Allstocks.com's Bulletin Board Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Allstocks.com's Bulletin Board » Off-Topic Post, Non Stock Talk » Oil Prices Are Rising Despite Lowest Demand Since 1997

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!    
Author Topic: Oil Prices Are Rising Despite Lowest Demand Since 1997
raybond
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for raybond     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Oil Prices Are Rising Despite Lowest Demand Since 1997

By Pat Garofalo on Feb 15, 2012 at 11:50 am


Oil is once again trading above $100 per barrel, bringing with it estimates that U.S. gas will cost more than $4 per gallon by May, if not sooner. The Obama administration is already bracing for higher gas prices and the political cost that they could exact.

But it isn’t increasing demand for oil that is driving the recent price increase. In fact, demand is the lowest it’s been since April, 1997, according to the Oil Price Information Service (OPIS). Instead, OPIS points to speculators as the party responsible for driving up prices:


Strangely, the current run-up in prices comes despite sinking demand in the U.S. “Petrol demand is as low as it’s been since April 1997,” says Tom Kloza, chief oil analyst for the Oil Price Information Service. “People are properly puzzled by the fact that we’re using less gas than we have in years, yet we’re paying more.”

Kloza believes much of the increase is due to speculative money that’s flowed into gasoline futures contracts since the beginning of the year, mostly from hedge funds and large money managers. “We’ve seen about $11 billion of speculative money come in on the long side of gas futures,” he says. “Each of the last three weeks we’ve seen a record net long position being taken.”

A multitude of experts, from academics to government agencies, have pinned the 2008 gas price spike on oil speculators. Of course, a big increase in gas prices could doom the slow but steady economic recovery.

[BadOne]

--------------------
Wise men learn more from fools than fools from the wise.

Posts: 3767 | From: beautiful California | Registered: Sep 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
CashCowMoo
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for CashCowMoo     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
U.S. demand...its a GLOBAL market in case you forgot.


Global oil demand is forecast to climb to 89.9 mb/d in 2012, a gain of 0.8 mb/d (or 0.9%) on the year.

http://omrpublic.iea.org/


Saudi Arabia Cuts Oil Output, Export: Industry Report
http://www.cnbc.com/id/46445698


Iran stops oil sales to British and French firms

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/02/19/us-iran-oil-europe-idUSTRE81I07W201202 19


A lot of GLOBAL things happening to affect the price.

--------------------
It isn't so much that liberals are ignorant. It's just that they know so many things that aren't so.

Posts: 6946 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
glassman
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for glassman     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
yeah cash, but turn on Fox for two hours during almost any day and you'll hear them complain at least once that it's Obama's fault-

and there is one underlying issue. that is that all the larger oil co's consolidated into five.... they decide the prices of oil and distillates now...

--------------------
Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.

Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
CashCowMoo
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for CashCowMoo     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by glassman:
yeah cash, but turn on Fox for two hours during almost any day and you'll hear them complain at least once that it's Obama's fault-

and there is one underlying issue. that is that all the larger oil co's consolidated into five.... they decide the prices of oil and distillates now...

I think its out of Obamas control really. Still does not deal with what Ray is trying to portray with the post. Leading people to think that global demand is down and oil prices are going up, and basing it off U.S. demand. Then alluding that its all the big oil companies fault. I do not think they need subsidies though that it for sure.

Obama could help ward off excessive speculation with a few moves that would cause at least some relief. Obama is the best thing to happen to people who want higher oil prices. Years ago people who cried out over how long it will take to bring on more domestic production...."oh it will take years etc etc". Domestic US production is up, but that is because of drilling on private lands such as in the Bakken area where they dont even have enough transportation to move the oil out of the area with the amount they are producing.

Posts: 6946 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
glassman
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for glassman     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I think its out of Obamas control really.

so do i, but and i know you hate this, i do think Cheney and Bush came into office with 15$ oil and under them we saw it go to 147 for a day...

the fact that they held secret meetings and both were involved in the oil business is no coincidence...

the real hard facts are that we are using up the last of our oil right now cash, and some of us, like me, would have preferered we kept it for the future..

id do beleive that at 200$ per barrel? we can afford to take oilshales adn convert them to relatively safe fuels...

i am not a treehugger, i just happen to disagree with unbridled capitalism. humans in general need to have basic rules, and for Santorum to accuse people like me of "earth worship" is stoopid.

i simply respect the fact that we live in finite environmetn right now, and if we are ever going to get off this rock? we are going to need to manage teh resources that we do have very carefully... cold fusion will come to us as we keep peering inot physiccs, and then we'll learn how to construct any type molecule we want form any feedstock molecules, but if we lose our economy before we reach that point? there will be no funding to hire and train the people that will discover those processes. so, it'snot "worship" at all, it is in fact hardcore pragmatism.

