"OPEC believes strongly that prices are too high and nobody wants to see these prices," the delegate told Reuters. "(But) it has nothing to do with fundamentals."
------------------ technology is great when it works and one big pain in the ass when it doesn't. Detroit iron rules all the rest are just toys.
There is no oil shortage. It is not about the shortage issue.
We have a demand and refining capacity problem. Demand for oil all around the is way up. Not just the US demanding more, but BRIC countries as well.
We are also pumping the same amount of oil that we did 20 years ago, but with double the amount of pumps and rigs, making them less efficient and also because we (The USA) cannot pump in any new places that we know where oil is. Off shore and Alaska.
Did you know that Cuba is going to pump oil off shore only 45 miles from the Florida border? Did you know that Mexico recently discovered huge amounts of oil in the gulf for which they will pump? But we cannot pump anymore that is out there now because of enviromentalist.
We also have less refineries in the USA. We haven't built a new one since the 1970's. Making gasoline and diseal a bit tough to come by as these refineries are bursting at the seems in capacity. Why do you think if one goes down that oil prices rise? One refinery shutdown for what ever reason effects the supply that much.
We are never going to see gasoline prices below $1 ever again. Demand is way to high because of SUV's and the BRIC countries.
With all due respect. Why does it become NECESSARY to increase prices when demand increases? It's not as if those who need it won't buy it but more that those who need it will PAY MORE for it.
How do you spell glutinous greed?
Then there is this other bit of finely crafted bullshit about the inability to refine fuel fast enough.. OK... Show me one gas station with a sign that says " OUT OF FUEL due directly to a shortage of supply and I'll let you call me the town idiot. Until then YOU are the idiot for accepting such a stupid capitalist idea.
quote
Originally posted by Wichita:
There is no oil shortage. It is not about the shortage issue.
We have a demand and refining capacity problem. Demand for oil all around the is way up. Not just the US demanding more, but BRIC countries as well.
IP: Logged
08:06 AM
RACE Member
Posts: 4842 From: Des Moines IA Registered: Dec 2002
Can anybody say. Iran crises. Or better yet, useful excuse to gouge the public? Kind of like WMD were in Iraq, a useful excuse to do whatever they want.
Here are sme other cited BS issues.
Switching the Northeastern states from MTBE to Ethanol additive. Summer switch of gasoline mix. Instability in Iraq. More demand from summer driving.
Here is the truth.
People drive more in Summer and buy less heating oil and natural gas for home heating. So the oil and gas companies use whatever excuse they can to raise prices on the oil we are using, gasoline. They WILL push prices way past $3 this summer. Are you ready for $3.25 during the Memorial day weekend vacation? How about possibly $3.50 in August? Sound good? No I didn't think so. Maybe it's time we declassify the secret energy task force documents attended by energy lobbyists and industry leaders?
With all due respect. Why does it become NECESSARY to increase prices when demand increases?
Lets say that you have a Fiero that you want to sell. You believe that it is worth $2000, but it has been for sale for 4 months and there is only one guy interested, and he is not willing to pay you more than $1600. The DEMAND for your car is low. Do you hold out for an unknown length of time to get your price? Or do you just take what you an get? Conversely, you list your car for sale and you think it is worth $2000. For the sake of argument lets say that it turns out that your particular is highly sought after and you have 30-40 people all wanting your car and are willing to pay up to $4000 to make sure that they get it. The DEMAND for your car is high. Do you hold out and only take the $2000 that you were origionally asking for? Or do you take the amount they will give you?
I don't know about you but I would take $4000 over $2000 anyday. From the oil suppliers point of view, America as a whole is willing to pay high gas prices up to a point. If they werent then gas prices would go down from low DEMAND. I am not saying I like high gas prices, it is placing a huge strain on my budget; but I am not willing to bash capitalism (which is the only economic system that actually works) over this one issue.
That's a BS argument because there is no competition against oil. I can go buy a different car if the Fiero gets too pricey, but no matter what happens with gas, oil, nat gas, and electricity prices, I HAVE to pay it. There is no capitalism in that, they are monopolies. Even hybrid cars use gasoline. What choice do we have? Horse and buggy? Bicycles?
