More on gas prices...

[big_al]

oil fields in the US are declining because fields in the US are not as profitable as fields in far away lands where they get so much bonuses, tax breaks, and free support in other forms plus the cheap labor in said countries. just like Iraq was used to tie up production on the 2nd largest oil reserves in the world to make sure production increases would be less possible, foreign drilling is easier to do and easier to delay shipments to the market. Saudi Arabia having less production could mean a lot of things. 99% of the time, the US asks SA to either increase or decrease. Or it could be a result of maint. you have to look at yearly output not a few months

 

[big_al]

I dont know whether you support bush, but I do see this supporting of corporate profiteering. I agree about finding altneratives, but for the most part, too much money is tied up with oil companies, they have too much political power in both parties, anything that starts now will take at least a decade to be enacted.

I have no doubt peak oil will happen, but this sudden scare that caused prices to increase past katrina levels is suspect to the highest degree

 

[CrimsonEclipse]

Blame is worthless.

If I gave you undeniable proof of who's fault this crisis tomorrow, what would
you do? NOTHING!!

SO, instead of blame, how 'bout making solutions?

No one seems to mention the effect it will have on the Aviation industry.

strange

CE

 

[414Flyer]

oil fields in the US are declining because fields in the US are not as profitable as fields in far away lands where they get so much bonuses, tax breaks, and free support in other forms plus the cheap labor in said countries. just like Iraq was used to tie up production on the 2nd largest oil reserves in the world to make sure production increases would be less possible, foreign drilling is easier to do and easier to delay shipments to the market. Saudi Arabia having less production could mean a lot of things. 99% of the time, the US asks SA to either increase or decrease. Or it could be a result of maint. you have to look at yearly output not a few months

NO, Its because there is less oil to extract. Again, you are coming up with some economic conspiracy, when its just science (physics and geology). Fields produce more at first, then production decreases with time. Its not because oil is being hoarded or wells turned off. Most of the US has been seismically surveyed. An area of production does not last forever.

A lot of oil is not owned by large oil companies, its by small companies or individual land owners with mineral rights. ANYONE with oil production they can sell would love to sell as much as possible right now. it will probably drop some again, but I dont see it getting much below 50 ever again.

Actually I think selling short oil stocks for the short term would make some money. Unless military action with Iran breaks out, then look for spikes over 100/bbl.

 

[jetflyer]

Here are a lot of Peak oil references for you to read. The U.S. is not in decline for the reasons you say.

These are old and haven't been updated in a while but they're a good start for learning about this problem:

1)From Financial Sense Newshour with Jim Puplava:
http://www.netcastdaily.com/fsnewshour.htm
He has interviews with Peak Oil experts weekly. You can listen to them from his site. He is interviewing Matthew Simmons Saturday.

2) Roscoe Bartlett, Republican Congressman from Maryland just gave a new speech to Congress, broadcast on C-SPAN on July 19, 2005 about COMING OIL SUPPLY PROBLEMS(PEAK OIL).
Here is the transcript.:
a)http://www.xecu.net/thorn/PO/PO-July19-2005.html

Feb. 8th, 2006 Bartlett gave this speech to congress. This is a Wonderful explanation and INTRODUCTION from a Congressman and talks in depth about the Department of Energy Study:
b)http://www.peakoil.net/Publications/PeakOilSpclOrder%2315TextCharts020806Low.pdf

Roscoe Bartlett met with Bush about Peak Oil on June 29th. So Bush, no doubt knows about the coming oil supply problems. Here is the press release:
c)http://www.bartlett.house.gov/latestnews.asp?ARTICLE2900=7308


3) Here is a recent Associated press article:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2005-05-28-oil-shortage_x.htm?csp=34

4) A great site for PEAK OIL introduction. READ FIRST:
www.yubanet.com/cgi-bin/artman/exec/view.cgi/8/15426

5) Article about Peak Oil coming around 2007-2008:
http://www.globalpublicmedia.com/articles/196

6) http://www.financialsense.com/energy/main.htm
Read as many of the articles here especially the Peak Oil ones
a) Peak Oil and what it means to you: http://www.financialsense.com/fsu/editorials/petch/2005/0703.html
b) Crude Awakening: http://www.financialsense.com/fsu/editorials/saxena/2005/0617.html

