How much is gas where you are?

[Indy]

And the drums of war are beating. More bad news from Iran and Israel every day. How does $10.00 per gallon strike you?

[Ankf00]

the problems with fannie mae, freddie mac, and indymac will get us to $10.00 quicker than the usual mideast bs

[racermike]

$4.17/g fill-up at Arco/BP today readying for drive to Portland tomorrow.

Gas mileage is suckin' right now due to using air conditioner too much the last couple of weeks with all the heat we have had.

[OW]

Gas is FREE here...........................................



Did I just Fart?

[Gnam]

Airlines cry uncle. :cry:


An Open letter to All Airline Customers:

Our country is facing a possible sharp economic downturn because of skyrocketing oil and fuel prices, but by pulling together, we can all do something to help now.

For airlines, ultra-expensive fuel means thousands of lost jobs and severe reductions in air service to both large and small communities. To the broader economy, oil prices mean slower activity and widespread economic pain. This pain can be alleviated, and that is why we are taking the extraordinary step of writing this joint letter to our customers. Since high oil prices are partly a response to normal market forces, the nation needs to focus on increased energy supplies and conservation. However, there is another side to this story because normal market forces are being dangerously amplified by poorly regulated market speculation.

Twenty years ago, 21 percent of oil contracts were purchased by speculators who trade oil on paper with no intention of ever taking delivery. Today, oil speculators purchase 66 percent of all oil futures contracts, and that reflects just the transactions that are known. Speculators buy up large amounts of oil and then sell it to each other again and again. A barrel of oil may trade 20-plus times before it is delivered and used; the price goes up with each trade and consumers pick up the final tab. Some market experts estimate that current prices reflect as much as $30 to $60 per barrel in unnecessary speculative costs.

Over seventy years ago, Congress established regulations to control excessive, largely unchecked market speculation and manipulation. However, over the past two decades, these regulatory limits have been weakened or removed. We believe that restoring and enforcing these limits, along with several other modest measures, will provide more disclosure, transparency and sound market oversight. Together, these reforms will help cool the over-heated oil market and permit the economy to prosper.

The nation needs to pull together to reform the oil markets and solve this growing problem.

We need your help. Get more information and contact Congress by visiting www.StopOilSpeculationNow.com.

01. AirTran Airways Robert Fornaro: Chairman, President and CEO
02. Alaska Airlines Bill Ayer: Chairman, President and CEO
03. American Airlines Gerard J. Arpey: Chairman, President and CEO
04. Continental Lawrence W. Kellner: Chairman and CEO
05. Delta Richard Anderson: CEO
06. Hawaiian Airlines Mark B. Dunkerley: President and CEO
07. JetBlue Dave Barger: CEO
08. Midwest Airlines Timothy E. Hoeksema: Chairman, Pres&CEO
09. Northwest Douglas M. Steenland: President and CEO
10. Southwest Gary Kelly: Chairman and CEO
11. United Airlines Glenn F. Tilton: Chairman, President and CEO
12. US Airways Douglas Parker: Chairman and CEO

[Methanolandbrats]

Airlines cry uncle. :cry:
Bhoo hoo...............ya know who should have been smart enough to be buying oil contracts and locking in a price? Ya, the airlines. Airlines have always been a hobby, not a business and they sure as hell are not an investment.

[cameraman]

Bhoo hoo...............ya know who should have been smart enough to be buying oil contracts and locking in a price? Ya, the airlines. Airlines have always been a hobby, not a business and they sure as hell are not an investment.

#10 on that list, Southwest did exactly that. It isn't helping anymore.

If they are correct in their assertions, and I don't know that they are, then whatever changes were made need to be re-examined.

Personally I'd be more apt to believe them if they had listed the exact regulatory changes that they claim are causing the problem. What were the changes made over the last 20 years, quit dumbing down the message and present some facts.:irked:

[dando]

#10 on that list, Southwest did exactly that. It isn't helping anymore.

Their fares are still the cheapest out there. Flights from CMH to MCO in December for our WDW trip are less than 1/2 of NWA or Delta and fly direct as well. They'll feel the pain next year is my guess.

-Kevin

[Ankf00]

their futures options haven't expired yet, but they're about too. some union contracts are up at about the same time too, they're in for a world of hurt.

[oddlycalm]

There is no doubt that speculation a contributing factor, but it's not the underlying factor. Still even if the speculation premium is only 15% it would be helpful to get it out of the system. Any regulatory changes here would have to be in cooperation with London markets or all you'll be doing is driving the trade to London. The days when we can act alone and make our rules stick are over.

Consider some fun facts from Koppel's China series on Discovery. China now has more than 300 million people in the middle class. That's more people than the US has period. They have high rise cities of 15 million people in central China we've never heard of. More Buicks are now sold in China than in the US. (cue GM wise cracks) Point is, we are 5% of the world population and we are used to using 25% of all the energy resources without any competition. Things changed.

Things won't get noticeably better (lower) in the energy markets until a) significant new supply is brought online, b) the US has a carbon policy that takes uncertainty out of the equation for business and c) bad things stop happening in producing regions.

oc

[Sean Malone]

There is no doubt that speculation a contributing factor, but it's not the underlying factor. Still even if the speculation premium is only 15% it would be helpful to get it out of the system. Any regulatory changes here would have to be in cooperation with London markets or all you'll be doing is driving the trade to London. The days when we can act alone and make our rules stick are over.

