WHY ARE GAS PRICES SO HIGH (and going higher)?

Dennis Olson

Chief Curmudgeon
_______________
Stripped of all BS, here's MHO....

Last fall, the oil companies got those prices established, and no oil execs or politicians were dragged out and shot. There were no riots over gas prices. We bent over as a nation and took it in the keester.

In short - they're this high because WE ALLOWED IT, and TPTB saw that we did.

We only have ourselves to blame. The time is SOON for the bullets to start flying....

JMHO
 

brokenwings

Veteran Member
I have to whole heartedly agree with you Dennis!! It is just because we ALLOWED them to rape us with these high prices. I hardly even hear anyone complain too much. What the HELL is wrong with all of us??? We sit with our thumbs up our you know whats while our borders are wide open, illegal alieins running amock, and our government has spent us into a corner and NOBODY SAYS ANYTHING!!!!!

I just don't get it. Are we all so juiced up from the chemtrails that we can't take a stand about ANYTHING??!!!

I predict that they will keep raising prices as long as we let them get away with it and when we start to squeel, they will stop at that price. You ain't seen nothing yet. Most people say they won't change their habits or anything until gas gets to $5.00 a gallon!!! I for one changed my gas habits back when gas got to $2.00 a gallon!
 

Thornwalker

Inactive
The sheep are waaaaay to engulfed in who’s going to be the next American Idol to be worried about such trivial things such as fuel prices…:kk1:
 
One oil exec said, "There's no law against making a profit."

This is basic economic theory. There's plenty of textbooks that explain how to price your product for maximum profit.

So , they bump up prices, observe how much gets sold... if it doesn't drop significantly, up go the prices again. And again. And again, until it gets to the point that the consumer uses less.

So far, there's only been grumbling. But "there's a war on, don't you know", so people suck it up. When there's eventually a big transport stoppage, you'll find fuel prices will ease a few percent. But it'll still be 100's of percent above what it used to be.
 

Dennis Olson

Chief Curmudgeon
_______________
Once Exxon/Mobil's $13,700/hr CEO takes a bullet in the head, you'll see things change. I don't care HOW much money he has. He'll stop a bullet the same as anyone else.

Tick tock.....
 

CountryboyinGA

Inactive
Thornwalker said:
The sheep are waaaaay to engulfed in who’s going to be the next American Idol to be worried about such trivial things such as fuel prices…:kk1:
Exactly. Think about it, Congress had hearing on the use of steriods in baseball. WT%?

It shows where the masses have their minds.

CBinGA
 

Birdlady

Membership Revoked
http://www.abc4.com/business/story.aspx?content_id=94A19B1E-D744-4636-B115-387FC25ADECA

"The first is the price of crude oil, which in early trading Friday was just $3 off its record of $69.91 per barrel -- largely on geopolitical fears about Iran and Nigeria.

The second is the government's requirement that gasoline refiners stop using MTBE, or methyl tertiary butyl ether, that adds octane and cuts pollution. Refiners invested heavily in MTBE production facilities 20 years ago when Washington virtually required it. But MTBE has been found in drinking water and the politically connected ethanol industry is successfully pushing their product as a MTBE substitute.

Costs entailed in switching gasoline-making facilities from MTBE to ethanol is straining the system -- and sending ethanol prices sky high. Further, ethanol carries an import tariff of 54 cents a gallon as well as an ad valorem tax of 2.5 percent. "

http://money.cnn.com/2006/04/12/magazines/fortune/pluggedin_fortune/index.htm
"There's no harm in having the government keep a closer watch on the energy industry, and Kohl's sympathy for consumers is commendable, but blaming Big Oil for high gas prices is a little like blaming McDonald's (Research) for obesity. (Yes, I know that also makes for effective politics.)

Because while those profits might seem outrageous - ExxonMobil (Research) earned over $36 billion last year - Big Oil makes its money by pumping oil out of the ground, not refining and selling it as gasoline. Of Exxon's mammoth haul, only a tiny fraction came from making and selling gas in the U.S.

The idea that prices are set by Big Oil, not the traders at the NYMEX and other global bourses, is a misconception that seems to come into vogue whenever energy prices start making new highs. And putting the blame on OPEC, let alone trying to subject a foreign cartel to U.S. laws, seems to be doing anything but dealing honestly with the problem of too much demand and too little supply here at home."
 

Dennis Olson

Chief Curmudgeon
_______________
And the gooberment could suspend the ethanol requirement at the stroke of a pen.

Couldn't they....

Big Oil OWNS the government...
 

workingman

Membership Revoked
There's a resource war going on.

and since Regan ripped off the solar panels on the White House roof

GREED IS GOOD

and CONSERVATISM was converted to
GRAB ALL YOU WANTISM



wonder why there are almost NO alternative energy products part of society, thank Oil Companies
wonder why this country is going down the tubes? .....

....PIGS, PIGS IN POWER and LITTLE PIGGYS WITH THEIR LITTLE PIGGY HOUSES & CARS
are oblivious to the emotional existence of others or any living thing.
 

workingman

Membership Revoked
and like the IMF, it's another form of TAXATION
to fund the takeover of the world

as soon as most of us are dead

life will be easy for the chosen few

in a "nutshell" we are funding our own demise.
 

