How long till we tell... ( Gas Topic )

[Roy Karrde]

This topic is inspired by a Russ Martin Show discussion today. With Gas Prices constantly rising, and talk of it going to $5 a gallon come this summer in some places. It is only a matter of time till we start drilling in American Waters and in Alaska, as well as building more refineries.

Right now what is preventing that is the extreme environmental lobby pressuring Congress to veto any bill.

So how long until we tell the "Green" groups to shove it up their ass? The backlash is already starting against ethonal, and truck drivers are protesting. So how long will it take until you have had enough? When is it worth more to drill in Alaska, than keeping that area free of oil drilling? What price do you think until we start having more and more protests infront of Congress for change now?

Participate in the poll and enjoy having a discussion on Gas Prices ^_^

[mr_pikachu]

Let's be honest. If the "green" groups can convince politicians to outlaw analog TVs and lightbulbs that don't cause migraines, they totally own the government. Nuclear winter could envelop the planet and they'd still form a human circle around Alaska singing Kumbaya. Because it's not about helping humans, animals, plants, or anything else; it's about sticking it to "the man."

Excuse the cynical pessimism. Which I sincerely hope isn't actually realism.


EDIT: None of those poll options really apply to me. Now, if you had an option that said "free"...

*is fed up with hysterical environmentalists*

[Roy Karrde]

Personally I just think that at some point people are going to get so pissed that the Government cannot ignore them. Especially if it happens this summer, right before a election. There just has to be some kind of breaking point.

[Blademaster]

This topic is SO not biased.

[Roy Karrde]

Well I would be glad to hear a alternative view point from a Environmentalist, and how we should sacrifice for gas and food prices, with many of the poor starving and truckers not able to make their wages. Becuase a couple of miles of Alaska should not be dirtied up?

I mean seriously there is going to come a point where food is going to get too high for many to buy, and the cost of gas too high for truckers to transport goods around the nation. Shouldn't at some point before that happen we as human beings realize that keeping a few miles of Alaska untouched is not worth it?

[mr_pikachu]

Oh, as soon as someone posts a counterpoint I fully expect the discussion to disintegrate into dozens of snide, back-and-forth jabs on the edge of flaming. Which is when I'll be evacuating the thread.

At any rate, I'm just tired of people being imbeciles. If you want to develop alternate energy sources, fine! Please, feel free! I'm all for that. No one's really sure when the petrol supply will run out, but it'll happen someday, so let's get a head start on that. Besides, gasoline isn't cheap, so if you can make something else run better and cheaper, go for it!

Until you've got an economical solution, though, don't whine about how awful gasoline is and how anyone who touches the grass with a shovel is a direct descendant of Satan. Develop an alternative fuel source, make it better and/or cheaper than the current system, and viola! Everything's fixed.

Better to solve the problem than waste your time complaining about it.

...In case you hadn't noticed, this is a hot topic for me right now. I'm rather livid.

[firepokemon]

No offense to you Americans but in terms of real costs, you guys have some of the cheapest petrol prices in the world. A price that is way cheaper than you will see in Europe, Australia, New Zealand and elsewhere. Sorry but its hard to feel sorry for what you see say as high petrol prices, when the rest of us are paying even higher costs. Now lets see, exactly what type of cars do the two of you drive? Are they economical vehicles or are they gas guzzlers?

I would be interesting to find out really. As if they are bigger vehicles, well I wouldn't be sorry about it. But as I don't know what you drive. I can't exactly judge you on that.

The petrol companies love high prices, I mean have you seen what Shell and BP made in 1st quarter profits? Why they were up by 25%. Cutting government taxes won't do it. And more supply does not necessarily mean lower prices. And even if prices do become lower, they will be negated in no time, as we've probably reached the stage where high prices are permanent. Its of no real interest for carmakers to make cars that don't use oil. Although you know, if General Motors and Ford could get off their arse and make the stuff. Well then maybe they wouldn't be rolling in mountains of debts. But thats not the case, instead they keep making cars that the rest of the world do not want and that even America increasingly do not want. Another thing, if America didn't evade Iraq, I doubt oil prices would be so high. If I were you two, get the hell use to it. One day, you will join the rest of us, who are getting taxed more and more and more especially with the Kyoto treaty and stuff that is putting even more taxes on our petrol/oil. Thus our prices are much higher in comparison to what you pay.

You americans are pretty lucky if you ask me. I'd kill for the price you guys have. So meh stop your moaning.And either adjust your driving or how often you use it or get use to high prices. Because I'm sorry but its here to stay.

[Crystalmaster Mike]

I don't know the prices for oil in America, so I can't compare, but let me just say that fp is right about at least one thing: we all feel the sting of those price increasements...

You know, the world is pretty messed up, if you'd consider.
I'd say a lot of people today acknowledge to a varying degree the Earth has been polluted by mankind, yet still, ecology is, as ever, only improved in ways that economically profitable. And admit, an average Western inhabitant is so used to his own luxury, he couldn't cope with out it and rather just ignore the outside world in favor of exercising his couch hanging skills

Now, if you will excuse me, I'm going to ironically prove my own point by eating some junk food from the Yellow Arches FastFood Corp., and spending a large portion of my afternoon in a movie theater seat.

[Heald]

You think that's bad? Try £4.50 a gallon ($9) in the UK.

The problem with the UK is that they're trying to wean us off cars with public transport.

Except the Labour government officially said that they are trying to wean people off public transport with higher prices.

This makes no sense to me. What am I meant to do? Walk back to London from Sheffield?

[Clark]

i filled up yesterday for 3.6999 a gallon. 50$ that could have gone to something more worthwhile. i really hate the fact that i have to drive everywhere unless i wish to walk a few hours.

[Heald]

Meh, I sort of have one foot in each hole at the moment. I believe we should we working towards being greener as a whole, but on the other hand, weaning us off petrol by raising the prices when there is no viable alternative is completely wrong.

You must also bear in mind that OPEC is keeping the prices artificially high at the moment, and while a small government tax cut will help, the oil companies will gain most of the profit from it. There is simply no reason for OPEC to be charging such high prices at the moment, apart from inflating their own profits (and punishing the West for allying with the Jews).

The Government doesn't help at all, but then again, when does it ever help? We're meant to be moving to renewable sources, hell, 10 years ago, it was predicted everyone would have electric cars and public transport would be awesome. 10 years on, electric cars are shit, hybrid cars are only marginally cleaner than petrol cars and public transport is both more expensive and shittier than before. The British Government are taking unprecedented steps to make sure that leaving your house is more expensive than ever. Subsidies are being cut, car tax and petrol duty is sky-rocketing and tickets for public transport are rising way above inflation. Electric cars aren't viable, we still don't have clean/hydrogen cars or whatever we're meant to be driving and public transport costs roughly the same as the petrol you'd spend to get there, except it is much slower and you're crowded in with a bunch of smelly fat women and their ten fat chav kids in tow. I can't wait until Labour fuck off out of my government so we can get some real politicians in.