[This message has been edited by connecticutFIERO (edited 04-18-2006).]
IP: Logged
11:41 AM
Formula88 Member
Posts: 53788 From: Raleigh NC Registered: Jan 2001
conn's right. (did I just say that?!?! ) Gasoline is similar to a utility in that you don't have much of a choice. You have to buy it. You can't just say, "Gas is too expensive, I won't buy anymore." Sure, you can conserve, but there are limits to what you can do.
I am all about capitalism and a free market, but this does have monopolistic power over the market and that isn't good.
IP: Logged
11:47 AM
PFF
System Bot
Toddster Member
Posts: 20871 From: Roswell, Georgia Registered: May 2001
Originally posted by connecticutFIERO: Maybe it's time we declassify the secret energy task force documents attended by energy lobbyists and industry leaders?
Could you expand on this?
IP: Logged
11:58 AM
fierobear Member
Posts: 27079 From: Safe in the Carolinas Registered: Aug 2000
Agreed (Christ, that just ruined my whole morning).
quote
Gasoline is similar to a utility in that you don't have much of a choice. You have to buy it. You can't just say, "Gas is too expensive, I won't buy anymore." Sure, you can conserve, but there are limits to what you can do.
I am all about capitalism and a free market, but this does have monopolistic power over the market and that isn't good.
At this point, I have to agree that oil/gas should be regulated, being that it's a public utility and a necessity. That's normally not a direction I like to see things go, because I don't trust government with more power, and the free market tends to make things better. But not in this case.
They just deregulated elecricity in MD and prices will rise 80% !!! How the price can go up that much in beyond me. If BG&E a subsidiary of Constalation can make insane amounts of money before the price rise how can this increase be justified? Exxon/Moble is now the largest company with profits that are sickening. On top of that the feds spen upwards of 6 Billion dollars a year on subcedies for big oil.
IP: Logged
12:24 PM
madcurl Member
Posts: 21401 From: In a Van down by the Kern River Registered: Jul 2003
------------------ "Anyone can make a copy of something, it may look good but it ever is the real car, make something from your imagination, something unique, something nobody has, anything is possible and, ideas can be a reality."
IP: Logged
12:36 PM
86GT3.4DOHC Member
Posts: 10007 From: Marion Ohio Registered: Apr 2004
Originally posted by connecticutFIERO: Summer switch of gasoline mix.
Ummm HELLO!!! Last fall prices were going up "because of the winter mix" So what is it, every season the next season's mix gets more expensive? Bottom line is its not costing these people any more to do any of this, thats why they are reporting the largest profit increases in world history in tens of billions a year (I think it was 30 billion something).
If they want to control oil consumption, the government should apply additional taxes to gas, and regulate what the gas companies can charge, that way at least we would be getting some of our extra money spent back in a round a bout way instead of it going to big oil people. Dont get me wrong, I dont want more taxes or more governmental control, but SOMEONE needs to do SOMETHING. They jumped all over bill gates about the anti-trust violations, but the oil companies can unify their pricing so that no one ever has a lower price than their local competitors? There is no competition what so ever in the gasoline market, I thought that constituted a monopolistic market. My question is, why does no one company charge 5c less per gallon than everyone else? They would sell dry, far surpassing the profits that could be made by selling a normal amount for regular price. Something or someone somewhere is keeping them from doing anything about prices.
IP: Logged
12:40 PM
86GT3.4DOHC Member
Posts: 10007 From: Marion Ohio Registered: Apr 2004
Your analogy is a low demand situation. But ok so I have the last fiero on the face of the planet and you want it... I could take no more than bluebook value of 2300 and be happy OR I could accept your offer of 40k. The only difference is A. Your willingness to PAY However, In the case of gasoline "we" have no choice. OR B. My GREED. However, In the case of gasoline "we" have no choice.
I COULD let it go for a penny. So the value of the last fiero on the planet rests solely on my shoulders and not yours.
