These oil executives will not disclose their income to CNN. How do you NOT know what you made last year! [smiley=huh.gif]

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

get a rope, god forbid they make money

Let's see how much that affects the price of gas...

According to the EIA (START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE) we consumed 20.7 million barrels per day in 2007.  According to START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE, you get about 19.5 gallons of gasoline out of each barrel, in addition to some other things like heating oil.

So, that makes daily consumption about 20,700,000 * 19.5 gallons, or 403,650,000 gallons per day, or 147,332,250,000 gallons in 2007.

Let's just round up to 150 Billion gallons to make this simple.

So, these guys on the panel made something like 5.5M + 14M + 15M, let's just round up and say they made 100 million dollars.  OMG.  That's works out to .06 pennies per gallon.  Not 6 cents, .06 cents, or 6/10,000 of a dollar.

How much does the government make on every gallon? In California, it's over $.50 per gallon! (START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE and that was in 2002! For doing NOTHING other than regulating and taxing it?  The oil companies at least do something useful.

It so easy to point the finger at the oil companies, but we are the problem.  We vote idiots into office, and they have created this demand/supply problem.

holy shit.  my calculator says the same as yours.  400million gallons of gas a day is friggin mind-blowing.

If the company profit is in pennies per gallon, and the taxes are also in pennies per gallon, why is it that the company oil profits have skyrocketed while the tax revenue for roads and infrastructure hasn't?    
.....Er, well, maybe the tax revenue has skyrocketed, but i dont see any new roads or anything.  

Their profits are running at about 8%, which is probably enough incentive to deal with the regulatory nightmare that is energy.

Any way you slice it, 8% of $4.00 a gallon is more money than 8% of $2.00 a gallon.  Their profit is rising because the market price for their product is rising.  The fact that they enjoy totally inelastic demand is sad, but it's not their fault that the market (worldwide) is demanding more than can be supplied (by over a 1 million barrels per day).  That's why prices are going up, and profits follow naturally.  If they did not, there would be no reason to be in that business.

They are not angels, but they are not the problem.  Our congress is the problem, and our people are the ones putting those idiots in charge.  Sadly, the action that people want is for these same idiot politicians to punish the oil companies and sue OPEC, as if that is going to accomplish anything at all.

Reduce demand, increase supply by using our own resources (whatever they are), and the problem goes away.

BMoneeTheMoneeMan wrote on May 22^nd, 2008 at 7:31pm:

If the company profit is in pennies per gallon, and the taxes are also in pennies per gallon, why is it that the company oil profits have skyrocketed while the tax revenue for roads and infrastructure hasn't?

Taxes are fixed per gallon, not a percentage of the price.  As the price rises, oil company profits will rise, but tax revenue will be the same.  It is not like sales tax.

BMoneeTheMoneeMan wrote on May 22^nd, 2008 at 7:31pm:

holy shit.  my calculator says the same as yours.  400million gallons of gas a day is friggin mind-blowing. If the company profit is in pennies per gallon, and the taxes are also in pennies per gallon, why is it that the company oil profits have skyrocketed while the tax revenue for roads and infrastructure hasn't?     .....Er, well, maybe the tax revenue has skyrocketed, but i dont see any new roads or anything.

The tax on a gallon isn't to sneeze at.  and the higher the pump price the more that $ tax generates.  It sure as $hit isn't going into that lock box for infrastructure and road repair!  The pols and local gov. spend money like drunken sailors and when the economy really tanks you and I are going to not be asked but demanded...threatened to open your wallets more.  When sales tax decreas, the spending dosn't they just stick it to the property owners.  

-P.

[smiley=JAW_DROP.gif] [smiley=JAW_DROP.gif] [smiley=JAW_DROP.gif] [smiley=JAW_DROP.gif] [smiley=JAW_DROP.gif] [smiley=JAW_DROP.gif] [smiley=JAW_DROP.gif] [smiley=JAW_DROP.gif] [smiley=JAW_DROP.gif] [smiley=JAW_DROP.gif] [smiley=JAW_DROP.gif] [smiley=JAW_DROP.gif] [smiley=JAW_DROP.gif] [smiley=JAW_DROP.gif] [smiley=JAW_DROP.gif] [smiley=JAW_DROP.gif] [smiley=JAW_DROP.gif]

wrote on May 22^nd, 2008 at 7:45pm:

Taxes are fixed per gallon, not a percentage of the price.  As the price rises, oil company profits will rise, but tax revenue will be the same.  It is not like sales tax.