Consider some fun facts from Koppel's China series on Discovery. China now has more than 300 million people in the middle class. That's more people than the US has period. They have high rise cities of 15 million people in central China we've never heard of.
oc

For two years now I've been reading about the 300 million 'new' middle class in China and have been nervously awaiting the highly prophecized emergence of the Chinese "Super Power".
The fact is the Chinese 'middle class' and the middle class of the U.S. are based on much different criteria. I don't have the resource links at hand, but basically the Chinese middle class is defined by a combined household income of around 30K which will allow them to buy 1 expensiveness automobile and live in state subsidized housing. A hard contrast to the American middle class but considering that most of that new Chinese middle class population's parents are farmers who live in thatch roofed huts (an admirable profession in Chinese culture) it is a big step toward modernization and yes, still a strain on resources.

[JLMannin]

There is no doubt that speculation a contributing factor, but it's not the underlying factor. Still even if the speculation premium is only 15% it would be helpful to get it out of the system. Any regulatory changes here would have to be in cooperation with London markets or all you'll be doing is driving the trade to London. The days when we can act alone and make our rules stick are over.

Consider some fun facts from Koppel's China series on Discovery. China now has more than 300 million people in the middle class. That's more people than the US has period. They have high rise cities of 15 million people in central China we've never heard of. More Buicks are now sold in China than in the US. (cue GM wise cracks) Point is, we are 5% of the world population and we are used to using 25% of all the energy resources without any competition. Things changed.

Things won't get noticeably better (lower) in the energy markets until a) significant new supply is brought online, b) the US has a carbon policy that takes uncertainty out of the equation for business and c) bad things stop happening in producing regions.

oc

From the oil speculation link:


As speculators continue to dominate the market, the volume of oil traded “on paper” has been as high as 22 times greater than the volume of oil consumed. As prices rise, institutional investors have become active traders, turning commodities into just another asset class. This has caused severe market imbalance and upset the natural relationship between supply and demand. As a result, legitimate customers such as trucking companies, airlines, and consumers have been forced to purchase oil at unnecessarily higher prices. This has dramatically raised costs, resulting in needlessly high prices for American consumers and businesses.

Remember the California "power crisis" of high demand/low supply? All that network conjestion that was driving up delivery prices of electricity was all created on paper by Enron. Once delivery contracts enter the picture, "supply" and "demand" lose any attachment to the physical world.

[Ankf00]

Inventories are decreasing, unless speculators are buying crude and hording it at Dr. No's lair, speculation is not driving this. Further, refiners are paying up to 2x the premium (above market rate) they usually have paid in the past to purchase higher quality crudes, meaning there's that much more competition to acquire the crude supplies they want. Also the USD sucks donkeyballs right now

[cameraman]

And reality is: D. a mixture of all of the above.

[Sean Malone]

Inventories are decreasing, unless speculators are buying crude and hording it at Dr. No's lair, speculation is not driving this. Further, refiners are paying up to 2x the premium (above market rate) they usually have paid in the past to purchase higher quality crudes, meaning there's that much more competition to acquire the crude supplies they want. Also the USD sucks donkeyballs right now

Speculation drives much of it.

[Insomniac]

Speculation drives much of it.

You could say anyone who buys or sells a futures contract without the intention of taking delivery is speculating.

[cameraman]

You could say anyone who buys or sells a futures contract without the intention of taking delivery is speculating.

Ummm, yeah that is exactly what they are doing and anyone who does it should never forget that fact.

[JLMannin]

Inventories are decreasing, unless speculators are buying crude and hording it at Dr. No's lair, speculation is not driving this. Further, refiners are paying up to 2x the premium (above market rate) they usually have paid in the past to purchase higher quality crudes, meaning there's that much more competition to acquire the crude supplies they want. Also the USD sucks donkeyballs right now

A subtle question - (1) are the inventories actually decreasing, or (2) is speculation activity creating the appearance that inventories are decreasing?

Being that gas stations still have gas, I'm betting on #2.

4.099 for 87 octane here on the drive in this morning.

[Ankf00]

the fact that gas is still being produced has 0 to do with the trend in inventories

Saudis promise 500K boost (where they're going to pump it from is still up in the air, since it'll likely be sour shite), and markets still suck balls. Saudis always promise more, yet output remains the same (they have no spare capacity worth a damn)

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121538245435630879.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

:\

[Insomniac]

Ummm, yeah that is exactly what they are doing and anyone who does it should never forget that fact.

It's just a word that gets tossed around. Practically everyone is speculating in everything when it comes to financial investments,

[Insomniac]

A subtle question - (1) are the inventories actually decreasing, or (2) is speculation activity creating the appearance that inventories are decreasing?

Being that gas stations still have gas, I'm betting on #2.

4.099 for 87 octane here on the drive in this morning.

Just because price goes up doesn't mean supply is going down. Demand is going up, and you never see any articles or talk about shortages. No one is saying they need oil but can't get it. So you have demand going up coupled with a weak dollar, and you have $4/gallon gas.