Like I said above. SHOW ME a gas station with a sign that reads " OUT OF FUEL" due to low supply and I'll eat my words. Till then don't expect me to park my head in my arse and pretend that what you say is true. There never was or never will be a true shortage of fuel for the forseeable future in AMerica.. China? Maybe. But not in America where money is king and oil company proffit margines soar like eagles.
quote
Originally posted by Chump: Lets say that you have a Fiero that you want to sell. You believe that it is worth $2000, but it has been for sale for 4 months and there is only one guy interested, and he is not willing to pay you more than $1600. The DEMAND for your car is low. Do you hold out for an unknown length of time to get your price? Or do you just take what you an get? Conversely, you list your car for sale and you think it is worth $2000. For the sake of argument lets say that it turns out that your particular is highly sought after and you have 30-40 people all wanting your car and are willing to pay up to $4000 to make sure that they get it. The DEMAND for your car is high. Do you hold out and only take the $2000 that you were origionally asking for? Or do you take the amount they will give you?
I don't know about you but I would take $4000 over $2000 anyday. From the oil suppliers point of view, America as a whole is willing to pay high gas prices up to a point. If they werent then gas prices would go down from low DEMAND. I am not saying I like high gas prices, it is placing a huge strain on my budget; but I am not willing to bash capitalism (which is the only economic system that actually works) over this one issue.
[This message has been edited by 84Bill (edited 04-18-2006).]
Ummm HELLO!!! Last fall prices were going up "because of the winter mix" So what is it, every season the next season's mix gets more expensive? Bottom line is its not costing these people any more to do any of this, thats why they are reporting the largest profit increases in world history in tens of billions a year (I think it was 30 billion something).
If they want to control oil consumption, the government should apply additional taxes to gas, and regulate what the gas companies can charge, that way at least we would be getting some of our extra money spent back in a round a bout way instead of it going to big oil people. Dont get me wrong, I dont want more taxes or more governmental control, but SOMEONE needs to do SOMETHING. They jumped all over bill gates about the anti-trust violations, but the oil companies can unify their pricing so that no one ever has a lower price than their local competitors? There is no competition what so ever in the gasoline market, I thought that constituted a monopolistic market. My question is, why does no one company charge 5c less per gallon than everyone else? They would sell dry, far surpassing the profits that could be made by selling a normal amount for regular price. Something or someone somewhere is keeping them from doing anything about prices.
Did you even read my post? Because you just took my point and argued against it by repeating my post's point. In essence you are arguing exactly what I am arguing. It's true gas has a monopoly, it's also tru ethat this is a byproduct of having energy insiders running the country. It sucks to think that scum sucking energy tycoons are running the United States, but the proof is in the pudding as they say.
To the poster adsking about the Energy Task Force:
"In his second week in office George W. Bush created the task force, officially known as the National Energy Policy Development Group (NEPDG) with Dick Cheney as chairman. This group was supposed to develop an energy policy for the Bush administration. With both Bush and Cheney coming from the energy industry, which had contributed heavily to their campaign, and with the group proceeding in extreme secrecy, critics charged that the energy industry was exercising undue influence over national policy.
Congressmen Henry Waxman and John Dingell prompted the General Accounting Office (GAO), the investigative arm of congress, to pursue congress's oversight authority. Eventually the GAO filed a lawsuit known as Walker v. Cheney against the administration. This represented a power struggle between the legislative and executive branches. Judge John D. Bates, a recent Bush appointee, dismissed the case.
The activities of the Energy Task Force remain classified, even though Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests (since 19 April 2001) have sought to gain access to its materials. The organisations Judicial Watch and Sierra Club launched a law suit (U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia: Judicial Watch Inc. v. Department of Energy, et al., Civil Action No. 01-0981) under the FOIA to gain access to the task force's materials. On 5 March 2002 the US Government was ordered to make a full disclosure; this has not happened, pending appeal. In the Summer of 2003 a partial disclosure of these materials was made by the Commerce Department.
What was obtained were maps and charts, dated March 2001, of Iraq's, Saudi Arabia's and United Arab Emirates' oil fields, pipelines, refineries, tanker terminals and development projects. One of the projects disclosures was entitled "Foreign Suitors for Iraqi Oilfield Contracts".