I coulda sworn the mark up was in pennies per gallon and not pennies per dollar

I think that's the way they invoice it, but they work off of margins, so the price per gallon that they call markup is flexible whereas the taxes are not.

wrote on May 22^nd, 2008 at 6:11pm:

get a rope, god forbid they make money It so easy to point the finger at the oil companies, but we are the problem.  We vote idiots into office, and they have created this demand/supply problem.

Right. The only people worse than ebay and drug companies for gouging is big oil. Zero consciences. Screwed, blued, and tattooed as my old employer used to say.

Charlie

Rail.  

Soon.

Think backwards.

Steve G

People buy so much of what they see on TV. And they also want somebody to point the finger at. Oil company execs are easy targets, but 8% is no huge operating margin. I wish the company I worked at could make 8 cents on the dollar, but we're a little more capital intensive than an oil company (i.e., over 500 jet airplanes and over 100,000 trucks to run and maintain).

What a lot of people forget about is that average Americans own much of the oil companies, mostly in the form of 401K's. Why should I be bitter when they succeed?

Paul98 wrote on May 22^nd, 2008 at 7:46pm:

It sure as $hit isn't going into that lock box for infrastructure and road repair!

That 'lock box' bit gets me every time.  I think of Al Gore talking about how we will take the social security money and put it in an iron-clad lock box and throw away the key.

You have to remember that for the last 70 years, the Republican party has been trying to kill Social Securtiy. All my life it has been called the third rail of politics. Good. George tried it too. Gore should have known better than to make that silly statement though.

Defending the unbelieveable business of oil company gouging is hard to fathom. They deliberately haven't built new refineries here for years. No money in that, you know.

It's hard for me to root for a business that in the late 30 and 40s, bought up streetcar systems in several cities to kill public transportation that they didn't have a piece of. No money in streetcars either.

Charlie

Brew wrote on May 22^nd, 2008 at 9:51pm:

Why should I be bitter when they succeed?

Because the top guy makes 15 million a year and has no worries?....just a thought.  ;)

wrote on May 22^nd, 2008 at 10:13pm:

Because the top guy makes 15 million a year and has no worries?....just a thought.  ;)

The top guys in just about every company in which I own stock make millions, too. So? When did capitalism become a nasty word? If I'm envious, I should become one of those guys, not point the finger at 'em. Turns out I'm not envious - but I do give them some of my hard-earned money to invest. And that's just enough for me.

wrote on May 22^nd, 2008 at 10:13pm:

Because the top guy makes 15 million a year and has no worries?....just a thought.  ;)

Dude, you are living in the 80s if you think the top guy only made 15 million.

Capitalism is fine.

J. P. Morgan and and the Rockefellers made the golden age which was so golden that even Republicans had had enough after the turn of the century. If you're going to make money, it would be nice if you don't act like Scrooge McDuck.

Greed such as this hasn't been seen in 100 years. The country can't afford it.

Charlie

Greed is a moral issue, not a legal one. Any suggestions on how to legislate greed out of the marketplace?

"Fair" is a ball that drops between two white lines. The way I figure, I can either get angry, get even, or get lost. I'll spend my time focusing on stuff that makes me happy - in other words, I choose to get lost.

Here we go again:

- Profit is evil and greedy
- People shouldn't be allowed to make so much money.
- That big corporate money should be forcefully. redistributed to those who don’t have as much.

What does sound like to you?

I knew I liked you Mark.

Marc wrote on May 23^rd, 2008 at 12:34pm:

Here we go again: - People shouldn't be allowed to make so much money. - That big corporate money should be forcefully. redistributed to those who don't have as much. What does sound like to you?

If they haven't been said, it would sound like nothing.

I can't seem to find the quotes in this thread where these things were said, or mentioned the first time in the ANWAR thread.