[JLMannin]

Just because price goes up doesn't mean supply is going down. Demand is going up, and you never see any articles or talk about shortages. No one is saying they need oil but can't get it. So you have demand going up coupled with a weak dollar, and you have $4/gallon gas.

I'll take that as an answer of (2). In the real world, it is not possible to have an increase in demand without a decrease in supply.

I was in Champaign, Illinois and saw $3.969 for regular near the U of I campus.

[oddlycalm]

Remember the California "power crisis" of high demand/low supply? All that network conjestion that was driving up delivery prices of electricity was all created on paper by Enron. Once delivery contracts enter the picture, "supply" and "demand" lose any attachment to the physical world.
Remember it,? I had a front row seat. Enron's trading desk was in Portland and I have a friend who is a senior auditor and PGE. Worst kept secret in the world what they were doing. I don't even think they tried to keep it a secret. That was out and out fraud in an unregulated market. The fact that FERC did nothing and DOJ only managed to take down a couple lowly traders was all but ignored by the mainstream media.

That said, it bears little relationship to commodities futures in a regulated market and is a red herring in their argument. I wish it were that easy. Cameraman is right, it's a D) all of the above situation.

Regular (87) is $4.09 at a couple places around here, but most are around $.20.

oc

[Ankf00]

In the real world, it is not possible to have an increase in demand without a decrease in supply.

wtf? of course it's possible. supply impacts price, not demand.

you don't get to argue that real world metrics are imagined just because the metrics don't support your take and then cite "real world." fact is dollar is weak and oil is pegged to it, fact is inventories are down, fact is spare production capacity is just not there.

above i'm not arguing that futures has 0 impact, i'm merely arguing against it as the new boogeyman and main driver just because the "big oil is gouging us" argument is no longer in vogue. quite the contrary, the curve for oil eerily matches the curve for housing, dot coms, and every other major bubble in recent history, to a T. on the other hand, unlike housing & dot coms, crude is a finite resource whose supply can't just be invented or created

[Insomniac]

I'll take that as an answer of (2). In the real world, it is not possible to have an increase in demand without a decrease in supply.

Supply and demand are not inversely proportional. They are completely independent.

[nissan gtp]

for is down a bit 'round here -- 3.85 for low octane in a few places

[dando]

for is down a bit 'round here -- 3.85 for low octane in a few places

Get ready to grab your ankles...we were as low as $3.83 on Friday, but 87 rose to $4.09 midday. :irked:

-Kevin

[trish]

The lowest Shell station here was $4.49 a few days ago and I believe the lowest in town was Getty at $4.38.

[dando]

XvKqpFLWCoY

:eek:

-Kevin

[Gnam]

^ Does that mean hydroponics is gonna save the world?


http://img213.imageshack.us/img213/8532/cheechchongsmallgc8.jpg

Far out, man. :p

[Stu]

http://kudlow.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NjMyNDljNTQ5MThjNWE3YTAzYWYzMmZmNDVmMjA0ZWY=

President Bush says Drill, and Oil prices fall nearly 10 dollars.

Only a couple years too late, but at least someone in Washington has the marbles to do something about oil prices that will actually make an impact.

[Methanolandbrats]

http://kudlow.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NjMyNDljNTQ5MThjNWE3YTAzYWYzMmZmNDVmMjA0ZWY=

President Bush says Drill, and Oil prices fall nearly 10 dollars.

Only a couple years too late, but at least someone in Washington has the marbles to do something about oil prices that will actually make an impact. Short term profit taking, nothing more. And Kudlow is a moron.

[Stu]

Short term profit taking, nothing more.


BS.

If speculators believe that there is an increase in domestic oil supply on the horizon, then they are going to start selling off while prices are still high. The sell off leads to a drop in prices.

Sadly the other part to this is the expected drop in demand from the US, due to the slowing economy.

Why would something as meaningless as "short term profit taking" lead to the sharpest single-session decline in crude prices since January 1991???

What needs to happen now is action. Congress needs to go along with it and regulations and restrictions need to be rolled back, otherwise prices will just rebound.

[Methanolandbrats]

BS.

If speculators believe that there is an increase in domestic oil supply on the horizon, then they are going to start selling off while prices are still high. The sell off leads to a drop in prices.

Sadly the other part to this is the expected drop in demand from the US, due to the slowing economy.

Why would something as meaningless as "short term profit taking" lead to the sharpest single-session decline in crude prices since January 1991???

What needs to happen now is action. Congress needs to go along with it and regulations and restrictions need to be rolled back, otherwise prices will just rebound.

The $10 move comes after a huge move to the upside. Fed yammering about slowing economy and Bush's order were just the soundbite of the day. The president of Iran will fart sideways, a Nigerian will toss a rock at an oil worker or some other "event" will push it right back up. This ain't the top in crude prices. Wait till the heating season hits. And I've got an oil furnace :eek: I'm looking really hard at electrical heating to supplement so I can leave the oil burner on 40 degrees. As far as what congress has to do, we need to quit using so much crude, that would have an impact on prices since the United States uses so much of the Global Supply. True to fashion, it will take $15 gallon gas and a total collapse before the asshats in the government will do anything about encouraging alternative transport fuels, alternative space heating and cooling, etc.... It's as if the government is sitting around waiting for big oil to develop and push alternatives, won't happen. They're in the oil business to make money. Reminds of Weyerhauser and old growth forests. Someone asked an executive, "what happens when all the trees are cut down, won't you damage your business?" He said "no, we'll take the money we made cutting down trees and start another business". There ya have it, combine the corporate emphasis on short term profits and the governments stupidity and you see how utterly screwed we are.

