Stock Up People !!!!

[ABMax24]

No they don't set the price at all and I wouldn't expect them to sell below market value. But they do control it by cutting production to drive up prices.

That generally only happens when oil prices are below that of production costs, which is a standard practice regardless of industry. But that's not the case right now.

Unless you're talking about groups like OPEC+ controlling production. But that also has nothing to do with the oil companies.

Back to my original post in this thread, if we want low oil prices and low fuel prices then let oil companies develop oil and gas. If we want to reduce carbon emissions then put restrictions on oil and gas companies, but beware this comes with increased oil and fuel costs.

There is no having our cake and eating it too. High oil prices directly correlate to a faster uptake of renewables. Low oils prices slow the development of renewables. So we can be frustrated at the slow adoption of renewables, or we can be frustrated with high oil prices, but not both.

 

[bholler]

That generally only happens when oil prices are below that of production costs, which is a standard practice regardless of industry. But that's not the case right now.

Unless you're talking about groups like OPEC+ controlling production. But that also has nothing to do with the oil companies.

Back to my original post in this thread, if we want low oil prices and low fuel prices then let oil companies develop oil and gas. If we want to reduce carbon emissions then put restrictions on oil and gas companies, but beware this comes with increased oil and fuel costs.

There is no having our cake and eating it too. High oil prices directly correlate to a faster uptake of renewables. Low oils prices slow the development of renewables. So we can be frustrated at the slow adoption of renewables, or we can be frustrated with high oil prices, but not both.

I agree with allot of that. But don't agree that they only do it when the price drops below production cost. They do it when their profit increases aren't going to meet shareholder expectations.

 

[showrguy]

No they don't set the price at all and I wouldn't expect them to sell below market value. But they do control it by cutting production to drive up prices.

We all know who cut production and drove the prices sky high, we just can’t say it out loud on here..
And if you think it was the Oil Industry, you musta bumped your head on a heavy wall insulated liner…. Lol

 

[old greybeard]

Oil is a global commodity, with the international market setting the prices. Expecting US producers to sell at below market rates to the home market, instead of globally shows a lack of understanding of markets or responsibility to shareholders. Increase production, reduce demand will work. But with the current huge increases in carbon tax per ton by the administration, plus the federal lease freeze, why would they increase production when the global rates guarantee profits. Don’t like it, start your own oil production and sell it cheap. Or nationalize the market and watch us turn into Venezuela, tons of oil, have to import gasoline.
Our NG s being blocked from easy export by nimby’s. It should be 3x what Americans pay. Do Americans appreciate that? Nope attack producers, attack fracking.
Let’s tax the living crap out out of plastic. Let’s ban imports from countries that don’t meet our pollution standards, or human rights standards. Pollution is the threat to our world, not climate change. Which imhop is just a power grab. Yet we give china a free pass on pollution, CO2 emissions and human abuses. Let’s not even pretend that we are willing to sacrifice.

 

[wishlist]

We all know who cut production and drove the prices sky high, we just can’t say it out loud on here..
And if you think it was the Oil Industry, you musta bumped your head on a heavy wall insulated liner…. Lol

Didn’t bump my head but isn’t OPEC still way below pre covid production ?

 

[begreen]

Let’s tax the living crap out out of plastic. Let’s ban imports from countries that don’t meet our pollution standards, or human rights standards. Pollution is the threat to our world, not climate change. Which imhop is just a power grab. Yet we give china a free pass on pollution, CO2 emissions and human abuses. Let’s not even pretend that we are willing to sacrifice.

Watch this 3 part series, seriously. See where those doubts came from. Hear it from the people that sowed them and now greatly regret their role in this disinformation campaign. It's a power grab alright. One that has already happened.

The Power of Big Oil | FRONTLINE

Watch FRONTLINE's three-part documentary examining the fossil fuel industry’s history of casting doubt and delaying action on climate change.

www.pbs.org

 

[snobuilder]

If there was money to be made it would be done.

Except for the nonsense of the greenies that thinks a solar array in my WI yard covered by snow on a cloudy day will deliver what I need. Its beyond the money. wind and solar are criminal in the minerals they gobble up vs the power they produce. TOTAL WASTE OF TIME AND TAX DOLLARS. $6 a gallon heating oil is criminal as well. pipe lines. boooooo. Why isn't there an all out effort to bring plentiful, clean burning natural gas to every community possible?. Take all the wasted and worthless GREEN energy tax dollars and redirect it to NG delivery.

 

[showrguy]

Except for the nonsense of the greenies that thinks a solar array in my WI yard covered by snow on a cloudy day will deliver what I need. Its beyond the money. wind and solar are criminal in the minerals they gobble up vs the power they produce. TOTAL WASTE OF TIME AND TAX DOLLARS. $6 a gallon heating oil is criminal as well. pipe lines. boooooo. Why isn't there an all out effort to bring plentiful, clean burning natural gas to every community possible?. Take all the wasted and worthless GREEN energy tax dollars and redirect it to NG delivery.

