NationStates Jolt Archive

There are growing calls across the nation to open it now that Louisianna's refineries are closed. Half of the US's oil imports go through New Orleans, and the remaining refineries probably can't take it all. Gas prices will go through the roof, as they are starting to.
Yet opening the reserve is not just a mistake, but a bitch slap to the American people. For one, that reserve is there for a cataclysmic event, like a war, or a rerun of the Arab oil embargo. This event, while it'll result in higher prices in the short term, is not an emergency. New Orleans, unlike what was feared, was not destroyed, and the refineries only need to be repaired, and not rebuilt.
Which leads me to a second point, that opening that reserve is unfair to New Orleans. If oil is released from the Reserve, then prices will be depressed. So what is the incentive to repair the oil industry there? Because this is a supply shock, any company with a refinery in the Gulf is hurting, and they have real reason to rebuild those refineies and supporting infrastructure. If prices are depressed, do you think reconstruction will move as quickly there?


And while I have your attention, I better just say that the world better pitch in. No, really, they better for everyone's interest. Because, you see, this is the largest port in the US. The docks are damaged, and what's worse, silt may block the acsess channels. And in addition to managing a lot of vital imports, there is an extremely vital export from that port: grain. It is the largest grain port in the world, and if that port isn't up and running before long, there will be massive shortages. I would think it'd be a matter of time before foreign investors rush to finance the port's dreging and repair. Otherwise, there is a very real possibility that world food prices would soar.

http://www.fxnetworks.com/shows/originals/oilstorm/main.html

http://www.fxnetworks.com/shows/originals/oilstorm/main.html
Yeah, the reserve is meant for things that cataclysmic, not little things like this. Besides, the rigs themselves have physically survived, as have their priceless operators.

NO! The Oil Reserves must ONLY be used in a state of Nationa emergency, in which the Nation itself is threatened.

NO! The Oil Reserves must ONLY be used in a state of Nationa emergency, in which the Nation itself is threatened.
I guess it's too late to save the oil reserve. Bubba tapped into it for a far stupider reason.

I agree with you to the extent that I think that the strategic reserves shouldn't be opened. That oil is for an emergency, and should be kept for emergency. Sometimes bad things just happen for no reason. It'll cost us at the pump. I'm truly sorry, but life isn't fair sometimes and you just have to suck this one up.

I disagree to the extent that you argue that there wouldn't be an incentive to repair the damage. Sure there is... it's money. :) Whether oil is $40/barrel or $80/barrel, the owners of the refineries and drilling platforms are making $0/barrel when it's not being produced. Why would you want to sell 50K barrels when you could sell 80K barrels? There's no incentive for the oil producers who DON'T own the refineries and drilling platforms to get them fixed because they'll make more money as long as it's down, but obviously it's not up to them.

I agree with you to the extent that I think that the strategic reserves shouldn't be opened. That oil is for an emergency, and should be kept for emergency. Sometimes bad things just happen for no reason. It'll cost us at the pump. I'm truly sorry, but life isn't fair sometimes and you just have to suck this one up.

I disagree to the extent that you argue that there wouldn't be an incentive to repair the damage. Sure there is... it's money. :) Whether oil is $40/barrel or $80/barrel, the owners of the refineries and drilling platforms are making $0/barrel when it's not being produced. Why would you want to sell 50K barrels when you could sell 80K barrels? There's no incentive for the oil producers who DON'T own the refineries and drilling platforms to get them fixed because they'll make more money as long as it's down, but obviously it's not up to them.
However, I'd imagine that the owners of the refineries are the only ones repairing them. It'll be companies like Exxon Mobil and Kerr-McGee making the repairs. New Orleans is their lifeblood.

And while I have your attention, I better just say that the world better pitch in. No, really, they better for everyone's interest. Because, you see, this is the largest port in the US. The docks are damaged, and what's worse, silt may block the acsess channels. And in addition to managing a lot of vital imports, there is an extremely vital export from that port: grain. It is the largest grain port in the world, and if that port isn't up and running before long, there will be massive shortages. I would think it'd be a matter of time before foreign investors rush to finance the port's dreging and repair. Otherwise, there is a very real possibility that world food prices would soar.
Oh, but the US doesn't need the rest of the world.