--------------------
Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.

Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
CashCowMoo
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for CashCowMoo     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by glassman:
I think its out of Obamas control really.

so do i, but and i know you hate this, i do think Cheney and Bush came into office with 15$ oil and under them we saw it go to 147 for a day...

the fact that they held secret meetings and both were involved in the oil business is no coincidence...

the real hard facts are that we are using up the last of our oil right now cash, and some of us, like me, would have preferered we kept it for the future..

id do beleive that at 200$ per barrel? we can afford to take oilshales adn convert them to relatively safe fuels...

i am not a treehugger, i just happen to disagree with unbridled capitalism. humans in general need to have basic rules, and for Santorum to accuse people like me of "earth worship" is stoopid.

i simply respect the fact that we live in finite environmetn right now, and if we are ever going to get off this rock? we are going to need to manage teh resources that we do have very carefully... cold fusion will come to us as we keep peering inot physiccs, and then we'll learn how to construct any type molecule we want form any feedstock molecules, but if we lose our economy before we reach that point? there will be no funding to hire and train the people that will discover those processes. so, it'snot "worship" at all, it is in fact hardcore pragmatism.

It is what it is though. We should have been going for greener stuff a long time ago, but we didnt have the tech that we do now. We should begin seeing some really creative stuff coming out in the next 10 years for alternative energy. Its just too much money to fully go after. We have to do what we have to do. We have to rely on affordable energy right now while planning for a future conversion when we are hopefully much better standing financially as a nation if that will ever happen.
Posts: 6946 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
glassman
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for glassman     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
but we didnt have the tech that we do now.

'tech' isn't discovered under rocks...

tech is discovered adn developed thru hard work, plain and simple. maybe the hardest work of all...

that work costs money, and that moeny has to come form somewhere. pure research is not what publicly owned corporations want to invest in, they invest in development of the pure research after they get it..

that pure research tends to be done by exteemely liberal people cash, not "conservatives"....

ask any conservative if the universities are full of liberals....

teh university of california system is huge owner of patents, they activley develop them every day, and that is by far the bastion f liberalism in America..

--------------------
Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.

Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
glassman
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for glassman     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
no this is not my wife, but she is one of the people doing serious GMO, and it si getting very "difficult" to get funding to do the work for some reason:


Attacks paid for by big business are 'driving science into a dark era'

Researchers attending one of the world's major academic conferences 'are scared to death of the anti-science lobby'


Robin McKie, science editor
The Observer, Saturday 18 February 2012

Most scientists, on achieving high office, keep their public remarks to the bland and reassuring. Last week Nina Fedoroff, the president of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), broke ranks in a spectacular manner.

She confessed that she was now "scared to death" by the anti-science movement that was spreading, uncontrolled, across the US and the rest of the western world.

"We are sliding back into a dark era," she said. "And there seems little we can do about it. I am profoundly depressed at just how difficult it has become merely to get a realistic conversation started on issues such as climate change or genetically modified organisms."

The remarks of Fedoroff, one of the world's most distinguished agricultural scientists, are all the more remarkable given their setting.

She made them at the AAAS annual meeting, an event at which scientists normally revel in their latest accomplishments: new insights into marine biology or first results from a recently launched satellite, for example.

But this year there has been a palpable chill to proceedings. Yes, good work was reported to the 8,000 who attended the various symposia and lectures at the meeting in Vancouver.

However, these pronouncements were set against a background of an entire intellectual discipline that realises that it, and its practitioners, are now under sustained attack.

As Fedoroff pointed out, university and government researchers are hounded for arguing that rising carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere are changing the climate. Their emails are hacked while Facebook campaigns call for their dismissal from their posts, calls that are often backed by rightwing politicians. At the last Republican party debate in Florida, Rick Santorum insisted he should be the presidential nominee simply because he had cottoned on earlier than his rivals Newt Gingrich or Mitt Romney to the "hoax" of global warming.

