KingDollar Will Cut Oil Prices

Friday, 16 Mar 2012 | 4:40 PM ET

By: Larry Kudlow
CNBC Anchor

No matter how much President Obama protests, the simple fact is that he continues to oppose and mock and disparage oil and gas drilling. He is a prisoner of the environmental left, and he remains on the wrong side of energy history.

And that’s exactly why he has a 59 percent negative rating on the economy, according to a recent poll, even though jobs and other indicators have actually picked up.

It’s about $4 or higher gas at the pump. Polls overwhelmingly show that Americans want drilling in ANWR and offshore, and that they want hydraulic fracturing of shale for oil and gas. They also overwhelmingly want the Keystone Pipeline (by roughly 70 percent).

And they believe the government can act quickly to lower gas prices in the short run.

But the president scoffs at all this. In his energy speech this week, he suggested that the drill, drill, drill crowd (of which I have long been a member) would have founded the Flat Earth Society. He says we might even have sided with 19th-century president, Rutherford B. Hayes.

Ha, ha, ha. Very funny.

But the reality is, oil, gas, and coal -- not wind, solar, geothermal, and algae -- are going to be crucial to America’s transportation, electricity, and economic growth for many decades to come.

What’s particularly galling about Obama’s riff is his constant use of a false statistic. The president argues that America uses more than 20 percent of the world’s oil, although “even if we drill in every square inch of this country, we still only have 2 percent of the world’s known oil reserves.”

This is just patently untrue. According to the Institute for Energy Research, when you include oil shale, the U.S. has 1.4 trillion barrels of technically recoverable oil. That is enough to meet all U.S. oil needs for about the next 200 years, without any imports.

With the technology revolution in the energy business, including horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracking, the old idea of proved oil reserves that Obama keeps using is replaced with the new concept of recoverable resources. Many thanks to Investor’s Business Daily for its story that the U.S. now has 60-times more recoverable oil reserves than Obama claims. And that doesn’t even include the natural-gas shale revolution, which has already slashed electricity prices for homes and businesses and will eventually be used more and more in transportation.

And then there’s the EPA, which is holding up oil and gas exploration in the Outer Continental Shelf, Alaska’s North Slope, ANWR, Utah tar sands, and the whole Green River Formation in Wyoming and neighboring states. Energy development on private lands is leading to greater development and production. But the Obama administration is still way behind on permits for drilling on federal land or offshore.

Steps could in fact be taken to lower gas prices in the short run. EPA mandates for boutique gasoline supplies and ethanol mixtures could be eased, perhaps saving 50 cents a gallon -- without sacrificing clean air.

But the best idea I’ve heard to ease gasoline prices comes from Joint Economic Committee vice chairman Kevin Brady, a Texas Republican. He has proposed the Sound Dollar Act, which would require the Fed to monitor gold and the foreign-exchange value of the dollar . He would also replace the Fed’s dual mandate with a single mandate for price stability.

A stronger dollar is key. The Joint Economic Committee just put out a study showing that a 10 to 15 percent appreciation of the greenback to pre-recession levels (before the Fed launched its massive dollar-creation, pump-priming campaign) would lower gasoline prices by 43 cents. So if the Treasury and the Federal Reserve strengthened the value of the dollar, oil and gasoline prices would decline.

It’s an excellent idea. The best one out there. A return to King Dollar would boost consumer real incomes, attract capital from all over the world, and grow the economy at a faster rate.

So there is an action plan on energy. The laws of supply and demand will work to hold back prices. So will a strong dollar. So will easier regulatory mandates. And if market forces generate clean-energy alternatives, then fine. But a true all-of-the-above strategy would take the handcuffs and the sarcasm off of fossil-fuel drilling.

Rutherford B. Hayes can’t do it because he’s dead. But Obama could. Or more likely, a new White House occupant will.

oil

Obama Hates SUVs (I only mildly dislike them)

From The Times
April 3, 2010




Barack Obama aims to drive gas guzzlers off the road with greener laws

The Governator, Arnold Schwarzenegger, popularised the Hummer but now the President is trying to call a halt to the American love affair with giant SUVs

Giles Whittell, Washington 93 Comments

Recommend? (18) For decades they have thundered along America’s highways and choked up parking lots, a symbol of extravagance unchallenged by politicians, emissions standards or common sense.



They are the four-wheel-drive behemoths known to the US Government as “light trucks” and to consumers as SUVs (sport utility vehicles) — but their easy ride as the world’s most conspicuous mobile polluters ended this week.



In a coup that achieves something President Clinton promised but never delivered, President Obama has forced the big three US carmakers, and their unions, to accept tough mileage rules for cars and SUVs. The rules will cut emissions from vehicles by more than a third over the next four years.



Whether the new rules end America’s love affair with huge cars remains to be seen. But they are being introduced at a time when SUV sales are at a fraction of their peak level five years ago. Their demise coincides with the country’s first mass-produced “plug-in” electric car, which finally rolled off a Michigan production line this week.



Related Links

Obama scoring from every shot

Oil and Troubled Waters

US 'cash for clunkers' plan burns through $1bn

From 2016, new cars and SUVs will have to deliver an average of 35.5 miles per gallon (42.6 miles per British gallon), comparable for the first time with European and Japanese requirements.



SUV mileage under the new regime is expected to average 28.8mpg (34.5mpg in Britain), or nearly three times that of the Hummer H1 that Arnold Schwarzenegger once drove into Times Square in New York to begin the vehicle’s transition from armoured personnel carrier into celebrity runabout.



The new rules end a notorious loophole in US law by which SUVs were exempt from emissions standards that applied to cars. This made them so much more profitable that at the peak of the sport utility boom, a single Ford plant was generating up to $15 million (£9.8 million) a day in pre-tax profits.



The rules were welcomed yesterday by the industry and environmentalists. The US Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, which had little choice but to accept the standards after the $25 billion bailout of Chrysler and General Motors, said they gave the industry “a clear road map” instead of a patchwork of differing state rules.



The Natural Resources Defense Council said they were “good for consumers, companies, the country and the planet”. Ray LaHood, Mr Obama’s Transportation Secretary, called them “historic”, claiming they would save consumers $3,000 per new vehicle and cut emissions by 1 billion tons.



The Big Three producers will have to spend about $52 billion to upgrade engines, power trains and air-conditioning systems to meet the requirements. The average cost of a new car or SUV is expected to rise by $1,000 as a result, meaning that the future of American motoring depends on consumers’ willingness to pay a modest premium for old-fashioned cars — or a larger one for something very different.



General Motors’ new management has famously “bet the company” on the Chevy Volt, an electric super-mini with a small petrol engine designed only to recharge its batteries on long journeys. Its 40-mile range on batteries alone means that commuters living less than 20 miles from work would almost never have to fill their tank. GM has high hopes, despite its price tag of $40,000 before federal tax rebates.



Its main competitor at the New York International Auto Show is the allbattery Nissan Leaf, which will cost $32,000 with a range of 100 miles and no petrol-powered back-up.



