Author Topic: Obama Admn keeping Oil drilling ban ($6 a gallon gas here we come) - Told You So  (Read 57842 times)

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41759
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.

May 4, 2011
Gasoline and Onions
 

The speculators are ripping us off!


"The skyrocketing price of gas and oil has nothing to do with the fundamentals of supply and demand, and has everything to do with Wall Street firms that are artificially jacking up the price of oil in the energy futures markets. ... (T)he same Wall Street speculators that caused the worst financial crisis since the 1930s through their greed, recklessness and illegal behavior are ripping off the American people again by gambling that the price of oil and gas will continue to go up."

Here we go again. That quote was Sen. Bernie Sanders doing what some always do when the price of oil spikes: complain about speculators. Now, President Obama says he'll investigate them: "We are going to make sure that no one is taking advantage of the American people for their own short-term gain." I assume that his new Financial Fraud Enforcement Working Group, like its predecessors, will uncover nothing untoward.

In America, we don't have a free market -- we have a government-saturated economy in which oil companies and other corporations have a cozy relationship with politicians and bureaucrats. That's wrong, but even that can't explain the recent run-up in prices. Oil companies today are no more greedy or clever than they have been all along.

We have to look for a better explanation -- and it isn't hard to find. Demand for oil rises with the growth of China, India and other developing countries. When poor people get a little richer, they buy cars, computers and refrigerators. They burn more fuel to make them and to run them. Rising demand, other things being equal, increases prices.

And other things have not been equal. Japan's nuclear plants are out of commission, and Libya, which accounts for about 2 percent of world oil production, is wracked by civil war. This is small compared to previous disruptions in the region, but it still affects the price.

The evil oil-speculator theory also runs up against the fact that the Federal Reserve's inflationary policies (QE2) and other factors have continued the dollar's slide against foreign currencies -- to a three-year low. As the dollar loses value, oil sellers demand more for their product. "Commodities, along with most traded goods globally, are priced in dollars," former Federal Reserve official Gerald P. O'Driscoll of the Cato Institute writes. "It is the old story of too much money chasing too few goods."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If Sanders and other economic illiterates get their way, we'll have new laws banning "speculation." That will raise prices further. Don't believe me? Think back to a previous time when a Senate committee said that "speculative activity causes severe and unwarranted fluctuations in the price. ..." That was in 1958, when people got upset about the price of onions. Fools in Congress addressed that problem by banning speculation on onion prices.

The result? A Financial Times analysis found that the ban made prices less stable. This year, the retail price of onions rose more than the price of gasoline -- 36 versus 24 percent. Most years, the price of onions fluctuates more than other goods. No mystery there. Speculators help keep prices stable. When they foresee a future oil shortage -- that is, when prices are lower than anticipated in the future -- speculators buy lots of it, store it and then sell it when the shortage hits. They know they can charge more when there's relatively little oil on the market. But their selling during the shortage brings prices down from what they would have been had speculators not acted.

Speculators are like the ants in Aesop's "Ants and the Grasshopper" fable: They save resources for lean times. Everyone benefits because everyone has a chance to buy from them in those lean times.

Speculators don't "artificially jack up the price of oil" -- they take risks. Those who guess wrong lose a lot of money.

Historically, speculators have been convenient scapegoats, and they have suffered greatly for it. So have the rest of us.

While government should never create political opportunities for speculation, it should also stop interfering with its legitimate economic function.

We all are harmed when central planners take charge.

 

‹‹Previous Page |1 | 2 |


Copyright 2011, Creators Syndicate Inc.

Page Printed from: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2011/05/04/gasoline_and_onions_109746-full.html at May 04, 2011 - 06:09:01 AM PDT

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41759
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Obama’s Oily View of America
Townhall.com ^ | May 4, 2011 | Robert Knight



When Barack Obama is in flyover country, if you close your eyes, you can almost hear a moderate Republican on the stump.


But when he’s on the Left Coast, the real Obama surfaces, bristling with praise for confiscatory taxation, redistributing wealth and ever bigger government.


It was in San Francisco, after all, that he let slip his famous gaffe on April 6, 2008 about rural Pennsylvanians clinging to “guns and religion.” And it was in San Francisco on April 20, 2011 that he told a Democratic National Committee audience that America’s greatness comes from government spending. Not from God-given liberty, limited government and a market economy that produced the freest, wealthiest country in history.


No, America’s greatness, apparently, came only with the New Deal and Great Society, when Washington grew from a sleepy town into a confiscatory monster sucking the life out of the rest of the country. That’s when Michelle Obama became, for the first time in her adult life, proud of her country. Wait, sorry. That was when Barack won the nomination in 2008.


But it’s never enough. Like the gangster in the 1948 Bogart classic Key Largo, Obama, like Johnny Rocco, wants more. “Yeah, Rocco (Barack) wants more.”


Here’s a snippet of Obama’s April 20 remarks:


“I will not reduce our deficit by sacrificing the things that have always made America great. The things that have made Americans prosper. I won’t sacrifice our investments in education. I will not sacrifice those. I won’t sacrifice our investments in science and basic research. I won’t sacrifice the safety of our highways or our airports.”


Read: Republicans want cars and planes to crash, scientists to hang up their lab coats and kids to get dumber.


In one of the most appalling displays of sheer gall, Obama actually decried America’s dependence on foreign oil. This is the president whose executive agencies have strangled new ventures to tap America’s enormous fossil fuel resources.


“I won’t sacrifice our investment in clean energy at a time when our dependence on foreign oil is causing Americans so much pain at the pump,” he told the DNC crowd.


And more pain is on the way. Obama’s EPA has denied a permit to Shell Oil Company to drill off Alaska’s coast. The company spent five years and nearly $4 billion preparing to give America a 27-billion-barrel shot in the arm of our domestic oil supply, which is down to 7 million barrels a day, 13 million short of what America uses.


Too bad, Shell. The extremist green lobby that dominates this administration is intent on destroying fossil fuel industries to prepare us for a mythical wind, solar and rickshaw-powered immediate future. You can’t say Obama did not warn us. He said explicitly in January 2008, for example, that his proposed cap and trade system would “bankrupt” anyone who wanted to build a new coal-fired plant.


On Tuesday, Obama was at it again, urging Congress to punish oil companies by ending “unwarranted” tax breaks. The man who has done more than anyone to jack up the price of gas said that high pump prices “provide more than enough profit motive to invest in domestic exploration and production.” Yes, if you will stop flirting with Brazil and get your foot off the neck of U.S. energy companies.


Meanwhile, China is expected within five years to require 15 million barrels of oil a day, up from the current 9 million. India is going to need 7 million barrels, up from its current use of 4 million. That’s a lot of competition for resources that Obama is making even scarcer.


Former Shell Oil President John Hofmeister, who is arguing for a balanced energy policy through his nonprofit group Citizens for Affordable Energy, warns that the government’s sabotage of fossil fuels and the world’s growing appetite will cause not just crippling prices but outright shortages here within two to three years.


While Obama scoffs at the notion that new drilling would make a difference, the U.S. sits on perhaps one trillion recoverable barrels of oil, enough to last more than 200 years without any Middle Eastern oil. Unleashing this could create millions of jobs, lift the economy and free us from dependence on foreign oil. Instead, the president pretends to back new production while his bureaucrats smother it.


Obama’s most misleading assertion might be that the United States has “about two, maybe three percent of the world’s proven oil reserves; we use 25 percent of the world’s oil.” As Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski noted in a recent column, “That line is crafted to make the audience think that America is both running out of oil and using oil at an unsustainable rate.”


The weasel term is “proven.” That includes only oil under sites already approved and prepared for harvest. The Congressional Research Service estimates that the U.S. has 157 billion barrels of recoverable oil. Another 900 billion from shale and other unconventional sources will soon be recoverable. The only thing blocking this energy bounty is the hard leftists who populate the White House, executive agencies and U.S. Senate. They are hell bent on making America swallow the Gaia version of the Earth, socialist economics, and Al Gore’s man-caused global warming.


