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

[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/thecry...ming_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. 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/C...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 )

[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 )

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.

[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/program...ent/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.

[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.