US motorists have shown repeatedly that their affection for big cars rebounds as petrol prices fall, but the new regulations reflect a long-term trend. On average, Ford sold 412,000 Explorer SUVs each year from 1995 to 2003. By 2008 sales had slumped to 78,000. GM has sold the Hummer brand to a Chinese rival and SUV sales fell overall by 52 per cent last year alone.



The new standards are based on a 2007 Supreme Court Ruling that reclassified carbon dioxide as a pollutant. They will be enforced by the Environmental Protection Agency, whether Congress approves or not.



Top trumps



Lamborghini Murcielago LP640 The gas-guzzler tax on this is $6,400, (£4,200), bringing the total price to $362,400 for a car that can reach 60mph in three seconds. A 6.5-litre, V-12 engine pumps out 632hp, enough to reach 211 miles an hour at 13mpg (estimated US gallons)



Cadillac SRX If you want an unnecessarily big antisocial 4x4, you can do no better than this, according to Jeremy Clarkson. Accepted by car enthusiasts as the ugly duckling of the SUVs, the motor makes up for what it lacks in looks with 17mpg



Hummer H2 David Beckham’s favourite car, perhaps for its macho 6-litre V8 engine. Fifteen hundred Americans bought the 7mpg monster last year



Cadillac Escalade SUV The ultimate accessory for any rapper, it has a 6.2-litre engine that attracted 16,000 Americans to invest in a 12mpg motor last year



Chevrolet Corvette A slick sports car that can cruise at 185mph — at great environmental cost. There are about 750,000 of these, which promise 16mpg, registered in the US.












Obama

The Coming Tax

For the good of mankind.  The cost of food will dramatically increase.  The cost of plane fares will dramatically increase.  The cost of mail and postal shipments will dramatically increase.  The cost of everything will dramatically increase.  And the government will find that whether or not it reduces driving, all that money is sure useful.  Government will put billions into minority programs, education, law enforcement, streets, buses, trains ... thus creating a new cosntituency by giving back what they just stole, and the people served will think the billions are a godsend.


March 2, 2010

Fuel Taxes Must Rise, Harvard Researchers Say


By SINDYA N. BHANOO
The New York Times


To meet the Obama administration’s targets for cutting greenhouse gas emissions, some researchers say, Americans may have to experience a sobering reality: gas at $7 a gallon.

To reduce carbon dioxide emissions in the transportation sector 14 percent from 2005 levels by 2020, the cost of driving must simply increase, according to a forthcoming report by researchers at Harvard’s Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs.

The 14 percent target was set in the Environmental Protection Agency’s budget for fiscal 2010.

In their study, the researchers devised several combinations of steps that United States policymakers might take in trying to address the heat-trapping emissions by the nation’s transportation sector, which consume 70 percent of the oil used in the United States.

Most of their models assumed an economy-wide carbon dioxide tax starting at $30 a ton in 2010 and escalating to $60 a ton in 2030. In some cases researchers also factored in tax credits for electric and hybrid vehicles, taxes on fuel or both.

In the modeling, it turned out that issuing tax credits could backfire, while taxes on fuel proved beneficial.

“Tax credits don’t address how much people use their cars,” said Ross Morrow, one of the report’s authors. “In reverse, they can make people drive more.”

Dr. Morrow, formerly a fellow at the Belfer Center, is a professor of mechanical engineering and economics at Iowa State University

Researchers said that vehicle miles traveled will increase by more than 30 percent between 2010 and 2030 unless policymakers increase fuel taxes.

[And he knows this how?  And if he raises the taxes by more than 110%, he knows it will not increase ... how?]






taxes

Gasoline Taxes

January 2009 Taxes: Federal, State taxes combined

gas

OIL: Below $65 / barrel.

A few points -

1) Whatever gave these Einstein's the idea that world recovery would be FAST??
Answer: NOTHING. It has been apparent for six months that the recovery under Obama will take us years.

2) Oil may well be dropping because the 3-4 speculators who kept prices high have been found out and names are known and they want to live. With those 3-4 out of the game, it dropped and added to the failing world economy, oil continued to fall to a reasonable rate.

By Wednesday, it was below $63 a barrel. Gas dropped .07 a gallon.

Now, if oil rose $4 a barrel, gas would jump 20 cents at least!!!

World stocks fall as oil drops below $64 a barrel amid faltering economic optimism

By Pan Pylas, AP Business Writer

On Monday July 6, 2009, 8:36 am EDT

LONDON (AP) -- World stock markets fell as oil prices slumped below $64 a barrel Monday amid concerns that any recovery in the global economy will be a long, hard slog following disappointing U.S. jobs data last week.

In Europe, the FTSE 100 index of leading British shares was down 46.10 points, or 1.1 percent, at 4,190.18 while Germany's DAX declined 70.46 points, or 1.5 percent, to 4,637.75. The CAC-40 in France was 47.41 points, or 1.5 percent, lower at 3,072.10.

Wall Street futures pointed to a weaker open Monday. Dow futures were down 89 points, or 1.1 percent, at 8,152 while the broader Standard & Poor's 500 futures fell 10 points, or 1.1 percent, to 883.30.

Trading volumes were light in both Europe and Asia as investors awaited a lead from Wall Street, which was closed Friday for the Independence Day holiday. U.S. stocks had been hit last Thursday after the nonfarm payrolls data, which showed U.S. employers slashed 467,000 jobs in June -- 100,000 more than anticipated.

"Markets sold off hard on the back of those payroll figures last Thursday so the potential remains for something of a reversion to be seen but we are now moving into the slower summer season and so long as the green shoots of recovery continue to struggle to take root, then equities will likely remain adrift," said Matt Buckland, a dealer at CMC Markets.

Equities rose from the middle of March until the start of June on hopes that the U.S. economy in particular will recover from recession sooner than anticipated. Many investors saw stock valuations as particularly cheap and started buying. The S&P 500 index in the U.S. rose around 16 percent during the second quarter, its best performance since 1998, amid hopes of a global recovery despite worries about the banking system, public finances and the length and depth of the recession.

But disappointing economic news over the last few weeks brought an abrupt end to the rally and altered the general mood prevailing among investors. The start of the second quarter earnings reporting season will provide some clues as to whether companies have already seen the worst of the recession. U.S. aluminum giant Alcoa Inc. opens earnings season on Wednesday.

"Aside from international developments, markets should also focus on the upcoming Q2 earnings in the U.S., which get started this week, and its impact on the growth outlook," said Geoffrey Yu, an analyst at UBS.

"Markets have rallied throughout Q2 on the back of strong growth expectations but if the cyclical rebound fails to materialize due to structural problems, especially in the U.S., markets may correct sharply," he added.

Earlier in Asia, Japan's Nikkei 225 stock average fell 135.20, or 1.4 percent, to 9,680.87 and Hong Kong's Hang Seng dropped 226.23, or 1.2 percent, to 17,977.17 in a choppy session.
Elsewhere, Australia's index lost 1.2 percent and Singapore's market closed off 1.2 percent.

Defying the region's losses, South Korea's Kospi added 0.6 percent after Samsung Electronics Co., the world's biggest manufacturer of memory chips, announced quarterly profit estimates for the first time. The company estimated operating profit would come it at between 2.2 trillion won and 2.6 trillion won, compared with 2.4 trillion won last year.

