Americans still want cheap oil

[editec]

Cheaper energy would turn the economy around but that's not what the neo-socialists want. The left wing warmers thrive on hysteria and crisis and that's why democrats will not allow the US to be independent of foreign oil no matter how rich our own resources are. It's not like we are wishing for the moon. Oil prices doubled in the last couple of years under the Hussein regime.

Silly ass. We are pumping more oil now than we have in many years.

www.oilindependents.org » All-Star States in U.S. Oil Production Increases

U.S. crude oil production, after sinking to levels not seen since the mid-1940s, rose more than half a million barrels per day just between 2007 and 2011. That size of increase has not been witnessed in the U.S. for more than forty years. The source of that large gain certainly did not occur in the federal offshore, which, with 2011’s unusually sharp drop of nearly 240,000 barrels per day netted an increase of just under 30,000 barrels per day over the four-year period. By contrast, the remaining areas (onshore plus state waters) saw production rise from a 2007 low of 3.72 million barrels per day to 4.29 million barrels per day, a surge of some 570,000 barrels per day.

This increase does not even include the jump in the nation’s output of natural gas liquids (NGLs), which reached a record 2.18 million barrels per day in 2011 – an increase of 400,000 barrels per day since 2007. NGLs and crude oil increases together yield a gain of nearly 1 million barrels per day in just four years – an increase of nearly 15 percent. And these increased barrels mean increased jobs. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the number of Americans now employed in oil and gas development and support activities has grown by more than 100,000 in five years – from 344,000 jobs in mid-2007 to 454,100 in March 2012.

If oil prices rise in the next two years, it will be because the oil companies can get more money by exporting the oil than they can here in the states.

Gas, other fuels are top U.S. export ? USATODAY.com

NEW YORK (AP) – For the first time, the top export of the United States, the world's biggest gas guzzler, is — wait for it — fuel.

So, you want to blame the President for the rise in fuel prices. Shows what an ignorant jerk you truly are. If someone offshore will pay a dime more a gallon, the oil companies will ship the fuel, and tell you to go to hell.

This may appear off-topic, but I think it puts the subject in perspective...

There's never a peep out of anyone about the fact that we are paying record prices for groceries while agriculture exports tens of millions of metric tons of grains each year.

Start a thread about FOOD and prepare for heavy swells on that subject, too.

So why should energy companies be denied exporting their commodity?

Is someone "denying" them that right? I think what they're doing is pointing out that drilling here does nothing to decrease prices for US.

Certain refined products are being exported because demand here in the states has waned, or at least flattened out. Diesel, heating oil, bunker fuels... the heavier stuff. These fuels are in high demand overseas and command a premium.

Drop prices locally and watch the market take off again. Demand is flat because prices are high.

Natural gas is also in big demand overseas and sells at 5 times what the domestic market brings. So, LNG or liquefied natural gas is being considered for export.

5 times? I'd like to see those numbers.

These are hard dollars being brought back into our country. The jobs required to export this stuff are the kinds of jobs we need.

What makes you think the profits are coming BACK into this country?

Again, why is agriculture being waved on through while the hydrocarbon industries are given the big red STOP sign?

Probably because we can still afford to eat food, but the cost of energy has become so onerous?

 

[Mr. H.]

Thanks for all that.
I had you figured wrong.
You're only half stupid.

 

[editec]

Thanks for all that.
I had you figured wrong.
You're only half stupid.

Gee thanks Mr.H

As I am sure you've already intuited, my self image is entirely dependent on the kindness of strangers.

 

[Old Rocks]

Here is the problem. There are a billion automobiles in the world. At present trends, there will be a two billion in twenty years or less. Each of these represents demand on the oil worldwide. At some point, producers are going to start to reserve their production to their own population. And the price will go up in ratio to demand and the ROIE that the various ways of producing oil demand.

In other words, tar sands and other very expensive ways of recorvering oil are going to increase the price at the very time that the demand is also doing the same. Get the Picture?

 

[Mr. H.]

Producers of hydrocarbons have no mechanism for passing along increased costs to consumers.

 

[The Professor]

Want to see the math?

Okay

Exxons' Profits in 2012 = $15.9 Billion

$15,900,000,000 billion/365days = $435,616,438 PER DAY

$435,616,438/24 hours = $1,815,068 per hour

$1,815,068/3600 (seconds in an hour) = $504.18 per SECOND


Remember, now that is profit AFTER taxation.

And your point is, comrade?

Contrary to what a lot of people think, Exxon is not gouging the public.

It seems that many people do not know the difference between profit and profit margin. Profit margin, which is the true indicator of the success of a business to keep prices low, is defined as the percentage of income to sales. For example if Exxon sold just one gallon of gas for $3.00 and made a net profit of 30 cents, their net profit margin would be 10%. If they sold two gallons of gas, their profit margin would be the same since $.60 divided by $6.00 would be the same as $.30 divided by $3.00. In fact if Exxon sold a billion gallons of gasoline their profit margin would still be 10%. Exxon isn't making a lot of money because they are gouging the public. They are making a lot of money because they sell a lot of ******* gasoline. I used the figure 10% in the preceding example because that is roughly what the profit margin has been for big oil companies (for 2012, Exxon's was about 12%). Many businesses make more than that. One year when I compared Exxon's profits to other businesses, Exxon's was around 10% and Coke was making about 19%.

The government makes more money on each gallon than Exxon because the government taxes a specific amount per gallon. When gas was $3.00 a gallon, the government (at all levels) was getting around $.60 and $80. while Exxon was getting only $.30. Of course, if gas went down to $2.00 a gallon, the government would be making about 3 times more than Exxon.

The same people who do not know the difference between profit and profit margin apparently never heard of the mass production concept whereby per-unit costs are reduced in order to sell more product and increase total profit. I don't give a damn how much total profit a company makes since that does not affect me as a consumer; however I do care how much profit they make on the single transaction I am involved with. I would much rather buy a $4.00 burger from a restaurant chain who made $5 billion in net profit than purchasing the same sandwich for $6.00 from a local restaurant which made only $25,000 in net profit.

I will conclude by saying that McDonald’s made $5.5 billion net profit in 2012. They didn't make so much because they fleeced the public. They made so much money because they sold a hell of a lot of burgers and fries. Same with the oil companies.

 

[Politico]

I am one of them.