Community archive
by dmambo
by cp7212
by dmambo
The U.S. refinery capacity has been running at max capacity for several years. For a variety of reason, economic and environmental, it has not been feasible for the oil companies to build new refineries. With the loss of refining capacity due to Katrina, the "supply" portion of supply and demand has taken a big hit. This should be somewhat reduced as the delivery systems are reconfigured, but may never return to previous levels.
That's the short term problem. Long term factors have contributed to the growth of the "demand" side of the equation. These include several decades of governmental policies that encourage inefficient use of foreign and domestic fossil fuels; fuel-wasting driving practices (some of them illegal); the lack of viable national or regional mass transit systems; and the successful marketing of fuel-inefficient vehicles.
by ozi eagle
by jkaras
They decided on capitolizing on a quick buck under the guise that shipments were not going to be delivered due to the hurricane damage. Truth is nothing was or is barring any shipments, let alone any supposed new inflated shipments. I live in Florida and it got insanely inflated over a few hours. So I say ok fine you want to rip your customers off? well I have as well as others taken notes on which stations ripped people off and am never going back to their stations to force them out of business. If that is how they want to run their business the nit's going to cost them severely. I like that some politicians are going to get the stations that price gauged hopefully pulling their license. It will cost them more in attorney fees and penalties than they made in profit. You wanna get back at them? Take a picture with your cell phone of their prices and email the picture to the commisions that are investigating the ones responsibile, make them pay!!!!
The sad thing is that gas is going to sky rocket needlessly because it's already risen. I know for a fact if the prices get any more higher their will be riots from angry Americans being put further into the poorhouse, by that idiot of a president Bush. His approval rating is dropping faster that history has ever reported on a past president.
ON a side note the planning for the help of the effected areas were quite sub par and demand the removal of leaders that failed the people that cost too many people their lives. For shame, it's quite embarassing to the level of ineptness.
by tonythetiger
by rouschkateer
by dmambo
I'd like to know what's going on. I can't believe that it's gouging by the stations themselves. I live in a small town, and a number of the stations here are locally owned. I have a real hard time believing that those owners are conspiring to rip off their neighbors.
The distributors, the oil cos., SOMEBODY must be making some serious bucks off of this situation. If you have any "insider" info, I, for one, would be glad to learn something.
On a side note, I would not be surprised if gulf coast residents see outrageous prices for sheetrock, plywood, etc in the coming months. There will be snakes out there just trying to rip off the victims.
by jkaras
The hike in gas had nothing to do with standard economics of the oil trade. It was a quick grab at more profit by local stations blaming the hurricane disaster that the pipelines were destroyed, and shipments wouldnt be able to be distributed to them. The roads work just fine here in Florida and Georgia. They didnt "get" a new shipment that was more expensive, that's different. They had the same gas sitting in their tanks waiting to be sold. They saw an opprotunity to make more profit. The gas prices were increasing .10 an hour roughly. Certain stations were charging from 2.55 to 3.00 inside two hours, some in other areas like Georgia got up to almost 6.00!!
The truth, the pipelines were damaged but still moving oil, albeit not at full capacity, but not turned off for any length of time causing a gas shortage. You and I can differ on economics about if the next order is going to cost more adjust prices to compensate for loss, but come on at most .10 should have been the increase not .30+. My parents were in business for 9.5 years and our prices never sky rocketed. I understand supply and demand quite well. They cashed in. News reports have been reporting escalations of as high as 4-5 dollars by three months time. DO the media use scare tactics for ratings? Yes, but one fact in gas prices, once the price gets hiked it never goes back down, only more expensive.
Now do you feel that Bush, FEMA, and anyother agency or politician acted accordingly in the preparation of this disaster? They had how many days to prepare? Every city has a worst case scenario plan if something happens right? Everyone knows that New Orleans sinks an inch every year and is below sea level in a punch bowl type area. I cant blame anyone on a natural disaster, but I sure can blame those responsible to protect the people that they failed to properly protect, plan, and organise any relief. They had ample time to mobilize troops from nearby bases ready to I dont know airlift supplies into the areas? I mean its an old tactic mind you, but it sure woked over 60 years ago. We dont have any helicopters? How but bus lines to transport people out of the city that are too poor to evacuate that dont have transportation, hell Castro did it in Cuba and that's a third world country. Truth is nobody did anything, then when the you know what hit the fan, still nobody did nothing. It's Friday and you know what, next to nothing still hasnt happened. Funny I sure saw many reporters getting into the most dangerous areas, how did they get there? No answers huh? My last question to you is this just how long do find it acceptable to wait to take approprite action? Where's your line? Hospitals have no power, food, no water for dying people. No baby formula, no transportation, no control, utter chos and its been days, you proud of that? They chose those positions of resposibilities, made promises that they were capable and they could handle any situation. they have blood on their hands, and it isnt ever going to wash off. This is a prime example on the ineptness of our leaders and lack of empathy. Shame on them and they should be help liable for crimminal charges of neglect. If a parent can be thrown to the lions, then why not them? Chew on that MR. ARROGANT.
by av .
We don't see it as much yet in Northern NJ - I'm waiting. Gas has risen about $.40 over the past few days, but its not like what you have in FL or Atlanta. I totally expect that our gas is going to go sky high because of the disaster.
Truth be told, we in the US have been lucky for many years as far as gas prices go. Our luck has ended and its time to get smart and take a page from people in other countries that have had high gas prices for as long as I can remember. Still, I just can't believe how our government can allow price gouging in a time of crisis. The people that do it should be put out of business. Where is our government anyway?
After looking at CNN for the past few days, I would say that our government isn't prepared for disasters of this scope in the homeland. They failed miserably. Don't get me started on what I think of Bush. All of our llawmakers will get to prove just how well they are working for the American people or not.
The bottom line is that we all have to ensure our own safety and can't rely on government or any other agency to ensure our safety and wellbeing. I'm with you - this is truly embarassing and heartbreaking too.
by oz_media
Aren't a large part of those fuel costs directly due to taxes, not fuel company profits?
I thought an increase in U.S. gas taxes should have been done years ago. We could mandate that every penny be spent on highway and mass transit improvements, and the increased fuel cost would encourage fuel efficient vehicles. But then I get 39 miles per gallon in one car and 31 in the other.
by tonythetiger
Sure they are, but also they generally have smaller vehicles that use less fuel so they have to. It's a vicious circle. Raise gas taxes will encourage more economy but then as economy increases, less gas is used, so the tax will have to be raised again to keep the same revenue flowing in.
Personally I think you should be taxed on the number of miles you drive and the weight of your vehicle. Maybe a penny per mile per year times the weight in tons.
by jck
But, the Canadian dollar is not stronger than the US dollar, like the British pound is. So if Canadian gas is $4.30 a gallon, that's about US$2.80. I have no idea what the gas price in Vancouver is, but I can only imagine it's sky high now. Everyone's is.