In mainland China, the benchmark Shanghai Composite Index closed up 1.2 percent at 3,124.67, a 13-month high.

Thailand's stock market is closed Monday and Tuesday.

Oil prices tumbled amid the global economic uncertainty, with benchmark crude for August delivery down $3.29 to $63.44 a barrel.

The dollar fell 0.8 percent to 95.27 yen the euro dropped 0.4 percent $1.3896.

A big loser Monday was the pound, which fell 1 percent to $1.6131.

Earlier this year, the pound fell to a near 24-year low of just above $1.35 amid mounting worries about the state of the British economy and the level of government borrowing. It slowly recouped some of the losses since March as the appetite for risk improved, most notably in the stock markets. With concerns about the growth outlook, the early-year concerns may be re-emerging.

"Anecdotal evidence suggests some sterling selling by central banks has already taken place, but the biggest sterling threat comes from private investors turning their backs on Britain due to declining investment opportunities and the rising default risk," said Hans Redeker, global head of FX strategy at BNP Paribas.












oil

Oil prices: Greed and Speculators

I would bet if they looked deeper at the spikes over the last few years they would find 3-5 buyers causing much of the concern and promoting fear to make millions.

This speculator should lose his home, his job, everything - and spend 75 years in prison next to Maddoff, for his crime is worse in some respects.





‘Rogue broker’ blamed for oil spike

By Javier Blas and Izabella Kaminska in London
Financial Times
July 2 2009

The startling spike in oil prices to their highest level this year on Tuesday was caused by a rogue broker who placed a massive bet in the Brent oil market, triggering almost $10m (€7m) of losses for his company.

PVM Oil Associates, the world’s largest over-the-counter oil brokerage, said on Thursday it had been the “victim of unauthorised trading”. The privately owned company said that as a result of the unauthorised trades it had been forced to close substantial volumes of futures contracts at a loss.

London-based PVM said it had informed the Financial Services Authority, the UK regulator. But officials at the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, the US regulator, claimed they had been kept in the dark for several hours in spite of an agreement between the watchdogs last year to exchange such market-sensitive information spontaneously.

Oil traders in London and New York said the “unauthorised trading” explained the exceptional spike in business activity and prices in the early hours of Tuesday that some initially thought must have been caused by a geopolitical event. “Trading volumes rose overnight and prices jumped more than $2 a barrel without apparent justification,” a senior oil trader in New York said.

Prices rose in one hour from $71 to $73.5, the highest level for the year, according to Reuters data. In total, futures contracts for more than 16m barrels of oil changed hands in that hour – equivalent to double the daily production of Saudi Arabia, the world’s largest oil producer, and far more than the traditional 500,000 barrels for that time of the day.

Traders said the broker implicated had allegedly accounted for at least half of the unusual activity, with the rest the result of others chasing the rally. Oil prices on Thursday fell to $66.5 a barrel, down almost 10 per cent from Tuesday’s peak.

The Financial Times has identified the PVM broker as Steve Perkins. PVM declined to comment and Mr Perkins could not be reached. Fellow traders said Mr Perkins was considered an experienced broker, well-regarded in the market.

This is the second episode of rogue trading in the oil market this year. In May, an oil trader at Morgan Stanley was banned by the City watchdog after he hid from his bosses potential losses on trades made under the influence of alcohol.

The incidents come as regulators are considering tougher oversight of the commodities markets after policymakers complained that speculators fuelled last year’s surge in oil and agriculture prices.

The involvement of PVM is ironic considering the company’s head, David Hufton, has been an outspoken critic of speculators in the oil market, calling some of the exchanges “electronic oil casinos”. In 2006, he said that “if futures exchanges did not exist, oil prices would be a lot lower”.

The $10m loss is a heavy blow for PVM, which reported profits of just $5.6m in the year to July 2008, according to its accounts.

Additional reporting by Izabella Kaminska and Brooke Masters

oil

Gas tax. A bad idea then and now.

It's back! This idea won't go away. Fine for people living in Delaware. BAD for people in California.


By-the-mile road tax could replace by-the-gallon federal fuel tax


By STEVE EVERLY
The Kansas City Star


The year is 2020 and the gasoline tax is history. In its place you get a monthly tax bill based on each mile you drove — tracked by a Global Positioning System device in your car and uploaded to a billing center.

What once was science fiction is being field-tested by the University of Iowa to iron out the wrinkles should a by-the-mile road tax ever be enacted.

Besides the technological advances making such a tax possible, the idea is getting a hard push from a growing number of transportation experts and officials. That is because the traditional by-the-gallon fuel tax, struggling to keep up with road building and maintenance demands, could fall even farther behind as vehicles’ gas mileage rises and more alternative-fuel vehicles come on line.

The idea of shifting to a by-the-mile tax has been discussed for years, but it now appears to be getting more serious attention. A federal commission, after a two-year study, concluded earlier this year that the road tax was the “best path forward” to keep revenues flowing to highway and transportation projects, and could be an important new tool to help manage traffic and relieve congestion.

The decision by the 15-member National Surface Transportation Infrastructure Financing Commission was unanimous, which surprised Robert Atkinson, the group’s chairman. But he said it became clear as the commission’s work progressed that a road tax on miles traveled was the best option.

“If you’re committed to the system being improved then it was a no-brainer,” he said.
The commission pegged 2020 as the year for the federal fuel tax, currently 18.5 cents a gallon, to be phased out and replaced by a road tax. One estimate of a road tax that would cover the current federal and state fuel taxes is 1 to 2 cents per mile for cars and light trucks.

The commission said work needed to start soon to prepare for a road tax. But more work has already been done than most people probably realize.

Oregon did a field test in 2007, concluding it was possible to collect a road tax. The University of Iowa’s Public Policy Center — with support from the Federal Highway Administration and 15 states, including Kansas and Missouri — began work a decade ago on how a road tax could be deployed.

Now the University of Iowa, with the help of a $16 million federal grant, is beginning the field test that will eventually include 2,700 vehicles in six states. The vehicles equipped with computers and GPS devices will keep track of the miles traveled and send the data through wireless technology to a billing center that will compute “simulated” tax bills.

“There is a lot of work nationally going on that is beneath the surface,” said Pete Rahn, director of the Missouri Department of Transportation.

Missouri, like the federal government and other states, has been watching revenues from the gas tax decline. Last year that revenue was down more than 3 percent, and so far this year it has declined a similar amount. The state’s highway budget was about to “hit the rocks,” he said, but federal stimulus funds gave it some breathing room.

Even when the economy recovers, the gas tax will remain under pressure.

“The Chevrolet Volt won’t pay a penny of fuel tax,” Rahn said of the electric car that will make its debut next year.

Rahn, past president of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, said some states have considered implementing a road tax without waiting for the federal government to act, but a national system would probably work best.

Privacy concerns have been raised, and federal legislation also could set limits or otherwise provide safeguards on all the data that could be collected from GPS devices in vehicles. The Iowa study is looking at ways to protect privacy.

U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood earlier this year said the road tax should be among the options considered for future financing, but he backtracked with a statement that such a tax was not Obama administration policy.

