Gas Prices? Who's Fault?

[Stinger]

Oil is a finite resource, if companies spend a little larger proportion of there revenues on alternative energy. Instead of the trillions of dollars on oil exploration. Then make the new markets competitive and business will be slowly as affective as the oil industry (long term prospect). Realistically this is actually the only option with the demand for oil becoming more, especially with China and India starting rapid industrialisation.

The energy companies (they are not just oil companies) do exactly that. Texaco/Shell is one the largest investors in hydrogen technology and spend millions on hydrogen R&D.

This may be a long-term project and the short-run will be economically difficult for the Western countries,

The new energy plan will help but will take time.

Additionallyof greater importance than the current budget deficit or the current economic ranking.
two words that Americans dont seem to understand....

Global Warming (El Ninos, mass flooding...etc)

Most Americans i know will laugh...

Well if we have warmer winters then we use less heating oil don't we.

 

[gordontravels]

To blame President Bush for the rise in oil prices shows a complete lack of understanding. The same can be said about Presidents Clinton, GHW Bush, Reagan and Carter. These were and are the Presidents that have held office since OPEC decided $2.00 a barrel wasn't enough. There are only two components that you can blame for higher prices for both oil and gas. The countries that produce oil and the Republicans and Democrats in Congress since around 1976.

President Bush put forward an energy bill and it passed. Democrats, many who voted for it now say it gives too much to our oil companies. Tell me. Who else put forward an energy bill? What were the choices? None.

Kyoto Treaty? Trading polution credits with 3rd world countries? This is a good idea? I think you will find that since that failed concept was touted the country of Russia has brought much more oil on line and they may have changed their mind about supporting Kyoto. Those who love the Kyoto Treaty such as France are now experiencing some of the poorest economic conditions of any industrialized nations on earth. Question that? Insee, the French Governments equivalent of our Fed is the one that says so. The French liberal government has failed their people in both social and economic programs and with a growth rate of around 1.5% they're people have much more pain coming.

The problem in our country is the two party system that spends most of it's time downing the other side instead of working. You can't get the lawn mowed if the mower doesn't work. If the mechanic knows what is wrong with the car it still won't run til he decides to fix it.

Our Republicans and Democrats have two priorities above all others. Complain about the other side and get elected or re-elected. What about the work we send them to do? What are they spending our tax money on? Why do they wait to do something about high gas prices only when high gas prices are high? And are they doing anything about high gas prices? How about your favorite Democrat? How about your favorite Republican? What are they doing? What have they done or even said say 6 months or 18 months ago? Kyoto? Kyoto that would give us higher gas prices than we have now?

At least during the Carter years the congress lowered the speed limit on interstates to 55. Lots of people didn't like that but it helped. The word is "helped". Anyone want to tell me what our current Congress is doing? Anyone?

I blame the 2 party system because if you are the one you can blame the other and those who go along with you are happy to blame. Blame is cheap and takes little thought. Don't like proposed Social Security changes? What's your idea? That's the way it works. If nothing gets done maybe our side will win next time. In the meantime, you and I pay for what Republicans and Democrats don't do.

The problem IS Republicans and Democrats and those of you that want to put it on one President or one party just reinforce those two parties and allow them to take care of themselves before they even have to think of you. We'll never get it done that way. :duel

 

[Iriemon]

Originally Posted by Stinger

Known reserves are higher now than at anytime in history, the more we use the more we find. In fact we will never run out. Can you figure out why?

Sure. Surging demand and dwindling supplies make prices higher and higher and we use less and less. At $1000 a barrell, not many can afford to use much of it, and demand goes down.

The goal is to forstall the effects of that occurance by reducing our use of fossil fuels and developing alternative energy sources.

Our incentives should be to put pressure on OPEC to lower price but developing our own. In the mean time our energy companies continue to work on alternate sources which one day will become cost effective and cost effieicent.

I think the president should be jawboning OPEC like he said he would when oil prices were 1/2 what they are now.

 

[gordontravels]

I'm sure OPEC is hearing from our government. Just don't assume they would do what Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton or Bush tells them to do. These are autonomous countries.

Besides, the countries of the world see how divided we are politically so they don't have to take us as seriously as if we were the "united" States. :duel

 

[AliG]

The planet getting constantly warmer is not 'natural', and will cause the sea levels to rapidly rise. This will result in a huge displacement of people which will then cause further economic and social problems...anywhere at sea level currently will be affected
This Scientists say will happen in 50 years time

 

[Iriemon]

I'm sure OPEC is hearing from our government. Just don't assume they would do what Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton or Bush tells them to do. These are autonomous countries.