Plus, most of the cost of gasoline in England is a taxation.
Gas prices here are over US$3 a gallon now for all grades, and gas stations are running out.
Funny thing is, Nymex crude and its futures were both down as of 4pm from yesterdays trading.
I guess refining costs more when there are fewer refineries? hahahaha
Greedy distribution bastards...
by oz_media
NO matter if tax is 3% or 300%, when crude goes up so does the price, taxed in or not. The price at h epump still go up, it's not like taxes increase more than the cost of crude sa it's proportional, also no different than dollar value.
Let's say gas in Vancouver is $1.09L that works out to $4.14 CAD at 3.8 litres to the US gallon.
No matter what the dollar value is, it is stil more expensive becaue we are paid in Canadian dollars not US. A dollar to you is a dollar to me. 1 Gallon of fuel costs over $4 Canadian.
by oz_media
Actually reported that Bush would be increasing production by opening up refineries NOT operating or not operating at full capacity and he will be permitting the clean air acts to be breached for this purpose.
This would then imply that the US refineries have NOT been operating at maximum capacity for years.
I missed that one.
The regular unleaded refineries were at full capacity. We do have other refineries that don't run at full capacity. They produce fuels designed to meet the stricter air quality standards in selected metropolitan areas. By suspending the clear air standards in those areas, the refineries that produce these custom fuels can be used at full cap for regular unleaded instead.
by rouschkateer
I would have replied on how it affected everyone in the world, not just us, but I thought better of it.
Of course, with every disaster, there are going to be financial repercussions that affect the entire country. This is especially true for large-scale disasters. Concentrating our efforts and search and rescue, rather than restructuring the pipeline in the area, is a bit more important. Police themselves are siphoning gas out of stranded cars in the New Orleans area. Why? Because they can't even GET any from the oh-so convienient gas station. It sure isn't because of the price.
When things like this happen, I just sit back and let it go. I have WAY more important things to worry about rather than inflating gas prices. Perhaps now is the time to consider carpooling, public transportation, walking to work, or bicycling. Make sure your car is regularly serviced to get the best possible gas milage. But really, please don't whine about stretching a dollar. Thousands have it much much worse.
by mikeewalton
by puppybreath
Bad energy policies pre-date this administration.
The Democratic party wants the government to spend money to improve society, and is willing to raise taxes to do it. The Republican party wants the government to spend money to promote the economy, and is willing to go into debt to do it.
by oz_media
Don't have time for the heat but Bush never made billions and definitely not in oil, he was/is a complete failure in the oil business. Hire Bush and wait for your company to crash.
As for the chickens&it military, I always thought soldiers were soldiers, do they go all whimpy under a democratic leader? DO they start getting scared and running away when the government changes? No, the leader is just a little more reluctant to send them off to die that's all.
As for defending everyone else, that's an American mindset, not shared by "everyone else". Nobody feels the US is defending them, even though the US claims and actually beliwves it is defending them. In reality, the US is usually acting out of fear of it's own safety, not to help others.
Seems to have always been the case, WWII onward.
by gadgetgirl
Just proving cost of living, really, but you have to admit, you?re better off than us on fuel prices?..
At prices this morning, 02 Sept, on way in to work: (unleaded fuel, most common here)
1 litre 93.9p, exchange rate this morning $1 = 0.54 pence
Ergo, 1 gallon is ( 4.545 litres) = 93.9 x 4.545 = ? 4.27 , $7.84
Have a 50 mile round trip to work, 5 days a week, plus the usual running around the doors.
(Thank goodness I now get 53 miles to the gallon in my new (to me) car!!)
I'm not trying to stir up trouble here, yes, ours is mostly tax, just giving you an idea how much you have to go to catch up with what we pay here (bedgrudgingly)
A necessary evil for some of us.
GG
by cp7212
Everybody is saying that the prices are going up because of this and that, but nobody is letting on to where all of this cash is going. It's obviously not to build refineries.
I heard this morning on the news that the federal govt. is thinking about suspending the gasoline tax of 18.4 cents/gallon. Eighteen point four? Who are they kidding? Last time I looked, the gas tax made up 31% of every gasoline dollar spent.
I agree that other countries have it harder with the gas prices, but my question to them is: Did your gas prices go up a dollar/gallon in under a week? And it's still marked to go up today.
We've had natural disasters (besides Carter being in office and creating the futures market) before here and I didn't see the gas prices rocket.
I also heard on the news that the federal govt. is going to be checking into price-gouging. That gave me a good laugh before work. I can see GWB checking into his good buddies to see if it's going to affect his retirement fund. Give me a break. I ask most of the people that are complaining if they voted for GWB, and if they tell me that they did vote for him (or worse, didn't vote at all), to shut up.
Funny how the prices rose up so fast right before Labor Day. Despite all the economic baloo and all of the "reasons why this is happening", I still think something hokey is going on.
BTW, good or bad, thanks for all the feedback.
by dmambo
A) We have a MASSIVE deficit at this time.
B) We should probably be taking steps to REDUCE oil usage right now (and in the future).
C) A fed tax rollback would at most reduce prices back to Tuesday's levels (a little sarcasm there, but it's true).
D) Winter heating season is almost upon us. I'd rather pay more for my car, which is somewhat discretionary, and be sure I can fill my furnace's oil tank in January. It gets cold in VT.
Who knows, maybe in the long run, the oil prices will prove to be a benefit for the Western economies. China and India are fueling their economic growth with oil. Could this slow them down?
by cp7212
by sleepin'dawg
Remember GWB??? Now think about his connections to the oil industry. Enough said. BTW isn't it marvelous how he's responded to the Katerina tradgedy in New Orleans, Gulf Port et al??? Even his Daddy is disgusted with him to the point where he has put aside political differences to join Clinton in raising relief money.
[b]Dawg[/b] ]:)
by oz_media
When the US invaded Iraq, GWB reduced gas prices in Iraq to the equivalent of 5 cents a gallon US and subsidised it from American taxpayers pockets.
Cost was said to be $1.50 US per gallon shipped by Haliburton (gee, no conection there) to Iraq ad sold for a nickel return per gallon.
When this was posted here, US citizens were more than happy that they were subsidising Iraqi gas, it should be the same now. Have the US subsidise their OWN gas with tax dollars! But that just wouldn't be acceptable I don't think.
Funny how the tides turn when it's to favour the presidents motives.
by jdclyde
That it is the enviornmental wackos that wouldn't let more refineries be built for so long, and it is the cost of refining the oil that has had a lot to do with the cost at the pumps.
No, don't drill because it only helps a little.
No, don't build refineries because they polute.
