Author Topic: Obama Admn keeping Oil drilling ban ($6 a gallon gas here we come) - Told You So  (Read 51384 times)

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39899
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.

blacken700

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 11873
  • Getbig!
Oreilly is clueless. 

Next.   

hahahaha oreilly is 30 seconds of the 5 minute video,and it was his guess not bill  ??? ::) :D

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39899
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
The news wires are reporting that President Obama actively lobbied Senate Democrats to defeat the Keystone pipeline yesterday. The effect of blocking the Keystone XL Pipeline is to defer 700,000 barrels of oil per day. And as I reported at The Weekly Standard recently, the president’s policy of choking off oil production under federal leases will prevent another 1 million barrels of oil per day this year, and even more next year. 

Obama will soon be personally responsible for preventing some 2 million barrels per day of possible North American crude oil production from reaching the American economy. The U.S. currently produces only about 6 million barrels of domestic crude oil, so that would be more than a 30 percent increase in domestic production.  

The president likes to say that America is producing more oil than ever before, but that’s due entirely to shale oil (e.g., fracking) and oil sands. The boom in production from private sources is currently shielding the administration from the political consequences of taking such a huge amount of oil off the market.  

Two millions barrels per day of oil production would affect not just the price of gasoline in North America, but also the economics of world oil production: The president is preventing the U.S. from increasing oil production by an amount nearly equivalent to Iran’s total oil exports. He insists that gasoline prices are rising because of “fears” about a disruption in Iranian supply, but he wants you to believe that gasoline prices would be unaffected by a 30 percent increase in domestic U.S. oil production in the next two years.

If you’re gullible enough to believe that, consider this: The recession drove world oil demand from a peak of 86 million barrels per day in 2007 to a low of 85 million barrels per day in 2009. In the same period, the price of gasoline fell by half. We are once again entering a period of scarcity, where slight fluctuations in demand or supply will have a disproportionate impact on gas prices — but this time the scarcity is largely the product of Obama’s policies.  

— Mario Loyola, a senior analyst at the Armstrong Center for Energy and the Environment, is director of the Center for Tenth Amendment Studies at the Texas Public Policy Foundation. 

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39899
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Dem rep. rips Obama’s energy policy (Gene Green, RAT-Texas)
The Hill ^ | 3/09/12 | Josiah Ryan
Posted on March 11, 2012 4:19:43 PM EDT by Libloather

Dem rep. rips Obama’s energy policy
By Josiah Ryan - 03/09/12 03:47 PM ET

Rep. Gene Green (D-Texas) on Thursday bashed President Obama’s proposal to increase taxes on oil-and-gas companies, saying it would kill jobs and result in lower domestic energy production.

“I oppose the president’s proposed tax increases on the oil and gas industry,” Green said Thursday, as reported by the Houston Chronicle. “An $85 billion tax hike would suppress our domestic production, stifle job creation, drive up imports of crude oil from nations that are hostile to us and increase the volatility of the gasoline markets.”

Obama outlined his vision for domestic energy in a speech Wednesday, arguing that the $4 billion in tax breaks that go to the energy industry are in part responsible for record profits they are reporting. He suggeted the money could be better deployed to incentivize the alternative energy industy.

“We’re giving them extra billions of dollars on top of near-record profits that they’re already making,” Obama said.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39899
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Somehow we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe," Steven Chu, now the energy secretary, said in a 2008 interview with the Wall Street Journal.

A gallon of regular costs more than $8 there. The Oil Price Information Service thinks the average price here will rise to $4.25 a gallon by the end of April. That would exceed the record of $4.11, set in July 2008.

A gallon of regular cost just $1.85 the day before President Barack Obama was inaugurated. If the price were to double again during a second Obama term, Mr. Chu's goal could be achieved.

Sen. Obama expressed little concern when the price of gas was approaching the current record high.

"I would have preferred a more gradual adjustment," he told CNBC in a June 2008 interview. "But if we take some steps right now to help people make the adjustment ... then I think we can come out of this stronger and have a more efficient energy policy."

Earlier, Mr. Obama told the editorial board of the San Francisco Chronicle that "under my plan of a cap and trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket."

