posted on April 1, 2004 11:27:12 AM new
We should have taken all the money we spent on Iraq and put it into a Manhattan type project for an indepenent fuel source. Instead we have an American president begging OPEC to cut us a break. MAkes me sick. Gotta get rid of this loser come November.
Bush Talks to Most OPEC Nations About Oil-
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Bush has spoken to most of the leaders of OPEC nations about global crude oil supplies and rising prices, U.S. Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham said on Thursday.
"I know that he has had conversations with ... most of the leaders of OPEC," Abraham told a House Energy and Commerce Committee hearing. He declined to respond to a lawmaker's question about whether Bush had specifically spoken to Saudi Arabia, the cartel's largest member, which led a push this week to cut OPEC production by 1 million barrels per day in April.
The Bush administration had asked OPEC to delay the cut, citing record-high U.S. retail gasoline prices.
posted on April 1, 2004 01:26:12 PM new
[townhall.com]
Group Finds Kerry Rhetoric on Rising Gas Prices 'Laughable'
(CNSNews.com) -
Democrat John Kerry's attack on President Bush for the nation's dependence on foreign oil in the midst of rising gas prices raised the ire of a public policy group that says, "Kerry's rhetoric would be laughable if the consequences of its implementation weren't so serious."
"Senator Kerry needs a reality check," said NCPA Senior Fellow H. Sterling Burnett. "The strategic petroleum reserve is supposed to be set aside for use in case of war or other national emergency, not to stave off temporary gas hikes. I guess he forgot about the war on terror."
NCPA also admonished Kerry for claiming the U.S. could eliminate its dependence on foreign oil in 10 years by investing in new renewable technologies and increasing automobile CAFE' standards.
"Every credible study shows that proposed technologies and the necessary infrastructure to replace the internal combustion engine are decades away at best," said Burnett.
"Increasing CAFE' standards simple makes it cheaper to drive, thus it will not reduce our reliance on OPEC. It would instead result in thousands of otherwise avoidable deaths and tens of thousands of needless injuries."
Burnett said Kerry has no room to talk about America's dependence on foreign oil, since the Democrat has repeatedly opposed efforts to increase domestic production.
"We will only become more dependent upon foreign supplies of oil in the future under the Kerry plan," Burnett said.
---------
Let's see....kerry opposed drilling on our own soil....opposed the windmill farms in his own backyard.....
hey...maybe he just might recommend another $.50 per gallon gasoline increase to reduce consumption.
posted on April 1, 2004 01:31:22 PM new
Both Bush and Kerry should be talking to US automakers to increase fuel economy in cars and trucks and working toward more gas/electric hybrid vehicles.
This way we do not have to deal with these idiotic countries in the Middle East.
Impeach Bush
Marriage is a Human Right not a Heterosexual Privledge.
Bigotry and hate will not be tolerated.
But any president's power to prevent a crisis or control oil prices is limited, he said. The world's biggest producer --- Saudi Arabia --- is not only the dominant force in OPEC, but also the only major oil producer with the capacity to rapidly ratchet up production.
High production kept prices low in the 1990s and helped spur the U.S. economic boom. But in late 1999 the Saudis began cutting back and prices rose. But for a few months, that policy has continued. And other world economies, notably China's, have grown, kicking demand into higher gear.
"The bottom line is that we have been at the mercy of the Saudis for decades, and we continue to be at their mercy," Hakes said. "A president could elect to use his influence on OPEC. Historically, presidents have been reluctant to do that. And doing it could even be counterproductive."
posted on April 1, 2004 01:56:32 PM new
Possible Domestic production doesn't amount to a hill of beans compared to our energy needs. That's why it is so stupid to debase the Alaskan wild life refuge for a little bit of oil that will do nothing but make a few entities a lot of money.
Bush has to go begging hat in hand to OPEC to bail his stupid a$$ out.
posted on April 1, 2004 02:05:09 PM new
He wasn't "begging" for anything.
The US needs oil....kerry has no workable suggestions that will help during the next 10 years. Those are the FACTS. Presidents have no control over what OPEC does....as our history has proven.
posted on April 1, 2004 04:44:44 PM new
Perhaps the nation needs to do what California is doing and stop looking at it as a political situation and start looking into the possibility that it is in reality - corporate greed. California is launching an FTC investigation since they have found no logical justification for the rising prices.