The U.S. commission recommending a road tax believes a measured approach would work best. The federal Highway Trust Fund should be replenished with a higher gas tax as an interim move, the commission said, with work continuing on getting a road tax enacted and deployed.

Congress would have to pass legislation phasing in the tax and settling such issues as whether there should be a higher tax for thirstier and higher-polluting vehicles.

A low-tech approach in collecting the tax could amount to an annual reading of each vehicle’s odometer. A high-tech approach would involve equipping cars and trucks with GPS devices and computers.

The commission favors the higher-tech approach, in part, because far more can be done with it. For example, it could be tailored to help reduce traffic congestion by charging different rates throughout the day. A Brookings Institution study estimated that peak travel could be reduced up to 20 percent if the tax made it cheaper to travel outside of rush hour.

Deb Miller, Kansas secretary of transportation, said a road tax was an issue the federal government would need to take the lead on and help resolve such issues. She is on a National Research Council committee working on a proposal that among other things would ask Congress to consider further study of a road tax and how it could be deployed.

The public will have to be educated and convinced that a road tax is needed, but it is something that needs to be considered, Miller said.

“I thought for a long time the most promising option was going to a vehicles-miles-traveled tax,” she said.

Gas tax gap

•The gasoline tax is mainly divided into federal and state portions. The federal tax is 18.4 cents a gallon. In Missouri, the combined federal and state fuel tax is 35.7 cents a gallon. In Kansas, it is 43.4 cents.

•If current state and national trends and gas tax rates continue, a national commission estimates that in the next quarter-century the U.S. will have only about one-third of the $200 billion needed each year to keep up and improve the highways.














gas

OIL to $250 ??

I am thoroughly confused.

The economies of the nearly every nation on earth are crashing, and oil/gas prices will go up?

Just six months ago inventories were revealed to be very high, supplies in US refineries and on ships around the world - full and over capacity.

And suddenly - dour forecasts. And the Democrats are holding hearings? Obama is out there attacking the prices, talking about nationalizing the oil companies?

I warned some time ago (on this blog) that nationalizing the oil companies would occur if certain conditions occured and THEY WOULD ONLY have themselves to blame. Obama is probably calling Chavez for tips.

Oil price leaps to year's high
Predictions of $250 a barrel on fears for oil reserves, hopes of economic recovery and hedging against weak dollar



Terry Macalister
guardian.co.uk

Wednesday 10 June 2009




The price of oil burst through the $71 a barrel mark today amid revelations that proven reserves had fallen for the first time in 10 years and predictions that the price could eventually hit $250.


The latest high – from lows of $30 only four months ago – came on the New York Mercantile Exchange, where the cost of July deliveries rose by $1.35 to $71.36.


This comes on top of a $2 rise the day before as investors rushed into the market on the back of lower stockpile figures, higher demand estimates and speculation against further falls in the dollar.


"I wouldn't be surprised if we're testing $80 in a week or two," said one analyst, while BP's chief executive, Tony Hayward, questioned whether $90 could be the "right" value.


Kuwait's oil minister, Sheikh Ahmad al-Abdullah al-Sabah, put some of the rise down to signs of recovery in Asia but warned that overall demand was still weaker than last year. Opec would not raise supply at current oil prices but did not rule it out "if it reached $100", he said.


Alexei Miller, chairman of the Russian energy group Gazprom, raised the stakes further when he reiterated last year's estimates of $250 a barrel. "This forecast has not become reality yet, given that the [credit] crisis gained momentum and exerted a powerful impact on the global energy market. But does this mean that our forecast was unrealistic? Not at all."


The latest surge has also raised fears that higher energy costs could snuff out the nascent economic recovery. Shares on Wall Street's Nasdaq index fell 1%.


The febrile atmosphere in oil markets was fed by the publication of BP's Statistical Review of World Energy, which showed that the world's proven crude reserves had fallen by 3bn barrels to 1.258tn by 2008 from a revised 1.261tn in 2007.


Declines in important producers such as Russia and Norway offset rises in new areas such as Vietnam, India and Egypt. The figures did not include Canada's tar sands, which are put at 150bn barrels.


The drop is partly attributed to a drop in exploration drilling due to the precipitous fall in oil prices last year but also to the end of "easy" oil. Conflict this week in the Amazon and speculation about Arctic drilling underlined how oil companies are pushing into environmentally sensitive places to find new reserves.


Tony Hayward, BP's chief executive, insisted there was enough crude to last 42 years at current consumption levels, roughly the same as last year. Adherents of "peak oil" – the theory that the maximum rate of oil production has been reached – believe supplies will run out much sooner because of growing demand.


The BP boss said: "Our data confirms that the world has enough proved reserves of oil, natural gas and coal to meet the world's energy needs for decades to come." Higher prices allowed companies to invest in finding further reserves while not choking off demand, he said.


"There is a rational argument to say that somewhere between $60 to $90 a barrel is the right sort of level," he said.


Global oil consumption fell 0.6% to 81.8m barrels a day in 2008, the first decline since 1993 and the largest drop for 27 years. North Sea output dropped 6.3% to its lowest level for three decades.


By contrast, gas use rose by 2.5% globally and 16% in China. The use of coal, the heaviest emitter of climate-changing carbon, rose 3.1%, with Chinese demand up 6.8%, leaving it with a market share of 43% despite more high-profile announcements about its commitment to renewables.


BP says it is difficult to compare "primary" carbon fuels with renewable sources of electricity. BP notes that globally solar capacity rose nearly 70% and wind by 30% year on year but says renewables only generated 1.5% of global electricity and therefore began at a low base.But it notes these sources are playing an increasingly important role in some countries with wind power providing 20% of total electricity generation in Denmark, 11% in Spain and 7% in Germany.


Despite the 2008 rise in coal consumption, the BP data showed growth in the use of the fuel continued to decline compared with 2007 when it rose 5% and five years ago when it went up by 8%.


But the coal figures will alarm environmentalists and increase the calls for companies and governments to speed up trials on "clean coal" technology and the use of carbon capture and storage.


China has promised to increase its use of renewables: Zhang Xiaoqiang, vice-chairman of the China's national development and reform commission, says the country may produce as much as 20% of its energy from wind and solar by 2020.





















oil

Obama / Chavez - Oil and Auto Companies - Any differences.

Chávez seizures fuel Venezuela oil fears

By Benedict Mander in Caracas
Published: May 10 2009 12:41 Last updated: May 10 2009 18:27
Financial Times

A fresh round of expropriations in Venezuela has raised fears that the Opec producer’s already declining oil output could sink to its lowest level in the past 20 years.

Troops were mobilised over the weekend to assist Venezuela’s state-owned oil company, PDVSA, in seizing the assets of some 60 oil service companies, after a law was approved last week that paves the way for the state to take increasing control over its all-important oil industry.

“To God what is God’s, and to Caesar what is Caesar’s,” said Venezuela’s President Hugo Chávez, as he presided over the expropriation of at least a dozen rigs, more than 30 oil terminals and some 300 boats.

“Today we also say: to the people what is the people’s,” the socialist leader said to roars of approval from red-clad supporters on the shores of Lake Maracaibo, the heartland of the nation’s oil production.

