2
   

Why Do Higher Gas Prices Anger You?

 
 
Brand X
 
  1  
Reply Thu 28 Sep, 2006 02:40 pm
Impressive return. I was quoting a report I heard on NPR last week, that's gov't radio for ya! LOL!

No need to hurry the process being there are no new refineries to finish it. Hello bottleneck.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 28 Sep, 2006 02:44 pm
Brand X wrote:
Impressive return. I was quoting a report I heard on NPR last week, that's gov't radio for ya! LOL!

No need to hurry the process being there are no new refineries to finish it. Hello bottleneck.


It is an intentional bottleneck, because there is zero reason for the oil companies to increase refinery supply. Having less refineries = less cost of ownership AND higher gas prices. What is the downside?

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Brand X
 
  1  
Reply Thu 28 Sep, 2006 02:53 pm
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Brand X wrote:
Impressive return. I was quoting a report I heard on NPR last week, that's gov't radio for ya! LOL!

No need to hurry the process being there are no new refineries to finish it. Hello bottleneck.


It is an intentional bottleneck, because there is zero reason for the oil companies to increase refinery supply. Having less refineries = less cost of ownership AND higher gas prices. What is the downside?

Cycloptichorn


Agreed to a point...ownership is a bitch, can't blame them there.
0 Replies
 
hamburger
 
  1  
Reply Thu 28 Sep, 2006 05:21 pm
"Having less refineries = less cost of ownership AND higher gas prices. "

anyone willing to sink some money into buiding a new refinery Rolling Eyes ?

consumers seem to be happy to leave lots of money at walmart to buy all kinds of useless stuff ; so smart investors (example : giant pension funds) will likely do better to invest in factories making barbies ... rather than taking a chance on a refinery .
i think it's interesting that many people willingly part with their money to buy throwaway junk but holler when they have to pay for life's necessities ... it's a strange world .
hbg
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Fri 29 Sep, 2006 03:35 am
Bi-Polar Bear wrote:
Thomas wrote:
Bear -- in your opinion, can oil prices move in any direction without proving that Bush conspires with Big Oil? Evidently "up" and "down" don't qualify.


sure.... when bush is a private citizen and he is no longer using oil prices to manipulate his political agenda...l


And after a new president takes office,and the price of oil still goes up,who will you blame that on?
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Fri 29 Sep, 2006 06:27 am
mysteryman wrote:
Bi-Polar Bear wrote:
Thomas wrote:
Bear -- in your opinion, can oil prices move in any direction without proving that Bush conspires with Big Oil? Evidently "up" and "down" don't qualify.


sure.... when bush is a private citizen and he is no longer using oil prices to manipulate his political agenda...l


And after a new president takes office,and the price of oil still goes up,who will you blame that on?


the new president if he/she is doing the same thing bush and bushco do.... otherwise i will look for the reasons where they are.
0 Replies
 
Brand X
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Oct, 2006 06:51 am
OPEC sees barrel price moving too low...so hey...let's cut production!

Quote:
OPEC to slash output for first time in 2 years
Cartel to trim one million barrels a day; announcement sends price back above $60

GHAIDA GHANTOUS AND TOM ASHBY

Reuters News Agency

DUBAI; ABUJA -- OPEC will take one million barrels of oil a day off oversupplied world markets as soon as possible with its first output cut in more than two years, OPEC officials said yesterday, sending oil prices back above $60 (U.S.).

Leading oil exporter Saudi Arabia will shoulder the biggest part of the burden as the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries moves to address a 23-per-cent drop in prices since July 14 and fuel stocks that are at a seven-year high in the United States, a senior OPEC delegate said.

The organization that pumps over a third of the world's oil will curb supplies by over 3 per cent, he said. "The goal now is to cut actual oil production by one million barrels daily as soon as possible but the exact date is still being worked out," the delegate said.

The U.S. was dismayed by the news. Energy Secretary Sam Bodman said he will tell OPEC ministers that the world still needs all the oil OPEC could pump heading into winter. He noted that at $60 a barrel oil was still near record highs. "We still need oil for sure. We still need all the oil we can get."


