How to Raise Fuel Prices

| May 21, 2008

I stumbled across this at BitsBlog. I don’t see any step that was missed…

Create shortages in the oil markets by ensuring domestic oil supplies can never be used. This will force us to get oil from the least stable spots in the world, thus forcing not only higher prices, but forcing us to fund people intent on destroying us.

Regulate domestic suppliers out of business with NIMBY, and enviro-whackjob policy, and regulations and of course, the great leveler, taxes.

Make sure that no new refineries are built over a period 30 years, to meet the need.

Mandate that everyone buys only governmentally mandated formulations of gasoline, thus creating shortages of the ingredients.

More at the BitsBlog

Category: Economy, Foreign Policy, Politics, Society

15 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
trackback

[…] Welcome to the crew from “This Ain’t Hell” […]

Frankly Opinionated

You hit it on the head but you left out the part where we are supposed to blame George Bush for Bill Clinton closing ANWR in the 90’s, back when they said, “Drilling domestic oil won’t help for 10 years.” That was 12 years ago. Don’t the moonbats realize that the “Owners” of the oil companies are the shareholder, those retirement funds that the members want to see get all that they can. There is no “Mr. Mobil”, No “Mr. Exxon”, sitting in some mansion on the hill counting his billions. Even though we still have the least expensive retail price on gas and diesel of the developed countries, it sucks that we are financing the jihad against us. It is long past time for American Sheeple to wake up and smell the coffee.
Good post.
nuf sed

Peter

Domestic supplies? Are there any, that are worth drilling for?

Rooney

If you take the total cost of the war up to now and divide it buy Iraq’s total oil production (at full capacity) since the invasion you will get a price of over $200 per barrel.

Or, if you take the estimated total cost of the war and divide it by Iraq’s total proven reserves you get a price of $18 per barrel. Figure in extraction costs and other associated expenses and you get $23 per barrel. In March of 2003 before the invasion the price of oil was around $35 per barrel.

We could have bought almost the entire proven reserves of Iraq for the price of what this war will cost. Makes you think…

Jonn wrote: Makes who think? It hasn’t made you think. If the war was solely about oil, you might make sense…but it wasn’t. Only crackpots and lunatics think there was a conspiracy to take Iraq for it’s oil. That’s the second time you’ve posted that stupid message on this forum.

Rooney

Careful Jonn- I never said the war was solely about oil. Just crunching some numbers, that’s all.

509th Bob

Off Topic, but…

Does anyone know what type of Air Force VIP transport Pelosi is flying these days? I’ve been looking, and the topic has gone completely cold since Feb. 2007. The Gulfstream C-21 could reach San Fran easily, but it was “too small” for Pelosi. So, is she using the C-40 (Boeing 737) or the C-32 (Boeing 757)? She clearly wanted the C-32, as befitting her majestic role in government.

Does anybody know the answer?

509th Bob

I’ve done more checking. No definitive answer, but it looks like she was given an all-white C-40, the Boeing 737. The C-20 was just too small (10 to 12 passengers) for her cronies to all fit in. Also, no bed on the C-20.

Rurik

Two othre factors have been omitted. We were eager to see backwards countries like China, Russia, and India move into the modern world. Both China and India have ove a billion souls each, every one of them loging to drive their own car. and after 18 years of economic freedom, Russian cities all have traffic problems of New york and Washington dimension. I hear the situation is similar in China and India. And that means a lot of ectra market competition for whatever petrol is produced. and as mroe countries move up from the Turd World, that situation is not going to get better.

Then there was scant mention of commodities speculation and market manipulation – not by oil companies or producers, but by speculators such as the Emperor Soros. We do not know what role he might be playing in this, but I would bet it is neither minor, or benign. He does have a history of fiddling with such situations.

Jetty

Good topic. I believe that the biggest portion of our Domestic problems can be laid squarely at the feet of the Enviromental-Wackos, or, more precisely, at the feet of the Congressional Wackos who have seized the issue on their behest to further their own Tax and Regulate Agendas. That should be our primary target, but, as Rurik suggests, there is another important aspect to the whole equation. Increasing demand from the, uh, emerging…Turd…World Countries. (I’m sorry, that just paints such an appropriate mental picture..)