7) An investment firm that specializes in ENERGY, 321Energy, has daily news articles on PEAK OIL and OIL in general here: http://www.321energy.com/archives.php?c=oil
Canadian Economist talks about imminent Peak oil Problem: http://www.321energy.com/editorials/sprott/sprott070505.html

8) A GREAT BLOG with news updates daily all about PEAK OIL: http://www.theoildrum.com/
ANOTHER GREAT INTRODUCTION and where you can read about flat year over year production of the world oil:
http://www.theoildrum.com/storyonly/2006/3/1/3402/63420


9) Great Chat Group to look at Current Events, Peak Oil Discussion, Energy Technology, and Economics of Peak Oil: http://www.peakoil.com/forums.html

10) Iraq and the Problem of Peak Oil: http://globalresearch.ca/articles/ENG408A.html

11) The Association for the Study of Peak Oil and Gas (ASPO) has their website at: www.peakoil.net They have a new newsletter every month I believe, which talks about the newest developments on peak oil. They have done analysis on Peak Oil and predict 2010 for Peak Oil.

12) Here is the Oil Depletion Analysis Center (ODAC) site. They also have done analysis on Peak Oil and predict 2007-2008 for Peak Oil.They have new articles about peak oil all the time:
http://www.odac-info.org/

13) READ THIS from the U.S. Govt. Department of Energy. It is a must read. It's long, but it is worth reading. It is a great introduction as well to the problem and why it won't be easy to overcome.
http://www.netl.doe.gov/publications/others/pdf/Oil_Peaking_NETL.pdf

14) The Ultimate Doomer Site-He basically thinks we're screwed no matter what: www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net -- Everything UNDERLINED is a link and you can explore almost all his sources. I recommend looking at as many links as you have time for.

15) http://www.energybulletin.net/
Daily articles on peak oil and ALTERNATIVES to Oil. Good site to learn about everything being done to help.

I think the U.S. will liquefy coal, use the Oil-shale of the Rocky Mountains, and adjust using every alternative imaginable. I think we'll have a very bad recession before things get better. How long will it take? I don't know, but the DOE study says decades.

 

[CrimsonEclipse]

Oh, and buying a fuel efficient vehicle is not necessarily cost effective.
Unless you are already due for a new vehicle AND the purchase will cut
your consumption a MINIMUM of 30%-50% you're likely to lose money on
the deal. Not to mention that Fuel efficient vehicles are now at a price
PREMIUM!

So when is the best time to buy a hybrid or another 40mpg vehicle?
2 years ago.

Enjoy the ride.

(wish I kept my Metro)

CE

 

[kingsize]

1. We are WAY behind the power curve on converting to an alternative form of energy. It's almost comedic how it's suddenly in the press and at the forefront of the layman's concerns, when the thinkers out there have known for DECADES that this "energy crisis" would one day show its ugly head. I blame dumbass politicians that look out for themselves rather than true national interests and I blame (to a lesser extent) big oil...but hey, what capitalist industry isn't trying to max out its profits??? That's their JOB! It's up to government to keep them in line, and facilitate the advancement of technology. If they had done that we all would already be driving cars standard equipped with flux capacitors.

2. How much do high gas prices really hurt us? It sucks right? $3 a gallon is horse ********************, but guess what they're paying in Europe? WAY more. I lived in Europe where the military provided us gasoline coupons so we wouldn't have to pay European prices. With coupons, gas was still about $2.50 a gallon, whereas the locals were paying $5/gallon (way more in some places like London where everything is absurdly overpriced). And guess what? They've been paying $4-5 a gallon for years. That's why they all drive girly little cars and scooters, and why they take public tranportation when they leave town. It's why they place way more emphasis on recycling (it was illegal where I lived to put stuff in the garbage that should go in the recycle bins).

3. Americans are especially disgustingly abusive with energy consumption. I'm a perfect example. My vehicle gets 12 miles per gallon, and that's when I'm PARKED!!

4. How will all this stuff affect the airline industry? higher priced gas means higher priced tickets. It means people budgeting more out of their income for driving, which means less disposal income available for buying those higher-priced airline tickets, which means fewer seats on the airlines being filled, which means fewer flights run, fewer aircraft being used, fewer pilots needed, shorter skirts on the flight attendants, etc... you get the idea. At least that's how my unknowledgeable brain sees it. You guys flying the airlines probably have better insight and hear more talk about how it will affect things. As long as SWA keeps serving up peanuts I'll be good. They are still serving peanuts aren't they?