[Napoleon]

BS.

If speculators believe that there is an increase in domestic oil supply on the horizon, then they are going to start selling off while prices are still high. The sell off leads to a drop in prices.

Sadly the other part to this is the expected drop in demand from the US, due to the slowing economy.

Why would something as meaningless as "short term profit taking" lead to the sharpest single-session decline in crude prices since January 1991???

What needs to happen now is action. Congress needs to go along with it and regulations and restrictions need to be rolled back, otherwise prices will just rebound.

You literally haven't the slightest idea of what you are talking about. Speculators cannot affect a price of a commodity unless they hold inventory off the market (which is what Enron did) or feed supplies onto the market, and it is well documented that neither has occurred. “Speculators” have nothing to do with it. That is just a right wing talking point that has somehow ended up injected into the political discourse even though there is no factual basis for it. Oh, and if you were in a economics class and made the assertion that drilling that would not effect supply for something like 7 to 10 years would effect prices today you would be instantly flunked out of that class, the whole idea is literally that silly.

This column covers some of this territory:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/27/opinion/27krugman.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

Without going upstream in this thread and showing what resources I have posted note that an incredibly detailed book from 3 years “Twilight in the Desert” by Matthew R. Simmons makes an incredibly compelling argument that the Saudi’s have run out of extra capacity and basically in so many words that we are at or past peak production. Here is a good review of the book and description of it:

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2005/0506.drum.html

Well Business Week just independently verified the central thesis of his book in an article dated July 10th. Shorter version of the article, the Saudi’s are full of it when they say there is any spare capacity.

http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/content/jul2008/db2008079_865368.htm?chan=rss_topStories_ssi_5

Welcome to the peak oil world.

Again this is a great resource for those interested in the subject.

http://www.theoildrum.com/

[Ankf00]

last week's govt report on inventories is an unexpected uptrend in both gas and crude. reduced consumption is finally having an impact with our refiners.


and what napolean said about speculators and withholding supply...


The $10 move comes after a huge move to the upside. Fed yammering about slowing economy and Bush's order were just the soundbite of the day. The president of Iran will fart sideways, a Nigerian will toss a rock at an oil worker or some other "event" will push it right back up. This ain't the top in crude prices. Wait till the heating season hits. And I've got an oil furnace :eek:

:rofl: it's funny cuz it's true.

[JLMannin]

You literally haven't the slightest idea of what you are talking about. Speculators cannot affect a price of a commodity unless they hold inventory off the market (which is what Enron did) or feed supplies onto the market, and it is well documented that neither has occurred. “Speculators” have nothing to do with it. That is just a right wing talking point that has somehow ended up injected into the political discourse even though there is no factual basis for it. Oh, and if you were in a economics class and made the assertion that drilling that would not effect supply for something like 7 to 10 years would effect prices today you would be instantly flunked out of that class, the whole idea is literally that silly.

If they cannot affect the price, then why are speculators playing the market? Are they just bored because there is no good open wheel racing to watch anymore?

[Ankf00]

If they cannot affect the price, then why are speculators playing the market? Are they just bored because there is no good open wheel racing to watch anymore?

if you cannot affect the price, then why do you buy stocks or bonds and invest in an 401K/roth?

[cameraman]

and invest in an 401K/roth?

Well because I have no choice in the matter and the University deposits the money in the 403b for me. I've been doing that for 20 years now and you really have to wonder how long we are going to have to keep working because even though I have averaged 16% of my gross income invested every year I'd hate to have to try to live off the current balance for up to 30 years:saywhat:

[Stu]

if you cannot affect the price, then why do you buy stocks or bonds and invest in an 401K/roth?

your purchase of stocks does impact the price. while its not significant, enough people purchasing or selling can make an impact, leading to over or under valued shares.

[G.]

if you cannot affect the price, then why do you buy stocks or bonds and invest in an 401K/roth?
I buy the stock, the price goes down. There's a definite causal relationship there.

[Ankf00]

shoddy analogy on the stocks on my part, but you yourself buying/selling impacts nothing, you likely are not buying/selling with the thought that your purchase/sale will increase/decrease your value.



a straight up analogy is the purchase of oil, more people seek to buy oil, actual crude, the price goes up, and the premiums paid by refiners atop market rate goes up. but we're not talking that, we're talking futures and speculation.

[Stu]

You literally haven't the slightest idea of what you are talking about. Speculators cannot affect a price of a commodity unless they hold inventory off the market (which is what Enron did) or feed supplies onto the market, and it is well documented that neither has occurred. “Speculators” have nothing to do with it.

Perhaps the term speculators was misused. I could have just as easily said purchasers. Either way, if purchasers believe that more supply will be coming on the horizon, then prices should drop.


That is just a right wing talking point that has somehow ended up injected into the political discourse even though there is no factual basis for it.