Nine OPEC countries will take part in the supply curbs and will cut their "fair share" from overall OPEC production, the senior delegate said. OPEC pumped 29.47 million barrels a day in September, according to a Reuters survey.

Only Iraq, exempt from quotas, and Indonesia, a net importer, will not participate, he added. All of this could pave the way for a realignment of OPEC quotas, and tricky negotiations, at a meeting already scheduled for December.

OPEC president Edmund Daukoru said later yesterday that some members wanted an emergency meeting before then, but he thought it would be worthwhile only if the group were ready to make a substantial cut from its ceiling of 28 million b/d.

"If we meet now, to have an impact on the market . . . it would have to be substantive," said Mr. Daukoru, who is also Nigeria's Minister of State for Petroleum.

He said a reduction of one million b/d would be in line with market fundamentals.

So far, six members -- top exporter Saudi Arabia, Algeria, Venezuela, Nigeria, Libya and Kuwait -- were making voluntary cuts, but he did not say by how much. Talks were continuing on how to stem what he called a freefall in prices.

The senior OPEC delegate said Saudi Arabia will reduce its production by 300,000 b/d from September's 9.1 million b/d, taking the kingdom's production to its lowest since May, 2004.

This will be OPEC's first output cut since April, 2004.

The group last changed its ceiling in July, 2005, with a 500,000-b/d increase in response to rising demand from the U.S. and China's fast-growing economy and a seemingly relentless rise in the price of oil.

But the situation has changed in recent months with a stumbling U.S. economy and a rapid descent in the price of oil from its $78.40 peak in mid-July.

OPEC delegates said the organization's primary concern is the high level of global fuel stocks.

Analysts have expected OPEC to cut output for some time, especially after Nigeria -- which holds the OPEC presidency -- and Venezuela said last week that they were making unilateral reductions.

"The marketing departments of these countries are finding it difficult to move their oil. And high global inventories are of grave concern," said Gary Ross of New York's PIRA Energy.

The front-month November light, sweet crude contract on the New York Mercantile Exchange closed 59 cents or 1 per cent higher at $60 a barrel after earlier trading as high as $60.97.

Oil prices have tripled since the start of 2002.


Source
0 Replies
 
hamburger
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Oct, 2006 03:43 pm
"OPEC sees barrel price moving too low...so hey...let's cut production! "
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
nothing unusual about that imo .
producers of all kinds of commodities - particularly in the acricultural sector - often reduce production if the price falls .
it is not unknown for governments to even pay producers/farmers for reducing acreage thereby 'stabilizing' the price - meaning to prevent it from falling .
now , personally i'd like the gas price to be low if i want to drive around a lot , but i'd like it to be high if i'm investing in the petroleum industry :wink: .
i guess it depends on what side of the fence one sits ?
i can't really blame the oil-producing countries for trying to get the best price they can .
perhaps it'll even speed up the development of alternative fuel ?
hbg
0 Replies
 
hamburger
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Oct, 2006 04:09 pm
...CHINA BUILDS UP STRATEGIC OIL RESERVES...
0 Replies
 
squinney
 
  1  
Reply Sat 7 Oct, 2006 05:53 am
hamburger wrote:
"Having less refineries = less cost of ownership AND higher gas prices. "

anyone willing to sink some money into buiding a new refinery Rolling Eyes ?

hbg


The thing is that I have already paid for the cost of building new refineries. The cost of new refineries was an argument for prices being so high last year. So, our government gave the oil industry a bunch of money ON TOP of the record profits they were already reporting.

See Here

And especially HERE.
0 Replies
 
hamburger
 
  1  
Reply Sat 7 Oct, 2006 03:13 pm
squinney :
david lewis , at one time the leader of the "new democratic party" in canada coined a great phrase : "corporate welfare bums" ,
for those corporations - and i believe there are many - that scream and holler about government interference in business and at the same time ask for more tax concessions and handouts from government .
they seem to be a growing breed and spread all over the world .
hbg
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Sat 7 Oct, 2006 04:05 pm
Come to think of it, I'm not sure I ever answered the question Squinney asked in the title of her thread:
    "Why do higher oil prices anger you?"
My answer is that they don't. On the contrary: they fill this bicyclist and subway rider with Schadenfreude about all those suckers who moved to the suburbs. Now they drive to work and to the grocer every day, unable to control their addiction to cars. High gas prices make me feel like a genius for having decided, years ago, that I'd rather live in the center of my city and pay a higher rent. In exchange I can now shop within an easy walk from my home and work within a 30 minute bike ride from it. If gas prices went up to $100, all I'd feel is more Schadenfreude and more self-admiration. Bring 'em on, Hugo!
0 Replies
 