Watchingbear

Senior Member
I do not like the exxon CEO, but he is just reaping a windfall profit. Oil is not up nearly as much as many other things, housing and healthcare to name but two. And oil company profit growth has lagged far behind banks and financial companies for well over a decade - although this appears to be changing.

How long do we think that we can just issue trillions of electronic dollars and buy up 80% of the world's resources without producing anything that anyone wants? Oil demand from china and india are exploding, and production cannot keep up. They have all our dollars...but we will just print more. And it will get worse.

An ounce of gold will still buy the same amount of oil that it did a few years ago, but your dollar won't. Understand this, and you can find the real culprit behind the move in oil prices.

http://mwhodges.home.att.net/inflation.htm
 

jim_bo

Inactive
I agree Dennis! Insurance corps and oil corps both have the gov'ts hand twisted behind their back. What other corporations would not have to follow legistlation after it was voted in here in Calif? They set their own rules but then again I wonder who else besides the president owns stock in these corporations?

Like I said in an earlier post when the truck drivers across America have had enough and start their 45 day strike as they park their big riggs and the American people join in and NOT buy gas for at least a month will create a low demand and by the oil corps own words the price shoud come way down.


Jim_bo
 

Oilpatch Hand

3-Bomb General, TB2K Army
Birdlady said:
http://www.abc4.com/business/story.aspx?content_id=94A19B1E-D744-4636-B115-387FC25ADECA

"The first is the price of crude oil, which in early trading Friday was just $3 off its record of $69.91 per barrel -- largely on geopolitical fears about Iran and Nigeria.

The second is the government's requirement that gasoline refiners stop using MTBE, or methyl tertiary butyl ether, that adds octane and cuts pollution. Refiners invested heavily in MTBE production facilities 20 years ago when Washington virtually required it. But MTBE has been found in drinking water and the politically connected ethanol industry is successfully pushing their product as a MTBE substitute.

Costs entailed in switching gasoline-making facilities from MTBE to ethanol is straining the system -- and sending ethanol prices sky high. Further, ethanol carries an import tariff of 54 cents a gallon as well as an ad valorem tax of 2.5 percent. "

http://money.cnn.com/2006/04/12/magazines/fortune/pluggedin_fortune/index.htm
"There's no harm in having the government keep a closer watch on the energy industry, and Kohl's sympathy for consumers is commendable, but blaming Big Oil for high gas prices is a little like blaming McDonald's (Research) for obesity. (Yes, I know that also makes for effective politics.)

Because while those profits might seem outrageous - ExxonMobil (Research) earned over $36 billion last year - Big Oil makes its money by pumping oil out of the ground, not refining and selling it as gasoline. Of Exxon's mammoth haul, only a tiny fraction came from making and selling gas in the U.S.

The idea that prices are set by Big Oil, not the traders at the NYMEX and other global bourses, is a misconception that seems to come into vogue whenever energy prices start making new highs. And putting the blame on OPEC, let alone trying to subject a foreign cartel to U.S. laws, seems to be doing anything but dealing honestly with the problem of too much demand and too little supply here at home."



Thank you for a badly needed injection of reason.

When demand decreases, supply will increase, and prices will drop commensurately. How do you decrease demand? Don't buy gasoline. It's surprising how it doesn't occur to so many purportedly rational individuals that if they think gasoline is too expensive, they should refrain from buying it.

Funny thing, though...nobody on this thread who is publicly inciting violence against oil industry professionals has bothered to explain how if they shot every last oil industry employee in the street it would result in lower gasoline prices.

I want somebody to explain how that's going to work. Really, I do. :lol:

Getting back to Realityville, the only thing that can help in the short run is lower demand. Unless you can figure out a way to produce and distribute more ethanol. Remember...ethanol corrodes pipelines. You can't transport it that way. So you're limited to trucking it around. And that constrains the amount of ethanol you can make available.

I'm surprised nobody has nailed Archer Daniels Midland as the corporate Mr. Big in this gasoline price conspiracy. :lol:
 

TIK

Inactive
Dennis Olson said:
Stripped of all BS, here's MHO....

Last fall, the oil companies got those prices established, and no oil execs or politicians were dragged out and shot. There were no riots over gas prices. We bent over as a nation and took it in the keester.

In short - they're this high because WE ALLOWED IT, and TPTB saw that we did.

We only have ourselves to blame. The time is SOON for the bullets to start flying....

JMHO

HELLO!! I've been saying the same dang things, Dennis. Review some of my old threads. And we'll KEEP taking it in the keester as long as we DON'T change our driving habits. And just as I was saying to my wife, that will NEVER happen. NEVER. People are too selfish and ignorant of the world around them to hope that.
 

Hiding Bear

Inactive
Watchingbear said:
I do not like the exxon CEO, but he is just reaping a windfall profit. Oil is not up nearly as much as many other things, housing and healthcare to name but two. And oil company profit growth has lagged far behind banks and financial companies for well over a decade - although this appears to be changing.

How long do we think that we can just issue trillions of electronic dollars and buy up 80% of the world's resources without producing anything that anyone wants? Oil demand from china and india are exploding, and production cannot keep up. They have all our dollars...but we will just print more. And it will get worse.