Oh, but the US doesn't need the rest of the world.
On a political level, no. For private capital, yes. No economy can sustain itself these days. North Korea tries, and look at them.

Hmm. This seems like a good time to stop selling you Americans oil.

Now let me just say something here: I don't want the world to send the US care packages. That happened in Indonesia. Where's the money these days? It's not toward rebuilding, that's for sure. Money for a disaster is really only a stopgap, and something that an agency like FEMA and the Red Cross can easily handle. If you feel so inclined to give the Red Cross a check, please do so. They have other things they can use it for, anyhow. If a foreign government pledges aid, or volunteers inundate the Gulf, they are doing the equivilant of forcefeeding an obese glutton.
A far nobler form of money transfer is investing and loans. If you want to help out, buy shares of Kerr-Magee, or perhaps some munis from the Big Easy and Biloxi.

deny me this...its inevitable those reserves will be used in your life times

and what happens when you start to run out of oil in say...3 years?

Hmm. This seems like a good time to stop selling you Americans oil.
Okay. Then there'd be no more capital flowing overseas to oil producers. And especially in the Middle East, they will have even less capital to purchase less grain, be it American or otherwise. And don't forget, as more Americans won't be able to drive, less can get to places of work, and less can't support the financial services that sends money overseas. Money that people buy stuff with.
Really, you guys can get lost in fundementals. Try saying that producers won't export oil to China. What will happen then? Here's a hint: you may not be able to afford these nice computers.

food will be a rare commodity in the wst...in our life times

deny me this...its inevitable those reserves will be used in your life times
Yes. But they are not meant to be used for every American's oil needs forever. They are meant to be a stopgap for disasters, like for a few days. Supposedly, if something happens, those few days will let the US seek other alternatives to getting that oil. Of course, that time has not come.

yeah but what i mean is...america is built on oil and money, all three will cannot last two decades without action being taken at least twenty years ago

Okay. Then there'd be no more capital flowing overseas to oil producers.

I never thought about that...but you're right. No one will ever stop selling us oil, unless they have another major source of income...there's just so much money to be made refueling Hummers.

I'd bet hydrogen will be a big kick in the crotch to the Saudis...if people get off their arses and actually put some muscle into research.

yeah but what i mean is...america is built on oil and money, all three will cannot last two decades without action being taken at least twenty years ago

Ok, this is the worst sentence in the history of Nationstates. You state 2 "things", but refer to the fact that all "three" will "cannot" last two decades with action being taken "twenty years ago."

But nevermind that. The point is this. America is built not on oil and money, but nowadays on debt and POSSIBLE economic strength.

Still, we should open them up for now...at least until we can restore those oil platforms in the Gulf to functional order.

yeah but what i mean is...america is built on oil and money, all three will cannot last two decades without action being taken at least twenty years ago
I've heard the arguments from you guy's already. Of which I have one response: I am a firm believer that the free market is the most perfect system divised by man. We are far better off than twenty years ago, but not necessarily because of any technology. There are more intelligent people, a better capital market, less trade regulations, and many, many, many more individuals in the free world today. Each individual is a potential producer, consumer, investor, and thinker. Most of those that talk of a world without oil are trying to address what they see as a deeper problem: the moral decadence of capitalism. In their eyes, something farther left is superior. Jimmy Carter tried pulling that trick off during the 1979 oil shock. The American people saw right through it.

We need to be clear on something.

The entire reason this is a problem is because we haven't open a new oil refinery in 30 years. That's why were dependent on foriegn oil and that's why the slightest upset in the market skyrockets prices. And who's to blaim? I'm glad you asked. It's none other than our friendly neighborhood enviromentalist wacko. They are the ones that have stoped us from drilling off the coast of Fla and in ANWAR. Ultimately they are to blame. Period.

We need to be clear on something.

The entire reason this is a problem is because we haven't open a new oil refinery in 30 years. That's why were dependent on foriegn oil and that's why the slightest upset in the market skyrockets prices. And who's to blaim? I'm glad you asked. It's none other than our friendly neighborhood enviromentalist wacko. They are the ones that have stoped us from drilling off the coast of Fla and in ANWAR. Ultimately they are to blame. Period.

Or maybe you're going to blame intelligent scientists who don't want to destroy the ARTIC and FLORIDA for only temporary oil. Face it, even if we did open refineries there, it would be temporary solely because oil will run out no matter how many refineries you open.

