Monday, June 09, 2008

Welcome to GW Bush's Oil Thunderdome of Doom


I am ending my embargo about talking about gas prices. "HOLY F Batman, Americans are getting ass raped at the pump!"

I paid $4.22 dollar a gallon gas on Saturday so I could take the better half's car up to OTB for the Belmont Stakes. Classy guy huh? Nothing says romance like all you can eat crabs legs, Maryland White Trash, and gambling addicts!


There has to be some twisted prophecy about George W Bush repeatedly losing all of his dad's rich friends' money in the 80's on bad oil deals and then under his disastrous tenure as president, the nation's average price of gas goes from $1.25 to over $4.00, rumored to be $5 by July 4th.

Since Oil companies are continually posting record profits, it is suffice to say Bush finally did become a successful oil man and earn his father's praise. Unfortunately, it is at the expense of the economy and our checking accounts.

I want to warn you about the "Lets Drill Yellowstone" faction out there who will always argue more drilling is the answer. Several studies prove that this would barely help with prices at all.

Furthermore, more US oil drilling is a temporary band aid and does not provide a long term solution to America's energy problems. We need to ween ourselves off oil, not become more dependent on it. China/India are becoming bigger players in consumption than ever before and thus they will surely cancel out any supply of oil we would find in American anyway. The oil would be sold on the world market too.

There are many factors at play with the rise in gas prices other than just supply/demand.

US occupying a highly violent/unstable Iraq and threatening Iran with war does not help stabilize the market. OPEC's interests are obviously not with helping Americans at the pump either. Bush's pow wow with his Saudi buddies was ineffective in agreeing for them to increase production.

The record low weak dollar is being directly linked to high gas prices. Bush's policies of running up our deficits for his wars by borrowing trillions from China has enabled the Chinese to subsidize their own gas prices, which is keeping world demand from decreasing dramatically because of the high price of oil.

Speculators driving the price up so much that the Federal Government launched a probe into possible oil trading manipulation and publicized their investigation.

I do feel bad because it is almost as US City planners over the past 30 years were on the payroll of Detroit and the oil companies. More and more sprawl was built with no transportation concerns considered at all other than auto and legitimate public transit options were ignored by the populace and local/state/fed municipalities.

Here is a great article about the long term effects of $200 barrel of oil on the world.

Welcome to GW Bush's Oil Thunderdome of Doom and here is a sign to keep up/drink your spirits with a strong public safety message.



Federal Probe into Oil Market Manipulation

The Future of 200 a Barrel Oil


UPDATE:The chief executive of the world's largest energy company has issued the most dire warning yet about the soaring the price of oil, predicting that it will hit $250 per barrel "in the foreseeable future".

Mac Gs World

5 comments:

Al Bundy said...

telling it like it is. niiiiice.

the oil is just a thank you card to all the old pals. the close buddies get defense spending. he made his pops the most dough from carlyle group holdings. they own every bomb you need to take over another country. GHW chaired til 03.

Anonymous said...

On April 24th 2006, Nancy Pelosi released a press statement that was reported to address the Republican’s empty rhetoric with regard to gas prices. In the press release from over two years ago Nancy wrote:

“With record gas prices, record CEO pay packages, and record oil company profits, Speaker Hastert and the Majority Congress continue to give the American people empty rhetoric rather than join Democrats who are working to lower gas prices now.

“Democrats have a commonsense plan to help bring down skyrocketing gas prices by cracking down on price gouging, rolling back the billions of dollars in taxpayer subsidies, tax breaks and royalty relief given to big oil and gas companies, and increasing production of alternative fuels.”

It is now June of 2008 and the price of oil has doubled in the last year and it is up 44% since January. If the Democrats had a plan (I highly doubt that) then they either forgot to implement it or it was implemented and was a horrible failure. Much like any other time Democrats claim to have a plan, they are long on talk and short on action. In fact, are usually lying about what they “plan” to do. There is a lie up front in the price gouging claim. They have conducted about a dozen investigations and have found no price gouging. The only gouging is by state and federal governments who reap trillions of dollars in taxes and don’t have to do anything for the money.