"Those of us who grew up in the sixties, when we put men on the Moon, now have to watch as every Republican candidate for this year's presidential election denies the science behind climate change and evolution. That is a staggering state of affairs and it is very worrying," said Professor Naomi Oreskes, of the University of California, San Diego.

Oreskes is co-author, with Erik Conway, of Merchants of Doubt, an investigation into the links between corporate business interests and campaigns in the US aimed at blocking the introduction of environmental and medical measures such as bans on smoking and the use of DDT, laws to limit acid rain, legislation to end the depletion of ozone in the atmosphere and attempts to curb carbon dioxide emissions.

In each case, legislation was delayed by years, sometimes decades, thanks to the activities of a variety of foundations – such as the Heartland Institute – which are backed by energy companies such as Exxon and billionaires like Charles Koch.

These institutions, acting as covers for major energy corporations, are responsible for the onslaught that has deeply lowered the reputation of science in many people's minds in America. This has come in the form of personal attacks on the reputations of scientists and television adverts that undermine environment laws. The Environmental Protection Agency, which is responsible for blocking mining and drilling proposals that might harm threatened species or habitats, has become a favourite target.

"Our present crisis over the rise of anti-science has been coming for a long time and we should have seen it coming," adds Oreskes.


http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2012/feb/19/science-scepticism-usdomesticpolic y?fb=native

--------------------
Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.

Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
CashCowMoo
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for CashCowMoo     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by glassman:
but we didnt have the tech that we do now.

'tech' isn't discovered under rocks...

tech is discovered adn developed thru hard work, plain and simple. maybe the hardest work of all...

that work costs money, and that moeny has to come form somewhere. pure research is not what publicly owned corporations want to invest in, they invest in development of the pure research after they get it..

that pure research tends to be done by exteemely liberal people cash, not "conservatives"....

ask any conservative if the universities are full of liberals....

teh university of california system is huge owner of patents, they activley develop them every day, and that is by far the bastion f liberalism in America..

I know that, but we have a lot more advances to work with now than we did then, and its still very expensive. Didnt they try the green push a while back? Sure there were opponents of it more back then, but still it was very costly with little return.

One day I hope to have a self sufficient home with wind, solar, geothermal, etc.

Posts: 6946 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
glassman
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for glassman     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
cash, i bought an apple computer in 1982, and there's phones now that have 10X to 100X more computing power.

the computer with printer and green screen was 3 grand... the phones today? well they are cheap compared to that...

as more production capability comes on, prices will get better...

--------------------
Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.

Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
raybond
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for raybond     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
FIVE Facts About Gas Prices

Feb 21, 2012 | By ThinkProgress War Room

As Gas Prices Rise, GOP Wants Even More Handouts to Big Oil

Though oil demand is at its lowest since 1997, oil prices (and gas prices along with them) are once again on the rise. Analysts are projecting gas prices will top $4 a gallon nationally and perhaps reach record highs later this year. Despite relatively low demand and surging production levels in the U.S., prices are of course rising due to myriad factors, including speculation and instability in the Middle East.

For their part, Republicans have latched on to these rising prices as proof that President Obama has pursued an “outrageously anti-American” energy policy. As with most other overheated conservative attacks on the president, the facts don’t line up in their favor.

Here’s FIVE key facts about rising gas prices, the GOP, and Big Oil.

1. Domestic Energy Production Has Soared Under President Obama: The number of oil drilling rigs in the U.S. hit a record last week, having quadrupled in number over the past three years . Between oil and gas drilling rigs, the U.S. now has more rigs at work than the rest of the world combined. The current oil boom has buoyed the projections of some leading oil industry analysts:


“It’s staggering,” said Marshall Adkins, who directs energy research for the financial services firm Raymond James. “If we continue growing anywhere near that pace and keep squeezing demand out of the system, that puts you in a world where we are not importing oil in 10 years.”

