Drilling does not lower gas prices

[timpage]

Sit on it and spin Whirly....

http://www.businessinsider.com/for-t...-prices-2012-3

[Sexyeccentric1]

Good luck getting any of them to acknowledge facts...remember they are in a bubble and think the high gas prices are the Presidents fault..lol

[CuteOldGuy]

Sit down. You're going to be shocked.

I'm not ready to accept the Business Insider blog conclusions, but I respect the site, and will review it more closely, and compare it with others I trust. If I've been wrong, I will say so.

This site cannot be readily discounted. Timmy, I will even thank you for posting it. I'm so used to being right, that I will want to correct my error quickly, if there has been one. I'll get back to you.

Dammit. It has been months since this site made me have to think.

[I B Hankering]

"[T]he U.S. market is becoming somewhat separate and less determined by global conditions and more domestic production and increased access to Canadian oil would lower U.S. oil prices -- more drilling in the Gulf of Mexico and elsewhere in North America and the Keystone XL pipeline would significantly lower gas prices. . . .

". . .whether Americans pay $115 a barrel for oil from Saudi Arabia and Nigeria or obtained from U.S. sources does make a profound difference for the economy.

"The annual trade deficit on petroleum is about $300 billion. Raising U.S. oil production to its sustainable potential of 10 million barrels a day would cut import costs in half, directly create 1.5 million jobs."

Read more: http://www.upi.com/Top_News/Analysis...#ixzz1puPGHDAu

[TheDaliLama]

Here's something that is lost on you fools. It doesn't matter as much as to what it costs...but domestic drilling produces not only US jobs but it goes into the pockets of people so shop at Walmart, by cars, eat at resturants and see providers. That money stays here.

You BO defenders about oil production do not have a clue. You've been sold that "Big Oil" is evil and harmful. It is not and we've got over 250 years left of it in this country alone.

[CuteOldGuy]

I know the Llama* is right on that one, but I'm still going to investigate the article.

*Notice I didn't call you "Your Assholiness"?

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

I know the Llama* is right on that one, but I'm still going to investigate the article.

*Notice I didn't call you "Your Assholiness"?

Read this article also. It's saying essentially the same thing Dali is saying - plus: http://www.upi.com/Top_News/Analysis...#ixzz1puPGHDAu

[JD Barleycorn]

If drilling does not decrease gas prices then why is Obama trying to sell the fantasy that he has more drilling going on?

[essence]

It's all politics.

It's all about a priori beliefs, and how hard it is to change opinion based on facts.

The Monty Hall game is the classic case of this syndrome.

Nobody wants to change their opinion, whatever the facts.

This forum is proof if ever it is needed of this.

[Seedy]

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

If drilling does not decrease gas prices then why is Obama trying to sell the fantasy that he has more drilling going on?

Because he is a lying dog, that will say and do ANYTHING to re-elect his COMMUNIST ass. Why is it with all the natural gas drilling, the prices have dropped dramatically, oil would absolutley do the same, but the powers that be don't want that. Bring in more fucking windmills, made by GE in FUCKING CHINA... damn, my fucking head is going to explode, freakin politicians, their all a bunch of cocksuckers....

[I B Hankering]

Given increased production of domestic oil and natural gas as well as biofuels in the U.S. — along with increased oil imports from Canada — there’s a possibility North America could become self-sufficient by 2024. John Felmy, chief economist for the oil industry's American Petroleum Institute, says.


There’s also potential for oil shale, which has yet to be developed on an economical basis, but offers a “vast resource,” Felmy says.
Realizing self-sufficiency depends, though, on federal energy policy, he adds. “We have to have the political will to do it.”


Canada — not Saudi Arabia — constitutes the biggest source of imported oil for the United States, he says. The relationship is doubly beneficial because 90 cents of every dollar spent on Canadian oil comes back to the U.S. through trade. The ratio for oil purchased from the Middle East falls to 30 cents.


Yet, President Barack Obama has delayed construction of the full length of a pipeline that would transport oil from Canadian oil sands to U.S. refineries — a decision Felmy decries as a mistake.


While the Barack Obama administration might want to claim credit for promoting increased domestic energy production, the industry has expanded production despite federal policies, not because of them, Felmy says. And increasing federal regulations and their associated costs threaten continued increases in production, he says.

http://thebusinesstimes.com/economis...f-sufficiency/

[i'va biggen]

for those of you who don't watch the news,but only relay blogs and threads.
Usage (demand) is down in the USA we have a surplus which being sold on the world market.Refineries are shut down,because the demand is low.