Secretary Chu has backed away from his infamous quote. But that was political expediency. Democrats want high energy prices, but not the blame for them.

"If you are a politician who wants to raise the price of gas, you have two choices," said Prof. Walter Russell Mead. "You can persuade the military leadership to install you in office through a coup d'etat, or you can lie to the voters and pursue your agenda on the sly."

Democrats want higher energy prices mostly to make alternative sources of energy seem economical. That's a tall order. The Energy Information Administration estimates the cost of generating a megawatt hour of electricity from a new plant would be 66 cents from plants powered by natural gas; 86 cents from hydro; 95 cents from coal; 97 cents from wind; $1.13 from biomass; $1.14 from nuclear, and $3.12 from solar thermal.

Only wind appears competitive. But industrial wind turbines are eyesores, they kill a lot of birds and bats, and -- as sweltering Texans and shivering Britons have learned -- tend not to work when it is very hot or very cold.

The Obama administration's massive subsidies to "green" firms have produced more embarrassment than energy. Solar panel manufacturer Solyndra, which went bankrupt last September after receiving $535 million, has left behind an environmental mess. Eleven other subsidized firms are having financial problems and five have filed for bankruptcy, CBS News reported in January.

In his state of the union address this year, President Barack Obama cited battery manufacturer Ener1 as a government investment success. Ener1 filed for bankruptcy two days later.

A few days after Mr. Obama said he planned to buy a Chevy Volt, General Motors announced it will suspend production of the electric car. About 1,300 workers will lose their jobs, at least temporarily.

The $38.6 billion in loan guarantees it provided to "green" firms created just 3,545 permanent new jobs, according to a Department of Energy estimate. That's an average cost of $5 million per job.

Mr. Obama's "investments" haven't been bad for all of us. Eighty percent of the firms that got DOE loans are run or owned by the president's financial backers, according to the Hoover Institution's Peter Schweizer. "Green Firms Get Fed Cash, Give Execs Bonuses, Fail," headlined an ABC News investigative report broadcast Tuesday.

In what was billed as a "major speech" on energy policy Feb. 23, the president pledged to make more such "investments."

The speech was remarkable for its mendacity. During the Obama administration, the time it takes to get a permit to drill in the Gulf of Mexico has nearly doubled. Leases to drill on federal lands in the West are down 40 percent. But Mr. Obama claimed credit for the recent rise in domestic production of oil and natural gas. This "couldn't be farther from the truth," said the president of the American Petroleum Institute.

We can't drill our way to lower gas prices, Mr. Obama said. The Institute for Energy Research says there are 1.4 trillion barrels of recoverable oil in the United States and offshore, "enough to last at least 200 years." But most are on public lands. Government policy keeps them locked up.

"The administration has done everything but support drilling," said retired Shell oil company executive John Hofmeister. "We are on the verge of slipping into an energy abyss."

Jack Kelly is a columnist for the Post-Gazette and The Blade of Toledo, Ohio (jkelly@post-gazette.com, 412 263-1476). More articles by this author
First published on March 11, 2012 at 12:00 am

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39899
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
More green nonsense: Obama's 'investment' pitch
EDITORIAL
Published Mar 10, 2012 at 3:00 am (Updated Mar 8, 2012)     

http://www.unionleader.com/article/20120310/OPINION01/703099991/-1/opinion




 
 

President Obama on Wednesday advocated increasing federal tax breaks for automobiles that run on electricity or natural gas, plus spending $1 billion to finance recharging stations for electric vehicles in 15 cities, plus $650 million to make electric cars more appealing to consumers. Maybe he forgot that his own budget projects that the federal debt (now at $15 trillion) will increase to $25 trillion in the next decade.

Instead of learning from his failures, the President is doubling down on them. Though his schemes to redirect cash from some economic sectors to those he personally or politically favors have proven ineffective at stimulating the broader economy, he proposes throwing more money down the same hole.

“We need to invest in the technology that will help us use less oil in our cars and our trucks, in our buildings, in our factories,” Obama said on Wednesday, “That's the only solution to the challenge. Because as we start using less, that lowers the demand, prices come down. It's pretty straightforward. That's the only solution to this challenge.”