5. How will this affect what we drive? I don't know, but I'm just damn glad government FINALLY is showing some real interest in this problem. Now they just need to put their policies where their mouths are and put remedies on the fast track. I want to buy a new vehicle, but I'm not going to for a matter of years, during which time I hope we see the majority of production vehicles fueled by jello or leftover meatloaf. In the meantime I'll look into trading in my gas guzzler for a Vespa sccoter or a fruity Kia or something else equally economical and feminine looking.

6. Start walking places. It's okay. Seriously. I'm sick of seeing tubbies walking all over the place. Fat Chicks. Oversized cars. Even small cars with fat chicks in them. It's kind of sickening really (after living overseas) how excessive we are. Luckily my city has some girls who take care of themselves, otherwise I'd be "going heavy" sooner than I thought I would.

 

[414Flyer]

Well domestic decline is in part to major producing fields just dont produce as much as they used to. Production inevitable declines as natural pressure disappears and then secondary means of recovery have to be utilized.

yes, there will have to be major changes made, especially in conservation, which is something I think too many Americans are alien to the idea of. Instead of educating people as to what can be done and as to why oil and gas is going to be expensive around the world for the future, both want to play politics and "investigate" why people cant get their god given right to gas for 1 dollar a gallon, and give lip service about it.

 

[414Flyer]

Oh, and buying a fuel efficient vehicle is not necessarily cost effective.
Unless you are already due for a new vehicle AND the purchase will cut
your consumption a MINIMUM of 30%-50% you're likely to lose money on
the deal. Not to mention that Fuel efficient vehicles are now at a price
PREMIUM!

So when is the best time to buy a hybrid or another 40mpg vehicle?
2 years ago.

CE

No one has to buy a new vehicle to get a fuel efficent one. People that buy hybrids are doing it more for emotional reasons that really cutting back on resource consumption.

 

[jetflyer]

414, Crimson, Kingsize, and to some extent Big_al

I am somewhat encouraged by our conversation. 6 months ago I'd be laughed out of the room for talking about what is coming. I was called a chicken little, etc.

I think we needed more chicken littles 10 years ago to really help, but atleast serious conversation is finally starting to go on about this.

Hopefully someone will educate Chucky Schumer from NY. Not just him but the rest of the morons that haven't figured it out yet in the U.S. government.

Jet

 

[jetflyer]

If you guys haven't read it you should read what the oildrum people are sending to our politicians:
http://www.theoildrum.com/story/2006/4/26/121441/891#more

They're sick of the 100 senators and 400+ Retarded house reps that we have and their total lack of knowledge of such a serious issue.

Our leaders are even blaming the oil companies and saying it is just pure greed. We're going to get nowhere having such morons leading us.

Jet

 

[414Flyer]

Yeah but the problem with that article, is that it is logical, contains reality, and does not speak in emotional cliches that deal with conspiracies.

Politicians do not want to deal with either, do not want to tell people to make changes in their lives, and would rather make nice political sound bites that they can use in re-election commericials. But hey, its easier to to that and let people get back to reading celeb gossip magazines to know more about Paris Hilton, than it is to tell people to pick up a book and learn about topics like oil production and economics.

Instead, they will continue to make vague accusations of price gouging so they can get on tv and act like they care, even though investigations do not find such gouging. And make allegations of unfair profits, even though oil industry profit margins are lower than many other industries.

 

[jetflyer]

414,

Unfortunately you make me laugh, and I agree with you.

The Dems like Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi are so clueless. They're just going on and on about their price gouging mumbo jumbo and wanting an investigation into the oil companies profits, etc. to make themselves look like a hero.

I'm afraid that you're right and that they don't even care what the truth is. They just want to link Bush to the oil companies and bring the Republicans down in the mid-term elections.

I hope America continues enjoying their "IN TOUCH" magazines in the meantime, while everyone remains clueless.

Jet

 

[CrimsonEclipse]

shorter skirts on the flight attendants

WOOHOO!!>...wait a second, you mean ALL flight attendants? nevermind.

Oh, there's an election coming up. I have a feeling Mickey Mouse will be popular


CE

 

[LarryinTN]

While this might be true, I can choose tap water (free) over a $1.50 Coke because buying a soft drink is optional.