I think there is just a little bit more going on than GWB and his evil master plan. Remember, he is too stupid. How could he make that hurricane kill all those people so he could make his money and political payback? Get real. You people need to go take your meds or something.
by jkaras
Nobody is or was blaming him for creating the Hurricane. We were all ranting about how a hurricane that hit three states somehow caused the highest increase in gas prices inside 24 hours. The price hasnt skyrocketed because of fewer refineries or environmentalists or lack of supplies, it was greed over a bs scare tactic over a natural disaster.
Truth is though every form of energy has greatly increased since he has been in power. He and his cronies have profited from his lack of concern over the economics of the common man. That is a legitimate gripe. We as Americans depend on self transit, not mass transit because our leaders never made that option a reality. We are dependant on gas to make our country run because there is no other option. Why because there was big money in supplying oil to buy politicians. Always has always will.
When I was 18 I paid .70 a gallon, I'm 34 and I pay almost 3.00 for that same low grade gas. That's some hike and it costs me more than I can handle even with my little Honda. Truth is once gas goes up and we pay for it it never goes down. Once a precedence is set it inflates. I acknowledge prices will climb as society progresses, but this isnt about progress, its about greed from people who control the oil to make more profit, not world economy.
by jdclyde
some of the posts here show people with a predefind agenda that haven't put much thought, logic, or evidence into them.
The Bush family is into oil so everything that happens that is bad will obviously be their scheming?
Just not much objective thinking going on. Show me where Bush has profitted from his "lack of concern".
What would you want him to do, set a price for the gas? MAKE them lower their prices? Do you really think he has that kind of power? The President and rest of the government do not determine prices. They can look into unfair pricing though, and they are.
Think back, the energy problems had already started back when William Jefferson Clinton was still in office and the ONLY thing he did was release from the oil reserve, just like Bush is doing now. HMMMMMM.
by willcomp
Maybe I wouldn't be quite so strong, but you are basically correct, especially about the refineries. Hasn't been one built in the US in over 30 years as I recall. Biggest hurdle is expense associated with environmental controls.
Why a storm affecting just 3 states in the deep south can so affect prices should be obvious.
A significant portion of domestic oil and natural gas production is located in South Louisiana, Texas, and the Gulf of Mexico. Those oil rigs you see washed ashore and the ones just plain missing are not pumping oil. All the Gulf of Mexico oil rigs had to be evacuated and lost production for about a week.
Much more critical than oil production loss is the loss of refinery capacity and pipelines. Dubya can release the entire strategic reserve but it won't do any good if we can't make it into gasoline and diesel fuel.
South Louisiana has a number of refineries and one of the largest refineries in the US is located in Pascagoula, Mississippi.
Port Fouchon, the largest oil and gas terminal facility in the US was destroyed.
Does that explain how a storm in 3 little states can have such an impact? Just be thankful it wasn't the Texas Gulf Coast or we'd be hurting worse. That's the only location with greater impact on oil and gas supply.
Dalton
by cp7212
Okay, let's say that GWB and his administration look into this price gouging. His administration finds there was gouging....do you think anything is going to happen from this?
Same scenario, the refineries and ports get back up to speed....do you think anybody is going to say ok, let's lower the price. I think it's on a one way climb, no matter what happens?
JD, sarcasm aside, where do you think all of this money is going? I don't have any answers for this, it is strictly interrogative.
by rouschkateer
To report gouging. Come on, it's a simple Google search. Watch CNN. Read the newspaper. Yes they CAN do something, and yes they WILL do something.
by jdclyde
But I find it hard to believe that the person Democrats like to say is a very stupid man could pull this off on the scale that is being suggested here?
And it is Congress looking into the pricing, not the administration. There are enough in Congress that are just BEGGING for anything bad they can pin on Bush so I don't believe this is a pass.
It is just funny, people that are suppose to be intellegent, thoughtful people that work with facts for a living would start up with wild claims that no one has come close to being able to show to be anything more than drunken dillusions.
Doesn't anyone on this board have an objective thought in their heads anymore?
People here HATE Bush, so that equals to him HAVING to be behind everything bad?
NOTE: The price has dropped 40 cents here. I don't know what it will do a month from now.
by cp7212
I live in PA and I heard our Dept. of Transportation (PENNDOT) didn't budget enough money this year for gasoline. I think it's a little twisted that a gasoline tax is imposed on every gallon of gas to take care of our roads and now we may not have enough gas money to fuel our heavy machinery.
DMambo, I totally agree with you about the tax rollback. I was driving to work when I heard this and I thought well that price decrease would last until I pass the next gas station....
And as far as winter coming, whether you use heating oil or natural gas, you can be sure they're going to up that..... 'tis the season. I think it's time to buy a wood stove. ;)
by dmambo
by oz_media
She also said that the price of gas is ridiculous compared to US prices.
If you take my figure ad convert them to US dollars its pretty scary.
But equating a dolar earned in the US to a dollar earned in Canada or a pound earned in England, we have FAr higher prices than the US, based on what we are paid. In fact in Enlgand, pay is much lower, so 4 Pound is far more of a hit in the pocket book than $4 US.
Therefore, you guys have no reason whatsoever to complain abotu fuel costs, it is FAR lower than other countries and they have had these prices for ages. Sure it gone from 79 cents to 1.19L in Canada, but it's always more expensive than US gas.
Now if US gas was the same QUALITY as Canadian gas, Canadians would still be running across the border for gas. I used to gas up in the US every week, even with the exchange rate it's STILL cheaper to drive south for gas. You'll save about $10 a tank compared to gas in Canada.
BUT, as I am now quite picky about fuel quality and what additives are used, I pay the higher price and get Canadian gas.
I agree that we have no reason to complain about gas prices. I'm not. I may grouse about the temporary lack of supply, but my two cars have get 32 and 39 MPG. I don't care if it hits $4 or $5 US.
My point was that part of the higher cost in other countries is that taxes make up a larger percentage of the total cost. I think we should have raise the taxes here a couple of bucks several years ago. Then the cost would have driven up demand for efficient vehicles, driving down the demand for gas, and we wouldn't be in this mess now. I'd rather pay higher taxes and theoretically get improved services than pay higher prices to improve oil company revenues.
by oz_media
Well this could fit here or on the where's the help thread.
20 countries have said they will delegate over 6 milion barrels of crude to America to help recover from the loss due to Katrina. This is how allied nations have agreed to help reduce the cost of gasoline and stop price gouging in the states.
So for this thread, it shows not an answer but HELP in controlling soaring costs and help; which GWB has said WILL reduce the price of oil in the US over the next 3-6 months. Canada will be shipping nearly double the amout of oil to the US over the next three months and Canada is one of your major suppliers these days, if not the largest.
SO between the Red Cross, other private companies support (logistically or monetarily) and the increased oil flow to the USA, people HAVE come to your aid from all over the world (still a little bitter about that other thread).
Lower priced gas and aid is on the way, please just be patient and let these events take their course.
by willcomp
GWB can release the whole strategic reserve but it won't help in the short term. Same for crude oil from other countries. What we need is gasoline and diesel fuel.
