The Real Reason for Rising Gas Prices
By clrumfelt
@clrumfelt (5490)
United States
April 24, 2008 8:36am CST
There is plenty of gasoline for the taking. Domestic oil reserves in Alaska, other public lands and the Gulf of Mexico. There is enough oil there to power all of the USA for the forseeable future, yet Congress have repeatedly passed restrictions on getting our oil from domestic sources and kept the USA dependent on foreign oil for 60% of its needs. It is alarming to me that the USA is giving
away so much of its revenues to foreign oil sources when we could be developing sources of oil and nuclear energy right here at home and enriching our own people instead of terrorist oil producing nations abroad. Here's the link:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=62393
7 people like this
17 responses
@ladym33 (10979)
• United States
24 Apr 08
It is the environmentalists that keep this from happening. We really need to work out some sort of a compromise. We need to do something, this is slowly turning the middle class in to the poor, and poor well they are suffering the most. We really need to start taking care of Americans.
4 people like this
@clrumfelt (5490)
• United States
24 Apr 08
I totally agree. The oil crisis is one thing that is ruining our economy right now. You'd think some politicians would wake up and see that.
3 people like this
@guinness1982 (261)
• United States
24 Apr 08
Whos going to be getting replaced in less then a year? Its funny to me how gas prices hae gotten so high these few years, My boyfriend and I have talked about it a million times "bush is an oil man he has stocks in oil" hum...He's got the power to do basicly whatever he wants you dont think that he doesnt get something out of it? But, Im just going to wait and see, It just wont surprise me if when bush is replaced by whoevers going to replace him the oil prices go down shortly after.......We will see I guess.
2 people like this
@Maggiepie (7816)
• United States
26 Apr 08
This is SOOOO true! It isn't the president who sets oil prices, though -- it's OPEC. What we COULD do domestically is hold Congress' feet to the fire with loads of angry calls & letters DEMANDING they allow drilling in ANWR (among other activities).
Most people think the oil companies would be spoiling a vast, idyllic Eden, when the truth is it's only a =postage-stamp-sized= plot of land, which, btw, carabou LOVE because of the warm pipes in the winter! AND, it looks like the MOON in the area they'd drill into -- NOT a lush ecosystem! =AND= the local populace WANTS it done there!
And as for not drilling in the Gulf (& not building refineries), this is the heighth of sillyness. It actually draws in fish & coral to the areas, replenishing the seas!
So I say go ANWR, GO!
Maggiepie
3 people like this
@huppsterdave5125 (279)
• United States
24 Apr 08
Well that article sounds promising. If that is true then we are in good shape. I think that the government is looking into the future. When the rest of the world is out of oil they think the United States will have enough to last at least until we can come up with a better alternative fuel. I am in a resources geology class in college and our professor is directly involved with the mining industry. He does not believe we have enough oil to last us very long at all. In fact he says our oil production peaked in the 1970's. He said we nedd an alternative fuel soon. In fact he believes that most of us will be driving electric vehicles in the next 10 to 15 years. Also, he stated that the price of gas will continur to rise becasue the world just does not have an adequate supply of oil anymore. I am not sayin he is all correct, but he seems to know what he is talking about. Believe me I hope your article is right, because it is going to be an expensive shift from gas powered to electric powered vehicles.
4 people like this
@clrumfelt (5490)
• United States
24 Apr 08
A lot of others disagree with your professors projections, but keeping our oil reserves intact is not going to benefit the USA when we need it most-right now when people can't even affort to drive to work and are being forced into home foreclosures and poverty. Right now when food prices are so high people can't afford of feed their families. Alternative fuels were a good idea but with the processing it will take to develop them they will be even more expensive than the oil prices are now. I hope some of those senators take a serious look at solutions to using so much imported oil soon.
3 people like this
@redyellowblackdog (10629)
• United States
24 Apr 08
When I point the following things out, many disagree or even get angry. So, please, to those of you about to vehemently disagree, know this. I'm really not stupid and I have thought this through. What follows is feasible, but not provable. Nor do I insist it is all true, though some of it is fact, I think it is probable the following taken all together explains why oil drilling is restricted here in the USA. Here's why I think we don't do more developement of domestic oil supplies.