Nonsense. The flaw is Obama's use of the word “we.” By that he means the government, at his direction. But how does Barack Obama know which “green” technologies are best, which are most viable, which are most promising? He doesn't. And yet he insists that “the only solution” to our high oil consumption is to let him and his team play tech-investor with our money. How completely absurd.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39899
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Obama's Approval Rate Plunges Due To Gas Prices
Asia One News ^ | March 12, 2012 | AFP




WASHINGTON - US President Barack Obama's job approval rating, weighed down by soaring gas prices, has plunged below 50 per cent, giving his political opponents what appears to be an opening in the November election, a new opinion poll showed.

The survey by ABC News and The Washington Post indicated that only 46 per cent of Americans now approved of the way Obama is handling his job and 50 per cent disapproved.

The situation was a reversal from early February when 50 per cent approved of the president's performance and 46 per cent disapproved.

According to the survey, the drop was attributed to soaring gas prices threatening to crimp America's slow recovery from a recession.


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


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

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39899
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
AFPM PRESIDENT TESTIFIES ON GASOLINE PRICES
AFPM ^ | March 07, 2012 | AFPM





American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers President Charles T. Drevna told a House subcommittee today that high crude oil prices are the primary factor behind high gasoline prices, and said the most effective actions to help American consumers would be to increase U.S. oil production, increase oilimports from Canada and reduce overregulation.

Drevna said that according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, "only 6 cents of every dollar that Americans pay for gasoline goes to the refining industry that AFPM represents. The cost of crude oil accounts for 76 cents, followed by taxes at 12 cents, and distribution and marketing also at 6 cents

"Refiners, as well as petrochemical manufacturers, are the first customers of a barrel of oil and the first to be impacted when oil prices rise," Drevna said in written testimonyto the House Subcommittee on Energy and Power, which conducted a hearing ongasoline prices this morning.

"Refiners don't set the price of oil any more than automakers set the price of steel, bakers set the price of wheat or restaurants set the price of cattle," Drevna added. "Oil is an international commodity that trades in the free market and its price is not controlled by its purchasers."

Drevna called on the Obama administration to allow increased exploration and development of America's vast oil and natural gas resources on federal lands and in federally controlled waters tomeet America's energy needs, create jobs and improve America's economic and national security.

In addition, Drevna advocated approval of the Keystone XL pipeline to bring 700,000 barrels of oil a day from Canada to U.S. Gulf Coast refineries.

Drevna said overly burdensome and conflicting government regulations threaten American competitiveness. He said some regulations are not doing anything to protect the environment but only jeopardize American jobs and raise consumer costs further. Examples of these are Tier 3 regulations to reduce sulfur in gasoline, greenhouse gas regulations, lengthy permitting delays, and requirements under the Renewable Fuel Standard involving biofuels, Drevna said.

Oil prices have risen recently because of concerns about the future of Iranian oil production, increased oil demand in developing nations and the decline in the value of the U.S. dollar,Drevna said.

"Historically, the best mechanism available to address high crude oil prices has been to take actions to increase the global crude oil supply," Drevna said. "When America has taken such actions in the past, it has sent a message to the market that ourcountry is serious about meeting our energy and national security needs."

Drevna said U.S. exports of refined petroleum products -primarily diesel fuel because there is an excess domestic supply -are benefitting American consumers. He pointed out that America imports about 60 percent of the crude oil the nation needs and is not a net exporter of gasoline.

"Exports don't raise gasoline prices," Drevna said. "Rather,exports bring billions of dollars to America, preserve and create jobs, strengthen our economy and reduce our trade deficit. In fact,in allowing domestic refiners to run at higher utilization rates, exports are likely keeping consumer costs from rising further. If all American manufacturers and agricultural interests were prohibited from exporting their products, they would produce less -and that could actually raise consumer prices."



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

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39899
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Obama Makes 4 Misleading Gas Statements in One Week
 
www.breitbart.com


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
by Wynton Hall 5 hours ago 17post a comment 
 


President Barack Obama continues to struggle with Americans' growing ire over soaring gas prices--the highest ever at this time of year.

