Obama Admn keeping Oil drilling ban ($6 a gallon gas here we come) - Told You So

[Soul Crusher]

The new greenhouse-gas standards “will hurt every American driver, trucker, farmer and flier with higher gasoline, diesel and jet fuel prices,” Hutchison said in a letter sent Wednesday to EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson. “Higher prices passed on to consumers will feel like a new gas tax.”


________________________ ________________________ ___

[LurkerNoMore]

Having to resort to photoshopped pics to make a point is only saying you are unable to make a relevant point in the first place.

[Soul Crusher]

I guess bamas own statements r not sufficient for you. 

[Soul Crusher]

Yikes! Gasoline to hit $5 per gallon in 2011?
WorldNetDaily ^ | January 02, 2011 | WND


The Obama administration is continuing a ban on offshore drilling in favor of offshore wind farms at a time when gasoline threatens to reach $5 per gallon – an economic nightmare the American public might well see develop in 2011, Jerome Corsi's Red Alert reports.

With OPEC targeting $100/barrel oil as OPEC oil ministers gathered last week for a meeting in Cairo, 2011 may see oil challenge the $148/barrel all-time high reached in July 2008.

This"No amount of spin will win the Obama administration gains in public approval if gasoline tops $4 per gallon or threatens to reach $5 per gallon," Corsi wrote.

OPEC members Iran, Venezuela and Libya have weighed in favor of the $100/barrel target, rejecting Saudi Arabia's preference for prices centered at the $75 level, the level that oil has traded above since September.

The end of 2010 has seen oil prices climb above $90/barrel, as Red Alert predicted at the end of the third quarter 2010.

Earlier in December, the Obama administration reversed policy, announcing a ban on offshore drilling in the eastern Gulf of Mexico and off the Atlantic coast that is expected to continue for at least seven more years.

Ironically, in March, less than one month before the BP Deepwater Horizon oil rig disaster in the Gulf, Obama and Interior Secretary Ken Salazar had promised to open up the eastern Gulf and parts of the Atlantic coast to offshore oil and natural gas exploration.


(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...

[Soul Crusher]

Oil's surge in 2010 paves the way for $4 gasoline,
yahoo ^ | 1/2/111 | ap, Chris Kahn, AP Energy Writer


Price of oil rises 30 percent in 2010; gasoline prices could hit $4 a gallon in 2011

NEW YORK (AP) -- The price of oil is poised for another run at $100 a barrel after a global economic rebound sent it surging 34 percent since May. That could push gasoline prices to $4 a gallon by summer in some parts of the country, experts say.

Flying, shipping a package and ordering a pizza all likely would get more expensive in the new year if that happens and companies pass along higher energy costs. Some economists say rising energy prices will slow economic growth.

The U.S. is the world's largest oil consumer, but prices since spring have been on a roll primarily because of rising demand in developing countries, especially China. China's oil consumption is expected to rise 5 percent next year; that compares with less than 1 percent growth forecast for the U.S.


(Excerpt) Read more at finance.yahoo.com ...

[Soul Crusher]

Driving US Families into Fuel Poverty
Right Side News ^ | January 3, 2011 | guy Innis, Rev. Samuel Rodriguez and Amy Frederick

________________________ _______________________



Will America learn in time from the price being paid by British companies and families?

The Obama Administration still hasn't gotten the message voters sent Washington on November 2.

The lame duck session and 111th Congress finally ended, without the White House getting key items on its wish list. So now, the Environmental Protection Agency and Interior Department intend to impose costly, job-killing, economy-strangling new rules for power plants and refineries, and implement more land-grabs that will lock up additional millions of acres and more billions of dollars of American energy.

Their goal is to end the hydrocarbon and nuclear era in America, and force us to convert to “renewable” energy. Beginning January 2, they plan to ignore clear voter mandates and consumer needs – and use regulations and executive edicts to slash carbon dioxide emissions, impose “clean energy standards,” halt onshore and offshore drilling, and hobble the vehicles, electrical generating plants and factories that are the backbone of our nation’s economy, jobs and living standards.

EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson claims these actions are needed to ensure “environmental justice” for poor and minority families threatened by “manmade global warming.” Meanwhile, the United States and entire Northern Hemisphere are enduring yet another nasty winter, marked by early snow storms and record cold temperatures. Some scientists say Earth could be entering another prolonged period of cooler temperatures.

Businesses, workers and families face unemployment, injustice, bankruptcy and worse at the hands of their government, if this regulatory power grab continues.

The Congressional Research Service says average US households will pay almost $1,000 this winter just for heat. That’s average: Alaska to Florida, Hawaii to New York. Northern states residents will pay double or triple that. Businesses, schools and hospitals will also be hammered.

In Cobb County, Georgia, hundreds shivered outside to apply for heating assistance from a welfare agency that may not have enough money for every family that needs help. Along the Canadian border, in St. Lawrence County, New York, over 8,000 households were approved for heating aid by cash-strapped local, county and state governments that wonder where the money will come from – while Albany has blocked drilling for shale gas that could fuel homes and power plants, and generate billions in revenue.

All this is before the Feds actually implement more of the job-killing, family-freezing CO2 limits and other plans they are contemplating. To see what’s in store for millions of American businesses and families, one need only look at the planet’s sole country that still obstinately clings to its draconian climate change and renewable energy goals, regardless of the costs.

Across Great Britain, household energy bills could double by 2020, to $3,900 (£2,500) a year, market expert Mark Todd of EnergyHelpLine.com has warned. Gasoline prices are likewise climbing to unaffordable levels, and the majority of United Kingdom companies will see their natural gas and electricity prices skyrocket by 100% between 2012 and 2016 – on top of a carbon tax bill of “at least” $65,660 (£42,000) annually – according to the analytical firm Carbon Masters.

Moreover, most of Britain’s older coal-fired and nuclear power plants are scheduled to be shut down, with almost nothing to replace them, even as electricity demand rises. That could bring widespread blackouts, said the Daily Mail, and cause hundreds of thousands of UK jobs to be outsourced to countries where energy costs are much lower, and air pollution and carbon dioxide emission standards far less stringent. That will hardly improve England’s economy or global environmental quality.

Far worse, more than 5.5 million households will be plunged into “fuel poverty” by early 2011 – forced to spend more than 10% of their family incomes on energy – National Energy Action and other charities said. That’s over one-fifth of all UK households and a major increase from 4.5 million families in 2008. Most in these households are over age 60, but working families are also struggling to keep the heat on, as prices soar.

Nearly 28,000 people died in Britain last winter, most of them pensioners who could not afford adequate heat. Charities say this is the highest winter death rate in northern Europe, worse even than much colder nations like Finland and Sweden. And this winter has already seen the coldest December night for Wales in 169 years of record keeping. Britain is on track to having its coldest December in a century.

To stay warm, thousands of elderly are using travel passes to ride buses all day, while others seek refuge in libraries and shopping centers, the Sunday Express noted. Others are “putting their health at risk, in an attempt to keep costs down,” by bundling up and turning the heat down or off entirely, said Age UK Charity Director Michelle Mitchell.

Now, amid the Christmas and New Year holiday, two million homes, schools and hospitals face fuel rationing. Some families could wait weeks before they can get their fuel oil tanks refilled, as more snow falls across Great Britain.

Meanwhile, the British government has cut funding for its Warm Front heating assistance program from $470 million this year to $172 million in 2011, Consumer Focus campaigner Jonathan Stearn angrily noted. And because the winds barely blow during the coldest weather, Britain’s “shiny new green” turbines were able to supply only “one-500th of the exceptionally large demand” for electricity during the frigid weather of early December, Sunday Times columnist Dominic Lawson ruefully observed.

That’s a tiny fraction of the wind turbines’ “rated capacity.” But it is a situation commonly faced with turbines on freezing Minnesota winter nights and sweltering Texas summer afternoons, when they average a measly 10% of the electricity output their subsidy-hungry backers say they are capable of.