The real thing we need to know is why has the plan not been implemented? If it has, why has it not worked and what kind of plan was it to give us such huge increases? Nancy Pelosi promised America that she and her Democrats had a plan and now things are worse than they were a year ago. I think I can speak for everyone when I answer why this is the case.

Empty rhetoric…

Here is an idea. Drill here, drill now, pay less.

Mac G said...

Was that copied directly from Townhall?

Our current energy policy has been written by the Bush administration and was passed into law by a Republican controlled Congress.

The democrats now control the agenda in the house and Senate but that does not mean they have veto proof majority to pass a new energy policy.

The Senate's margin is one vote and the House's majority is much smaller because of BlueDog Dems, who vote with the republicans on a large part of bills.

The "plan" has not been implemented because well, it can not get through the Congressional Republicans or Bush.

Honestly, I do not even think I agree with the "plan" and taxing oil companies' profits is not really a solution either.

Drilling is a short term solution on the supply side that does nothing to decrease the demand by ignoring the needs of alternate energy and mass transportation.

We can drill everywhere in the US but eventually it will run out or cost so much that our kids/grandkids will be Fd.

Speaking of sweet plans, gas was 1.45 when we invaded Iraq and while I look at the trillions of new defense spending debt, I am still wondering when the Iraqi oil is going to pay for all of it like Bush's plan.

I truly appreciate your comment and I do have share some beefs with Pelosi's, her hands have been tied with the Blue Dogs and Republicans.

mostly harmless said...

Oil companies make the same 10% profit the always have. Do liberals never take economics? Supply and demand is the crux of high fuel prices as India and China have expanded their fuel needs exponentially over the past five years (coincidentally about the same length as our current albatross in Iraq).
Nancy Pelosi couldn't lower fuel prices, would you like to know why? Politicians have no effect on the supply of oil. The politicians (both sides by the way) can talk all they want about policies and plans and procedures, but the only thing that can lower prices is to increase supply (allowing drilling in North Dakota - 5 billion estimated barrels, ANWR - 7.7 billion barrels, and the Gulf of Mexico - up to 15 billion barrels) and decreasing demand on foreign oil (the continued development of lithium ion batteries for future hybrids like the Chevrolet Volt as well as cars able to run on natural gas, which the US has an inordinate amount of, the continued development of processes using microorganisms to develop ethanol (as opposed to depleting our corn supply which is idiotic) and the use of hydrogen). Nothing the politicians do will solve this problem. This problem will be solved by the free market and the ingenuity of companies, many domestic for alternative fuel sources. But if you want to keep blaming Bush for everything wrong in your life keep doing so. I do not like the man but at least my taxes are much lower than the will be when Barack Obama gets elected.

Anonymous said...

The current situation is the result of decades of mismanagement by Congress on both sides of the aisle. The executive branch can recommend and push for laws, but their main job is to enforce them.

Good policy proposed by either party tends to get blocked by the other or becomes so diluted through compromise that it is ineffective. I've come to the conclusion that most members of Congress are more concerned about their own needs and wants rather than what is good for the country.

What the country needs is a common sense energy policy that makes use of ALL available science and technologies to solve our problems. Yes, sucking on the oil teat when most of it is imported is a stupid idea, but denying access to 85% of our potential reserves doesn't make much sense either. It wouldn't take much compromise to allow minimally invasive survey and exploration. If promising fields are found, current modern technology could allow us to get the oil without a large impact on the environment.

