Right Wingers eating crow on price of gasoline. $1.39 in Indiana.

[Toddsterpatriot]

13014296

He said his plan would make electricity more expensive. I think that's a bad idea. Bad then, bad now, bad in the future. Clear?

It's only a bad idea if you are correct that industrialized mankind has no effect on the earth's environment.

Spending a dollar today could save thousands of dollars in the future.

Did you believe the science that may have saved the earth's ozone layer?

. About 90 percent of CFCs currently in the atmosphere were emitted by industrialized countries in the Northern Hemisphere, including the United States and Europe. These countries banned CFCs by 1996, and the amount of chlorine in the atmosphere is falling now. But scientists estimate it will take another 50 years for chlorine levels to return to their natural levels.

It's only a bad idea if you are correct that industrialized mankind has no effect on the earth's environment.

Of course we have an effect. Look at Beijing. Or the old Soviet Union.

Spending a dollar today could save thousands of dollars in the future.

Or it could save millions, or billions.
If you're gonna pull numbers out of your ass, go big. LOL!

Did you believe the science that may have saved the earth's ozone layer?

Do you believe the Space Shuttle Columbia was an acceptable casualty in the fight against CFCs?

 

[Oldstyle]

Right Wingers eating crow on price of gasoline. $1.39

I had a Snickers today when I bought a tank of gas.

Crow ain't my style.

When you were eating that Snickers bar and filling up with your cheap gas, Siete...did you remember to thank the conservatives who made it possible? The ones that supported fracking over liberal objections?

this POTUS or any other POTUS doesn't control the price at the pump , so no.

I was referring to the conservative Governors who pushed fracking in their States against the wishes of all you liberals, Siete! When you fill up on your $1.39 gas...just remember who made that happen!

uh, no.

the variable in the price of a gallon of gas is more sophisticated than fracking.

shipment, marketing and several other factors dictate the price of a gallon of gas.

but all of you simpleminded old geezers and RW idiots believe what you want to, nothing can or will educate you beyond that.

G'day

Did you go to college, Siete? Supply and Demand dictate the price of oil. Right now the Saudis are flooding the market with cheap oil because they are trying to undercut the price of shale oil. They are doing so BECAUSE fracking developed so much oil.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

Toddster 13014296

He said his plan would make electricity more expensive. I think that's a bad idea. Bad then, bad now, bad in the future. Clear?

It was true but not necessarily bad then, but it is not true now to state that electricity prices must rise to get C&T regulations enacted. Knowing what we know today it is horrible judgment to state that you know that electricity prices will go up in the future due to a wise and balanced energy policy that we have had for nearly seven years now.

Your words are a sick joke just like the RW'ers of 2012 predicting $5 plus gasoline if Obama was reelected.

 

[Siete]

Right Wingers eating crow on price of gasoline. $1.39

I had a Snickers today when I bought a tank of gas.

Crow ain't my style.

When you were eating that Snickers bar and filling up with your cheap gas, Siete...did you remember to thank the conservatives who made it possible? The ones that supported fracking over liberal objections?

this POTUS or any other POTUS doesn't control the price at the pump , so no.

I was referring to the conservative Governors who pushed fracking in their States against the wishes of all you liberals, Siete! When you fill up on your $1.39 gas...just remember who made that happen!

uh, no.

the variable in the price of a gallon of gas is more sophisticated than fracking.

shipment, marketing and several other factors dictate the price of a gallon of gas.

but all of you simpleminded old geezers and RW idiots believe what you want to, nothing can or will educate you beyond that.

G'day

Did you go to college, Siete? Supply and Demand dictate the price of oil. Right now the Saudis are flooding the market with cheap oil because they are trying to undercut the price of shale oil. They are doing so BECAUSE fracking developed so much oil.

the price of GLOBAL oil is a big factor, never said it wasn't, and I'm not discounting demand either ... gasoline is taxed ... different states, different tax, different price .. does a president set state tax ?

nope.

sure I went to college, apparently you didn't

 

[Oldstyle]

Toddster 13014296

He said his plan would make electricity more expensive. I think that's a bad idea. Bad then, bad now, bad in the future. Clear?