People are getting upset because the evil oil executives make money.  Congress is grilling said evil-doers about their income.  Congress is tlaking about a 'windfall profits' tax.  Congress is going to sue OPEC.  Congress won't allow any drilling in America.  Congress won't allow any new refineries or nuclear power plants.  The Feds and the states both make more money on gas than the oil companies.  Something is wrong with this picture.  Oh, it's congress.

Here's my perspective on the whole thing:

Campbell Brown is hot!

Thank you for the news, Shawn.

In reading Marc's "Here we go again", and from the ANWAR thread:


Marc wrote on May 15^th, 2008 at 1:33am:

Jonny's posts like this still get the same kinds of responses from some of the same people, but now I see even more socialists coming out with even more twisted statistics.

I got the impression he was reading from these threads and I had a hard time finding "shouldn't be allowed" or forcefully redistributed being said a first or second time so couldn't make sense the conversation at all.

Charlie,

The reason we have not had any new oil refineries built in the United States since 1973 is nto the oil companies' fault.  There has not been a permit issued for construction of one by the Federal government since then.  They have been allowed to expand existing refineries, but have not been allowed to build new.  In 1976 Hess Oil, for whom I worked built a new refinery in Aruba because they had been trying since 1965 to be permitted for a refinery in NJ, but were repeatedly turned down by the US government.  

There is a refinery in the planning and developemental stages in AZ that has been in the permitting process for 10 years now, BUT STILL HAS NOT BEEN PERMITTED BY THE EPA.

Today in the House hearings Maxine Waters showed her true colors when she said that the goal of the liberals is to "socialize" and for"the government to take over and run your oil companies".  Some here would probably think that was a good idea.

Jerry

I, for one, welcome our new socialist overlords.   :-X

Callico wrote on May 23^rd, 2008 at 4:37pm:

Maxine Waters showed her true colors when she said that the goal of the liberals is to "socialize" ...

Confusing.  How can this person say the goal of the liberals if these are her true colors?  Is there a quote for this?

Glenn Beck to Big Oil,what should be said.

GLENN:  Enough.  We brought together the heads of big oil.  See that big head over there?  Yeah, he runs Shell.  That one?  That runs ExxonMobil.  Mr. Big oil, we're here to talk about the high price of gasoline.  How could it have possibly gotten this high?

Let me tell you what we've done here in congress.  We told you that drilling in ANWR is off limits.  We told you that drilling off the coast of Florida and California is off limits.  We told you, Mr. Big oil, that there wouldn't be any new leases for drilling in the Gulf while China and Venezuela and even Cuba pursued these leases and have just signed 100-year leases on the oil in the Gulf of Mexico.  We here in congress have promised, as all three presidential candidates have also promised, to introduce and pass in the next term a cap and trade legislation bill that will increase the price of gasoline according to the EPA by an additional $1.50.  Some people say it could be as high as $5 additional per gallon.  Order, order.  We have said that we're shutting down oil fields in Colorado.  We won't let you develop shale oil fields in several Western states.  And yesterday we passed legislation that would let us sue OPEC with the full understanding that they'll never retaliate.  Yes.  We have allowed environmental attorneys to sue you big oil fiends for future possible destruction of Alaskan Eskimo village which legal experts believe is the same strategy used to bring down big tobacco.  We're especially proud of our recent action to protect the polar bear and their habitat which just happens to be where the future oil deposits happen to be located.  We told you that you're making too much money and that we're looking at seizing any money that we consider windfall profits.  Yes.  We have allowed you to drill in some very small areas in Alaska while simultaneously creating very generous environmental laws which have tied up the very production we authorize through years of litigation after you spent the money on buying and setting up equipment.  We told you through our policies that we would not allow you to build a new refinery in over 30 years.  In fact, this great country, under our tutelage, has even reduced the number of operational refineries by half since 1982.  Order, order, order.  We have even told your potential competitors in the nuclear and hydroelectric industries that we would send the environmental lawyers after them if they even dared think about building a new plant or a new dam.  We've refused to fund or allow the deployment of coal-to-oil technology which has been around since the 1930s.  We've told you that you have to make different blends of gasoline, let states like California dictate what unique gasoline blends you have to make for them.  We will not reduce our federal gasoline tax.  We won't even consider reducing it for the summer months.  So Mr. Big oil, tell me why exactly are gas prices so high?  Order, order!