Part of Mr. Obama's challenge is that he continues to make misleading statements that only conflate his growing problems on gas policy.  Here are at least four of them Mr. Obama made in the last week alone:

1.  On March 7, 2012, Mr. Obama said this in a speech in Mount Holly, North Carolina:

PRESIDENT OBAMA: “Now, because of these new standards for cars and trucks, they’re going to — all going to be able to go further and use less fuel every year.  And that means pretty soon you’ll be able to fill up your car every two weeks instead of every week — and, over time, that saves you, a typical family, about $8,000 a year.”

AUDIENCE MEMBER:  “We like that.”

OBAMA:  “You like that, don't you?”

AUDIENCE:  “Yes!”

OBAMA:  “Eight thousand dollars — that's no joke. … It looks like somebody might have fainted up here.”

REALITY: According to the Washington Post Fact-Checker, Mr. Obama's claim that Americans will save $8,000 a year isn't true.   In actuality, they will save $8,000 over the life of a car--and that's only if government estimates hold accurate until 2025.  One of those estimates assumes that the future price of fuel will be $3.42 a gallon--a full 33 cents lower than it is right now in the year 2012.

2.  On March 10, 2012, Mr. Obama said this during his weekly address:

You and I both know that with only 2% of the world’s oil reserves, we can’t just drill our way to lower gas prices – not when consume 20 percent of the world’s oil.

REALITY: Tell that to the state of Colorado who is currently paying .50 cents less per gallon of gas than the rest of America.  Why?  Simple, says Professor of Economics Mark Perry:  they get their oil from Rocky Mountain states.  As theDenver Post explains:

Some of the cheapest gas prices in the country routinely are in the Rocky Mountain states. The reason is cheaper crude prices and refinery costs, according to the agency.

Refineries get most of their oil from within the Rocky Mountain states or nearby parts of the Midwest or from Canada....

"In general, gasoline prices in the Rocky Mountain area have been lower than the national average for much of the past year due to relatively low crude-oil input costs to refineries in a region that is fairly self-sufficient in meeting its demand for gasoline and other petroleum products; refineries within the Rockies supply most of the regional demand," the Energy Information Administration stated in its Feb. 14 report.

Minnesota and other parts of the Midwest are experiencing the same kinds of lower gas prices as the result of domestic and Canadian drilling.

3.  On March 10, 2012, Mr. Obama said this during his weekly address:

Under my Administration, oil production in America is at an eight-year high. We’ve quadrupled the number of operating oil rigs, and opened up millions of acres for drilling.

REALITY: As Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchinson (R-TX) notes, "“Offshore drilling permits are being issued at less than half the rate of the previous administration. The average number of leases issued on public lands is less than half than during President Clinton’s term.”

4.  Last week, at a presidential press conference, Mr. Obama said the following to FOX News reporter Ed Henry:

“Ed, just from a political perspective, do you think the President of the United States going into re-election wants gas prices to go up higher? Is there anybody here who thinks that makes a lot of sense? Look, here’s the bottom line with respect to gas prices: I want gas prices lower because they hurt families.”

REALITY:  Mr.  Obama appointed as his Secretary of Energy Steven Chu, a man who in 2008 admitted to the Wall Street Journal that the goal must be to raise gas prices: “Somehow we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe,” Mr. Chu said.    And, indeed, in 2008, Mr. Obama himself also said he wanted higher gas prices to ween Americans off oil, but preferred a "gradual adjustment."

Again, all of these statements by Mr. Obama were made within just the last week.

One in five Americans now blame Mr. Obama for America's skyrocketing gas prices.  If he doesn't speak squarely about why he personally lobbied Senate Democrats to oppose the Keystone Pipeline and why he appointed an Energy Secretary whose stated goal was to send gas prices soaring, many more voters will hold him responsible come November.



Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39899
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
U.S. must 'hustle' to reach 36 billion gallons of biofuels by 2022, ag secretary says
Kansas City Star ^ | March12, 2012 | by Cory Nealon
Posted on March 12, 2012 9:34:49 PM EDT by Oldeconomybuyer

The United States can meet President Barack Obama's goal of producing 36 billion gallons of biofuels by 2022, but it better get moving.

That's according to Tom Vilsack, secretary of the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

According to a 2010 Agriculture Department report, the agency plans for the U.S. to produce 13.4 billion gallons of biofuels from grasses and sugars. The rest would come from oil seeds, crop residues and wood waste.