As for the gaping federal deficit that’s freaking out the numbers crunchers at Standard & Poor’s, Obama’s friends at the leftwing Center for American Progress have an answer. In a Good Friday column in The Washington Post, Matt Miller trashed the House GOP’s budget proposal and admitted that Obama’s plan would add “$7 trillion in red ink over the next decade.” He touted, instead, the Congressional Progressive Caucus (read: socialist) plan, which “still wins the fiscal responsibility derby thus far; it reaches balance by 2021 largely through assorted tax hikes and defense cuts.”


That’s the ticket. Give the government even more of our money (that should teach them not to spend so much!) and soften the Defense Department while the Middle East blows up.


The only hope we have is if Americans ignore the Obama-crazy media and start asking why our spendaholic government needs higher taxes and why gas pumps are functioning like ATMs in reverse.


Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41759
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
The Obama Watch
Obama's War on Oil
By Peter Ferrara on 5.4.11 @ 6:10AM


http://spectator.org/archives/2011/05/04/obamas-war-on-oil/print




As a guest on a black radio talk show recently, I suggested that someone ask President Obama what his plan is for bringing down high gasoline prices.

What a gaffe that question would be. The current high gas prices, and more, are precisely the President's plan.

President Obama's Secretary of Energy is former Berkeley physics professor Steven Chu, who said in 2008, "Somehow we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe." We still have a way to go to achieve Secretary Chu's goal. The average price for a gallon of gas in Europe is over $8.

President Obama's Secretary of Interior is Ken Salazar. When he was a Senator in 2008, he proclaimed on the floor of the Senate that he would oppose any offshore drilling no matter how high the price of gasoline rose, even to $10 a gallon.

When President Obama took office in 2009, the average price of gasoline in America was $1.83 a gallon. Today it is more than double that at $3.87. As the above quotes indicate, the Obama Administration's policy is to increase it well beyond that.

Extremist Quackery

Why would President Obama want high gas prices? It's a matter of ideology for him. He thinks it's good for the environment for gas prices to be high. The higher gas prices are, the less you will drive.

Also, higher gas prices make his beloved "alternative fuels" more competitive. That is because these alternative fuels are inherently more expensive, and so can't compete with cheaper gas. Note this is not a prescription for easing the financial burden on working people. High gas prices make it more likely you will buy expensive "alternative fuels." But either way, your wallet will still be drained.

Worst of all, these "alternative fuels" are not anywhere near sufficiently viable to power the modern American economy into the 21st century. To sharply restrict and drive up the price of the traditional energy that can power our economy today decades before any possible alternative energy can take on the burden is a policy of national economic suicide. That is President Obama's energy policy today.

Don't even bring up the notion of global warming to justify President Obama's high gas price policy. I have discussed the discredited science behind that phony ideological claim in this space in detail before. If you need a refresher course, check out the Heartland Institute's definitive, 800-page tome Climate Change Reconsidered. The most advanced climate scientists such as MIT's Richard Lindzen now have definitive proof that man-caused greenhouse gas emissions will not raise earth's temperatures anywhere near dangerous levels. The increased CO2 in the atmosphere and the resulting slightly increased warmth will only improve agricultural productivity and human health.

These are the reasons why Victor Davis Hanson wrote in a recent column, "So much of this Administration's talk about energy sounds similar to a bull session in the faculty lounge, or what we would expect from lifelong bureaucrats and public functionaries who have never experienced long commutes or struggles in the harsher, profit-driven private workplace."

Supply and Demand

President Obama has raised gas prices by carrying on a war against U.S. oil production. One year after the Deepwater Horizon Gulf oil spill, the environment in the gulf has mostly recovered, but the same cannot be said for the American economy. Instead, after a deepwater drilling moratorium declared illegal in several judicial rulings that still dragged on for months, and then a continuing drilling permit slowdown also judicially condemned, giant deepwater drilling rigs have now been uprooted from the Gulf of Mexico and sent to friendlier economic environments in the Congo, Brazil, and elsewhere. The Gulf of Mexico has been a mainstay of U.S. oil production for decades with little adverse environmental effects. But President Obama seized on the opportunity provided by the spill to shut down as much of the Gulf production as possible. Maybe that political opportunity is why the Administration was so slow to act to minimize damage from the spill.

Also never recovered from the spill has been the congressionally-approved offshore drilling plan for the eastern Gulf of Mexico, the South Atlantic, and the mid-Atlantic, which President Obama deep-sixed in response to the spill. That action alone deprives the American people of an estimated 7.6 billion barrels of oil and 36.6 trillion cubic feet of natural gas.

Just warming up, the Obama Administration also rescinded already issued permits for drilling in the Chukchi Sea off Alaska. Shell Oil recently discovered that after spending $4 billion to develop shallow-water drilling on vast tracts already leased from the federal government in the Beauford and Chukchi Seas north of Alaska, President Obama's EPA has denied it permits to begin exploratory drilling. That leaves another estimated 27 billion barrels of oil in the ground.

But the Obama Administration has not just squelched offshore drilling. Drilling opportunities have been withdrawn in Montana, and oil shale production activities have been stopped in Colorado and elsewhere in the American West.

In December, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service began the process of listing the dunes sagebrush lizard as an endangered species. As Investors Business Daily explained on April 28:

If the dunes sagebrush lizard, now considered a separate species, is granted endangered status, oil and gas production in the Permian Basin in New Mexico and Texas may have to be shut down…. The Department of Energy says the Permian Basin has a quarter of the nation's proven reserves and 20% of the nation's daily production comes from there. It has a quarter of the nation's active oil and gas wells and is home to 21% of the rigs actively drilling in the U.S.

Supply down, prices up. That should not be too hard to understand even for a grassroots Democrat. But highly skilled Obama propagandists say, hold on, domestic oil production for 2009 and 2010 is up, not down. President Obama cited the figures himself, saying, "So any notion that my administration has shut down oil production might make for a good political sound bite, but it doesn't match up with reality."

But the reality is that just as the economy grows over time, oil production is supposed to grow with it. All of the above actions the Obama Administration has taken to shut down oil production means unambiguously that oil production is now or soon will be lower than it would have been otherwise. Which means prices are higher than they would have been otherwise.

Moreover, oil is not produced by flipping a switch. It takes years of development. Which means the increasing oil production in 2009 and 2010 that Obama and his propagandists cite is due to the policies of the Bush Administration. The impact of the policies adopted by the Obama Administration over the last two years, as part of its War on Oil, will be seen in oil production figures in the years ahead. Already the Energy Department projects that oil production in the Gulf will be down 20% just this year. That translates into a loss of 375,000 much needed, good paying jobs. The Department further projects that domestic oil production overall will drop sharply over the next two years.

In addition, oil markets today are not blind to what is coming down the pike. Today's oil price reflects the outlook for tomorrow. And constrained supplies tomorrow mean higher prices today. Opening up new oil supplies for tomorrow will similarly mean lower prices today.

Beyond oil supply and demand, there is another powerful factor driving up oil and gasoline prices. The price of oil tracks closely with the price of gold going back many decades. Look it up for yourself. The same wildly loose, Keynesian, Federal Reserve monetary policies (fully backed by President Obama) that have been causing gold to soar are causing oil to soar as well, along with other commodities across the board. Hence the rise of inflation, which is causing real wages to decline in this brave, new world of Obamanomics.

Obama's Scapegoating: Another Abuse of the Public

In addition to the above abusively misleading propaganda, President Obama is already scurrying to deflect blame for the gas price suffering resulting from his deliberate policies to others -- the scapegoats.

He has ordered the Justice Department to investigate the possible illegal actions of speculators. In his April 23 radio address, Obama bragged that as a result the Attorney General has "launched a task force with just one job: rooting out cases of fraud or manipulation in the oil markets that might affect gas prices, including any illegal activity by traders and speculators. We're going to make sure no one is taking advantage of the American people for their own short term gain."