2. President Obama Has Taken Huge Steps to Reduce Our Dependence on Oil: In addition to overseeing a dramatic increase in domestic energy production (including from renewable sources), the president has also taken steps to reduce the amount of oil we consume. Most notably, new modern standards requiring cars and light-duty trucks to achieve an average fuel economy rating of 54.5 miles per gallon by 2025 will cut U.S. oil use by 2.2 MILLION barrels of oil per day by 2025 — a move that will save consumers $1.7 TRILLION and also cut greenhouse gas pollution by 6 BILLION metric tons. The 54.5 MPG standard by 2025 builds on an earlier Obama administration policy to increase fuel efficiency to 35.5 MPG by 2016, a one-third imrovement to fuel economy standards that had previously languished in neutral for more than 20 years. Even as gas prices are rising, Americans’ cars are becoming significantly more efficient.

3. Big Oil Made a Record $137 BILLION in Profits Last Year: Just the five largest oil companies — ExxonMobil, ConocoPhillips, BP, Chevron, and Shell — booked a combined profit of $137 BILLION in 2011, even though these companies produced 4 percent less oil in 2011. And of course Big Oil’s record profits are directly related to increasing pain at the pump for American consumers:



4. Republican Politicians Oppose Ending Taxpayer Handouts to Big Oil: Every Republican presidential contender and nearly every Republican member of the House and Senate has signed a pledge to oppose ending taxpayer handouts to Big Oil— handouts that will add up to more than $40 BILLION over the next ten years. In addition, Republicans have repeatedly voted in lockstep to block efforts to repeal the tax giveaways to Big Oil. President Obama, however, remains undaunted and has once again included repeal of these wasteful giveaways in his budget for 2013.

5. Republican Politicians Want to Cut Big Oil’s Taxes Even More: Both the House Republican budget plan released last year (and supported by nearly every Republican member of the House and Senate) and the tax plans of every GOP presidential contender call for cutting the corporate tax rate by one-third or more. This huge tax cut could result in another big windfall of billions of dollars for Big Oil. By contrast, President Obama has proposed closing wasteful tax loopholes and wants to clamp down on the use of foreign tax shelters (ExxonMobil uses at least 20) that allow huge corporations to avoid paying their fair share in U.S. taxes.

IN ONE SENTENCE: Instead of giving billions more in handouts to Big Oil despite the industry’s record-breaking profits, President Obama has presided over a dramatic increase in domestic energy production coupled with unprecedented efforts to decrease Americans’ spending at the pump by modernizing fuel economy standards.

--------------------
Wise men learn more from fools than fools from the wise.

Posts: 3767 | From: beautiful California | Registered: Sep 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
CashCowMoo
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for CashCowMoo     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Why is it so bad about how much money a company makes, and why is it only aimed at oil when companies like at&t or health care companies get a pass on massive profits.

http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune500/2011/performers/companies/prof its/


Why is profit such a bad word anyway? Get rid of the subsidies to larger corporations.

Here is an example:

Taxpayers on Hook for Failed Ethanol Plant
February 6, 2012


"The project raised $320 million, largely in the form of federal, state, and local subsidies, but the plant never produced a drop of ethanol. Nor did the factory ever hire the 50 to 70 permanent employees its promoters had promised. On Jan. 3, Range Fuels finally sold the factory to New Zealand-based LanzaTech for a mere $5.1 million. Taxpayers and private investors are left on the hook for most of the remaining $315 million."


Note that this green project was done under the BUSH admin, the evil green hating admin that it was oh it was so awful! What about fishery subsidies,


All the hate against oil and Utopian dreams about a rapid move into oil free America is well intended, but just not realistic. People need to be REALISTS more often than IDEALISTS.


"Bigger Subsidies Make Bigger Solar a Bad Bet"

http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/blog/post/2011/12/bigger-subsidies-make- bigger-solar-a-bad-bet


What about Amtrack? Housing subsidies? There are subsidies for so many things that just seem to go into black holes. I wonder what the oil subsidies compared to all the others look like.

--------------------
It isn't so much that liberals are ignorant. It's just that they know so many things that aren't so.

Posts: 6946 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
glassman
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for glassman     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
cash, the govt has been picking winners and losers since the indian treaties....

the ethanol subsidies specifically helped red states. look at the map [Wink]

if you add on all of the security that we have to rpovide oil co's to do biz in the world? the oil co's are very highly subsidized... i've seen figures as high 12$ per gallon of gasoline...

--------------------
Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.

Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
CashCowMoo
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for CashCowMoo     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by glassman:
cash, the govt has been picking winners and losers since the indian treaties....

the ethanol subsidies specifically helped red states. look at the map [Wink]

if you add on all of the security that we have to rpovide oil co's to do biz in the world? the oil co's are very highly subsidized... i've seen figures as high 12$ per gallon of gasoline...

Heres the thing, they get rid of those subsidies for oil....its going to be something else after that. Its always something.
Posts: 6946 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
glassman
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for glassman     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
oil is still all over the world...

we just don't have the oil we need here, so we'll be defending the Saudi's and whoever till we don't need it or it's gone... that cost is why we spend more than everybody else combined on "defense"...

there is no one solution right now to the problem...

--------------------
Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.

Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
CashCowMoo
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for CashCowMoo     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
We have enough oil here if we can lower our consumption. They cant keep up with shipping the oil produced in ND.

There is a TON of oil still in California, but we know what happens in that state. Mississippi has a bunch of new wells being drilled onshore, I mean its all over.

--------------------
It isn't so much that liberals are ignorant. It's just that they know so many things that aren't so.

Posts: 6946 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
glassman
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for glassman     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
i keep hearing that we have enough oil from Faux news...

it's not true. we use 20 million BPD.

we have to begin building and selling electric cars.

cellulosic ethanol will help. corn based ethanol is ridiculous to the extreme, and was only implemented in the anticipation of repcacing it with non-food based ehtanol.. it needs another billion dollars of research to find the keys tho [Eek!] there are plenty of critters that have the enzymes we need to break the sugars out of cellulose, but we need to be able to make them work in vat, like yeast [Smile]
that means we need wind and solar to increase dramatically, we also need nuke plants for a few more decades till we get fusion working. as of now fusion is dream and if you even bring it up with seriuos scientists? they get weird. But then allnew stuff causes people to act wierd.

i know nukes are not safe, but nothing else is either.

Liquified natgas will be useful for fleets, natgas elctric generation too...

it is going to take alot of differnt stratedies, and waiting is just dumb, no matter how bad th eeconomy is? oil is the underpinning of the whole world economy and as long it is the only game in town? we are nothing more than hogs at the trough getting fat for the butcher....

some of US want to see the gold standard back? well we are actually running on the oil standard rightnow.. gold is not really a *consumable* oil is.. we need to get off the oil standard now.

--------------------
Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.

Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
CashCowMoo
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for CashCowMoo     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Ron Paul is all about the gold standard, but people think he is crazy.

--------------------
It isn't so much that liberals are ignorant. It's just that they know so many things that aren't so.

Posts: 6946 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
glassman
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for glassman     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
lemme vent one more thing. my wife is in the business of analyisng enzymes and how they are constructed by DNA. she broke open a very important one about 4 years ago. "they" couldn't make it work in yeast. however, we cannot figure out why "they" couldn't do it. it doesn't make sense. now, she doesn't get the funding to do wahtever she wants (we wish) and she would need a million dollar set up to try to make the yeast do it for her, and she would be starting from scratch, so the project was forwarded to people that should be able to do it in 6 months.. 4 years later? no publications.

meanwhile she got hot on another enzyme in the sam critter, this one deconstructs doublestranded RNA- you may recall about 6 weeks ago 'they" announced that doublestranded RNA may be able to cure any and every viral disease known to man... only thing is this enzyme she IDed would make therapeutic use of DSRNA useles. it's in bug spit, it may be in our spit, or even our blood.

anyway, withing weeks of announcing she had IDed this? her funding for it got pulled HARD. no landing, so the lesson is yes there is ton of politics in scientific research and if we walk away? soembody else will publish this stuff with a patent and we are in standoff mode, but how long can you stand on your own???

--------------------
Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.

Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
glassman
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for glassman     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by CashCowMoo:
Ron Paul is all about the gold standard, but people think he is crazy.

yep, but cash what is crazy? not being *normal* LOL... i ben crazy since i was born.

--------------------
Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.

Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
raybond
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for raybond     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Blame Oil Speculators, Not Obama, For Rising Oil Prices

By Alex Seitz-Wald on Feb 22, 2012 at 5:10 pm


As the improving economy has robbed conservatives of their chief talking point against President Obama, they’ve turned to rising gas prices as the next problem to pin on the president.

Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) “instructed fellow Republicans to embrace the gas-pump anger,” while Rick Santorum conspiratorially claimed Obama is intentionally pushing up prices to cut carbon emissions. Not to be outdone, Newt Gingrich released a 30-minute video today about how “the Obama administration is so anti‑oil” that they’ve forced the price of gas to go up.

But there’s little truth to claims that Obama has curbed U.S. oil production and driven up gas prices in the process. As NPR noted this morning, the number of drilling rigs in U.S. oil fields has quadrupled under Obama and domestic oil production hit an 8-year high in 2011. For the first time in 60 years, the U.S. is now a net fuel exporter.

Oil demand was actually down 4.6 percent last week over last year, while the supply of gasoline has actually increased slightly since a year ago. So why are gas prices so high? As McClatchy’s Kevin Hall explains today, there is a systemic problem: speculation.

Energy futures markets serve a legitimate role in helping producers (like oil companies) and big end users (like airlines) hedge against price volatility, but lately, they’ve been taken over by Wall Street speculators who never intend to actually use the fuel they’re betting on. As Hall reports:


Historically, financial speculators accounted for about 30 percent of oil trading in commodity markets, while producers and end users made up about 70 percent. Today it’s almost the reverse.

A McClatchy review of the latest Commitment of Traders report from the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, which regulates oil trading, shows that producers and merchants made up just 36 percent of all contracts traded in the week ending Feb. 14 while speculators who will never take delivery of the oil made up 64 percent.

Many experts, lawmakers (Democratic and Republican), and government regulators have expressed similar warnings.

Finally, after many delays, the government board responsible for regulating commodity futures markets finalized a rule in October to limit speculation, a power it was given by the Dodd-Frank Wall street reform law. However, the rule won’t go into effect until next October, as the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) needs to collect “one year of interest data” first. The financial industry is fighting the new rule, but just today, the CFTC took action against a company in different market, providing an example of how the energy regulation can effectively work.

--------------------
Wise men learn more from fools than fools from the wise.

Posts: 3767 | From: beautiful California | Registered: Sep 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
raybond
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for raybond     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
GAS PRICES FACT: Domestic Oil Production Has Soared Under President Obama | The number of oil drilling rigs in the U.S. hit a record last week, having quadrupled in number over the past three years. Between oil and gas drilling rigs, the U.S. now has more rigs at work than the rest of the world combined. The current oil boom has buoyed the projections of some leading oil industry analysts:


“It’s staggering,” said Marshall Adkins, who directs energy research for the financial services firm Raymond James. “If we continue growing anywhere near that pace and keep squeezing demand out of the system, that puts you in a world where we are not importing oil in 10 years.”

--------------------
Wise men learn more from fools than fools from the wise.

Posts: 3767 | From: beautiful California | Registered: Sep 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
glassman
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for glassman     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
yes, but don't beleive them when they tell you we have 100 years of this stuff left.

we might. but don't count on it, and specifically don't count on fracking to keep working. it could work better the deeper we go, but we could also end up draining all of our aquifers and trade fuel for water....

--------------------
Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.

Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pagan
Member


Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Pagan     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by glassman:
yes, but don't beleive them when they tell you we have 100 years of this stuff left.

we might. but don't count on it, and specifically don't count on fracking to keep working. it could work better the deeper we go, but we could also end up draining all of our aquifers and trade fuel for water....

Aw c'mon glass. CCM posted on another thread to you that oil was everywhere in the USA. We just gotta dig more holes! [BadOne]

--------------------
It is impossible to make anything foolproof because fools are so ingenious.

Posts: 3311 | From: St. Louis | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
glassman
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for glassman     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Faux news keeps putting people on saying that Obama won't let anybody drill in t e Gulf-

that's not what i hear:

But drilling activity in the Gulf of Mexico continues to recover. During Schlumberger's conference call to discuss fourth-quarter earnings, CEO Paal Kibsgaard told analysts that the rig count in the region could return to pre-Macondo levels by the end of 2012:

Analyst: So you'd mentioned that your outlook for North American rig count's flat this year, and you also said in your release that, basically, revenue was in line with the rig count, so it would seem to me that the upside here for you guys is really going to be in the Gulf of Mexico. And I was just wondering, if we strip out the strength of the seismic side, I'm curious as to where you are in your deepwater operations in the Gulf.