Stop.  That's what should be said.  Thank you.  That's what should be said.  Instead congress is going to bring big oil in front of them today and say, "Oh, oh, are you price gouging?"  .

mattscott,

I dont know who the fuck you are.......but, you are dead on my friend!!!

There does seem to be a small problem with even expanding refineries in the continental U.S., hard to believe I guess.   This portion from a PBS interview, December 2007.




Quote:

Problems for Indiana facility ELIZABETH BRACKETT: Twelve refineries in the U.S. have been expanded since 1995, but when BP tried to expand their facility in Whiting, Indiana, this summer, it ran into huge problems. BP also wants to refine more Canadian crude, which it says would help reduce U.S. reliance on Middle Eastern oil. BP Vice Chairman Stephen Elbert. STEPHEN ELBERT, Vice Chairman, BP America: This expansion is really important, we believe, for the nation and for the Midwest and for us. This country really needs a secure, stable supply of energy. The fields that we've relied on in the past in the West, some in the Gulf, are beginning to run out. We're beginning to import more and more oil from offshore, from foreign countries. And it's a national priority for the country to have a more secure and a more stable supply of crude oil. ELIZABETH BRACKETT: Unlike Marathon, BP said it needed higher limits on ammonia and other pollutants it discharges into Lake Michigan. It got the go-ahead from both the state of Indiana and the EPA. BP said it would seldom need to use the upper limits of its pollution permits and would not compromise water quality. The refining process would continue to take in and discharge 150 million gallons of Lake Michigan water daily. That water is treated in an 11-step process that removes the majority of its toxic pollutants before the water is return to the lake, says plant superintendent Joseph Morrison. JOSEPH MORRISON, BP Employee: I'm taking a sample of the water that's flowing from the process out into Lake Michigan right now. ELIZABETH BRACKETT: Is this as clean as the water in Lake Michigan is now? JOSEPH MORRISON: Yes, this is as clean as the water that's coming into the process from Lake Michigan. Pollutants in discharge water ELIZABETH BRACKETT: But as clean as it looks, the discharge water does contain small amounts of 23 different toxic pollutants, including chromium, strontium, benzeprine, mercury, ammonia, and total suspended solids. The new permit raised the limits for ammonia by 54 percent and total suspended solids by 35 percent. That outraged many in neighboring Illinois. ...Last month, BP backed down. START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

It's stunning that some people here actually buy what big oil's lobbyists and bought and paid for "scientists" say. It's similar to accepting the bizarre bloggers world domination conspiracy theories. It's like my neighbor that actually believes what Detroit says: that labor is the cheif cause of American auto makers problems in this market. Egad!

Who is more likely to exaggerate, lie, or denegrate anything that might just make business take a second look at what they are doing to the country..while piling unheard of sums of cash that never benefits our historically patient citizenry and sending it to offshore accounts...big oil or people that have some doubts about what they are told and stand to make almost nothing on this idea?

For God's sake how much more bending over does it take?

Charlie

Kevin,

Unfortunately I do not have access to the quotation from Maxine Waters at this time.  I personally heard her speaking to the gentleman from Shell when she said that.  I will be looking for a transcript tomorrow when I have the time.

Charlie,

"Big Oil" does not have to send those "huge sums of cash" to offshore accounts.  90% of their revenues come from off shore.  Also, most of our oil companies in the United States are not U S owned.  They were bought out in the 70's and 80's because of the regulations they were having to put up with in the US made it untenable for them to continue as American owned entities.  American Oil Corporation, the original "Big Oil"(Standard Oil, John D Rockefeller),  known as Amoco was bought out by British Petroleum (BP) as was Gulf Oil.  Shell Oil is a subsidiary of Royal Dutch Shell, and has always been so.  ExxonMobil is primarily foreign owned.  Citgo is Argentinian.  ConocoPhillips and Marathon are about the only major American owned companies left.  This is not all inclusive obviously, but I think you can take my point.

the bending over we as American citizens are having to put up with comes from socialists and anti-capitolists in our government.  What I heard in the "hearings" today sounded more of Marx and Engels than it did of a free economic policy.