First, let's have some facts.
First fact:
Exxon-Mobil, XOM has made record profits during the Iraq war and the oil crisis. The world record profit for any corporation is held by XOM during the rapid run up of oil prices. The other oil companies have mostly done very well, too. This shows restrictions in the oil supply produce more profit for oil companies, not less. Check this out on your own, if you like. More profit goes to oil companies if less than the maximum of oil supply is flowing. When you truely understand the law of supply and demand, and that corporations do not merely pass on only their increased costs, this is obvious.
Now, I'm not saying profit is bad. Profits are good. However, in this case, they indicate something. What? We will get to that.
Second fact:
It is the duty of the board of directors of all public corporations to maximize profits for their shareholders. Obviously, XOM's board of directors is doing an excellant job. I even expect to buy some of their stock later this year. Putting your money with the winning team is what makes sense.
Third fact:
There exists an optimum rate for the oil to flow in order to just meet demand so as to produce the maximum profit. Anyone with moderate math skills could calculate this rate with access to all the figures of production, sales, and etc of oil in the world. The oil industry does have these figures.
Fourth fact:
It is the duty of oil company executives to attempt to control oil production so as to produce the most profit for their companies. Given the profits they make, they are doing their duty.
Fifth fact:
The optimum rate of oil flow for maximum profit is closer to what it was when XOM made its record profit during the Iraq war than it is during times when production is high. High production and supplies equals low profits.
Sixth (not a fact):
There is a proposed economic law that states anything that can make money, will make money, or even might make money, is or will be done by someone.
Seventh (not a fact):
It follows from the proposed economic law above that someone in the oil industry covertly funds environmental groups while giving money simutanously to liberal legislators so as to be able to restrict drilling in the USA. Profits are increased if the oil supply is restricted just enough, but not too much. Whether or not someone is actually doing this, we do not know. It is a fact that if someone did the above, it would make money for the oil companies. The question is only, "Is the proposed economic law correct?".
This is why, IMHO, oil drilling is restricted in the USA.
3 people like this
@redyellowblackdog (10629)
• United States
24 Apr 08
For those who seriously doubt this hypothesis that the oil industry covertly funds environmental groups (even those groups wouldn't know who really is giving them their money. Front groups and shell companies would be doing it) look again at fact four.
It is the duty of oil company executives to attempt to control oil production so as to produce the most profit for their companies.
Fact four is undeniable. So, if these people are not covertly funding environmental groups, how are they fullfilling their duty to maximize company profits through restriction of the oil supply? Does everyone truely think oil companies pay these people millions of dollars per year to do common ordinary management things any middle manager could do for a lot less?
3 people like this
@redyellowblackdog (10629)
• United States
24 Apr 08
Yes, we the voters should hold congress accountable for the lack of developement of domestic oil supplies. Congress could change the laws so that the oil companies would make more money from domestic oil than imported oil. The problem is that congress is in the oil companies' pockets. Congress passes laws the oil companies want, not what consumers want. We must vote the rascals out.
3 people like this
@clrumfelt (5490)
• United States
24 Apr 08
I have known this to be true for some time. And
the leaders of the oil companies seemed so flippant
about making such profits at everyone else's expense.
They are going to have a lot to answer for someday.
But don't you think Congress could overrule the special
interests of the present oil industry and do some good
for the USA by developing our domestic oil supplies?
So doesn't the blame ultimately fall on Congress for not
doing enough?
3 people like this
@bobmnu (8157)
• United States
24 Apr 08
We need to vote for the senators and congressmen who will allow the US to drill for oil and build new nuclear power plants. Since the Alaskan Pipeline has been build I have not heard any proof that the Caribou herd has vanished, which was predicted by the Environmental groups. Congress has convinced the people that the oil companies are to blame and will not recognize or admit that they are to blame.
We all need to write our elected officials and demand they open up the US oil fields and build new power plants and new Oil Refineries.
3 people like this
@clrumfelt (5490)
• United States
24 Apr 08
The wildlife is doing well because the environmentalists ensure that extra measures are put in place to protect the wildlife in an area. This is one example among many that we can protect the environment and also have progress. We should all write our congressmen and let them know how we feel about this. Imagine, if we could get all the MyLotters in the USA to write their congresspeople....