An ounce of gold will still buy the same amount of oil that it did a few years ago, but your dollar won't. Understand this, and you can find the real culprit behind the move in oil prices.

http://mwhodges.home.att.net/inflation.htm

Well put. I personally don't believe any executive should be paid more than $10 million a year or so (but allowed to buy as much stock as he/she wants). But having said that, the ex chief of Exxon is actually getting proportionally less of the profits than what other executives are making relative to the sales at their companies.

I have been talking here about the price-rising impact of the coming ethanol changeover weeks ago, but in reality the latest move is more specifically related about worries concerning Iran - and the price that may have to be paid to secure smaller supplies of oil with dollars that have no intrinsic value.

While the Fed talks tough about maintaining the dollar's value through higher interst rates, in reality what the world thinks the value of the dollar should be is more important. As long as everyone around the world accepts paper US dollars for real goods, inflation stays at a managable level. In the early 70s when France and then OPEC didn't want to accept dollars any longer, inflation sprinted ahead. We may be on the verge of something similar here.

So oil companies, government regulations and other factors are to blame for higher gasoline prices - but in the longer run the most important factor is the available supply of oil and the amount of dollars that need to be produced to maintain our standard of living.
 

Ruckmanite

Veteran Member
OK, I'll throw myself under the bus for oil companies.

First, what is wrong with a 10% profit margin? You guys don't bitch about Wal-Mart making over 10%, nor any other company.

Second, let us have a basic review on just how screwed we are, evil oil companies or not, and examine the real cause of the oil disaster we face.

1. There have been no new refineries built in the USA since the 1970's due to
NIMBY and EPA crap. If you are an oil company, and you want to build a
refinery here in the CONUS, it is 5 billion+ to get things to ground breaking. The demand for refined products exceeds the capabilities we have to refine gas right now. We import refined products every day.

2. Remember Katrina and Rita? Those hurricanes clobbered the Gulf coast refineries and natural gas and offshore oil platforms. We are still down 20% from pre-hurricane 05 levels. Those things aren't cheap. Shell lost it's Mars platform, and BP nearly lost the massive Thunderhorse.
3. Depletion, depletion, depletion. We peaked here in CONUS in 1970 per King Hubbert's prediction. We produced 10 MBPD then, and only 5-6 now. Imports make up the difference. Prudhoe Bay peaked in the late 80's at 2 million barrels/day and is now down to 950,000 barrels per day. Do the math.

4. The big players, specifically Saudi Arabia, Mexico, and Kuwait are in deep trouble. Mexico's Cantarrel field, by Pemex's own reports, is in decline, and faces catastrophic decline rates over the next 3 years. Ghawar, the king of kings of oil fields in Saudi Arabia, is rolling over, as water cut is nearing 40% and over. Aramco's own reports forecast an 8% decline YOY for existing fields, that's 760 thousand barrels per day. Not chump change.

5. Kuwait peaked, and is in decline.

6. Nigeria has booted Shell out of the country, with death threats to all workers who dare to return. Kiss goodbye another 600,000 barrels/day.

7. China and India are growing rapidly, and their thirst for oil is also. The absolute supply demand ratio is now balanced, and demand is outstripping supply right now.

8. The ethanol/MTBE debacle is unfolding. We don't have enough ethanol to make up for the lost MTBE, and their is no distribution via pipelines for ethanol (it is corrosive to pipelines).

9. The EPA's of many states have made it so difficult for refineries that we have some 50 or so blends of unleaded gas here in the country.

10. NEW EPA rules regarding sulfur content in fuels are requiring more refineries to shut down and retool. The ppm is being drastically lowered, and this comes at a greatly increased cost. You think Chavez is going to take a huge loss and retool his CITGO refineries on the Gulf Coast to meet the new rules, or simply sell the fuel elsewhere where the EPA rules are less stringent? IIRC, those are now for sale.

11. Now toss in Iran/Iraq/terrorists/Mid-East instability and you get a risk premium.

12. Our FRn's are quickly becoming a joke. The world's oil is priced in dollars, and the Iranian Oil bourse, and the possible Russian direct sale of oil for Euro's will tank the dollar. Toss that in also.

It isn't just the evil oil companies fault. Pin a portion of the blame on the EPA with a zillion blends of fuel, winter and summer, and the FACT that it is nearly impossible to build a refinery here, and wow, we are suprised that fuel would actually rise in price??? It is a bit more complex than that friends.

If you want to learn a bit more, from a less emotional standpoint, and one supported by facts, check out the downstreamers oil board, and theoildrum.com and rigzone.com (very cool photos of just how massive offshore rigs are).
 

Birdlady

Membership Revoked
Oilpatch Hand said:
"I'm surprised nobody has nailed Archer Daniels Midland as the corporate Mr. Big in this gasoline price conspiracy."


I DID mention this:
Archer Daniels Midland comes to mind.

"There’s politics in this - favoring farming lobbies over oil lobbies. Both those lobbies are big and powerful."
http://energystockblog.com/article/8577
 

Y2kO

Inactive
The price of crude oil is set by movements on the three major international petroleum exchanges, all of which have their own Web sites featuring information about oil prices. They are the New York Mercantile Exchange (NYMEX, http://www.nymex.com), the International Petroleum Exchange in London (IPE, http://www.ipe.uk.com) and the Singapore International Monetary Exchange (SIMEX, http://www.simex.com.sg).