Besides, the countries of the world see how divided we are politically so they don't have to take us as seriously as if we were the "united" States. :duel

Completely agree. It was Bush who was criticizing Clinton for not doing this, and said that was what was needed to bring prices down. So he's president now. Where's the jawboning?

Buy maybe it was because we were so much more united under Clinton before the "uniter" go elected.

 

[gordontravels]

The planet getting constantly warmer is not 'natural', and will cause the sea levels to rapidly rise. This will result in a huge displacement of people which will then cause further economic and social problems...anywhere at sea level currently will be affected
This Scientists say will happen in 50 years time

Sorry AliG, but your "not 'natural" thing is wrong.

This planet has gone through drought and ice age over and over far earlier than the creation of man or the burning of fossil fuels. There have been celestial events and tectonic events that have not only changed the climate but wiped out up to 95% of all species on earth within a relative few years.

Celestial event? - comet, astroid/planetoid or meteorite hits. Look at the moon and then multiply by 25 or much more to understand how we have been bombarded. It's good though because if we hadn't been hit by comets and related objects we wouldn't be here. That's where our water came from.

Tectonic event? Approximately 74,000 years ago the volcanic island of Tuba erupted in the area of present day Java (remember Krakatoa?). It is estimated that there were 25 million people in the world at that time. Some that study the science of genetics tell us that the population of the world at that time could have gotten down to less than 2,000. Makes you think of Yellowstone, Crater Lake, Vesuvius, Mt. Fuji, Mt. Rainier, Mt. Shasta and other strato-volcanoes that may pop or pop again one day.

We have solar cycles that fluctuate regularly in intensity. This is germain to our climate because it is our sun that controls the weather on earth. Winds and the direction and force of those winds is a direct result of the effects of sunlight.

We also know that there have been times in the past when places like Texas, Oklahoma, Nebraska, the Dakotas and most of the rest of the North American continent and many other places in the world were under water. That would mean that the polar caps were nearly non-existent. I was in northwest New Mexico not long ago standing on a rock full of sea shells and other sea creatures.

When someone says scientists are sure of global warming and it is our fault I know they don't know; the scientists I mean. An educated guess? Absolutely. The hottest day in recent memory for the United States occured back in the 1930's. A town in Arkansas hit 121. Our climate has improved since then and even though we are cooler now than then that doesn't mean global warming or cooling isn't occuring. It's when you cite a "certain" cause that you are citing speculation and nothing more. No one knows for sure but we do know for sure about the Sun.

Global warming? Ice age? You tell me. Which one will happen first? :duel

 

[AliG]

My point was that if you look at the glaiceral patterns, this one is very different that was what i meant being 'not natural'. My friend did a Masters in this particlar field...and he said that this glaicer pattern is 'out of place'.
Meaning that the world ,if you like will not 'correct itself', like it has done through the past ice ages and natural global warmng , the natural melting.

So what do you think will happen or do you recognize 'global warming' as a problem?

 

[gordontravels]

My point was that if you look at the glaiceral patterns, this one is very different that was what i meant being 'not natural'. My friend did a Masters in this particlar field...and he said that this glaicer pattern is 'out of place'.
Meaning that the world ,if you like will not 'correct itself', like it has done through the past ice ages and natural global warmng , the natural melting.

So what do you think will happen or do you recognize 'global warming' as a problem?

Well first I'd like to be prepared to answer you intelligently so please, I have two questions for "your friend":

1. What is this term "out of place" and how does it apply to global warming?

2. What caused the last two ice ages and what is meant by the term "correct itself".

I suppose I could ask about "natural global warming" and "natural melting" but those two will do for now. I am very interested in your "friend's" response. :duel

 

[Navy Pride]

There are a lot of reasons why gas prices are so high but the main one is the environmental whackos tree huggers who have the democrats in the U.S. Senate in their back pockets............If it was not for them we would have been drilling for oil in ANWAR the Gulf of Mexico and other areas where we know oil is in the ground...........We should have been drilling there 10 years ago but becasue of filibusters by democrats in the Senate the Republicans could not get approval............

You reap what you sow Liberals, don't forget that........

 

[Batman]

Not to mention the last refinery to be built in the United States was in 1976.
We can't refine crude oil fast enough for the demand.

 

[Iriemon]

There are a lot of reasons why gas prices are so high but the main one is the environmental whackos tree huggers who have the democrats in the U.S. Senate in their back pockets............If it was not for them we would have been drilling for oil in ANWAR the Gulf of Mexico and other areas where we know oil is in the ground...........We should have been drilling there 10 years ago but becasue of filibusters by democrats in the Senate the Republicans could not get approval............