This is the same case that Justice Scalia refused to recuse himself from after being asked to step aside because of a friendship with Dick Cheney.
The MAJOR problem with that solution is the price per barrel will rise exponentially and the end result is you will ultimatly end up paying more for the same energy usage. Granted you may get thrown a bone in the form a dividend and a higher selling price at some point. But when you do you are out of the game.... and still have to pay more for the same energy you use.
It's like a dog chasing it's tail.. you're never gunna get it but in the off chance you do your face is in your ass.
quote
Originally posted by fierobear: Solution - buy oil company stock. If you can't beat 'em (and you can't), might as well join 'em.
[This message has been edited by 84Bill (edited 04-18-2006).]
IP: Logged
01:16 PM
86GT3.4DOHC Member
Posts: 10007 From: Marion Ohio Registered: Apr 2004
Did you even read my post? Because you just took my point and argued against it by repeating my post's point. In essence you are arguing exactly what I am arguing. It's true gas has a monopoly, it's also tru ethat this is a byproduct of having energy insiders running the country. It sucks to think that scum sucking energy tycoons are running the United States, but the proof is in the pudding as they say.
Sorry that sarcasm was a little misdirected, Im agreeing with you.
IP: Logged
01:24 PM
Tigger Member
Posts: 4368 From: Flint, MI USA Registered: Sep 2000
Originally posted by Wichita: We also have less refineries in the USA. We haven't built a new one since the 1970's. Making gasoline and diseal a bit tough to come by as these refineries are bursting at the seems in capacity. Why do you think if one goes down that oil prices rise? One refinery shutdown for what ever reason effects the supply that much.
Right now the refineries in the US run at 98% of capacity. In other words, in order to supply the demand for fuel, they must run 24/7, year round, with no more than ONE WEEK of down time, in order to meet demand for fuel. There is NO excess capacity remaining.
As for the questions regarding the increase of price when demand increases and the supply cannot increase....
The law of supply and demand is THE basic law of economics. It's like thermodynamics in that you cannot violate it; attempts to do so will only cause problems other than high prices. There are a few situations in which government intervention can help (eg monopolies).
Let us use a simplified fictional example: I live in a town which has small gas stations on every block, each with only one pump. All the gas stations get their gas from the same refinery.
I buy my gas from Joe, the guy across the street. For a while, gas prices are low: $0.50 per gallon. Joe never has any trouble supplying me with gasoline because there's plenty of it and it's cheap. I could just as easily go to any other gas station in town and get about the same price, but Joe's a personal friend and I always buy from him.
Then, the big refinery that everyone gets their gas from explodes. It'll be out of commission for at least a month. Most gas stations start selling their gas for $1 per gallon, but Joe bucks the trend: "Why should I be so greedy?" He decides that he'll continue to sell a gallon of gas for $0.50 per gallon.
The word gets out. Joe's gas station is MOBBED by people looking for that cheap gasoline. When I go to fill up, I have to wait in line, and by the time I get my turn at the pump, Joe has run out of gas: there is none left to sell, and he can't get more for a month.
Meanwhile, Billy's gas station, on the next street over, still has plenty of gasoline for sale at $1, as do the gas stations of David, Tom, and Harry on the next several streets. Only Joe is out of gas.
The higher price acts as a negative influence on demand: if something costs more, you tend to consume less of it than if it is cheap.
Back in the 1970s, the government tried price controls on energy. What happened? Supply dropped, leading to gas lines and rationing. Why?
Let's go back to my fictional neighborhood. For the sake of this example, we'll assume that the gas station owners want to make $0.25 per gallon profit; the refinery also wants $0.25 per gallon profit. The refinery must therefore be able to manufacture gas for $0.50 less per gallon than the retail price at the pump in order to satisfy this condition.
The refinery has been repaired. The EPA has enacted new emissions standards and the plant was forced to install very expensive pollution-control equipment; they have to pass this cost on to the consumer, so gas has risen to an all-time high retail price (at the pump) of $1.50 per gallon.
The mayor is outraged at this "profiteering" and steps in and gets the city council to enact a new law: henceforth gasoline can only cost $1. What happens?