Or maybe you're going to blame intelligent scientists who don't want to destroy the ARTIC and FLORIDA for only temporary oil. Face it, even if we did open refineries there, it would be temporary solely because oil will run out no matter how many refineries you open.

First, who said anything about destroying. Our technology is completely safe. When's the last time we had a spill in the Gulf of Mex? I'm sorry but your point is 20 years too old. and your right it wouldn't be a permanent solution but it would give time to get hydrogen up and running wouldn't it? :headbang:

Okay. Then there'd be no more capital flowing overseas to oil producers. And especially in the Middle East, they will have even less capital to purchase less grain, be it American or otherwise. And don't forget, as more Americans won't be able to drive, less can get to places of work, and less can't support the financial services that sends money overseas. Money that people buy stuff with.
Really, you guys can get lost in fundementals. Try saying that producers won't export oil to China. What will happen then? Here's a hint: you may not be able to afford these nice computers.
I think you're getting yourself fundamentally lost. I'm talking about Canadian oil. If you guys are in an oil pinch over the hurricane, and seeing as you're not adhering to NAFTA, I think it's fair to staunch the flow of Canadian oil for the time being. Until you decide to do right by your signed treaties.

First, who said anything about destroying. Our technology is completely safe. When's the last time we had a spill in the Gulf of Mex? I'm sorry but your point is 20 years too old. and your right it wouldn't be a permanent solution but it would give time to get hydrogen up and running wouldn't it? :headbang:

We had an oil spill around the Maryland/Delaware area about 1 to 2 years ago. Killed a damn lot of wildlife too. And no technology is ever completely safe.

Furthermore, we would be spending so much time going after oil that all hydrogen research would pretty much stop.

We had an oil spill around the Maryland/Delaware area about 1 to 2 years ago. Killed a damn lot of wildlife too. And no technology is ever completely safe.

Furthermore, we would be spending so much time going after oil that all hydrogen research would pretty much stop.

All we'd have to do is stop wasting govt funds on things like attempting to build a rain forrest in Ohio and comparable projects and use it where we need it most.

I think you're getting yourself fundamentally lost. I'm talking about Canadian oil. If you guys are in an oil pinch over the hurricane, and seeing as you're not adhering to NAFTA, I think it's fair to staunch the flow of Canadian oil for the time being. Until you decide to do right by your signed treaties.

Good 'ol Canada. Don't you guys get your milk in bags up there?

All we'd have to do is stop wasting govt funds on things like attempting to build a rain forrest in Ohio and comparable projects and use it where we need it most.

We're not building a rain forest in Ohio you retard. I don't know which Onion article you read that from, but that's just not true.

I think you're getting yourself fundamentally lost. I'm talking about Canadian oil. If you guys are in an oil pinch over the hurricane, and seeing as you're not adhering to NAFTA, I think it's fair to staunch the flow of Canadian oil for the time being. Until you decide to do right by your signed treaties.
You never told me you were Canadian. Oh well. Now I know that you guys are upset about that lumber stuff, as am I. But is it that big of an issue to make everyone pay the price? Think of all the valuable capital that flows into Canada.

We need to be clear on something.

The entire reason this is a problem is because we haven't open a new oil refinery in 30 years. That's why were dependent on foriegn oil and that's why the slightest upset in the market skyrockets prices. And who's to blaim? I'm glad you asked. It's none other than our friendly neighborhood enviromentalist wacko. They are the ones that have stoped us from drilling off the coast of Fla and in ANWAR. Ultimately they are to blame. Period.
They don't have anything to do with the refining problem, but just the drilling problem. In any case, shortly after the last oil refinery in the US was built, prices collapsed, and they haven't risen back until now. We may see a new refinery in the US in the next few years, though preferably not along the Gulf Coast :) . My idea is to build a few on the shores of Lake Ontario, and pipe the oil to the densely populated East Coast.

We had an oil spill around the Maryland/Delaware area about 1 to 2 years ago. Killed a damn lot of wildlife too. And no technology is ever completely safe.

Furthermore, we would be spending so much time going after oil that all hydrogen research would pretty much stop.
This is why I believe that society should stay out of energy. Too many interest groups jockey for the same thing, and we can never make them happy. But we can get close, and do it faster, if governments don't get involved. Maybe hydrogen is not the magic bullet. Maybe some guy in a lab in Shenzhen has the perfect energy source already, but it just drowns in regulations.