2 people like this
@Guardian208 (1095)
• United States
25 Apr 08
Yes, it turns out that the caribou like our activities there. They tend to stay near the pipeline infrastructure. The guess is that they like the warmth that our facilities produce. Go figure!
3 people like this
@rodney850 (2145)
• United States
24 Apr 08
Not only has the herd not vanished, it is reported to actually be overpopulating!
3 people like this
@rodney850 (2145)
• United States
24 Apr 08
No! No! No! This is all president Bush's fault! He lied to get us into Iraq so he could make tons of money on the foreign oil and on the backs of the American people! NOT!!!! But to hear the liberals tell it that is exactly what happened. It doesn't matter that some owl in Alaska might have to move his habitat by a thousand yards and so environmentalists whine and protest and lobby congress and get laws passed that inevitably will put gasoline prices above 5 dollars a gallon! We DON'T need foreign oil, we need to be allowed to drill and pump our own but right along with that I don't believe the big oil conglomerates are telling the whole truth either! If it is so expensive to import foreign oil how can you make profits in the BILLIONS of dollars?
@bobmnu (8157)
• United States
25 Apr 08
Everyone seems to overlook the reports that Gasoline is a small part of the income of the big oil companies. The Congress is trying to regulate a company based on world wide sales and all goods and services. The media spins it so that people think that all the income is from Gasoline. One report said the the oil companies make 9% profit on gasoline. Below the national average of 12-15% profit margin for most companies. Companies must make a profit to maintain the jobs and stay in business.
3 people like this
@clrumfelt (5490)
• United States
24 Apr 08
Something tells me that those owls will still be around long after we're gone, and so will the oil if we don't start using it. When they investigated the oil
companies about the record profits they were making they were so smug about it. They really don't care. The only thing we might do to make THEM care would be to get a million or so people to protest and boycott gasoline consumption for a few days. It would be hard to get that much support for
such an idea, but might help.
2 people like this
@kenzie45230 (3560)
• United States
27 Apr 08
Thanks for the link and information, clrumfelt. You're right. We do need to have more oil drilled in the US and get less from other countries. You're also right that we need to contact our representatives and Congress. If enough people did that, they might sit up and listen.
Alas, most people prefer to complain and rarely take action. Look at our voting numbers. Not many even bother to vote. (But they will choose to complain about the person who gets into office. Go figure.)
@clrumfelt (5490)
• United States
27 Apr 08
I agree. Instead of complaining people should do what they can to change the things they don't like. And if they don't try to help change things they really have no right to complain.
1 person likes this
@emeraldisle (13139)
• United States
24 Apr 08
Many have talked about this for years since even before gas started going up back in the 90's and the fact that we have all this oil sitting here but whenever there has been talk of using it the environmentalists come in and protest. They lobby congress and make huge stinks about how if we drill here we could or might cause environmental damage. Not that it will cause but that it might. As we have seen with reports if something might cause a problem we must not do it then.
Congress needs to tell the environmentalists to shut up and to start opening up the oil fields we have here. If they did this they could then tell OPEC we don't need you anymore we are using our own. Even if we couldn't completely stop buying the oil from foreign sources we would have a better negotiation leverage in order to buy it cheaper. Until we are willing to do this though we are stuck with whatever prices we can get it for.
@clrumfelt (5490)
• United States
24 Apr 08
I'm all for protecting the environment, but somehow a compromise needs to be reached so that the USA can take advantage of the resources that are sitting here dormant while we go bankrupt importing oil from other countries.
2 people like this
@drknlvly6781 (6246)
• United States
24 Apr 08
I already knew about these sources being blocked off for a while now. This is part of the back story the public doesn't know about the war. Bush is profiting off of this somehow. I can't wait until someone else gets into office, maybe they will lift the ban on these sources that we so desperately need.
3 people like this
@bobmnu (8157)
• United States
24 Apr 08
President Bush is not blocking this. The Democratics in Congress could open up the lands but refuse to do so. The Environmental groups are opposed to any expansion in energy. The want alternative fuels but block a wind farm because of the looks. They are opposing Ethanol Plants in Minnesota because it use too much water. What to these Idiots want. They want us to use CFL bulbs that contain mecury. They want electric cars but oppose new power plants. They pushed ethanol and now oppose it because it uses water.