[Asilynne]

Oh, as soon as someone posts a counterpoint I fully expect the discussion to disintegrate into dozens of snide, back-and-forth jabs on the edge of flaming. Which is when I'll be evacuating the thread.

At any rate, I'm just tired of people being imbeciles. If you want to develop alternate energy sources, fine! Please, feel free! I'm all for that. No one's really sure when the petrol supply will run out, but it'll happen someday, so let's get a head start on that. Besides, gasoline isn't cheap, so if you can make something else run better and cheaper, go for it!

Until you've got an economical solution, though, don't whine about how awful gasoline is and how anyone who touches the grass with a shovel is a direct descendant of Satan. Develop an alternative fuel source, make it better and/or cheaper than the current system, and viola! Everything's fixed.

Better to solve the problem than waste your time complaining about it.

...In case you hadn't noticed, this is a hot topic for me right now. I'm rather livid.

I agree with this totally, unfortunately Necessity is the mother of invention...so things will probably have to get far worse before someone will have finally had enough and invent something feasable besides gasolene and go through all the hard work to get it popularized. That is, unless the gas companies, electric companies etc kill them and steal their product so as to keep it from the public and keep societys dependance on them >.>

That being said Id rather not go destroying the last lil bit of pristine frontier land america has :/ so whoever has any sort of vision or skill in this world had better see the necessity and get off their lazy asses quickly because I really hate having to shell out my hard earned money just to get around :P

EDIT: In fact since the enviromentalists are usually democrats who are big on taxes why dont they tax the oil companies and use the extra profits (since we are paying out the ass anyway) to set up a fund for the research and development of new and better energy sources, you know, ones that work as well as gasolene but are easier and cleaner AND CHEAPER. But that would require work wouldnt it :/ If environmentalists spent half the time and energy (hrhrhr energy) they do on whining as they do on actually working to find a solution we would probably have one by now. Although it would be a lil ironic for the gas companies tax money going towards ultimately putting them out of business wouldnt it XD

[Roy Karrde]

That being said Id rather not go destroying the last lil bit of pristine frontier land america has :/ so whoever has any sort of vision or skill in this world had better see the necessity and get off their lazy asses quickly because I really hate having to shell out my hard earned money just to get around :P


The land wont be destroyed, we have ways now to make it completely environmental friendly, and the area that can be used would be incredibly small. Especially when you consider the entire area is larger than many states.


Cutting government taxes won't do it.

It will actually drop the price as much as 50 cents in some areas. The Oil Companies do not get profits off the Government taxes anyway. Infact they make get even more profits as the use of Gas would go up this summer instead of decline.


And more supply does not necessarily mean lower prices. And even if prices do become lower, they will be negated in no time, as we've probably reached the stage where high prices are permanent.

Well for one more supply will lower prices, if anything it will scare the hell out of the Saudi's and cause them to flood the market with even more oil. If they keep gas prices high while the price of oil drops, then there will be lawsuits, as well as government investigations.


Another thing, if America didn't evade Iraq, I doubt oil prices would be so high.

Not really, Iraq plays a small part, but as does Iran's actions as well as Venuzela, as well as China's increasing need for oil. As well as the lack of new refineries to deal with the need for more gas.

[.hacker]

What's really sad is that the United States has a HUGE oil reserve in the Dakotas (estimates place a potential 200-500 BILLION barrels of oil), but we can't drill most of it since the cost and energy spent drilling for it is higher than the price of oil. Hopefully, this will be changing in a bit.

Someone mentioned Alaska? I think we should have drilled that area long ago, and I would recommend drilling there NOW (just my opinion).

[Leon-IH]

You'd do better devoting your resources towards developing something sustainable, long term economically speaking.

[PsiUmbreon]

Someone tell me why I detect a hint of bias in this topic? Anyway...

I think f*cking up the environment is not the solution. We should be looking to invest in alternative fuel sources and putting more hybrids on the road. People should start walking and riding bikes more. Don't we also have an obesity epidemic in this country? And why are we letting the oil companies stick it to us this much? The government can totally have a say in the prices. Stop adding oil to the 'strategic' reserve. That's what's making the prices so effing high . And make the oil companies stop milking the political situation and using it as an excuse to drive up the prices. There's plenty of oil left still that isn't in untouched land, but maybe this should be a wake up call to us, telling us to start, you know, conserving energy, recycling more, and using alternative fuels more. It's entirely possible to end our dependence on foreign oil without causing permanent damage to our environment.

[mr_pikachu]

And why are we letting the oil companies stick it to us this much? The government can totally have a say in the prices. Stop adding oil to the 'strategic' reserve. That's what's making the prices so effing high . And make the oil companies stop milking the political situation and using it as an excuse to drive up the prices. There's plenty of oil left still that isn't in untouched land, but maybe this should be a wake up call to us, telling us to start, you know, conserving energy, recycling more, and using alternative fuels more. It's entirely possible to end our dependence on foreign oil without causing permanent damage to our environment.

As Heald mentioned earlier, OPEC has a massive amount of influence on the oil market; it pretty much has total control over who gets petrol and who doesn't. (This is part of why calling the Iraqi conflict a "war for oil" seems silly to me, but that's an entirely different argument.) Right now we're simply not getting the same share as in the past, which is why prices are skyrocketing in the states.

This has a sweeping effect. First, consider the strategic reserve. The more OPEC restricts our resources, the more desperate we are due to our dependency on foreign oil - as we've seen recently, they have no problem with doing so. Having some petrol in reserve is a defense against further restrictions (or a downturn of the whole market).

Second, we haven't touched the natural resources in many areas because certain protest groups have pressured the politicians. I'll leave it at that to avoid starting a tangential flame war.

Third, I'm all for working toward alternative solutions, but the people working on them need to shut up about "save the planet" and such. There's enough evidence against global warming and similar theories that for many people, myself included, such terms prompt instant revulsion no matter how good the idea may be. Why cite a subject that many think is deeply flawed when you could just target the smart shopper in all of us? Take an alternative, make it economical and market it on that basis; stop the ideological drivel.

Fourth, the increased prices are a highly misunderstood point. What many people don't realize is that oil companies hate high prices. Their profit margin remains the same, yet people buy less because they're more conscious of their gas usage. Net profits decrease even as the incensed public accuses the whole industry of price gouging. Less money and catastrophically negative publicity... what company would want that?