The EPA is exploring other sources, such as animal fats, municipal solid waste and algae.

The push for more biofuels comes as other industries, such as commercial power companies, seek alternative fuel sources to comply with tougher pollution standards set by the Obama administration. For example, Dominion Virginia Power announced last year it would convert three coal-fired power plants to biomass.

Citing a Penn State University study that states the U.S. produces more than 1 billion tons of biomass a year, Vilsack said there is plenty to satisfy numerous industries. Environmental groups aren't so sure.

The Southern Environmental Law Center is concerned that companies will start removing healthy trees from forests to meet demands that are expected to grow.

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

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39899
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Obama's Pump Debacle
Townhall.com ^ | March 14, 2012 | Jonah Goldberg




 As gasoline prices climb, President Obama's poll numbers plummet. In February, a Washington Post/ABC poll had Obama up 6 points against Mitt Romney. Monday's poll has him down 2.

According to the polls, gas prices are a huge part of the story, particularly given how the last 30 days or so have not exactly been great for the GOP.

No wonder Obama is desperate to get out in front of the issue. The dilemma is that he's invested so much of his prestige in his energy policies that he can't admit those policies have been an abject failure. But he also can't have people thinking his policies are responsible for the energy price Americans care about most: gasoline.

"Despite the gains we've made, today's high gas prices are a painful reminder that there's much more work to do to free ourselves from our dependence on foreign oil and take control of our energy future," the president declared Monday in a statement on the one-year anniversary of his "Blueprint for a Secure Energy Future."

Let's take the second proposition first. Obama often says, "Under my administration, America is producing more oil today than at any time in the last eight years." That's true: It's also true that under Obama's administration, Snooki from "Jersey Shore" got pregnant and Charlie Sheen lost his job. And he can take about as much credit for those developments too.

Never mind that if he'd gotten the cap-and-trade proposals he campaigned on, energy prices would be even worse. (He once acknowledged that under his plan, electricity prices would "skyrocket" and coal companies would go bankrupt. His Energy secretary, Steven Chu, admitted he wanted America to emulate European gas prices, when they were about $8 per gallon.)

The boom in oil production has taken place almost entirely on private and state lands, while on federal lands it's dropped (11 percent from 2010 to 2011 alone). The administration has also slowed the permitting of offshore oil and gas development to a trickle.

Another major factor is the development of new technologies that make it possible to extract ever more fuel from domestic sources. Instead of words of support, Obama keeps telling those companies they need to be taxed more and have their subsidies yanked, and he's touting the wonder-working power of algae (a possibly valuable fuel source by the middle of the century).

Ending subsidies to business entirely, including oil companies, is a good idea. But Obama's policy is completely different. He thinks he's smarter than the market and can pick winning industries and products.

It's an ugly record. Forget Solyndra -- and other solar and wind firms that have been going belly up like birds around a windmill -- that's old news. So is his decision to block the Keystone XL pipeline.

Last year, the Energy Department awarded a $10 million "L Prize" for development of an affordable and eco-friendly light bulb. Philips just put its winning model on the market, for $50 apiece. Meanwhile, GM has temporarily suspended production of the Volt because of lack of demand for the "affordable" electric car.

On the unaffordable end of the market, things are even worse. Consumer Reports tried to test drive the new $107,850 Fisker Karma, but it couldn't: "We buy about 80 cars a year, and this is the first time in memory that we have had a car that is undriveable before it has finished our check-in process."

There's actually plenty Obama could do to help with gas prices, but he's right not to do some of them. He shouldn't release oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, nor should he appease Iran on its nuclear program. But he could, for instance, suspend the Jones Act, which requires that all ships carrying goods between American ports be U.S. flagged. Doing so would dramatically lower the cost to distribute oil and gas (and outrage his union base).

Obama was recently asked by Fox News' Ed Henry whether high gas prices are a deliberate result of White House policies. His response was telling. "From a political perspective, do you think the president of the United States going into re-election wants gas prices to go up higher? Is there anybody here who thinks that makes a lot of sense?"

In other words, Obama desperately wants people to think he's against higher gas prices -- at least until he gets re-elected.