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
If it's really "common" sense, why do so few people actually have it?
posted on April 2, 2004 09:18:26 AM new
They can launch all the investigations they want, 46% of the price for a gallon of gasoline is from the crude oil costs, which OPEC controls.
The cost of oil is ultimately irrelevant. The fact that we are totally dependent on foreign supplies and always will be as long as we are petroleum based is a political question.
posted on April 6, 2004 04:44:13 PM new
I just returned from a round trip from Tx to West Point, KY. Not surprisingly the highest gas prices I encountered were in Clinton's home state. What do you make of that?
----------------------
Linda, I wanted to come by & say hello but didn't know where to find you.
'We have dispatched Dr. David Kay...to search for the bio-warfare agents we believe hidden in Senator Kerry's forehead. If Senator Kerry has used botox as part of a wrinkle enrichment program, he is in violation of UN Resolution 752. Upon receiving Dr. Kay's report, the weapons of mass destruction that Senator Kerry so adamantly insists do not exist...may well be above his very nose.'" --Dick Cheney when asked whether John Kerry has had Botox treaments
posted on April 6, 2004 05:06:01 PM new
::They can launch all the investigations they want, 46% of the price for a gallon of gasoline is from the crude oil costs, which OPEC controls. ::
Do you make this up as you go? According to that stat - gas should be $1.14 a gallon right now.
Crude oil is at $29 a barrel today, in fact it has dropped $2 a barrel over the past month as gas prices have steadily risen.
Here is a break down from last year of the cost of a single gallon of gas in California when BTW - crude oil prices were the same as they are now according to Petroluem Marketing Monthly
As of May 1, for a gallon of gas at $1.87.
Refining Costs: 75 cents, including 5 to 8 cents for oxygenate clean air additive.
Crude Oil Cost: 61 cents.
Federal Excise Tax: 18 cents.
State Excise Tax; 18 cents.
State/local taxes: 14 cents
Gas station profit: 1 cent.
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
If it's really "common" sense, why do so few people actually have it?
posted on April 6, 2004 05:48:37 PM new
bear - When clinton was still President the state signs at the boarder between MO and AR said:
[on top] - "Welcome to Arkansas";
[in the middle] - "Arkansas - The Natural State";
[and on the bottom] - "Home of President Bill Clinton"
The bottom section was full of bullet holes and spray paint covered his name. So I guess there were/are some here who didn't like him, including our group of CA transplants.
My little town sits right in between Lake Norfork and Bull Shoals Lake. Next time your headed this way....let me know. Maybe you and your wife could join my friends and I for a pontoon boat ride out on either lake. Both are beautiful and a lovely way to spend the day.
Plus another site mentioned that CA pays higher gas prices because of MTBE [along with NY and Conn.] It says: "They must now rely on gasoline containing Mid-West produced ethanol - which must be delivered via rail, truck or barge - not pipeline.
I'll post the link....lists all the reason that the price of gas increases.
----
Gasoline Price Volatility in 2004 - What's Going On?
posted on April 6, 2004 08:18:44 PM new
Linda. I saw the (I guess new) sign outside Hope, AR.
Next time we head that way. I'll let you know.
'We have dispatched Dr. David Kay...to search for the bio-warfare agents we believe hidden in Senator Kerry's forehead. If Senator Kerry has used botox as part of a wrinkle enrichment program, he is in violation of UN Resolution 752. Upon receiving Dr. Kay's report, the weapons of mass destruction that Senator Kerry so adamantly insists do not exist...may well be above his very nose.'" --Dick Cheney when asked whether John Kerry has had Botox treaments
posted on April 6, 2004 09:10:58 PM newDo you make this up as you go?
Not at all. Pay attention your own figures.
Subtract out the taxes, which are not market driven factors, and crude makes up almost half the cost. And your figures are for CA, of which you're looking at crude being at 1/3 the cost. But it also make a difference where the "crude" is priced at-- the well head or at delivery to the refinery, it also makes a difference where the crude came from in determining the cost. Geography makes a difference where you source the crude.
The 46% was given as a national average for the cost mix of crude.
As usual you don't know squat about oil markets fenix. Stick to trinkets on eBay.
