$5 a gallon

[jmichael]

Originally Posted by Devo

And yet, the last time oil prices were this high were under Obummer, who, stopped the Keystone XL for 8 years, and, had the same war on oil, that Poopy Pants, or his advisers have restarted.

Don't bullshit us by saying its an international market if we don't have to buy the energy internationally, from a cartel of producers who set the price by what they pump.

Oil prices are not set by demand, they are set by the producers, hence, why the prices are going up every day, but demand isn't.

Do you think more people are driving today than on Monday?

Same supply, more money because of the war Poopy Pants failed to stop, and by reduced supply Poopy Pants has insist we have.

All while buying Russian oil.

Eye is 100% correct, if you don't believe him do your own research.
We ( USA ) export as much oil and gas as we import, it's the oil companies who do this, the government has no control, it's called free enterprise.
If you want to invest in oil, open a futures account. Oil is a commodity. Sweet Texas Crude is traded on the CME and Brent Crude is traded ICE
learn something http://www.asktraders.com/learn-to-t...e/oil-trading/ and quite making an ass of yourself

[chizzy]

Originally Posted by HDGristle

Devo, eye's got your number here

U think? Maybe but if eyes getting his number is anything like his math, I dont think so

Since when is 1.1 only 1% of 19?

Must be the new left math

[lustylad]

Originally Posted by chizzy

U think? Maybe but if eyes getting his number is anything like his math, I dont think so

Since when is 1.1 only 1% of 19?

Must be the new left math

Eye mistated. The contraction in US oil output (1.1 million bpd) represents slightly over 1% of GLOBAL production (around 100 million bpd).

19 million bpd is the current US consumption rate.

[eyecu2]

think about this, the oil and gas industry has most Americans by the short hairs. Meaning it does impact your monthly expenditures for the average American if gas goes up significantly, or gasoline goes up significantly. Doesn't it seem a bit unfair, that the oil and gas and Auto industry control almost 20% of the average person's income and expenses, when it comes to heating, transportation etc.

If it were up to me, I'd prefer that we have nationalized nuclear plants that support a part of the grid for electric cars, trucks and utilities. Make oil and gas worthless to import, and while that may fuck over a few oil/ gas companies, they've been getting rich of the backs of the global population since Henry Ford put a label on a car. Hell, it would be better than polluting the ground, and air with CO2 & put our country back on top without steeling money from mom s n dad's pocketbooks. In larger metropolis areas they would supplement old grids and make recharging stations much more plentiful.

The only thing a POTUS changes is what open land leases can be explored or things like nuke plants for large government projects like Tennessee valley authority. Also doesn't need to be high pressure steam reactors, there are some cool new technology like thorium salt (not new but safer) or he'll, all this talk about fusion reactors, why not start to build an infrastructure to get some on line when the technology meets up with the ability to transmit.

Sadly, I don't think either would happen because our country can't even agree between parties whether we should fix Bridges or not. I think about what it took to build the Hoover dam, and the interstate - national highway system, and know for certain that we could do it, if both parties were willing. There's just too much dark money and private interest in politics. Can you imagine the oil industry hearing that they were going to be going out of business in the next 20 years? Or at least substantially in a downward spiral? Oil and gas are wasted by burning it, when it's much better to produce other things like ethylene and plastics, and other products instead of just setting it on fire. Hell they've even been talking about electric planes lately. In any event it won't be this administration that does it, nor the next one because these political parties are holding on to old, and I mean ancient ideas of make America great again like it was in the 50s, or crazy way out wacky green ideas for the sake of only the environment. The one thing about committing to a green technology would mean that you would literally make the Middle East and Russia almost worthless for the commodities they own underground. China still has lots of raw earth materials underneath like for making batteries and things but the future is electricity, and every electric company in the local area is building out their grids for charging stations already -go ahead and read about it- or you can look at EVERY auto manufacturer creating 4x the hybrid and electric autos. Worried about having a fast Hemi car? Try a Tesla plaid... The point is, that the car companies know it's coming, the electric companies know it's coming, and the fact that many conservatives think oil and gas will save us or help us, is like holding onto the anchor while treading water.

[HDGristle]

I don't see viable, commercialized fusion, at scale, in my lifetime. Not without a massive leap forward or two

[eyecu2]

Originally Posted by eyecu2

think about this, the oil and gas industry has most Americans by the short hairs. Meaning it does impact your monthly expenditures for the average American if gas goes up significantly, or gasoline goes up significantly. Doesn't it seem a bit unfair, that the oil and gas and Auto industry control almost 20% of the average person's income and expenses, when it comes to heating, transportation etc.

If it were up to me, I'd prefer that we have nationalized nuclear plants that support a part of the grid for electric cars, trucks and utilities. Make oil and gas worthless to import, and while that may fuck over a few oil/ gas companies, they've been getting rich of the backs of the global population since Henry Ford put a label on a car. Hell, it would be better than polluting the ground, and air with CO2 & put our country back on top without steeling money from mom s n dad's pocketbooks. In larger metropolis areas they would supplement old grids and make recharging stations much more plentiful.