This move forms part of a broader assault against the private sector, which Mr Chávez has increasingly blamed as Venezuela slides into recession. Simultaneously he is engaging in what opposition leaders say is a campaign of persecution of his political foes.

Manuel Rosales, a former presidential candidate, has been granted asylum in Peru to escape arrest over corruption charges, while congress has removed almost all the spending powers of Antonio Ledezma, the anti-Chávez mayor of Caracas. Other opponents have been jailed or gone into hiding.

PDVSA, which is suffering from a sharp fall in export income, made the surprise move against the oil service companies in response to their threat that they would suspend operations until it paid a backlog of invoices. Some, including Helmerich & Payne and Ensco International, abandoned rigs this year.

PDVSA, which is under pressure to cut expenses by 60 per cent because of tumbling revenues, is estimated to owe as much as $12bn (€8.9bn, £7.9bn) to contractors since suspending payments to them last August, shortly after oil prices began their precipitous decline.

It has demanded that companies accept a 40 per cent cut in their bills, arguing that the decline in oil prices means they are charging too much.

The new law will also enable PDVSA to pay debts with bonds rather than cash, and compensate assets at book value.

The move is the latest sign of the deepening cashflow crisis that has bedeviled the state oil company for at least two years as it has become overburdened with responsibilities far removed from its core business – in particular funding and running the massive social programmes that have become the bedrock of Mr Chávez’s support.

But analysts say that by shifting its problems onto its suppliers, PDVSA is storing up even bigger problems for the future. Not only does it lack the ability to operate as efficiently as the service providers, but it sends a grim signal to companies considering investing in Venezuela. Consequently, future oil production is under threat.

Perhaps most worrying is the impact this could have on foreign companies’ interest in a major auction currently underway to develop the Carabobo block in the oil-rich Orinoco Belt, which is the first oil investment opportunity in Venezuela in the last decade, and represents the oil dependent country’s biggest hope for reviving sagging production. According to the IEA, production fell to 2.36m bpd in 2008, compared to 3.18m bpd in 1997, although PDVSA claims it actually increased to 3.27m bpd in 2008.

Some 19 companies – including BP, Chevron, Shell, StatoilHydro, and Total – have expressed interest in bidding for the Carabobo projects that could collectively produce over 800,000 bpd, and require investments of $25-30bn.

But adding to worries about the lack of legal security in Venezuela, intensified by recent developments, international oil companies are also concerned by prohibitively high start-up and financing costs as well as tight profit margins due to fiscal terms that were drawn up before oil prices began their precipitous decline last year.

David Voght, a director at IPD Latin America, which advises several international oil companies operating in Venezuela, said: “Venezuela’s aggressive fiscal terms and the country’s persistent trend toward nationalisation of oil industry activities will make it more and more difficult to attract foreign investment and competitive bids from qualified operators.”

Taxes and royalties have been hiked four times since 2004, with an 85 per cent windfall tax introduced last year, while companies were ordered to give up operational control over four multibillion-dollar projects in the Orinoco two years ago, prompting Exxon Mobil and ConocoPhillips to exit the country and opt for international arbitration.

Although most companies are keen to have a stake in Venezuela, which now claims to have 172bn barrels of proven oil reserves making them the second largest in the world after Saudi Arabia, the government’s unpredictability and inflexibility are a serious deterrent.

“It’s a great paradox. There are companies that want to invest in Venezuela and to remain on a long-term basis, bringing capital, technology and know-how, but they may not do so because the government is refusing to recognize that the outlook for oil prices has changed,” said an industry source in Caracas, who requested anonymity. “They have to face up to reality.”






Chavez

OIL: Nationalization or worse

OBAMA


Dear Oil Company Executives:

I am quite sure I warned on this blog within the last couple years that unless you took action to reduce gasoline costs - the government would take steps to nationalize you.

You have now witnessed the semi-nationalizing of banks and financial institutions, the call to tax and or take-away the bonuses of AIG executives (by the president and his congress not to mention the American people - all unconstitutional after the fact) ... and now, new efforts by Obama to regulate and control industry and institutions.

Your industry is on the list. Your companies have simply not broken through into the public sphere as yet, but you will, when prices rise and your bonuses / profits are announced.

You should be very worried. VERY worried.

Now, here is a suggestion to mitigate the efforts to roll-over you by government:

- bonuses: 10% of what you have received. The rest remains in company accounts for reinvestment. You receive a modest percentage for the 'loan', and you will collect your 10% thereafter PLUS the savings/loan percentage. These 'loans' will not be repaid to you, but you will collect the interest on them for 7-8 years, after which, you will again be permitted to take the full amount or remain at the 10% level and collect the interest.

- the profits your companies make must not be publicized. How to accomplish this? Redefine when something becomes a profit. Like gross and net salaries. Reinvest, build new plants, invest in new energy sources, new searches for oil in shale ... much of which will be a loss, BUT allows a write-off. Write-off losses and deduct investments BEFORE you announce profits. That should solve that issue, especially if you are very careful about amounts invested.


Why am I wanting to help an industry I could care less about? because part of the answer to saving yourself is LOWER gas prices. If gas prices were $1.50 a gallon, the public would be less concerned about your multi-billion dollar profits. Further - we all know that none of the OPEC countries pump what they say they will (what their cartel authorizes) - therefore, there is 15-20% more oil on the market than they say. Our reservoirs are filled, your refineries are filled, ships sit filled off shore rather than to receive a lower price for the oil [This is interesting. When oil goes up in price, gas prices go up that very second, even though ships transport oil bought at lower prices. UNLESS the ships buy it at lower prices and sit off shore waiting for the price to go up. You are getting it both ways and this is in large part why we, the people, who will, eventually own your companies, why we hate you so much.] Give up some of this control.

Lower gas prices to between $1.60-$1.75.

Reinvest your profits.

Lower your bonuses.


Do the above 3 and it will ward off government take-over of your industry.

Fail to do so, and as powerful as your industry is, Obama and his nation will run over you like you're all speed bumps.

And no one, including me, will care much.

My greater issue is, I don't want everything nationalized because Obama, as a socialist, thinks they should be.







Obama

Obama: Tax you by the mile

Think California, Texas, Arizona, Nevada ... Tax us by the mile.

Now some will say - this will simply substitute for the gas tax, but au contraire mon ami - if it SIMPLY substituted for the gas tax, they wouldn't need this. Plus, when they implement this, they will also keep the gas tax (who can possibly say no to revenues).

The American consumer, taxed to death by Obama - but of course, they are not called taxes.

And why not wrap a Green fee in it, to help save the planet.

Lots of new fees you can implement, but none are taxes.

[Will Obama do it - NOT this year, but he has time. After all, HE WON, GET OVER IT.]




AP Interview: Transportation secretary says taxing how much we drive may replace gasoline tax
By JOAN LOWY
Associated Press Writer
7:17 AM EST, February 20, 2009

WASHINGTON (AP) — Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood says he wants to consider taxing motorists based on how many miles they drive rather than how much gasoline they burn — an idea that has angered drivers in some states where it has been proposed.

Gasoline taxes that for nearly half a century have paid for the federal share of highway and bridge construction can no longer be counted on to raise enough money to keep the nation's transportation system moving, LaHood said in an interview with The Associated Press.