Right wing? Right-wingers want to drill. Its democrats in office that believe speculation has had a big influence. Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee has said. "The fact that the CFTC has refused to recognize that there is any speculative component at all to the rise in oil prices despite what we believe is overwhelming testimony to the contrary indicates that they need this push." I don't think he is a right-winger. Heck, Ralph Nader is one of the biggest opponents of "speculators" and he is the furthest person imaginable from a "right-winger"

Note, I'm not saying this to bash Dems or Right Wingers, just pointing out how you made an incredibly incorrect statement.


Oh, and if you were in a economics class and made the assertion that drilling that would not effect supply for something like 7 to 10 years would effect prices today you would be instantly flunked out of that class, the whole idea is literally that silly.

The 7 to 10 year stat is skewed. It does not account for rigs that used to be in operation that have stopped due to the ban. Oil from those rigs could reach the market in less than a year, if all bans are lifted of course.

It also amazes me that people say it will take 7-10 years, when the Swedes can work with the Russians to get things going in 2 months.


MOSCOW -- Swedish oil company Lundin Petroleum announced it has made a major oil discovery in Russia's north Caspian Sea. The discovery was made during exploratory drilling on the Morskaya-1 well on the Lagansky block, which has estimated reserves of more than 800 million barrels of oil.

"This is a world class oil discovery which has confirmed the excellent prospectivity of the Lagansky block," said Ashley Heppenstall, President and CEO of Lundin Petroleum.

Drilling is expected to commence at the end of September, and Lundin Petroleum plans to drill a further two wells in 2009.


Look I'm not going to be dense and believe that some spoken words by Bush are going to cut oil prices in half. But it can be argued that it helped. It also went along with reports that demand was slowing and that there was more supply than originally calculated.

[Stu]

a straight up analogy is the purchase of oil, more people seek to buy oil, actual crude, the price goes up, and the premiums paid by refiners atop market rate goes up. but we're not talking that, we're talking futures and speculation.

ok so for the future:

more people are expected to buy oil, actual crude, in the futre, the price goes up for the futures market.

[nrc]

"Right wing?" "Left wing?"

You're free to discuss chicken wings, buffalo wings, Airbus or Boeing wings, but I'm unaware of any topic fit for this board where there's any difference between the left and right wing.

[Stu]

"Right wing?" "Left wing?"

You're free to discuss chicken wings, buffalo wings, Airbus or Boeing wings, but I'm unaware of any topic fit for this board where there's any difference between the left and right wing.

I'm very disappointed that both Quaker Steak and Lube's in northeast Ohio decided to go buffet style with their AYCE wings on Tuesday nights. While the buffet works well for their cheap Lunch Buffet, it doesn't for AYCE wings. It was much better to have fresh wings delivered to you in batches as the evening went on. When they sit on the buffet, they usually end up tough. Some also swim in the sauces, while others sit on top and dry out. Very sad.

[Gnam]

Didn't the Feds end the Silver Boom in the late 70's by making investors take delivery of the silver they bought?

If people had to store 10,000 barrels, they might put their money into other things and let oil prices drop.

[oddlycalm]

Today it's $4.29 for 87 at the three stations near me. Or, you can spend $15 driving across town and pay $4.09.

oc

[cameraman]

It also amazes me that people say it will take 7-10 years, when the Swedes can work with the Russians to get things going in 2 months.

Bollocks. Lundin has been working for at least four years to get that one test well drilled. It was supposed to go in in 2006 and then it was delayed until 2007 when it didn't happen. They finally managed to get the spud in place this spring.

To say that they went from zero to production in two months is idiotic.

[Ankf00]

ok so for the future:

more people are expected to buy oil, actual crude, in the futre, the price goes up for the futures market.

this.



What needs to happen now is action. Congress needs to go along with it and regulations and restrictions need to be rolled back, otherwise prices will just rebound.


Only a couple years too late, but at least someone in Washington has the marbles to do something about oil prices that will actually make an impact.

not this.



The 7 to 10 year stat is skewed. It does not account for rigs that used to be in operation that have stopped due to the ban. Oil from those rigs could reach the market in less than a year, if all bans are lifted of course.

It also amazes me that people say it will take 7-10 years, when the Swedes can work with the Russians to get things going in 2 months.


if the equipment and infrastructure for delivery is in place, yes, it can be delivered quickly. but fact is there's a massive shortage of equipment and experienced personnel. rig construction hasn't exactly been a boom industry the past 20 years, many of the offshore rigs in the Gulf were sent overseas after the last bust.

the reason there is so much exploration and production in the central and western gulf is a) petrol reserves measured by 100bbl's and b) the infrastructure is there, the equipment is there. the company's can easily get around and conduct business exploring & producing. there are rigs off california that can produce, there's 3 sitting right off the coast of Santa Barbara, but exploration is a much more expensive endevour due to the lack of infrastructure, and they don't even have that equipment available to begin with. why run around exploring when you can focus your limited resources on what you know is going to generate a return on your investment.

the east coast has nothing in terms of infrastucture and platforms, further the east coast had 49 test wells drilled before the ban, all were plugged & abandoned, 44 of those yielded 0 hydrocarbons whatsoever, the only 5 that had anything were all off the coast of Jersey. The well reports are available for many of those wells and the consensus is that the source rock generally wasn't thermally mature enough for o&g generation.

congress, president, columnists, whoever, can say what they want on the subject, but when the above is repeated by the eng's at the services co's and e&p's who direct and run these projects it means that all the accusations, all the conspiracy theories, all the evil boogeymen and magical panacea's are worthless. global consumption: up, OPEC production: maxed out. even w/o considering the practicalities and reality of the situation, throw that out the window, the production that will go online will be a drop in the bucket, drops in the bucket don't impact long term prices.