It was true but not necessarily bad then, but it is not true now to state that electricity prices must rise to get C&T regulations enacted. Knowing what we know today it is horrible judgment to state that you know that electricity prices will go up in the future.

Your words are a sick joke just like the RW'ers of 2012 predicting $5 plus gasoline if Obama was reelected.

Did that statement make sense when it was rattling around in your brain, TotallyFooledbyObama?

 

[Oldstyle]

When you were eating that Snickers bar and filling up with your cheap gas, Siete...did you remember to thank the conservatives who made it possible? The ones that supported fracking over liberal objections?

this POTUS or any other POTUS doesn't control the price at the pump , so no.

I was referring to the conservative Governors who pushed fracking in their States against the wishes of all you liberals, Siete! When you fill up on your $1.39 gas...just remember who made that happen!

uh, no.

the variable in the price of a gallon of gas is more sophisticated than fracking.

shipment, marketing and several other factors dictate the price of a gallon of gas.

but all of you simpleminded old geezers and RW idiots believe what you want to, nothing can or will educate you beyond that.

G'day

Did you go to college, Siete? Supply and Demand dictate the price of oil. Right now the Saudis are flooding the market with cheap oil because they are trying to undercut the price of shale oil. They are doing so BECAUSE fracking developed so much oil.

the price of GLOBAL oil is a big factor, never said it wasn't, and I'm not discounting demand either ... gasoline is taxed ... different states, different tax, different price .. does a president set state tax ?

nope.

sure I went to college, apparently you didn't

Undergraduate degree in History from UMass...MBA from Northeastern. Unlike you, Siete...I actually stayed awake during my economics classes!

 

[Oldstyle]

When you were eating that Snickers bar and filling up with your cheap gas, Siete...did you remember to thank the conservatives who made it possible? The ones that supported fracking over liberal objections?

this POTUS or any other POTUS doesn't control the price at the pump , so no.

I was referring to the conservative Governors who pushed fracking in their States against the wishes of all you liberals, Siete! When you fill up on your $1.39 gas...just remember who made that happen!

uh, no.

the variable in the price of a gallon of gas is more sophisticated than fracking.

shipment, marketing and several other factors dictate the price of a gallon of gas.

but all of you simpleminded old geezers and RW idiots believe what you want to, nothing can or will educate you beyond that.

G'day

Did you go to college, Siete? Supply and Demand dictate the price of oil. Right now the Saudis are flooding the market with cheap oil because they are trying to undercut the price of shale oil. They are doing so BECAUSE fracking developed so much oil.

the price of GLOBAL oil is a big factor, never said it wasn't, and I'm not discounting demand either ... gasoline is taxed ... different states, different tax, different price .. does a president set state tax ?

nope.

sure I went to college, apparently you didn't

And apparently you slept through Civics classes as well...Presidents don't set taxes...that's the job of Congress.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Toddster 13014296

He said his plan would make electricity more expensive. I think that's a bad idea. Bad then, bad now, bad in the future. Clear?

It was true but not necessarily bad then, but it is not true now to state that electricity prices must rise to get C&T regulations enacted. Knowing what we know today it is horrible judgment to state that you know that electricity prices will go up in the future due to a wise and balanced energy policy that we have had for nearly seven years now.

Your words are a sick joke just like the RW'ers of 2012 predicting $5 plus gasoline if Obama was reelected.

It was true but not necessarily bad then

Higher prices are good? Is that the liberal stance?

but it is not true now to state that electricity prices must rise to get C&T regulations enacted.

You can raise the price of CO2 emissions but that won't cause electricity prices to rise? Is that the liberal stance?

 

[Siete]

this POTUS or any other POTUS doesn't control the price at the pump , so no.

