|
Post by grova on Apr 5, 2012 11:28:20 GMT -4
He had a plan to turn things around, remember? He said things had taken a turn for the worse and he was going to 'get the car out of the ditch', remember? Remember all those promises? Remember, 'Give me a TRILLION DOLLARS of your hard earned money and I will guarantee you we can keep unemployment under 8%'? Well? Unemployment is still through the roof, gas prices are ridiculus, the housing market is in shambles, and our troops are still dying in the middle east while Obama apologizes. Seriously grova, you need to stop watching so much Fox TV and start thinking for yourself! BTW: Did you read my post? In my opinion, gas prices are were they are because of Obama's poor decision making. Do you really agree with his idiotic remarks about saving fuel? Who put the car in the ditch to begin with? I did read your post but I prefer facts to opinions.
|
|
|
Post by Frank on Apr 5, 2012 11:40:34 GMT -4
Is the car out of the ditch or is it farther off the road? Are you better off now than you were four years ago? My problem was all the promises made to get elected, and then the flip-flop. Everyone covers for the man saying 'he didn't know it was that bad' Seriously? He was running for POTUS! He knew everything, but he just talked his a$$ off to get elected. Nobody is defending Bush for his last years in office, so why is Obama being defended for doing a lousy job too?
|
|
|
Post by RobMoore on Apr 5, 2012 16:37:59 GMT -4
I am glad to hear about the algae!! I won't worry about gas prices anymore. Also if we are invaded we could use the algae instead of jet fighters. I was wrong about you guys. You really do have a plan!! It is ridiculous to think we're at any risk of invasion, even without any F18s, much less 1 short. We ARE at risk of losing our country economically, and dependance on foreign oil is part of what will take us down.
|
|
alice
New Member
Posts: 20
|
Post by alice on Apr 6, 2012 9:08:47 GMT -4
I'll have to agree its Obama's fault he is the Pres after all. We still need to put the blame on others who's job it is to make the laws to control things like this. We had the housing problem and now we have the gas price problem. The issue with supply and demand is totally made up because of the "gambling" on wall street. Money and who has it is the issue. Deregulation will only make things like these worse. Whats the next thing that these manipulators will corrupt to cost Americans our treasure maybe water, oh that's already happening too. It may be time for a revolution.
|
|
|
Post by grova on Apr 11, 2012 20:52:36 GMT -4
I am glad to hear about the algae!! I won't worry about gas prices anymore. Also if we are invaded we could use the algae instead of jet fighters. I was wrong about you guys. You really do have a plan!! It is ridiculous to think we're at any risk of invasion, even without any F18s, much less 1 short. We ARE at risk of losing our country economically, and dependance on foreign oil is part of what will take us down. This probably doesn't help either... April 10, 2012 Today, speculators dominate the trading of oil futures. According to Congressional testimony by the commodities specialist Michael W. Masters in 2009, the oil futures markets routinely trade more than one billion barrels of oil per day. Given that the entire world produces only around 85 million actual “wet” barrels a day, this means that more than 90 percent of trading involves speculators’ exchanging “paper” barrels with one another. Because of speculation, today’s oil prices of about $100 a barrel have become disconnected from the costs of extraction, which average $11 a barrel worldwide. Pure speculators account for as much as 40 percent of that high price, according to testimony that Rex Tillerson, the chief executive of ExxonMobil, gave to Congress last year. That estimate is bolstered by a recent report from the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis. www.nytimes.com/2012/04/11/opinion/ban-pure-speculators-of-oil-futures.html?_r=2&hp
|
|
|
Post by dej on Apr 12, 2012 1:50:20 GMT -4
Nothing new there, oil futures have determined the upward & downward tends in gas prices for a long time. Day to day production has very little effect on prices. Occasionally things like a hurricane in the Gulf may cause a brief spike, which clears when wells or refineries come back on line. That is why the current production figures the White House was touting a couple weeks ago are irrelevant to today's gas prices.
It's the future supply that speculators bet on. That's why the last time gas prices got to this range, they dropped when Bush announced the opening of new drilling areas. Even though it would be years before production in those areas, just the potential increase in FUTURE oil supplies was enough to bring prices back down under $2 a gallon. Now we have the opposite situation. Most of these areas have either been officially closed by decree or unofficially by bringing the permit process to a stall. No new oil sources in the forseable future means futures go higher.