Is this what Lisa Jackson would call “environmental justice”? How do her actions, perverse notions of “justice,” and government-driven energy price spikes square with a 2009 poll by Wilson Research Strategies? It found that 56% of blacks think politicians and bureaucrats setting climate change policy in Washington fail to consider economic and quality of life concerns in the black community. Fully 76% are unwilling to pay more than $50 a year more for electricity, to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Northern US winters are far worse than even record-setters in Britain. Why would anyone want to impose costly and nightmarish energy and environmental policies on American families, rich or poor?

The outgoing Congress nearly enacted a bill that would have provided much needed congressional checks on EPA actions. The Murkowski bill fell just short in a Senate dominated by partisan Democrats. The incoming Senate should be far more supportive of such legislation, especially in the face of EPA and other attempts to override the will of Congress and the American people.

The Affordable Power Alliance will urge the new Congress to honor its constitutional duties, and prevent the Obama administration from imposing excessive regulations inspired by extreme ideologies. Congress, including Democrats up for reelection in 2012, needs to heed the overwhelming public demand that America’s economy no longer be held hostage by an elitist environmental network – even if that network includes the President of the United States.

[Soul Crusher]

Please respect FT.com's ts&cs and copyright policy which allow you to: share links; copy content for personal use; & redistribute limited extracts. Email ftsales.support@ft.com to buy additional rights or use this link to reference the article - http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/056db69c-1836-11e0-88c9-00144feab49a.html#ixzz1A70z3eI4


Oil price ‘threat to recovery’
By Sylvia Pfeifer, Energy Editor

Published: January 4 2011 22:32 | Last updated: January 4 2011 22:32

________________________ ________________________ _______________________


High oil prices threaten to derail the fragile economic recovery among developed nations this year, the leading energy watchdog has warned, putting pressure on the Opec oil cartel to increase production.

Over the past year the oil import costs for the 34 mostly rich countries that make up the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development have soared by $200bn to $790bn at the end of 2010, according to an analysis by the International Energy Agency.

EDITOR’S CHOICE

 Jan-04.BP shares surge on spill compensation - Jan-04.South Atlantic yields more frustration - Jan-04.Petrobras in talks over Eni’s Galp stake - Jan-04.Energysource blog - Jan-04.Eurozone inflation passes ECB target - Jan-04..The increase, due to high crude prices, is equal to a loss of income of about 0.5 per cent of OECD gross domestic product, according to the IEA.

“Oil prices are entering a dangerous zone for the global economy,” said Fatih Birol, the IEA’s chief economist. “The oil import bills are becoming a threat to the economic recovery. This is a wake-up call to the oil consuming countries and to the oil producers.”

Oil prices have edged closer to $100 a barrel in recent weeks and Brent crude hit $95 a barrel for the first time in 27 months on Monday as the economic recovery has gathered pace.

Although oil prices dropped on Tuesday, the warning from the IEA will put pressure on Opec to increase its production. Despite the high prices, oil ministers decided last month to leave their quotas unchanged.

Ali Naimi, the Saudi oil minister, repeated at the time that he favoured an oil price of “$70 to $80 a barrel” and that there were no plans to convene an extraordinary meeting before June 2 this year.

However, according to Mr Birol, “it is not in the interest of anyone to see such high prices”.

OECD countries account for about 65 per cent of all global oil imports, he said. “Oil exporters need clients with healthy economies but these high prices will sooner or later make the economies sick, which would mean the need for importing oil will be less.”

In the very short term, therefore, “it may not be a bad idea that the producers are ready to increase production and show their understanding that these high prices are not good for the global economy,” he added.

Oil consuming nations, meanwhile, need to accelerate their efforts to reduce their reliance on oil, especially for transportation, he said. According to the IEA’s analysis, the European Union has seen its import bill rise by $70bn during 2010, equal to the combined budget deficits of Greece and Portugal.

On top of the high crude prices, Europe is still to feel the full impact of higher gas prices as 75 per cent of its gas contracts are linked to oil prices. The weak euro against the US dollar will also amplify the cost.

The US, meanwhile, has seen its bill jump by $72bn. Japan, which imports more than 99 per cent of its energy needs from oil, gas and coal, is paying an additional $27bn. Less developed nations are also being hit, seeing their bill rise by $20bn, equal to a loss of income of almost 1 per cent of GDP.