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

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39899
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Obama in Your Tank
Editorial of The New York Sun | March 12, 2012


http://www.nysun.com/editorials/obama-in-your-tank/87740/


“Obama Defends Energy Policies” is the headline over a Reuters dispatch in respect of gasoline prices. It reports on the president’s launch of what the British wire service characterizes as “the most comprehensive defense to date of his energy policies.” It says the president is “pushing back against election-year attacks from Republicans” who say his energy policies “are to blame for high gas prices that are eroding his popularity with voters.” The problem with all this is that it’s not the energy policies that are driving up gasoline prices. It’s the monetary policies, and if the Republicans can’t manage to get that point into focus, it’s hard to see how they can put the rest of the monetary debate to their advantage.

We’ve been making this point for months now. The fact is that priced in specie — gold or silver — the value of gasoline has been plunging. We made this point in April last year, after Mr. Obama used his weekly radio address to declare that to rectify rising gasoline prices there was, as he put it, “no silver bullet.” Our point was that a gallon of gasoline was selling at the time for fewer grains of silver than it was selling for when Mr. Obama (or, for that matter, Mr. Bush) had acceded to the presidency. Gasoline at the pump was selling for a sixth of an ounce of silver when Mr. Obama was sworn in. Today, the value of the same gallon of gasoline has fallen to less than a 10th of an ounce of silver. Measured in gold, the value of gasoline has also been plunging.

In other words, it’s not the gasoline that’s been going up. It’s the dollar that’s been going down. Americans, however, don’t hold their money in gold or silver. They generally hold their money in accounts denominated in dollars, and the dollar has been getting weaker. It is the view of the Sun that this fact lies at the bottom of the grim feeling that has swept the country under President Obama, the lingering sense that we are falling behind. We are all for energy policies that maximize the incentives to explore and produce our own oil and gas. But the it’s not going to bring relief to the misery Americans have felt during the Obama presidency until a restoration of sound money.

This is not the kind of issue that the Republican candidates can deal with in a glancing way. Mr. Romney has vowed to replace Chairman Bernanke at the Federal Reserve. Mr. Gingrich has vowed to establish a gold commission, chaired by no less a pair of luminaries than James Grant, who edits the Interest Rate Observer, and Lewis Lehrman, who, with Congressman Ron Paul, wrote a famous dissent from the recommendation of the Gold Commission of the 1980s to stick with fiat money. This issue, if it is to be made to resonate with the voters, will have to be pressed at ever turn, including every time Mr. Obama gets confused and tries to characterize the high number of dollars gasoline is fetching at the pump as a failure of energy policy.



Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39899
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Mar 18th, 2012 @ 12:46 pm › Conservative Byte
↓ Skip to comments



In May 2009, four months into the Obama presidency, retail gasoline prices averaged $2.32 per gallon. Rep. Charles Boustany (R-LA) wrote Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner to express concern about the impact that the Administration’s budgeted changes in tax policy would have on the oil and gas industry. Secretary Geithner clearly laid out the Administration position in his letter of response (pdf link).

That was then, this is now.

In just three years’ time, retail gasoline prices are up 68%. $4.00+ gasoline prices loom as a key reelection vulnerability for the President; in response, the Administration’s rhetoric has shifted to “energy friendly”, but its original energy-hostile policies have not changed a whit.

From Secretary Geithner’s May 2009 letter:

The Administration believes that oil and gas preferences distort markets by encouraging more investment in the oil and gas industry than would occur under a neutral system. To the extent the credit (sic) encourages overproduction of oil, it is detrimental to long-term energy security and is also inconsistent with the Administration’s policy of reducing carbon emissions and encouraging the use of renewable energy sources through a cap-and-trade program. Moreover, the credit (sic) must ultimately be financed with taxes that result in underinvestment in other, potentially more productive, areas of the economy.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39899
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Video: Biden Booed at St. Patrick's Day Parade ["A Chorus of Boos"!]
The Washington Examiner ^ | March 18, 2012
Posted on March 18, 2012 9:07:16 PM EDT by Steelfish

March 18, 2012

Video: Biden Booed at St. Patrick's Day Parade by Joel Gehrke

Vice President Joe Biden often touts his working-class background, but he got the cold shoulder from some St. Patrick's Day celebrants in the state where he was born, as the crowd booed Biden towards the end of a parade in Pittsburgh.