When people dismiss "Drill Baby Drill" by saying it won't drop gas prices, since it'll take 5 years to see any oil, a couple of possibilites come to mind. Either they are clueless about about how the oil futures market works, or else they do know, but don't care, because their agendas are more important than what consumers pay for gas to get to work.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 12, 2012 7:51:10 GMT -4
Gas Prices Refinery closures risk Northeast gas price spike By Steve Hargreaves @cnnmoney April 10, 2012: 5:36 AM ET
NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- While gas prices soar to record levels, many U.S. refineries that make and sell gasoline are going broke.
Nearly 50% of the refining capacity on the East Coast has either shut down or may shut down within the next few months.
If gas shortages develop due to the closed refineries, East Coast drivers could face higher prices than they otherwise would later this year.
Sunoco (SUN, Fortune 500), which closed its Philadelphia-area Marcus Hook refinery in December and is trying to sell another facility nearby, said its refining businesses has been losing $1 million dollars a day for three years running.
Last fall, ConocoPhillips (COP, Fortune 500) closed its Trainer refinery, also in the Philadelphia area.
If all three refineries were closed, that would leave just six operating refineries in the Northeast.
The refineries are losing money because they are old and cannot process the cheaper, heavier types of oil that are increasingly in supply from Canada's oil sands, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela and elsewhere.
The Sunoco refineries can process only the types of "light, sweet" crude imported from West Africa or the North Sea. The lightness refers to the oil's density, the sweetness to its sulfur content.
Light, sweet oil is the easiest to turn into gasoline -- but also costs about $20 more per barrel.
Refineries that have been upgraded and expanded along the U.S. Gulf Coast are capable of turning the heavier, cheaper oil into gasoline.
East Coast gasoline shortages are a real possibility -- but not because there isn't enough gasoline in the United States. The real problem lies in transporting that gasoline to the Northeast.
Analysts worry there won't be enough barge, tanker or pipeline capacity to bring the gasoline to market.
"There are going to be logistical problems getting product into New York," said Ben Brockwell, an analyst at the Oil Price Information Service. "The people I talk to are expecting shortages from August through the rest of the year."
The supply shortages would occur at gasoline terminals, often identified by those giant, white, round tanks seen near ports and refineries.
And that could drive up gas prices, though the impact should be temporary -- eventually, refiners in the Gulf Coast, Europe or Newfoundland would seek to take advantage of the higher prices by shipping gas to needed areas.
The worst of the supply crunch would come after the peak summer driving season when prices won't likely be as high as they are now.
The U.S. Energy Information Administration has been monitoring the situation. While it isn't quite as alarmed as Brockwell, it does see possible trouble.
"The potential loss of the Sunoco Philadelphia refinery presents a complex supply challenge," the agency said in a recent report
|
|
|
Post by Rich Fisher on Apr 12, 2012 9:16:22 GMT -4
It seems odd that the feds would let this happen. There are agencies such as EDA (Economic Development Agency) that give millions of dollars to towns and regions to rebuild infrastructure and create jobs. This should be a prime candidate for a grant like that since it would save jobs at the plants, create jobs updating them, and ultimately help the communities along the East Coast.
People seem to forget that when gas prices go up, everything goes up. When transportation costs rise everything from groceries to hardware / durable goods, to clothing goes up to cover the swelling costs. In a fragile economy something like rising gas costs could put a halt to growth. Don't even get me started on Maryland's ridiculous soon to be implemented "gas tax" to drive the nails in the coffin in a bit deeper...
|
|
|
Post by tomc on Apr 12, 2012 11:40:42 GMT -4
...meanwhile the oil companies continue making RECORD profits.
It doesn't take a genius to figure out that it's not the Government causing the problem.
|
|
|
Post by bob66 on Apr 12, 2012 13:45:55 GMT -4
...meanwhile the oil companies continue making RECORD profits. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that it's not the Government causing the problem. I could not agree more. Why don't the oil companies invest in their own refineries? All they seem to want to do is hold us hostage by saying that the big, bad EPA and other gov't agencies should cut them more breaks so they can "afford" to upgrade their own outdated facilities. Bunch of crap.....