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,8209-1257188,00.html

SPECIAL REPORT
Speculators hijack oil market
September 12, 2004

Prices have been forced up unnecessarily as investment banks and hedge funds join the ‘black gold rush’. Robert Winnett reports:

A LARGE WAREHOUSE in Amsterdam may seem an unusual place to attract the City’s top traders and hedge funds. But, in the past few months, Morgan Stanley has been accumulating warehouse space in the Netherlands to store its hottest new property — oil.

This and the tankers that have been hired by the investment bank illustrate just how important oil is now becoming in the City of London and Wall Street.

Morgan Stanley may be among the most advanced of the new breed of oil speculators, but, over the past year, many banks and hedge funds have joined the “black gold rush”. With the stock market proving lacklustre, the oil market has been a godsend for the banks, which describe it as the “new Nasdaq”.

Speculators have helped to drive oil prices to near record levels — peaking at almost $50 a barrel last month. Oil is the talk of the City with many millions of pounds being made every day, and oil traders are among the most sought-after employees.

“If you can spell derivative, you can earn six figures, and anyone who can navigate his way round the oil market is offered $1m just to sign a contract,” said one trading executive.

There have traditionally been two distinct oil markets. The first is the futures markets in London and New York that trade the right to buy oil at a predetermined point in the future. About one-sixth of all oil is sold this way, although most contracts are traded and then lapse without oil changing hands.

This “paper” market, the main stamping ground for speculators, acts as a benchmark for the price of oil in the second market — crude bought direct from oil companies.

If prices on the futures market rise too far above the so-called physical market, oil users such as airlines and petrol dealers pull out, so prices fall. If prices on the futures market are lower than in the physical market, the users pile in, pushing up prices.

However, this traditional equilibrium has been rocked by short-term speculators dipping in and out of the futures market. This has led to sharp rises in the price and far more volatility.

Meanwhile, banks such as Morgan Stanley are also beginning to move into the physical market to buy oil — or even entire oilfields.

Morgan Stanley recently won the contract to supply fuel to United Airlines, and Goldman Sachs recently bought 10m barrels of oil.

A senior oil company executive said: “Even within this firm, the mechanics of the market are not widely understood. When oil prices go up, everyone talks about fundamentals and geopolitics, but the role of speculators and banks is now very significant.”

In the City, Barclays, Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs are leading the charge into oil but, in addition, several secretive hedge funds are now wagering hundreds of millions of dollars every day in the oil market and reaping the dividends. Over the past few months, ABN Amro has also built up an oil-trading team.

[...]

The International Energy Authority, an intergovernmental organisation, recently criticised the role of speculators. They have also been attacked by French and American government ministers. Alan Greenspan, chairman of America’s Federal Reserve Board, said that speculators had caused oil prices to “surge”.

A secret analysis of the market carried out by a big European oil company recently found that speculators were adding between $7 and $8 — or between 15% and 20% — to the price of a barrel of oil.

This month, rocketing petrol prices forced Gordon Brown, the chancellor, to delay a proposed increase in fuel duty.

A senior executive at one oil firm said: “This is the hottest oil market I have ever seen. There has been a massive increase in hedge-fund activity. And what we call non-commercial interests (those who do not use oil for their business) has doubled recently.

“A lot of new banks are coming in and all the speculation is very disruptive.”

Much of the trading by hedge funds has been driven by sophisticated computer-trading models. The models, known as “black boxes”, use complicated formulas to determine trades for a hedge fund.

Over the past few years, a number of hedge funds have added the oil markets to their trading systems as the price of oil tends to rise sharply after periods of strong economic growth. Hedge-fund insiders therefore say that oil is an excellent short-term bet.

The sharp rises and falls in the market over the past month are symptomatic of such computer-generated trading. Prices rose sharply to almost $50 a barrel, at which point the computers kicked in to automatically sell huge positions.

Last week, the computer trading models kicked in again to cause the biggest daily fall in oil prices for three months — a drop of 4% to $42.81 a barrel.

Jeffrey Currie, head of commodities research at Goldman Sachs said: “The number of speculators is typically correlated with high economic growth. They work off macro-economic trading models.

“Equities are anticipatory assets — you buy them when you expect the economy to do well — but commodities such as oil are spot assets that you buy when the economy has done well.”

Man Group’s AHL hedge fund and Aspect Capital Management are two of the London-based funds that have moved heavily into oil.

Stephen Butler, an oil expert at Aspect, said: “We are one of the biggest in Europe and have built up our exposure over the past 18 months. We probably have up to $250m (£140m) exposure a day on the London and New York markets.

“Our trading is determined by computer so we don’t have the emotional factor. It has worked well on the energy markets and has been one of our best-performing sectors.”

But apart from the short-term speculators, the investment banks have also identified a looming “oil crunch”, which has encouraged them to move aggressively into the market.

Goldman Sachs calculates that for the first time this year demand for oil will outstrip the world’s capacity to refine and distribute it.

Benoit de Vitry, head of commodities at Barclays Capital, said: “The oil system has cracked. There is a lack of refinery and distribution capacity. The spare capacity is now down to 1m barrels a day. People are not worried about having their meal on the table today, but fears are growing about the future.”

According to Goldman Sachs, the capacity of oil tankers and oil refineries has been dropping since the early 1980s because of a lack of investment, and the crunch will come this year. Since 1983, real spending on exploration and production of energy has fallen by 49.5%. To build the extra infrastructure that is required will take years, possibly more than a decade, to complete.