Jerry

Charlie... it's not a question of believing big oil and their lobbyists.  The economics of it are all very simple.  Pointing fingers at big oil as the problem fails to acknowledge that they do everything than can do, within the law, to have product to delver to us.  If you could show me where they have fought to limit their ability to produce (and in the process, increase supply and reduce price) you'd have a leg to stand on here.

Callico wrote on May 23^rd, 2008 at 4:37pm:

Today in the House hearings Maxine Waters showed her true colors when she said that the goal of the liberals is to "socialize" and for"the government to take over and run your oil companies".

Callico wrote on May 24^th, 2008 at 1:55am:

Unfortunately I do not have access to the quotation from Maxine Waters at this time.  I personally heard her speaking to the gentleman from Shell when she said that.  I will be looking for a transcript tomorrow when I have the time.

I thought the most unmistakable bearing of what she said made very clear she speaks for herself.  

wrote on May 24^th, 2008 at 3:41am:

Pointing fingers at big oil as the problem fails to acknowledge that they do everything than can do, within the law, to have product to delver to us.  If you could show me where they have fought to limit their ability to produce (and in the process, increase supply and reduce price) you'd have a leg to stand on here.

Without being specific to the understood present, there has been a related example in the past making a showing possible.  
 In a shocking betrayal, they saw fit to capitalize on opportunism,** which revealed in 1947 having  overcharged the navy during WWII and afterwards.  (Chevron and Texaco, $1.23 a barrel as opposed to other country buyers, .95 - $1.00 a barrel) After examining oil agreements dating back to 1928, a commission concluded that domestic and international oil trade, as well as U.S. and world production, had been artificially restrained and manipulated by the largest multinationals* in an attempt to fix oil prices.  Moreover, the oil giants had divided up among themselves the world's most important markets and producing areas with a view to suppressing competition.
 Any public airing of the report's findings would have been a spectacular blow to America's credibility as a pillar of fairness and equal justice, offering the Soviet propaganda an unexpected bounty of material for attacks against Western capitalism.  For this reason, Truman finally decided to resolve the matter through civil litigation rather than criminal proceedings, there was no way the defendants could escape a guilty verdict as they stuggled to regain an impossible purity.

*the Seven Sisters: Exxon (Standard Oil of New Jersey), Texaco (Texas Oil Company), Chevron (Standard Oil of California), Mobile (Standard Oil New York - Vacuum Oil) Gulf Oil, Royal Dutch Shell, and BP (Anglo-Iranian Oil Company).


from a book encompassing the incident.



**capitalize on:  to take advantage of; turn to one's advantage.

opportunism:  the policy or practice, as in politics or business, of adapting actions, decisions, etc., to expediency or effectiveness without regard to principles or consequences.

(interesting when combining the emboldened definition)


Capitalism has occasionally snuck in its related ugly cousins.

It definitely goes back to supply and demand

We SUPPLY the Congress and then FORGET to DEMAND that they do anything.

If you ask the average man/woman on the street who their rep or senator is - they don't have a clue, yet they keep electing these idiots and these idiots keep doing whatever they want because no one tells them differently.

Until the people of this country wake up and start DEMANDING their EMPLOYEES in DC start doing something NOTHING will ever get done and we'll keep getting screwed.

But that would take an effort and getting off our apathetic butts and getting involved and most people aren't willing to do that.

My 2 cents...

Hugs BD

BarbaraD wrote on May 24^th, 2008 at 8:04am:

But that would take an effort and getting off our apathetic butts and getting involved and most people aren't willing to do that.

Nope Barb, sadly you are right. You were right about everything you said, the answer to everything is in our own hands but we prefer to sit and bitch and whine than stand up and ACT.

If we all took to writing, phoning, emailing people in power then they would have to listen. While we don't - they won't.