[Roy Karrde]

Just to correct you Psi, the whole strategic reserves has very little to do with the prices. We buy so little oil for the reserves compared to the rest of oil we buy each day that stopping buying from it would reduce the prices by only a cent or two.

[Heald]

Petrol is up to £5 a gallon ($10) in the UK, and yet the government insists it cannot delay any tax increases which are due to come into effect soon otherwise it will upset their environmental agenda.

This makes no sense. If you were planning on putting the price up to promote greener substitutes, then fine, but if prices go up naturally, then you don't need to do anything. This is complete bullshit.

[Andrew]

I personally own a scooter, so I pay like 5 bucks a week to drive it. If I was able to buy an electric scooter, that would be my preference, but, there's not one commercially available.

If anything, I think we should start phasing out cars that run exclusively on petrol and encourage motor companies to create more hybrids (Ie Toyota Prius). To help encourage it we should reduce government taxes on buying a new car, and the registration fees. Looking for more renewable energy sources such as a much more robust solar energy market should also be on our agenda.

Only by weining ourselves off of SOOOO much petrol, do we stand a chance in the long run. Plus bitching about it all the time won't fix it either. Ie reducing Government Taxes ect.

[Ultimate Charizard]

I am interested in what cars you guys drive tbh.
If your driving some economical sensible car then fair enough. If your driving round in a typical American Re-inforced Steel 7-litre V8 Tank then i gots no sympathy.

I agre with Heald (Mostly cos its from a UK point of view). The cheapest Bus ticket i can get is £1.10. And that will go (around my town) anything upto about 3/5 miles depending where your going. To the next towns over your looking at £2.70 which is roughly 9-10 miles.
You can get trains for those and they only charge £2.60 for a return ticket but its still a pain in the ass when as Heald said, your forced to sit with the unwashed masses, not to mention risking your lives with packs of feral chavs running around (i wish i was exaggerating)

Just be thankful you guys havent been introduced to wonderfull world of Congestion charges. A bunch from my area went down to the recent Football finals in london and got stuck with a £60 ($120) fine for driving through Central London instead of using public transport. (only busses, taxi's and locals to Central London are exempt)

[Roy Karrde]

I am interested in what cars you guys drive tbh.
If your driving some economical sensible car then fair enough. If your driving round in a typical American Re-inforced Steel 7-litre V8 Tank then i gots no sympathy.

1996 Dodge Intrepid, 19 MPG in the City, 27 MPG on the Highway. Not the best car, but alot better than the others out there. And even then it is costing me 30 bucks a week to travel back and forth from College.

[Heald]

You can get trains for those and they only charge £2.60 for a return ticket but its still a pain in the ass when as Heald said, your forced to sit with the unwashed masses, not to mention risking your lives with packs of feral chavs running around (i wish i was exaggerating)
£2.60 for a return? Where I'm from £2.60 will get you a single to a station 1 stop away (i.e. about 2 miles). I'm literally pissing distance from London but because driving into London is such a pain (not to mention the congestion charge), I'm forced to take a train, which is an £8 single.

[Ultimate Charizard]

Didnt realise London was that expensive. Im up in the Leeds area (Castleford) and the next town over (wakefield) is 2 stops away.

[firepokemon]

It would appear this thread has new life.

PsiUmbreon - We allow the word fucking here.

Roy Karrde - I kinda like your points and can't be bothered debating them.

Mr. Pikachu


Fourth, the increased prices are a highly misunderstood point. What many people don't realize is that oil companies hate high prices. Their profit margin remains the same, yet people buy less because they're more conscious of their gas usage. Net profits decrease even as the incensed public accuses the whole industry of price gouging. Less money and catastrophically negative publicity... what company would want that?

Their profit margins do not stay the same as these companies are more than just retail outlets. Yeah sure, retail where the everyday person gets petrol/oil/gas profit margins do not change. But the big companies get most of their money from the actual drilling and selling to retail markets. So when prices are high, they do make money and more. Also I'm not sure they are hurt if US decreases their use, since China and elsewhere are using more and will continue to use more. Thus higher prices benefit the oil companies greatly. Its only at retail where they get hurt.

Heald:


Petrol is up to £5 a gallon ($10) in the UK, and yet the government insists it cannot delay any tax increases which are due to come into effect soon otherwise it will upset their environmental agenda.

This makes no sense. If you were planning on putting the price up to promote greener substitutes, then fine, but if prices go up naturally, then you don't need to do anything. This is complete bullshit.

The funny this is here, the government has said that they will freeze taxes on oil. Thus they are currently simply frozen. But I think Britain would be in the same boat as New Zealand. In that trying to cover upcoming Kyoto promises they can charge car consumers and thus do taxes. As this in the long run, should lead to decrease in consumption and shows that they actually care about the Kyoto Protocol. I agree with you and am thankful New Zealand is at least freezing further taxes. But its likely due to the Kyoto Protocol that they have to have such taxes.

----

I drive a 2005 Suzuki Swift 1.5 Litre car that does I think 9L for every 100 kms. Its super economical and I got in brand new in 2005. Its a wonderful car and it costs 60 dollars to fill up (thats 60 NZD) so it really helps. That and a full car can last me a month since I'm well located in Christchurch and can get anywhere really within 10-20 minutes. We;ve just passed the 2 dollar mark and forecasts appear to be $2.50 within six months or a year.

And the price of oil goes up due to consumption but also because many countries in OPEC have problems and when they have problems the price goes up. I notice the Americans seem to think that if the US opens up more reserves that they own that this will mean lower prices. That doesn't exactly work, since the price still has to do with the International price. And it is not in the governent's favour to hurt the oil companies, since most of them have personal interests in such things. And of course massive amount of dollars is given to these companies in the form of subsidies etc.

Oh and I'm not a fan of Hybrids. They're ultra expensive and I don't know how other countries work and New Zealand generally imports Japanese used cars and the average age of vehicles here are 11 years. And these hybrids are likely to have problems by the time they are 10 years old. People need to be looking at European diesels and smaller cars. Not necessarily bigger cars that just happen to have hybrid engines. And in the long run, we actually need alternatives to the concept of a Hybrid.

In reality we need to be thinking, oil is going up its going to continue to go up. Yeah sure certain countries can open up more oil fields etc. But if we are honest, long term says oil will keep going up. Car manufacturers need to think smart, the fact is they're too much looking at how they can improve turbo diesel cars and how to make hybrid vehicles. When really ultimately, the whole technology of vehicles needs to be looked at. Basically Ford and General Motors are too backwards looking and too much focused on making their cars look smart when really they keep losing market share to Japanese car makers and ultimately they don't even seem that focused on building hybrid engines. They get huge behind-the-scenes subsidies etc and lets face it. Those two comapanies are bleeding money. One reason is because they agreed to rather hostile union demands but another reason is they continue t build cars that in the long run as the price of oil keeps rising will no longer be wanted.