"We should look at the vehicular miles program where people are actually clocked on the number of miles that they traveled," the former Illinois Republican lawmaker said.

[To read the rest of the interview, click on the title link]








Obama

OIL BELOW $36 a Barrel.

Oil is below $36 a barrel and gasoline is higher than it has been in several months.

Makes perfect sense.

Oil Companies:

A Warning. Obama is in a nationalization mood and that may include oil at some point.

Don't do it.

Oil stockpiles were reported as much higher than expected 1-2 months ago, now they are lower - which means they are probably where they should be ... YET PRICES JUMP.

I am all for hanging oil company executives, gas station owners, and anyone involved in oil analysis / selling.

I AM confident (certain) that with 24 hours, oil would be less than $30 a barrel.




Business and_Finance

Oil prices tumble below $36 on bulging inventories

By DIRK LAMMERS, The Associated Press


Oil prices plummeted below $36 Wednesday on more evidence that U.S. storage facilities are bulging with unused crude.

Light, sweet crude for March delivery fell $1.99 to settle at $35.94 a barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange.

Oil closed under $40 Monday for the first time in several weeks, and has closed lower every day since.

A weekly report from the Energy Information Administration showed that crude inventories jumped by 4.7 million barrels for the week ended Feb. 6. That easily surpassed the expectations of analysts surveyed by Platts, the energy information arm of McGraw-Hill Cos., who expected a boost of 3.4 million barrels.

Including last week's build up, crude inventories have increased by more than 30 million barrels in the past five weeks.

But gasoline futures soared on Nymex when the same report showed that U.S. inventories had declined by 2.6 million barrels, surprising trader who expected stockpiles to grow by 900,000 barrels.

????????????????


"Demand went positive for the first time in recent memory, over a year ago, so that's given us a little bit of support," said Phil Flynn, an analyst at Alaron Trading Corp.

Retail gasoline prices have been a sore point for motorists in recent weeks, as prices at the pump rise even with oil in the doldrums.

Prices at the pump rose again Wednesday, and the EIA report spelled out some of the reasons why.

Refiners took in 214,000 fewer barrels of crude last week and gasoline production fell, the EIA reported.

The companies that own refineries are seeing the same dour headlines about job losses, and have slashed production as they try do match supply with demand.

That means there is less gas on the market, and consumers are seeing that at the pump.

The national retail average price for a gallon of regular gas rose 1.2 cents to $1.94 a gallon overnight, according to auto club AAA, the Oil Price Information Service and Wright Express.

That is about 15 cents a gallon above what it was a month ago, but about $2.17 below last July when prices peaked at $4.11 per gallon.

"Weak product demand is forcing these refiners to curtail activities, cutting runs, and that backs crude up into terminals, pipelines and floating storage, etc.," said Jim Ritterbusch, president of energy consultancy Ritterbusch and Associates. "At the same time, it reduces gasoline production."

Many refiners shut down early this year for regular maintenance due to a growing consensus that millions of lost jobs will translate into less demand for gasoline.

A dismal forecast by the International Energy Agency on Wednesday further highlighted falling demand.

The Paris-based agency lowered its estimate for global oil demand in 2009 by 570,000 barrels to 84.7 million barrels per day because of the worsening economic downturn. The lowered forecast came after the International Monetary Fund predicted the world economy to grow by only 0.5 percent.

"Not only will the two-year contraction in oil demand be the first since the early 1980s, but 2009's decline will also be the largest since 1982," the IEA said.

The IEA forecast arrived one day after the U.S. Energy Information Administration predicted global oil consumption would decline by 1.2 million barrels a day this year.

Flynn said any optimism has to be tempered because of the continued build in crude inventories.
"People are going to realize that at some point, that oil is going to come to market," he said. "And when it does, it could dramatically pressure prices to the downside."

Addison Armstrong, director of market research at Tradition Energy, said the latest China customs data show net January crude imports that dropped to the lowest level in 13 months.

"The decreases are the result of the slowing economy, which has caused manufacturing plants to be closed and electricity generation to shrink," Armstrong wrote in a research note.

Oil had been trading near $40 for about two weeks, underpinned by OPEC production cuts. The Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, which accounts for about 40 percent of global crude supply, said earlier this week it has completed about 80 percent of 4.2 million barrels per day of output cuts announced since September.

In other Nymex trading, gasoline futures jumped 2.6 cents to settle at $1.2698 a gallon. Heating oil gained 1.5 cents to settle at $1.3164 a gallon, while natural gas for March delivery fell less than a penny to settle at $4.532 per 1,000 cubic feet.

In London, the March Brent contract fell 33 cents to settle at $44.28 on the ICE Futures exchange.








oil

Oil and Gas Prices

OIL is selling for below $40 a barrel. $39 +

And gas prices increase.


democrats - where are your hearings?

Boxer - where is the vitriol, the attack Panzer, where is your condemnation of big oil?

Come on - wake up - save us, from oil.






oil

Hey Hey BHO What Have You Done To Lower Gas Prices Today!

Hey Hey BHO What Have You Done To Lower Gas Prices Today!

Hey Hey BHO What Have You Done To Lower Gas Prices Today!

Hey Hey BHO What Have You Done To Lower Gas Prices Today!

Hey y'all ... I know for 8 years some people went hog wild accusing The Bushman of oil connections, profits for oil companies, and all that jazz, but I have a question for you.

When was oil $41 a barrel and what were the gas prices?

What is oil today?

What is the gas price?

Isn't it odd? Why no hearings? Why no big Senate hearings on the inflated prices?

Why no Dem banging their shoe screaming they will roll over oil?

Why?

What happened to change?

I have an idea.

You ran into a tax revenue you liked, so it didn't bother you they charge more ... because you get more revenue off them ... and you like that.

Who you don't like is the taxpayer ... what you do like are taxes.

Pretty obvious, I think.




pre

Oil and Gas Prices

I admit, some things, some ideas, some 'things' are just beyond my ability to understand.

Gas use down.
US oil supplies higher than at any time, ever.
World oil use, down.
Oil cost per barrel, down.

Gas prices - UP

I understand there are complicated naswers that include refineries and shipping and ... I don't care. Oil is cheaper than it has been in 15 years and our gas prices should be at the same level or very close. I am figuring, somewhere around 90 cents, even $1 would be fine. I would even accept $1.25. What the oil companies have done, if it is not intentional, was brilliant.

Force us to tolerate, accept and psychologically embrace the $4.50 per gallon, then lower it, but never go as low - thereby keeping profits higher and adding to government coffers while still much lower than the $4.50.

Hang them all until the prices fall.





Gasoline price plunge pushes consumer prices down

Jan 16 12:08 PM US/EasternBy MARTIN CRUTSINGERAP Economics Writer


WASHINGTON (AP) - A record plunge in gasoline prices pushed overall consumer prices down for the third straight month in December, closing out a year in which inflation rose at the slowest rate in more than a half-century.


Concerns remain low about possible deflation, but represent a marked change from just six months ago when soaring energy prices threatened to trigger a widening inflation problem that many analysts believed the Federal Reserve would have to fight by raising interest rates.