That is very well put

In before the lock… lol

 

[bholler]

Except for the nonsense of the greenies that thinks a solar array in my WI yard covered by snow on a cloudy day will deliver what I need. Its beyond the money. wind and solar are criminal in the minerals they gobble up vs the power they produce. TOTAL WASTE OF TIME AND TAX DOLLARS. $6 a gallon heating oil is criminal as well. pipe lines. boooooo. Why isn't there an all out effort to bring plentiful, clean burning natural gas to every community possible?. Take all the wasted and worthless GREEN energy tax dollars and redirect it to NG delivery.

And how much do we spend in tax breaks and incentives for oil and gas companies?

Do a little research about how snow cover is dealt with on solar panels. It clear you have done zero research and done care what the actual truth is.


Care to respond to my comments about your graph "proving" gas uses the least ammout of minerals?


I again am in no way implying that we are at all ready to eliminate fossil fuels at all. That absolutely is not the case. But why are you so against working towards alternatives?

 

[brenndatomu]

But why are you so against working towards alternatives?

I personally don't have a problem working toward it, at all...bring it! But my issue is having it crammed down our throats when anybody with even half a brain can see that we are nowhere close to ready to force it mainstream...which seems to be where things are headed here lately...

 

[bholler]

I personally don't have a problem working toward it, at all...bring it! But my issue is having it crammed down our throats when anybody with even half a brain can see that we are nowhere close to ready to force it mainstream...which seems to be where things are headed here lately...

How exactly is it being crammed down our throats nationally? There is the new law in NY which I absolutely think goes to far to fast and a few local ordinances. But in general I don't see anything being forced on anyone

 

[brenndatomu]

How exactly is it being crammed down our throats nationally? There is the new law in NY which I absolutely think goes to far to fast and a few local ordinances. But in general I don't see anything being forced on anyone

Well, for one it starts in NY, and/or the left coast making new laws like that...and then auto makers making announcements that they will be all electric by XXXX date...which I guess is more like virtue signaling than forcing it down our throats...as when it comes right down to it, they will back off when things aren't working out...and therefore not selling...

 

[bholler]

Well, for one it starts in NY, and/or the left coast making new laws like that...and then auto makers making announcements that they will be all electric by XXXX date...which I guess is more like virtue signaling than forcing it down our throats...as when it comes right down to it, they will back off when things aren't working out...and therefore not selling...

I honestly see that the ny law will cause to many problems quickly and won't be copied. But who knows I could be wrong.

 

[stoveliker]

Well, for one it starts in NY, and/or the left coast making new laws like that...and then auto makers making announcements that they will be all electric by XXXX date...which I guess is more like virtue signaling than forcing it down our throats...as when it comes right down to it, they will back off when things aren't working out...and therefore not selling...

But doesn't that (they backing out) mean that there is no "forcing"...?
That they *chose* to "virtue signal"? (and that apparently it pays them to cater to these wishes...? I.e. there is demand.)

Data, worldwide (so not US only):

Fossil Fuels Received $5.9 Trillion In Subsidies in 2020, Report Finds

e360.yale.edu

Energy Transition Investment Hit $500 Billion in 2020 – For First Time | BloombergNEF

The world invested unprecedented amounts in low-carbon assets last year, from renewables to cleaner transport, energy storage to electric heat

about.bnef.com

I could not find studies from the same institution for both numbers, so I don't know how accurate a comparison is here. Yale and Bloomberg are good enough for me.
However, it suggests a factor of 10 difference. Worldwide.

The far, far, far higher amount of tax dollars spent on fossil fuels as compared to other sources is hindering the following approach.

Regarding energy, I think we should do *all of the above, with the exception of coal* (and with a large nuclear component).
Why?
(Because coal is rather dirty and detrimental to the forested hill landscape that is in appalachia.)
Because diversification is safe (see current state of world affairs - and on a local scale, see my oil boiler, wood stove, solar panels and minisplit).
Because it allows folks to choose the energy resource that is most suitable (see solar in Northern Canada). It creates a palette/spectrum of energy resources that one can pick and choose from.
And so that all get to a price point that is economically feasible.

That price point should include for fossil fuels e.g. insurance for inhabitants of low lying areas (or, yes, subsidies to move them away from those areas), as that is also the cost of fossil fuels. It should also include "mineral cost" (I'd say any non-renewable resource needed, e.g. anything mined) for all fuels.

However, the current skewed subsidization of fossil fuels hinders reaching a palette of energy sources whose mix actually works. There IS no unbiased picking from this spectrum of resources we have, because one has been pushed down our throat for a century and still gets boatloads of subsidies. The playing field is not equal.
In capitalism, a non-equal playing field will NEVER reach the optimum (spectrum of) solution(s).

Given the long, long track record of subsidies to fossil fuels, it's therefore in my view more than fair to subsidize renewable fuels for a while now to reach an even playing field. Currently fossil fuels have a 100 year head start. Let the rest catch up.