Here we run into a problem. The owners of the gas stations must charge $1 per gallon, by law. The refinery is selling gasoline at $1.25 per gallon. The gas stations cannot sell gasoline for less money than it costs them to buy it, so they band together and talk to the refinery.
The owner of the refinery understands the problem and finds ways to reduce his costs. He and the station owners also agree to halve their profits (accepting around $0.125 per gallon profit, each), and the refinery owner manages to pare his wholesale price down to $0.875 per gallon, so the gas station owners can sell the gas for $1.
But the methods that the refinery owner uses to reduce his costs (laying off workers, reducing maintenance, etc) also end up reducing his ability to produce gasoline. He has fewer workers to operate and maintain the equipment. When he buys crude oil, he must wait for times when the market price of crude is low enough that he can afford to sell the gas for $0.875 per gallon.
***
If you allow for another town, it gets even more interesting:
In the next town over, they have plenty of gas...selling for $1.50 per gallon. The people from my town who can't get gas here have to go elsewhere to buy gas, because they have to have it. Even if it means driving extra distance (spending that much more on fuel) they will do it...and they end up saving nothing.
Anybody think to ponder whether the oil industry purposefully limits refinery capability? I mean it IS in their interest isn't it? Supply and demand like you say, right?
Kind of like what Enron did to California. Create false energy shortages to drive up the price of energy.
"Two US senators are demanding a criminal inquiry after evidence emerged which suggested that Enron manipulated the power market to make extra money out of California's energy crisis last year. "
"The FERC is investigating Enron's behaviour during the crisis, which saw wholesale power prices rise by a factor of ten and almost bankrupted three major utilities.
The meltdown followed a deregulation of wholesale power which left price caps on consumer prices. "
"The memos also spell out techniques dubbed "ricochet" by Enron - but more widely known in the trade as "megawatt laundering".
The strategy had Enron selling its electricity across state boundaries and then reselling it back into California at higher prices.
Money for nothing?
And a third strategy - the one called "Death Star" within Enron - is eerily similar to the kind of allegation made by California state officials during the crisis.
They had claimed companies including Enron had created phantom congestion on transmission lines, and entered into fake sales with one another to boost prices.
According to the memo from Enron's lawyers, that is precisely what happened.
"The net effect of [the Death Star] transactions," they wrote, "is that Enron gets paid for moving energy to relieve congestion without actually moving energy or relieving congestion." "
IP: Logged
02:40 PM
84fiero123 Member
Posts: 29950 From: farmington, maine usa Registered: Oct 2004
Have you noticed in the news articles talking about gas prices, they always seem to mention, "and Americans are driving as much as they ever did."
Did it ever occur to these people that maybe we've been cutting our driving down - but day in and day out you still have to go to work, so other than vacation road trips there's not a lot of fluff in the average family's gas budget to cut out.
And yes, tourism has noticed a decline in business as people are taking fewer road trips and staying home more.
It's like if you only drive to and from work because that's all you can afford when gas is $2 a gallon. Then when it hits $3 a gallong, you keep driving to and from work - so that must mean you don't mind the extra price?
This is why normal supply and demand DON'T work with gasoline or heating oil.
Besides, how much of your driving is done for pleasure? If you cut out all pleasure driving, how much of an impact would that have? I used to cruise around a lot and listen to music in my Fiero. It was one of my favorite pasttimes. When gas hit $2, I stopped doing that. Even so, it's not like I did it every day. We're still only talking about a 5 or maybe 10 gallon per week difference.
Luckily I just bought a house closer to work, so I can cut my driving down some more, but barring a major change like that there's really not a lot you can do. Sure, sell your SUV and by a Hybrid. But crunching the numbers tells you that you won't save much, if any, unless you drive a LOT. And if you need the capacity of an SUV, you're just screwed.
IP: Logged
03:38 PM
Scott-Wa Member
Posts: 5392 From: Tacoma, WA, USA Registered: Mar 2002
Right now the refineries in the US run at 98% of capacity. In other words, in order to supply the demand for fuel, they must run 24/7, year round, with no more than ONE WEEK of down time, in order to meet demand for fuel. There is NO excess capacity remaining.