Callico wrote on May 23^rd, 2008 at 4:37pm:

There is a refinery in the planning and developemental stages in AZ that has been in the permitting process for 10 years now, BUT STILL HAS NOT BEEN PERMITTED BY THE EPA.

While there may be other hurdles, local or other agencies, financing, and dealing with oil companies, according to the EPA site an approval went through.



Quote:

Arizona Clean Fuels Refinery Permit The proposed Arizona Clean Fuels Refinery in Yuma, Ariz., would be the first new oil refinery built in the U.S. in more than 30 years. EPA worked in partnership with the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality during their permitting process for the refinery, and the permit was issued in the record time of nine months. START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Quote:

Arizona looks to Saudis to build Yuma oil refinery Backers of a proposed $2.5 billion oil refinery in Yuma are talking with Saudi and other Middle Eastern interests about investing in the Arizona project. Refinery backers also are lobbying Congress for tax and other incentives to help the massive project get built. Those incentives are included in a controversial energy bill backed by business interests and the Bush administration but panned by critics as corporate welfare for big oil. START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

The Saudi's were mum to the approach of investing but financing seemed to be attempting gov handouts, as of 2005.

our national wealth is going to the middle east, so they can buy better weapons to kill us with.

Are we stupid or what?

So, on my way to work I stop at the gas station down the road to fill up.  Across the island from me is a guy filling up his brand new Hummer.  I notice that he left the engine running.

Seventy bucks later I pull off and continue to work.

On my return trip home, I notice that he's still there continuing to fill his vehicle.  Maybe I should have told him to turn his engine off.

Now, the first part of this story is true.  The second part is my poor attempt at an allegory. An allegory of us...filling our tanks, standing still and getting nowhere.

Conserve however you can.  Challenge yourself for one month to do everything possible, what ever you think possible, to power down.

Cheap oil is over.

Steve G

Have to agree. I guess it takes a swift kick to get us to pay attention.....Detroit too.

Charlie

An interesting site from the US Government showing the weekly averages of fuel prices across the US, also showing the increase/decrease over the previous week.  The graph on the right shows the percentages of the price of gasoline/diesel and where it goes.

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

I don't think a 6% margin for distribution and marketing leaves a whole lot of room for gouging by the oil companies.  You will notice that at 11% for taxes the government is taking almost twice as much, and that is not even the profit level!  The Boston Tea Party was over a 2% tax.  We surely have forgotten a lot in the last 234 years!

Jerry

Just the low end of profitability, refining, has a lot of wiggle room as of 2006.



Quote:

Giant oil refinery in India shows forces roiling industry Tuesday, August 29, 2006 By Steve Levine and Patrick Barta, The Wall Street Journal Distilling crude oil into gasoline, diesel, home-heating oil and jet fuel used to be a lower-margin business. These days it's a fat profit center. The U.S. market is especially lucrative, sometimes earning its refiners $20 or more on every barrel of crude oil they refine.  Exxon Mobil Corp. earned $1.3 billion in its refining arm in the second quarter, up 11 percent from a year before. Independent refiner Valero Corp. earned $1.9 billion in the quarter, up about 124 percent, a jump partly due to its acquisition of another refiner. START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Quote:

Shell, Saudis to Spend $7 Billion on Texas Refinery "We have had strong refining margins in recent years,'' said Ivor Pether, who helps oversee about $17 billion at Royal London Asset Management, including around 30 million Shell shares. ``It's probably very sensible for Shell to raise its capacity in America." The price difference between a barrel of crude and a barrel of gasoline, a rough measure of refining profitability, rose to a record $37.477 a barrel on May 17 in the U.S. "The returns will be higher than with a new build. The number they're looking for is a 15 percent return." START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Quote:

Tax Breaks President George W. Bush has pledged measures including tax breaks to spur construction...

Let's all chip in and see if we can help them make that 15% margin and give them what they want.   ;)

"--------- There is no short-term fix for gasoline prices. Prices are what they are as a result of rising global oil demand from India, China and a rapidly growing Middle East on top of our own increasing consumption, a shortage of “sweet” crude that is used for the diesel fuel that Europe is highly dependent upon and our own neglect of effective energy policy for 30 years.