The International Energy Agency forecasts that over the next 30 years the energy industry globally will require $16,000 billion in new investment to catch up — and it is not clear where this money will come from.

Apart from the oft-quoted, short-term oil price, there is also a lesser-known market in long-term oil futures — the right to buy oil in five years’ time. This has traditionally been a rather staid market, and the price of a barrel of oil in the long-term market has been around $20 for most of the past 20 years. However, over the past 18 months, the price has rocketed to $35 a barrel as the speculators have moved in.

The bleak, long-term outlook for oil prices is also why banks have begun to buy up oil supplies directly. Morgan Stanley and Deutsche bank recently bought the rights to 36m barrels of oil between 2007 and 2010 direct from a North Sea oilfield.
 

Y2kO

Inactive
http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/ene...le=Letter+To+President+Bush+and+Senator+Kerry

April 6, 2004

President George Bush
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500

United States Senator John Kerry
304 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington DC 20510

Dear President Bush and Senator Kerry,

In recent days, both of you have weighed in on the high price of gasoline in the United States. Unfortunately, the debate has not yet turned to the main cause of the recent gasoline price spikes. That has little to do with OPEC but is a result of the deliberate restriction of supply by the highly consolidated domestic refining industry.

We write you with new internal Shell documents showing manipulation of supply at domestic refineries and ask that both of you call for an immediate moratorium on refinery closures in the United States. The documents available at http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/utilities/rp/ show Shell is shuttering its highly profitable Bakersfield refinery -- artificially restricting the supply of California gasoline to drive up the price and lying to the public about it.

The April 5th "Alliance Refining Update" document shows that Bakersfield, which supplies 2% of California's reformulated gasoline, has the biggest margins of any Shell refinery in the nation-- or $23.01 per barrel, about 55 cents profit per gallon. That means, for example, that margins are 36 cents per gallon higher in Bakersfield than in Port Arthur Texas. The internal document comments under the category of refinery margins "Wow." Yet Shell has publicly stated it is closing the Bakersfield facility, and not selling the refinery, because it is not profitable.

The case of Shell's Bakersfield closure, discussed further below, shows how refiners have consciously closed refineries and maintained low inventories because they know that in a speculative commodities market the scarcer the commodity, the higher the price. When there's a shock to the system, the market anticipates a shortage and spikes the price of the commodity. Since it doesn't cost refiners any more to make the gasoline when the price is high, their profits soar too.

In the wake of soaring gasoline prices in the Midwest two years ago, for example, the Federal Trade Commission found low inventories to blame for price spikes following a pipeline break. One refiner, Marathon, even acknowledged to the FTC that it had no incentive to bring gasoline in quickly since that would lower the price. Days ago Saudi Arabia similarly pointed to limited refining capacity as an explanation of higher US gas prices.

As you may know, Californians are paying the highest prices for gasoline the nation, up to 50 cents per gallon more than most other areas in the nation. The culprit is low inventories and restricted refining capacity maintained by the five oil refiners that control 90% of California's special CARB fuel.

Given this restriction of supply, it's shocking that Shell would announce the closure of yet another refinery responsible for 2% of the state's gasoline supply. That would bring the number of refineries in California making CARB fuel to 12, from 37 in 1983, despite a burgeoning population. Everyone seems to be aware that local refineries can barely meet our needs for CARB gasoline and the lack of refining capacity is recognized as a major factor in the higher pump prices. Closing yet another refinery would undoubtedly cause prices to rise even further.

This market obviously functions like no other. If there were a computer shortage, would any computer maker close computer factories?

When Shell announced its intentions to close its refinery in Bakersfield by October of 2004, the company blamed poor profitability and a declining crude supply in the San Juaquin Valley. Shell stated in its press release that the refinery's continued operation is "no longer economically viable" because "there is simply no longer an adequate supply of crude oil to justify the continued operation of this facility." The Seattle Times also reported on March 6th: "Shell will close the plant because it was unprofitable and didn't receive enough oil from the area to keep operating, said James Frazier, a company spokesman."

The new evidence obtained by the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights (FTCR) shows Shell has deceived the public with these statements and that it intends to demolish the refinery to keep gasoline off the market, and the price of gasoline high, rather than sell the refinery. Your united call to keep this refinery and others open can stop such anti-competitive behavior.

Shell has admitted to the media and its own employees that it has not sought to sell the refinery. That's confirmed by internal documents showing a timetable to decommission and demolish the Bakersfield refinery right after shut down in mid-September. The company implied no other oil company would want the refinery as it is unprofitable and any buyer would face the crude shortage.

Since Shell's announcement, industry observers, local crude producers, and analysts at the California Department of Conservation, Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources have questioned the notion that the Bakersfield refinery could run out of crude. They have pointed out how California is ranked 3rd behind Alaska and Texas for size of crude oil reserves and ranks 4th amongst the states in crude production. FTCR is now convinced a 20 year supply of local crude is available for processing in Bakersfield.

In addition to the April 5th update, an internal Shell Power Point Presentation titled "People, Planet, Results February 2004 Shell Bakersfield Refinery" disproves the claim Bakersfield is not profitable as the company displays positive net earnings for 5 out of the last 7 years.