It's part of the big lie... same BS spouted about environmental costs. Millions of dollars as a one time cost to improve the environment spread out in those 100's of billions of dollars in profit? Why do they need billions in tax breaks and incentives along with reducing environmental requirements that would cost "millions" as we keep hearing?
Why haven't any new refineries been built.... easy question, they aren't needed and the companies DO NOT WANT THEM. They've been closing refineries for the last decade in an attempt to restrict supply and drive up refinery profits.
IP: Logged
08:28 PM
Scott-Wa Member
Posts: 5392 From: Tacoma, WA, USA Registered: Mar 2002
If you read this BP site, they talk about how they are investing in new refining capabilities to make the higher quality fuels, and repeat the "no new oil refinery built in the United States since 1976" mantra. They don't ever mention the glut in refining capacity that has caused them to close refinery after refinery over the last decade because they weren't profitable.
Oh yeah... they can't get caught lying, note that it always is "in the United States..."
There is no crude shortage. Global oil prices are being driven by speculation. OPEC isn't the only group looking at the prices and saying WTF. You can thank the U.S. and some other Comodities Markets for the current price.
Your local pump price is an entirely different matter.
quote
Originally posted by RACE: I blame the Republicans and the Democrats.
When talking pump gas prices.... In this case you'd be right... The last "energry bill" killed MTBE, a fuel aditive, with no "grace period." So all refiners are switching en mass to Ethanol, which itself creates huge problems and is in limited supply to start with. This is being done because companies want to avoid as much litigation as possible over the water polution caused by MTBE. (The same MTBE that the USEPA forced them to use in the first place with little research.)
1. Ethanol is Hygroscopic and/or Hyrdophilic. Much like Brake Fluid. It will absorb any water it comes into contact with. Ethanol for fuel use must be almost 100% pure. Dilution below about 98% means it must be reprocessed to proper purity BEFORE it is added to gasoline. 2. The entire oil industry is switching to Ethanol in as short a time as possible. There aren't enough rail cars and trucks to move the Ethanol needed. 3. You cannot move ethanol blended fuel by pipeline due to #1. The fuel is blended at the end of the lines before delivery to stations. This is why #2 is a big problem. 4. Water in fuel station tanks WILL be absorbed by ethanol blended fuel. This WILL degrade the fuel. Water in station tanks is a huge and well known problem that is being completely ignored by USEPA and Congress. Tanks are configured so that they can hold a significant amount of water. In normal operation with "standard" fuel the water will sit on the bottom of the tank. Ethanol fuels will imediatly pull that water into the entire tank. Ethanol does what "Dry Gas" does in your car tank. 5. All this is also part of why GM's "Live Green, Go Yellow" campaign is a farce to appease greenies. What GM leaves out of that promotion is that you fuel bills on E85 will go up even more as your MPG drops significantly when using the E85. You think $3.00 a gallon is bad? It's even worse when your MPG drops anywhere from 5-10 MPG. Nevermind that you can't get E85 thru most of the country. Nevermind that it's not possible and won't be possible in the near future to make E85 available in all but a few markets. 6. Gulf Coast refineries and wells are still recovering from Katrina. Other refineries nation wide that were due for repairs were kept online to take up the slack. Refineries which now have to be taken off line for repairs etc. Contrary to common belief refineries are big machines that are not built to operate continuously forever. Various systems must be taken offline at regular intervals.
To Greatly over simplfie it....
Refineries are gigantic machines built to work in bursts. Long bursts but burts all the same. They are probably among the biggest if not The Biggest machines on the planet. I doubt many of you have any idea what you are looking at when you see one.
In operation... They make a load of whatever product(s) and shove it(them) into the tank farm. When the tanks are full, the machine that is the refinery goes off line for repairs cleaning etc. The plan is that the tanks will keep things moving until the machine is fixed. Katrina seriously screwed the schedule and the elimination of MTBE with no grace period or limits on litigation have further screwed things up.
Yes, you can make the case that the refiners should have planed ahead for the elimination of MTBE. The fact is that with no phase in time you'd have the same problem. California did have a phase in period and had far less problem as a result.