Are you back to the pre-Macondo levels? Are costs now fully absorbed in that market? And I guess I'm just wondering, are your margins now in the Gulf higher than in your U.S. land business?

Paal Kibsgaard: Yes, the simple answer to that is yes. This quarter, I think, was the first quarter where our Gulf of Mexico margins were accretive to North America. So, obviously, there's been a lot of focus in on the multi-client sales for Q4, which was quite strong, but I think it's also important to point out the strength we have on the deepwater side for well operations, both wireline and on the drilling segment. So we are quite optimistic in terms of the outlook for the Gulf of Mexico; firstly, in terms of our market share position, and in addition to how well we can leverage our high-end technology and operational performance in this type of market. So we see steady growth in deepwater drilling rig counts during 2012, roughly about a rig a month. So we would be at pre-Macondo levels for drilling rigs in the deepwater by the latter part of 2012.

Schlumberger traditionally has been one of the leading services company in the Gulf of Mexico. If the rig count in the region recovers to pre-Macondo levels by the end of 2012, that would be a huge boon for Schlumberger.

These major discoveries, coupled with a recovery in the Gulf of Mexico and Brazil's ongoing investments in offshore production, have tightened the supply-demand balance for deepwater drilling rigs, especially the ultra-deepwater units. Last month, several contract drillers announced impressive fixtures.


http://seekingalpha.com/article/372621-going-deep-oil-service-providers-should-b enefit-from-boom-in-deepwater-drilling

Macondo is the site where the BP well blew

--------------------
Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.

Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
CashCowMoo
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for CashCowMoo     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
“Somehow,” Chu said, “we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe.”

-Obama's energy secretary Steven Chu in 2008.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0212/73138.html#ixzz1nLV7WKWF


Report: Obama Energy Secretary Steven Chu Personally Intervened In $1.4 Billion Loan To Prop Up Solyndra…

http://weaselzippers.us/2012/02/17/report-obama-energy-secretary-steven-chu-pers onally-intervened-in-1-4-billion-loan-to-prop-up-solyndra/


Sounds like they have the poor in their best interests!

--------------------
It isn't so much that liberals are ignorant. It's just that they know so many things that aren't so.

Posts: 6946 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
glassman
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for glassman     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
another misquote cash...

Times Tough for Energy Overhaul
Struggling Economy, Falling Oil Prices Complicate Obama Team's Agenda

DECEMBER 12, 2008

But the next administration will face a range of obstacles on the energy front, from plummeting oil prices and a declining economy to potential rifts among Mr. Obama's own advisers.

In a sign of one major internal difference, Mr. Chu has called for gradually ramping up gasoline taxes over 15 years to coax consumers into buying more-efficient cars and living in neighborhoods closer to work.

"Somehow we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe," Mr. Chu, who directs the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory in California, said in an interview with The Wall Street Journal in September.

But Mr. Obama has dismissed the idea of boosting the federal gasoline tax, a move energy experts say could be the single most effective step to promote alternative energies and temper demand. Mr. Obama said Sunday that a heightened gas tax would be a "mistake" because it would put "additional burdens on American families right now.


http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122904040307499791.html

that's the wall st journal reporting that.. another Fox news outlet, so it isn't biased for Chu or Obama...

--------------------
Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.

Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
raybond
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for raybond     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I don't know what every one else is living with but we are seeing prices go up 3 and 4 cents a night.

Get up a nice beautiful morning, have my bacon and eggs look at the ocean and then look at the gas station down the street and say my god its getting close to 5 dollars a gallon.

--------------------
Wise men learn more from fools than fools from the wise.

Posts: 3767 | From: beautiful California | Registered: Sep 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Happy Valley
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Happy Valley     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Raise margin requirements for oil futures and this all ends...

Not gonna happen though, at least not til every last drop is milked from this cow on the long side...Oil prices have nothing to do with supply/demand, the CME could end this any time they wanted to...When speculators give them the green light, they will pull the rug on this pig...

Posts: 2379 | Registered: Apr 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
glassman
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for glassman     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
hey happy, long time...

do yo know how much margin is legally available on the CME to the big players? i have looked but i can't find it...

--------------------
Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.

Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.

Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Allstocks.com Message Board Home

© 1997 - 2013 Allstocks.com. All rights reserved.

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.2

Share