Increase In US Oil By 10X

[Kathianne]

Let's hope it pans out:

http://www.nextenergynews.com/news1/next-energy-news2.13s.html


Massive Oil Deposit Could Increase US reserves by 10x

America is sitting on top of a super massive 200 billion barrel Oil Field that could potentially make America Energy Independent and until now has largely gone unnoticed. Thanks to new technology the Bakken Formation in North Dakota could boost America’s Oil reserves by an incredible 10 times, giving western economies the trump card against OPEC’s short squeeze on oil supply and making Iranian and Venezuelan threats of disrupted supply irrelevant.

In the next 30 days the USGS (U.S. Geological Survey) will release a new report giving an accurate resource assessment of the Bakken Oil Formation that covers North Dakota and portions of South Dakota and Montana. With new horizontal drilling technology it is believed that from 175 to 500 billion barrels of recoverable oil are held in this 200,000 square mile reserve that was initially discovered in 1951. The USGS did an initial study back in 1999 that estimated 400 billion recoverable barrels were present but with prices bottoming out at $10 a barrel back then the report was dismissed because of the higher cost of horizontal drilling techniques that would be needed, estimated at $20-$40 a barrel.

It was not until 2007, when EOG Resources of Texas started a frenzy when they drilled a single well in Parshal N.D. that is expected to yield 700,000 barrels of oil that real excitement and money started to flow in North Dakota. Marathon Oil is investing $1.5 billion and drilling 300 new wells in what is expected to be one of the greatest booms in Oil discovery since Oil was discovered in Saudi Arabia in 1938.

...

[JohnDoe]

excellent.

so why aren't the oil speculators dropping the price of oil with all of these huge new finds, there in ND and also in the Gulf near mexico, and in the caspian sea?

if the oil companies continue to REFUSE to build new refineries even WHEN we offered them FOR FREE our closed military locations as spots to build the refineries with NO Environmental regs, gasoline prices will continue to rise.... :(

[Pale Rider]

Yeah this is great news... so why isn't it on every single channel on the news? I haven't heard a word. Now we won't have one single excuse for remaining in Iraq either.

[DragonStryk72]

excellent.

so why aren't the oil speculators dropping the price of oil with all of these huge new finds, there in ND and also in the Gulf near mexico, and in the caspian sea?

if the oil companies continue to REFUSE to build new refineries even WHEN we offered them FOR FREE our closed military locations as spots to build the refineries with NO Environmental regs, gasoline prices will continue to rise.... :(

Well, right now, they're likely looking to see if there's going to be a hard fight from the environmental lobby,such as with ANWAR, so that they don't go dropping big money on something that may not happen.

[Pale Rider]

Well, right now, they're likely looking to see if there's going to be a hard fight from the environmental lobby,such as with ANWAR, so that they don't go dropping big money on something that may not happen.

Why do you say that? The article says Marathon Oil is investing 1.5 billion dollars and drilling three hundred new wells.

[CockySOB]

This article relates to small independent developers who are making profits on bypassed oil. I expect we'll see a lot more of this type of company in the next few years, especially if oil prices continue to rise.

http://www.theoaklandpress.com/stories/033008/bus_20080330319.shtml

[DragonStryk72]

Why do you say that? The article says Marathon Oil is investing 1.5 billion dollars and drilling three hundred new wells.

Yes, but they can still get shut down before the product makes it to market, so they're holding back on the drop in price make absolute certain they don't get burned.

[red states rule]

Why do you say that? The article says Marathon Oil is investing 1.5 billion dollars and drilling three hundred new wells.

Without new or expanded refineries this means nothing. Refineries are at full capacity and can't process more oil

[Pale Rider]

Yes, but they can still get shut down before the product makes it to market, so they're holding back on the drop in price make absolute certain they don't get burned.

Well I'll tell ya what, whoever it is that stands in the way of this ought to be drawn and quartered. If it's the dems working under pressure from the tree huggers, that ought to make them real unpopular. People are sick to DEATH of the rising price of gas.

[Sitarro]

Well I'll tell ya what, whoever it is that stands in the way of this ought to be drawn and quartered. If it's the dems working under pressure from the tree huggers, that ought to make them real unpopular. People are sick to DEATH of the rising price of gas.

Yea, the rising price of everything except salaries! I'm sure new refineries are number one on Obamessiah's list. I am amazed at the price of a gallon of milk. It's gonna get real interesting if the truckers go through with the strike that is planned for April, they are really taking it in the shorts.

