Excellent Report on the Future of Oil Prices..

U

UT1986

500+ Posts
...for those that are interested to read about it. It's about 80+ pages and you can download from a link attached ot the bottom of the blog in the link below.
The Link
 
Thanks for the link. I skimmed the first half of the article. The chart on page 11 showing countries that have reached peak production is noteworthy (although it includes very few of the Middle Eastern oil producers. The point about oil price increases being due to increased money supply is also pretty key.

So what can an average Joe do, other than make reasonable efforts to buy/drive more fuel efficient cars, conserve energy at home, and buy oil and energy stocks/ETFs?
 
Two things:

1) The President has done nothing to improve domestic oil production. Nothing. He's just a very fortunate bystander in that situation. In fact, he's hurt domestic production by his heavy-handed approach to the Gulf of Mexico.
2) It is true that our production is not likely to make a significant impact on gas prices. What our production can do is improve our trade imbalance, create lots of good paying jobs, and improve the tax rolls (corporate tax, personal taxes, and royalties) for the federal government as well as state and local governments.

In effect, domestic oil production could help us pay for financial alternative energy projects, as opposed to just borrowing more money from the Chinese to help the Chinese sell more solar energy products.

Obama could help this situation by pushing forward with Keystone and by finding government property that can be safely opened up for E&P.
 
Uninformed couldn't have said it any better
whiteflag.gif


That oxygen thief Nancy Pelosi did her damndest to try to convince the public that Bush was on the actual Merc trading floor, and that he was solely responsible for high oil and gas prices when he was in office.

Now, the White House wants to act like they never in a thousand years would ever try to use those shennanigans to blame the current energy connundrum on one single public official.

Full of crap are they that act like this is new news. Every Democrat in office full well knew that the President didn't have the power to shift gas prices more than a penny or two, but it didn't stop them from saying it back then. What a different tune they sing now.
 
Giovanni that's not true about speculators bidding up the price of oil. That's what Nancy Pelosi et al lin the MSM ike to claim, but they don't know a damn thing about the price of oil and why it is rising. Read the link the report I've included in the original post and explains the reasons for oil prices increasing.
 
PH-

I think the important take away from that statistic is that despite an increase in our production, be it private or public, oil prices have spiked again. IMO, further evidence that whatever we produce in the US doesn't have much effect on prices. We need a long term plan to move away from crude. It could be NG, coal, nuclear, wind, solar etc...anything besides crude oil.

Shiner-
if we are going to use energy plays to create jobs, lets do it in arenas that give us a larger degree of energy independence.
 
Look guys, until there are technologies that are more feasible from a cost and realibility standpoint to provide energy sources to the US, it will be oil, natural gas, coal and nuclear energy. Renewable energy will slowly provide a greater percentage of the energy sources used, but right now it's only about 8% per the EIA.

As you can see, from the chart below, we will need oil, natural gas and coal for several more years before renewable resources can supplant fossil fuels. That's the reality.

The Role of Renewable Energy Consumption in the Nation's Energy Supply, 2009

Share
Total US
Coal 21%
Natural Gas 25%
Petroleum 37%
Nuclear Electric Power 9%
Renewable Energy: 8%
Of which:
Hydroelectric 35%
Geothermal Energy 5%
Biomass 50%
Solar Energy 1%
Wind Energy 9%
The Link
 
Wonder why the price of crude is 15% lower in the out years on the commodity exchange than the spot month. April 2012 is around $107 per bbl while October 2017 is around $91 per bbl.

Looks like the money people think supply or use will ease over the next 5 years.

Just asking.
 
Ut1986,

Right, renewables are about 8% of electricity production. Oil is primarily used for transportation- a separate but related issue. Your post- and that of Shiner's is comparing the economics of a mature industry that has been the status quo for about 110 years or so, and folding arms while looking at these 10-20 year old technologies.

The thing is, oil has costs that people pay in places other than the pump- whether it be national security, health, pollution or plain stupidity in being dependent on something our enemies primarily have. In this case, it is well worth paying a smaller premium to get over the hump and make renewables and electron based transportation economic. The good news is that relatively speaking- this is not a 50 year project. Depending on our ambitions, we are looking at economic wind today, economic solar (grid parity) within 5 years, and economic plug in vehicles within 5-10 years.

The bad news is China, Germany and Japan realized this about 15 years ago and have a decent head start.

My vote is for doing something proactive other than folding arms and mocking the new tech on the block. If we all did that- we'd never have used the early cell phones, DVDs, etc.
 
No one on this post has "mocked" new technology. I think everyone is for it although some may not want to hand every new concept a blank check from Uncle Sam. I've advocated expanding production on government land in order to generate revenues that could be used for alternative energy projects.
 
Shiner,

Your view isn't unreasonable, but it also does nothing to help prepare for $8 or $10 gasoline when we know damn well in advance that day is coming. California and Hawaii already broke $5, today, and it's not even summer yet. We probably should do what Americans do best- innovate products, design them and sell to the rest of the world until they later copy them.

Every profitable company in industry has an R&D group- we used to operate our country like a company- balanced books and investing in the future. There are limitations to what corporations can do, or if they can accomplish something- they could do it faster and better if they had partners.
 
McBrett, I am not arguing with your points at all. We do need to invest in the future. Absolutely agree. Only problem is we are broke. Worse we have huge debts. We need to cut off the gravy train of government handouts and generate more revenue. Oil & Gas Royalties from government land could be a great source of revenues on multiple levels.
 
Our Secretary of Energy has a stated goal of getting gas prices up to what they are in Europe. I have no idea why he would have such a goal, but it is what it is.
 
Shiner- if the Secretary really did have that goal there would be nothing he could do about it. If Congress and the White House had that goal, or a goal of lowering prices- there's also nothing they can do about it. No single entity in the entire planet can alter oil prices. It is too global of a commodity with too many overlying factors.

I do know Sec. Chu, aside from one comment you are taking, spends most of his time on the things we can control- American demand and how we can lower it through innovation. It's a lot easier to not need something than it is to try to replenish a diminishing commodity when you can't control it's price.

In Europe and Asia, they are all 100% focused on moving forward with much less consumption of oil. That is something you should wish to imitate as we are buying a lot of their technologies and not vice versa.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

NEW: Pro Sports Forums

Cowboys, Texans, Rangers, Astros, Mavs, Rockets, etc. Pro Longhorns. The Chiefs and that Swift gal. This is the place.

Pro Sports Forums

Recent Threads

Back
Top