[Stu]

global consumption: up, OPEC production: maxed out. even w/o considering the practicalities and reality of the situation, throw that out the window, the production that will go online will be a drop in the bucket, drops in the bucket don't impact long term prices.

thats why alternatives such as coal (liquid coal) and natural gas also need to be taken advantage of domestically, in addition to green technology.

we're still going to be an oil based nation over the next 20 years.

[Insomniac]

BS.

If speculators believe that there is an increase in domestic oil supply on the horizon, then they are going to start selling off while prices are still high. The sell off leads to a drop in prices.

Sadly the other part to this is the expected drop in demand from the US, due to the slowing economy.

Why would something as meaningless as "short term profit taking" lead to the sharpest single-session decline in crude prices since January 1991???

What needs to happen now is action. Congress needs to go along with it and regulations and restrictions need to be rolled back, otherwise prices will just rebound.

The futures contracts expire next month. How would Bush just saying we should drill affect 1 month from now? Or even the expected U.S. demand. It is short term profit taking based on news.

[Insomniac]

OK, catching up on the news, I read the following:

It will take ~10 years to start getting oil if/when the offshore drilling ban is lifted
They admit the short term benefit is purely psychological
At its peak, it will result in an additional 220,000 barrels a day
We use 20,730,000 barrels a day right now
Every average MPG you can increase for the entire fleet saves about ~130,000 barrels a day


So, 220,000 barrels is nothing. We can get the same net result (and more) by improving MPG. And given how the value of SUVs/Trucks is dropping and less are being sold, seems like we're headed that way involuntarily. Plus, on top of the fact that trying to find more oil does nothing to reduce our dependence or consumption, it doesn't even make sense from a long term national security perspective. I don't see the point besides lining oil companies pockets.

[nrc]

Anything we do right now other than cutting consumption isn't going to have much affect for quite some time.

The only way to cut consumption is to leave prices high. If you jack up the CAFE numbers and the price falls people will simply drive more and adjust their vehicle choices.

[Insomniac]

Anything we do right now other than cutting consumption isn't going to have much affect for quite some time.

The only way to cut consumption is to leave prices high. If you jack up the CAFE numbers and the price falls people will simply drive more and adjust their vehicle choices.

Do you mean drive more than they drive now, or more than ever before? I don't know if prices will fall unless global demand starts dropping. On that Koppel documentary on China, they were saying they'd have more cars on the road than us by 2030. And I believe 40% of our oil usage is for passenger car fuel.

[Indy]

In 2007 the earth cooled significantly. We may in fact be staving off a mini ice age with our carbon emissions. Certainly this last year has at least brought the global warming theory into question, and I say that as someone who thought it really was happening.

So, if reducing carbon is not the goal, what is the point? How about instead of a "race to the moon" style national effort to reduce energy usage, we allow the markets to take care of it (more expensive gas will provide all the incentive we need) and devote our "moon mission" resources to a worthwhile goal, like transforming our country to one where not a single child is abused?

[Insomniac]

In 2007 the earth cooled significantly. We may in fact be staving off a mini ice age with our carbon emissions. Certainly this last year has at least brought the global warming theory into question, and I say that as someone who thought it really was happening.

So, if reducing carbon is not the goal, what is the point? How about instead of a "race to the moon" style national effort to reduce energy usage, we allow the markets to take care of it (more expensive gas will provide all the incentive we need) and devote our "moon mission" resources to a worthwhile goal, like transforming our country to one where not a single child is abused?

Global temperatures may've dropped, but the ice is still melting. Just have to look to the northwest passage to see that. This is also the reason people refer to it as climate change instead of global warming. Some people think it it snows later than usual that proves it isn't true (and vice versa when new record highs are reached earlier than usual).

[Stu]

Global temperatures may've dropped, but the ice is still melting. Just have to look to the northwest passage to see that. This is also the reason people refer to it as climate change instead of global warming. Some people think it it snows later than usual that proves it isn't true (and vice versa when new record highs are reached earlier than usual).

People refer to it as global climate change instead of global warming because they don't want to admit they are wrong. Climate change of course is nothing new, its only been happening over the last few billions of years.

[Insomniac]

People refer to it as global climate change instead of global warming because they don't want to admit they are wrong. Climate change of course is nothing new, its only been happening over the last few billions of years.

A couple years where the temps didn't go up cancel out the trend I guess. All these wackjob scientists are clinging to anything they can.