[red states rule]

Well I'll tell ya what, whoever it is that stands in the way of this ought to be drawn and quartered. If it's the dems working under pressure from the tree huggers, that ought to make them real unpopular. People are sick to DEATH of the rising price of gas.

and what is the Dems answer to this issue PR? Billions in new taxes on the oil companies

How the hell will that lower the price of gas. Corporations do NOT pay taxes - we do

The price of gas will go up under Dems and they know it. For years libs screamed how gas was to cheap - now they are using it as an issue

Dems do not have a clue on how to increase our oil supply and refinery capacity. That is what is needed to lower the price at the pump

[red states rule]

Are we working on this oil find? It is in the Gulf, and I think there is a ban on any drilling in the Gulf

'Huge oil find' in Gulf of Mexico


Three companies led by US-based Chevron say they have found an oil field under the Gulf of Mexico that could boost US reserves by more than 50%.
Drilling at a test well yielded "a flow rate of more than 6,000 barrels of crude oil per day", Chevron said.

The discovery may rival the biggest US oil field in Prudhoe Bay, Alaska.

Experts caution that the true size of the oil field is not yet known and it will be a long time before any of the oil there enters the market.

"In the last 15 years, there've been so many great projects that started out and then petered out," Matt Simmons, the head of a group of energy investment bankers, told Reuters news agency.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/5318776.stm

[JohnDoe]

Yes, but they can still get shut down before the product makes it to market, so they're holding back on the drop in price make absolute certain they don't get burned.

They DO NOT WANT to build more refineries Dragon, PERIOD. The environmental EXCUSE is bullshit....they haven't even tried to build more refineries...they stop before they even pursue it and claim that the Green Laws will stop them... This is a lie to cover their own asses and this came out when WE OFFERED THEM Millitary installations all over the usa that had closed down, for them to use to build their refineries EXEMPTING THEM from any environmental laws...they still REFUSED to build them....

They do NOT want to build more refineries because....

NOT building MORE refineries makes them control the price of gas better and makes them MORE, MUCH MORE profitable than they EVER WERE.

The oil and gas industry is the MOST profitable industry in the United States of America....they plan on keeping it that way and they CAN KEEP IT that way, because of the deregulation that we allowed to happen that allowed basically 5 oil companies to control 5 different regions of the usa, all by themselves...monopolies of regions.

I saw a great program on c-span on all of this within the last month.

jd

[red states rule]

They DO NOT WANT to build more refineries Dragon, PERIOD. The environmental EXCUSE is bullshit....they haven't even tried to build more refineries...they stop before they even pursue it and claim that the Green Laws will stop them... This is a lie to cover their own asses and this came out when WE OFFERED THEM Millitary installations all over the usa that had closed down, for them to use to build their refineries EXEMPTING THEM from any environmental laws...they still REFUSED to build them....

They do NOT want to build more refineries because....

NOT building MORE refineries makes them control the price of gas better and makes them MORE, MUCH MORE profitable than they EVER WERE.

The oil and gas industry is the MOST profitable industry in the United States of America....they plan on keeping it that way and they CAN KEEP IT that way, because of the deregulation that we allowed to happen that allowed basically 5 oil companies to control 5 different regions of the usa, all by themselves...monopolies of regions.

I saw a great program on c-span on all of this within the last month.

jd

JD, do you know how much profit oil companies make off the sales of a gallon of gas?

Try TEN CENTS

Do you know what the average amount of taxes are on a gallon of gas?

Try 45 to 80 cents

As far a the enviro wackos blocking building new refineries

http://www.reason.org/commentaries/moore_20050901.shtml

It is from 2005, but it nails it

[Pale Rider]

They DO NOT WANT to build more refineries Dragon, PERIOD. The environmental EXCUSE is bullshit....they haven't even tried to build more refineries...they stop before they even pursue it and claim that the Green Laws will stop them... This is a lie to cover their own asses and this came out when WE OFFERED THEM Millitary installations all over the usa that had closed down, for them to use to build their refineries EXEMPTING THEM from any environmental laws...they still REFUSED to build them....

They do NOT want to build more refineries because....

NOT building MORE refineries makes them control the price of gas better and makes them MORE, MUCH MORE profitable than they EVER WERE.

The oil and gas industry is the MOST profitable industry in the United States of America....they plan on keeping it that way and they CAN KEEP IT that way, because of the deregulation that we allowed to happen that allowed basically 5 oil companies to control 5 different regions of the usa, all by themselves...monopolies of regions.

I saw a great program on c-span on all of this within the last month.

jd

All politics aside jd, in light of the article Kathy posted, what do YOU think we should do?

[DragonStryk72]

Yea, the rising price of everything except salaries! I'm sure new refineries are number one on Obamessiah's list. I am amazed at the price of a gallon of milk. It's gonna get real interesting if the truckers go through with the strike that is planned for April, they are really taking it in the shorts.

my bet is, that if gas prices drop down by a real amount, you'll see the cost of living in general drop back down as well, not immediately, but as time passes, and these companies are able to get more of this oil into the market, supply and demand will work to automatically lower prices.