You reap what you sow Liberals, don't forget that........

Damn! And would could all have been driving BIGGER SUVs. Those @#$R! liberals. All their fault.

I think the real problem is that Bush is not jaw boning OPEC enough like he said he could do.

 

[Iriemon]

Not to mention the last refinery to be built in the United States was in 1976.
We can't refine crude oil fast enough for the demand.

How would more refineries lower the price per barrell of crude oil?

 

[cnredd]

How would more refineries lower the price per barrell of crude oil?

It woul NOT lower the price of crude(I think)...It would lower the price at the pumps...

Two pizza parlors...one has one oven...the other has four...They have all of their ingedients and their rent on the property is the same.

Since the one with the four ovens can, obviously, make pizzas at a rate four times faster than the other one, he could sell more pizza.

If the rent is $2000 a month for each of them, the guy with the four ovens could lower the lower the price on his pizzas and still make the rent quicker than the other one.

This is the same reason why you can buy an 8oz. bottle of a product at $2.00, but the 16oz. bottle costs $3.59 instead of $4.00

The gas price would come down if not for the lack of refineries because this bottleneck prevents more gas going out to the open market, and the more of a product available...the less the price.

 

[Navy Pride]

Damn! And would could all have been driving BIGGER SUVs. Those @#$R! liberals. All their fault.

I think the real problem is that Bush is not jaw boning OPEC enough like he said he could do.

The Arabs are really going to do what President Bush tells them to do.......Boy do you live in a fantasy land.........

Oh and your boy Kerry has a SUV.......

 

[stsburns]

It's just simple "Supply and Demand." If anybody says anything else, their partisan.

 

[Iriemon]

The Arabs are really going to do what President Bush tells them to do.......Boy do you live in a fantasy land.........

Oh and your boy Kerry has a SUV.......

I am not the one who claimed oil prices would be lowered by jaw boning OPEC. It was Bush who claimed that.

Kerry's not my boy. But the insatiable demand for fuel is a factor in oil prices, if you believe in market theory. All the Kerrys driving SUVs doesn't help. But when gas is relatively cheap like it has been until recently, people don't worry about it. That's why I like the idea of a tax. If you believe in free market theory, increasing the price of gas will result in lower demand (consuption). If we had lower consumption, we wouldn't be so dependent upon our good friends in the Middle East.

 

[gordontravels]

It woul NOT lower the price of crude(I think)...It would lower the price at the pumps...

Two pizza parlors...one has one oven...the other has four...They have all of their ingedients and their rent on the property is the same.

Since the one with the four ovens can, obviously, make pizzas at a rate four times faster than the other one, he could sell more pizza.

If the rent is $2000 a month for each of them, the guy with the four ovens could lower the lower the price on his pizzas and still make the rent quicker than the other one.

This is the same reason why you can buy an 8oz. bottle of a product at $2.00, but the 16oz. bottle costs $3.59 instead of $4.00

The gas price would come down if not for the lack of refineries because this bottleneck prevents more gas going out to the open market, and the more of a product available...the less the price.

Another excellent post. Now add to it that the neighborhood had 1,000 residents when the two stores began business and at the time you are speaking of. The 1 oven guy tried to get a permit to build 3 more ovens and the 4 oven guy tried to get a permit to build 2 more ovens. They both were turned down by the local government who feared the citizens in the nearby neighborhoods would have to smell pizza cooking even though technology stopped the spread of pizza fumes.

Now the neighborhood has over 4,000 SUV's - oops, sorry - residents but the number of pizzas is the same while the demand has gone up. Supply - demand = more per pizza. Oh and the oil - oops, sorry - the ingredients have gone up all during this time too. (glad we're not talking about cheeseburgers).

Now, a pizza that used to cost you $6.99 now costs you $10.99 and an extra dollar surcharge for delivery. There are just so many ovens with so much space and only so many pizzas can come out of them each day. OPEC, Ofcourse Pizza Entirely Consumed leaves you with plenty of raw materials (oil) but not the ovens to cook it (gasoline).

Just think of the difference in cost if those refineries would have been built in 1981 or 1986 instead of today.

Sorry, no new refineries since 1976? Leaves us to fume.

 

[Iriemon]

It woul NOT lower the price of crude(I think)...It would lower the price at the pumps...

Two pizza parlors...one has one oven...the other has four...They have all of their ingedients and their rent on the property is the same.