@Taskr36 (13963)
• United States
25 Apr 08
I remember years ago Bush was pushing for them to start drilling for oil in Alaska but the liberals and environmentalists shot it down hard. To many people fail to realize how deep in the hole we are because of all the environmental crap we deal with.
California got so crippled by environmentalists that they were importing energy from states like Texas and Arizona. Eventually that led to their governor being fired before his term was up. Just look at California when you wonder what happens when environmentalists get their way. It's the most expensive state to live in, with high costs of power, and at one point environmentalists even managed to shut of irrigation water for farmers because they didn't want the water to come from lakes with sucker fish in them. Environmentalists really need to be reigned in sometimes.
2 people like this
@clrumfelt (5490)
• United States
25 Apr 08
I agree with you. The environmentalists are raising the quality of life for animals and plants. However, the quality of life for people in the USA is suffering greatly because of their misguided crusades.
2 people like this
@Guardian208 (1095)
• United States
25 Apr 08
While I do believe that we need more domestic drilling to get us out from under the thumb of OPEC, that will not solve our current problem with gas prices. There is not a supply problem. In fact, last month a coalition of countries petitioned OPEC to increase its level of oil production. They flatly refused, not because they wanted to impose their will on us, but because they are currently producing more oil than current demand warrants. (despite what our rather naive media would tell us)
It is also NOT president Bush controlling oil prices to secure his retirement. That idea is foolish. He is a republican president with a democratic majority in congress. So he does not have the ability to manipulate the price of gas nor is it in his best interest to do so. We need to stop blaming Bush for everything and find real solutions to real problems.
The reason gas prices are so high is due to oil speculation pure and simple. Let me use redyellowblackdogs fact format. (Thanks redyellowblackdog!)
FACT
The New York Mercantile Exchange (NYMEX)controls the investment in oil. They set the margin. The margin is simply the a "good faith" deposit that is supposed to be based on the volatility and price of the commodity. Right now you can buy/control 1000 barrels of crude oil for only $3375. Depending on the day, you would be controlling $67,000 worth of oil for only a $3375 investment. With the current trend in oil prices, any investor worth his salt would be shoveling money into oil. (These examples are taken from an article and are using old numbers for the price of oil. The math is still valid. www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,166038,00.html )
FACT
The price of crude oil has doubled in recent times, the NYMEX has only raised the margin once, and only by a token amount. They should have raised it more significantly to deter the widespread speculation that we are experiencing today.
FACT
Neither the president, the oil producers, the oil refineries or the gas stations benefit from high gas/oil prices. Some would argue that the oil producers benefit and they do in some ways, but they are producing more oil than is being sold. they are sitting on inventories longer than they would like. As any business person can tell you, old inventories cost you money. Yes, they are making more per barrel, but they only get paid on what is sold, not what is drilled. Don't get me wrong they are not hurting by any means, but they would rather sell at a lower cost and move more oil than be in the current situation and have demand diminish.
FACT
Yes, the oil companies benefit as is attested by their record profits. What I would like to do is to remove the restrictions against building new refineries and domestic drilling. We could literally force the oil companies to invest in those things by reminding them of their record profits. If we drilled more domestically and had newer more efficient refineries, the cost of gas would be reduced as well.
But the biggest winners are the oil speculators. Imagine you invest $3375 for the controlling interest in 1000 barrels of oil. And you bought it when a barrel of crude cost $105. Oil is now trading at $117 per barrel. You would have made $12,000 on an investment of $3375. That's a 356% return on your investment!
So one of the things that we have to do is to get the NYMEX to raise the margins on crude oil and raise them significantly. If investors have to come to the table with more of their own money to invest, they will invest less in it. And if they invest less in it, the futures that they are trading become worth less and will sell for less.
The only other alternative is for this investment bubble to pop like the tech bubble did. The problem with that is that we don't know what the consequences of that will be.