The ratio of countries’ oil import bills to GDP, a key measure of the cost of oil prices on economies, is close to levels last seen during the financial crisis in 2008, Mr Birol warned.

If oil prices remain above $90/barrel for the rest of this year then the ratio for the European Union will be 2.1 per cent – close to the 2.2 per cent level it reached in 2008.

“It is a very telling story. 2010 rang the first alarm bells and 2011 price levels could bring us to the same financial crisis times that we saw in 2008,” said Mr Birol.

Additional reporting by David Blair

.Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2011. You may share using our article tools. Please don't cut articles from FT.com and redistribute by email or post to the web.

[Danny]

The gaggle of fools and dolts will probably blame Bush when gas goes to $7 agallon. 

gas was 4.85 in Chicago a couple of years ago if I'm not mistaken. was that Obama's fault too?

[Soul Crusher]

no, but he liked it

[Danny]

no, but he liked it

u don't make any sense.

[Soul Crusher]

 

[LurkerNoMore]

Link to solid proof that Obama liked that price then or you are just crying and whining again.

[The Showstoppa]

Wait, wait, wait.......seems that the reason gas prices were rising a couple of years ago was because "Bush is an oil man"      He's been out for 2 years, almost 3.......so what is to blame for the rise now? 

[Soul Crusher]

Link to solid proof that Obama liked that price then or you are just crying and whining again.

[LurkerNoMore]

Instead of me watching all those bullshit videos, why not specifically point out the minute and second in each where Obama says "I liked the high gas prices in Chicago a couple of years ago"

[Soul Crusher]

Watch the first one jackass.   

He says:   "I would have preferred the prices go up more gradually" as opposed to the spike.    The others are equally self explaining.   

 

[Soul Crusher]

Oil refineries sue EPA over ethanol plan
GOPUSA ^ | January 4, 2011 | Ken Thomas (Associated Press)



WASHINGTON (AP) — A ruling by the Obama administration allowing the sale of gasoline containing 15 percent ethanol is running into legal hurdles from trade groups opposing the plan.

The National Petrochemical and Refiners Association sued the Environmental Protection Agency on Monday over the decision to allow the sale of gasoline containing higher blends of corn-based ethanol, the second major group to protest the ruling.

The Obama administration said in October that gas stations could start selling the ethanol blend for vehicles built since the 2007 model year, increasing it from the current blend of 10 percent ethanol.

[Soul Crusher]

BUMP FOR LURKER

[Danny]

Watch the first one jackass.   

He says:   "I would have preferred the prices go up more gradually" as opposed to the spike.    The others are equally self explaining.   

 

Please tell me you do realize they will ONLY go up. The question is how fast.

[Soul Crusher]

Please tell me you do realize they will ONLY go up. The question is how fast.

  

Just like home prices, stocks, bonds, etc right?

Every hear of supply and demand?   

[tu_holmes]

  

Just like home prices, stocks, bonds, etc right?

Every hear of supply and demand?   

That is a PART of why it goes up... OPEC would cut their shit if the US would take 1 week and not drive.

Commodities like "barrels of oil" have absolutely nothing to do with supply and demand... It's perceived desire... not actual use.

[Soul Crusher]

That is a PART of why it goes up... OPEC would cut their shit if the US would take 1 week and not drive.

Commodities like "barrels of oil" have absolutely nothing to do with supply and demand... It's perceived desire... not actual use.

As well as perceived supply and perceived demand.   

Funny - enviro kooks never think the laws of basic economics ever apply to oil or other goods.     

[Soul Crusher]

[Option D]

Hey there is a thread up.. i want your imput.. quit ignoring it.. the word Palin is in  it.. so you must click on it

[LurkerNoMore]

Watch the first one jackass.   

He says:   "I would have preferred the prices go up more gradually" as opposed to the spike.    The others are equally self explaining.   

 

Again, that is NOT saying "I like the high prices in Chicago" like you claimed.

Two different things.  Looks like I was right.  More bullshit and crying from you.