But unless the Justice Department is going to investigate President Obama and his policies, that last sentence cannot possibly be true. When Attorney General Eric Holder said his task force had already uncovered a couple of things that are disturbing, the Wall Street Journal editorialized in response, "That must be some crack squad."

That response was apt because all the sermonizing about speculators is a long standing, disreputable abuse of the public raised by political scoundrels every time oil prices rise. Oil prices are set in a world oil market. Speculators speculate that oil prices will fall as well as that they will rise. If they speculate the wrong way, they lose their shirts. That is why an exhaustive investigation in 2008 by the Commodities Futures Trading Commission, which unlike Obama's politicized Justice Department actually enjoys expertise on the issue, concluded that the net effect of speculation was to reduce prices. That is because all the speculation just nets out to accelerating market recognition of supply and demand conditions, making oil prices smoother and less volatile, reducing risk and hence price.

That is why as Investors Business Daily editorialized on April 26, "At last count, 35 such investigations have been conducted over the decades, and none -- not a single one -- has turned up wrongdoing by investors or oilmen." All of this talk of speculation is just boob bait for bubbas, intentionally misleading the gullible, uneducated, and easy to command. As IBD added, "Rather than carry out another useless inquisition of private citizens, our political class should be investigating its own role in the price crisis. The result would be a revelation for those who fall for Washington's line about greedy businessmen whenever gasoline prices become painfully high."

But President Obama does have a policy answer to the question, what is your plan to address rising gas prices? He wants to raise taxes on oil companies. With all of the profits oil companies are making, Obama says, they don't need any subsidies. He labels $4 billion in tax loopholes as oil company subsidies and calls for those loopholes to be closed.

Oil companies should not be getting subsidies from the government in any event. But the dollar amount of oil profits is high because the oil companies invest such huge amounts to produce oil. As a return on investment or sales, oil profits are modest. While ExxonMobile and the other oil companies earn about 7% on sales, respected public citizens such as Google, Microsoft, and McDonald's regularly earn 20% or more.

Moreover, the fundamental truth is that the government doesn't subsidize oil companies. Oil companies subsidize the government. ExxonMobile alone pays more in income taxes than the bottom 50% of income earning citizens combined. In 2008 alone, ExxonMobile paid $116.2 billion in taxes. The effective corporate tax rate for all oil companies in 2008 was 42.3%.

In addition, the tax provisions Obama calls subsidies for oil companies involve the oil depletion allowance, expensing for indirect drilling costs, and the foreign tax credit, the first in the tax code since the beginning almost 100 years ago. But these are standard tax provisions allowed all mining, manufacturing and international companies for business expenses, depreciation and taxes paid to foreign governments, not subsidies. Abolishing them for oil companies would involve simply punitive taxation appropriate only for political scapegoats.

But this policy answer should earn President Obama a follow up question: how does raising taxes on oil companies reduce oil prices? Answer: it doesn't, it raises them even more.

A Consistent Obama Policy

When a citizen did manage to ask President Obama about rising gas prices recently, Obama answered coldly, "If you're complaining about the price of gas and you're only getting eight miles a gallon, you know, you might want to think about a trade-in."

But at least President Obama's answers and policies on the issue have been consistent. When asked about allowing more drilling during the 2008 campaign, he answered, as quoted by Investors Business Daily, that such drilling would not "lower gas prices today. It would not lower gas prices this summer. It would not lower gas prices this year." He added that "There's no silver bullet that can bring down gas prices right away," and anyone who says otherwise is just "trying to grab headlines or score a few points." He said he would not offer the "false promises, irresponsible policy and cheap gimmicks that might get politicians through the next election."

In other words, he did not campaign on bringing down gas prices. He said actually that doing so was not possible, even though policies enacted that very fall opening up future oil supplies led to collapsing oil prices soon enough.

America holds vast energy resources, far more than any other country overall, enough for America to be the world's number 1 coal producer, natural gas producer, nuclear power producer, and darn near the world's number 1 oil producer, if producers were just set free. But voters already have their answer from President Obama on this issue. If you want the lower gas prices, lower oil prices, and lower energy prices necessary for a booming economy, you are going to have to get yourselves another President.

Letter to the Editor

StumbleUpon| Digg| Reddit| Twitter| Facebook

Peter Ferrara is Director of Policy for the Carleson Center for Public Policy, Senior Fellow for Entitlement and Budget Policy for the Heartland Institute, and General Counsel of the American Civil Rights Union. He served in the White House Office of Policy Development under President Reagan, and as Associate Deputy Attorney General of the United States under the first President Bush. He is the author of America’s Ticking Bankruptcy Bomb, forthcoming from HarperCollins. 



________________________ ________________________ _____


Boooooooommmm.   

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41759
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Obama on Oil | Living a Lie
Natural Born Conservative ^ | May 7, 2011 | Larry Walker, Jr.


________________________ ________________________ ________________________ ___



“We’re actually producing more oil here than ever.” ~ Barack Obama (05/06/2011) ~

The truth: We are producing fewer barrels of oil here than we did in 1951. ~

Obama would be correct, if our nation was founded in the year 2003. But of course anyone born before 2003 knows that Obama’s statement is - in fact - not true. For those more interested in truth, than in the shallow words of lying politicians, we are actually producing fewer barrels of oil today than we produced in the year 1951.



It’s time to start drilling, and time to stop lying. If Obama won’t do it, then let’s find someone who will.

References (Check the facts):

http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=PET&s=MCRFPUS2&f=A

http://www.eia.doe.gov/totalenergy/data/monthly/pdf/sec3_3.pdf

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41759
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Gas prices will stay high until U.S. stops dreaming and starts drilling
washington Examiner ^ | 5/9/2011 | Mark Tapscott




Remember when you were a kid and your mother told you to eat your brussels sprouts because "they're good for you." That's exactly the attitude we get today from President Obama, Energy Secretary Steven Chu and Interior Secretary Ken Salazar concerning high gas prices. This is no surprise, of course, because Obama clearly said during the 2008 presidential campaign that his environmental programs would cause energy prices to "necessarily skyrocket."

And today, as millions of Americans struggle to make ends meet while gas prices reach and exceed $4 per gallon, Obama shrugs his shoulders and claims there's no "magic bullet" to restore reasonable energy costs, while telling a father with a family of 10 that he should buy a "hybrid minivan," which doesn't yet exist. But magic isn't required to make energy costs come down. The last time gas prices hit $4 per gallon was when President Bush was in office.

Oil prices were at record highs of nearly $150 per barrel. But the day Bush signed an executive order allowing increased U.S. offshore oil and natural gas drilling, the price of oil plummeted and gas prices at the pump soon followed suit. Obama could do the same thing today with the stroke of a pen on an executive order, or by picking up the phone and calling Salazar and Chu.


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

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41759
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Demand, not speculation, cited for rising oil prices
May 6, 2011
http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/sc-cons-0505-money-consumer-watch-20110506,0,6142022.story




 
High oil prices are here to stay, and they're caused by surging demand and limited new supply, not Wall Street speculators.

That's the message from Fatih Birol, chief economist at the International Energy Agency.

"Speculators are only responding to what is going on in the markets," Birol said. "We don't see enough oil in the markets. The major driver is supply and demand."

Birol said growth in worldwide oil demand is outstripping growth in new supplies by 1 million barrels a day per year.

Much of that new demand is coming from China, which is adding 800,000 vehicles to its roads each year, he said, and is responsible for fully half of the world's demand growth. Birol noted the growth in China's oil consumption is equal to all of the new output expected from Iraq over the next few years.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out our crossword, sudoku and Jumble puzzles >>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Plus, countries that export oil are not doing enough to invest in new production, and countries that use a lot of oil are not doing enough to cut back.

