As ABC News’ Cecilia Vega introduced her piece on high gas prices, the sign at the downtown Los Angeles gas station behind her showed the price of regular gas at $4.99 a gallon. However when the piece concluded nearly two minutes later the price of regular gas had jumped 10 cents to $5.09 a gallon.
BEFORE:
AFTER
BEFORE:
AFTER
Gas prices? Not my fault.
President Barack Obama hit back on Thursday at election-year Republican criticism of his energy policy, offering a staunch defense of his attempts to wean Americans off foreign oil and saying there was no 'silver bullet' for high gas prices.
Obama sought to deflect growing Republican attacks over rising prices at the pump, blaming recent increases on a mix of factors beyond his control, including tensions with Iran, hot demand from China, India and other emerging economies, and Wall Street speculators taking advantage of the uncertainty.
He admitted today that he does not have a "silver bullet" solution for skyrocketing gas prices, but he proposed alternative energy sources such as "a plant-like substance, algae" as a way of cutting dependence on oil by 17 percent.
"a plant-like substance, algae" !~))!
President Barack Obama hit back on Thursday at election-year Republican criticism of his energy policy, offering a staunch defense of his attempts to wean Americans off foreign oil and saying there was no 'silver bullet' for high gas prices.
Obama sought to deflect growing Republican attacks over rising prices at the pump, blaming recent increases on a mix of factors beyond his control, including tensions with Iran, hot demand from China, India and other emerging economies, and Wall Street speculators taking advantage of the uncertainty.
He admitted today that he does not have a "silver bullet" solution for skyrocketing gas prices, but he proposed alternative energy sources such as "a plant-like substance, algae" as a way of cutting dependence on oil by 17 percent.
"a plant-like substance, algae" !~))!
Nobody says its totally off supply and demand but the majority of the fluctuation is simply an imbalance of supply to an ever increasing demand. Any threats of uninterrupted supply in a market that is clearly tight this tight will have fluctuations. The sanctions we put on Iran has alot to do with this. Now they cut off England and France they need to make up for that. Iran can find use for that oil they are withholding because demand for oil will only get stronger. The bottom line is Sweet crude is harder to get so the refining process gets more expensive. Not to mention we have ever increasing demand as the rest of the world is now having the American dream. It was actually better when OPEC controlled the price of oil before the world became a global economy.
Chavez wanted to make a deal with the US in 2005 or 2006 that he would sell oil for like 60 bucks a barrell for a very long time frame
(you can google it if you dont remember, and the sources will be reputable ones and btw that is when shortly after Chavez became public enemy #1. HMMM wonder why)
Linn energy's hedge book is for 75 bucks a barrell. If they were willing to sign that deal, their costs have to be way below that ( and their divvy is gooooddd)
I remember some Arab prince or whoever, was begging the world for 75 bucks a barrel in early 2009(when it was sub 50)
So there is absolutely no reason why it should be this high, if only supply and demand are the main factors
(you can google it if you dont remember, and the sources will be reputable ones and btw that is when shortly after Chavez became public enemy #1. HMMM wonder why)
Linn energy's hedge book is for 75 bucks a barrell. If they were willing to sign that deal, their costs have to be way below that ( and their divvy is gooooddd)
I remember some Arab prince or whoever, was begging the world for 75 bucks a barrel in early 2009(when it was sub 50)
So there is absolutely no reason why it should be this high, if only supply and demand are the main factors
Good points. If you are referring to the Bakkin formation in North Dakota, there is said to be about 3.5 Billion barrels of crude. We import over 10 Million barrels a day. If you do the math the crude is enough to stop importing for a year. Thats a great find and it will be valuable to us down the road but that wont come online even if we started today for 5-10 years. and in the grand scheme its not that much. As far as fracking is concerned while it does improve the extraction process i also have serious questions if the cost/benefit of it. I live above the Marcellus Shale here in PA but i know a handful of people working down there and the possible threats to the Aquafirs is a huge hurdle. If that was to effect the fresh drinking water, it could be catastrophic. The reality is banning trucks wont be needed. The market will force things liek that to happen. Dont you remember in 2008 or was it 2009, when people were dumping their Suburbans for Rav4's or a Pryius? Im sure that will take place again. If it does, i wouldnt mind getting my hands on one of the monsters. The price would be right then and thats the beauty of the free market isnt it.
Oil is a global commodity. I cant see how anyone can promise a set price on oil. That would be insane. Also, i think if the US corporations could have been offered such a deal it would have been struck in a heartbeat. Oil companies know the price of oil will only rise because the demand will always outstrip the supply unless we can invent a new replacement for gasoline. Now only would oil keep going up over the supply being less then demand a factor for prices to keep rising also the inflation from all the printing we have done and will continue to do is another cause for worry. Remember, most oil is traded for American dollars (petro dollars). There is no escaping that inflation tsunami that will inevitably effect all commodities. I think that is the very reason the US wanted Chavez gone. He doesnt want to take part in our dollar scheme anymore. You know how much they pass for a gallon of gas in Venezuela? Less then they do for a gallon of water. Its like a dime. In US money. Chavez you cant rest assured will have another coup on his doorstep once we figure out how to dismantle Iran.