The Labor Department said Friday that consumer prices dropped 0.7 percent in December, slightly smaller than the 0.9 percent drop economists expected.


For the year, consumer prices edged up by just 0.1 percent, down from 4.1 percent in 2007 and the smallest annual change since consumer prices actually fell by 0.7 percent in 1954. The big yearly improvement occurred because of the sizable declines in energy prices in recent months.


Excluding volatile food and energy prices, so-called core inflation was unchanged in December. For the year, it rose a moderate 1.8 percent, compared with a 2.4 percent increase for all of 2007.


Price pressures have eased as the recession intensified. Further evidence of the slowdown came Friday in a separate report from the Federal Reserve showing that production at the nation's factories, mines and utilities plunged 2 percent in December, capping the worst year for manufacturers since 2001. Last month's drop, double the amount analysts expected, came after a 1.3 percent decline in November, which was even sharper than initially reported.


For all of last year, industrial production declined 1.8 percent, a sharp reversal from the 1.7 percent increase logged in 2007. It marked the worst showing since a 3.4 percent decline in 2001, when the country last suffered through a recession.


For December, gasoline prices fell by 17.2 percent, the largest monthly decline on records that go back 71 years.


Overall energy prices also dropped by record 8.3 percent as home heating oil and natural gas showed declines.


For 2008, energy prices fell 21.3 percent, with gas costs tumbling by 43.1 percent. Food costs were unchanged in December, and rose 5.8 percent for all of last year.


But some large foodmakers have been raising their prices to offset input costs that reached records highs last summer, and it's not clear how much, if at all, those will drop as ingredient costs moderate.


Kellogg Co., the world's leading maker of breakfast cereals, has been increasing the price of its products, like Frosted Flakes, and competitors with less market share have followed suit, UBS analyst David Palmer. The "substantial pricing action" Kellogg took gives it wiggle room to promote, and play with pricing, as input costs come down, he wrote in a note to clients Friday.


Food companies that have raised prices are better positioned this year because if they have to lower them to match price drops by private label competitors trying to entice shoppers to switch to lower-cost brands, it won't hurt their profit margins as much, analysts said.


Kellogg's most recent pricing action was announced in the fall. Starting next week, there will be low-to-mid single digit percentage price increases on Pop-Tarts and the bulk of the Battle Creek, Mich.-based company's cereal brands, but not All-Bran or Special K.


The sizable slowdown in overall inflation last year gave consumers more spending power. Average weekly earnings, after adjusting for inflation, rose 2.9 percent last year, a big improvement from 2007 when average weekly earnings fell 1 percent, the government's CPI report showed on Friday.


However, the typical household may not feel those benefits as they watch the value of their homes and stock holdings plunge, and see job layoffs soar.


The big declines in overall prices in recent months came after soaring energy and food prices in early 2008. But the worst financial crisis since the 1930s sent the economy into a tailspin in the fall. The Fed is now focused on trying to ensure the financial turmoil does not push the country into a severe and prolonged recession.













gasoline

OIL: Less than $40 a barrel and we are paying more.

DEMOCRATS. Senators, Congressman??

OIL is at $40 or less per barrel and we are paying 30-45 cents MORE per gallon than we were in December.

Gas has risen from a low of $1.50 to $1.95

WHY?

Our stockpiles are at ALL TIME HIGHS

Gasoline usage is at a 30 year low.

Oil prices are low.

A ship was just released with 100 million worth of oil to be dumped on the market.

There is MORE than enough OIL ... so why?

Another way: Oil was $148 = $4.50 gallon
Oil = $40 should be $1.25 gallon

I would accept $1.50 a gallon and be satisfied.


Democrats, you complain a lot about a lot of really silly things ... this one is serious and this one should be pushed EVERY chance you get.

Be the people's spokesman on oil/gas and you will be re-elected EVERY time you run.

We need someone to represent us.

They shut a refinery because prices are too low? FORCE THEM to open it.

They shut a refinery to clean it - SO OPEN ANOTHER ONE.

No need to build more because the price has dropped - FORCE them to build 10 more. that way, any time they close 2-3 for cleaning, we will always have 7 more than we need, and should 1-2 get old and need repair, we will be ahead of where we are currently by at least 5.

Do something, because oil will not stay low and then it goes up, not from the low but from this high. Do something now.









oil

All of these Things

What do these things have in common: All of these things are similar.


AAA reports Americans driving less than in the last 37 years
Federal Highway Administration - Americans drove less than in recorded history

USAir reports 2008 will be a much lower than expected year for profits, and they will cut flight routes and another story about capacity and flights

Airport official details cutbacks

Alcoa To Lay Off 15,200, Reduce Operations

Toyota closes factories



**********************

Answer:
WITHOUT ANYONE telling us we have cut use of oil/petroleum for air travel, less carbon/global warming

WITHOUT ANYONE telling us we have cut use of oil/petroleum for auto travel, less carbon/global warming

WITHOUT ANYONE telling us we have cut use of resources oil/petroleum and aluminum - less carbon/global warming

WITHOUT ANYONE telling us we have cut purchasing vehicles and are sticking with what we have - less tires used, less petroleum used, less carbon/global warming


ALL THAT without anyone telling us or taxing us!!

Congress is considering TAXING you based upon the miles you drive (WHY? They need money, but the less we drive, the less money is available, the higher the taxes to compensate for the decreased driving!!!





idiots

Gasoline: Taxes, Hybrids, and Running on Empty

Brilliant.

I don't know if I should laugh or cry.

Save the planet and tax ourselves into poverty.





Panel wants fuel taxes hiked to fund highways

Jan 2, 2009
By JOAN LOWY
Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) - A 50 percent increase in gasoline and diesel fuel taxes is being urged by a federal commission to finance highway construction and repair until the government devises another way for motorists to pay for using public roads.

The National Commission on Surface Transportation Infrastructure Financing, a 15-member panel created by Congress, is the second group in a year to call for higher fuel taxes.

With motorists driving less and buying less fuel, the current 18.4 cents a gallon gas tax and 24.4 cents a gallon diesel tax fail to raise enough to keep pace with the cost of road, bridge and transit programs.

In a report expected in late January, members of the infrastructure financing commission say they will urge Congress to raise the gas tax by 10 cents a gallon and the diesel fuel tax by 12 to 15 cents a gallon. At the same time, the commission will recommend tying the fuel tax rates to inflation.

The commission will also recommend that states raise their fuel taxes and make greater use of toll roads and fees for rush-hour driving.

A tax increase on this order would be politically treacherous for Democratic leaders in Congress—a gas tax hike was one of the reasons they lost control of the House and Senate in the 1994 elections. President-elect Barack Obama has expressed concern about raising gas taxes in the current economic climate. But commission members said the government must find the money somewhere.

"I'm not excited about a gas tax increase, but the reality is our current gas tax doesn't pay for upkeep of the system we have now," said Adrian Moore, vice president of the Reason Foundation, a libertarian think tank in Los Angeles, and a member of the highway revenue commission. "We can either let the roads go to hell or we can pay more."

The dilemma for Congress is that highway and transit programs are dependent for revenue on fuel taxes that are not sustainable. Many Americans are driving less and switching to more fuel-efficient cars and trucks, and a shift to new fuels and technologies like plug-in hybrid electric cars will further erode gasoline sales.