While we are weaning ourselves away from foreign oil, there is a long list of other energy sources that should be expanded or explored. We need to look at what energy technology works best for each area of the country. Wind and Solar are darlings of the enviro set, but are not the answer for the majority of the country. Areas that have abundant sun or constant wind are ideal areas for them to supply a good percentage of that area's energy. There are also many regions that have large untapped geothermal energy potential, these should be explored. Ethanol, another technology liked by enviros, has shown some huge growing pains. Corn, the source of most of the US's ethanol, has shown itself to be less than an ideal solution. And the subsidies Congress has voted in are huge. Brazil, which is presented as a model of ethanol usage, uses sugar cane for its ethanol as it is much more efficient than corn. Regardless, energy is required to plant, grow and harvest these crops. The net energy value of sugar cane is much higher than corn, but since much more of the country is ideal for growing corn, CONGRESS mandated tariffs on imported sugar cane which pushes it to too high of a price to use for ethanol. There is a lot of promising technologies out there that use agricultural waste (both crops and meat animals) to create ethanol and biodiesel. Money should be removed from corn subsidies to fund this research. I have also read about technology that is being developed recycle plastic and rubber from old cars back into petroleum. More funding is needed for this research.

Another area to look at to reduce our oil use is plastics. The best estimate I could find says that about 4 percent of the US's daily oil use is used as feedstock for plastic and another 4 percent or so provides the energy to transform the feedstock into handy plastic. We should move towards using natural products such as soy, corn and algae to create our plastic. What other things are made from oily? How about: Clothing Ink, Heart Valves, Crayons, Parachutes, Telephones, Enamel, Transparent tape, Antiseptics, Vacuum bottles, Deodorant, Pantyhose, Rubbing Alcohol, Carpets, Epoxy paint, Oil filters, Upholstery, Hearing Aids, Car sound insulation, Cassettes, Motorcycle helmets, Pillows, Shower doors, Shoes, Refrigerator linings, Electrical tape, Safety glass, Awnings, Salad bowl, Rubber cement, Nylon rope, Ice buckets, Fertilizers, Hair coloring, Toilet seats, Denture adhesive, Loudspeakers, Movie film, Fishing boots, Candles, Water pipes, Car enamel, Shower curtains, Credit cards, Aspirin, Golf balls, Detergents, Sunglasses, Glue, Fishing rods, Linoleum, Plastic wood, Soft contact lenses, Trash bags, Hand lotion, Shampoo, Shaving cream, Footballs, Paint brushes, Balloons, Fan belts, Umbrellas, Paint Rollers, Luggage, Antifreeze, Model cars, Floor wax, Sports car bodies, Tires, Dishwashing liquids, Unbreakable dishes, Toothbrushes, Toothpaste, Combs, Tents, Hair curlers, Lipstick, Ice cube trays, Electric blankets, Tennis rackets, Drinking cups, House paint, Roller skates wheels, Guitar strings, Ammonia, Eyeglasses, Ice chests, Life jackets, TV cabinets, Car battery cases, Insect repellent, Refrigerants, Typewriter ribbons, Cold cream, Glycerin, Plywood adhesive, Cameras, Anesthetics, Artificial turf, Artificial Limbs, Bandages, Dentures, Mops, Beach Umbrellas, Ballpoint pens, Boats, Nail polish, Golf bags, Caulking, Tape recorders, Curtains, Vitamin capsules, Dashboards, Putty, Percolators, Skis, Insecticides, Fishing lures, Perfumes, Shoe polish, Petroleum jelly, Faucet washers, Food preservatives, Antihistamines, Cortisone, Dyes, LP records, Solvents, Roofing. If we can convert even a portion of these into non-petroleum based products, it will reduce our dependence on oil.

And now we come to the elephant in the room, Nuclear Energy. Today's nuclear energy is not your dad's nuclear energy. Modern Pebble Bed Reactors use a Passive Safety System that prevents accidents and meltdowns by their very design. Some countries in Europe and Asia get a large portion of their energy from nuclear reactors. A commitment to increasing our use of this technology would go a long way to reducing our dependence on oil, coal and natural gas for our electrical generation. I'd be interested in the technology the Navy uses to power its ships. They've used them for decades with no accidents. I also read about a self contained reactor that Toshiba is developing that is 20x6 feet and will power a small town for 40 years.

There are many other promising technologies that could use more funding like shale oil, clean coal, fusion, liquid coal, hydrogen (not made from petroleum or natural gas) and wave and tide energy among others.

Enough of my ranting, I'm sure I missed a bunch of alternatives, but I think I covered the major ones.