Appears that we may receive some refined products from other countries strategic reserves. Some seem to have had the good sense to stockpile ready-to-use products instead of crude oil that has to be refined.
Although crude oil supply has been affected, the main short term effect is loss of refinery capacity. The US already had insufficient refinery capacity and at least 7 refineries with a total production of well over 2,000,000 barrels per day were affected by Katrina. Apparently such "minor" consequences are not reaching major news outlets.
Recent gasoline shortages in the Southeast and the East Coast resulted primarily from loss of the Colonial and Plantation Pipelines that feed much of the eastern US. Pipelines were down due to loss of electrical power in South Louisiana and South Mississippi. Both should be back to about 75% capacity now. I have heard loss of the pipelines mentioned in news coverage of high gas prices in Atlanta (probably because CNN is headquarted there and it was important because they were affected).
As horrific as the 9-11 attacks were, Katrina will have a greater and longer lasting impact on the economy and our daily lives.
by jck
The biggest hit was to oil drilling platforms, not refineries.
They said that 70% of refining in the affected areas should be back up by the end of the week and the rest to follow within the next 30-90 days.
by oz_media
GWB has alreaedy said he will fire up the refineries that have been running at low volume due to air control restrictions. He has decided to ignore air care in order to get these plants up to full operational capacity again.
In case anyone is thinking I am taking a shot at GB, well I would but in this case, I would also agree that an air care EXCEPTION needs to be made (temporarily) in order to get production back to full volume again.
I was ready to tell Oz he was full of #1 sweet crude, but I'll be darned if he isn't right. Go to http://www.eia.doe.gov/oil_gas/petroleum/info_glance/importexport.html
and scroll down until you see "Crude Oil Imports by Country of Origin".
In June '05, the U.S. brought in over 51 million barrels of Canadian oil, more than any single OPEC country and just 20 million behind all the Persian Gulf countries combined. In second place was Mexico, with 48 million, just ahead of Saudi Arabia's nearly 48 million. Fourth went to Venezuela's 38 million. Venezuela is an OPEC member but not a Middle Eastern country, as is fifth place Nigeria.
Oz, thanks for the stuff, even if we can't refine it. We'd send you some of our beer, but most of it really isn't worth drinking.
by oz_media
You didnt really think I'd make such a claim without being pretty certain first do you? I've been around TR too long for that one. LOL! :D
The US has been druelling over Canadian oil sands for decades, now that natural gas is becoming more widely used they are starting to notice our CNG producing abilities too.
Alberta's good for more than just beef ya know! (And no you guys can't have any!) ;P
by cp7212
I'm not saying it's all Bush's fault. I know I didn't vote for the man. Personally, if I didn't have such strong reservations over the right to vote, I wouldn't have voted at all. I saw a debate between Bush and Kerry, and I sat there thinking, "Man, this country is screwed."
I just can't believe all of the dissent that follows this man. It's pretty coincidental, if you ask me. You see more and more people pleading with Bush to pull out of Iraq and it took him five days to mobilize help for the Katrina disaster. You would have thought at least FEMA would have had some kind of preventative maintenance. They knew it was coming.
When something bad happens, I don't always point the finger at Bush. But darn, the guy is supposed to be a leader and I don't see it in him.
And there is still one answer I've been looking for....who gets all of this money? I live in a town that has a United refinery and I spoke to one of the managers before this price surge occurred. He told me his refinery takes a straight 40 cents a gallon/gasoline off of the top. Nice.
by willcomp
One of the more plausible explanations I've heard for Federal foot dragging in Katrina response is that FEMA in now buried in Homeland Security instead of being an independent agency.
FEMA had an excellent track record previously. Now the FEMA Director apparently has to get permission from the Homeland Security Secretary to scratch his butt. Not the way to run an emergency agency.
by jck
That the current FEMA director said they didn't know about all the problems for 2 days I think, which news helicopters were broadcasting pictures of the whole coast the next morning.
I wonder if Homeland Security took away his people that monitor natural disasters as well.
Plus, I heard "Brownie" (as Bush calls him sometimes) only had previous management experience in a horse association, and little if any FEMA-type experience.
Lovely...I wonder if I can become Secretary of Defense now. I'm as qualified for that as he was for FEMA, evidently.
by jck
From what I understand (from my co-worker who just moved back from England after living there almost 20 years):
In England, petrol tax is a percentage of per unit cost at the pump. As the price goes up, so does the tax.
In Florida (where I live), I think the gas tax is a flat $.31 per gallon. As the price goes up here, there is no tax increase.
According to wikipedia, the U.S. federal gasoline tax as of 2005 was 18.4?/gal (4.86?/L), and the gasoline taxes in the various states range from 10 cents to 33 cents, with an average about 22 cents per U.S. gallon (5.8?/L).
So it is relevant, because the distributors/producers of the petrol are the only ones to benefit from a price hike. The hike isn't based partially on taxes.
And as for oil pricing, as of Thursday it was *down* some $.23 per barrel from Wednesday and still below $70 per barrel. So, shouldn't the price per gallon then have gone down instead of being up $.42 a gallon ($2.57 on monday...$2.99 on Thursday)?
Just makes no sense. Oil flow is still there. Gas supply is fine. 70% of refining capacity in the states affected will be back online by the end of this week. There was no reason for a 25% gas price increase.
It was simply greed.
In Vancouver as of March 1, 2005 on CAD$.50 per litre base, you're paying about CAD$.385 per litre in tax. So, your per gallon cost was roughly 40% taxes. Mine ends up being about 20% tax per gallon at the same time.
Essentially if you had the same tax as we do, you'd be paying somewhere around US$2.90-3.15 per gallon instead of US$3.48 you pay now.
So, taxes are truly relevant in this case. You're paying the same as me comparatively.
References:
by oz_media
Gasoline prices go up and so do the taxes.
If gas was the same price and additional taxes had hiked it so high, I would agree, but taxes are pretty proportionate. If gas had shot up simply because of an increase in taxes it would be different.
by jck
the distributors artificially inflated the prices.
Oil was not yet in short demand.
Within 48 hours, Bush said he would release 500k gallons of crude a day from the reserve until other supplies could be arranged for.
Gas was still on trucks and ships going everywhere but the areas affected by the hurricane.
It was just the distributors who decided the price would spike on crude and decided to pro-actively raise their prices.
It's called price gouging. Worst I've seen was a Shell station in Virginia at $5.89 for regular unleaded.
Maybe they thought they were in England? HAHAHAHA :D
by willcomp
The US does not have adequate refinery capacity with all refineries operable. We import gasoline. Loss of refinery capacity has a greater impact on gasoline supply.
Also lost Port Fouchon terminal facility, which will have a significant effect.
by jck
Watch coffee prices soar. I heard that 30-40% of the coffee that comes in the USA comes through New Orleans and that no other port on the gulf has the facilities to process it.