Those companies need to particularly be looking at new car technology because its the only way they are going to get out of bleeding money (I can't imagine the debts they're holding). The fact is if they were not in the market of making cars they would probably be up for bankruptcy. Their future depends on a new concept of the car. I doubt they'll do it. Its going to be somewhere else. But if the US is really interested in keeping itself as the top economy in the world. They need to be looking at these two companies.

----

Hmm and I realise I'm spouting off what is likely to be utter crap. So yeah sure you can quote some of the things I said and debate it. But I probably won't reply back. Since I basically just used this thread as a rant. And most likely half of it is lies.

[Roy Karrde]

And the price of oil goes up due to consumption but also because many countries in OPEC have problems and when they have problems the price goes up. I notice the Americans seem to think that if the US opens up more reserves that they own that this will mean lower prices. That doesn't exactly work, since the price still has to do with the International price. And it is not in the governent's favour to hurt the oil companies, since most of them have personal interests in such things. And of course massive amount of dollars is given to these companies in the form of subsidies etc.

I don't believe the US Government would actually want to put their oil out on the international market. Infact it would most likely be leased out to the oil companies for the oil to be used only on the US Market. But while that may sound greedy, the common thought is that the US even trying to find a alternate source of oil would have a ripple effect around OPEC as they try to drive down prices before the US can slip out of their grasp and other countries follow the US' example.

As for the oil companies, mind you they are the ones advocating this, they have been for some time. The higher the price goes, the less consumption that comes out, and the lower their profits are. It isn't as if they want to have less consumption, and they know the higher the prices go, the more in the end it is going to hurt them.

[RedStarWarrior]

No offense to you Americans but in terms of real costs, you guys have some of the cheapest petrol prices in the world. A price that is way cheaper than you will see in Europe, Australia, New Zealand and elsewhere. Sorry but its hard to feel sorry for what you see say as high petrol prices, when the rest of us are paying even higher costs. Now lets see, exactly what type of cars do the two of you drive? Are they economical vehicles or are they gas guzzlers?

I would be interesting to find out really. As if they are bigger vehicles, well I wouldn't be sorry about it. But as I don't know what you drive. I can't exactly judge you on that.
Quote for mother-fucking truth.

Us Americans are spoiled and whine about paying close to what our European friends pay...fucking wankers.

[Heald]

Quote for mother-fucking truth.

Us Americans are spoiled and whine about paying close to what our European friends paid five years ago...fucking wankers.
Fixed for truth.

[RedStarWarrior]

I love you, Heald.

Heh, yeah. I have relatives that live in Italy and they tell me that gas is so cheap state-side right now.

[mr_pikachu]

Their profit margins do not stay the same as these companies are more than just retail outlets. Yeah sure, retail where the everyday person gets petrol/oil/gas profit margins do not change. But the big companies get most of their money from the actual drilling and selling to retail markets. So when prices are high, they do make money and more. Also I'm not sure they are hurt if US decreases their use, since China and elsewhere are using more and will continue to use more. Thus higher prices benefit the oil companies greatly. Its only at retail where they get hurt.

This logic is a little flawed. If retail outlets are selling less, it naturally follows that they will buy less petrol from production companies. The existence of a middleman doesn't shield the higher end of the process from negative effects. Furthermore, many retail outlets are run by the production companies themselves; BP, for instance, delves in both ends of the market from production to distribution. Saying "Its only at retail where they get hurt" doesn't work.

In any case, many so-called petroleum companies are currently trying to shift their respective businesses to become general energy companies, as they're looking to beat future market shifts toward alternative fuel sources. While I don't expect to see massive outlets in place of gas stations tomorrow, and very few people are gambling on hydrogen cell or solar-powered vehicles at present, things are apt to change eventually.

Also: Many countries are hovering around $10 a gallon (factoring in exchange rates and such). 40% of that price isn't much by comparison; it's a noteworthy shift, but we're still pretty lucky over here.

[Roy Karrde]

It should also be noted a Petition signed by 100,000 Americans is being delivered to Congress this week to encourage domestic drilling to bring down Gas Prices and to stop the Warner-Lieberman bill which would raise the cost of gasoline, diesel fuel, heating oil, and aviation fuel. At some point the Democrats in Congress are going to have to recognize the voice of the American people and get off the teet of radical Green Groups.

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=prnw.20080529.DC23746&show_article=1

[Andrew]

I don't know why we should increase our dependence on a non-renewable fuel resource Roy. It would be better to use alternative forms of fuel in the long run instead of ruining some of the most picturesque places in the world (Alaska) for our short term benefit.

[Roy Karrde]

I don't know why we should increase our dependence on a non-renewable fuel resource Roy. It would be better to use alternative forms of fuel in the long run instead of ruining some of the most picturesque places in the world (Alaska) for our short term benefit.

No one isn't saying we shouldnt work on alternate forms of fuel, but this country runs on oil, from the transportation of goods to just the overall functioning of the country it needs oil. And it is going to remain that way for a few more decades.

As for ruining Alaska, the drilling area is incredibly incredibly small, we're talking I believe 1/20th the size of Washington DC in a state that is bigger than Texas. Not to mention oil drilling has advanced a long way and now has the ability not to ruin the environment.

[The Blue Avenger]

It should also be noted a Petition signed by 100,000 Americans is being delivered to Congress this week to encourage domestic drilling to bring down Gas Prices and to stop the Warner-Lieberman bill which would raise the cost of gasoline, diesel fuel, heating oil, and aviation fuel. At some point the Democrats in Congress are going to have to recognize the voice of the American people and get off the teet of radical Green Groups.

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=prnw.20080529.DC23746&show_article=1

This may be pessimism, but I sincerely doubt that a petition signed by a full .05% of Americans able to vote is going to have much of an effect on anything.

[Roy Karrde]

This may be pessimism, but I sincerely doubt that a petition signed by a full .05% of Americans able to vote is going to have much of an effect on anything.

100,000 is still alot of voices, not to mention that even more didn't even know about it. Hell I didn't even know about it or I would have signed it.

[The Blue Avenger]

Yes, it's a lot of voices, but I still question how effective it'll be - I don't think it's enough to worry anybody in office. I suppose only time will tell, though.