Necessities eat away average Joe paychecks everyday, the CPI is a joke. Trying to include gaz, foods, healthcare, education costs.....to see what happens. People work less hours, get pay less, save less, eat less, drive less, spend less,.....living standard for average American slowly slide down the toilet yet both parties fully behind Ben The Printer.
PRINNNNNNNTTTTTTTT TO INFINITY.
Newt Gingrich's $2.50 gas promise
Gas prices are on the rise, and so like clockwork, politicians are now selling the promise of lower prices at the pump.
Newt Gingrich, struggling to regain momentum in the Republican presidential primary, is leading the way, promising to get prices down to $2.50 per gallon.
"I've developed a program for American energy so no future president will ever bow to a Saudi king again and so every American can look forward to $2.50 a gallon gasoline," Gingrich said during his self-introduction at Wednesday's CNN debate.
The promise might garner attention on the campaign trail, but there's little more than snake oil in that rhetorical well.
Politicians can do almost nothing to influence the price of gasoline in the short-term, and long-run efforts are likely to be complicated by the global nature of the crude oil market.
"Political rhetoric is all it is," said Guy Caruso, an economist who led the Energy Information Administration and worked as an analyst at the Central Intelligence Agency.
"Short of price controls, which were a disaster during the Nixon administration, politicians can't do much to change the price of gasoline," he said.
Other industry experts CNNMoney surveyed echoed those sentiments.
"This is absurd," said Paul Bledsoe, a Bipartisan Policy Center scholar who spent more than 20 years working on energy policy in Washington. "Obviously the price of oil is set on a global market. In the immediate term there is almost nothing you can do."
Gingrich's plan for lowering prices revolves around increasing domestic energy production to levels that would make geopolitical concerns an afterthought. The way to do that, according to Gingrich, is by eliminating the EPA, building the Keystone pipeline and allowing more drilling.
"And at that point, if, in fact, the Iranians want to do something with the Strait of Hormuz, maybe the Chinese have a problem or the Indians have a problem or the Europeans have a problem," Gingrich said in a 28-minute video his campaign has produced on the subject. "But I am not sure at that point that the Americans will have a problem."
But unless the way crude oil is bought and sold in the global market is drastically changed, the United States would still have a very real problem.
Oil is a global commodity -- it can be shipped anywhere around the world. Its price is determined largely by global supply and demand.
The United States would have to remove itself from the global trade in oil and gasoline to set its own prices, a move that could set the country up for a supply shortage and that most economists would not support.
Caruso said it's just not a practical idea. "This is a global market with fungible supplies," he said. "We can't isolate ourselves."
There's also the question of whether Gingrich's targeted production level is possible.
According to a 2009 study from the government's Energy Information Administration, opening up to drilling areas off the East Coast, West Coast and Florida's Gulf Coast would yield just 500,000 extra barrels a day by 2030 -- not enough to replace U.S. imports or bring global prices down.
The world currently consumes 89 million barrels a day, and by then would likely be using over 100 million barrels. By the time OPEC finished cutting production to adjust for the increased supply, Americans might save 3 cents per gallon.
"The notion that somehow we can produce so much domestically that we will move the global price is incorrect," Bledsoe said.
Meanwhile, the oil industry says that by expanding beyond offshore areas and drilling everywhere that isn't national park, an additional 10 million barrels of oil a day could come online by 2030 -- more than enough for the U.S. alone.
All of this is not to say that oil production or prices are impenetrable to policy changes. Increasing domestic production is feasible, and even desirable -- but the impact on price will hit around the margins.
"We need to be doing more energy, across the board," said Peter Beutel, an oil analyst at Cameron Hanover.
"There are ways forward here that would be very positive," he said, while acknowledging that even with a massive production increase, it is difficult to predict a certain price point, as Gingrich has. "Who's to say whether it will be $1.75 or $2.75?"
The Gingrich campaign did not immediately respond to a request for comment on how the predicted $2.50 price point was reached.
Of course, it's not only Republicans who have proposed tinkering with government policy in an effort to combat high gas prices.
During the Bush administration, then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi urged the president to release crude oil from the nation's Strategic Petroleum Reserve to combat high prices.
The White House rejected her call, saying that using the reserve to manipulate prices was "ineffective."
But catch a politician in a rare moment of candor and you might hear an acknowledgement that gas prices are largely out of their control. Here's what President Obama had to say last year about high gas prices during the 2008 campaign:
"We were at the height of political season. You had all kinds of slogans and gimmicks and outraged politicians -- they were waving their three-point plans for $2 a gallon gas," Obama said.
"And none of it was really going to do anything to solve the problem," he continued. "The truth is, none of these gimmicks, none of these slogans made a bit of difference."
Gas prices are on the rise, and so like clockwork, politicians are now selling the promise of lower prices at the pump.
Newt Gingrich, struggling to regain momentum in the Republican presidential primary, is leading the way, promising to get prices down to $2.50 per gallon.