Think of it like giving a tuneup to your car. Your 1960's to 70's car. Most refineries have been around at least that long. Thanks to NIMBY and the Greenies, not one new refinery has been built in decades. Even with ALL refineries online there is going to come a point bloody soon where it's not going to be enough ever again. Ethanol may slow but is NOT going to stop that from happening.
------------------ Dr. Ian Malcolm: Yeah, but your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could, they didn't stop to think if they should. (Jurasic Park)
If OPEC says the price of crude it to high, remember OPEC. They are the ones making the money off of us.
There is a fundamental problem here about how we make the prices for oil and gas.
There are to many middle men, and to many people getting their cut before it ever reaches the pump.
The oil producers
the shippers
the guys on wall street
the guys in government
the lobbyists
and all the others I can’t even begin to think of that make money doing nothing other than just being there to make money off of our misery at the pumps.
The answer, How the hell do I know, I’m just a fken Idiot in Maine on a small farm that thinks that all the people that make money on the increase in the price of gas and oil are leaches. Blood sucking leaches.
------------------ technology is great when it works and one big pain in the ass when it doesn't. Detroit iron rules all the rest are just toys.
I think it is BuSh's failt he has done nothing to reduce oil prices and a lot to rase them
the whole iraq war [unnessary] and reduced the oil flow from there key boy lay BuSh's best buddy and ENRON showed these clowns how to rig the market sure that gang is out or so they want you to belive [like just how many are realy in jail] but no action againts the new fools who are following their plan NOW or is it the same people with a new name on the door minus they few they charged BuSh's sandy arab buddys who control the flow does he lean on them to up the flow,? NO he is to busy saber rattiling at iran, so further raseing prices or any other arab buddys of his NO? he is to busy trying to selling ports to them
the reason no new oil refinerys in the USA is simple they are built in cheap labor areas offshore like the bahama's so the american workers donot get desent jobs
THE CORPs control BuSh, the bought him and he must pay them back you didnot think they gave all that cash for fun did you?
------------------ Question wonder and be wierd are you kind?
It's part of the big lie... same BS spouted about environmental costs. Millions of dollars as a one time cost to improve the environment spread out in those 100's of billions of dollars in profit? Why do they need billions in tax breaks and incentives along with reducing environmental requirements that would cost "millions" as we keep hearing?
Why haven't any new refineries been built.... easy question, they aren't needed and the companies DO NOT WANT THEM. They've been closing refineries for the last decade in an attempt to restrict supply and drive up refinery profits.
Why haven't any new refineries been built.... easy question: they cost too much to build.
Every time anyone wants to build a "dirty" project of any kind (landfill, refinery, power plant, etc) he must perform an environmental impact statement. I had an opportunity to look at the environmental impact statement for the controversial "third airport" that's been under discussion here in the Chicago area for the past 20 years. It's HUGE. The local library has three four-foot shelves devoted to storing this "statement". I have no idea what it cost to generate this thing but I know it was not beer money.
Every time anyone wants to build a "dirty" project of any kind, he must find a place to build it which is not in anyone's back yard. The phenomenon is so commonplace, we even have a popular acronym to describe the people who object to such projects being built near their homes: NIMBY, "not in my back yard". These people band together and hire lawyers to stop the construction of these projects.
Every time anyone wants to build a "dirty" project of any kind, he must deal with armies of lawyers from environmentalist groups who wish to stop the project. Even if the environmental impact statement shows that the environment won't be harmed by the project, these people will try to stop it.
If all of these hurdles have been passed, then he must still obtain the needed permits to build the thing, and this takes yet MORE time and money.
* * *
The paper linked by the above quote essentially says two things:
1) Oil companies have worked to maximize their profits, using methods which include the closing of refineries. 2) Oil companies are now making record profits.
With the ever-increasing cost of environmental regulation, some plants are cheaper to close than they are to bring into compliance with environmental regulations. Should we make laws forcing oil companies to keep refineries open, even if they are unprofitable? This would amount to a special tax on oil companies.