This isn't good news for American drivers, currently paying an average of nearly $4 a gallon at the pump.

"We have to learn to live with these higher prices," said Birol, who declined to say exactly how high oil will go. "They are here for a long time."

The International Energy Agency represents oil-consuming countries such as the United States, European nations and Japan. It was formed following the Arab oil embargo in the early 1970s, and it is responsible for shuffling strategic oil reserves among developed nations during a time of crisis. It also conducts extensive research on world oil markets.

Some argue that the world has plenty of oil, but that it is trapped in shale rock, tar sands or other types of formations.

Birol said challenges to extracting that oil include cost and environmental impact.

"There's a difference between having those reserves in the ground and having them at the gas pump," he said.

Birol's bleak view is not shared by everyone. Other analysts say plenty of new production from places such as Iraq and off the coast of Brazil should combine with sluggish worldwide economic growth to create an oil glut for at least the next few years. They place most of the blame for high prices on Wall Street, not soaring demand or price gouging from companies such as Exxon Mobil, BP, Chevron and Royal Dutch Shell.

Birol said U.S. politicians can do little in the short term to lower oil and gas prices.

In the long term, he said, the U.S. should focus on increasing its own domestic oil production and limiting consumption through higher fuel-efficiency standards and better incentives for electric cars.

"Oil will be more and more expensive unless countries like the U.S. and China use less," he said.


yourmoney@tribune.com

kcballer

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4597
  • In you I feel so pretty, In you I taste God
Demand, not speculation, cited for rising oil prices
May 6, 2011
http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/sc-cons-0505-money-consumer-watch-20110506,0,6142022.story




 
High oil prices are here to stay, and they're caused by surging demand and limited new supply, not Wall Street speculators.

That's the message from Fatih Birol, chief economist at the International Energy Agency.

"Speculators are only responding to what is going on in the markets," Birol said. "We don't see enough oil in the markets. The major driver is supply and demand."

Birol said growth in worldwide oil demand is outstripping growth in new supplies by 1 million barrels a day per year.

Much of that new demand is coming from China, which is adding 800,000 vehicles to its roads each year, he said, and is responsible for fully half of the world's demand growth. Birol noted the growth in China's oil consumption is equal to all of the new output expected from Iraq over the next few years.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out our crossword, sudoku and Jumble puzzles >>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Plus, countries that export oil are not doing enough to invest in new production, and countries that use a lot of oil are not doing enough to cut back.

This isn't good news for American drivers, currently paying an average of nearly $4 a gallon at the pump.

"We have to learn to live with these higher prices," said Birol, who declined to say exactly how high oil will go. "They are here for a long time."

The International Energy Agency represents oil-consuming countries such as the United States, European nations and Japan. It was formed following the Arab oil embargo in the early 1970s, and it is responsible for shuffling strategic oil reserves among developed nations during a time of crisis. It also conducts extensive research on world oil markets.

Some argue that the world has plenty of oil, but that it is trapped in shale rock, tar sands or other types of formations.

Birol said challenges to extracting that oil include cost and environmental impact.


"There's a difference between having those reserves in the ground and having them at the gas pump," he said.

Birol's bleak view is not shared by everyone. Other analysts say plenty of new production from places such as Iraq and off the coast of Brazil should combine with sluggish worldwide economic growth to create an oil glut for at least the next few years. They place most of the blame for high prices on Wall Street, not soaring demand or price gouging from companies such as Exxon Mobil, BP, Chevron and Royal Dutch Shell.

Birol said U.S. politicians can do little in the short term to lower oil and gas prices.

In the long term, he said, the U.S. should focus on increasing its own domestic oil production and limiting consumption through higher fuel-efficiency standards and better incentives for electric cars.

"Oil will be more and more expensive unless countries like the U.S. and China use less," he said.


yourmoney@tribune.com


Thanks 333 i've highlighted the good quotes.   Nothing Obama can really do, high priced oil is here to stay! 
Abandon every hope...

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41759
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Judge orders action on 6 Gulf drilling permits
AP/Yahoo ^ | 5/10/2011




NEW ORLEANS – A federal judge has given the Obama administration 30 days to act on six permits for deep water drilling in the Gulf of Mexico.

U.S. District Judge Martin Feldman on Tuesday ruled on a lawsuit filed by Ensco Offshore Co. and others. He rejected Interior Department arguments that the issue was moot because it already has resumed issuing permits following the moratorium that was imposed last year after the massive BP oil spill.


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

Option D

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17367
  • Kelly the Con Way
flood on the mississippi.. gas will cost.. its obamas fault.. he summoned "Storm" from the X-men to cause the rain to fall  ::)

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41759
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Gasoline prices to stay high through 2012, federal agency says
Plain Dealer ^ | 5/11/11 | John Funk




Gasoline prices will remain high through 2012, the U.S. Energy Information Administration says. The government's prediction Tuesday assumes significant increases in global oil consumption, oil price increases to go along with that, and even stronger profits for oil companies in the short run. But it does not mention the volatility that has beset oil markets in the last couple of weeks, driving prices to near record highs. The spikes -- driven by massive amounts of investor money electronically moving in and out of the commodities markets -- have convinced many motorists that somebody is gouging them.


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

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41759
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Mary Landrieu (D-La) pushes back against attacks on Big Oil
Politico ^ | 5/11/11


________________________ ________________________ ___________

Landrieu pushes back against attacks on Big Oil
May 11, 2011


Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.) has thought of a novel way for oil industry executives to protest her party’s attacks on their federal subsidies: Pack up your things and go elsewhere.


“I don’t think the oil executives would ever do this, but if I were one of them, I would be tempted to just shut off the spigots and go elsewhere and maybe America could run everything on solar power for the next decade or two and see what happens,” Landrieu told POLITICO.

Landrieu, who hails from a major oil producing state, has grown frustrated with the push by her party to target the subsidies as a way to pay down the deficit. Democrats – who have long targeted the industry – say that eliminating the tax breaks would slash the deficit by $21 billion over the next decade. A number of oil industry executives will testify before the Senate Finance Committee Thursday.


“It’s really very disappointing to me,” Landrieu said. “We should be really working on tax code reform for all industries, not singling out this particular industry.”


Late Wednesday, Landrieu and Alaska Sen. Mark Begich (D) sent a letter to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid saying that “although it is politically appealing to take a swipe at America’s oil and gas industry at this time of high profits, repealing the tax incentives now will hurt consumers, discourage domestic production and jeopardize millions of American jobs.”


______________________


Good for her.   Screw these environazis and psychos. 

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41759
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Rex Tillerson: Proposed tax hikes are ‘discriminatory and punitive’ {Oil/Gas}
Fuel Fix ^ | May 12, 2011 | Jennifer Dlouhy




Senate Democrats are unfairly singling out the nation’s five biggest oil companies with a “discriminatory and punitive” plan to eliminate tax credits and deductions used broadly by other industries, Exxon Mobil CEO Rex Tillerson is set to tell Congress on Thursday.

Tillerson is expected to join executives from the other four oil giants — Shell, ConocoPhillips, Chevron and BP — in arguing before the Senate Finance Committee that if the targeted tax provisions are eliminated, it would discourage new investment key to unlocking more natural gas and oil in the future.

“A much better solution” for raising federal revenue is for the U.S. to open up more land and waters for oil and gas development, Tillerson will say, according to prepared testimony.

“Arbitrarily punishing five U.S. oil and gas companies by raising their taxes will generate far less government revenue than if we were allowed to compete and produce our nation’s resources,” Tillerson is set to say.

In his written testimony, Tillerson argues that the targeted tax provisions are similar to deductions and credits used by a range of other companies. For instance, Senate Democrats have proposed axing a domestic manufacturing tax deduction that is broadly available to companies producing goods in the U.S., including farmers, newspaper publishers, movie producers and chemical factories.