Starbucks stock would be real good to have right now...coffee will be $8.00 a cup by October.
by cp7212
I see already that the tire manufacturers are hiking their prices. It won't just be what goes through New Orleans. I'm sure everyone will go on the "pass it to the consumer" bandwagon.
I'm waiting for food to go up next and the cooler weather will be coming to my region next. Heating oil will go up, of course. Natural gas will go up (for whatever reasons of their own they can concoct).
All of the high prices will force the lower class into either bankruptcy or rioting. The middle class will become the lower class and the rich will, of course, become richer. It may sound like a paranoid conclusion, but I don't see it getting any better.....
by dmambo
by jck
going up over $.20 cents, or about 8 percent, in one day? and, over $.50, or about 20 percent, in 3 days?
I'd say that qualifies as "shot up".
Highest I've seen regular unleaded her for was over $3.20 a gallon. This morning, some stations were $2.89. And as I said, I got gas on Monday for $2.57 per gallon so prices are still up $.32 in a best case scenario from last Monday's price and were up as much as $.52 cents at one point at the station I used.
Anyways...I don't know what you think it is, but 20 percent is a big price increase. Just think if your clothes all went up 20% in 3 days.
Then you'd probably shop at Bealls outlet like me!!! :D
by jck
Thanks to the Bill of Rights, I have 4 guns and ammo for them.
Someone tries to loot my house...they better be wearing body armor.
by cp7212
by jdclyde
Run for cover everybody! Swill is coming through!
Four huh? Have to peer you on this!
Unfortunately, mine are not for personal protection. With children in my house the risk of them getting a hold of them was greater than that of someone breaking in while I am home so mine are locked up in my safe.
Although with the changes of the carry laws in Michigan, I just may get around to getting my carry permit! Woo woo!
by willcomp
Finally saw a blurb about refineries on the boob tube news financial segment. The US lost 10% of its refinery capacity due to storm damage. Several are starting back up now and should be back in production within the next few days.
Oil and gas production in the Gulf should ramp back up shortly. I still don't know how many rigs were lost or severely damaged. Get ready for short natural gas supplies and high prices this winter. A significant chunk of natural gas production is in the Gulf of Mexico (about 30% if I remember correctly). Most of the rest is in Louisiana and Texas.
by oz_media
Alberta is said to have one of the largest natural gas deposits in the world. They have sat on it for years and trickle it out as needed.
NO YOU CAN'T HAVE NONE!!! ;)
by oz_media
In Vancouver gas is always 20cents more expensive than just outside of Vancouver.
It's 10 cents/litre more in Richmond than 20minutes in direction (exceot West of course, you'd get wet that way).
Prices around here always vary 10-20 cents litre, or 38, 76 cents per gallon.
by oz_media
That's the attitude! Saw some of you guys running around shooting each other in New Orleans. Nice to see how Americans come together in times of hardship.
And just think, if you ever et really pissed at life, you can just go to MacDonalds and take em all out with you! WAHOOO!!!!!
Gee, I wish MY neighbours were ready to shoot me, I feel left out.
Why would you need a gun to protect your home from looters? Do they all carry guns to? Bit of an issue resolved with an issue?
I had someone break in my home a few years back when living in New West. The cops arrived to find the guy screaming for me to let him go, lucky he didn't crap himself on my kitchen floor, then I woulda really been po'd!
Yes, I cheated and had a knife (not the kitchen variety) to his throat, but that was just to keep him down and to stop him from wriggling around.
If I had shot him, I'd be the one doing time, unless he had a gun to my head.
by garion11
I dunno I could be wrong...but
Big demand + Less Supply = Higher prices.
If that doesn't add up to you guys...then just blame Bush! ;).
by jck
guaranteed...if 50% of big SUV owners switched to hybrid cars, oil companies would do nothing more than shut down refineries and drilling sites and keep the price the same.
i.e.- The price would stay the same...and more people would just be out of work...and few or none would be executives.
God bless capitalism :D
.
Oil companies (and other business interests), contrary to what you suggest, have been trying to build NEW refineries for years, only to be denied by politically correct zealots who would rather appease the radical environmentalists than take the necessary measures to meet and satisfy the US's growing energy needs.
There has not been a new refinery built in the USA since 1976.
Current refineries are operating so near 100 percent, that it could be statistically called operating at 100 percent capacity. What happens when one (or more) of these refineries goes down? That's a rhetorical question, of course, because we all know the answer.
Crown Prince Abdullah of Saudi Arabia recently offered to increase oil imports to the US, but we don't have the capacity to refine it. We're currently consuming 20 million barrels of oil per day. And we are currently refining 20 million barrels of oil a day.
Not only has the USA been importing more oil over the years, but we ALSO are importing more refined products, i.e. gasoline, because our own refineries can't keep up with the rising demand. We're importing a million barrels of GASOLINE each and every day, 10 percent of our gasoline consumption.
President Bush has offered to make closed military bases available for building more refineries, which would also have an added side-effect of improving the economies and employment rates of many localities, but the environmentalists win again. Do you know how many attempts to build new refineries have been denied over the past 30 years? I don't know either, but I'll look for the answer. However, I know it's more than one. And I also know it's more than ten. And I'll bet it's more than a hundred.
No, the "oil company executives", whom you so freely demonize, want MORE refineries, not fewer.
We refine 20 million barrels of oil per day, but only half of that, about 10 million barrels a day, is used for transportation. And a big percentage of "transportation" includes the airline, rail and trucking industries.
To correct your false assumption, if 50% of big SUV owners switched to hybrid cars, the impact would be, in the overall scheme of things, insignificant. And the "oil company executives" would still want MORE refineries.
Yours is a typical, emotionally driven and uninformed knee-jerk reaction. Many people base their opinions on such sentiments. And that, in my estimation, is frightening.
Edited Part:
By the way, ONE new refinery would mean the addition of 3000 short-term construction jobs, and 600 long-term and permanent jobs for some local economy. Instead, we "choose" to out-source 10 percent of our gasoline production industry. Nope, I just don't get it.
by dmambo
When I said they ratchet up, I tried to imply that there will be no going back. I'd be willing to wager that when the "crisis" is over, average US prices will hover around $2.85 per gallon. It'll seem like a bargain after prices around $3.50.
Six months ago, I would have said the the teat suckers would drive prices over $2.00 temporarily, then let them fall back to $1.95 or so, resulting in just a 25% spike. I underestimated the balls on these people and the willingness of SUV drivers to take it up the chute.
A lady I work with drives a 90 mile round trip in her 2004 Ford Expedition. I figure it's costing her around $20 per day. Serves her right for buying that beast.
by jck
Oz: I know how that is. Up here gas is cheaper by sometimes $.30 than it is 40 miles south of here in St. Petersburg. I figured it was just because they have to compensate for property and local taxes.