Most companies shoot for a percentage of their price that is profit, so that, when the cost to produce and ship drops, they can drop the price quickly without hurting their overall sales.

[JohnDoe]

JD, do you know how much profit oil companies make off the sales of a gallon of gas?

Try TEN CENTS

Do you know what the average amount of taxes are on a gallon of gas?

Try 45 to 80 cents

As far a the enviro wackos blocking building new refineries

http://www.reason.org/commentaries/moore_20050901.shtml

It is from 2005, but it nails itActually Rsr, the Oil industry profits are the highest profits for any industry in the united states.

They clear, after paying all taxes, after paying all ceo salaries, after paying all employees, after paying all benefits, after paying all costs including oil purchases from overseas, after paying all overhead for all of their different businesses, after paying all research and development costs and drilling costs, after paying all transportaion costs, the oil industry nets 10 cents to 11 cents on every DOLLAR they collect from us.

In comparison, Walmart Nets 3.5 cents for every dollar they collect from us....and people seem to complain about that like it is too much!!!!

The 3 Corporations that I have worked for expected 4-6 cents earned on every dollar when all was said and done, and 6 cents was considered VERY GOOD return for the retail/wholesale/manufacturing industries.....compared to walmart's 3.5 cents, it was EXCELLENT! Earning 6 cents on the dollar compared to 3.5 cents on the dollar was earning 71% more in profits than Walmart was Earning so it was EXCELLENT!

Earning 11 cents on the dollar verses earning 3.5 cents on the dollar is earning/making 214% MORE IN PROFITS than walmart is earning in profits....to put what the oil companies are reporting in profits in to perspective!!!! It's incredible, truely incredible to achieve such a feat....and guess whose backs they are earning the EXTRA, INCREASED profits from the past 6 years?

Us.

jd

Your figures are old and outdated RSR....the oil and gas industry have been reporting unprecedented, RECORD profits.

[JohnDoe]

All politics aside jd, in light of the article Kathy posted, what do YOU think we should do?For this oil in North Dakota? Drill like mad!!!! What the heck have they been holding back and waiting for...do they want us tax payers to pay for the drilling or something? lol

It is OIL that was in this find, NOT refined gas...

If they do not invest some of their damn profits in to building refineries, and HOPEFULLY the newer more environmentally safe refineries, then we will NOT SEE the price of gas go down...PERIOD.

This program said the past month we reduced our use of gasoline by 100,000 barrels a day I thought they said but it could have been for the month, and 600,000 gallons of gas reduction with the additive of ethanol in to the gas mix...since we instituted the ethanol program...

This is an incredible reduction in usage but gasoline prices CONTINUE TO RISE for us....the LACK of refineries is what controls the price of gas being so high.

Maybe , we the people need to build and OWN ourselves some refineries on those closed military bases, put a fire under the oil industry's butt?

jd

[DragonStryk72]

Actually Rsr, the Oil industry profits are the highest profits for any industry in the united states.

They clear, after paying all taxes, after paying all ceo salaries, after paying all employees, after paying all benefits, after paying all costs including oil purchases from overseas, after paying all overhead for all of their different businesses, the oil industry nets 10 cents to 11 cents on every DOLLAR they collect from us.

In comparison, Walmart Nets 3.5 cents for every dollar they collect from us....and people seem to complain about that like it is too much!!!!

The 3 Corporations that I have worked for expected 4-6 cents earned on every dollar when all was said and done, and 6 cents was considered VERY GOOD return for the retail/wholesale/manufacturing industries.....compared to walmart's 3.5 cents, it was EXCELLENT! Earning 6 cents on the dollar compared to 3.5 cents on the dollar was earning 71% more in profits than Walmart was Earning so it was EXCELLENT!

Earning 11 cents on the dollar verses earning 3.5 cents on the dollar is earning/making 214% MORE IN PROFITS than walmart is earning in profits....to put what the oil companies are reporting in profits in to perspective!!!! It's incredible, truely incredible to achieve such a feat....and guess whose backs they are earning the EXTRA, INCREASED profits from the past 6 years?

Us.

jd

Your figures are old and outdated RSR....the oil and gas industry have been reporting unprecedented, RECORD profits.

we're gonna need some actual statistics on that though, jd. It still also does not answer the article, which yes, has a very factual basis. We watched it happen over drilling in ANWAR, which was specifically meant to be used as an oil field should the need arise, like say, a protracted fight in the Middle East that raises gas prices an untenable amount, or a hurricane swallows a city, and destroys some port space, and refineries, as well as the oil that is located within those refineries. The environmental lobby crushed it, despite the fact that it would have helped mitigate the current gas prices.