[joe bloe]

Originally Posted by TheDaliLama

Here's something that is lost on you fools. It doesn't matter as much as to what it costs...but domestic drilling produces not only US jobs but it goes into the pockets of people so shop at Walmart, by cars, eat at resturants and see providers. That money stays here.

You BO defenders about oil production do not have a clue. You've been sold that "Big Oil" is evil and harmful. It is not and we've got over 250 years left of it in this country alone.

Liberals love to pretend that the argument over increasing domestic oil production is only about whether or not it will lower gas prices. As you mentioned, increasing domestic oil production would create lots of high paying jobs. In addition, it would generate huge amounts of tax revenue to the government to help lower the deficit. Increasing domestic oil production would make America wealthier; that's a good thing.

America has enormous energy resources, oil, oil shale, natural gas and we have more coal than anywhere else on earth.

The real reason that the left is against using our energy resources is that the left's primary motivation is aquiring power for the federal government and decreasing our personal freedom. Access to affordable gas means Americans have the freedom of mobility. We can live where we want, work where we want and travel about freely. This makes us more difficult to control.

The left's long term goal is to force almost everyone to use public transportation by discouraging ownership of personal vehicles. The left's vision of utopia is a country where everyone is dependant on the government for every necessity. The left wants public transportation, public housing, public healthcare, public schools, public retirement plans (Social Security), food stamps etc, etc.

The government will eventually provide everything you need; all you will have to do is obey them.

[Whirlaway]

This is a BI report on a study conducted by that esteemed petroleum industry spokesgroup - The Associated Press !




The Associated Press has no standing to deliver an honest and unbiased analysis of energy issues. Afterall they have long supported the "Green House Gas" lie, the "ice bergs are melting" lie, the Big Oil is Bad lie, and the manmade warming lie....

The AP is a cooperative owned by the nation's major media outlets ! They are NOT independent....we know the MSM is in the pocket of the lefties that want socialism to regin. The AP basically ignored Obama's past; while posting more than 20 reporters to vet Sara Palin's autobiography ! How many AP reporters were assinged to vet Obama's 2 books? Answer: None !

This storyline put out by AP is a counterpunch to the petroleum industry's plan to lower prices. A plan that includes more drilling, less regulation, and lower taxation. It is more kool-aid for the Obamazombies.

In summary, The AP 'study" is the old adage. Statistics don't lie, but liars use statistics.

[oglfp12]

Originally Posted by Whirlaway

This is a BI report on a study conducted by that esteemed petroleum industry spokesgroup - The Associated Press !




The Associated Press has no standing to deliver an honest and unbiased analysis of energy issues.

Interesting response, Whirlaway. How did the AP get so many folks to buy in to their lie? From the article:
" 'Drill, baby, drill has nothing to do with it,' said Judith Dwarkin, chief energy economist at ITG investment research. Two other energy economists said the same thing and experts in the field have been making that observation for decades."

"The AP analysis used Energy Department figures for regular unleaded gas prices adjusted for inflation to 2012 dollars, oil production and oil demand. The figures go back to January 1976, the earliest the Energy Department keeps figures on unleaded gas prices. Phil Hanser, an economist and statistician at the energy consulting firm The Brattle Group; University of South Carolina statistics professor John Grego; New York University statistics professor Edward Melnick and David Peterson, a retired Duke University statistics professor, looked at the analysis, ran their own calculations, including several complicated formulas, and came to the same conclusion."

On the other hand, the article that I B Hankering referenced, http://thebusinesstimes.com/economis...f-sufficiency/ , is from a speech and interview with John Felmy, chief economist for the American Petroleum Institute. And what is the American Petroleum Institute? It is the largest trade association for the oil and gas industry, claiming to represent around 400 corporations engaged in oil production, extraction, distribution, and other aspects of the industry. It is based in Washington, D.C. and has offices in 27 state capitals. The American Petroleum Institute is also a lobby, spending around $7.3 million on lobbying each year in 2010 and 2009, and spending $6.3 million in 2011. (Source: American Petroleum Institute, Annual Lobbying Expenditures, Open Secrets, accessed March 6, 2012.)

Who should I believe? A data analysis that was peer reviewed and verified, or a lobbyist?