Moreover, an end-of-2003 memo from Shell manager Jeff Krafve to fellow refinery employees says it all: "[W]e turned in excellent operational performance this year. We are the most reliable US Shell refinery in 2003, and achieved world-class performance two years in row now. We have made quantum step improvements in our environmental compliance, finishing well under target again for the second straight year. We have reduced the expense we control 15+% year over year, and have been one of the few Shell U.S. refineries to turn a profit¿.We've done this with the lowest personnel index in Shell refining in the country, making us comparatively the most productive and effective workforce in the system."

Owning a refinery with this type of profitability located in the largest gasoline market of the in the world, why wouldn't Shell offer to sell the refinery rather than close it? Interviews of workers at the refinery provide the answers.

Refinery workers in Bakersfield told FTCR that Aamir Farid, General Manager of the Shell's refinery, stated to hundreds of employees at an employee meeting that the company would never sell the refinery because it did not want the competition. This suggests the real motivation for the company to close the refinery is to ensure its production does not stay on line and further decrease competition for the company's remaining two refineries in California.

If the Bakersfield refinery is closed, Californians will undoubtedly suffer even greater economic harm at the pump due to the loss of treasured refining capacity for our unique blend of CARB gasoline and diesel fuel. Both the loss of CARB fuel refining capacity and the damage to competition will be nearly impossible for the state of California to reverse in the future.

Together you have an opportunity to stop Shell from closing this refinery and to maintain the nation's refining capacity by calling for a moratorium on all refinery closures in the United States. It's the right thing to do not only for Americans' bank accounts, but also for our national security. As the bulldozers are apparently on the way to Bakersfield, time is of the essence.


Sincerely,
Jamie Court Tim Hamilton
President Petroleum Consultant
 

Y2kO

Inactive
http://cnn.netscape.cnn.com/news/story.jsp?idq=/ff/story/0002/20060417/0347311525.htm

Qatar says OPEC can do nothing about high oil price

DOHA (Reuters) - Oil prices are too high and OPEC can do nothing to cool them, Qatari Oil Minister Abdullah al-Attiyah said on Monday.

"I think oil prices are too high but there is nothing we can do," he told Reuters on the sidelines of the Qatar Economic Forum.

Asked if high prices were harming the global economy, he said: "When they get above $60 I start to worry."

Oil leapt to $70 a barrel for the first time in seven and a half months on Monday, extending strong gains made last week as tension mounted between Iran and the West over Tehran's nuclear ambitions.

Asked if Qatar was concerned about supply disruptions from Iran, Attiyah said: "We are confident that nothing will happen with Iran." Iran pumps around 5 percent of the world's oil.

Oil prices have risen more than 20 percent since mid-February, despite sizeable U.S. crude inventories, as geo-political fears compounded fundamental worries that refiners might struggle to make enough gasoline for the summer driving season.
 

Y2kO

Inactive
http://business.guardian.co.uk/story/0,,1745467,00.html

Chávez seeks to peg oil at $50 a barrel

· Price could see Venezuela producing for 200 years
· Country's reserves may exceed Saudi Arabia's

Mark Milner
Monday April 3, 2006
The Guardian


Venezuelan president Hugo Chávez is poised to launch a bid to transform the global politics of oil by seeking a deal with consumer countries which would lock in a price of $50 a barrel.

A long-term agreement at that price could allow Venezuela to count its huge deposits of heavy crude as part of its official reserves, which Caracas says would give it more oil than Saudi Arabia.

"We have the largest oil reserves in the world, we have oil for 200 years." Mr Chávez told the BBC's Newsnight programme in an interview to be broadcast tonight. "$50 a barrel - that's a fair price, not a high price."

The price proposed by Mr Chávez is about $15 a barrel below the current global level but a credible long-term agreement at about $50 a barrel could have huge implications for Venezuela's standing in the international oil community.

According to US sources, Venezuela holds 90% of the world's extra heavy crude oil - deposits which have to be turned into synthetic light crude before they can be refined and which only become economic to operate with the oil price at about $40 a barrel. Newsnight cites a report from the US Energy Information Administrator, Guy Caruso, suggesting Venezuela could have more than a trillion barrels of reserves.

A $50-a-barrel lock-in would open the way for Venezuela, already the world's fifth-largest oil exporter, to demand a huge increase in its official oil reserves - allowing it to demand a big increase in its production allowance within Opec.

Venezuela's oil minister Raphael Ramirez told Newsnight in a separate interview that his country plans to ask Opec to formally recognise the uprating of its reserves to 312bn barrels (compared to Saudi Arabia's 262bn) when Mr Chávez hosts a gathering of Opec delegates in Caracas next month.

Venezuela's ambitious strategy to boost its standing in the global pecking order of oil producers by increasing the extent of its officially recognised reserves is likely to face opposition. Some countries will oppose the idea of a fixed price for the global oil market at well below existing levels. Others are unlikely to be happy with any diminution of their influence over world oil prices in favour of Venezuela.

Caracas's hopes for an increase in its standing would be a far cry from the days when Mr Chávez came to power after years of quota-busting during which Venezuela helped to keep oil prices down. "Seven years ago Venezuela was a US oil colony," said Mr Chávez.

As he seeks to bolster his country's standing on the world stage, the Venezuelan president has also introduced radical changes to the domestic oil industry. Last Friday his government announced that 17 oil companies had agreed to changes which will see 32 operating agreements become 30 joint ventures that will give the government greater say over the country's oil industry.