I was referring to the conservative Governors who pushed fracking in their States against the wishes of all you liberals, Siete! When you fill up on your $1.39 gas...just remember who made that happen!

uh, no.

the variable in the price of a gallon of gas is more sophisticated than fracking.

shipment, marketing and several other factors dictate the price of a gallon of gas.

but all of you simpleminded old geezers and RW idiots believe what you want to, nothing can or will educate you beyond that.

G'day

Did you go to college, Siete? Supply and Demand dictate the price of oil. Right now the Saudis are flooding the market with cheap oil because they are trying to undercut the price of shale oil. They are doing so BECAUSE fracking developed so much oil.

the price of GLOBAL oil is a big factor, never said it wasn't, and I'm not discounting demand either ... gasoline is taxed ... different states, different tax, different price .. does a president set state tax ?

nope.

sure I went to college, apparently you didn't

And apparently you slept through Civics classes as well...Presidents don't set taxes...that's the job of Congress.

that's WHAT I said (post# 790 )... apparently you skipped comprehension class.

duuuurrrrrrr

 

[whutTHEYsay]

13015102 Oldstyle 13015102

Higher prices are good? Is that the liberal stance?

No. This is my stance. When gas and electricity prices go up for any reason gradually *higher energy prices would encourage energy efficiency across the full array of American businesses and citizens. It would provide industries of all kinds with a predictable outlook for energy costs, allowing them to confidently invest in growth.*

And *allowing the price for gas and oil to rise could be the centerpiece of “game-changing incentives” that would alter consumer behavior when it came to buying cars and using electricity. That could help the country wean itself off an overreliance on foreign oil. To become energy secure, we may need to turn to those game-changing incentives that will lead individuals and businesses of all kinds to invest in efficiency and to reduce their use of oil and energy.*

That could be good, right?

Being energy secure, right? Invest in efficiency and reduce U.S. demand for volatile foreign sources of oil. Right? Good? Not bad? Good?

http://mobile.nytimes.com/20w12/04/...bama-for-rising-gas-prices.html?referer=&_r=0

Wean ourselves off an overreliance on foreign oil. That would be good.


Just as the fact that $100 a barrel oil drove investment into the fracking boom we experienced since then. In that sense too - high prices were good - since we as Americans ultimately benefitted from it.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

13015102 Oldstyle 13015102

Higher prices are good? Is that the liberal stance?

No. This is my stance. When gas and electricity prices go up for any reason gradual *Higher energy prices would encourage energy efficiency across the full array of American businesses and citizens. It would provide industries of all kinds with a predictable outlook for energy costs, allowing them to confidently invest in growth.*




And *allowing the price for gas and oil to rise could be the centerpiece of “game-changing incentives” that would alter consumer behavior when it came to buying cars and using electricity. That could help the country wean itself off an overreliance on foreign oil. To become energy secure, we may need to turn to those game-changing incentives that will lead individuals and businesses of all kinds to invest in efficiency and to reduce their use of oil and energy.*

That could be good, right.

In short, make fuel more expensive for everybody which would kill any economy.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

I

In short, make fuel more expensive for everybody which would kill any economy.

So the man you probably voted for In 2012 intended to kill economy.

What, you didn't read his book?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Higher prices are good? Is that the liberal stance?

No. This is my stance. When gas and electricity prices go up for any reason gradually *higher energy prices would encourage energy efficiency across the full array of American businesses and citizens. It would provide industries of all kinds with a predictable outlook for energy costs, allowing them to confidently invest in growth.*

And *allowing the price for gas and oil to rise could be the centerpiece of “game-changing incentives” that would alter consumer behavior when it came to buying cars and using electricity. That could help the country wean itself off an overreliance on foreign oil. To become energy secure, we may need to turn to those game-changing incentives that will lead individuals and businesses of all kinds to invest in efficiency and to reduce their use of oil and energy.*

That could be good, right?

Being energy secure, right? Invest in efficiency and reduce U.S. demand for volatile foreign sources of oil. Right? Good? Not bad? Good?

http://mobile.nytimes.com/20w12/04/...bama-for-rising-gas-prices.html?referer=&_r=0

Wean ourselves off an overreliance on foreign oil. That would be good.