Removing the Sec. 199 domestic manufacturing deduction for just “a select few companies within the oil and gas industry . . . is tantamount to job discrimination,” Tillerson will say. “Why should an American refinery worker employed by a major U.S. oil and gas company in Billings, Mont., be treated as inferior to an American movie producer in Hollywood, an American newspaper worker in New York or an employee at a foreign-owned refinery in Lemont, Ill.?”

The Senate Democrats’ proposal aims to raise $21 billion over the next 10 years. Supporters argue that with crude prices over $100 per barrel and the biggest oil companies raking in outsize profits, the tax provisions amount to “wasteful and ineffective corporate subsidies.”

“While families across the country are being squeezed, your industry is doing better than ever,” said several Senate Democrats in a letter to the CEOs of the top five oil companies on Wednesday. “And yet the U.S. government continues to dole out $4 billion a year in tax breaks to your companies. These subsidies are not sustainable, and we intend to end them.”

But the plan could backfire, warned Conoco Phillips CEO Jim Mulva on Wednesday. Mulva, who also is set to testify before the Finance Committee, stressed that tax hikes could effect gasoline prices.

“At a time when everyone is concerned over the cost of gasoline,” Mulva said, “Congress shouldn’t do anything that could actually worsen the situation.”

The Senate Democrats’ bill would block the top five major integrated oil companies from claiming:

A tax credit on payments to foreign governments — including petroleum income taxes – that they pay in exchange for some economic benefit. The five biggest oil companies would still be able to deduct foreign payments.

- A domestic manufacturing deduction, which has generally been available to a broad range of U.S. firms.

- A deduction for intangible drilling costs, such as the cost of repairs, site preparation and hauling supplies. Currently, integrated oil companies can expense 70 percent of the cost of these intangible drilling costs, but the legislation would require the big five oil companies to instead capitalize all of these costs.

- A percentage depletion deduction for oil and natural gas wells, computed using a portion of the revenue from the sale of those hydrocarbons.

- The bill also would limit the deduction of certain tertiary injectants, chemicals used to boost the amount of oil and natural gas that can be recovered from individual wells. Currently, companies are allowed to deduct the cost of those injectants, but the bill would force the big five oil companies to instead capitalize those costs and recover them over time.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41759
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Stalling offshore drilling is costing jobs and gas prices
By Alan Nunnelee (R-Miss.) - 05/12/11 09:07 AM ET

 

Energy prices are once again dominating kitchen table conversations across the country - with families facing tough decisions as more of their hard-earned paychecks go towards feeding the pump.

While these astronomical prices are most notable on the five foot signs outside of every gas station across America, they are also notorious for affecting normal day-to-day activities and the price of consumer goods. Back in Mississippi, concerned citizens are asking, how am I going to continue driving to work or taking my kids to school, soccer practice and piano lessons when it puts such a huge dent in my budget? Most of all they are asking, when will gas prices go down and what do we have to do to keep them low?

The continued stalling of energy production by this Administration is preventing Americans from finding relief at the pump. Since taking office, President Obama has actively delayed, blocked and stalled American energy production.

The American people are sick of the stalling tactics and that is why House Republicans are concentrating on three key initiatives that will reverse the Obama Administration’s policies that are hurting families, destroying jobs and increasing our reliance on foreign oil.

Last week the House passed The Restarting American Offshore Leasing Now Act, which requires the Secretary of the Interior to conduct oil and natural gas lease sales in the Gulf and offshore Virginia that have been delayed or canceled by the Obama Administration. This week the House focuses on The Putting the Gulf Back to Work Act and The Reversing President Obama’s Moratorium Act.

In May 2010, President Obama put a moratorium on drilling permits in the Gulf. The ban was officially lifted in October 2010; however, the Obama Administration has chosen to drag their feet and stall the permitting process. 

This stalling tactic is costing Americans jobs. In fact, reports indicate that if the Obama Administration’s de facto moratorium is sustained for 18 months, it will cost the United States over 36,000 jobs – 24,532 of those in the Gulf. Twelve rigs have already left the Gulf for other regions, taking hundreds, even thousands of jobs with them.

The Administration’s stalling efforts are also causing a significant decline in American energy with production in the Gulf expected to fall by 240,000 barrels per day in 2011.

The Putting the Gulf Back to Work Act sets a firm 30 day timeline for the Secretary of the Interior to act on drilling permits and restarts permits that were approved prior to the moratorium imposed in May 2010.

When President Obama took office, the Atlantic Coast, Pacific Coast and areas in Alaska were open for new offshore drilling. Now, the President’s actions have placed the entire region off-limits and blocked access to some of the most promising shallow water resources.

The Reversing President Obama’s Offshore Moratorium Act will implement a smart drilling plan by requiring the Administration to move forward on American energy production in areas containing the most oil and natural gas resources.

All three energy bills combined could create 250,000 jobs short-term and 1.2 million jobs long-term.  By putting the Gulf back to work and expanding offshore drilling, we will keep and create good jobs in America.

Finally, this is about America’s energy security. As a member of the House Energy Action Team (HEAT), I am committed to promoting policies that will strengthen our national security by decreasing our dependence on foreign energy. America will continue to face problems as long as we rely on our enemies for our needs.  House Republicans know that our energy security will only come through an all-of-the-above approach, including more American oil, natural gas, clean coal, nuclear energy and new technologies such as wind and solar power.

America - we are listening and focusing on long term goals to get more American energy out of the ground. Robust domestic energy production, free from the Obama Administration’s stalling games, will put an end to the gas prices that are straining budgets and compromising our energy security.

http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/energy-a-environment/160773-stalling-offshore-drilling-is-costing-jobs-and-gas-prices


Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41759
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
INSANITY: Bromwich Grasps At Double Regulation On Offshore Oil
Posted by: MacAoidh on Tuesday, May 3, 2011, 17:35
Tagged with: David Vitter    Michael Bromwich    Obamoratorium    offshore oil




Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement director Michael Bromwich, who has been caught repeatedly making statements which are patently untrue in congressional testimony and who has been under constant fire for his agency’s failure to resuscitate the offshore oil exploration business through the issuance of permits, made headlines yesterday by announcing that he wants not just to ride herd over the oil companies he’s tasked with regulating and permitting, but over the oilfield service companies as well.

Bromwich’s gambit would put contractors and suppliers under his agency’s management, at a time when he has already decried a lack of resources available to BOEMRE for its current mission of regulating the rig operators.

Bromwich stressed the move wouldn’t upset the longstanding principle that oil and gas companies are “fully liable for things that go wrong” offshore.

“There is a virtue in the clarity that we’ve had historically in being able to go directly against the operators even when it relates to contractors, but there are at least a small number of cases where we want to be able to go against contractors,” Bromwich said.

“Certainly in at least some cases, where the behavior of non-operators — that is, contractors – is egregious enough, we need to have the ability to move directly to enforcement actions, through the assessment of civil fines and through the other regulatory tools that we have.”

Bromwich said an internal review of current laws concluded that the agency already has “broad legal authority over all activities relating to offshore leases, whether it is engaged in by lessees, operators or contractors.”

Bear in mind, the kinds of things BOEMRE would attempt to fine or sue oil contractors for are already regulated. The operator of a rig is held responsible for compliance with federal regulations on the part of all of its contractors, suppliers and other business partners on that rig. Separate regulatory activity threatens a blizzard of paperwork that would put the industry at even more of a standstill – particularly given the current performance of BOEMRE, which has slowed permitting for drilling by 78 percent in deepwater since the Deepwater Horizon accident last April. Permitting in shallow water since February is off by 26 percent from the five months previous to Deepwater Horizon as of last month.

Randall Luthi, the head of the National Offshore Industries Association, said it’s unclear how the ocean energy bureau will assert its authority – especially given that its resources are already strained.

“Once you shift from just regulating the operators to the contractors, the universe could be huge,” Luthi said. “We’ve got an agency that – according to every report we’ve read in the last year – is chronically underfunded and doesn’t have the personnel to do what they were designed to do. And just as funding starts to come in, there is what looks like a push to do more.”