The original deals were signed in the 1990s as part of a drive to attract more investment into the country's oil industry. However Mr Chávez said the deals gave foreign companies too much and the government too little. Under the new arrangements state-run Petroleos de Venezuela will hold 60% of the joint ventures. "Now we are associates and this commits us to much more ... it's no longer a contract for doing a service, it's a strategic alliance," Mr Chávez told the companies that signed up.

The new arrangements were not universally welcomed by the oil companies. Exxon Mobil and the Italian energy company Eni have refused to sign up to the new arrangements.

Mr Chávez, a former paratrooper who has survived several attempts to oust him and who faces re-election in December, regards Venezuela's oil revenues as crucial to his plans to fight poverty. Critics accuse him of squandering the country's oil wealth on improvised social programmes.

The Venezuelan president used the Newsnight interview to attack the role of the International Monetary Fund in Latin America, where it has a reputation for pushing market-based reforms as the price of its help to countries struggling with their finances.

The Chávez government has helped a number of countries, including buying Argentinian and Ecuadorean bonds, with Mr Chávez arguing that he would like to see the IMF replaced by an International Humanitarian Fund.
 

dharma

madman across the water
Good comments by OH, ruckman, and Birdlady. I would also note that: Iraq + Venezuela + Nigeria + Gulf of Mexico = about 2.4 million bbl/d offline that we would otherwise have available as production now, a lot in a world where we burn about 84.5 million bbl/d and prices are set at the margin. Add in Chad, Bolivia, and maybe Peru if things get much worse, plus 3-4%/yr worldwide depletion, and you've got a real setup for crisis, real crisis—perhaps soon.
 

cory

Inactive
Yes but the real reason is us.

Ruckmanite said:
... 12 good reasons ...

Reason 13 - consumption.

I'm driving a 2000 Nissan Sentra SE 4 door sedan, 5 speed stick, 4 cylinder computer controlled, 4 valve 150 HP engine. It's rated at 30 MPG and I'm getting 30 MPG on suburban-highway commuting.

I have mixed feelings about this car. I bought it when gas was running 99 cents a gallon. The 150 HP engine is the "sports" option. Maybe I shoulda got the 135 HP economy engine.

Be that as it may, most of the cars on the road with me get much worse gas mileage, as in 20 MPG, 15 MPG, worse. When a Lincoln Navigator hssssSSSSSsss past at 80 MPH, its huge butt wobbling from lane to lane as the polly guns-it, what kind of mileage is it getting? 10? 8 MPG?

It's silly to blame the oil companies or whoever when the real reason that gas is expensive is that folks are happy to buy it at $3.00/gallon.

Other than the occasional PRIUS, Civic, or Jetta TDI, there isn't much on the road that gets 30 MPG in real driving conditions. In fact most pollies have no idea how much gas they use or what their gas mileage is.

If you ask them, they might recall the numbers from the ads, "Oh the EPA on this is 27." Yeah, well, the way you pollies drive, you're getting 18, maybe.

Or even worse, they'll say, "I buy gas only once a week so I know I'm getting good mileage".

Well polly, so how many miles do you drive in a week?

"ah, ah, ah donno."

I'm in the geezer lane trying to keep my speed steady. I've got 5-30 synthetic in the crankcase and iridium plugs, tires are pumped up and still, the best I can do is 30 MPG.

That's the problem.
 

FireDance

TB Fanatic
What I find terribly interesting is that the $/mileage has not increased again. Remember they stoked mileage money right quick when gas first went up, they took it back and they have not raised it again. What's the deal with that happy crappy?
 

Coast Watcher

Membership Revoked
OK, I'll bite ---

Dennis, what happened to you? For months now you've been beating the Peak Oil drum, predicting the very thing that's now happening. You KNOW why prices are so high, and it has nothing to do with greedy oil executives. Now you're inciting folks here to violence, talking about bullets flying and shooting people in the public forum! And aside from a few voices of reason on this thread, the TB2K sheeple are eating it up. So what brought the change of heart?

CW
 

LoupGarou

Ancient Fuzzball
While I am not saying whether I believe this is due to "peak oil" or not, I find it odd that our government would not ease restrictions on EPA and other agencies to allow cars in like the VW Lupo, that can get almost 100MPG. The only thing I can come up with is this (watch out folks, it's another possible conspiracy theory...):

Gas is going up, and cars are still getting pathetic mileaqe, thus more people are going to try to move in closer to the cities again to cut down on their miles traveled. This puts more people back in a few tighter areas. Less and less people are going to want to live 30 miles outside (or farther) from the city. They will try to huddle in a 10-20 mile circle from center. Saves gas, keeps them together, and is easier to watch them that way. What if this is their plan all along? Sounds nuts, I agree. But what if this was the reason. I remember something about a "rewilding" plan from Uncle Nancy, that basically wanted to get all of the people back in major metro areas, and allow the wild areas to be free of humans (some places humans could not even visit). Sure sounds nuts...

BUT, it also allows them to bring our prices of goods (not JUST gas) closer to all of the other countries prices. As well as with all of the people moving, less and less people will notice any "new" people coming in the area. Could this be another phase of NAFTA, CAFTA, or another "treaty" that our government has sold us out on?

Just pondering...