Just as the fact that $100 a barrel oil drove investment into the fracking boom we experienced since then. In that sense too - high prices was good - since we as Americans ultimately benefitted from it.

No. This is my stance. When gas and electricity prices go up for any reason gradually *higher energy prices would encourage energy efficiency across the full array of American businesses and citizens.

So the current, lower prices, are good or bad?

That could help the country wean itself off an overreliance on foreign oil.

Just like, "Drill baby drill!!!", but I remember libs mocking that idea recently.
Even though that ended up dropping the price and helped the country wean itself off an overreliance on foreign oil.

and reduce U.S. demand for volatile foreign sources of oil.

Is Canada a volatile foreign source of oil?

 

[whutTHEYsay]

Toddster 13016627

So the current, lower prices, are good or bad?

They are very good because they come with increased efficiency and more use of alternative sources and renewables. It's the best of both worlds (a) pay less for fuel and (b) use less fuel - let's say to drive the same distance, get goods delivered to the stores and keep your food cold for lower cost, and breathe in cleaner air the whole time much to your dismay that polluters are being regulated.

How do you make low oil prices last and stabilize for longer periods of time? It's not by ignorantly mouthing "Drill Baby Drill" and then sit on the glut of hastily extracted oil that the market does not need. Drilling by itself has its own built in market affecting limititations.

Increasing efficiency and finding cheaper and less polluting ways to power our machines and technology and lifestyle is not so limited.

Drill Baby Drill was ignorance personified as Sarah Palin. Where is that idiot now? I can't believe you used such blatant stupidity to try and make a point.

 

[Synthaholic]

LOL...so you "trust" Barry to do the right thing?

Of course I do! And not only the right thing, the smart thing.

 

[Synthaholic]

Kindly explain why letting China increase their pollution output for the next 15 years before capping it...when they are already the world's worst polluter...helps with the climate change issue?

I asked you for a link on that and you haven't bounced one out here yet.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

So the current, lower prices, are good or bad?

They are very good because they come with increased efficiency more use of alternative sources and renewables. It's the best of both worlds (a) pay less for fuel (b) and use less fuel let's say to drive the same distance, get goods delivered to the stores and keep you food cold for lower cost, and breathe in cleaner air the whole time much to your dismay that polluters are being regulated.

How do you make low oil prices last and stabilize for longer periods of time? It's not by ignorantly mouthing "Drill Baby Drill" and then sit on the glut of extracted oil that the market does not need. Drilling by itself has built in market limititations.

Increasing efficiency and finding cheaper and less polluting ways to power our machines and technology and lifestyle is not so limited.

Drill Baby Drill was ignorance personified as Sarah Palin. Where is that idiot now? I can't believe you used such blatant stupidity to try and make a point.

They are very good because they come with increased efficiency

How do you figure that?

more use of alternative sources and renewables.

Yeah, we've been wasting tens of billions on subsidies for those turkeys. Why is that good?

Drill Baby Drill was ignorance personified as Sarah Palin.

Yup, ignorance is why our oil production surpassed Saudi Arabia's.
Oh, wait, it was because of much more drilling. LOL!

I can't believe you used such blatant stupidity to try and make a point.

We're not talking about Obama's blatant stupidity.



What a bozo.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

"No, BP, the U. S. did NOT surpass Saudi Arabia in oil production"



Toddster 13017168

Yup, ignorance is why our oil production surpassed Saudi Arabia's.

No. I'm saying ignorance is believing we can achieve sustained energy independence and price stability by drilling oil alone? We gotta do "All of the Above" just as both Obama and Mitt Romney have said.

So you fell for the trick that puts US ahead of Saudi Arabia and Russia in crude oil production for 2014.

Here are the results for 2014 when natural gas plant liquids (which is not sellable as crude oil) is deducted from US production:

Russia at 10.1 mbpd and Saudi Arabia at 9.7 mbpd of crude oil. The United States at 8.7 mbpd remained in third place.