|
|
|
Post by grova on Apr 12, 2012 23:11:46 GMT -4
...meanwhile the oil companies continue making RECORD profits. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that it's not the Government causing the problem. I could not agree more. Why don't the oil companies invest in their own refineries? All they seem to want to do is hold us hostage by saying that the big, bad EPA and other gov't agencies should cut them more breaks so they can "afford" to upgrade their own outdated facilities. Bunch of crap..... 24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m0un5hf8qR1rrugbxo1_500.jpg
|
|
|
Post by dej on Apr 13, 2012 6:40:03 GMT -4
It's not a new problem, as outlined by this 2004 article from Slate: The Great Refinery Shortage America needs oil. You'd rather have a beach condo. www.slate.com/articles/business/moneybox/2004/06/the_great_refinery_shortage.htmlIt's not really related to oil companies being unwilling to invest, because they generally have invested in upgrades and expansion when they could. For example, one reason that the XL pipeline was going to Texas is because refineries there have been able to upgrade to handle tar sands oil. In 2007 refineries in Whiting, Indiana and Detroit, Michigan tried to get permits to make the same kind of upgrades. Five years later, Detroit upgrades have started. The Whiting, Indiana refinery faced even stiffer opposition, led by Illinois Democrats thingy Durbin and then-Congressman Rahm Emmanuel. They finally have the go-ahead, and expect to start upgrades next year. DAVID SYKUTA, Executive Director, Illinois Petroleum Council summed it up pretty well during the fight to upgrade the Indiana refinery: "Refineries are kind of the ultimate NIMBY, "not in my backyard." People love what they make, don't like to live near them. In fact, they're kind of beyond NIMBY. We call them BANANAs now, "build absolutely nothing anywhere near anything." That's kind of how people feel when it comes to energy. Even though they want a gas station like this within two blocks, by God, the price better be cheap. So we have a disconnect with reality on that in our country." Government is certainly another part of the equation. In 2010 the EPA announced plans for expanded regulations on oil refinery emissions. Their original fact sheet indicated the new final standards would announced in Nov 2012. Recently EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson indicated they have been delayed until beyond 2012. Any refinery planning upgrades or expansion would be crazy to do so before knowing what new rules they have to meet. If I wasn't the naive trusting person I am, I might think the delay was related to gas prices and an election previously scheduled for Nov 2012. ;D The government is playing an additional role by financing refineries overseas even while fighting expansion efforts here. US giving money to Columbia and Brazil to build refineries af.reuters.com/article/energyOilNews/idAFN0728653320110407The U.S. Export-Import Bank, an agency of the federal government, approved a $2.84-billion loan for a massive project to expand and upgrade an oil refinery in Cartagena, Colombia owned by Reficar, which is owned by Ecopetrol, the Colombian national oil company. This investment in Colombia has made it one of the hottest stoccks going! www.energyandcapital.com/articles/colombia-oil-stocks/1150The chairman of the Export-Import Bank is Fred P. Hochberg, appointed President Obama in January 2009. Before taking this position, Hochberg had been a fundraiser and bundler for Barack Obama's Presidential campaign in 2008 and was member of the Obama transition team. Ecopetrol has a number of private investors. One significant stakeholder is a 1%'er named George Soros. Again, being a naive trusting person, I'm sure this is all just coincidence. ;D
|
|
|
Post by hisea on Apr 25, 2012 21:33:29 GMT -4
EPA Official's 'Philosophy' On Oil Companies: 'Crucify Them' - Just As Romans Crucified Conquered Citizens Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK) took to the Senate floor today to draw attention to a video of a top EPA official saying the EPA’s “philosophy” is to “crucify” and “make examples” of oil and gas companies - just as the Romans crucified random citizens in areas they conquered to ensure obedience. Inhofe quoted a little-watched video from 2010 of Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) official, Region VI Administrator Al Armendariz, admitting that EPA’s “general philosophy” is to “crucify” and “make examples” of oil and gas companies. In the video, Administrator Armendariz says: “I was in a meeting once and I gave an analogy to my staff about my philosophy of enforcement, and I think it was probably a little crude and maybe not appropriate for the meeting, but I’ll go ahead and tell you what I said: “It