China and India have been paying quite generous Fuel Subsidies in their…emerging.. Countries in the hopes of bettering their Economies and keeping their Rabble Un-Roused. I’m no Economist, but it seems pretty obvious that such Policies can only place further monetary strain on a World Supply, as it relates to our Pump Price, that is already in a tenuous position as a result of the Restrictionists and the Profiteers.

And, Peter, I would add to Don Carl’s response that, with every increase in the “Stabilized” Price of Crude, that supply of “Worth Drilling for Domestic Supplies” increases dramatically.

Skye

Domestic supplies? Are there any, that are worth drilling for?

No drilling needed and a proven resource (Ask France) would be:

Nuclear Power – Clean, robust, and environmentally friendly.
DON CARL Added:
Kinda hard to fit in a car though…

Skye

Poorly crunching the numbers as well.

I never said the war was solely about oil. Just crunching some numbers, that’s all.

Jetty

Great point(s) Skye. Serious question, are you proposing Nuclear Fueled Cars, Trains, Trucks, etc, as well as the obvious Electrical Generating Capacity? (Why not? The Nautilus was probably Science Fiction in 1944.) Using the Electricty generated by Nuclear to power “Hybrid” Electrical Vehicles? I could easily be convinced to sign on to either concept, or both. I’ve always hated “Big” Buggy Whip.

Still, there are enormous amounts of Fossil Fuels out there, Domestically, which can also be obtained in an Environmentally Friendly way, despite the nay-sayers, and we have quite an Infrastucture already in place, World-Wide, to utilize it.

rochester_veteran

Last year I had an interesting conversation with a guy who retired from Ginna Nuclear Power Plant in Wayne County in Western New York State. We met at a HS wrestling tournament and as a life-long worker in the nuclear power industry, he assured me that nuclear power is clean power, abundant and safe. Nuclear power would be able to supply municipalities, businesses and our homes with enough electricity to power our needs and it’s much more cleaner than coal powered plants. Our own oil reserves could then be used for gas for our cars rather than being dependent upon Middle-Eastern oil. We do need more oil refineries State-side.

Jetty

I’m sorry Rochester_veteran, but I disagree with your conclusions, to a certain extent. I DO agree with you, and Skye, that Nuclear offers a cleaner, safer source of Electricity Production than say, Coal, and we should have been pursuing making Nuclear our Primary resource for the generation of Electricity vigorously for the last 30 Years or so. However, on 16 March, 1979, a Movie called “The China Syndrome”, starring our own Poster Girl of Patriotism, Jane Fonda, was released, and within two weeks, we all were thanking our lucky stars that our newly Elected, Nuclear Physicist, Ex Navy Captain and Liberal Messiah President, Jimmy Carter was at the helm to don a hard hat and personally inspect the horrific, World Threatening Tragedy that had occurred at a place called Three Mile Island. Never mind that the true Environmental Impact was minimal, unlike some of those resulting from later accidents in “Turd World” (I love the analogy Rurik) Countries(can you say, Chernobyl?) Our Safe-Guards worked, and, there were actually even more stringent Safe-Guards put in place as a result of the Accident, the door was closed on realistic development of Nuclear Energy in our Country, and remains closed to this day. Here is the Breakdown of our current sources of Electrical Energy Production from EIA Government Sources: “The three primary energy sources for generating electric power in the United States are coal, natural gas, and nuclear energy. These three sources consistently provided between 84.6 and 88.6 percent of total net generation during the period 1995 through 2006. Petroleum’s share of total net generation peaked at 3.6 percent in 1998. It has declined thereafter to a low of 1.6 percent in 2006. Conventional hydroelectric power’s contribution has declined from 9.3 percent in 1995 to 7.1 in 2006. Renewable energy sources, other than hydroelectric, contributed 2.4 percent of the Nation’s net electric generation in 2006. Since 1995, renewable generating capacity, on average, has accounted for 2.1 percent of net generation. In that time, 2001 was the only year in which net generation by renewable resources was less than 2.0 percent of total net… Read more »