"A chorus of boos rained down on Biden and his supporters down the last stretch; stil, Biden kept smiling," said Brandon Hudson of the local NBC affiliate.

(Excerpt) Read more at campaign2012.washingtone xaminer.com ...

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39899
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Free Republic
Browse · Search   Pings · Mail   News/Activism
Topics · Post Article
Skip to comments.

With Gas Prices Rising, Smog Rules May Stall
Wall Street Journal ^ | March 18, 2012 | By Tennile Tracy
Posted on March 18, 2012 10:13:17 PM EDT by Oldeconomybuyer

The Obama administration, facing political heat over high gasoline prices, may delay new rules that would cut pollution from cars but also could bring higher prices at the pump, environmental and industry leaders said.

The rules would require refiners to make cleaner-burning gasoline and auto makers to build cars that emit fewer smog-forming pollutants. The Environmental Protection Agency was scheduled to roll out the rules before April, but it hasn't yet submitted them for White House review.

"We expect that timing will begin to slip, perhaps for political considerations" said American Petroleum Institute President Jack Gerard.

The new standards are known as Tier 3, following the Clinton administration's adoption of Tier 2 standards in 1999.

An EPA spokeswoman declined to confirm whether there would be a delay, saying only that the agency "continues to develop the Tier 3 vehicle and fuel standards" and is "engaging diverse stakeholders as part of that process."

(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39899
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Gas Prices Still Going Up, Refineries Shutting Down (should be front page but MSM supports Obama)
Boise Weekly ^ | March 18th | George Prentice




Energy industry analysts say there's no relief in sight at the nation's gas pumps.

While prices jumped 6 percent in February, market experts said many of the nation's refineries have been idled or shut down permanently because their owners claimed they were losing money on them. According to the Wall Street Journal, Sunoco is expected to close another of its large refineries this July, "taking another 335,000 barrels per day in production capacity off the market."


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



tu_holmes

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 15922
  • Robot
Ok, now you have to explain to me what Obama has to do with Sunoco choosing to close a refinery.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39899
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Ok, now you have to explain to me what Obama has to do with Sunoco choosing to close a refinery.

Refineries are being forced out of business due to EPA mandates on may types.   

tu_holmes

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 15922
  • Robot
Refineries are being forced out of business due to EPA mandates on may types.   

Ah... I get it.

Ok... I was just wondering.

These are new mandates? If so, then yes, Obama is definitely to blame.


Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39899
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
NATIONAL REVIEW ONLINE          www.nationalreview.com           PRINT

The Corner

The one and only.

A Gasoline Nightmare

By Victor Davis Hanson
March 20, 2012 1:44 P.M. Obama is barnstorming the west — blasting oil companies, trying to convince voters that he supports an “all of the above” policy, and reminding them that drilling has increased since his tenure. But that won’t work for five reasons.

1) No one believes that Obama is sincere. In 2008, in the hope-and-change adulation days when he was running for president, he talked about skyrocketing energy prices as a necessary cost for his vision of a desired cap-and-trade law. Energy secretary–designate Chu talked about the desirability of high European-like gasoline prices. And soon-to-be interior secretary Senator Salazar infamously bragged that even $10-a-gallon gas would not change his mind about new offshore drilling. All that has been so widely reported that one can even hear it at the gas pump — where those filling up mumble that Obama wanted these high gas prices.

In response to that political problem, the Obama team has not yet explained why they no longer believe the above. Secretary Chu merely concedes that he’s changed his mind, but that was an embarrassingly political concession. In other words, the public believes that Obama and his associates privately still think that high gas prices help the environment, cool the planet, make preferred subsidized green energy viable, and curb the gas-guzzling culture of the American middle class, but with a wink and a nod simply cannot say that any longer since they are now in a reelection cycle. And because Obama does not now either defend or refute his embarrassing remarks about the price of power needing to “skyrocket,” or similar views of his subordinates, voters believe that he will probably go back to his earlier positions if reelected or out of office.