The only thing a POTUS changes is what open land leases can be explored or things like nuke plants for large government projects like Tennessee valley authority. Also doesn't need to be high pressure steam reactors, there are some cool new technology like thorium salt (not new but safer) or he'll, all this talk about fusion reactors, why not start to build an infrastructure to get some on line when the technology meets up with the ability to transmit.

Sadly, I don't think either would happen because our country can't even agree between parties whether we should fix Bridges or not. I think about what it took to build the Hoover dam, and the international highway system, and know for certain that we could do it, if both parties were willing. There's just too much dark money and private interest in politics. Can you imagine the oil industry hearing that they were going to be going out of business in the next 20 years? Or at least substantially in a downward spiral? Oil and gas are wasted by burning it, when it's much better to produce other things like ethylene and plastics, and other products instead of just setting it on fire. Hell they've even been talking about electric planes lately. In any event it won't be this administration that does it, nor the next one because these political parties are holding on to old, and I mean ancient ideas of make America great again like it was in the 50s, or crazy way out wacky green ideas for the sake of only the environment. The one thing about committing to a green technology would mean that you would literally make the Middle East and Russia almost worthless for the commodities they own underground. China still has lots of raw earth materials underneath like for making batteries and things but the future is electricity, and every electric company in the local area is building out their grids for charging stations already -go ahead and read about it- or you can look at EVERY auto manufacturer creating 4x the hybrid and electric autos. Worried about having a fast Hemi car? Try a Tesla plaid... The point is, that the car companies know it's coming, the electric companies know it's coming, and the fact that many conservatives think oil and gas will save us or help us, is like holding onto the anchor while treading water.

Originally Posted by chizzy

U think? Maybe but if eyes getting his number is anything like his math, I dont think so

Since when is 1.1 only 1% of 19?

Must be the new left math

Sorry it's 5% of our use...but a 5% reduction doesn't not equate to a 200% increase. That's just not how this works. The whole pipeline hyperbole about where we get oil is a ruse from FOX news where their opinion based "Shows" just don't support the facts.

The real threat to gasoline pricing would be what would happen if OPEC decided to cut production 30%, globally you would see the cost of oil double and that would impact the entire world.

All the more reason to switch to a different consumable versus strictly oil derivatives. We could literally drive those countries who have their only resources that's oil into bankruptcy. I'm not saying I want the oil and gas industry to be worthless, or eliminate those jobs because we'll always need petroleum products for lubricants and specialized uses including jet fuel and other fuels, but it seems that they have always held the US population hostage whether it be the changeover to Summer mix for gasoline, or a refinery breaking down, or all the politics around a pipeline like the keystone. I've mentioned it several times pipelines do not benefit most local consumers, they benefit the oil companies

[eyecu2]

Originally Posted by HDGristle

I don't see viable, commercialized fusion, at scale, in my lifetime. Not without a massive leap forward or two

Yeah I am hopeful as there are new technologies that support it invented weekly. Clearly it's still in its infancy since it just started a year or so ago that we were able to create a fusion reaction that was sustainable to some extent, so who knows how long it will take till that is either commercially ready, or as a test operational reactor? If it's anything like high pressure steam reactors, that took 20 years or so to become commercially applicable but we're seeing a steep learning curve that could result in cutting that down to 25% of the original 20 years. Imagine a fusion reactor that is ready to produce electricity either in a test fashion or some small-scale in the next 5 years?! Ambitious yes but maybe not impossible. I think we'll see it within the next 10 years becoming commercially applicable.

[Salty Again]

Originally Posted by Jacuzzme

Yeah, being openly hostile to the energy sector definitely doesn’t effect energy prices. Sheesh, the fairytales these guys make themselves believe to justify supporting the geriatric moron are amazing. I paid $3.89 yesterday at the local station, today it’s $4.14

Not only gasoline either, natural gas is also through the roof. Our bill for last month was over $600 and the house is newer and we’ll insulated, they usually run $3-400 in cold months. It’s totally ridiculous, considering western Pennsylvania is sitting on an ocean of gas. A few years ago they were practically giving the shit away. I have no idea how anyone making less than 6 figures can afford to raise a family in the age of Biden.

... Mate, I can't stop laughing! ...

How the silly liberal lads try to show that HIGHER FUEL PRICES
have nothing to do with Biden's ending of energy independence.

Our mates Devo, Loretta and LustyLad have tryed to give them
a chance to make proper sense of this... but...

Blimey!. .. If this keeps up - will ridicule set in??

### Salty

[berryberry]

LMAO it’s amusing albeit really sad to see all the usual suspects so delusional to think the President has no impact on energy prices. But that is what libtards do - they toss out misinformation and jump to defend Senile Biden on anything no matter how wrong they are

[lustylad]

Originally Posted by eyecu2

Sorry it's 5% of our use...but a 5% reduction doesn't not equate to a 200% increase.