Cynical ideas, like the McCain-Clinton summertime gas-tax holiday, would only make the problem worse, and reckless initiatives like the Chrysler-Dodge-Jeep offer to subsidize gasoline for three years for people who buy its gas guzzlers are the moral equivalent of tobacco companies offering discounted cigarettes to teenagers.

I can’t say it better than my friend Tim Shriver, the chairman of Special Olympics, did in a Memorial Day essay in The Washington Post: “So Dodge wants to sell you a car you don’t really want to buy, that is not fuel-efficient, will further damage our environment, and will further subsidize oil states, some of which are on the other side of the wars we’re currently fighting. ... The planet be damned, the troops be forgotten, the economy be ignored: buy a Dodge.”

No, our mythical candidate would say the long-term answer is to go exactly the other way: guarantee people a high price of gasoline — forever."  Tom Friedman, NYT. He goes on to say the it takes this kind of thing to get oil and Detroit on our side.

Hard to argue with it from here.

Charlie

Charlie wrote on May 28^th, 2008 at 10:07pm:

"--------- There is no short-term fix for gasoline prices.

Wanna bet, Charlie?

Massive Oil Deposit Could Increase US reserves by 10x

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGESTART PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

wrote on May 28^th, 2008 at 10:14pm:

Charlie wrote on May 28th, 2008 at 10:07pm: "--------- There is no short-term fix for gasoline prices. Wanna bet, Charlie? Massive Oil Deposit Could Increase US reserves by 10x

Besides, it's North Dakota for crap sake.

Even wildlife refuse to live in North Dakota. ;D

I have to wonder though. Friedman of course is saying that the high price just might change our way of thinking. We've had it soft for a long time. Even my ultra conservative neighbor is looking at hybrids.

Charlie

Charlie wrote on May 28^th, 2008 at 10:39pm:

Even my ultra conservative neighbor is looking at hybrids.

He can drive whatever the fuck he wants!

I NEED to drive my one ton to make a living!

Just curious to know why this is:

As of ~ 5 years ago it was not possible to register a new diesel automobile in NYS!  A truck yes but not an automobile.  25-30 years ago deisel autos wrer much more prevelant than they are today.  WHy is this and what group got them essentially banned in NYS?  Todays deisel is much more environmentally friendly than its gas burning counterpart.  ~35 mpg vs 25 mpg!  

Was it the nasty conservitives or the tree hugging bunnymen?

-P.

If there is so much competition from China and India for purchasing the oil which supposedly drives up prices, why the hell is gas only $2.53 per gallon in China? Do they pay less per barrell than we do? Can they refine it cheaper than we can? I doubt it. But if they can, we need to study how they are doing it.

Iran is winning the war, one barrell at a a time.

Jimmers

wrote on May 29^th, 2008 at 9:38am:

If there is so much competition from China and India for purchasing the oil which supposedly drives up prices, why the hell is gas only $2.53 per gallon in China? Do they pay less per barrell than we do? Can they refine it cheaper than we can? I doubt it. But if they can, we need to study how they are doing it. Iran is winning the war, one barrell at a a time. Jimmers

China and many countries subsidise energy costs for the people.  

-P.

Paul98 wrote on May 29^th, 2008 at 5:22am:

Just curious to know why this is:

Quote:

The reason for the ban: In 1992, New York made its vehicle emissions regulations conform to California's. The high sulfur content of the fuel makes it tough to market a diesel that meets the standards, said Allen Schaeffer, executive director of the Diesel Technology Forum. But, beginning Oct. 15, at least 80 percent of the diesel fuel sold in the United States must have a sulfur content of 15 parts per million, as opposed to the current 500 parts. START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Quote:

The same emission standards take effect in Connecticut and New Jersey in 2009 START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Quote:

the advent of ultralow-sulfur diesel fuel and new engine technology means that the emissions from these trucks have been reduced by more than 90 percent. Consumers, too, can be more energy efficient by driving a diesel car that gets up to 40 percent more miles per gallon and puts out 22 percent less carbon dioxide than a comparable gasoline car. And unlike the Toyota Prius hybrids, diesels deliver the fuel savings whether driven in the city or on the highway. Allen Schaeffer Executive Director Diesel Technology Forum Frederick, Md., May 23, 2008 START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Looks like resulting improvement coming soon.   :)