[mr_pikachu]

I don't know why we should increase our dependence on a non-renewable fuel resource Roy. It would be better to use alternative forms of fuel in the long run instead of ruining some of the most picturesque places in the world (Alaska) for our short term benefit.

Quite right; we can't rely on oil forever. As I mentioned earlier, the oil companies agree with you and are trying to convert their businesses as such.

I'd be all for dropping gasoline and switching to an alternative fuel if that was possible. However, none of the other options have yet been developed to the point of being usable. While we may not like it, there's no choice but to rely on petrol in the short term as we prepare for the future.

As for the petition, I also question its effectiveness. It's not the number of voices that's the problem, though. After all, with most people blaming the oil companies for high gas prices and remaining ignorant to the role of OPEC (as well as the restrictions on drilling placed by the government), Congress likely sees no reason to fear.

How many people would even know if the Warner-Lieberman bill passed? How many would have even heard of it? Considering the attention span of the American public, depressingly few, I'd wager. There's more for Congressmen to gain in campaign contributions than lose in future votes.

[Roy Karrde]

How many people would even know if the Warner-Lieberman bill passed?

The sharp rise in gas prices by a dollar or more per gallon, as been expected by the Warner-Lieberman bill would pretty much clue the American people in.


How many would have even heard of it? Considering the attention span of the American public, depressingly few, I'd wager.

So far it has been under the radar but it has been making it's rounds in the news cycle for a while. The reason it isn't being hyped more is becuase the Republicans do not expect it to pass.


There's more for Congressmen to gain in campaign contributions than lose in future votes.

Mind you the drastic effects on oil prices by this bill is more than enough to keep Congress away from it. Even Democrats know this bill is political suicide and are keeping it from pretty much getting passed and or keeping it from being veto proof.

[mr_pikachu]

Fair points. I will say that a rise in prices wouldn't necessarily make the U.S. public see the light. Gas has pretty much doubled in price over the last several years, yet the majority of people don't have a clue what OPEC is. (From what I've heard from Fox News enthusiasts, even Bill O'Reilly imcomprehensibly thinks that some executive has total control and is somehow manipulating the world market.)

The truth is far too difficult for most people to believe.

[Roy Karrde]

Well mind you we're not expecting another cent or two, or a huge rise in oil prices on the stock market. The price is going to jump over a dollar or two, or even three very quickly with this sham of a bill passed. When that happens people are going to start looking for why this is happening. Democrats are already being painted as the party that has broken promises on the price of oil. They do not need to have Republicans pinning them with another reason as to why Oil Prices are getting even higher.

[mr_pikachu]

The sharp rise in gas prices by a dollar or more per gallon, as been expected by the Warner-Lieberman bill would pretty much clue the American people in.

Gah, I misread that as "barrel." Yeah, an instant 25% hike would definitely get people talking. I'm still not sure the truth would emerge from the resulting blame game, but with that much on the line it's probably not a risk the left is willing to take.

[Roy Karrde]

Well a update on the Global Warming Bill, it has been pretty much struck down and destroyed.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/thecrypt/0608/Dems_yank_global_warming_bill.html

Now comes the Democrats talking about how those evil Republicans love Global Warming and love lower Gas Prices and all that.

[Heald]

The bill was incredibly badly timed, and I think most people can agree now is not the time to talk about increasing prices even further for oil users when prices are rising at this rate, but look at it this way: the Democrats have been pushing for environmentally friendly measures for ages, and they're now in the position of power to introduce them. Unfortunately, thanks to the blunders made in the Middle-East by the White House (as well as our foolish Government), oil prices have risen. The Republicans in Congress can bitch and whine all they want about high oil prices and why the Democrats will destroy America with their climate-change bills, but they only have to look at their leader to see who is the one to blame for high oil prices in the first place.

[Roy Karrde]

As much as you want that to be true Heald it isn't. You are forgetting a variety of factors, the weakened dollar due to the housing slump which has cost comadaties like Gold and Oil to be driven higher as people flock to it, the sizeable increase in demand from China and India in the last few years, and most of all the Democrats refusal to build new refineries, thus driving prices higher when one is taken down.

Saying it is Bush's fault is only burying your head in the sand and trying to look for the easiest person to blame. Something way too many people have done these past few years.

[Heald]

It is very much true, so much true that if you were to ask any economist or any other expert in the oil market about the high prices of oil, there would be two things that would always come up: the rise of Asian industries and the Middle-East conflicts. Asia's growing industries cause more dependency on oil, increasing the price, whereas the conflicts in the Middle-East make it more difficult and therefore more expensive for oil companies to drill for oil in war-torn zones. There are other mitigating factors (such as the US slump) but, looking at oil prices globally, these are the two factors. Want proof? Look up any graph of global oil prices and note sharp spikes in price just after we invade Iraq in both Gulf Wars.

I know I'm pretty anti-Bush but no one can deny that he has some part to play in the global rise of oil prices, and Republicans need to know that they're being hypocrites if they both support the conflict and yet want oil prices to come down.

On an interesting note, oil prices last took their biggest plummet due to September 11th. Since many right-wing "experts" say unequivocally that if Obama is elected president, something akin to 9/11 will happen again. I guess if people really want low oil prices, you should vote for Obama!

[Roy Karrde]

You should also note that the current spike in oil prices, the one that has sent Oil over 130 dollars, and caused the price of gas to jump over 1 dollar between last year's price and this year's. Has nothing to do with Iraq, or the Middle Eastern Conflict. Look at the Middle East right now, Iran is defiant but they are also keeping themselves pretty stable, Iraq for the past year has been more stable than it has since the invasion, and nothing else is happening.

Yeah you could blame the oil spike in the past around 2005 to 2006 on Iraq, but not now. There is nothing that is happening in the Middle East to really cause any concern. Also if you want to talk about hypocrits you could say the same about Democrats who support getting us off Foreign Oil, but at the same time oppose exploration and drilling for oil in our own country.

[Heald]

True, but it was the Iraq War that set the ball rolling.

[Roy Karrde]

You cannot be certain of that, we do not know how oil would have responded in the last few years, with or with out Iraq. If anything we could have been worst off as Iran and Iraq could be in a nuclear arms race.

Either way the Oil problems we are experiencing right now have nothing to do with with Iraq, and more to do with the Dollar and China, both of which would have happened with or with out Iraq.

[Heald]

I could also show the Iraq War's effect on the dollar too but this topic is about oil so I'll leave it at that.