We're not building a rain forest in Ohio you retard. I don't know which Onion article you read that from, but that's just not true.

My bad it Iowa. Here's a quote.

Citizens Against Waste, a watchdog organization, identified $23 billion in pork-barrel projects that were added to appropriations bills this year to bloat the deficit. Those projects ranged from an indoor rain forest in Iowa to a program to encourage children to play golf in Florida.

You can read the whole article at www.holmencourier.com/articles/2004/11/19/opinion/00edit/txt

Releasing oil from the SPR isn't going to move prices by more than a few dollars, and is not going to discourage rebuilding of the refineries. The reason is, the SPR contains 600m barrels, the world consumes over 28bn barrels per year, and the US consumes 7bn barrels of that.

If the refineries aren't repaired, the US economy dies. Which is why they will be, and fast. Which is why releasing the oil is a pointless gesture, especially as buying replacement supplies at $70 per barrel is going to hurt like hell...as if the trade deficit wasn't insane enough.

Good 'ol Canada. Don't you guys get your milk in bags up there?
Yup, bags if you want 'em. I stick to cartons for the most part, though.

Releasing oil from the SPR isn't going to move prices by more than a few dollars, and is not going to discourage rebuilding of the refineries. The reason is, the SPR contains 600m barrels, the world consumes over 28bn barrels per year, and the US consumes 7bn barrels of that.

If the refineries aren't repaired, the US economy dies. Which is why they will be, and fast. Which is why releasing the oil is a pointless gesture, especially as buying replacement supplies at $70 per barrel is going to hurt like hell...as if the trade deficit wasn't insane enough.
My thoughts exactly. I disagree with you on the trade deficit bit, but that's another thread. I also disagree that the US economy will "die". That takes a cataclysmic event, like a war, or an asteroid. Instead, we will see an intense and prolong contraction with likely ripple effects across the planet. Yet no one in Wall Street or Washington (or anywhere else in the world, for that matter), wants to wait and see what that's like.

http://www.fxnetworks.com/shows/originals/oilstorm/main.html

That show was B.S.

At any rate, no they shouldn't be. There is no need.

The US economy will be hit minorly to somewhat moderately by this but since it is more efficient then that of developing countries.. it can sustain this. The economy will rebuild refineries (and who knows increase capacity of them.. hah)...

Remember we have enough oil. More then enough (why the oil storm show was bullshit).. we just don't have enough refinery capacity.

You never told me you were Canadian. Oh well. Now I know that you guys are upset about that lumber stuff, as am I. But is it that big of an issue to make everyone pay the price? Think of all the valuable capital that flows into Canada.
It's been on my front-burner for days now, ever since that double-bitchslap we got last week. I'm thinking about it; I know my PM is thinking about it, and about what we're all grumbling publicly about. I'd never expect Paul Martin to take a strong stand on the issues - and I don't expect you'll see him take as strong a stand as some of us might be willing to take.

But all flowing capital aside, we cannot abide by trade on your country's terms. If I had the PMO, NAFTA would be so much birdcage-lining. And we would aggressively pursue alternate markets in the interim. You're not the only consumerite society on this planet, after all guys.

I don't know what you'll see and hear from Ottawa regarding all this - but it's not going to go away any time soon.

It's been on my front-burner for days now, ever since that double-bitchslap we got last week. I'm thinking about it; I know my PM is thinking about it, and about what we're all grumbling publicly about. I'd never expect Paul Martin to take a strong stand on the issues - and I don't expect you'll see him take as strong a stand as some of us might be willing to take.

But all flowing capital aside, we cannot abide by trade on your country's terms. If I had the PMO, NAFTA would be so much birdcage-lining. And we would aggressively pursue alternate markets in the interim. You're not the only consumerite society on this planet, after all guys.

I don't know what you'll see and hear from Ottawa regarding all this - but it's not going to go away any time soon.
I'm sorry. This is deplorable, but it is no rational reason for Canada to halt all exports to the US, unless it wants to become a much colder third world country. Cooler heads than yours are in Ottowa. Unfortunatly, I find as many bimboheads in the US. They think that the refining problem is solved by drilling more, not refining more, and that China should limit its oil, the list goes on and on. I am convinced that everyone wants to kill every human and get his possessions, so long as they remain in the collective abstract.