Quote:

Wednesday, May 28, 2008 - 3:03 PM EDT NY, 13 other states suing EPA Business First of Buffalo - from The Albany Business Review Cuomo said that in March, the EPA adopted two new "weaker" standards for regulating ground-level ozone pollution -- also known as "smog" -- and ignored recommendations by its own independent science advisers. "The EPA is charged with protecting the environment, yet the Bush administration has repeatedly used it as a tool for facilitating pollution instead of combating it," Cuomo said. The other states and regions joining the suit are: California, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Massachusetts, Maryland, Maine, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, and Rhode Island, as well as New York City and Washington, D.C. START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Quote:

Wednesday, December 12, 2007 Administration Oversight, Environment, Politics and Science Committee Report: White House Engaged in Systematic Effort to Manipulate Climate Change Science The evidence before the Committee leads to one inescapable conclusion: the Bush Administration has engaged in a systematic effort to manipulate climate change science and mislead policymakers and the public about the dangers of global warming. The White House Censored Climate Change Scientists The White House Extensively Edited Climate Change Reports Other White House Actions START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Thanks Kevin!

Seems pretty ironic that the "greenies" in thier quest to control polution, actually caused more pollution in the long run by using a heck of a lot more fuel.  LOL  Kind of like when the pols forced BTME in the gas in the name of "cleaner air" and ended up polluting vast underground aquifers!

I still say take a fat pol, render their blubber and make bio deisel :)

-P.

In one respect, a point that seems clear though, being unable to sell diesels to consumers in MAJOR markets like CA and NY due to regulations forces technology, in this one instance, to make better improvements.    :)



However, I've seen the price of diesel fuel lately!

Paul98 wrote on May 29^th, 2008 at 11:27am:

I still say take a fat pol, render their blubber and make bio deisel :)

We'd still have to keep a flame under their butt on a cold morning to get them started.   ;)


from a link above


Quote:

which he had filled the day before with biodiesel fuel consisting largely of rendered animal fat. Plummeting overnight temperatures had caused the fat to congeal, and the result was a clogged engine and a stalled car. Dr. Sackner-Bernstein recently bought aquarium heaters to warm the barrels of biodiesel in his driveway to prevent clogging.

Jonny, that can't be right.  That field in ND would be, by far, the largest oil field in the world, dwarfing that field in Saudi.  (Gwahar?  I dont know how to spell it)  

and why in the hell would we subsidize the oil companies?!?!  and why in the hell do the oil companies need to borrow money from Saudis?

That oil field is real, but the amount of recoverable oil is more like 4 Billion barrels.

 
START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

The entire Bakkan formation has produced about 105 million barrels so far.  Keep in mind, that's enough oil for about 1 week in the US.  7.5 days, to be more precise.

-Shawn

Kevin_M wrote on May 29^th, 2008 at 11:52am:

Paul98 wrote on May 29th, 2008 at 11:27am: I still say take a fat pol, render their blubber and make bio deisel :) from a link above Quote: which he had filled the day before with biodiesel fuel consisting largely of rendered animal fat. Plummeting overnight temperatures had caused the fat to congeal, and the result was a clogged engine and a stalled car. Dr. Sackner-Bernstein recently bought aquarium heaters to warm the barrels of biodiesel in his driveway to prevent clogging.

Hmm...yep, that's our government alright! ;)

-P.

Paul98 wrote on May 29^th, 2008 at 5:22am:

Just curious to know why this is: As of ~ 5 years ago it was not possible to register a new diesel automobile in NYS!  A truck yes but not an automobile.  25-30 years ago deisel autos wrer much more prevelant than they are today.  WHy is this and what group got them essentially banned in NYS?  Todays deisel is much more environmentally friendly than its gas burning counterpart.  ~35 mpg vs 25 mpg!   Was it the nasty conservitives or the tree hugging bunnymen? -P.

The funny thing is that about 10 miles from me is Cummins Engines. They just celebrated making something like a million of the the things the other day.

Charlie