Gas prices will not come down immediately as crude drops in price. There is a lag as the more expensive crude moves through the system.
posted on April 6, 2004 10:05:19 PM new
Which version of math did you take where .61 is half of 1.87? I know southerners may be a bit notoriiously backwards but according to my calculator it is 32.6%
I may not have a complete understanding but at I do know how to do reseach and even give supporting numbers and sources rather than pulling numbers out of thin air. I think it is also safe to safe I have a better grip on math.
Please give supporting data for your 46%
Using todays figures from AAA....
Crude is $29 a barrel,
At 55 gallons per barrel, crude price is 52.7 cents a gallon.
National average price of gas - $1.77
Crude price to gas price = 29.77%
By all means, please feel free to dispute but this time can we get a source for your numbers.
( BTW - even if you use the most expenise cost per barrel of crude of $33 a couple months ago you are still at .60 or 33.89% )
Maybe the reason you can't make a living on ebay is you inability to correctly compute profit margins.
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
If it's really "common" sense, why do so few people actually have it?
Crude Oil - the monthly average of the composite refiner acquisition cost, which is the average price of crude oil purchased by refiners
Refining Costs & Profits - the difference between the monthly average of the spot price of gasoline or diesel fuel (used as a proxy for the value of gasoline or diesel fuel as it exits the refinery) and the average price of crude oil purchased by refiners (the crude oil component).
Distribution & Marketing Costs & Profits - the difference between the average retail price of gasoline or diesel fuel as computed from EIA's weekly survey and the sum of the other 3 components
Taxes - a monthly national average of federal and state taxes applied to gasoline or diesel fuel
It should be noted that the second and third components can vary widely, depending on the time when the components are being calculated. Since there is typically a lag between when the spot price changes to when the retail price changes, the refining costs & profits component and the distribution & marketing costs & profits component can vary from month to month. For example, as prices increase on the spot market, often the retail prices take time to adjust. Thus, at this point in the cycle, the refining costs & profits component (assuming no corresponding increase in crude oil prices) would be relatively large while the distribution & marketing costs & profits component would be relatively small. However, later on, as retail prices "catch-up" with the previous spot price increases, the distribution & marketing costs & profits component would increase while the refining costs & profits component would decrease.
******
Censorship, like charity, should begin at home; but unlike charity, it should end there --Clare Booth Luce
[ edited by bunnicula on Apr 6, 2004 10:54 PM ]
[ edited by bunnicula on Apr 6, 2004 10:54 PM ]
posted on April 6, 2004 11:12:48 PM new
Linda- I can say that Southerners are notoriously a bit backwards... I am not a native Californian, I come from a long line of southern breeding and still sound like Scarlet revisited when I go on a rampage
Bunni - that could be however if so, he is using incorrect data to support his hypothesis. He blames OPEC for rising gas prices. The crude figures used in those stats are not OPECS figures. They are an almagamation of costs.
If they reflected pure per barrel costs then oil companies need to start renogiating costs since those number would reflect a cost of 41.74 per barrel, when the current price is $29.00
Coincidentally as I am typing this my news station is saying that gases prices will be rising again very soon and more consumer watchdog organizations are launching investigations due to a lack of logical explinations for the increases. I'm not quite sure why reamond thinks this is such a fr fetched theory... it has been proven that the California Energy Crisis two years ago was a manufacturered event to spike costs - why should oil companies be any different?
If you want to get into more conspiracy theories.... Detroit is now planning on introducing a record number of hybreds this season (I just caught that one at the end of the broadcast )
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
If it's really "common" sense, why do so few people actually have it?
posted on April 7, 2004 05:54:33 AM new
Unless something has changed, a barrel of oil is forty gallons, not 55 gallons.
A gallon of gasoline (in Texas) costs less than a gallon of milk, so it's still a great buy. Remember, also, that forty gallons of oil do not convert to forty gallons of gasoline.
High sulpher crude, while costing less, can cost more to refine and add to overall costs. It's complex issue and I doubt that it can be resolved on this board. Even the oil companies have a difficult time addressing costs.
posted on April 7, 2004 08:23:30 AM new
Fenix- you're wrong again as Bunni was nice enough to show. You're an example of people who know how to find information, but really don't know what it means. this presents a tangent with credibility.