2) The argument that under Obama oil production is up has the same ironic twist, and is more likely to hurt than help Obama: American oil production is up despite Obama rather than because of him, given that he has radically cut exploration on public lands and has been unable to affect fracking and horizontal drilling on private lands. He said not a word from 2009–12 about the revolution in oil drilling at a time when he was monotonously bragging about “millions of green jobs” and pouring hundreds of millions of federal dollars into failures like Solyndra. The public also knows that. Obama more or less expressed an antipathy for new oil production when he once talked about “tuning up” cars and inflating tires in lieu of new drilling, and then trumped that with recent talk of uniquely American algae potential, a fuel resource unknown to most of us. Had Sarah Palin said that, well . . .

3) Even less appealing is Obama’s insistence that drilling has only long-term benefits and is no short-term remedy. If so, why then brag that oil production is up since 2009, when none of the increase is due to Obama’s own approval of new federal leases, but is instead due to both Bush’s approvals and the vision of private enterprise? This argument really works against Obama because of its inherent selfishness: “I will take credit for my predecessor’s investment that paid off on my watch, but will not make any commensurate investment by opening up federal leases for my successor.” Or “I will subsidize green power and ignore private oil concerns, but in a political pinch will go silent about what I was for and what failed, while bragging about what I was indifferent to or against — which succeeded.” People are not stupid and know all this.

4) Obama argues that more American oil won’t greatly affect a global market. Aside from the fact that in a tight market psychology rules and even a modest increase from a major producer in times of crises can lower prices, Obama himself does not believe this. We know that because his administration is pressuring the Saudis to pump more and wants to tap the strategic reserve. In other words, a million barrels here and there from the Saudis and the reserve will calm markets and lower prices in a way that fresh American oil would not have? To be consistent and honest, Obama would have to either push the reserve, the Saudis, and new drilling here, or admit that all three won’t do much in a vast global market, given their relatively small percentages of the global daily production.

5) Obama borrowed more in three years and two months than did Bush in eight years. The massive aggregate debt and gargantuan deficits depress the value of the dollar, and help to spike oil prices; a president by the very nature of his budget does have influence on how much oil a dollar overseas will buy.

I can understand why Obama is furious about the politics of oil, but frantically doing derrick photo-ops simply looks desperate and cynical. Far better would be to explain to the American people why his team once wanted higher fossil-fuel prices and why that was or is wise or is no longer true; and, why he has radically curbed new leasing on federal lands, and why that is wise or at least once was wise from 2009-12; and why tapping the reserve or getting other foreign nations to pump more is helpful in a way additional American production would not have been; and why he will insist on budget discipline and restore balance in the purchasing power of overseas dollars.

If he can’t do that, then he should not wonder why most fault him for their spiraling gas bills.

Permalink
 



Option D

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17367
  • Kelly the Con Way
Ah... I get it.

Ok... I was just wondering.

These are new mandates? If so, then yes, Obama is definitely to blame.


There hasnt been a new refinery built since in 1970.

GigantorX

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6371
  • GetBig's A-Team is the Light of Truth!
None of this really matters.

All the new production/extraction that will be coming on line now and in the future will only be replacing declining production. The whole Peak Oil thing is true in regards to production, we will do all we can to maintain a plateau of production and then it will be a long, slow decline from there.

Worth mentioning that the new wells/production will be more expense per barrel when compared to the easier wells from long ago.

Higher prices are here to stay and it will only get more expensive in the future.

Only a decline in use of oil/gasoline and diversification away from it will help.

This is real talk, folks.

Option D

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17367
  • Kelly the Con Way
None of this really matters.

All the new production/extraction that will be coming on line now and in the future will only be replacing declining production. The whole Peak Oil thing is true in regards to production, we will do all we can to maintain a plateau of production and then it will be a long, slow decline from there.

Worth mentioning that the new wells/production will be more expense per barrel when compared to the easier wells from long ago.

Higher prices are here to stay and it will only get more expensive in the future.

Only a decline in use of oil/gasoline and diversification away from it will help.

This is real talk, folks.


You gotta blame Obama in there somewhere

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39899
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.

You gotta blame Obama in there somewhere

Absolutely - he has made every existing problem drastically worse. 

He is the worst piece of trash ever to hold office in this country.