[red states rule]

Actually Rsr, the Oil industry profits are the highest profits for any industry in the united states.

They clear, after paying all taxes, after paying all ceo salaries, after paying all employees, after paying all benefits, after paying all costs including oil purchases from overseas, after paying all overhead for all of their different businesses, the oil industry nets 10 cents to 11 cents on every DOLLAR they collect from us.

In comparison, Walmart Nets 3.5 cents for every dollar they collect from us....and people seem to complain about that like it is too much!!!!

The 3 Corporations that I have worked for expected 4-6 cents earned on every dollar when all was said and done, and 6 cents was considered VERY GOOD return for the retail/wholesale/manufacturing industries.....compared to walmart's 3.5 cents, it was EXCELLENT! Earning 6 cents on the dollar compared to 3.5 cents on the dollar was earning 71% more in profits than Walmart was Earning so it was EXCELLENT!

Earning 11 cents on the dollar verses earning 3.5 cents on the dollar is earning/making 214% MORE IN PROFITS than walmart is earning in profits....to put what the oil companies are reporting in profits in to perspective!!!! It's incredible, truely incredible to achieve such a feat....and guess whose backs they are earning the EXTRA, INCREASED profits from the past 6 years?

Us.

jd

Your figures are old and outdated RSR....the oil and gas industry have been reporting unprecedented, RECORD profits.

JD, the bottom line is the for all the work the oil companies do, the profit margin of ten cents a gallon is low

They have to find the oil, then drill, then pump, then ship to a refinery, refine it, then deliver it to your local gas station

The inventmest that has to made before they drill a hole is huge

The numbers are current JD - all that for a dime profit off a gallon of gas. Why are Dems so obsessed with the legal profit oa a US corporation? Their damn taxes are 4 to 8 times what the oil cmpany makes. So who is gouging who JD?

BTW, do you know how much Exon paid in taxes last year?

http://seekingalpha.com/article/63131-exxon-s-2007-tax-bill-30-billion


For some reason Dems say it is not enough

[5stringJeff]

We should be drilling this stuff immediately. The price of crude should drop substantially - perhaps $10-$20/bbl - once this report is officially released.

And could it be that the Dakotas and eastern Montana are in for a boom cycle?

[Kathianne]

We should be drilling this stuff immediately. The price of crude should drop substantially - perhaps $10-$20/bbl - once this report is officially released.

And could it be that the Dakotas and eastern Montana are in for a boom cycle?

And Cheney pushing for more refineries, Alaska drilling, and US exploration may have had an effect. I know, he's Darth Vader and all, but I think when all is said, analyzed we may find out many things were not as they seemed. I think this may go down as an administration that was more Nixonian than Nixon's, regarding communication of policies and the logic that underlied them.

[5stringJeff]

Yeah, I definitely give Bush 43 a D- on execution.

[JohnDoe]

we're gonna need some actual statistics on that though, jd. It still also does not answer the article, which yes, has a very factual basis. We watched it happen over drilling in ANWAR, which was specifically meant to be used as an oil field should the need arise, like say, a protracted fight in the Middle East that raises gas prices an untenable amount, or a hurricane swallows a city, and destroys some port space, and refineries, as well as the oil that is located within those refineries. The environmental lobby crushed it, despite the fact that it would have helped mitigate the current gas prices.
What IS your question Pale?

The article mentions NOTHING AT ALL regarding environmentalists concerned with this region...? So, how can this compare to ANWR...A National Wildlife Reserve, where it is against the law as it stands to drill?


Did I miss something about no one investing in this and drilling there because some group is trying to stop them?

This oil find was found in 1999...what the HELL is taking them so long? To me, THEY are holding back so they can continue to keep oil and gas prices high...

WHERE IN THE HELL are the Oil Speculators, why isn't oil going down on this speculation of the biggest expansion of oil wells since 1938 when oil was found in Saudi Arabia for goodness sakes?

A hurricane gets named in the atlantic and the damn Oil Speculators make the price of oil go up with speculations of it hitting the gulf of Mexico and oil wells or refineries off the coast. Then it misses them altogether and they wait 3 weeks to speculate the price down... i'm telling ya, we are being ripped off!

This is just such bulloney!

anyway....sorry for mouthing off...ask me the question you want me to answer and I will, but I am a little bit confused at what it is at this point? :)

jd

[DragonStryk72]

What IS your question Pale?

The article mentions NOTHING AT ALL regarding environmentalists concerned with this region...? So, how can this compare to ANWR...A National Wildlife Reserve, where it is against the law as it stands to drill?


Did I miss something about no one investing in this and drilling there because some group is trying to stop them?

