Posts
4473
Joined
8/1/2013
Location
Avondale, PA
US
Edited Date/Time
2/11/2022 12:15pm
Honest question?
What do you think?
Or is 3.50+ or even 5/ gallln the new normal?
I drive a lot per year so it matters to me. Am curious what everyone thinks.
What do you think?
Or is 3.50+ or even 5/ gallln the new normal?
I drive a lot per year so it matters to me. Am curious what everyone thinks.
This country has so much fuel deposits , we were selling it. But now we can't use it. But we can sure as heck pay a higher price from Russia. Which makes total sense. Wish it wasn't political......but it IS 100% political.
I'm spending $15.00 - $25.00 per day in my cargo vans for work. It stings.
At the same time we aren’t using our own - we’re making our sworn enemies filthy rich to use their oil.
Never made sense but that’s the world we’re in.
Just wondering if it’s only going up from here. Because it’s getting insane.
The Shop
But "we" are buying up the stuff that is cheapest to produce and delivers at a lower cost.
Here's the latest data on domestic oil production, in thousands of barrels, by month and year.
It’s a shift from a boom or bust strategy to low growth over the long term.
Worldwide demand for oil and gas will continue to increase each year for the foreseeable future.
There is an expanding bias against all things hydrocarbon- Forcing everyone in the industry to focus on ESG.
Point is- don’t expect prices to come down anytime soon.
Much like inflation, high energy prices are a regressive tax…always hurts the low and middle class the most.
That's one thing I don't understand about the lefts platform...they claim to be for the poor (while labeling the republicans for the rich)...but the lefts environmental policies really only hurt the poor (like when gas prices immediately started going up when Biden took office because he stopped the keystone pipeline).
The rich dude doesn't care if his gas is $6/gallon, or his utility bill on his home goes up a couple hundred bucks a month...but that poor single mom who is voting democrat, because she's been convinced they have her back, is going to suffer mightily if gas bumps up a couple bucks a gallon and her utility bill goes up $50.
"Going green" is the definition of a "first world" worry (well, a "rich first world worry", really)...only those that have nothing else to worry about are worried about the environment...the poor, and virtually the entire middle class have far bigger things to worry about...they just want to make it through the month, keep the heat on, get to work, and food on the table...they don't care about a pipeline, or the view in some valley they'll never go, or the air quality....its easy to want to save the planet, when you can afford it. Democrats aren't helping poor people.
It is running as it has been, importing foreign oil daily.......
At the peak we were producing 13.9 million barrels per day. Over the span of 3-6 months that dropped to something like 9 million barrels per day. It was the single biggest short term production drop in history.
I think we are back up to around 11-12 million barrels per day which is over a million barrels per day short of pre-Covid levels of production.
So yeah you are wrong again.
Perhaps you are basing your views on something other than facts?
https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/pet_crd_crpdn_adc_mbbl_m.htm
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/09/tc-energy-terminates-keystone-xl-pipeli…
But that wasn't even the point of my post...just that the lefts environmental policies hurt the poor by increasing their energy costs (fuel, gas, utilities), yet they somehow claim to be the champions of the poor.
https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=PET&s=MCRFPUS2&f=M
OPEC production, not as strong as it used to be.
https://www.eia.gov/opendata/qb.php?category=1039874&sdid=STEO.PAPR_OPE…
That's being remotely accurate.
As for the rest of the point, you are correct that the working poor often don't care for much more than to make it to the next month, then the next, etc. But they should, don't you think?
The Keystone XL is actually a very good example of why we need checks on things. We could all very well be so focused on just the next day, the next month, the next year, that we completely ignore things like where our drinking water and irrigation waters come from. Like the XL cutting right across one of the most important aquifers that feeds the heart of our nation so the Canadian producers can get rich.
What is American about potentially poisoning the largest source of fresh water for so many people in order to allow Canadian oil producers and the Alberta government to be able to move their oil a little bit easier?
https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/steo/report/us_oil.php
"U.S. crude oil production averaged an estimated 11.4 million b/d in October, up from 10.7 million b/d in September as a result of production increases following disruptions from Hurricane Ida. We forecast production will rise to 11.6 million b/d in December. We forecast annual production will average 11.1 million b/d in 2021, increasing to 11.9 million b/d in 2022 as tight oil production rises in the United States. Growth will come largely as a result of onshore operators increasing rig counts, which we expect will offset production decline rates. "
Pit Row
https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=pet&s=mcrfpus1&f=m
"Should they care?" And "Do they care?" Are two drastically different questions...its not for me to tell them what they should worry about...neither is it for the democrats to talk out of both sides of their mouth and say they plan to help them when all they are really doing-from what the poor ACTUALLY EXPERIENCE-is hurting them. Neither is it for me to try and save them from themselves...I wouldn't want someone taking food off my table in the name of preventing something I couldn't care less about. So I won't ever support doing it to anyone else.
Sure, it could "potentially" harm that water supply...I could also "potentially" get in a car accident driving to the track...but I still go.
never mind that its not just so that "Canadians can get rich"...It's also to keep oil prices down, which keep gas prices down, which keeps transportation prices down, which keeps food prices down, which keeps everything less expensive...because it adds more supply-much more-to the world oil trade...that additional supply helps meet the demand, which keeps prices down....so EVERYONE benefits from it.
To say that at the peak we were producing 400 million barrels a month and we are now producing 345 million barrels a month and say “that’s essentially the same over the years is not correct. That’s over a million barrels per day drop.
That’s not “oil production levels have stayed the same over the years.”
Those are very different things but wording them in the manner it was implies that he actual shut down oil flowing. Not the case.