squinney
 
  1  
Reply Sat 7 Oct, 2006 05:32 pm
Thomas - Gotta agree with you as far as encouraging planned trips, conserving, making use of bus system and such. But not everyone CAN live in the middle of the city. There are still plenty of rural areas. Kinda hard to plant a thousand acres of corn, wheat, etc to help feed the nation in the middle of town.
0 Replies
 
hamburger
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 Oct, 2006 01:29 pm
...ROYAL DUTCH SHELL BETTING OIL/GAS PRICES WILL STAY HIGH...

FORBES reports (link above) :
"Royal Dutch Shell effectively told the world on Monday that it does not think that oil prices will decline from current levels. The energy company said it would pay $6.8 billion to buy the 22% of Shell Canada that it does not already own, giving it access to the subsidiary's growing oil-sands division.
.
.
.
"The oil sands are profitable when the price of crude is above about $40 a barrel, so Shell's interest is a sign it does not think prices will fall below that level.

Oil has risen about 80% since 2003, making Canadian sands projects competitive. The price of a barrel of oil peaked in July of this year at $78.40 and traded Monday morning on the New York Mercantile Exchange at $58.58, a decline of 25.3% from that level. The recent drop has led the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries to institute a production cutback, although oil traders seem unconvinced that it will be able to increase prices from the current level."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

so , should i bet AGAINST shell ?
the petroleum producing cartell seems to think that prices are not going to hold up - therefore they want to see production cuts .
listening to canadian news , there is no consensus what will happen in the oilsands .
companies in the oilsands business think they can't go wrong - in the long run anyway - say 10 - 20 years down the road .
environmentalists see it as "pillaging the earth" .
i'm wondering what will happen when push comes to shove ?
there are some scientists that claim that oilsands exploration can be done "gently" , without causing an environmental disaster .
i'll stay tuned .
hbg
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 Oct, 2006 01:56 pm
hamburger wrote:
so , should i bet AGAINST shell ?

I would. Fifty Canadian dollars that on October 23th 2009, Light Sweet Crude Oil at the New York Mercantile Exchange will trade below US $58,10, after correcting for inflation (CPI). That's what Bloomberg quotes as today's price.
0 Replies
 
hamburger
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 Oct, 2006 02:05 pm
thomas :
i think that shell is in the position of a casino owner ; they'll adjust "the odds" in their favour to make sure they come out ahead :wink: .
hbg
0 Replies
 
hamburger
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 Oct, 2006 02:25 pm
...CANADA INVITED TO JOIN OPEC...
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 Oct, 2006 02:52 pm
hamburger wrote:
thomas :
i think that shell is in the position of a casino owner ; they'll adjust "the odds" in their favour to make sure they come out ahead :wink: .
hbg

Yes, of course -- but is this a "deal" or a "no deal"?
0 Replies
 
hamburger
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 Oct, 2006 03:25 pm
gasoline price too high ?
try the latest german invention : " BENZIN BESEN" ("gasoline broom") .
great gas mileage , but a little hard on your rearend Laughing .
strap on your roller-skates or skateboard , mount the "benzin besen' and away you go !
waiting for test report from thomas and walter :wink: Shocked .
hbg

http://www.spiegel.de/img/0,1020,728347,00.jpg
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Fri 29 Jun, 2007 03:36 pm
"Bottled water is a pathetic trend. You want another shocking number to throw out there? Consider that if a bottle of water costs, say, $1.25 and is roughly 1/4 gallon, then Americans are willingly paying twice as much for water as they are for gasoline, often at the same store. The same people whining about refined petroleum shipped around the world and sold for $3/gallon happily shell out $5/gallon or more for...water. Give me a break."

(Poster "literatehobo" on a TNR The Plank thread.)
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/01/2024 at 04:18:16