This oil find was found in 1999...what the HELL is taking them so long? To me, THEY are holding back so they can continue to keep oil and gas prices high...

WHERE IN THE HELL are the Oil Speculators, why isn't oil going down on this speculation of the biggest expansion of oil wells since 1938 when oil was found in Saudi Arabia for goodness sakes?

A hurricane gets named in the atlantic and the damn Oil Speculators make the price of oil go up with speculations of it hitting the gulf of Mexico and oil wells or refineries off the coast. Then it misses them altogether and they wait 3 weeks to speculate the price down... i'm telling ya, we are being ripped off!

This is just such bulloney!

anyway....sorry for mouthing off...ask me the question you want me to answer and I will, but I am a little bit confused at what it is at this point? :)

jd

I'm Stryk, not Pale
Because they speculated on ANWAR, which was established as a Wildlife refuge, UNLESS we needed the oil that was there, because, at the time, we did not, and so put in the provision to be able to use the land later, except, guess what, it got crushed, and so the companies lost money. any wonder they're not quite ready to put their balls in that bear trap again?

In 99, we didn't have much of a problem with the Middle East, so there was no need for the drilling when there was a ready supply was already there. the price per barrel was much lower, and so it wasn't seen as cost effective then to open it up (And here are some lovely new taxes to go with the new drill).

Oil is finite, so the companies are using the ME, because, let's face, the regulations down there are about as loose as you get, so it's not as though they have to work near as hard for it.

Katrina did hit refineries btw, and they waited to make certain that the companies weren't going to collapse, that's speculating, it's speculative, not concrete, and when somebody tells you that you lost several million dollars overnight, you feel it.

It is our own government that has created this tangled mess of an economy, and we are going to have to start learning how to prioritize better if we are to repair it.

[PostmodernProphet]

JD, do you know how much profit oil companies make off the sales of a gallon of gas?

Try TEN CENTS

actually, Red, that's a bit misleading.....the retail gas outlet on the corner where you fill your car makes a profit of ten cents a gallon....then there's the profit for the distributor who trucks the gas to the retail outlet, and the profit for the company that piped the gas from the refinery to the distributor......and then there's the profit for the refinery.....and probably a profit for the transporter who got the oil from the well to the refinery......now the biggie.....the profit for the guy pumping it out of the ground.....now tell me....if they only get ten cents a gallon profit and you can produce about twenty gallons of gas from a barrel of oil ($2 profit), that means if oil is selling for $100 a barrel, their costs are $98 a barrel?......it must have really sucked when oil was only selling for $60 a barrel, they had to feed a loss of $38 for every barrel they took out of the ground, right?.......

I have a friend who has some hunting property up in northern Michigan.....he got it cheap because it didn't come with the mineral rights.....there's an old oil well on the property....sometimes it pumps and sometimes it doesn't....he once asked the well owner what the difference was.....he said "$20 a barrel", if the market goes over that he turns it on, if it goes below he turns it off......this last year he bought a new, more powerful pump for the well......because he hadn't turned it off in quite a while and the old one was burning out.....

[JohnDoe]

I'm Stryk, not Pale
Because they speculated on ANWAR, which was established as a Wildlife refuge, UNLESS we needed the oil that was there, because, at the time, we did not, and so put in the provision to be able to use the land later, except, guess what, it got crushed, and so the companies lost money. any wonder they're not quite ready to put their balls in that bear trap again?

got a link for this Dragon?

In 99, we didn't have much of a problem with the Middle East, so there was no need for the drilling when there was a ready supply was already there. the price per barrel was much lower, and so it wasn't seen as cost effective then to open it up (And here are some lovely new taxes to go with the new drill).

We had a huge problem in the middle east with oil in 99... In fact clinton had to release some of the oil reserves to pull oil prices back in line and he showed the arabs he was tired of the dicking...

Oil is finite, so the companies are using the ME, because, let's face, the regulations down there are about as loose as you get, so it's not as though they have to work near as hard for it.

There is no excuse, these oil companies are either American and choose their loyalties to America or they can kiss my pearly white butt!

We are spending trillions on wars in the middle east because these suckers decided it would be "easier" on them to get the oil from the Middle east...BULLONEY!!!

Katrina did hit refineries btw, and they waited to make certain that the companies weren't going to collapse, that's speculating, it's speculative, not concrete, and when somebody tells you that you lost several million dollars overnight, you feel it.

There is NO excuse for manipulating (not speculating) a market.

It is our own government that has created this tangled mess of an economy, and we are going to have to start learning how to prioritize better if we are to repair it.


What do you suggest on the prioritizing and what do you mean by our own gov causing this mess? please explain!