I'd like to point out that the Iraq War's direct effect on oil may have been quite small, but the speculators that control the oil market were scared by the Iraq War and were scared into raising oil prices. The Bush Administration could not possibly foreseen how the war would have effected the economy, but they should have foreseen than their efforts would have had profound effects on the speculation of oil prices, which would have (and did) cause a large spike. The continuation of this is that speculation is very susceptible from effect from the mass media. America's media (at least the media outlets owned by right-wing moguls) may portray the Iraq War as a 'victory', but pretty much every global media outlet outside of America has shown the Iraq War to be a catastrophe, and it is the global media that the speculators will be scared by, not just one country's.

[Roy Karrde]

Well yes you are right it scared the speculators at that time, and drove oil up. But as I have said, you are not looking at what would have happened with out the Iraq War.

Lets say we never invaded Iraq, the inspectors come back and say they cannot find any WMDs, France and Russia push for a ease or drop of the Iraqi sanctions on grounds that they continue to cause a major humanitarian problem. Now sanctions or not, Saddam was persuing his quest to gain nuclear material. Iran at the same time is on it's own quest to get nuclear material. At that point you have a nuclear arms race, and the speculators raise the price of oil.

My point is that with or with out the Iraq War, we were on a collision course for a oil spike in 04/05. But as I have said above, the current spike, the one right now that has sent oil skyrocketing, has nothing to do with Iraq. And as much as you want it to be true, as much as you want to blame it on Bush, or the Right Wing, or anything else you don't like. It just isn't true.

[MToolen]

Personally, I've... not been on here for a while... and have also switched from my normal routine. I'm blessed to live in what is sometimes called rural-urban fringe (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rural-urban_fringe). My work and girlfriend's house, my two most frequented visits, are 3/4 and 4 miles away round-trip, respectively. To save on gas, I've decided to bike to these venues instead of driving my Ford Explorer (a 6V SUV with a max of 15 mpg city) around. I'm also looking into biking at least partially to my school in the fall since I'm commuting. This is less about me being preachy than it is about me being broke. :(

That aside, I'm not too sure who to blame for this crisis or who to elect to try and do something about it, although I know it's a combination of things and should be solved with another combination of things. The sad thing is that I echo sentiments of a very large yet silent chunk of the American population.

[Roy Karrde]

Well I officially have been proven right! Chuck Fucking Norris has come out telling Congress to get off their asses and drill.

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/ChuckNorris/2008/06/10/congress,_get_off_your_gas,_and_drill

We have more oil in the shale of Colorado, Utah and Wyoming than there is in the Middle East (800 billion barrels), liberals and environmentalists have made it illegal to touch it.

Chuck Norris pwns the Dumbasses!

[RedStarWarrior]

Chuck Norris is simply a strong Republican. I think we should drill some, but I feel that going full force into our own natural supplies would be a waste. We can just wait until oil is scarce in the world and then start pumping out the crude.

[Roy Karrde]

Well we need to do more than we are doing now, as Norris points out there are areas in the Gulf of Mexico that we could have been drilling, that are being taken up by Cuba, China, and Venzuela. And also the world is starting to move toward being off of gasoline, there really is not a reason to explore our own reserves and keep that oil and money flowing in the US, instead of giving it to dictators and regimes that finance terrorism.

[mr_pikachu]

I know I'm pretty anti-Bush but no one can deny that he has some part to play in the global rise of oil prices, and Republicans need to know that they're being hypocrites if they both support the conflict and yet want oil prices to come down.

What ever happened to "this is an oil war"?

Oh, I get it. Arguing that we only got involved in the conflict to swipe foreign oil is foolish now, since we're obviously not getting any and never intended to do so. The solution? Pull a 180 and say that it's the reason for our oil shortage. Brilliant!


RSW: The problem is that our own supplies are short now. I understand your point about waiting until later so that we can essentially dominate the world market, but there are three problems with that.

1. Consumers are suffering today. However sound your plan for future profits may be, it won't help us much if our economy falters in the short-term. Voters are unlikely to go for such a vision, either.

2. If we wait until everyone else is out of oil, chances are that alternative sources of energy will be well-developed by then. Other countries don't want the US to be the sole supplier of world power, so they'll be apt to switch their method to prevent a monopoly. Maybe this wouldn't be likely if the crude supply was set to expire in 20 years, but it could just as easily be 200. (Note that many wells that would be unprofitable in the present market could become legitimate when oil supplies are critically low; consumers would just have to deal with much higher prices to maintain the same net profit for production companies exercising their final options.)

3. Who's to say that future green groups will be any saner? The current trend in public opinion seems to favor environmentalism; just look at the commercials you see daily about global warming and those moronic spiral lightbulbs. (Side note: I plan to stock up on the classic bulb variety. 50 years' worth should be enough for now.) Such thoughts were hardly mainstream a decade ago; who knows how much further things could shift by the time world petroleum runs dry? I highly doubt they'll give up their protests against drilling in those reserves without a serious yet stupidly comical fight.

[mistysakura]

What's wrong with spiral lightbulbs? Global warming aside, they cut your electricity bills and last longer (I like this solely because I'm lazy and dislike changing lightbulbs :P)

[firepokemon]

What's wrong with spiral lightbulbs? Global warming aside, they cut your electricity bills and last longer (I like this solely because I'm lazy and dislike changing lightbulbs :P)

I'm guessing these spiral lightbulbs are all the same everwhere, though I guess since electrical standards are different, they will all be slightly different. Anyway my experience of them is that they don't last anywhere near the amount of time that its claimed they last. We've been through two within two years, one of those including a light that is used seldomnly perhaps 2-3 times a day and then for maybe four hours or so. So I can't say I am completely happy with those lightbulbs.

[Roy Karrde]

Figured I would go on and post up this image since this is a Gas Price topic.

http://www.hickpolitics.com/wp-images/gas_prices.jpg

[firepokemon]

Interesting but what harm will that do to the environment if you believe in that kind of thing. And I think the two that will bring major savings are optimistic at best.

Anyway thought I would reply to this since I was listening to the radio with some American on it who said in two years oil will be back to 70-80 dollars a barrel. All I thought was wtf was he smoking. I can't forsee oil dropping that far back. Barrels at 100 dollars are here for good, and I forsee oil never dropping past 120 dollars again.

[Roy Karrde]

Interesting but what harm will that do to the environment if you believe in that kind of thing. And I think the two that will bring major savings are optimistic at best.

Little to none seeing how we have advanced greatly in oil technology since the 70s where we can basically drill in places, and do almost no harm to the environment. Although of course the environmental groups will not tell you this...


Anyway thought I would reply to this since I was listening to the radio with some American on it who said in two years oil will be back to 70-80 dollars a barrel. All I thought was wtf was he smoking. I can't forsee oil dropping that far back. Barrels at 100 dollars are here for good, and I forsee oil never dropping past 120 dollars again.