For the typical US oil company, it costs around $15 per barrel to produce crude oil. Right now, that crude oil sells for $70 per barrel on the world market; that means that every barrel of oil any US oil company produces generates them $55 in pure profit. THAT is the source of the oil companies' "record profits", not high gasoline prices.
* * *
"Normal supply and demand DON'T work with gasoline or heating oil"?
Formula, in your own post you contradict that statement with: "Did it ever occur to these people that maybe we've been cutting our driving down--but day in and day out you still have to go to work, so other than vacation road trips there's not a lot of fluff in the average family's gas budget to cut out. And yes, tourism has noticed a decline in business as people are taking fewer road trips and staying home more. [emphasis mine]
That IS supply and demand functioning the way it always does. Discretionary travel is what takes the hit. As you note, non-discretionary travel cannot be cut.
"I used to cruise around a lot and listen to music in my Fiero. It was one of my favorite pasttimes. When gas hit $2, I stopped doing that. Even so, it's not like I did it every day. We're still only talking about a 5 or maybe 10 gallon per week difference."
That's 5 or 10 gallons times one person. Multiply it by every car guy (gal) in the US and how many gallons does it come to? And the Fiero's reasonably fuel-efficient; what about the guys with the big-block motors in their cars, who get 5 MPG with a tailwind?
Ed
IP: Logged
02:43 AM
fierobear Member
Posts: 27079 From: Safe in the Carolinas Registered: Aug 2000
The MAJOR problem with that solution is the price per barrel will rise exponentially and the end result is you will ultimatly end up paying more for the same energy usage. Granted you may get thrown a bone in the form a dividend and a higher selling price at some point. But when you do you are out of the game.... and still have to pay more for the same energy you use.
It's like a dog chasing it's tail.. you're never gunna get it but in the off chance you do your face is in your ass.
The reason I mention it is that they are making record profits. Even if you can't afford to buy stock, some people have a 401k, and you can sometimes direct where the money is invested. If they're making that much profit, you might as well get a piece.
IP: Logged
03:43 AM
fierobear Member
Posts: 27079 From: Safe in the Carolinas Registered: Aug 2000
You had to remind me didn't you. I had moved all my 401k funds into oil back in 02 just after Greenspan raised the fed for the first time in ages. Then was forced out of it a year later due to "inactivity." My 3k egg would probably be close to 3x the initial investment now. Pissesmeoff.
quote
Originally posted by fierobear: The reason I mention it is that they are making record profits. Even if you can't afford to buy stock, some people have a 401k, and you can sometimes direct where the money is invested. If they're making that much profit, you might as well get a piece.
Yup, I remember when Jimmy Carter took office. Retardster was probably still on the tate back then but I distinctly remember a sudden problem with the supply and demand of peanuts causing peanut butter prices to skyrocket.
MIh... I'm sure it's nothing more than a coincidence.
quote
Originally posted by ray b: I think it is BuSh's failt he has done nothing to reduce oil prices and a lot to rase them
[This message has been edited by 84Bill (edited 04-19-2006).]
IP: Logged
07:43 AM
jstricker Member
Posts: 12956 From: Russell, KS USA Registered: Apr 2002
I'm shocked. I'd have never, ever guessed that would be your stance, Ray.
John Stricker
quote
Originally posted by ray b:
I think it is BuSh's failt he has done nothing to reduce oil prices and a lot to rase them
the whole iraq war [unnessary] and reduced the oil flow from there key boy lay BuSh's best buddy and ENRON showed these clowns how to rig the market sure that gang is out or so they want you to belive [like just how many are realy in jail] but no action againts the new fools who are following their plan NOW or is it the same people with a new name on the door minus they few they charged BuSh's sandy arab buddys who control the flow does he lean on them to up the flow,? NO he is to busy saber rattiling at iran, so further raseing prices or any other arab buddys of his NO? he is to busy trying to selling ports to them
the reason no new oil refinerys in the USA is simple they are built in cheap labor areas offshore like the bahama's so the american workers donot get desent jobs
THE CORPs control BuSh, the bought him and he must pay them back you didnot think they gave all that cash for fun did you?
)