OOPS, yes you are DrangonStryk! Sorry! :)

jd

[red states rule]

Good morning JD

Here is more on the dime profit oil companies make. Your local gas station might make 2 or 3 cents profit


Oil Company Profits

The Investment U e-Letter: Issue # 653
March 23, 2007

Oil Company Profits: Just Who Is Gouging Whom?
by Alexander Green, Investment Director, The Oxford Club


The new speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, calls oil company profits "obscene."

And at first blush, many would agree. Over the past 12 months, for example, ExxonMobil has made pre-tax profits of $164 billion on sales of $369.5 billion. That's a lot.

But are big oil company profits bad?

Hardly. Companies exist to maximize profits. Profits are what keep workers employed. They keep companies innovating, creating new products and services. They keep the economy humming and the country strong. And they allow you and I to invest and secure our financial future.

Even the school teacher who plunks some of her retirement account in an S&P 500 Index fund benefits from Exxon's rising share price - which is a direct result of Exxon's rising profits.

Many will argue that there is nothing wrong with an oil company's profits, per se. It's just that Exxon is gouging us at the pump. They're making too much.

But are they? After all, Exxon can't dictate gasoline prices. Markets determine the price of oil. It's supply and demand that sets the price at the pump.

Oil Companies, Profits, and the Courts

Some Americans are skeptical on this point, I know. So I direct them to last year's Supreme Court decision. The court ruled unanimously that oil companies have not been colluding to set prices.

Oil prices are high today because the economies of huge nations like China and India are developing rapidly. More oil is being demanded in the world market and there are few new sources of supply.

Hurricane Katrina destroyed a lot of oil processing capacity around the Gulf of Mexico too, so there has been less oil being processed. When less oil is supplied, gasoline prices rise.

What does the average oil company make today on the sale of a gallon of gas? Ten cents.

The federal tax on gasoline, on the other hand, is nearly twice that. Then there's state gasoline taxes. (If you live in New York, for example, you're paying 68 cents a gallon in taxes.)

If Exxon is gouging us at ten cents a gallon, what exactly is the federal government doing to us at 18.4 cents a gallon?


for the complete article

http://www.investmentu.com/IUEL/2007/20070323.html

[PostmodernProphet]

What does the average oil company make today on the sale of a gallon of gas? Ten cents.

repeating it won't make it true, Red.....if they were only making ten cents a gallon when oil was at $40 a barrel, why are they still only making ten cents a gallon when they sell oil for $100 a barrel?.....what expenses have gone up?......

ever wonder what ten cents a gallon actually looks like on the ground?....

http://cache.viewimages.com/xc/78239200.jpg?v=1&c=ViewImages&k=2&d=17A4AD9FDB9CF1937B8C00E1EDBEE48C653BB0BB336660DD 284831B75F48EF45

go to google images and enter construction dubai........

[PostmodernProphet]

oil profits.....

reported in 2006 when oil was selling for $50 a barrel instead of $100


Analysts at JP Morgan recently pegged average refining and marketing profit at $19.10 per 42-gallon barrel of crude oil, up 60 percent from a year ago.

with production at 20 gallons of gas per barrel, it's closer to $1 a gallon than to a dime....and that was when they got half as much per barrel....


refining profits of 44 cents per gallon of gasoline

the profits from the refineries alone is four times what you claim the industry receives.....

http://www.californiaprogressreport.com/2006/07/gas_prices_a_pa.html

Red, it is time you realized that being a conservative does not mean you have to be an oil company stooge.....

[DragonStryk72]

Originally Posted by DragonStryk72 View Post
I'm Stryk, not Pale
Because they speculated on ANWAR, which was established as a Wildlife refuge, UNLESS we needed the oil that was there, because, at the time, we did not, and so put in the provision to be able to use the land later, except, guess what, it got crushed, and so the companies lost money. any wonder they're not quite ready to put their balls in that bear trap again?

got a link for this Dragon?

In 99, we didn't have much of a problem with the Middle East, so there was no need for the drilling when there was a ready supply was already there. the price per barrel was much lower, and so it wasn't seen as cost effective then to open it up (And here are some lovely new taxes to go with the new drill).


We had a huge problem in the middle east with oil in 99... In fact clinton had to release some of the oil reserves to pull oil prices back in line and he showed the arabs he was tired of the dicking...

Oil is finite, so the companies are using the ME, because, let's face, the regulations down there are about as loose as you get, so it's not as though they have to work near as hard for it.

There is no excuse, these oil companies are either American and choose their loyalties to America or they can kiss my pearly white butt!

We are spending trillions on wars in the middle east because these suckers decided it would be "easier" on them to get the oil from the Middle east...BULLONEY!!!