Actually I could see it dropping below 100 dollars soon. The Oil companies are only making 9 cents off of every dollar, with the drop of demand, they are losing more profits each week even with the high price. Not to mention that it is speculators and taxes that are driving these prices up, the actual price should be in the 60s right now.

[Heald]

Price estimates based on various sources

Propaganda != Facts. I imagine the 'various sources' come from oil executives who would directly profit from any new drilling projects, and some guy called Ted who votes Republican.

[Roy Karrde]

Propaganda != Facts. I imagine the 'various sources' come from oil executives who would directly profit from any new drilling projects, and some guy called Ted who votes Republican.

Yeah notice how you have nothing to back this up. Either way as pointed out in the picture, drilling and opening new refineries as well as other things would lower the price. The picture gives you a pretty good estimate of how much of a price drop we would see.

[Heald]

Yeah notice how you have nothing to back this up. Either way as pointed out in the picture, drilling and opening new refineries as well as other things would lower the price. The picture gives you a pretty good estimate of how much of a price drop we would see.
It's propaganda. He doesn't list any sources ("Various Sources"? How more ambiguous do you want to get?) and you should never trust any misinformation given out by any politician if it only serves to further their party's interests. I'd say the exact same thing if a Democrat came out with the same sort of thing, and the same if any of the parties in our country came out with anything like this.

[Roy Karrde]

It's propaganda. He doesn't list any sources ("Various Sources"? How more ambiguous do you want to get?) and you should never trust any misinformation given out by any politician if it only serves to further their party's interests. I'd say the exact same thing if a Democrat came out with the same sort of thing, and the same if any of the parties in our country came out with anything like this.

The thing is that he is right, the numbers can differ, but the things the Republicans want to do will bring down oil prices. The margin of error is open for intepretation, but we are looking at a possible 2 dollar drop and even more.

[Toxicity]

I'm only concerned about the price of gas because it also effects the price of food, which some people are struggling to be able to buy. Corn-based products are going to soar because of "safe" ethanol (which has been proven to be more harmful to the environment than petroleum-based gas) along with the flooding that has already killed crops in the Midwest.

Not everybody can have a car, but everybody needs food. I just hope it changes for the better soon to lessen the rift caused by extremes in income.

[mistysakura]

I'm only concerned about the price of gas because it also effects the price of food, which some people are struggling to be able to buy. Corn-based products are going to soar because of "safe" ethanol (which has been proven to be more harmful to the environment than petroleum-based gas) along with the flooding that has already killed crops in the Midwest.

Not everybody can have a car, but everybody needs food. I just hope it changes for the better soon to lessen the rift caused by extremes in income.

Total agreement. In particular, the ethanol scam is bloody terrible. Eat corn, burn petrol, not the other way round...

Roy: I'm interested in the new oil drilling technology you speak of. Any more information on this subject?

[Roy Karrde]

Roy: I'm interested in the new oil drilling technology you speak of. Any more information on this subject?

Its something that has been thrown around alot by Politicians and the Oil Companies, as to how technology now has been able to shrink the environemnt foot print caused by drilling.

One example is the reusable modular platform created by the Anadarko Petroleum Corporation in 2003 for Alaska. This platform reduced the environmental foot print greatly when used.

Other information can be found here.
http://www.fossil.energy.gov/programs/oilgas/environment/index.html

Its funny in a sad way, we have all of these studies and technologies that have been paid for both by private companies and by US Tax Dollars. And the Democrats do not have the spine to actually use it to bring down gas prices in the US. I mean what use is there to work on low impact drilling when the Democrats are going to let it go to waste and make the American People suffer?

[Roy Karrde]

Well for those that picked 4.50 seem to have won! If anyone noticed today's news conference the President pretty much pounded Congress for not trying to lower oil prices. I have a feeling that he and the Republicans will continue to do this till the election.

Americans want off shore drilling, the polls are swinging further in that direction each day. So what did Congress do today?

A bill to honor the life of Tim Russert
A bill to allocate land in Montana for a Cemetary
A bill to amend the Lacey Act Amendments of 1981 to treat nonhuman primates as prohibited wildlife species under that Act

Meanwhile Americans are trying to survive as Gas Prices go higher as well as food prices.

Good job Congress...

[The Blue Avenger]

Americans want off shore drilling, the polls are swinging further in that direction each day.

Interesting note - my dad was actually interviewed by an oil company, if I'm not mistaken, as to the effects of offshore drilling off North Carolina, and I'm fairly certain his results were that it would be very damaging to the local environment. Granted, I have next to no details about this, but I'll ask him about it next time we talk.

[Roy Karrde]

Well for one as for the polls right now it is in the 70s as to wanting to do off shore drilling. As for it being damaging, as I have pointed out earlier, we have invested over and over again in making eco friendly drilling technologies, but never use them.

[The Blue Avenger]

Okay, I heard back from my dad - here's the relevant information.


Typically the questions I've been asked concerned whether significant quantities of hydrocarbon (oil or natural gas) would be found off of an area known as the Point (the Point is an area about 36 mi offshore of Cape Hatteras) and the potential environmental impacts of drilling in that area.

The oil companies have estimated that there is about a 7% chance of finding anything in the area and about a 2% chance of finding enough to be commercially worthwhile (it costs millions of dollars just to drill). Their interest in the area stems from the presence of a buried ancient reef deep below the seafloor. The reef, made of carbonate rock, is very porous and thus could hold large quantities of oil or gas. This same reef extends to the Gulf of Mexico where oil has been found. The area of the Point is also a high spot - if there is oil around it would most likely 'float up' to the high spot.

The problem is that the Point is home to abundant sea life (see the pictures in the powerpoint file). Though we are not entirely sure why, it is probably because the Gulf Stream from the south and the Virginia Current from the north converge in this area. In doing so, they bring together lots of food (phytoplankton, zooplnakton, etc) and different habitats (cold water, warm water) thus creating a biological hotspot.

The area will not be easy to drill in. The currents are strong, the seafloor is rugged and the region is prone to severe storms (it's not called the Graveyard of the Atlantic for nothing).

The process of producing oil is a long one. The first step is drilling exploratory wells. This initially is only one drilling using a special drill ship that can work in deep water (the water depth is 800 meters - about 1/2 mile). The water is too deep to anchor in so the ship stays in place with powerful thrusters. Mobil requested permission to do an exploratory drilling and was denied. Chevron started the process again but stopped when it became apparent the politics were not in their favor. I suspect there will be a revival in interest now.