According to a draft of the financing commission's recommendations, the nation needs to move to a new system that taxes motorists according to how much they use roads.

"Most if not all of the commissioners have a strong belief and commitment that we need a fundamental transformation of the current system," said commission chairman Robert Atkinson, president of the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, a technology policy think tank in Washington.

A study by the Transportation Research Board of the National Academies estimated that the annual gap between revenues and the investment needed to improve highway and transit systems was about $105 billion in 2007, and will increase to $134 billion in 2017 under current trends.

Projected shortfalls in revenue led the National Surface Transportation Policy and Revenue Study Commission, in a report issued in January 2008, to call for an increase of as much as 40 cents a gallon in the gas tax, phased in over five years.

Charles Whittington, chairman of the American Trucking Associations, which supports a fuel tax increase as long as the money goes to highway projects, said Congress may decide to disguise a fuel tax hike as a surcharge to combat climate change.

Transportation is responsible for about a third of all U.S. carbon emissions created by burning fossil fuels. Traffic congestion wastes an estimated 2.9 billion gallons of fuel a year. Less congestion would reduce greenhouse gases and dependence on foreign oil.

"Instead of calling it a gas tax, call it a carbon tax," Whittington said. "As long as we label it as something else we may have the momentum and acceptance to move forward."

[Or we could be Al Gore and 'artificially raise gas prices to $5 a gallon' - I would assume he is wanting to model this idea after the Euros who all pay outrageous costs for a litre or gallon, and then some Americans compare our prices and tell us how low our prices are. Silly people - the Euros artificially inflate their prices and use the bulk to finance their social programs (which by the way are not being financed like they used to be, but the prices are still all artificially high).]

Bottlenecks around the nation cost the trucking industry about 243 million lost truck hours and about $7.8 billion per year, according to the commission.

The financing commission thinks the long-term solution is a mileage-based revenue system. While details have not been worked out, such a system would mean equipping every car and truck with a device that uses global positioning satellites and transponders to record how many miles the vehicle has been driven, the type of roads and time of day. Creation and installation of such a system would take about 10 years.

Moore said commission members were initially concerned that using technology to track driving might violate drivers' privacy, but they've been assured that such a system could be designed to prevent vehicles from being "tracked in some big brotherish way."





[This does not work with this article, but I need to stick this some place - 17% of all domestic oil production comes from Prudhoe Bay]








hybrids

OPEC, OIL, and Gas prices

Gasoline, Friday 11/21: $1.98 gallon. I read a headline today: falling prices, new fears - deflation.

Good lord - rising prices, the economy will stop, the poor will be unable to fill their gas tanks. Prices are dropping to where they were two years ago (which was STILL HIGH) and now it is - another fear.

Here is a suggestion - prices drop to there they were 3 years ago, gas prices drop to where they were 5 years ago. And the economy will pick up. We can afford the food, clothing, and products. We can fill our gas tanks and get to work.

The criticism of falling prices or fears underlie a macro view that prices shouldn't drop but maybe pennies - that we must endure high prices and that is simply not true.

We can go back to prices and costs nine years ago - it was a good time, we were told during the 2008 campaign by every Democrat ... so, lets go back to those prices and let OPEC drown. Ohhhh ... unless it is more complicated than the democrats proffered during the campaign. But, if it is more complicated, they would surely have told us, because they tell the truth. The media would have told us the truth - for that is what the media does - truth to power. So it cannot be more complicated.

Let the prices drop. It will be a good thing.


(it has fallen more than this since the 14th)



Crude falling despite news of another OPEC meeting

November 14, 2008


By MARK WILLIAMS, AP Energy Writer Mark Williams, Ap Energy Writer 11 mins ago
COLUMBUS, Ohio – Crude markets ignored word of another emergency meeting later this month by OPEC to address falling crude prices, focusing instead Friday on the largest ever October plunge for retail sales and a sharp drop in business inventories.

Almost every economic report suggests a dramatic pullback in spending on energy, sending crude down another 3 percent Friday.

Light, sweet crude for December delivery fell $1.74 to $56.50 a barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange.

The Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries held an emergency meeting only three weeks ago and slashed production quotas by 1.5 million barrels a day.

Bench mark crude prices have dipped another 8 percent since then, suggesting that demand for energy has fallen so fast amid a global slowdown that OPEC, for the moment, has lost much of its ability to control the price of oil through production cuts.

Instead, crude was taking its cue from more dour economic news.

The Commerce Department said Friday that retail sales fell by 2.8 percent last month, surpassing the old mark of a 2.65 percent drop in November 2001 in the wake of the terrorist attacks that year.

The decline in sales was led by a huge drop in auto purchases, but sales of all types of products from furniture to clothing fell as consumers retrenched.

The Commerce Department also said business inventories dropped by 0.2 percent in September. It was the first decline since March 2007 and the biggest drop in more than three years, since inventories fell by 0.3 percent in July 2005.

OPEC is trying to take oil off the market to keep pace with deteriorating demand.
An OPEC official said the 13-member states would meet in Cairo Nov. 29 on the sidelines of a previously planned meeting for Arab members of the group.

The official asked not to be named because the Vienna-based organization is not issuing a formal statement.

The hastily arranged meeting comes just weeks ahead of a previously set Dec. 17 gathering in Oran, Algeria.

The cuts from three weeks ago show that there simply is not enough demand to turn prices around, said Jim Ritterbusch, president of energy consultants Ritterbusch and Associates.

"During periods when demand is exceptionally weak as it now, they tend to lose pricing power," he said of OPEC.

But OPEC has to do something, he said. Maintaining production levels would make oil consuming countries happy, but probably drag prices down another $5 or $10 a barrel, he said. OPEC has trouble meeting the production cuts it sets anyway.

Oil prices have fallen about 60 percent during the last four months after reaching $147.27 in July.

OPEC, which produces about 40 percent of world supplies, has said it may cut production by the end of this month if prices continue to fall.

Before the 1.5 million barrel cut, OPEC said it was taking 520,000 barrels out of daily production. That too was brushed off by the market.

Meanwhile, the government said Friday that natural gas stockpile levels in the U.S. rose more than expected last week, but are 2 percent below the year-ago average.

The Energy Department's Energy Information Administration said in its weekly report that natural gas inventories held in underground storage in the lower 48 states rose by 62 billion cubic feet to about 3.47 trillion cubic feet for the week ended Nov. 7.

Analysts had expected a boost of between 41 billion to 46 billion cubic feet, according to a survey by Platts, the energy information arm of McGraw-Hill Cos.

The news sent natural gas for December delivery down 20 cents to $6.115 per 1,000 cubic feet on the New York Mercantile Exchange on Friday.

The national average price for regular gasoline fell again overnight, down 2.6 cents to $2.152 a gallon, according to according to auto club AAA, the Oil Price Information Service and Wright Express. That is nearly $1 a gallon below what it was a month ago.

In other Nymex trading, heating oil futures fell 3.67 cents to $1.838 a gallon, while gasoline prices dropped 6.8 cents to $1.23 a gallon.


oil