"I've developed a program for American energy so no future president will ever bow to a Saudi king again and so every American can look forward to $2.50 a gallon gasoline," Gingrich said during his self-introduction at Wednesday's CNN debate.
The promise might garner attention on the campaign trail, but there's little more than snake oil in that rhetorical well.
Politicians can do almost nothing to influence the price of gasoline in the short-term, and long-run efforts are likely to be complicated by the global nature of the crude oil market.
"Political rhetoric is all it is," said Guy Caruso, an economist who led the Energy Information Administration and worked as an analyst at the Central Intelligence Agency.
"Short of price controls, which were a disaster during the Nixon administration, politicians can't do much to change the price of gasoline," he said.
Other industry experts CNNMoney surveyed echoed those sentiments.
"This is absurd," said Paul Bledsoe, a Bipartisan Policy Center scholar who spent more than 20 years working on energy policy in Washington. "Obviously the price of oil is set on a global market. In the immediate term there is almost nothing you can do."
Gingrich's plan for lowering prices revolves around increasing domestic energy production to levels that would make geopolitical concerns an afterthought. The way to do that, according to Gingrich, is by eliminating the EPA, building the Keystone pipeline and allowing more drilling.
"And at that point, if, in fact, the Iranians want to do something with the Strait of Hormuz, maybe the Chinese have a problem or the Indians have a problem or the Europeans have a problem," Gingrich said in a 28-minute video his campaign has produced on the subject. "But I am not sure at that point that the Americans will have a problem."
But unless the way crude oil is bought and sold in the global market is drastically changed, the United States would still have a very real problem.
Oil is a global commodity -- it can be shipped anywhere around the world. Its price is determined largely by global supply and demand.
The United States would have to remove itself from the global trade in oil and gasoline to set its own prices, a move that could set the country up for a supply shortage and that most economists would not support.
Caruso said it's just not a practical idea. "This is a global market with fungible supplies," he said. "We can't isolate ourselves."
There's also the question of whether Gingrich's targeted production level is possible.
According to a 2009 study from the government's Energy Information Administration, opening up to drilling areas off the East Coast, West Coast and Florida's Gulf Coast would yield just 500,000 extra barrels a day by 2030 -- not enough to replace U.S. imports or bring global prices down.
The world currently consumes 89 million barrels a day, and by then would likely be using over 100 million barrels. By the time OPEC finished cutting production to adjust for the increased supply, Americans might save 3 cents per gallon.
"The notion that somehow we can produce so much domestically that we will move the global price is incorrect," Bledsoe said.
Meanwhile, the oil industry says that by expanding beyond offshore areas and drilling everywhere that isn't national park, an additional 10 million barrels of oil a day could come online by 2030 -- more than enough for the U.S. alone.
All of this is not to say that oil production or prices are impenetrable to policy changes. Increasing domestic production is feasible, and even desirable -- but the impact on price will hit around the margins.
"We need to be doing more energy, across the board," said Peter Beutel, an oil analyst at Cameron Hanover.
"There are ways forward here that would be very positive," he said, while acknowledging that even with a massive production increase, it is difficult to predict a certain price point, as Gingrich has. "Who's to say whether it will be $1.75 or $2.75?"
The Gingrich campaign did not immediately respond to a request for comment on how the predicted $2.50 price point was reached.
Of course, it's not only Republicans who have proposed tinkering with government policy in an effort to combat high gas prices.
During the Bush administration, then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi urged the president to release crude oil from the nation's Strategic Petroleum Reserve to combat high prices.
The White House rejected her call, saying that using the reserve to manipulate prices was "ineffective."
But catch a politician in a rare moment of candor and you might hear an acknowledgement that gas prices are largely out of their control. Here's what President Obama had to say last year about high gas prices during the 2008 campaign:
"We were at the height of political season. You had all kinds of slogans and gimmicks and outraged politicians -- they were waving their three-point plans for $2 a gallon gas," Obama said.
"And none of it was really going to do anything to solve the problem," he continued. "The truth is, none of these gimmicks, none of these slogans made a bit of difference."
Oh bullshit its just ObaMao taking care of green buddies like Solyndra.
You notice how Death eats a caca and Fletchulence get awfully wordy and full of explantions when it comes to defending ObaMao and oil the recent discovery of global markets.
I can remember when it was its just Bush taking care of his oil buddies.
Of course during the high price of gas period when Bush was Pres. unemployment rate was about 5%.
Its bullshit.Federals tax 33% of every dollar spent at the pump. ObaMao is delighted that he can extort the poor and middle class into funding the Unicorn industrty. All of this while the left claims he is never to blame.
You notice how Death eats a caca and Fletchulence get awfully wordy and full of explantions when it comes to defending ObaMao and oil the recent discovery of global markets.
I can remember when it was its just Bush taking care of his oil buddies.
Of course during the high price of gas period when Bush was Pres. unemployment rate was about 5%.
Its bullshit.Federals tax 33% of every dollar spent at the pump. ObaMao is delighted that he can extort the poor and middle class into funding the Unicorn industrty. All of this while the left claims he is never to blame.