Katrina did hit refineries btw, and they waited to make certain that the companies weren't going to collapse, that's speculating, it's speculative, not concrete, and when somebody tells you that you lost several million dollars overnight, you feel it.

There is NO excuse for manipulating (not speculating) a market.

It is our own government that has created this tangled mess of an economy, and we are going to have to start learning how to prioritize better if we are to repair it.What do you suggest on the prioritizing and what do you mean by our own gov causing this mess? please explain!


OOPS, yes you are DrangonStryk! Sorry! :)

jd

jd, first off, prove that they are manipulating the market, provide links for your assertions, and I will begin getting mine together for you. Until then, we are having an enlightened debate between the two of us, okay?

Please stop using the "evil corporations" philosophy, it helps no one. these speculators are just that, speculating, there's no safety net for them if they take the wrong deal. they are not protected in any way from losing their shirt on a bad business deal save for setting up back up funds themselves.

My main point though, is that you are being too quick to pass blame, preferring a quick band aid solution for something that requires stitches and a splint. Everyone these days seems a little bit obsessed with these quick points, but they do not solve the problem, they simply put blinders upon us.

As to the ME, yes we had a little tiny hiccup of a difficulty, and corrected it within a month or so. Not precisely the kind of stuff that alters economies. what does alter economies is overburdened governments voting itself more and more money, devaluing the dollar to such extent that now, Canada, who's dollar has never been what ours was, is now even up with us. You can't tell me that hasn't changed the landscape. We have an economy that is poised on the brink of a severe recession, and you question why investors may not be investing? Because they know how to get rich, and keep themselves that way, and part of that is not throwing their money away foolishly.

ANWR was founded that way, btw, it was on multiple news channels, it sparked debates on every talk show that dealt with it.

[Classact]

Who obstructs domestic drilling and building refineries? DEMOCRATS!

Letter: Democrats block efforts to increase oil productionhttp://www.tcpalm.com/news/2007/oct/22/letter-democrats-block-efforts-increase-oil-produc/

Senate Committee Rejects Republican Refinery Bill http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/oct2005/2005-10-26-10.asp

Dissenting Views
of
Reps. John D. Dingell, Henry A. Waxman, Edward J. Markey,
Rick Boucher, Edolphus Towns, Frank Pallone, Jr., Sherrod Brown, Bart Gordon, Bobby L. Rush, Anna G. Eshoo, Bart Stupak,
Eliot L. Engel, Albert R. Wynn, Ted Strickland, Diana DeGette,
Lois Capps, Michael F. Doyle, Tom Allen, Jim Davis,
Jan Schakowsky, Hilda L. Solis, Jay Inslee, Tammy Baldwin, and Mike Ross
H.R. 3893, the "Gasoline for America's Security Act of 2005" http://energycommerce.house.gov/legviews/109lvhr3893-dissent.shtml

There are hundreds of links that show the Democratic Party's total willingness to sell out America to the Mid East to coddle the Environmentalist Lobby.

[DragonStryk72]

And to the point of what to do, I would the main point is this: Get the hell out of their way. It cannot be said strongly enough that our government sucks at all things financial, and this means that, in order for the economy to improve, the government needs to get its ass out of it.

[trobinett]

Just the fact, as yet proven, that the oil is there should lessen the economic impact, that OPEC has on oil prices.

The details we can work out.:salute:

[Sitarro]

I worked for a offshore rig company in the 80s. They had numerous semi submersible rigs that they would lease, the going rate was 100,000 a day whether you hit any oil or not. That price just covered the rig and basic crew.

Looking for oil is an expensive business that doesn't pay out a lot of the time.

The oil business has an interesting ad on the radio, they ask a person if they know who the stock holders of an oil company are...... of course the answer is "I don't know". They then tell the person that if they have a 401K or any kind of investment plan then they are probably the stockholders. People don't seem to get that corporations are made up of people..... people like they are.

[JohnDoe]

And to the point of what to do, I would the main point is this: Get the hell out of their way. It cannot be said strongly enough that our government sucks at all things financial, and this means that, in order for the economy to improve, the government needs to get its ass out of it.

Why fabricate a story about the government holding this back? Why blame the government as you have done, when it does not mention ONE THING in this article about it being the gvt that is holding the drilling back?

It's our government that spent the money to do the geographical survey that found this black gold according to the article and our government that is going to give a huge report on this find this week?

Regarding your other note....I have worked for corporations almost as long as you have been alive....I understand profit margins and gross margin and earnings and Return on investment, (ROI) and markup, and overhead and percentage increases and company perfornmance in their financials... I don't need it explained to me....you guys need it explained to you...which is evident from all the posts on this thread...

and here are some links that i have found so far on the subject of profits and return on investment in the oil and gas industry.

http://www.niemanwatchdog.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=Background.view&backgroundid=135

http://www.reuters.com/article/reutersEdge/idUSN0422168020070504


http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/03/09/MNGF9OID9N1.DTL

Profit margins at California's gasoline refineries are soaring. And they're taking pump prices along for the ride.