.
No, BP, the U. S. did NOT surpass Saudi Arabia in oil production

by Kurt Cobb, originally published by Resource Insights | JUN 14, 2015

Even the paper of record for the oil industry, Oil & Gas Journal, got it wrong. With the release of the latest BP Statistical Review of World Energy, media outlets appeared to be taking dictation rather than asking questions about which countries produced the most oil in 2014.

If they had asked questions, they would have ended up with a ho-hum headline announcing that last year Russia at 10.1 million barrels per day (mbpd) and Saudi Arabia at 9.7 mbpd were once again the number one and number two producers of crude oil including lease condensate (which is the definition of oil). The United States at 8.7 mbpd remained in third place.

The most important question they could have asked is this: How is BP defining oil? It turns out that oil according to the BP definition includes something called natural gas liquids which includes lease condensate--very light hydrocarbons that come from actual oil wells and are included in the oil refinery stream--and natural gas plant liquids which come from natural gas wells and include such things as ethane, propane, butane and pentanes. Only a small portion of natural gas plant liquids are suitable substitutes for oil.


Production of natural gas plant liquids in the United States has grown rapidly as a result of increasing exploitation of natural gas in deep shale deposits, so-called shale gas. These liquids are useful, but they are not oil and only displace oil in a minor way. Moreover, their energy content is around 65 percent that of crude oil and so counting barrels of natural gas plant liquids as equivalent to oil is doubly misleading.

The second question media outlets could have asked is whether natural gas plant liquids can be sold as oil on the world market. The answer is a resounding "no." In fact, major exchanges accept neither natural gas plant liquids nor lease condensates as satisfactory delivery for crude oil. And, if we subtract lease condensate from each country's total, U.S. production will actually look relatively lower. It turns out that U.S. wells now produce a higher proportion of condensate as a result of growth in oil extraction from shale deposits (which tend to be rich in these condensates).

All of this leads my friend and colleague, Texas oilman Jeffrey Brown, to point out the following: If what you're selling cannot be sold on the world market as crude oil, then it's not crude oil. The implications are fairly obvious: The world has substantially lower oil production than widely believed, and growth in world oil supplies has slowed considerably in the last several years. Using the BP definition of oil, world production in 2014 was 88.7 mbpd. Using the stricter definition of crude oil including lease condensate, the number was 77.8 mbpd. Big difference!

Third place is great. Just thought you need to become more educated on the topic.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

"No, BP, the U. S. did NOT surpass Saudi Arabia in oil production"



Toddster 13017168

Yup, ignorance is why our oil production surpassed Saudi Arabia's.

No. I'm saying ignorance is believing we can achieve sustained energy independence and price stability by drilling oil alone? We gotta do "All of the Above" just as both Obama and Mitt Romney have said.

So you fell for the trick that puts US ahead of Saudi Arabia and Russia in crude oil production for 2014.

Here are the results for 2014 when natural gas plant liquids (which is not sellable as crude oil) is deducted from US production:

Russia at 10.1 mbpd and Saudi Arabia at 9.7 mbpd of crude oil. The United States at 8.7 mbpd remained in third place.

.
No, BP, the U. S. did NOT surpass Saudi Arabia in oil production

by Kurt Cobb, originally published by Resource Insights | JUN 14, 2015

Even the paper of record for the oil industry, Oil & Gas Journal, got it wrong. With the release of the latest BP Statistical Review of World Energy, media outlets appeared to be taking dictation rather than asking questions about which countries produced the most oil in 2014.

If they had asked questions, they would have ended up with a ho-hum headline announcing that last year Russia at 10.1 million barrels per day (mbpd) and Saudi Arabia at 9.7 mbpd were once again the number one and number two producers of crude oil including lease condensate (which is the definition of oil). The United States at 8.7 mbpd remained in third place.

The most important question they could have asked is this: How is BP defining oil? It turns out that oil according to the BP definition includes something called natural gas liquids which includes lease condensate--very light hydrocarbons that come from actual oil wells and are included in the oil refinery stream--and natural gas plant liquids which come from natural gas wells and include such things as ethane, propane, butane and pentanes. Only a small portion of natural gas plant liquids are suitable substitutes for oil.