Here is a simple math and economic primer -- I'll type slowly for Fenix and 12.
No matter what evil, and/or environmental, and/or corporate greed factors were involved in gas prices rising, OPEC cut supplies when crude oil prices were at historical highs. That, without any equivocation, will add to the price of a gallon of gas to the extent that crude is priced into a gallon of gas.
THE PRICE OF CRUDE OIL HAS THE MOST IMPACT ON MARKET PETROLEUM DISTILLATES. It represents the largest share of the cost of the distillate.
Where I learned my math and economics is irrelevant, but it is apparent that I learned them much better than Fenix.
edited for a needed second math lesson for Fenix--- 1/3 equals .33, which is the rounded figure I used to represent your .31 CA figures. For your further edification, there is a two one-hundredths difference between our figures, which is irrelevant to the argument.
posted on April 7, 2004 08:52:17 AM new
Thank you for the clarification on the gallons per barrel. My assumption was based on the proverbial 55 gallon drum but since I was not positive I searched for info and found nothing that contridicted that information. I was wrong, I can admit that.
But...
[i]To use Fenix's math:
At the end of March the cost of a barrel of crude oil was $38.18.
At 42 gallons per barrel, crude price is 90.9 cents a gallon.
The national average cost of gasoline is $1.77
Crude price to gas price = 51% [/i]
Not really Bunni
According to my math - 42 gallon at $29 =69 cents a gallon (according to your calculations the price per barrel would be$38)
National average of $1.77
Crude price to gas price - 39%
Reamond...
No matter what evil, and/or environmental, and/or corporate greed factors were involved in gas prices rising, OPEC cut supplies when crude oil prices were at historical highs. That, without any equivocation, will add to the price of a gallon of gas to the extent that crude is priced into a gallon of gas.
Come on - we already discussed this one. This is a media created crisis. Why did OPEC make the decision to cut back production? For the same reason they cut back production every year at the same time.... Spring is arrives, temperatures rise, demand drops. The only reason gas prices went up on that news is that gas companies knew they could get away with it because of the countries Chicken Little attitude when it hears this kind of news. BTW - they increase production with the onset of fall but somehow prices don't drop with that news which they should accoring to your theory.
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
If it's really "common" sense, why do so few people actually have it?
[ edited by fenix03 on Apr 7, 2004 08:53 AM ]
posted on April 7, 2004 08:55:29 AM newWhere I learned my math and economics is irrelevant, but it is apparent that I learned them much better than Fenix.
Wrong...
Next... do you really know anything or just cruise the web for your answers?
posted on April 7, 2004 09:09:56 AM newFor the same reason they cut back production every year at the same time.... Spring is arrives, temperatures rise, demand drops.
Demand for crude did not drop at that point in time. Demand was strong and supported the higher prices. The Spring "drop" does not change the fact that crude was at an all time high and they cut production. Some have said the demand spike was due to China hitting the market with some serious demand, but I have yet to see the figures.
The only reason gas prices went up on that news is that gas companies knew they could get away with it because of the countries Chicken Little attitude when it hears this kind of news.
Futures prices buy/sell on "news", market prices sell on fact.
BTW - they increase production with the onset of fall but somehow prices don't drop with that news which they should accoring to your theory.
This is a well thought out statement isn't it. You seem to think that all refining is for gasoline. "They" increase production to meet the needs of all the millions of people that use oil to heat with in the North East. It has nothing to do with gasoline supplies increasing. Driving actually drops in the winter months.
But the unrefuted fact still remains that crude prices represent the largest share of the price of a distillate, and when crude jumps from $28 to $38 a barrel, it has a correlative ripple effect throughout the supply chain. But the effect is actually more than just the obvious price jump. When the price of crude or any raw material goes up, so does the cost of "carrying" the supply all through the chain.
If the "sheiks" of Araby want my sympathy, oil must go to $12 a barrel again.
posted on April 7, 2004 09:24:39 AM newNext... do you really know anything or just cruise the web for your answers?
I do get analytical information from many sources, as all smart people do. However, we even smarter ones have the ability to synthesize information into coherent arguments, an ability which you twelve sorely lack.
But your "thinking" ability is good for laughs twelve. I am still laughing at the above statement.