I'm sorry. This is deplorable, but it is no rational reason for Canada to halt all exports to the US, unless it wants to become a much colder third world country. Cooler heads than yours are in Ottowa. Unfortunatly, I find as many bimboheads in the US. They think that the refining problem is solved by drilling more, not refining more, and that China should limit its oil, the list goes on and on. I am convinced that everyone wants to kill every human and get his possessions, so long as they remain in the collective abstract.

I wholeheartedly agree with you. Dobbs is just angry and doesn't realize if Canada halts all exports to the US, its economy will cease to exist.

I wholeheartedly agree with you. Dobbs is just angry and doesn't realize if Canada halts all exports to the US, its economy will cease to exist.
No, Dobbs isn't just angry. Actually, it's not anger at all, it's a cold-simmering sense of infamy. As to the remainder of your second sentence,
But all flowing capital aside, we cannot abide by trade on your country's terms. If I had the PMO, NAFTA would be so much birdcage-lining. And we would aggressively pursue alternate markets in the interim. You're not the only consumerite society on this planet, after all guys.
And Lotus Puppy, I don't want "to kill every human and get his possessions, so long as they remain in the collective abstract". In fact, I neither want to kill anyone, nor do I want their possessions. I am curious as to how this misapprehension has arisen.

I just thought now would be a good time to say that we wouldn't be having this discussion if we were further in on alternative energy. And I mean that not only in the sense that oil wouldn't be an issue, but also that the hurricane may never have happened (its intensity and size were likely magnified by global climate change).


...And don't tell me that "hydrogen is the answer." Hydrogen won't be the answer unless we have a clean, non-fossil fuel method for generating it (takes energy to make hydrogen). This means either massive solar projects, a reinvigoration of the nuclear fission energy program, OR (my personal favorite, though a bit far off) more research into nuclear fusion. Preferably several billion dollars worth of more research. An alternative energy Manhattan Project would do wonders both for our dependence on oil (and thus our relationship with the Mideast) and our environment.

It would be a smart move by the government to release the oil from the strategic petroleum reserves, because at the prices today they would make a lot of money, and then refill the reserve later when prices come down(making the government alot of money in the process). That is assuming that they sell the oil, I'm not too familiar with this reserve.

Of course that won't do any good, as I think they store unrefined petrol which would need to be refined first(and the refineries are out) in order to get any gasoline out of it. What America really needs is more oil refineries.

I just thought now would be a good time to say that we wouldn't be having this discussion if we were further in on alternative energy. And I mean that not only in the sense that oil wouldn't be an issue, but also that the hurricane may never have happened (its intensity and size were likely magnified by global climate change).


...And don't tell me that "hydrogen is the answer." Hydrogen won't be the answer unless we have a clean, non-fossil fuel method for generating it (takes energy to make hydrogen). This means either massive solar projects, a reinvigoration of the nuclear fission energy program, OR (my personal favorite, though a bit far off) more research into nuclear fusion. Preferably several billion dollars worth of more research. An alternative energy Manhattan Project would do wonders both for our dependence on oil (and thus our relationship with the Mideast) and our environment.

When gas gets too expensive we will switch over to alternative fuel sources, probably alchohols, those can be used in internal combustion engines with little trouble. The reason alternative fuels aren't used now is because they simply aren't as efficient, but once the prices rise enough they will be competitve with oil.

I think we need to say to hell with foreign oil and go to alternate means of energy entirely. That way other countries wouldn't have us by the balls economically. Yeah that was blut but I'm sick of gas prices.

When gas gets too expensive we will switch over to alternative fuel sources, probably alchohols, those can be used in internal combustion engines with little trouble. The reason alternative fuels aren't used now is because they simply aren't as efficient, but once the prices rise enough they will be competitve with oil.

I heard something some time ago about some guy that took crap and turned it into oil. Weird.

Here's a thought. You know how you can make diamonds, which take a long time to form, in a few days with one of those fancy machines? Howabout doing the same thing with dead plants and animals? Putting them under thousands of tons of pressure...

No, Dobbs isn't just angry. Actually, it's not anger at all, it's a cold-simmering sense of infamy. As to the remainder of your second sentence,

I'm practical. You are not. Canada would cease to exist.