Production of natural gas plant liquids in the United States has grown rapidly as a result of increasing exploitation of natural gas in deep shale deposits, so-called shale gas. These liquids are useful, but they are not oil and only displace oil in a minor way. Moreover, their energy content is around 65 percent that of crude oil and so counting barrels of natural gas plant liquids as equivalent to oil is doubly misleading.

The second question media outlets could have asked is whether natural gas plant liquids can be sold as oil on the world market. The answer is a resounding "no." In fact, major exchanges accept neither natural gas plant liquids nor lease condensates as satisfactory delivery for crude oil. And, if we subtract lease condensate from each country's total, U.S. production will actually look relatively lower. It turns out that U.S. wells now produce a higher proportion of condensate as a result of growth in oil extraction from shale deposits (which tend to be rich in these condensates).

All of this leads my friend and colleague, Texas oilman Jeffrey Brown, to point out the following: If what you're selling cannot be sold on the world market as crude oil, then it's not crude oil. The implications are fairly obvious: The world has substantially lower oil production than widely believed, and growth in world oil supplies has slowed considerably in the last several years. Using the BP definition of oil, world production in 2014 was 88.7 mbpd. Using the stricter definition of crude oil including lease condensate, the number was 77.8 mbpd. Big difference!

Third place is great. Just thought you need to become more educated on the topic.

Total Petroleum and Other Liquids Production 2014

International Energy Statistics

You're right. Including other liquids, we produced 13.9 million barrels per day last year.

These liquids are useful, but they are not oil and only displace oil in a minor way. Moreover, their energy content is around 65 percent that of crude oil and so counting barrels of natural gas plant liquids as equivalent to oil is doubly misleading.

That's interesting!

If they had asked questions, they would have ended up with a ho-hum headline announcing that last year Russia at 10.1 million barrels per day (mbpd) and Saudi Arabia at 9.7 mbpd were once again the number one and number two producers of crude oil including lease condensate (which is the definition of oil). The United States at 8.7 mbpd remained in third place.

Hmmmmm.....8.7 million barrels per day. Plus 5.2 million barrels per day of these other liquids.
5.2 million times 65% = 3.4 million barrels. 12.1 million total.

Just thought you need to become more educated on the topic.

Thanks, you're always good for a chuckle.

When you get a chance, tell me again how more drilling didn't help make us less dependent on those unstable countries, like Canada. LOL!

 

[bripat9643]

We on the other hand will immediately decrease our CO2 emissions by 20%...driving up the cost of energy in America and making it that much harder for US businesses to compete with Chinese industries.

So you believe in the same RW forecasters that predicted in 2012 that Obama's reelection would directly drive the cost of gasoline way above $5.00 per gallon. Those predictions were based on nothing.

Now you are still singing the same old song.

Reducing carbon emissions will not drive the cost of energy up any more than Obama winning a second term would drive up gasoline prices back in 2012.

. The Clean Power Plan will ultimately save about $45 billion a year, the EPA says, by both shrinking Americans’ energy use and reducing health costs for asthma, lung cancer and other illnesses caused by air pollution. The EPA estimates the rule will also cut about $85 a year from the average American’s utility bill.

White House Plan Calls for Even Greater Greenhouse Gas Reductions

You are hell bent on eating crow on the electricity angle too.

Meanwhile you might live longer because reducing carbon emissions has made your envirionment more healthy although you act as if you'd rather be living in Beijing right now with a surgical mask on your face.

Stop whining and believing idiots who make rediculous predictions based on nothing but RW'er standard boilerplate BS.

What's happening is US natural gas is cheaper and cleaner than coal and the power plants have been switching.

And alternative energy and renewables are continually becoming lower cost- higher benefit and competitive with carbon based sources.

The air is already clean, you dumb ****. Can you name one person who have ever suffered from ill health in this country as a result of power plant emissions?