My $0.02

 

[firefighterjake]

I used 89 gallons of heating oil last year. Granted it was a relatively mild winter . . . but that I believe is one of my best years in terms of heating oil usage.

 

[bholler]

I used 89 gallons of heating oil last year. Granted it was a relatively mild winter . . . but that I believe is one of my best years in terms of heating oil usage.

That is roughly what I use as well

 

[Ashful]

I’m at 970 gallons this year. I used to lock in pricing for 1000 gallons each year in July/Aug, but got burned on it when prices dropped mid-winter a few years back. Could’ve recouped that loss this year, if I had been on the ball, but life had been too busy and the savings in prior years too small to sweat it, at the time.

On the plus side, I own a crap ton of Exxon stock, so…

 

[snobuilder]

I agree with ending the wasted ethanol subsidies that use more fossil fuels to produce the ethanol than simply burning the dino oil to begin with.



Even if your 75.

 

[bholler]

I agree with ending the wasted ethanol subsidies that use more fossil fuels to produce the ethanol than simply burning the dino oil to begin with.



Even if your 75.

Well I agree with ending ethanol subsidies but not because it uses more fossil fuels to produce than it saves. I think we should end subsidies on all energy options. Including the massive amount we give to fossil fuels.

 

[snobuilder]

Well I agree with ending ethanol subsidies but not because it uses more fossil fuels to produce than it saves. I think we should end subsidies on all energy options. Including the massive amount we give to fossil fuels.

I have no problem with subsidizing things that actually work everytime without wasting time and effort just to make some politician and the greenie virtue signalers feel good about themselves as if they have an actual solution. Your argument that one subsidy justifies another isn't a solution , just an excuse for another feel good measure like solar and wind..

Like i said in another post. My NG furnace use costs has me wondering why I bother going through the wood processing effort.

Money (subsidies/tax dollars) well spent would be to get NG into as many communities as possible.

Here is something to ponder....why does the greater Phoenix area have to rely on 10 power plants when they have the best chance of any area in the nation to make solar work without back up. If any area in the country has a chance at making alt energy work....why isn't it a reality this late in the game?

Sources of Arizona utility-scale electricity generation:
full year 2021 [1]

AZ Power break down

Coal (13.2%)
Natural Gas (44.4%)
Hydroelectric (5.4%)
Wind (1.5%)
Nuclear (29.1%)
Biomass (0.2%)
Solar (6.2%)


Not enough subsidies?🤣🤣

 

[bholler]

I have no problem with subsidizing things that actually work everytime without wasting time and effort just to make some politician and the greenie virtue signalers feel good about themselves as if they have an actual solution. Your argument that one subsidy justifies another isn't a solution , just an excuse for another feel good measure like solar and wind..

Like i said in another post. My NG furnace use costs has me wondering why I bother going through the wood processing effort.

Money (subsidies/tax dollars) well spent would be to get NG into as many communities as possible.

Here is something to ponder....why does the greater Phoenix area have to rely on 10 power plants when they have the best chance of any area in the nation to make solar work without back up. If any area in the country has a chance at making alt energy work....why isn't it a reality this late in the game?

Sources of Arizona utility-scale electricity generation:
full year 2021 [1]

AZ Power break down

Coal (13.2%)
Natural Gas (44.4%)
Hydroelectric (5.4%)
Wind (1.5%)
Nuclear (29.1%)
Biomass (0.2%)
Solar (6.2%)


Not enough subsidies?🤣🤣

Not enough time. And to much resistance to change in that state.

Solar works. Wind works. Hydro works. Nuclear works. There are lots of options to fossil fuels that work. Yes each one has their strong points and weak points. But saying they don't work simply because they havnt been adopted yet is just rediculous.

And yet again I have nothing against natural gas as a good option to get us through until alternatives are more feasible.

But do you honestly have any clue how much it would cost to run natural gas lines in many rural areas???? I think you are drastically underestimating that cost.

 

[bholler]

If alternatives don't work why are they the fastest growing segment of energy production in the US? Even though only roughly 20% of energy subsidies went to them with 70% going to fossil fuels???? It just doesn't make sense.


And btw your example of Arizona is flawed because they are now one of the states with the fastest growing alternative energy systems.

 

[stoveliker]

But saying they don't work simply because they havnt been adopted yet is just rediculous.

Indeed. It has to do with the fact that an excrement-load of tax dollars have made other sources cheaper than they really are, thus economically blocking other feasible sources from taking their economically fair market share.

 

[SpaceBus]

Diesel is $6.10/gal today. It cost me $95 to top up from a little over half, when that used to fill the whole tank.

 

[snobuilder]

Indeed. It has to do with the fact that an excrement-load of tax dollars have made other sources cheaper than they really are, thus economically blocking other feasible sources from taking their economically fair market share.

But without those excrement loads of subsidies for the fossil fuels used to create and enable the fantasy of alt wind and solar energy....they both would be even more out of reach.

alt energy doesn't exist without the fossil fuel used to melt the minerals into the right shape.