DMambo: I know what you mean there. When I started working at the current job, I think gas was around $1.60 or so. With the spike, it effective had doubled since December, and had gone up by almost $1 per gallon before the hurricane hit.
It's just silly.
Maybe the oil companies next will shut down all their American refineries and open ones in Mexico, pay 70% less in labor, and use NAFTA to bring oil across the border and increase their profits that way.
God bless Congress and aristocracy.
.
.....stop buying the fuel.
by cp7212
.
....if I wanted to.
If I wanted to live the rest of my life without an automobile, I could easily do it. I just don't want to, at least not yet. I've actually had stints in my life (more than once) where I may not have driven an automobile for weeks, and in one case, for months. It's very possible. And to suggest that the only alternative is a horse or dog-sled is just downright silly.
I never buy a new car either, or pay for television, or do a lot of things that other people might do, but complain about after they do it. I'm amazed at the number of people who gripe about the "nothing" or the "smut" or the whatever it is they're griping about that they see on the television, but they continue to not only turn it on, but to pay for it to boot. What total idiots!
If you are forced to have an automobile because of your circumstances (and I use the word "forced" with reservations), then you just need to make different choices so you can create different circumstances. No one is really forcing you to do anything except yourself, directed, of course, by the choices you make. Choose a different place to live; choose a different lifestyle; make different choices, and then you'll have different needs and outcomes. Start with the end in mind, and work backwards to figure out a way to make it happen -- even if it's living life without an automobile.
I wish all the SUV hater, environmental extremists would really put their lifestyle where their mouth is. Let them live in homes made of anything but lumber and petroleum-based products; let them live without even riding in an automobile, much less owning one; let them heat their homes with solar (but don't use a petroleum based caulking), and use an open window for air conditioning; and so on. How many radical environmentalists have SUVs of their own? BaBa Streisand comes to mind. And so does Hillary GasGuzzler Clinton. Did Al EarthInTheInBalance Gore ever own or ride in an SUV? Of course he did, on both counts, even though he called the internal combustion engine the worst threat the world has ever known. What a bunch of unprincipled hypocrites. (The real answer is, environmentalism isn't really their agenda. It's merely a tactic to advance their real agenda, which is control.)
I don't care if you agree or not, but your life is totally dependent on the choices you make. And if you don't want to buy gasoline, but you buy it anyway, you've simply made the wrong choice (or choices) somewhere along the line. And if you want a future life where you don't have to, then start making plans. Actually, I've thought about this quite a bit. I know the city I'd choose; I even know the neighborhood. Yep, I could sure do it. Life might be different, to be sure. But it's all a matter of choice.
I have to wonder about people who make certain choices, but then gripe about it afterwards. HELLO! ANYBODY HOME?
by jck
that the law there is different than it is here.
Under Florida Statute, I have the right to shoot anyone entering or attempting to enter my home who is an emminent danger to myself, family, other tenants, or my property.
So...if a mob of 10 guys comes up with bats, knives and guns trying to break in my house...I'll risk going to jail for defending myself rather than wielding a knife or bat and going to the grave.
Do all my neighbors have guns? I don't know, but I have a right to own one in my country and my state.
Also, I want to make it clear that just because I own guns doesn't mean that I shoot at my neighbors for fun, wheez like a hillbilly stereo type, or go out and scream Islam praises and fire my gun in the air.
When it comes to owning guns, there's a big difference between a nut and a responsible gun owner.
Just like there's a difference between most fun-loving Canadians and those nutsoes in Quebec who are so radical and want independence.
I say...you guys give em independence...then tariff anything going in or out of Quebec 100%. That'd change their mind.
Nonetheless if you really feel left out, there's a house for sale 2 doors down from me. Buy it, move here, break in my front door with a bat or knife and come at me swinging.
And please don't criticize me for staying within my legal rights as an American to own guns, and then categorize me with the rapists, looters and hooligans that are taking advantage of a bad situation for everyone in New Orleans. I've done nothing wrong to you or anyone else, and I don't categorize you with Lou Perlman and his kind of ilk in the music industry.
by dmambo
That was Clinton's doing. A portion of his cabinet was pushing it and another faction was trying to scrap it.
In any event, what we really need to do is to stop wasting fossil fuels like we do. It's sad to hear a mom claim that the only reason she buys a monster-sized SUV is because there are so many others out there, she feels she needs it to protect her family in case of a crash. I live in New England, and 4 months a year, we really do need four-wheel drive. But we don't need it carrying around 5,000 pounds. (I love my little Subaru, which gets about 25 mpg. Not great, but a hell of a lot better than a full-size SUV.)
by jck
Yeah, I agree.
I drive a 2000 Kia Sportage. Gets 22MPG. And, it would seat 4-5 people if need be.
I even get scared of getting hit down here by some old geezer who can't see over the wheel of his Navigator.
But if I ever do and get hurt, I will own his car and part of his insurance company.
No real use for big cars. Go to Europe and see how many Suburbans and Navigators and Escalades and Hummers are on the roads there.
But, some Americans think you can't get along without them. Oh well. Ignorance is bliss.
by dmambo
by tonythetiger
for the most part. There were a few who jumped as high as $6.50 but they were quickly "corrected" by authorities. Some have even LOWERED their margin. The guy I know runs a convenience mart makes about nine cents a gallon normally. He sellls about a quarter million gallons a year making his profit for gas about $23,000. The rest he makes on items inside the store. When he got his first load after the hurricane, he had to actually sell at a loss for a few hours so as to not lose business to the guy across the street who hadn't gotten his first load yet. As soon as the other guy raised his price, so did my friend.
Like with the electric grid, something needs to be done about the infrastructure. It is old and decrepit. Lots of people made lots of money that should have went to maintaining the systems. These people need to be tracked down and be made to pay a substantial part of their profits toward the repairs and upgrades, and the people who paid the profit out instead of making the repairs need to be held accountable to their customers.
by jkaras
I get your point that not all make massive profits off gas, but I think your friend is claiming a false profit margin, sorry. He wouldnt be able to run a business off that kind of margin from his main attraction product. Twinkies, Ho HOs and sodas are rather delicious and slightly over priced at stations but that doesnt pay all the bills. I am sure he took a loss on getting his first shipment in, but that is business. I just find it hard to believe that he makes next to nothing off gas and is dependant on snacks in the store. He would have to sell such a huge amount of quantity to pay for his insurance, electric, employees, restocking the stores and pumps, rent, and other business related expenses for upkeep. My parents owned two pet shops and we had a three time mark up. We had good profits when things were good and were dirt poor eating hotdogs and beans for dinner to pay the bills.
My uncle had a gas station, well over 25 years ago. It was full serve with a garage, no quickie mart and he did fine for quite some time. Granted his massive profit margin was off fixing cars and repairing tires, but the steady money flow was from the gas, the repairs were just gravy because people were stranded.