Since the one with the four ovens can, obviously, make pizzas at a rate four times faster than the other one, he could sell more pizza.

If the rent is $2000 a month for each of them, the guy with the four ovens could lower the lower the price on his pizzas and still make the rent quicker than the other one.

This is the same reason why you can buy an 8oz. bottle of a product at $2.00, but the 16oz. bottle costs $3.59 instead of $4.00

The gas price would come down if not for the lack of refineries because this bottleneck prevents more gas going out to the open market, and the more of a product available...the less the price.

I am not familiar enough with refinery capacity and distribution issues to argue this point. However, from everything I have read, the problem with gas prices now is not due to the fact there is simply not enough gas available at the pump. I certainly have not seen this as an issue around where I live. The problem seems to be that the price of crude has gone up so much that the price of refined gas has gone up accordingly.

 

[cnredd]

I am not familiar enough with refinery capacity and distribution issues to argue this point. However, from everything I have read, the problem with gas prices now is not due to the fact there is simply not enough gas available at the pump. I certainly have not seen this as an issue around where I live. The problem seems to be that the price of crude has gone up so much that the price of refined gas has gone up accordingly.

You are correct that there is ENOUGH. The problem is that there could be MUCH MORE if not for the lack of refineries.

If you need your car fixed in the big city, you can REASONABLY get a fair price from your neighborhood mechanic because he(she?!?!) knows you have other options in the area.

If your car breaks down in a deserted area with only one mechanic in a 50 mile radius....you're gonna pay more and accept it. Why?

Availability....You still get what you need(a mechanic), but if there were more of them around, the prices would drop.

I'm sorry...It seems I'm on a serious analogy kick:doh

Time to go eat!:2wave:

 

[Iriemon]

You are correct that there is ENOUGH. The problem is that there could be MUCH MORE if not for the lack of refineries.

If you need your car fixed in the big city, you can REASONABLY get a fair price from your neighborhood mechanic because he(she?!?!) knows you have other options in the area.

If your car breaks down in a deserted area with only one mechanic in a 50 mile radius....you're gonna pay more and accept it. Why?

Availability....You still get what you need(a mechanic), but if there were more of them around, the prices would drop.

I'm sorry...It seems I'm on a serious analogy kick:doh

Time to go eat!:2wave:

Well if we use that analogy, honestly, there are tons of gas stations around, so I don't think the issue is that the price is being increased because of lack of supply sources.

Maybe there are so few refineries in the US right now that they are colluding on price and that is increasing the price, that's possible, tho' I haven't heard anyone arguing that. But otherwise, it just doesn't seem like this is a production or distribution bottleneck type of problem. But I'll concede I'm not familiar with this stuff.

Bon appetite!

 

[gordontravels]

But I'll concede I'm not familiar with this stuff.

On this we agree. Our production is on a knife's edge. If we have a refinery fire, an explosion, any disruption in oil supply for any meaningful period, you will see higher prices.

We have all those things - an explosion in southeast Texas at a refinery; a fire in another oil distribution point in Venezuela; a protest that has dropped production over 50% in Venezuela; a Central American country that just suspended all production indefinitely (some 220,000 barrels a day) and no new refineries built in the U.S. since 1976.

All these things add to the price of oil or gas and all these things are happening right now. We may not see shortages because many people like me are driving less because of the price but we won't see cheaper gas again. This is not a political thing exept for refinery capacity and our government should do something about that. At least relax regulations so they can be built and then deal with the ACLU and environmentalists.

No more cheap oil so drive the SUV slower :duel

 

[SKILMATIC]

O stop your whining and buy a hybrid, :lol:

 

[26 X World Champs]

There are a lot of reasons why gas prices are so high but the main one is the environmental whackos tree huggers who have the democrats in the U.S. Senate in their back pockets............If it was not for them we would have been drilling for oil in ANWAR.....

You reap what you sow Liberals, don't forget that........

Are you a super geologist? I ask because it is my understanding that if we sucked all the oil out of ANWAR it would not produce more than ONE YEAR'S supply of oil for the USA, so please, Mr. Geologist, please explain how ANWAR is the solution to our oild dependency?

BTW - I love when you make really, really stupid generalizations like "tree huggers" because it reminds everyone how pointless your posts are. Keep it up!

 

[SKILMATIC]

BTW - I love when you make really, really stupid generalizations like "tree huggers" because it reminds everyone how pointless your posts are. Keep it up!

You just did the same with that post. :doh

Liberals are very good at debacling there own arguments.