ARF-COM, And the process you refer to (converting trash to oil) is thermal deploymerization. Expect the process to be investigated and perfected even further in the future.

http://www.kantor.com/useful/thermo.shtml

Canada would not cease to exist if we stopped selling oil to the U.S., but regardless of that I myself would not want to see us use a natural disaster as a bargaining chip. Kicking someone when they're down is not what Canada is about as a nation. I would sooner see us put aside our current disagreement and help out our largest trade partner and build back some goodwill in Washington, it would achieve a lot more in the long run I think. Though it certainly is tempting sometimes, Dobbs, I agree.

Canada would not cease to exist if we stopped selling oil to the U.S., but regardless of that I myself would not want to see us use a natural disaster as a bargaining chip. Kicking someone when they're down is not what Canada is about as a nation. I would sooner see us put aside our current disagreement and help out our largest trade partner and build back some goodwill in Washington, it would achieve a lot more in the long run I think. Though it certainly is tempting sometimes, Dobbs, I agree.

No, I said Canada would cease to exist if it stopped exporting completely to the US. Lets face it, its economy is tied to the well being of the US economy. Screw us, and screw yourself forty times over. That's how it goes. The US economy is way larger, and extremely powerful... besides, Dick Cheney was supposed to go to Alberta from what I heard to check out the oil sands.

Oh, yeah, the idea of totally ceasing all trade with the U.S. is absurd and unnecessary, given that something like 96% of our cross-border trade is smooth and conflict-free. Did someone say something about ceasing all trade with the U.S.? I don't see that anywhere, but then I'm pooped.

And Lotus Puppy, I don't want "to kill every human and get his possessions, so long as they remain in the collective abstract". In fact, I neither want to kill anyone, nor do I want their possessions. I am curious as to how this misapprehension has arisen.
I am convinced that this all happens on a subconcious basis. People are as violent as their primative ancestors, but we just do a very good job surpressing it in most civilized societies. That doesn't mean that it isn't there.

I heard something some time ago about some guy that took crap and turned it into oil. Weird.

Here's a thought. You know how you can make diamonds, which take a long time to form, in a few days with one of those fancy machines? Howabout doing the same thing with dead plants and animals? Putting them under thousands of tons of pressure...
That probably takes more energy than it produces. But it is possible to make oil out of coal. The government encourages this through a tax bonus, but their is one problem: they define "synthetic oil" simply as the changed chemical composition of coal. So, for only a few million dollars and little equipment, you can buy coal, and spray pine oil, woodchips, or simply make coal into briquettes. You aren't taxed. Thus, no synthetic oil industry is in America.

Canada would not cease to exist if we stopped selling oil to the U.S., but regardless of that I myself would not want to see us use a natural disaster as a bargaining chip. Kicking someone when they're down is not what Canada is about as a nation. I would sooner see us put aside our current disagreement and help out our largest trade partner and build back some goodwill in Washington, it would achieve a lot more in the long run I think. Though it certainly is tempting sometimes, Dobbs, I agree.
Trade between the two nations is better than ever. It has more than tripled since NAFTA, and Canada has mostly profitted, being the largest exporter to the most lucrative market on the planet. Most industries, such as the auto, oil, appliance, and service ones, have benefitted greatly. That being said, bumps do exist. And I think that importers cause a lot of bumps with their buying power. That is the real danger of a trade deficit. Economically, I think they are fine, if not as good as a surplus. But their percieved problems are worse, especially when you bring it up to a politician.

Now, I didn't know this, but I found out that the reserve was opened last year after Hurricane Ivan. Ivan, as you may recall, did far less damage to the oil industry, but just enough to make speculators on Wall Street have a field day. The oil was only 4 mil. gallons. It's probable that the same thing will happen this time around. Truth be told, I have no problems if a bit of oil is released specifically for emergency vehicles and repair equipment. But releasing oil to the general market is a grave mistake.
BTW, this is ironic: most of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve is in Louisianna.

bump

BTW, this is ironic: most of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve is in Louisianna.

Actually I heard most of it is in Texas in underground salt caverns.

I think it is a good idea to release some of it now to supplement any shortages. There also has to be immediate repairs on refineries.

Actually I heard most of it is in Texas in underground salt caverns.