Sen. David Vitter (R-LA), who has become perhaps Bromwich’s chief tormentor on Capitol Hill, was enraged at the news.

“BOEMRE is perpetually failing at showing itself capable of handling its basic responsibility to issue permits.  The rate of permitting is abysmal and should be Director Bromwich and Secretary Salazar’s primary focus,” said Vitter.  “Instead, they’re diverting resources to expand their authority while adding more confusion to the process.  That’s not a recipe for lowering prices at the pump or getting Louisianians working again.”

Vitter fired off a letter to Bromwich today questioning his agency’s legal authority and available resources to begin regulating and investigating oilfield service companies – a letter which won’t likely find a happy reception at BOEMRE’s offices…

Dear Mr. Bromwich:

I have strong concerns with your remarks made yesterday in Houston regarding expanded jurisdiction at the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement (BOEMRE).  It appears this expansion of regulatory authority will serve as another hurdle to expanding our domestic production by inserting even more confusion to the permitting process.  I would appreciate a detailed response on several items relating to your expansion of jurisdiction and responsibility in light of the fact that you have said publicly, on multiple occasions, that BOEMRE does not have adequate staff to handle permitting as an excuse for your agency’s abysmal pace of approving permits.  Expanding the reach of your agency while simultaneously claiming you are “understaffed” is nothing short of confusing.

Particularly, I request the followin

1.A copy of the memorandum of legal authority that has been written.  The BOEMRE regulations currently apply to the operators because the regulations are incorporated into the lease contracts – in other words, the regulation has a contractual basis.  I am aware of no such privity of contract that exists between DOI and the support contractors.
2.How can BOEMRE apply existing regulations to contractors when the proposed regulations specifically only applied to lessees?  Are there not legal problems with this expansion of jurisdiction beyond the current contractual authority?
3.Your analysis of how the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act authorizes BOEMRE to manage contractors.  I am very skeptical of a broad scale regulation of contractors by BOEMRE, especially with no new regulatory proceedings that give them the opportunity for notice and comment under the Administrative Procedures Act.
4.Finally, please identify what staff you intend to direct away from their current responsibilities at Interior and explain why they could not better be utilized in the permitting process to get our energy industry and thousands of Americans back to work.
Again, you have on multiple occasions claimed to be understaffed, yet now – despite these claims – you appear to have adequate staff to expand BOEMRE’s jurisdiction and responsibility.  This announcement leaves Congress with no other reason but to believe that BOEMRE has always had the necessary means, staff, and flexibility to meet the rising challenges and demands on the agency.  Many of my colleagues in Congress would argue that includes the rising challenge of increased energy prices, a direct result of the lack of offshore drilling permits that could increase domestic supply.

I look forward to a detailed plan of how you intend to maneuver staff with this newly acknowledged flexibility to meet that very real need for increased permit approval.

In related news, the average gasoline price nationwide is poised to top the $4-per gallon mark by the weekend.

http://thehayride.com/2011/05/insanity-bromwich-grasps-at-double-regulation-on-offshore-oil


Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41759
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Myths About Oil and Gas
www.Townhall.com

May 13, 2011 | Bob Beauprez




As voters around the country wince at rising gas prices, panicked Democrats, in a rush to cover the failure of their all-or-nothing bet on the alternative energy industry have started singing a familiar tune – blame the oil and gas industry.  Instead of facing the reality of his owned failed policies, President Obama is calling for an end to the "tax giveaways" he claims amount to $4 billion in “subsidies” to the energy industry. 

This tactic isn’t surprising given the effect that rising gas prices have on the President’s approval ratings and his obsession with re-election.  But, less than truthful innuendos and political spin hardly helps American working families that are getting hammered at the pump. 


If our leaders are going to have an honest discussion about energy, it's important to clear up a few rumors, misconceptions and outright falsehoods being perpetrated about the oil and gas industry.  Let's begin with three of the more common ones:

1.      The industry doesn’t receive any taxpayer funded subsides.  None.

2.      Rampant speculation and Wall Street tricks aren’t driving up gas prices.

3.      The oil and gas industry is not dodging the taxes they owe and withholding “their fair share”. 


I'll say it again; contrary to popular opinion and the President's spin, oil and gas gets no taxpayer funded subsidies.  The tax code does allow them certain tax credits and deductions to encourage continued investment in an industry that is heavily front-end loaded with capital expense.  These are the same kind of incentives available to Coca-Cola, General Electric, Ford, and Micro-Soft and other companies doing business in the U.S.  Or, for that matter, like the deduction for mortgage interest payments enjoyed by homeowners.  But, importantly these are tax credits, and markedly different from direct taxpayer cash subsidies like the 45 cent per gallon payment blenders get to put ethanol in fuel mixes. 

When businesses invest in America, we all benefit.  The oil and gas industry plows about $300 billion into domestic projects per year – that's 75 times more than Obama's phantom "taxpayer giveaways"  amount - and employees over 9 million people.   Those are real numbers; not Washington spin, and if government would allow and encourage even more domestic production there would be more jobs and more investment – and more total taxes paid, too. 


Another argument that often circulates when gas prices go up is that a phantom class of “Wall Street speculators” is to blame for the increase of prices.  So pervasive was this school of thought that in 2008, President Bush commissioned an exhaustive review, via the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, of the effect that speculators had on market prices.  Their conclusion was surprising, according to The Wall Street Journal, “The agency concluded that speculators—otherwise known as traders—were putting downward pressure on prices. The liquidity they provide helps to smooth volatility.” 

Not satisfied with the 2008 study, President Obama recently resurrected this school of thought, even tapping Attorney General Eric Holder to police perceived illegal activity and price gouging.  Yet within the Presidents’ own Administration, the Federal Trade Commission found that the recent spike in oil prices is due primarily to normal market forces, including booming demand from developing economies in India and China and not because of any questionable behavior from Wall Street.

The third popular attack is that somehow oil and gas industry isn’t paying its fair share in taxes.  Democrat mythology aside, the oil and gas industry pays a much heftier percentage of net income in taxes (41.1%) than the average of all other S&P Industrials (26.5%).   Every single day, the industry is sending more than $85 million to the U.S. Treasury for taxes and royalty payments.  Yes, the energy companies are profitable, but their profit margins are right in line with manufacturing, aerospace, and food industries, while computer, pharmaceutical, and the beverage companies have triple the net income margins of traditional energy.   


I don't like subsidies and I don't like Congress or the IRS deciding what is good economic behavior and what is bad.   But, I do understand that you get more of what gets incentivized, and less of what is penalized.  And, there is a huge difference in "redistributing the wealth" through direct subsidy payments, and a tax credit that encourages investment in much needed production that creates jobs and taxable income. 

If congress is serious about creating jobs and jump starting the economy, they should lower the corporate tax rate, which is the highest among the 34 OECD nations, rather than increase the tax burden on energy or any industry.

Capital is fungible, and energy production is the prototypical global industry. Plenty of nations around the world are providing a far more welcoming business environment for energy production that the U.S. already with a less onerous tax code and far less regulatory burden.

If increasing our domestic supply is really a national objective, then this might not be the best time to send exactly the opposite message to the people that provide the capital to drill the wells.


Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41759
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Farmers across America ditch tractors for oxen in bid to beat rising fuel prices
The Daily Mail ^ | May 9, 2011 | Daily Mail Reporter


Posted on 05/15/2011 7:01:59


When farmers Danielle and Matt Boerson realised they could no longer afford to run their tractors, they took the bull by the horns - and ditched them for oxen.

Soaring petrol prices had become so high that the couple, who run an 80-acre farm near Madison, Wisconsin, were forced to get rid of their two tractors, hay baler, plough and rotavator.

So they took a course at the agricultural institute in traditional farming techniques.