So because people have to buy gasoline, oil companies should be denied the same oppertunity for profits as other businesses? Is that what you are saying?

Wouldn't it be better if companies which provide essential services earned higher than average profits so as to attract additional capital investment into those industries and producing more of the essential products?

The compairson with Coca-Cola was just to show that the size of the oil company's profits is due to the size of the oil companies, not some unusually high profit margin on their products. They make more money than other companies because they are bigger than all of the other companies. Their profit margins are actually rather low.

 

[LarryinTN]

Fuel taxes are based on a set amount per gallon--not a percentage of the sales price

No, quite a few states do charge a percentage on gasoline.

 

[flyer172r]

So because people have to buy gasoline, oil companies should be denied the same oppertunity for profits as other businesses? Is that what you are saying?

Wouldn't it be better if companies which provide essential services earned higher than average profits so as to attract additional capital investment into those industries and producing more of the essential products?

The compairson with Coca-Cola was just to show that the size of the oil company's profits is due to the size of the oil companies, not some unusually high profit margin on their products. They make more money than other companies because they are bigger than all of the other companies. Their profit margins are actually rather low.

If oil companies were re-investing their profits into further oil exploration, then yeah, that'd be great. But since they're not, I think people have at least some right to be pissed.

 

[LarryinTN]

Oh, and buying a fuel efficient vehicle is not necessarily cost effective. Unless you are already due for a new vehicle AND the purchase will cut your consumption a MINIMUM of 30%-50% you're likely to lose money on the deal.

That assumes that you'll buy new. If someone drives a lot of miles and wants to move to a more efficient car they can sell their gas guzzler and buy a more efficient used car for about the same price as what they get on the sale. i.e. Sell an SUV for $10,000 and buy a $10,000 small car, etc.

Looking at the Carmax web site for an example I find an '03 Blazer with 47,000 miles and a '04 Cavalier with 18,000 miles, both listed at $12,000. By selling the Blazer, and buying the Cavalier, you not only improve your gas mileage but you get a newer car with quite a bit fewer miles on it.

 

[LarryinTN]

If oil companies were re-investing their profits into further oil exploration, then yeah, that'd be great. But since they're not, I think people have at least some right to be pissed.

They are reinvesting.

Up until last summer's energy bill, you couldn't build a refinnery in the US. Too many bueracratic hurdles, environmental studies and public opposition. Now, for the first time in two decades, there are finally plans underway to build new US refineries.

Even today the oil companies are prohibited from doing new exploration in Alaska and off the coast of Florida, the two most promising sites for new domestic oil production.

 

[jetflyer]

Flyer,

Good point. They're NOT re-investing very much in future oil exploration. Sorry to contradict you LJ-ABX but I also heard they were not going to build another refinery in the U.S. and that they were going to allow others to build them overseas and ship in the finished products.

Granted LJ, you're right they need to be able to drill in those places. Soon we'll be begging them to go into Alaska and off both coasts, but should they just give up looking elsewhere till then?

Here is a short summary of the 2005 New Oil discoveries:
http://www.theoildrum.com/story/2006/2/28/21235/1491

The producers found less new oil that was potentially producable in 2004 and 2005 than any year since WWII. That's right.
Some say this is because they've gotten all the oil they're gonna get because they're so good at finding it now with seismic technologies, etc. and there's nothing else to find. They all had incentives to keep looking and they didn't find anything............ This is troublesome.

1/3 of the new discoveries were found through deep water exploration.

Lukoil(Russian company) found the largest find with 600 million barrels which is enough to power the world for a grand total of 7 days. Woohoo.

No oil company found as much oil as they sold last year. Exxon found enough natural gas in Qatar to be the equivavlent of the oil they sold.

We NEED these oil companies to invest those profits into alternatives and stop stock-buybacks etc. It's almost like they're content to just let their share price go up and sit back and watch the world crumble from an energy crisis.

On CNBC yesterday one analyst had a good idea:
He would tax heavily the profits of the oil company that were not reinvested into alternatives or for energy exploration.

I hate taxes but that sounded like a good idea since we NEED THEM TO KEEP LOOKING or start trying to get oil from coal or shale or start planting corn!!

So if they reinvested those profits for new energy sources they wouldn't be taxed extra. If they decided to do a stock buy-back that money would be taxed first. Taxes sometimes can do good things and encourage things we need to encourage. Sound like a good idea? To me, kinda...

Jet