If oil or gas is found, then more wells are drilled (about 10 plus or minus) to establish the size of the field. If it is determined that there is enough oil or gas to go after, then installation of permanent wells will begin. This whole process could take up to 10 years.

There would probably be a small environmental impact, if any, from the exploration phase unless a major (and unusual) accident occurred. The production phase, on the other hand, could an environment impact due to oil leakages and drilling spoils disposal.

So, although this is specific to North Carolina, the highlights here are that: the whole offshore drilling process could take up to ten years and the odds of finding anything are slim. Plus, the area itself is dangerous and, despite what you said about our tech being safer, Roy, the chances of an environmental impact during the second phase are still pretty high - and it's a biological hotspot.

Take that as you will.

[Roy Karrde]

So, although this is specific to North Carolina,

Which is just one area mind you, alot of focus is in Montana, Alaska, and in the Gulf.


the highlights here are that: the whole offshore drilling process could take up to ten years

Which isn't a excuse, but mind you the whole speculation market will automatically see the effect. Most of the market right now is driven by speculation.


and the odds of finding anything are slim.

Which is why we drill in areas that we have already found oil. Areas that in total are speculated to have more oil than any area in the Middle East.


Plus, the area itself is dangerous and, despite what you said about our tech being safer, Roy, the chances of an environmental impact during the second phase are still pretty high - and it's a biological hotspot.

I am not saying it isn't, but with each passing year our experience and work on safer and cleaner drilling increases. Look how far we have progressed from the 70s till now, from the 90s till now. You say that it may take 10 years to see the effects. Imagine the technology we will have for it by 10 years when we are actually working to try and provide safe drilling.

[The Blue Avenger]

Like I said, dude, this is just information I thought was interesting. *shrugs* It wasn't my intention to argue with you this time. :P

[Roy Karrde]

lol nah I understand and it is interesting. But mind you there are always two are three different sides to anything!

[mr_pikachu]

Sounds like your father's fairly knowledgable about the industry as well as this particular situation, HM. That being the case, would you mind asking him whether or not a horizontal well would a) be feasible in the North Carolina reef and b) reduce the potential environmental impact compared with a traditional well? I'd be curious to hear his take on the matter.

[Roy Karrde]

Republicans announced today they have enough votes to follow the will of the American public and lift the ban on offshore drilling. YAY!

They also announced today that the bill is not able to come to the floor becuase right now the Democrat leadership is blocking it. Boo!

So where does that leave us... one last roadblock!

[firepokemon]

Hmm how interesting. Democratives want expensive oil prices. Thats kinda whack. We've having numerous news articles on television here about speculators and that its them who are pushing up the prices. Because many investors see speculating on oil prices as being safer than the sharemarket at the moment. I don't really understand the whole speculation thing, to me its just people reacting badly to world affairs and demand from developing countries.

[Roy Karrde]

Speculators basically help/hurt the industry, they keep the industry liquid and basically makes the market go. What they do is they see something happen, and bet on if it is going to make the market go up or down. Which is why the whole "Oil prices wont drop for five years if we drill" is BS. The Speculators will serve the function of taking the oil down. That being said the opposite is going to be happening soon. Isreal and Iran are on a collision course which could spark off a major war in the Middle East. The last thing that needs to happen for any Western Country is for us to still be heavily reliant on their oil when it happens.

[firepokemon]

Hmm ok that makes sense. And Israel really doesn't help countries sympathise with them when they're going around testing their military capacity in regards to Iran and Iran vice versa. Though I guess thats better suited for another topic. But the last thing the world needs is those getting into that. Oil prices will jump and jump high, then we'll see another lot of food price increases and I don't know about other countries but here meat is going up particularly chicken thanks to grain prices and them being used in bio-fuels and vegetables are rising and dairy products. Well they've jumped horrifically.

[Drusilla]

I'm moving to some isolated spot, surrounded by trees, where I will fend for myself. I'm sick and tired of politicians claiming that they know what's best for me and mine when they obviously don't. I'm sick of people in general, but that's neither here nor there.

Now, this isn't happening in the immediate future, but it's my long-term plan.

For the time being, I have a car that can get nearly 400 miles out of ten gallons of gas, I avoid keeping lights on and the like when I don't need them, and I do my best not to throw things away when they can be reused. People forget that plastic is a petroleum product, too, and that some types are slightly toxic.

You can keep your governments and your wars. I don't want them, nor do I need them.

[mvtm]

I am quite in a hurry right now, so ill keep my post short and simple.
About Gas, well everything moves normal down here.

I pay :$1 to fill the Porsche with 95 octanes.$2 at most to fill large SUVs.

While we pay Gas cheaper than Water...We do have many issues.

1. Insecurity 24/7
2. A HELL of traffic. (NYC like)
3. Cars are 3 times more expensive than the US.Nevertheless most car inventory are sold out.1 year for a delivery spot.

[Toxicity]

Wow. For a country that is a major producer of international oil, I guess Venezuela does make some equally vital sacrifices.

Similarly, down in areas closer to the Gulf, the average price is notably cheaper than most inland locations due to what drilling states have been allowed to do; in Florida, we're also choked on traffic due to tourism, and then in the capital city I've dealt with people more environmentally crazed than one would expect for an area that was for so long under the influence of Bush's younger brother.

[Roy Karrde]

Well a varity of things have been happening on the oil drilling front. For one Florida has now come out in favor of offshore drilling, leaving the far left California the lone state against it. Also a petition of over 1.2 Million Signatures from Americans were presented to Congress today, saying that Congress needs to drill. Finally a "Gang of 14" style group is starting to form in support of Oil Drilling and to force Pelosi to finally allow a vote.

Now the only problem is that Pelosi is absolutely the worst person in power right now, she has blind support of the Oil Ban and has supported it since she got into office. Since she has the power to decide which bills get voted on, she is pretty much the only land block.

Although luckily this is a election year, and rank and file Democrats are getting scared that they could lose their seats to Republicans with 80% of this country supporting drilling and gas prices continue to rise. So hopefully that fear will help force a vote against the wishes of the nuts like Pelosi and Obama.

[mr_pikachu]

As much as I like that scenario, a better one is for the Democrats to not allow drilling and thus lose their seats, leaving the Republicans to fix everything and make people very happy with their new Congress.

I'd be perfectly happy with resistance from the Dems; it's not like there's that much time until elections, really. The incentives for waiting are greater than the aggravation of a few more months with high prices. We'll see how far Pelosi's radicalism goes... not making a move here would be political suicide for her party, but she's apt to do it. Bush's ban retraction has put the pressure squarely on her shoulders, so this should be fun to watch.

[firepokemon]

Still a relevant issue. Gas prices are well basically same as when this post was made.