Stop cutting rates is one way. That has driven gas up a dollar alone.

 

Someone gets it:thumb:

You guys are right, but you have to also understand that right now, they are cutting the rates in order to less the recession (if we do enter into one). Not cutting rates would elongate and worsen any recession we go into.

I had written in another post some ideas about what the government could do to encourage conservation (call for employers to allow vastly expanded telecommuting, imposition of a national speed limit to reduce fuel consumption on interstate highways). These would be immediate actions that would have an effect on domestic consumption if properly implemented and therefore have some near-term effect on gasoline prices.

 

I have some qualms about two ideas that I see in these types of posts repeatedly: 1) increased domestic drilling (ANWR, offshore, etc) and 2) building of more refineries.

 

On the first, increased domestic drilling, I am of the opinion that the current runup in gasoline prices is probably good for the long term health of our country and economy because it provides an incredibly strong market incentive for the development of alternative technologies to reduce our dependence on oil imports from the Middle East. GM and Toyota have announced production plans for plug-in hybrids and Nissan recently announced that they would be offering plug-in hybrids and electric cars for the U.S. market. Would these developments be happening if we were still fat, dumb, and happy paying $1.50/gallon? Without the development of technologies such as these, is there any doubt that we would continue along our current path of increasing consumption and dependency on countries that directly support terrorism? Oil is a finite resource that may be nearing exhaustion precisely at a time when global demand is exploding. There has been a lot of speculation that we may be near peak oil, and in my mind this is plausible because known reserves in major oil producer countries like Saudia Arabia are closely guarded secrets. What would happen to our economy if global oil production began a precipitous drop and we hadn't developed alternate technologies? The oil in ANWR would be a drop in the bucket given that scenario.

 

On the subject of building more refineries, what role does the U.S. government play in this? The government doesn't build and operate refineries--private businesses do. Why does the U.S. government need to interfere with the free market? If there were a strong economic incentive for energy companies to build refineries, they would build them (if not here, in Mexico where environmental requirements are more lax). I reject any suggestion that the federal government should subsidize the construction of new refineries by the big oil companies in the form of tax incentives.

 

In summary, we can either live with some pain in the near term, accepting that the long-term benefits of the technological developments will ultimately provide for a less oil-dependent future. Or we can be seduced by the siren song of short-sighted thinking and alleviate some of the discomfort in the short term by aggressively pursuing every last drop of oil within our grasp. The side effect of this decision would be diminished incentive to develop oil alternatives that could ultimately end our addiction. It has been said that a sign of maturity is delaying pleasure today to ensure a better tomorrow. I wonder how mature we are as a country.

I had written in another post some ideas about what the government could do to encourage conservation (call for employers to allow vastly expanded telecommuting, imposition of a national speed limit to reduce fuel consumption on interstate highways). These would be immediate actions that would have an effect on domestic consumption if properly implemented and therefore have some near-term effect on gasoline prices.

 

I have some qualms about two ideas that I see in these types of posts repeatedly: 1) increased domestic drilling (ANWR, offshore, etc) and 2) building of more refineries.

 

On the first, increased domestic drilling, I am of the opinion that the current runup in gasoline prices is probably good for the long term health of our country and economy because it provides an incredibly strong market incentive for the development of alternative technologies to reduce our dependence on oil imports from the Middle East. GM and Toyota have announced production plans for plug-in hybrids and Nissan recently announced that they would be offering plug-in hybrids and electric cars for the U.S. market. Would these developments be happening if we were still fat, dumb, and happy paying $1.50/gallon? Without the development of technologies such as these, is there any doubt that we would continue along our current path of increasing consumption and dependency on countries that directly support terrorism? Oil is a finite resource that may be nearing exhaustion precisely at a time when global demand is exploding. There has been a lot of speculation that we may be near peak oil, and in my mind this is plausible because known reserves in major oil producer countries like Saudia Arabia are closely guarded secrets. What would happen to our economy if global oil production began a precipitous drop and we hadn't developed alternate technologies? The oil in ANWR would be a drop in the bucket given that scenario.

 

On the subject of building more refineries, what role does the U.S. government play in this? The government doesn't build and operate refineries--private businesses do. Why does the U.S. government need to interfere with the free market? If there were a strong economic incentive for energy companies to build refineries, they would build them (if not here, in Mexico where environmental requirements are more lax). I reject any suggestion that the federal government should subsidize the construction of new refineries by the big oil companies in the form of tax incentives.

 

In summary, we can either live with some pain in the near term, accepting that the long-term benefits of the technological developments will ultimately provide for a less oil-dependent future. Or we can be seduced by the siren song of short-sighted thinking and alleviate some of the discomfort in the short term by aggressively pursuing every last drop of oil within our grasp. The side effect of this decision would be diminished incentive to develop oil alternatives that could ultimately end our addiction. It has been said that a sign of maturity is delaying pleasure today to ensure a better tomorrow. I wonder how mature we are as a country.

:thumb: Agreed 100%. Why mortgage our future?

 

Another thing that anyone who sees this thread needs to remember but often fails to consider, "Oil prices. Is there anything that the Government can do AS OUTLINED IN THE CONSTITUTION?"

If the gov can not do anything when the country is in need then what good are they come crunch time?

If the gov can not do anything when the country is in need then what good are they come crunch time?

:thumb: Agreed 100%. We rely too much on the government. We don't need Big Brother to come help us.

I

I have some qualms about two ideas that I see in these types of posts repeatedly: 1) increased domestic drilling (ANWR, offshore, etc) and 2) building of more refineries.