I appreciate your respomse and I'll consider your friend's claims but I think its off considerably. That's my opinion based off experience in self employment with a realistic outlook of profit and not being non-profit, I could be wrong so I will leave it at that.
I totally agree on the infrustructure points you made, accountability needs to be made, but the news is showing the finger pointing going awry with everyone trying to save their worthless butt. I think this is going to get glossed over, the media is getting their ratings now making their profit, but they will back down during the investigation to play nice with the administration. Again that's just my opinion and hope that I am wrong, but doubt it.
by tonythetiger
Actually he says he makes the most money off of the laundromat and beer and cigarettes (He also has a "General Store" section. (the only place in town you can get lawn chair webbing in the middle of winter :)). Gas sales account for less than 10% of his profit. He says that that's typical around here, since competition is so stiff (people will go across the street to save a penny a gallon, and across town to save a nickel).
He keeps the gas records seperately, and does not pay employees out of it specifically. He claims to gross about $150k a month sales not counting gasoline.
News always shows finger pointing. Journalists talk to people who are complaining, not people who are too busy to complain because they are DOING something. It's the nature of the beast. For every bad thing you hear about, there are at least a thousand good things you don't. Along with dozens of others in my community, we just signed up to take in a couple or small family. We have an extra bedroom, and a big table. The news will gloss over things like that as well.
Don Henley hit it right on the head when he sang "Dirty Laundry".
by willcomp
As more comes to light, it is becoming apparent that Homeland Security, FEMA, GWB, Mayor of New Orleans, Governor of Louisiana, and who knows how many others were all asleep at the wheel.
I'm most surprised at FEMA though. Thought they would do better.
Excuse manufacturing and finger pointing will last for years, Congress will investigate, and "reforms" will be made which will probably be about as effective as past "reforms."
I don't think they'll ever get the point that somebody competent has to be in charge and have the authority to act.
by jdclyde
jck did a good response that doesn't really need much added in.
There was the obvious part of showing that you, mr. oz media, didn't even BOTHER to read my post, or you would not have said "guys", instead of "guy".
I CLEARLY stated [b][i]"mine are locked up in my safe."[/i][/b] and not for personal protection.
I hunt and shoot in competition shooting, and am well within both legal and ethical right to do both.
Mind you, if I DID hear that looters were in the neighborhood, I would drop the first one to kick down my door. Everyone has the right to be secure in their homes. Not that this would EVER be likely where I am. Anyways, looting would be in the ritzy areas, not the middle class section I am in. They have the nicer stuff to steal.
Don't tell my you have sympathy for looters? And no, I am NOT talking about the people that are taking FOOD and water from the stores. I am talking about the worthless people that see this as a time to get a new TV or jewelry.
by garion11
by jck
Knee-jerk, eh?
You said they've been trying to build? Since when? I'd disagree. Even you've admitted they haven't built in 30 years.
Whenever the smaller refineries close because of deregulation, unprofitability, or inability to retrofit facilities to meet with regulations, the larger existing refineries have always boosted capacity to compensate...not try to build new in the states.
No one is trying to build new in the states because it's too expensive, too much hassle because of environmental regulation, that the permitting process takes up to 15 YEARS to complete for ONE refinery, and so many people have the "not in my back yard" mentality.
Corps are finding it cheaper, if anything, to buy old refineries, rather than build new, since "used" refineries sell for 30 to 50 percent of the cost of new construction.
As for them operating at "near 100 percent", I guess that's if you consider the 89-94% average "near". That 5-10% is a lot of oil...around .5-1.5M bar/day indifference from 100%.
Since 1981, refineries have declined from 324 to 149.
And while a 50%+ decline in number of refineries happened, we've only had a 10% drop in refining capacity up to date. And, that refining capacity has increased from 15.0 to 16.9M bbl/day so they are catching up to demand even with such refining closures.
All they'd have to do is retrofit to regulations and re-open existing refineries. So if there are some 175 off-line refineries sitting out there, why aren't these oil companies re-opening them if they are so sorely needed?
Here's an excerpt from the U.S. DOE:
============================================
"While some refineries have closed, and no new refineries have been built in nearly 30 years, many existing refineries have expanded their capacities. As a result of capacity creep," whereby existing refineries create additional refining capacity from the same physical structure, capacity per operating refinery increased by 28% over the 1990 to 1998 period, for example. Overall, since the mid-1990s, U.S. refinery capacity has increased from 15.0 million bbl/d in 1994 to 16.9 million bbl/d in September 2004. Also in September 2004, utilization of operating capacity at U.S. refineries was averaging around 90%, down from 97% in July and August. Although financial, environmental, and legal considerations make it unlikely that new refineries will be built in the United States, expansion at existing refineries likely will increase total U.S. refining capacity in the long-run."
http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/usa.html
================================================
Now, my questions of you:
Considering what corporations have done in other business sectors, what makes you think it inconceivable that oil corporations are incapable of shutting down refineries to relocate them in Mexico if the return in labor cost reduction pays for the refinery within 10-15 years?
What makes it inconceivable that Mexico would like all that new money in their country and would make concessions to get billions in revenue in their economy?
Can you explain why there are 175 refining facilities out there which could be re-opened with minor-to-moderate retrofitting of devices to make them compliant with regulations, but no one has done this to any significant extent in the wake of our "great need" for gasoline?
Don't you think executives would move those facilities, or build new ones, in Mexico to be more "fiscally responsible to the shareholder"?
A lot of people didn't think tech industry jobs would move overseas either in 1999. But, look at what happened there in the name of "streamlining" and "fiscal responsibility" after Y2K.
other sources:
www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6019739/
www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/petroleum/ analysis_publications/oil_market_basics/Refining_text.htm
www.detnews.com/2005/editorial/0508/31/A12-298216.htm
http://www.ericsiegmund.com/fireant/archivesmt/001833.html
...and others I can't find again...
---------------------
As for the SUV issue:
I can guarantee you if the average fuel mileage of SUV driver's vehicles went from 10-17 to 25-30mpg...you'd see a steep drop in gasoline consumption.
Also, these vehicles are exempt from fuel economy standards because their gross weight is in excess of 8,500 lbs can be found here:
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/which_tested.shtml
So...we can give up on the government...they're breaking their own mileage pledge made several years ago.
.
You said, "I can guarantee you if the average fuel mileage of SUV driver's vehicles went from 10-17 to 25-30mpg...you'd see a steep drop in gasoline consumption."
No, you can't guarantee any such thing. In fact, history has proven the opposite is true.
What's happened to fuel efficiency, in general, since the early 70s? I remember the 9, 10, 11 mpg automobiles. But now they get 20, 30 or more. What's happened to overall fuel consumption? It's risen dramatically.
Better gas mileage will not mean less, overall, fuel consumption in the long run. Because it hasn't so far. So your "guarantee" is empty and meaningless.
by jck
hahaha...ok...I didn't figure I'd have to get this rudimentary...but, let's do some math:
If SUV Driver A continues to drive his Suburban getting 14 mpg back and forth to work each day all week at 70 miles roundtrip per day, that means Driver A uses 5 gallons of gas per day and 25 gallons per week.