[Stu]

f'ing government officials. :flame:

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/news/2008/jul/22/city-gives-dnc-host-committee-pass-gas-tax/

both the dems and republicans will not be required to pay taxes on fuel purchased while they are in town for their conventions. a cost savings of about 40 cents per gallon.

but of course when congress had the chance to vote for a gas tax holiday for the general public, they overwhelmingly voted against it. citing that the savings wasn't enough to help americans, and that they needed the tax money so desperately.

now im not saying eliminating fuel taxes is a good idea, im just pointing out the incredible hypocrisy by these douche bags in office on both sides of the aisle.


edit: is it still a political post when both sides of the political spectrum are at fault?

[KLang]

f'ing government officials. :flame:

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/news/2008/jul/22/city-gives-dnc-host-committee-pass-gas-tax/

both the dems and republicans will not be required to pay taxes on fuel purchased while they are in town for their conventions. a cost savings of about 40 cents per gallon.

I think you might want to reread the linked article. That isn't what it says.

Oh and on topic:
I noticed yesterday that one of the more expensive stations I drive by regularly has regular below $4. Not sure when that happened.

[Stu]

I think you might want to reread the linked article. That isn't what it says.

Oh and on topic:
I noticed yesterday that one of the more expensive stations I drive by regularly has regular below $4. Not sure when that happened.

huh?


After the meeting, Faatz said it was wrong for the DNC host committee to get a tax break.

"I am just troubled by not having the payment of taxes for what I consider to be a privately funded party, and that's what the host committee is: it's a private organization," she said.

"If you've got a 14-gallon tank, on the average, that's about $5.66 that they don't have to pay for fill up," Brown said.

Sounds to me like they aren't paying taxes on the fuel.

[dando]

We're sitting @ ~$3.86 for regular the past few days.

I also read last week that the Feds might actually need to increase the ga$ tax by $.10 to pay for current and future road projects. :(

EDIT: Just read in the local fishwrap that some stations are below $3.70 now. For some reason the NW side of Cbus has the highest price$ in the vicinity. :irked:

-Kevin

[Stu]

I think you might want to reread the linked article. That isn't what it says.

http://www.myfoxcolorado.com/myfox/pages/News/Detail?contentId=7044132&version=3&locale=EN-US&layoutCode=TSTY&pageId=3.2.1


- Members of the committee hosting the Democratic National Convention are filling their car gas tanks at city-owned gas pumps, avoiding state and federal fuel taxes.

They have been getting the tax-free gas since March. They've also been using the city's car washes.

Other stories are saying that now that news has broken, they've commented that they will be paying taxes in the end. But this has been going on since March, they got caught and now they're paying.

No comment about the free city car washes though. That money could be going to local business, which also pay taxes.

[KLang]

http://www.myfoxcolorado.com/myfox/pages/News/Detail?contentId=7044132&version=3&locale=EN-US&layoutCode=TSTY&pageId=3.2.1



Other stories are saying that now that news has broken, they've commented that they will be paying taxes in the end. But this has been going on since March, they got caught and now they're paying.

No comment about the free city car washes though. That money could be going to local business, which also pay taxes.

Your original quote:
'both the dems and republicans will not be required to pay taxes on fuel purchased while they are in town for their conventions. a cost savings of about 40 cents per gallon.'

The story says it is not happening in the Twin Cities, just Denver. It is also the committee members setting up the convention not the attendees as you stated.

I agree they should be paying for gas like anyone else.

[KLang]

I also read last week that the Feds might actually need to increase the ga$ tax by $.10 to pay for current and future road projects. :(

Surely not during an election year, would they?

I actully don't mind (too much) paying the fed gas tax as long as it only pays for road work.

[dando]

Surely not during an election year, would they?

I actully don't mind (too much) paying the fed gas tax as long as it only pays for road work.

Oh hell no they wouldn't.

http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2008/jul/20/gas_tax_wont_take_holiday_may_rise/


Despite calls from the presidential campaign trail for a Memorial Day-to-Labor Day tax freeze, lawmakers quickly concluded, with a prod from the construction industry, that having $9 billion less to spend on highways could create a pre-election specter of thousands of lost jobs.

Now, lawmakers quietly are talking about raising fuel taxes by a dime from the current 18.4 cents a gallon on gasoline and 24.3 cents on diesel fuel.

-Kevin

[Ankf00]

The host committee, which is responsible for raising money to put on the convention, is using the city's pumps "for safety and security reasons," Lopez said.

"We know the gas is not tainted," he said. "We use it as a safety and security measure."


:rofl: :laugh: :rofl:

the convention committee is more inept than dallas city council...

[Sean Malone]

Surely not during an election year, would they?

I actully don't mind (too much) paying the fed gas tax as long as it only pays for road work.

Considering I commute on a toll road managed by a German company I mind higher gas tax.

[Stu]

Your original quote:
'both the dems and republicans will not be required to pay taxes on fuel purchased while they are in town for their conventions. a cost savings of about 40 cents per gallon.'

The story says it is not happening in the Twin Cities, just Denver.

2 people in the article are quoted, one says elephants are, one says they arent.


Hickenlooper said the practice isn't unique to Denver.

"I do know for a fact that they're doing the same exact thing in Minneapolis," Hickenlooper said, referring to the city that along with St. Paul is hosting the Republican National Convention.