Loup Garou
 

Dennis Olson

Chief Curmudgeon
_______________
Y2KO - your post #22 is particularly a particularly cogent analysis. I've said on MANY threads that ultimately, governments around the world will forbid trading ENERGY. It MUST ultimately be treated as a manufactured item, as in fixed cost to manufacture, and fixed profit margin. You "capitalist-at-any-cost" folks will have a stroke reading the preceding sentence, but it WILL happen. Just a matter of when.

And Ruckmanite, your post #20 is also spot-on. BUT - I'm really PO'd right now about the skyrocketing cost of EVERYTHING. Wages, however, have actually DECLINED in real percentage over the past 4 years (I'm SHOCKED! - NOT)

So I have some serious "issues" with all this crap. I'm QUITE sure that millions of Americans do as well. ARMED Americans. Which is why the gooberment WILL, in the end, attempt national criminalization and confiscation of firearms. And SOON.....

EDIT: Coast watcher - I'm not INCITING anything. I'm giving my OPINION. If that's incitement to you, you may want to look the word up in the dictionary....
 

Coast Watcher

Membership Revoked
Dennis Olson said:
The time is SOON for the bullets to start flying....

...

Once Exxon/Mobil's $13,700/hr CEO takes a bullet in the head, you'll see things change. I don't care HOW much money he has. He'll stop a bullet the same as anyone else.

Tick tock.....

Dennis, I'm well aware of the meaning, both annotative and connotative, of incite. Your own words speak for themselves. They are an incitement to violence, plain and simple. The fact that they are, by your own admission, your opinion and not a reporting of someone else's words only makes it all the more egregious.

CW
 
"...WHY ARE GAS PRICES SO HIGH (and going higher)?..."


Because the market(s) are allowing it to be so...without sufficient resistance (of any form) from buyers.

Suspect we're soon going to have our price point-of-resistance tested - the point at which we simply park 'em and walk or just don't go...

The foregoing not applicable to those with lots of $$$, of course.
 

Dennis Olson

Chief Curmudgeon
_______________
Coast Watcher said:
Dennis, I'm well aware of the meaning, both annotative and connotative, of incite. Your own words speak for themselves. They are an incitement to violence, plain and simple. The fact that they are, by your own admission, your opinion and not a reporting of someone else's words only makes it all the more egregious.

CW

In your opinion. You are, of course, welcome to it. I just don't have to share it.
 

Oilpatch Hand

3-Bomb General, TB2K Army
Birdlady said:
Oilpatch Hand said:
"I'm surprised nobody has nailed Archer Daniels Midland as the corporate Mr. Big in this gasoline price conspiracy."


I DID mention this:
Archer Daniels Midland comes to mind.

"There’s politics in this - favoring farming lobbies over oil lobbies. Both those lobbies are big and powerful."
http://energystockblog.com/article/8577

Ah, yes. So you did. I stand corrected. ;)
 

Oilpatch Hand

3-Bomb General, TB2K Army
blueridge said:
"...WHY ARE GAS PRICES SO HIGH (and going higher)?..."


Because the market(s) are allowing it to be so...without sufficient resistance (of any form) from buyers.

Suspect we're soon going to have our price point-of-resistance tested - the point at which we simply park 'em and walk or just don't go...

The foregoing not applicable to those with lots of $$$, of course.

We, the consumers, have the ultimate weapon. It's our decision whether or not to purchase. If we do not buy gasoline, the purveyors thereof are powerless over us. To the extent we elect to purchase less gasoline than we do now, we diminish their power.

What alarms me is the level of abject denial that we, as consumers, are our own worst enemy when it comes to gasoline consumption. We have such a sense of entitlement when it comes to inexpensive energy that we have some here who are starting to sound like a drug addict who is blaming the pusher for his own decision to purchase and consume drugs. "He got me addicted to his stuff...he makes me use it...I hate him for what he's doing to me. I think I'll blow his head off because I can't stop using the drugs he sells me."

Now, I think we can all agree how intellectually and emotionally juvenile such a stand is. Yet we have some here who apparently have adopted that mindset. "They got me addicted to their damn gasoline. I can't stop using. They're to blame for my dependence, and I think the solution is to blow their heads clean off." (Never mind the inalterable fact that if you kill off the people supplying your "drug," you will soon be doing without it altogether.)

The real solution, of course, is to minimize one's use of gasoline, if one is concerned about its cost. Stunningly enough, this option apparently doesn't occur to some of our members here, and I find that very surprising in a forum supposedly dedicated to preparing for just such a calamity.
 

mbo

Membership Revoked
well, gee, everyone could just buy econocars, or motorcycles, or mopeds, or car-pool, or buy a disel and grow YOUR OWN fuel, or take a train or bus to work, or bunch up their trips, or drive slower, etc., etc., etc.,

...but all I hear is a bunch of socialist crap on this thread about how the GOVERNMENT has to do something to basically ensure no one has to pay more. :kk2: :kk2: :kk2:


The entitlement mentality in this country is really showing its ugly face here. Greed goes both ways.
 

Dennis Olson

Chief Curmudgeon
_______________
The entitlement mentality in this country is really showing its ugly face here. Greed goes both ways.

Bullsh*t. GREED is extracting ever more money from people. SURVIVAL is trying desperately to make it on the little one has.

Survival isn't greed. You want greed? Talk to Exxon/Mobil's CEO.... :kk1:
 
Top