If SUV driver B switches to using the Ford Escape Hybrid and gets 36mpg back and forth to work each day all week at 70 miles roundtrip per day, that means Driver A uses about 2 gallons of gas per day and 10 gallons per week.
OK...So, Max...tell me...can I not guarantee you 25 gallons per week is more than 10 gallons per week?
I await your answer.
.
Bush wants more refineries to help control prices for gasoline - dated 02-07-2001
http://www.gasandoil.com/goc/news/ntn12757.htm
Build more refineries, Bush says
WEST POING, Va., May 16, 2005 (UPI) -- New oil refineries could be built at closed U.S. military bases to lessen the need to import already refined gasoline, President Bush said Monday.....
Bush urges more refineries, nuclear plants
Thursday, April 28, 2005 Posted: 5:19 PM EDT (2119 GMT)
http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/04/27/bush.energy/
And one more:
by jdclyde
[i]"No one is trying to build new in the states because it's too expensive, too much hassle because of environmental regulation, that the permitting process takes up to 15 YEARS to complete for ONE refinery, and so many people have the "not in my back yard" mentality."[/i]
Ask yourself, why is it the permitting process takes so long? Because enviro wackos have intentionally setup road blocks to hinder the building of the refineries.
Why don't we have more Nuke plants? Same reason. Irrational people have hijacked the best interests of the country.
by jck
And that Clean Air Act Bush signed into law has nothing to do with it?
I worked at a power company who has coal, oil and nuke generators. It affected all the "fossil" units, and the corp lawyers were making sure there were no repercussions on the nuke units either.
Bush must be a tree hugger too. I'm gonna send him a "I love The Oak more than my wife" tie-dye.
You want one too? :)
by jkaras
Wow am I ever in the wrong business!!!!! Does he have any decent looking daughters? As long as their not a hump back I'm game, lol.
That's awesome that you are helping others. Mad respect to you! Yeah I dig the Henley too. ONly time will tell how this situation plays out. I just hope the American public doesnt let this slide.
.
Of course if a person -- one person -- simply "trades" a vehicle that gets 20 mpg for one that gets 40 mpg, and assuming the miles driven remains the same, then of course that person will consume less fuel, half the fuel, even. And yes, you can certainly multiply that by whatever number of vehicles you wish to consider.
But I remember the 70s when these fuel efficiency standards first came to be. They'll be less oil imports, they said. They were wrong. They'll be less gasoline consumption, they said. Again, they were wrong. And they were wrong about "global cooling" as well, by the way.
In the overall scheme of things, looking at the bigger picture, and considering that 20 million barrels of refined products are consumed daily in the USA, if people quit driving their SUVs all-together and started walking, we'd still be refining and consuming 20 million barrels of refined products a day, and the future demands will still continue to rise.
by jdclyde
by oz_media
by oz_media
We can have guns to protect ourselves and our homes too. Most don't need to nor bother to.
It's got nothing to do with hugging a f******g tree either, that's a ridiculous comment. If I don't NEED a gun to shoot trespassers am I then a greenie, lefty, looney by your standards?
I know you lock up your guns and they are for sport, the percentage of Canadians with guns for the same is no different than the US, in fact I believe we have more. Yet nobody boasts about having guns for protection, they'd get sh*t kicked for being such a pu$$y.
We also don't have a problem with 10 guys armed with bats or guns runnign into our houses and looting us. If the same happened in Canada, I would be shocked to see any looting, other than stores of course. Liquor and smokes go a long way in such a situation.
by oz_media
?pening reduces the credibility of your entire post:
"...only to be denied by politically correct zealots who would rather appease the radical environmentalists than take the necessary measures to meet and satisfy the US's growing energy needs"
So your idea is just build more, build bigger, build faster and increase production so you can all choke and die?
Why resort to seekign a solution when you can ignore it and build more?
Nice mindset!
.
So you disagree with me. What else is new?
Choke and die? Speaking of having no credibility....
by jck
The average American household (approx 100M of them) uses 4 gallons of gas per day, which is approximately 20 percent of one barrel of oil.
If there are 10M large fuel-inefficient SUVs on the road, and 50% of those drivers switch to something that gets double the gas mileage and they use that average 4 gallons per day (which God knows, that isn't the case but I'm willing to use a low figure), then they'd save 10M gallons of gasoline per day.
And since 1 barrel of oil is approximately refined into 20 gallons of gasoline, that means (so long as they maintain their normal driving habits) an instant savings per day nationwide of .5M barrels of oil.
If you ask me, that would be a really good start to knock out 25% of our current refining deficit and reduce some dependence on foreign oil.
As for fuel efficiency standards:
I remember in the 80s or 90s, Congress made some kind of bill that required car manufacturers at some point to make vehicles that met a higher fuel efficiency standard sometime in the 21st century. Now, they've broken cars into classifications and given some of them waivers on certain models over a specified GVWR (8500 lbs).
Of course, Congress also mandated several years ago that all broadcasters be digital broadcasting by 2006. Only 3 stations in Tampa Bay so far are digital broadcasting. I don't think the others will meet the deadline. Especially the PBS stations who are funded on donations.
Oh well...nonetheless...my points:
a) If people drove cars to be responsible when it comes to use of fossil fuels rather than as a status symbol, the gasoline requirement in this country would drop significantly and I don't think we would be in such a crunch. That not only means big SUVs, but large trucks, large luxury cars, etc.
b) If people reduced the fuel consumption of the nation enough, oil producers would either shut down or reduce production at their facilities. Otherwise if they keep pushing out 400M gallons of gas a day and say there's only a call for 390M, they're fiscally cutting their own throats. It's in their financial best interests to keep us "on the edge" of a fuel shortage. And if they can find a way to reduce the number of facilities needed to push that gasoline out (as they've done with increasing production through tech advances and facility expansion), they would do that then close a less productive facility down to not only consolidate operations but to increase revenue by decreasing operational expense.
BTW...i've looked into trying to ride the local bus system. For me to take a bus from my house to my office, it would take me more than 2.5 hours to go 18 miles. and I would be an hour late to work.
I'm going to talk the local bus authority about establishing an "express bus" every hour or half- hour with only major stops in the two largest cities in the county so people who commute can use public transportation to get back and forth to work.
I'd be willing to ride a bus, simply because I spend about $5.50 on gas a day driving. I would only have to pay $1 roundtrip at their current price. It'd not only save me money, but also help reduce gas usage.
Anyways...nuff said.
by jck
A lot of the people in New Orleans probably didn't think their neighbors would shoot them, rape them, and break into their businesses and steal televisions and radios when there was 3 feet of water in the street and no electric.
BTW, I'm the lefty liberal nutso here... :p
Sort by Trending