was kind of like how the Romans used to, you know, conquer villages in the Mediterranean. They’d go in to a little Turkish town somewhere, they’d find the first five guys they saw and they’d crucify them. “Then, you know, that town was really easy to manage for the next few years.” “It’s a deterrent factor,” Armendariz said, explaining that the EPA is following the Romans’ philosophy for subjugating conquered villages. Soon after Armendariz touted the EPA’s “philosophy,” the EPA began a smear campaigns natural gas producers, Inhofe’s office noted in advance of today’s Senate speech: “Not long after Administrator Armendariz made these comments in 2010, EPA targeted US natural gas producers in Pennsylvania, Texas and Wyoming. “In all three of these cases, EPA initially made headline-grabbing statements either insinuating or proclaiming outright that the use of hydraulic fracturing by American energy producers was the cause of water contamination, but in each case their comments were premature at best – and despite their most valiant efforts, they have been unable to find any sound scientific evidence to make this link.” In his Senate speech, Sen. Inhofe said the video provides Americans with “a glimpse of the Obama administration’s true agenda.” That agenda, Inhofe said, is to “incite fear” in the public with unsubstantiated claims and “intimidate” oil and gas companies with threats of unjustified fines and penalties – then, quietly backtrack once the public’s perception has been firmly jaded against oil and natural gas. cnsnews.com/blog/craig-bannister/epa-officials-philosophy-oil-companies-crucify-them-just-romans-crucified
|
|
|
Post by topfish on May 16, 2012 18:00:39 GMT -4
Obama must be making the prices come down, if he could make them go up! Thanks President Obama, you da MAN and we appreciate your control over gas prices and lowering them.
|
|
|
Post by RobMoore on May 16, 2012 18:27:27 GMT -4
I'll thank him when they are back around $2.00
|
|
|
Post by hisea on May 16, 2012 19:01:50 GMT -4
Barry knows this is his only chance to stay in power! Gas prices are still 101% higher than in Jan 2009. SO..........thank you barry soetoro or who ever you are?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 16, 2012 20:33:51 GMT -4
While someone is out making a gallon of gas $2 again.....can they work at lowering the cost of new cars, houses and insurance too.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 16, 2012 20:35:35 GMT -4
Ooops, forgot one.....lower the cost of electricity too. Thanks!
|
|
|
Post by RobMoore on May 16, 2012 20:41:46 GMT -4
Want to know how?
|
|
|
Post by bob66 on May 16, 2012 21:35:50 GMT -4
Barry knows this is his only chance to stay in power! Gas prices are still 101% higher than in Jan 2009. SO..........thank you barry soetoro or who ever you are? Do you honestly think Obama has that kind of control over gas prices? Does he have a button on the side of his desk that he pushes every time he wants to stick it to the little people? Are you sure this doesn't have ANYTHING to do with speculators run amok? Nothing to do with plain old corporate greed? Dude, you are delusional if you think this is 1 guy controlling all of this. What are you gonna do with yourself when Mitt wins and shows he can't do any better? Sacrilege, you say!!! Guess what? Congress controls everything that happens in our government. And when congress fails to accomplish anything (as is usually the case) the president usually has at least some limited powers to shove some things through. But not much. So what is the end result? Nothing gets accomplished except a bunch of continuing resolutions. It will not change regardless of who is in the white house. Congress won't let it. Wanna blame someone for gas prices? Blame congress. Did I mention the house is majority republican? I wonder, if Boner is so smart and such a great leader, why is he not running for president? He could have Rush as his running mate and all of our problems would be solved....... Rant off.
|
|
|
Post by Frank on May 17, 2012 12:43:38 GMT -4
Not a button he can push, but a pen he can push! "Yes" to drilling in ANWR! "Yes" to drilling in the gulf! "Yes" to opening the pipeline! Bush did a lousy job in his last four years, but when gas prices started going up, he seriously looked at options in this country to produce more oil and you know what? Gas prices plummeted as middle eastern nations dropped their prices to make drilling in this country unreasonable. The moratorium Obama put on drilling in the gulf, and his refusal to drill in ANWR drove prices to record levels and kept them there. Oil rigs are not going to sit idle, so the gas companies moved the oil rigs to South America. That will be gas we can buy from Chavez. Oh, and don't forget the tens of thousands of jobs that lost too!