'It gave me the confidence that, yes, I could do this', Danielle told the Times. 'It just required a lot of concentration and a firm voice.' Their instructor was former peace core volunteer Dick Roosenberg, 64, who learned the trade while working for the UN in West Africa. He took the skills he had honed back to Michigan and set up Tillers International.

At first the company was aimed at helping Third World farmers harvest in the cheapest way possible.

On the side, he also helped historically-themed villages. But his specialist knowledge is now enjoying a new wave of interest with farmers from Wisconsin to Alaska now joining his courses.


(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41759
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Obama’s Oil Drilling Subterfuge
www.Redstate.com

 5/16/2011 | Daniel Horowitz




Many liberals in the media are expressing shock over Obama’s apparent willingness to increase oil production.  We all know that he is full of …, I mean ethanol, and they do too.

Those of you who were befuddled at the news that Obama will ‘expand drilling’ in Alaska are not missing anything.  Obama has pulled this political chicanery a number of times.  Whenever a specific proposal that he so adamantly opposes becomes too popular to ignore, he announces his support for it by promising to implement inconsequential reforms.  To that end, he declared during his Saturday radio address that he is “directing the Department of Interior to conduct annual lease sales in Alaska’s National Petroleum Reserve, while respecting sensitive areas, and to speed up the evaluation of oil and gas resources in the mid and south Atlantic”.

So we are to believe that the Beaufort and Chukchi Seas and ANWR, all of which are impounded from drilling leases by the administration, are more sensitive than Alaska’s National Petroleum Reserve?  Caribou, baby, Caribou in ANWR; drill, baby, drill in ANPR?  Think again.

Here is the report from The Hill:


President Obama announced Saturday the government would hold annual onshore lease sales in Alaska’s National Petroleum Reserve; extend the life of leases in the Gulf of Mexico and in some areas off the coast of Alaska for one year; speed up ongoing Interior Department testing in the mid- and south-Atlantic to gauge the level of resources; and establish an interagency task force to coordinate permitting for offshore drilling in Alaska.

The White House is making the policy shifts after taking intense criticism from Republicans in recent weeks over energy policy as gas prices have topped $4 per gallon in some parts of the country.Many of the proposals are incremental expansions of existing policies and had been set in motion prior to Saturday’s announcement. It’s also unclear by how much the plan will increase domestic oil production. (emphasis added)

Once again, Obama is attempting to diffuse disquiet over his anti-energy policies by embracing the opposition through inconsequential and empty promises.  He attempted this stratagem earlier this year when he announced wholesale regulatory reform in a Wall Street Journal op-ed.  Amidst growing pressure to roll back job killing regulations, Obama announced a momentous effort to “study” onerous regulations.  Needless to say, the regulations in the federal register have only grown since his vapid announcement.  In fact, he is attempting to regulate every facet of our economy; from the broadband providers to oil refineries, without congressional approval.  Nonetheless, he is still studying the problem.

Obama used the same ploy in his State of the Union Address by embracing popular policies, such as a corporate tax cuts and tort reform.  We haven’t heard about them since the address and probably never will.

His promise to reform land lease permits and to allow drilling in Alaska is another attempt at subterfuge for the purpose of tamping down the outrage toward his job-killing, anti-growth policies.  After all, didn’t the administration oppose all three GOP bills that would implement some of these very changes just last week?  House Natural Resources Committee Chairman Doc Hastings (R-WA) released the following statement on Obama’s radio address:


“In the last week, House Republicans passed three bipartisan bills that will create 1.2 million jobs, triple American offshore oil production and generate $840 million in revenue - real action to produce real American energy. It’s ironic that while the White House and Congressional Democrats strongly criticized these efforts, President Obama is now taking tiny baby steps in our direction. The President is finally admitting what Republicans have known all along - that increasing the supply of American energy will help lower prices and create jobs. One weekend address announcing minor policy tinkering, while positive, does not erase the Administration’s long job-destroying record of locking-up America’s energy resources.”

As Drudge observed yesterday, Obama made the exact same pledge over a year ago, immediately preceding his inexorable and unprecedented moratorium on drilling in the Gulf of Mexico and the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS).  Sadly, the New York Times was credulous enough to believe it and carried water for Obama by headlining a story at that time titled, “Obama to Open Offshore Areas to Oil Drilling for First Time.”  That didn’t exactly work out according to plan.

As such, don’t be fooled by this foxhole conversion.  His speech does not reflect a newfound obsequious to the will of the American people; he will never abdicate his radical ideology so easily.  Moreover, his political appointees at the Department of Energy and Department of Interior will wait for the inevitable lawsuits from environmental legal defense groups to scuttle the plans.  That is what the administration did when they blocked Shel Oil from drilling in the Arctic Ocean.  The environmentalists are already chomping at the bit.  And as is the case with every other proposal, he will encumber any meaningful drilling policies with endless environmental impact studies.  It’s akin to Obama’s promises of securing the border, even as his minions at the Department of Homeland Security instruct ICE agents not to apprehend non-criminal aliens.  Talk is cheap, Mr. President, and in your case, it is worthless.

Call your members of congress and request that they support H.R. 1777, which would implement comprehensive pro-energy reforms, such as opening ANWR for drilling, streamlining the permit and leasing process, and lawsuit reform (summary and commentary here).  Let’s unmask Obama’s fallacious attempt at being pro-energy and make him take a stand against real energy production legislation!

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41759
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Exxon fires back at NYT editorial on oil industry taxes {NYT enjoys same tax break}
Fuel Fix ^ | May 16, 2011 | Jennifer Dlouhy




A wise person (possibly Mark Twain) once famously cautioned: “Never pick a fight with a man who buys his ink by the barrel.” But it doesn’t look like Exxon Mobil is heeding that advice.

The company today hit back against a New York Times editorial that said it was “utterly absurd” for the nation’s five biggest oil companies to argue proposed tax increases would raise consumer prices and discourage domestic energy production.

In a blog post, Exxon Mobil Vice President Ken Cohen points out that one of the industry tax breaks Senate Democrats and the Obama administration have targeted for elimination is also enjoyed by the Times.

“The Times neglects to mention that it enjoys a higher deduction than we do for one of the measures it’s campaigning to have taken away from our industry,” Cohen writes.

At issue is the Sec. 199 domestic manufacturing provision, which is broadly used by a range of industries, including automakers, movie producers and newspaper publishers, to score a 9 percent deduction. Federal law limits the oil and natural gas industry to 6 percent domestic manufacturing deductions.

The deduction is one of a suite of tax breaks that Senate Democrats are pushing to end for the five biggest oil companies in legislation that could come up for a vote on Wednesday. A Senate Finance Committee hearing last week explored the issue with executives from those major oil companies, including Exxon Mobil CEO Rex Tillerson.

The New York Times editorial makes the case that the oil industry tax breaks are unnecessary, especially at a time when the companies are raking in substantial profits. “There is also an elemental matter of fairness here,” the Times editorial board writes.

The newspaper continues:

“More than anything, one has to wonder why the oil companies are fighting so hard for a comparatively small amount of cash, at least for them. The only explanation we can come up with is that they have always gotten what they wanted and expect to do so now, so why not?

While the domestic manufacturing deduction isn’t unique to the oil and gas industry, several of the targeted tax provisions are, the New York Times notes. Even without them, the Times editorial asserts, the “industry is not going to stop drilling on American territory as long as the oil is there and yielding big dollars.”

In his blog entry today, Cohen responds with a reprise of Tillerson’s arguments before the Senate Finance Committee last Thursday. His case boils down to a few points:

- Taxes on a select few companies would put them at a disadvantage against competitors when it comes to capital investments.

- It would be unfair to single out the oil and natural gas industry — and the jobs that are tied to it — with tax hikes.