 

On the first, increased domestic drilling, I am of the opinion that the current runup in gasoline prices is probably good for the long term health of our country and economy because it provides an incredibly strong market incentive for the development of alternative technologies to reduce our dependence on oil imports from the Middle East. GM and Toyota have announced production plans for plug-in hybrids and Nissan recently announced that they would be offering plug-in hybrids and electric cars for the U.S. market. Would these developments be happening if we were still fat, dumb, and happy paying $1.50/gallon?

 

Just curious, what point would gas prices have to reach before you would support expanding drilling here?

Just curious, what point would gas prices have to reach before you would support expanding drilling here?

I'm guessing that people who heat with LP or home heating oil may be a little more open to expanded drilling. It's going to cost them twice as much to heat their homes this winter.

:thumb: Agreed 100%. We rely too much on the government. We don't need Big Brother to come help us.

The sad thing is when we need them they never come through.

Limited conservation is fine but unilaterally imposing manditory conservation measures while imposing ridiculously expensive requirements to reduce the emission of greenhouse gases will cripple our economy. We need a vibrant economy to finance our enormous government bureaucracy and to fund innovation in the energy field.

 

Within reason, high fuel costs will accelerate the development of alternatives to oil but conservation alone will not solve the problem. Neither will government research into wind and solar power that is funded by money taken out of the private sector.

 

Our domestic oil production is declining and liberal Democrats and their allies like John McCain who oppose new drilling are to blame. It is too late to throw the rascals out in the upcoming election because the alternatives are not much better, but if we do not get some quality leadership in our government soon, we are headed for an economic meltdown, IMO.

 

If the gov can not do anything when the country is in need then what good are they come crunch time?

 

You've been one of the most vocal on lack of governmental action. What would you want to see the government do?

As a teenager and young man in the early '70s, I worked in a service station. Prior to the oil embargo, our normal price for a gallon of gasoline was 37.9 cents per gallon. When you made a purchase at that price, an attendent not only pumped it for you, but cleaned your windows, asked to check your oil, inflated your tires if requested, and stood outside in the heat, cold, or rain so that you didn't have to leave your car. As prices began to climb, services deminished and soon self service islands and later entire stations devoted to self service appeared. Next, the service bays were remodeled to become convenience stores. All in all, more money, less service.

 

What suckers we were/are.

Just curious, what point would gas prices have to reach before you would support expanding drilling here?

 

I don't think it would matter much if we expanded drilling in ANWR or offshore--we wouldn't be able to produce oil fast enough (in barrels/day terms) to have any significant effect on gas prices. A reasonable guesstimate of ANWR reserves is 7.7 billion barrels, which amounts to a little over a year of U.S. consumption. Estimates for peak production rate from ANWR are only about 800,000 barrels/day, compared to daily U.S. consumption of 20 million barrels/day, mean that even at maximum output, ANWR would produce less than 5% of U.S. consumption and less than 1% or current world consumption. Experts expect it would take 20 years for ANWR to reach peak production. According to the U.S. government Energy Information Administration, world oil consumption is expected to rise by about 37% by 2030. If ANWR were producing oil flat-out today it would be a tiny drop in the bucket in terms of affecting global oil prices and if consumption rises by that much the effect of ANWR on prices would be even less.

I don't think it would matter much if we expanded drilling in ANWR or offshore--we wouldn't be able to produce oil fast enough (in barrels/day terms) to have any significant effect on gas prices. A reasonable guesstimate of ANWR reserves is 7.7 billion barrels, which amounts to a little over a year of U.S. consumption. Estimates for peak production rate from ANWR are only about 800,000 barrels/day, compared to daily U.S. consumption of 20 million barrels/day, mean that even at maximum output, ANWR would produce less than 5% of U.S. consumption and less than 1% or current world consumption. Experts expect it would take 20 years for ANWR to reach peak production. According to the U.S. government Energy Information Administration, world oil consumption is expected to rise by about 37% by 2030. If ANWR were producing oil flat-out today it would be a tiny drop in the bucket in terms of affecting global oil prices and if consumption rises by that much the effect of ANWR on prices would be even less.

 

What about offshore drilling? Do you think that combined with ANWR could helped to increase supply enough to make an impact?

What about offshore drilling? Do you think that combined with ANWR could helped to increase supply enough to make an impact?

 

I don't know. At the rate the economies in China and India are growing and increasing their oil consumption, I'm skeptical. I haven't seen estimates for how much oil might be recoverable offshore.

I don't think it would matter much if we expanded drilling in ANWR or offshore--we wouldn't be able to produce oil fast enough (in barrels/day terms) to have any significant effect on gas prices. A reasonable guesstimate of ANWR reserves is 7.7 billion barrels, which amounts to a little over a year of U.S. consumption. Estimates for peak production rate from ANWR are only about 800,000 barrels/day, compared to daily U.S. consumption of 20 million barrels/day, mean that even at maximum output, ANWR would produce less than 5% of U.S. consumption and less than 1% or current world consumption. Experts expect it would take 20 years for ANWR to reach peak production. According to the U.S. government Energy Information Administration, world oil consumption is expected to rise by about 37% by 2030. If ANWR were producing oil flat-out today it would be a tiny drop in the bucket in terms of affecting global oil prices and if consumption rises by that much the effect of ANWR on prices would be even less.

 

However if the Dems had not blocked all access to that oil it would now be available and it is pureley speculation to say it would have had no effect. We are now paying for the shortsightedness of the Clinton administration in regards to this.