But Teresa McFarland, a spokeswoman for the Minneapolis-St. Paul host committee, said its members are getting their gas at public pumps.


It is also the committee members setting up the convention not the attendees as you stated.

Actually I didnt specify attendees or convention members. I should have clarified that it is in fact those which are running the convention.

[Ankf00]

slowing economy + increased inventory vs. nigerian rebels, who wins?

http://www.denverpost.com/nationworld/ci_9969613

yay volatility...

[Insomniac]

I thought all cities had their own "gas stations" for use by city vehicles, the school district (like school buses), etc. that essentially had all the taxes removed? Is this not common?

[cameraman]

But I thought it was illegal for the city to allow non-official business vehicles to use those pumps.

[Ankf00]

the host committee is a private organization, they should have 0 access to those pumps.

Like I said, more inept than dallas city council

[Insomniac]

But I thought it was illegal for the city to allow non-official business vehicles to use those pumps.

I would hope so!

[Stu]

Arctic May Hold 90 Billion Barrels of Oil, U.S. Says (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601082&sid=aqEDMhrCvp28)

[JLMannin]

$3.999 for 87 octane yesterday.

[Ankf00]

90bbl is nice, but estimated reserve numbers are usually unreasonably optimistic, depends on what's actually recoverable. Look no further than the "motherlode" off of Brasil.

[Stu]

90bbl is nice, but estimated reserve numbers are usually unreasonably optimistic, depends on what's actually recoverable. Look no further than the "motherlode" off of Brasil.

of course. i think the article addressed this too.

[Ankf00]

na, just what's estimated w/in alaska, and offshore in the entire arctic


arctic definitely has lots of resources

[TKGAngel]

$4.21 at Delta Sonic for regular gas. They're cheap, but they've now switched to prepay for cash customers. :irked:

If they're going to do that, they should train their staff not to be smart asses when customers come in and want their change. :irked:

[JLMannin]

Must be a price war in Indy. $3.799 today.

[Classic Apex]

$4.09 for premium today in Milwaukee-land...

[Gnam]

$4.29/gal in NorCal. Saw a Smart Car on the highway last week. Very small. I've seen pup tents with more structural integrity.

[dando]

$3.64 was the lowest I saw today. The BP across the river from us is stuck b/w a Kroger and a Giant Eagle ga$ depot, and must be getting squeezed biggie time. Both Kroger and Giant Eagle have loyalty ga$ disounts, so the BP was priced $.06 below the Kroger station (and I assume Giant Eagle).

-Kevin

[indyfan31]

$4.17 at an Arco in L.A. County.

[KLang]

$3.96 for V-Power this morning. :thumbup:

:thumbup: for 3.96 :saywhat: :laugh:

[manic mechanic]

$4.17 at a Mobil in Sun City tomorrow morning (down from $4.59 a few weeks ago).

~4.45 for V-Power (Menifee)

[JLMannin]

Up to 4.15 for the BY400 weekend; today, down to 3.71.

[Cam]

Up to 4.15 for the BY400 weekend; today, down to 3.71.

Thats the get the F outta town discount! :p

[dando]

I saw $3.59 on the way into work today. 550 mile drive to OCNJ next weekend appears more reasonable. :)

-Kevin

[Stu]

I saw $3.59 on the way into work today. 550 mile drive to OCNJ next weekend appears more reasonable. :)

-Kevin

a 40 cent difference per gallon is whats going to make you justify driving that far?

at 25 mpg, a 40 cent drop means you save $17 bucks. how is 17 bucks a difference maker?

[dando]

a 40 cent difference per gallon is whats going to make you justify driving that far?

at 25 mpg, a 40 cent drop means you save $17 bucks. how is 17 bucks a difference maker?

We're driving regardless, so I'm not justifying anything. I'll take $70 fill ups vs. $80 fill ups any day. A $.50 drop since our peak @ $4.09 == $10 per tank for the woman's truck. Times 4 fill ups there and back == $40 saved. A penny saved is a penny earned.

-Kevin

[Ankf00]

a 40 cent difference per gallon is whats going to make you justify driving that far?

at 25 mpg, a 40 cent drop means you save $17 bucks. how is 17 bucks a difference maker?


he goes there every year

[dando]

he goes there every year

16 years and counting....

Hooray cheese steak! Hooray Mack & Manco! Hooray shore!

:)

-Kevin

[Ankf00]

s'cool, we know you're a closet yanks & g'ints fan.

[dando]

s'cool, we know you're a closet yanks & g'ints fan.

:yuck:

:gomer:

-Kevin

[Andrew Longman]

16 years and counting....

Hooray cheese steak! Hooray Mack & Manco! Hooray shore!

:)

-Kevin

$40 bucks buys a lot of cheese steak and pork roll. :thumbup:

But that far down the shore you are likely to be closet Igles and Phillies fan. :yuck:

Enjoy! The Longman mob (actually my wife's family) just got back from two weeks down the shore at Seaside Park. We rented four different houses and for most of the time my kids had 21 cousins and three generations there. Memories for sure. :)

[Ankf00]

http://money.cnn.com/2008/07/31/news/companies/exxon_profits/index.htm?cnn=yes

article on XOM, how they operate, where they make their money

[WickerBill]

Filled up at $3.61 this morning.