- A better way to boost federal revenue would be by opening more U.S. lands and waters to oil and gas development. Oil companies pay royalties to the federal treasury for the energy produced on federal leases.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41759
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Rep. Kevin Brady: Fed policies add 56 cents per gallon of gas
Fuel Fix ^ | May 16, 2011 | Richard Dunham


________________________ ________________________ ________________________


Attempts by the Federal Reserve Board and the Obama administration to head off an economic collapse in 2008 have resulted in a jump in gasoline pump prices of 56 cents per gallon, Rep. Kevin Brady, R-The Woodlands, said today.

Brady, the top House Republican on the congressional Joint Economic Committee, released a study that looked at the economic costs to average Americans of the massive infusion of dollars into the U.S. economy by the Fed designed to stimulate the economy and stave of a national economic catastrophe as the U.S. financial system teetered on the brink of collapse.

“Americans are paying a steep price at the pump as a result of the weak dollar policies pursued by this administration and the Federal Reserve”, said Brady.

The study, entitled The Price of Oil and the Value of the Dollar, states that the value of the U.S. dollar has declined by 14 percent since the Fed began its program formally known as “quantitative easing” (also called “QE1″) in November of 2008, as the financial system neared meltdown.

By pumping out dollars to stave of an impending disaster, the Fed effectively devalued the U.S. currenc.y With oil an international commodity that trades in U.S. dollars, the declining value of the dollar has added $17.04 per barrel to the price of Brent Crude oil, the study found.

“There are two lessons here,” Brady said. “Rather than pointing fingers at energy manufacturers the president should be looking to his own Treasury and the Fed for answers to the high price of fuel. And this drives home the point that the Federal Reserve should have one mandate, price stability, to prevent inflation and preserve the value of the U.S. dollar.”



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



BBOOOOMMM.

 


Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41759
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Just Who is Gouging Us on Gasoline?
American Thinker ^ | 5-17-11 | Jeff T. Allen


________________________ ________________________ _______


Americans are fed up with high gas prices, and some U.S. senators are getting disgusted enough to act. Appearing in front of an Exxon gas station last week, Charles Schumer and several other senators called for the elimination of tax deductions oil companies use in their business of finding, refining, and marketing the precious energy we use. It is time we are outraged by blatant greed at the gas pump, they implored. Some of us agree, but for different reasons. Let's have the courage to name those who are getting the biggest cut from our gasoline dollars, and put a stop to it.

Understand where our money goes when we fill up at our corner station. Oil company profit is one place: the after-tax profits earned by the most successful oil companies in America works out to about 8-9% of revenues. That's 8 cents of every dollar we spend at the pump, and it's been much lower in years when prices are squeezed by too much supply. Sometimes there are no profits, but rather huge costs, if mistakes that get nasty are made in exploration or transportation (e.g. Exxon Valdez and BP Gulf spills).

The senators standing in front of the gas station would have you think such profit is the biggest chunk of your purchase price -- but it isn't even close. The taxes on gasoline at retail amount to a national average of 47 cents per gallon (including federal taxes of 18 cents, state and local taxes of 18 cents, and sales/other taxes at retail of more than 10 cents). And before taxpayers have paid that princely sum (to people who haven't invested a penny to produce the product), the operating profits of the explorers are taxed at 34% -- which is always passed on to consumers in the form of higher prices. States get into the act here too, taxing the retailers' profits after taxing the product at the pump. And let's not forget the other costs that drive up the gallon price, such as drilling restrictions that force explorers 5 miles deep under the ocean, transportation regulations and taxes, refining regulations, licenses, leases, and myriads of others.

Pulling huge quantities of wealth out of the ground isn't easy. Finding and refining oil takes knowledge of geology, drilling technology, finance, transportation logistics, and environmental science. Pulling even larger amounts of wealth out of taxpayers, however, takes only two things: ignorance and envy.

You see, average Americans have no concept of what it takes to deliver a gallon of gasoline to their neighborhoods -- for 1/10 the price/oz. of the latte they buy on the same corner. Most Americans aren't geologists. And they don't like high prices. So Americans routinely grumble about oil company profits, without any knowledge of the relative size of them or what risks it takes to earn them. Yet it is clearly the government which benefits most from our purchases at the pump, without lifting a finger to make the product.

Ignorance and envy are something our senators are banking on when they rail against oil profits. Our media culture loves to help them. But if corporations are to be "accountable" for egregious profits, where is the senatorial and media outrage over other company profits? Microsoft earns record profits of $18 billion, more than 30% of its revenues net of all taxes. The latte-maker Starbucks earns 11% of revenue. But there is no move from Mr. Schumer & Friends decrying the write-offs of Microsoft's development costs. Why isn't Mr. Schumer standing in front of Best Buy railing against the taxpayer "subsidy" of Microsoft? Do Microsoft's contributions to his campaign have any influence on his choice of targets? Is Microsoft (or any company) more worthy of egregious gain than Exxon?

If the public weren't so ignorant and envious of such capitalist exercises as making gasoline, perhaps they might turn their attention toward the biggest cost in their lives and also the biggest reason gas prices are high: government. If the government would spend less time punishing and restricting energy exploration and delivery, we might have more energy. If the government, however, wants to raise the after-tax costs of producing energy, we will surely get less, driving prices higher still.

As government elites gain greater money and power from exploiting our ignorance, they posture again about taxpayers and pump prices. But they really don't care about taxpayers and pump prices at all. Nothing in their behavior over energy policy leads to that conclusion. Rather than sticking up for taxpayers and consumers, the biggest pigs at the trough are looking for another way to stick it to taxpayers and consumers. In classic Atlas Shrugged fashion, the know-nothings mooching off the productivity and ingenuity of capitalists take the public stage to throw sand in the gears of a vital American output engine. The gouging continues. on "Just Who is Gouging Us on Gasoline?"


kcballer

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4597
  • In you I feel so pretty, In you I taste God
Do you enjoy posting in threads over and over with the same sourced drivel?  I mean seriously.  You have an obsession with one part of the equation on oil prices and only fixate on that.  It makes for a stupid thread full of the same sources over and over. 
Abandon every hope...

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41759
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
 ::)  ::)  ::)


These articles are posted as they come out.   You and mal tried telling my I was clueless that there was a connection between the weak dollar policy and gas procies.   Both of you were and still are dead wrong on that. 


This is why Obama policies of weak dollar, inflation, and scarcity via moritoriums are going to get his ass booted in 2012 thankfully.

   

kcballer

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4597
  • In you I feel so pretty, In you I taste God
::)  ::)  ::)


These articles are posted as they come out.   You and mal tried telling my I was clueless that there was a connection between the weak dollar policy and gas procies.   Both of you were and still are dead wrong on that. 


This is why Obama policies of weak dollar, inflation, and scarcity via moritoriums are going to get his ass booted in 2012 thankfully.

   

Oh please.  I've long said the weak dollar policy doesn't help.  You fail to even heed the words of the articles you post.  You act as if Obama is the sole reason for high oil, i have proven and articles that aren't redstate or some other nonsense have proven the exact same thing, over and over. 

This is bigger than the president and there is little he can do to stop the rising prices.  This thread is nothing more than a pitiful attempt to show how uninformed you are on oil and gas. 
Abandon every hope...

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41759
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
No, he is greatly adding to the problem by fdoing everything possible to make the matters worse and reacihng his stated goal of "SKYROCKETING ENERGY PROCES"   

kcballer

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4597
  • In you I feel so pretty, In you I taste God
::)  ::)  ::)


These articles are posted as they come out.   You and mal tried telling my I was clueless that there was a connection between the weak dollar policy and gas procies.   Both of you were and still are dead wrong on that. 


This is why Obama policies of weak dollar, inflation, and scarcity via moritoriums are going to get his ass booted in 2012 thankfully.

   

ps the US doesn't have enough oil to make much of a dent if any in the overall price.  The amount of oil we consume can not be paid for at current prices from US oil.  They would need to rise and stay high in order to make economic sense for oil companies to invest in Utah and further afield.  You fail to understand this basic principal - you do not save the cheapest, easiest oil for last.  

Abandon every hope...