I think it is a good idea to release some of it now to supplement any shortages. There also has to be immediate repairs on refineries.
Yes, but just think of what you are saying. You want to repair the refineries soon, yet you want to open the reserve, and therefore cut the price of what will finance these repairs. Explain how that works.

I've been hearing that some are talking about gas rationing. This is just rich. More bureaocracy, more unnecessary layers of people telling us how to live, where to drive, etc. Do we need need this? America won the Cold War, but if it rations gas so prematurely, it would smack of the USSR. If rationing is so badly needed, the rising price of gas will do it for us. How many of us can afford gas at $5 or $6?

bump

No, it wouldn't do anything. We have plenty of crude oil; the problem is, we can't refine it. All we'd be doing by tapping the reserve is putting more crude oil out there, and that doesn't do anything if it can't be refined. The only way we will definitely lower prices is by driving less and increasing refining capacity.

Price caps and rationing don't work. This has to be fought by supply and demand.

No, it wouldn't do anything. We have plenty of crude oil; the problem is, we can't refine it. All we'd be doing by tapping the reserve is putting more crude oil out there, and that doesn't do anything if it can't be refined. The only way we will definitely lower prices is by driving less and increasing refining capacity.

Price caps and rationing don't work. This has to be fought by supply and demand.
I agree with the first part--it's why I'm not giving Bush shit for not tapping the reserve, and most people who understand the way this stuff works know that refining is the issue here.

But in a period where oil companies are making record profits, a temporary price cap is certainly reasonable, especially in the areas most heavily affected by the storm.

But in a period where oil companies are making record profits, a temporary price cap is certainly reasonable, especially in the areas most heavily affected by the storm.
I'd support a temporary cap only for parts of the South. They need it the most right now. The East and West could easily compensate it with their own refining capacity, but the South has none left.
BTW, I wondered when this issue would enter the political realm: who knew whhat, who did what, did it work, etc. I'm not criticizing you. I'm just noting it.

actually if those dang green peace peeps would stop complaining then we wouldve opened em a while ago... we have plenty of uel in america why we get it from others? we dont know... think about it... $1 per gallon if we just made it our selves

actually if those dang green peace peeps would stop complaining then we wouldve opened em a while ago... we have plenty of uel in america why we get it from others? we dont know... think about it... $1 per gallon if we just made it our selves
Do you even know what the Strategic Petroleum Reserve even is?

I'd support a temporary cap only for parts of the South. They need it the most right now. The East and West could easily compensate it with their own refining capacity, but the South has none left.
BTW, I wondered when this issue would enter the political realm: who knew whhat, who did what, did it work, etc. I'm not criticizing you. I'm just noting it.
I learned this afternoon that south Florida, where I live, gets something like 95% of its gas from the Gulf, which means our supply will be massively restricted. Gas went up ten cents a gallon today, between 9:30 this morning and 5:30 this evening, and I heard on the radio on the drive home that wholesale prices for gas--wholesale!--finished up at over $3.00 a gallon, which means retail will blow that away. People will be howling at Congress to impose temporary caps when that happens, I'll bet, and it would be the decent thing for oil companies to do to cap the voluntarily--but then again, decency isn't in the vocabulary for those people.

I learned this afternoon that south Florida, where I live, gets something like 95% of its gas from the Gulf, which means our supply will be massively restricted. Gas went up ten cents a gallon today, between 9:30 this morning and 5:30 this evening, and I heard on the radio on the drive home that wholesale prices for gas--wholesale!--finished up at over $3.00 a gallon, which means retail will blow that away. People will be howling at Congress to impose temporary caps when that happens, I'll bet, and it would be the decent thing for oil companies to do to cap the voluntarily--but then again, decency isn't in the vocabulary for those people.
I don't believe that a cap is necessary for the whole nation. The high price will eventually start to hurt producers, especially the ones that refine at the Gulf, like Kerr-Magee. Do you think they like not makiing money? They have a greater reason to get those refineries repaired, and may even help pay to get the city cleaned up. I've already heard that some ports towards the Delta are planning to open very shortly. Henry Hub offshore gas platform is already running.
Also, this crisis may be softened soon. New Orleans, while a major refining center, is not the only one. There are several refineries near Baton Rouge, Alabama, and Mississippi. Mississppi especially was hit hard, but at least it isn't under twenty feet of water.