As for "should they care" vs "do they care", I think that 99.9999% of people would and DO care if their only source of fresh water is no longer available to them. But putting that point to them accurately and succinctly is not in the best interests of the businesses who would benefit from these sorts of things in the short term. Their interests are mostly in short term profits and large payouts to the largest stockholders and executives.
And yes, it is to make Canadians rich. As pointed out, we have enough oil here to meet our needs to the XL extension was for nothing more than enriching the Canadian producers. Most of the jobs after construction were going to Canadians as well.
So if we are going to be buying that oil from another country, why are we pretending that Canada is part of the US and other countries are 'foreign'?
You do see the numbers on the left of the graph, correct?
I am very fortunate to be in a position where I can make that choice though. Plenty of my friends are spending almost as much on gas a month as they do on their rent/mortgage and they are sinking financially. All I know is it isn't sustainable long term and something is going to break the levee.
The whole system is rigged and the good, honest, hard working people of this country are getting fucked big time.
"I think that 99.9999% of people would and DO care if their only source of fresh water is no longer available to them.
You talk like the water is guaranteed to be no longer be available to them if the pipeline is built...that is dumbing your argument down to extremes and proves you have a flimsy argument. The reality is that there is a POSSIBILITY that SOME water in ONE OF THE MANY aquifers in the midwest could be damaged IF there was a leak in the pipeline LARGE ENOUGH, and in the-relatively- VERY SMALL section of the pipeline that is over the aquifer.
Just because the pipeline is built doesn't mean all drinking water will be poisoned and unavailable to them...a remote chance? Sure, I'll give you that...but absolutely no guarantees.
Talking in extremes, like claiming the fresh water will no longer be available if the pipeline is built, is, like I said, dumbing down your argument. It doesn't suit you. You shouldn't do that.
And canadians may get rich...but so did Steve Jobs, and Bill Gates, And Elon Musk, and the Waltons, and a plethora of other individuals who provided a product or service that benefited society and/or that society wanted/needed....and this pipeline would benefit society by getting more and more oil (which society NEEDS) to market which increases supply for oil, which keeps oil prices low, which keeps fuel prices low, which keeps transportation costs low, which keeps food, travel, goods, etc. etc. less expensive.
And the point of the pipeline isn't that America is buying the oil...its that its easier for a landlocked Canadian province to get their oil to the largest refinery in North America (Port Arthur) and to port for export and sale on the world market...which, again, increases supply and keeps prices cheaper for ALL OF US to enjoy.
The water is guaranteed to be spoiled at some point. Just a matter of when. And the worst part is that the map I posted isn't a shot of 'many' aquifers, the areas are all connected. It is THE main aquifer system that supplies the heartland. That is the point. It isn't the sort of thing that would be localized and you just drill another well a few hundred yards or a couple of miles away.
So it isn't talking in the extreme, it is being realistic. This isn't they sort of water supply that you can simply replace, as you seem to want to believe. It is an irreplaceable resource that is truly far more important than oil, even though most think that seem to forget that. They believed that clean water is going to be around forever no matter how much we do to destroy our sources of it, but unfortunately that isn't true.
So while you believe that it is more important to ENJOY low oil prices, those prices will get you nothing without being able to irrigate crops and have drinking water from that single aquifer.
But what you are describing is definitely a symptom of how we have all become a bunch of Veruca Salts, wanting what we want and wanting it now, without regard to the impact that it will have in even the near future.
The issue last year was an oil production/demand issue but also an oil storage issue.
The world was producing more oil then it was using, combined with we were basically at 99% oil storage capacity. So it was a perfect storm for barrel of oil price to drop to zero. It even went negative for a few days.
The oil storage problem has been resolved. Oil output was cut globally to match the steep drop in demand. Oil has been depleted from storage as well.
Hundreds of oil companies went bankrupt last year.
Oil companies will be very cautious in flooding the markets with oil even as prices have recovered.
Another Covid lock down, Middle East war, green new peace laws, etc will have oil producers right back to where they were last summer.
Some oil companies are being hurt by high prices too. Many small companies hedge oil so they don’t get caught with their pants down if oil prices suddenly drop. Conversely, if oil prices go up, they are on the hook for that difference. It’s called a hedge book loss. It’s not just money you are leaving on the table. You actually have to pay the difference in the daily cost and whatever you hedged at.
Tricky game to play.
James Goecke is a hydrogeologist and professor emeritus at the University of Nebraska, and is widely known as the world expert on the Ogallala aquifer...he says this about an oil spill:
"It’s not like dropping oil into a lake, he says; remember, the aquifer is more like a sponge. He said people “were concerned that any spill would contaminate and ruin the water in the entire aquifer, and that’s just practically impossible.” To do that, the oil would essentially have to run uphill, he said. “The gradient of the groundwater is from west to east; 75 percent to 80 percent of the aquifer is west of the pipeline, and any contamination can’t move up gradient or up slope,” he said.
“Secondly,” Goecke added, “any leakage would be very localized. . . . A spill wouldn’t be nice, but it would certainly be restricted to within a half-mile of the pipeline.” He predicted that the varied layers of fine-grained seams of silt and clay would contain the flow of oil."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/keystone-xl-pipe…
So, you are indeed dumbing your argument down to extremes...looking at absolute worst case-and according to Dr. Goecke, unrealistic and almost impossible-scenarios to make your point. And that's a weak argument.
But back to my ORIGINAL point...regardless of the perceived, or real, environmental benefits of killing fossil fuels in the name of saving the planet...it still disproportionately negatively affects poor people, whom the democrats claim to want to help.
I thought it was because of Covid/OPEC etc.
But I’m just a dumb dirt bike rider and I know jack shit. So can someone explain to me how my higher fuel bill is in any way related to Joe Biden, or American politics in general?
Post a reply to: Is fuel ever coming back down?