3 people like this
@clrumfelt (5490)
• United States
25 Apr 08
I agree with you on this one. The big oil speculators have found a way to line their pockets at the expense of the American people and they aren't going to give it up easily.
2 people like this
@nubsnovets (72)
• United States
24 Apr 08
We have a little joke in our house. When the prices on gas rise we say that Bush must be getting ready for retirement. Just big corporate's way to make more money off us. They could have changed all of our cars to electric but of course that would have been bad for business.
3 people like this
@clrumfelt (5490)
• United States
24 Apr 08
It's a sad thing that big corporations bite the hands that feed them. Namely, ours.
2 people like this
@esecaira (27)
• United States
25 Apr 08
Sure..there are domestic oil reserves all around the USA...but we do not have the time to develop them. I will take years to avoid the bureaucratc red tape and the years to develop the fields. We may cry aboit our politicians...we can blame them..but the fact remains...we simple donot have time/ Anthings get worst in emerging nantions ...forget about cars, who simple doot have enought to feed themselves.
Again...arab producing contries keep on purchasing new jets for their " thousand " of princess and high rollers " and aston martins for their gardeners and tising gas prices just keep going up...it is a real world, a real problem...and we most find real solutions..on time
3 people like this
@clrumfelt (5490)
• United States
25 Apr 08
Good point. The best, quickest way to solve the problem is to fairly distribute the oil that is already available at prices people can afford. There are people starving and losing their homes because of the outrageous oil prices and long range solutions aren't going to help the ones who badly need help today. Thanks for your input.
2 people like this
@reene0225 (351)
• United States
25 Apr 08
Yea that is all true. There is another reason I can think of and that is President Bush. Me and my boyfriend were talking and we both agreed that since this is his last year in office oil prices will sky rocket. Mainly so he can make more money off of it without having to give a real reason why it's so high. We all know how he is so into his "oil" down in Texas. I think we need to depend more on USA oil resources than foreign too. Sure we have ethanol for e85 capable vehicles. Most vehicles are not e85 however. Corn has gone up a lot too not saving a bunch of money on the corn oil produced for gas purposes. It used to big a bigger difference in the 2 prices and now they're practically the same.
3 people like this
@clrumfelt (5490)
• United States
30 Apr 08
I don't think it is Pres. Bush's fault. True that this is his last year in office, and that would give Congress less reason to listen to him, in my opinion. After all he will be gone in a few months, anyway. I think the real fault lies on the big oil moguls that continue their foreign oil fortunes and are unrepentant about lining their pockets at the expense of the American people.
@onesiobhan (1327)
• Canada
30 Apr 08
Extracting oil from the ground is incredibly destructive to the area. I can understand why people wouldn't want oil extraction going on in their own backyards.
Conservation is the key. There is enough oil in existing reserves if people would stop wasting it.
@clrumfelt (5490)
• United States
30 Apr 08
You may be right about the oil reserves. They have to release them for it to affect
the price of oil and I don't think anyone has authorized that yet. Whenever domestic oil has been used enough precautions have been used to ensure not only the conservation of the areas, and also animal populations around those areas have thrived. Thanks for your reply.
@sharkbiter (382)
• United States
30 Apr 08
Finally, someone out there feels the same as I do. This Discussion hits the nail on the head. Everything we have here seems to be going overseas and we have nothing left. Could you imagine how many jobs would become available if we drilled our own oil. It seems however, that our economy and government are only going to get worse. They don't care about Americans or whether or not we have food to eat.
@clrumfelt (5490)
• United States
30 Apr 08
You are so right about the jobs and the help to our economy that domestic drilling would provide. If we could just convice Congress.
@dartman2 (124)
• Canada
1 May 08
It is likely that by raising the cost of fuel to consumers in North America, at least, the suppliers are driving us towards greener vehicles. This will, in turn, reduce our consumption, which will then require higher prices to maintain corporate profits. In this way, three goals are accomplished. The first of these is a somewhat greener world. The second is a guarantee of longer high profit-taking life for the oil companies and their oil reserves. Lastly, the consumer stays happy because he gets to use fuel in his vehicle for many more years, albeit at greater cost. I suppose this could be seen as a win-win-win situation. I guess it's all good. Am I missing something here?