My rant over.
|
|
|
Post by topfish on May 17, 2012 17:36:33 GMT -4
I think we need a little fact checking here. Try factcheck.org or politicifact.org (not sure if it is .org). The downside of the internet is lack of facts but it makes for good fiction. Of course there are many out there that believe both these sites are a conspiracy's' but there is medication for that.
|
|
|
Post by glk21c on May 18, 2012 14:06:41 GMT -4
I'm not sure drilling more would help. The US oil companies are already producing more oil than we can consume, they are shipping the overage to other customers across the world. Plus, even if they drilled more, there are still not enough refineries to refine the crude. Refineries are looked at like a jail (or Fed. Train Facility), not in my backyard
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 23, 2012 22:06:28 GMT -4
When 'Drill Baby Drill' means 'Export Baby Export'
CNNMoney May 23, 2012: 11:06 AM ET
More U.S. oil production may strengthen our energy security, but don't expect it to lower oil prices as long as demand is high overseas.
By Leah McGrath Goodman
FORTUNE -- Americans are frequently promised that more oil and gas drilling will translate into lower energy prices. In a pre-election advertising push this spring, American Petroleum Institute President and Chief Executive, Jack Gerard, said: "More domestic production is critical to putting downward pressure on gasoline prices – supply matters."
And so it does. But what happens when we start exporting those extra barrels?
You don't need to be an economist to know the answer. When supplies are tight, prices stay propped up. A fresh infusion of supplies may send prices down, but when they're exported to consumers overseas willing to pay more for their energy, Americans never get to see the savings.
A boom in natural gas drilling in the U.S. has, indeed, led to dramatically lower prices across the board as supplies hold near historic highs. Yet the most aggressive oil drilling in the country in nearly a decade has not produced the same result, even as crude oil inventories hit a 21-year high. While oil recently slipped below $100 a barrel – a dip Wall Street has already branded as temporary – it remains at the upper end of its historic range.
The reason is simple, although our nation's politicians and business leaders have been coy about it. It comes down to our ability to export. Right now, the U.S. does not have sufficient exporting facilities to keep pace with the flood of natural gas. On the other hand, we have long had the ability to export record amounts of petroleum products, such as gasoline, jet fuel and heating oil – and that's exactly what we've been doing.
The outcome is that, on an energy-equivalent basis, the cost of oil is nearly six times that of natural gas, and the two are hovering near their broadest divergence in more than two decades of trading.
The past year has marked a turning point for both. New technologies in natural gas drilling, such as hydraulic fracturing (known as "fracking") and horizontal drilling have led to a natural gas glut that's caused prices to nosedive. The nation's natural gas market has always been less global and more local, so while facilities exist to receive gas imports there are almost none available to ship them out.
Meanwhile, oil products have long been global commodities that are regularly sent in and out of the country. In 2011, U.S. petroleum product exports exceeded imports for the first time since 1949, hitting a record high. Last August to December was especially productive, as total monthly exports topped 3 million barrels a day for the first time ever. All told, the U.S. shipped out $111.1 billion of petroleum products, up 60% from 2010, establishing energy as one of the nation's top exports.
Though oil products and natural gas have been given different treatment due to the facilities available to ship them, exports of both this year have held near their historic highs – and the oil and gas industry is scrambling to get more out the door.
Last week, Enterprise Products and Enbridge reversed a key oil pipeline to the Gulf, which means more oil can be turned into fuel – and then shipped out of the country. At the same time, Cheniere Energy received regulatory approval to build the first major natural gas-export facility in the lower 48 states, drawing in deep-pocked investors like Blackstone Group.
While the $10 billion gas project won't be ready to start exporting until at least 2015, Cheniere says the facilities are already booked solid for the first 20 years of operation.
With Goldman Sachs predicting this week that the global balance between energy supply and demand will keep tightening, it is unlikely that demand for U.S. energy exports from buyers overseas such as China and India will cool down anytime soon. In fact, even if the nation's energy supplies are kept bottled up inside its borders the way natural gas is now, the U.S. Energy Information Administration suspects that instead of prices falling, refiners might just cut production.
The upshot is that the boost in oil and gas drilling does indeed undergird our energy security by reducing our dependence on foreign oil and gas. But any extra slack is not likely to translate in reduced prices at the pump for Americans, as oil and gas drillers are just as keen to export our supplies as to drill them.
|
|
|
Post by bob66 on May 23, 2012 22:21:48 GMT -4
"But any extra slack is not likely to translate in reduced prices at the pump for Americans, as oil and gas drillers are just as keen to export our supplies as to drill them." Hmmmm, didn't see that one coming. Sell Baby, Sell!!!
|
|