Actually it does. An economist would say the short-term elasticity of demand for oil is extremely low. That means people are very slow to consume less as the price increases. So a doubling in oil prices might well result in only a 5% cut in our demand. And a 5% supply shrinkage could easily cause prices to double.

Also, you need to look at global supply/demand, not just the US numbers. The bottom line is this - it only takes a slight imbalance between global supply and demand to send the price of oil either plummeting (like it did 2 years ago) or soaring (like it's doing now).

Originally Posted by eyecu2

I've mentioned it several times pipelines do not benefit most local consumers, they benefit the oil companies

That's a dumb statement. Pipelines benefit BOTH. They are the cheapest, most efficient and safest means of transporting oil & gas to every nook & cranny in the US. Without pipelines, all consumers would be paying a lot more for their energy.

[HDGristle]

Originally Posted by Salty Again

... Mate, I can't stop laughing! ...

How the silly liberal lads try to show that HIGHER FUEL PRICES
have nothing to do with Biden's ending of energy independence.

Our mates Devo, Loretta and LustyLad have tryed to give them
a chance to make proper sense of this... but...

Blimey!. .. If this keeps up - will ridicule set in??

### Salty

I posted this elsewhere and no one bit. Posting the link again, followed by AFPM's call for suspension of Russian oil imports. Then, a reminder that the AFPM does not support cutting off global markets.

https://www.afpm.org/newsroom/blog/o...ssia-explained

https://www.afpm.org/newsroom/news/a...roleum-imports

https://www.afpm.org/newsroom/infogr...ners-consumers

The point being, this isn't a switch that just gets flipped. The upswing in Russian oil began under Trump in 2019 even as he pursued his agenda and tar sand oil wasn't flowing through XL.

For all the talk of energy independence, we weren't, depending on how you factor NA oil into U.S. energy policy, we weren't even close. Which is why I'm on the side of energy resilience and see independence as a pipe dream unless/until oil and gas make up a pittance of total energy production. We won't stop burning petrochemicals in my lifetime. We can supplement existing oil and gas in other ways while shifting away from importing for domestic use, but unless there's a massive upswing in infrastructure beyond just XL, that vision of not using foreign oil is literally a pipe dream.

[Loretta77]

Biden certainly isn’t doing anything to help the raising gas prices. I’m sure we can all agree on that. I’m sure cnn or another corrupt news source will spoon feed its cult members some unreasonable explanation and they’ll eat it right up. Anyone who disagrees is a fascist nazi.

[HDGristle]

Originally Posted by Loretta77

Anyone who disagrees is a fascist nazi.

By berry's rules of debate, you just lost

[Loretta77]

That was sarcasm.

[eyecu2]

Originally Posted by lustylad

Actually it does. An economist would say the short-term elasticity of demand for oil is extremely low. That means people are very slow to consume less as the price increases. So a doubling in oil prices might well result in only a 5% cut in our demand. And a 5% supply shrinkage could easily cause prices to double.

Also, you need to look at global supply/demand, not just the US numbers. The bottom line is this - it only takes a slight imbalance between global supply and demand to send the price of oil either plummeting (like it did 2 years ago) or soaring (like it's doing now).




That's a dumb statement. Pipelines benefit BOTH. They are the cheapest, most efficient and safest means of transporting oil & gas to every nook & cranny in the US. Without pipelines, all consumers would be paying a lot more for their energy.

Do you think that a pipeline bus the only method of transport?? The oil is still coming here despite a pipeline. The ruse that it will suddenly change to increase 500-600 mm barrels is not true. The fact is that it still comes here via rail, truck and gathering lines vs a larger pipeline. The elasticity of price relative to demand certainly is not a one-to-one ratio but 5% does not equate to 200%. That's an absurd difference and could be offset by our purchase of oil from 10 other international sellers of gas and oil. The fact of the matter is the keystone Pipeline does it impact gasoline prices, the market does. There's no shortage of oil and gas, only a shortage of those supplying it at a rate of $50 per barrel or less. There's all the oil that you want to buy at $100 a barrel or more out there. This is about price gouging and greed. Again oil and gas companies grabbing the short hairs of the public. Elasticity of prices are not really a good compatible. Sub 2.00 per gallon gas is easy when nobody was buying it, but as we emerged from the pandemic, the avg price of gas was 3.00-3.20. avg. I could agree that elasticity of supply change of -5% equals an increase of 25% in price. But to compare the pandemic low of price of gas below two dollars to current is comparing apples to watermelon.

When demanding increases as it has, is the elasticity that supply has to catch up, and that's what we're experiencing predominantly from those $2 per gallon prices to almost four or above. Only 20 to 25% of that increase is due to any loss of supply domestically.