Refinery profit margins have more than doubled since last fall, according to one rough measurement, and now stand at $39 per barrel on the West Coast. That's more than double their average of $17 for the last five years.

Bulging refinery margins are one of the reasons Californians now pay $2.96 for a gallon of regular, up 44 cents since the start of February. And they play a part in record multibillion-dollar profits of major oil companies.

Californians also pay far more than drivers in other states do. The state's average now is 45 cents higher than the national average. Usually, the difference is more like 25 cents.




Two months earlier, executives of many of the same companies were brought before the Senate Judiciary Committee and questioned about the "merger mania" that some senators argued was behind the high oil prices.

In November 2005, the chief executives of the five largest U.S. oil companies sat shoulder to shoulder at a Senate witness table and sought to justify their profits. At the time, Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., reflected the views of many of his colleagues when he talked of "a growing suspicion that oil companies are taking unfair advantage."

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/C/CONGRESS_OIL?SITE=MIBAX&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT



Published on Friday, June 15, 2001 by the Associated Press
Leaked Oil Industry Memo Suggests Bid to Curb Refinery Output
by H. Josef Hebert

Even as the Bush administration cites a lack of refineries as a cause of energy shortages, oil industry documents show that five years ago companies were looking for ways to cut refinery output to raise profits. The internal memos involving several major oil companies were released Thursday by Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., whose office obtained them from a whistleblower. He said the materials did not necessarily reflect any illegal activities but said some of them "sure look very anticompetitive."



Dragon, there are plenty of reason to question what is going on with the oil and gasoline market and plenty of reasons to be concerned with possible manipulation....

it only takes a google and some reading to see this, it is NOT something that is just "made up" to punish the oil industry as you implied!

And

good morning

jd

[red states rule]

Good morning JD

Please tell me how the Dems plan to stick oil companies with billions in new taxes will increase the supply of oil, and lower gas prices?

Last year Exxon paid about $30 billion in taxes - why is that not enough for the Dems?

Besides, corporations do not pay those taxes, we do with higher prices

And if Dems are so upset over high gas prices, why not repeal the taxes on gas?

[retiredman]

and exxon STILL made more after tax profit than ever.....

clearly...as far as exxon goes, the more expensive oil is, the greater their profits. demand for gasoline and diesel fuel is nearly inelastic. They can add their profit margin onto a gallon of gas and the more it costs US, the more THEY take home in profits.

[red states rule]

and exxon STILL made more after tax profit than ever.....

clearly...as far as exxon goes, the more expensive oil is, the greater their profits. demand for gasoline and diesel fuel is nearly inelastic. They can add their profit margin onto a gallon of gas and the more it costs US, the more THEY take home in profits.

What a shock, A company has record demand for their product, they have record sales of that product, and they make a record profit

So a 41% tax rate is not enough for you MFM?

Remember, the government take on a gallon of gas if 4 to 6 times what oil companies make. I do not hear you complaining about how much government takes in

[JohnDoe]

Good morning JD

Please tell me how the Dems plan to stick oil companies with billions in new taxes will increase the supply of oil, and lower gas prices?

Last year Exxon paid about $30 billion in taxes - why is that not enough for the Dems?

Besides, corporations do not pay those taxes, we do with higher prices

And if Dems are so upset over high gas prices, why not repeal the taxes on gas?

Because it is Corporate Welfare RSR....

Why should oil companies get this Corporate Welfare from us tax payers and companies like Walmart NOT GET THEM, or companies like jcpennies or Dillards, or CSX trucking or any corporation out there?

Why?

It is NOT FAIR for other corporations that do not get this corporate welfare from the government to make them more profitable at the tax payer's expense....that these other corporations that are not given the same tax breaks do not make as much in profit for their shareholders...

WHY should all the tax payers in the usa, PAY for the oil and gas industry to be more profitable than a Walmart as example, or any other corporation?

I do not think this is just.

and good morning rsr, hope all is well! Took pics of my cat yesterday to send to you but I have not downloaded them yet to the computer.

jd

[red states rule]

JD, so if you remove the tax breaks (remeber Exxon paid $30 billion last year in taxes) the price of gas would go even higher

Government should do all it can to make it easier for oil companies to explore, and drill for oil. They remove restrictions so new refineries can be built

For years libs said how gas should be more cost more - now they have it and they are the ones whining the loudest. While at the same time they are the ones blocking all attempts to increase production

Looking forward to the cat pics JD

[retiredman]

What a shock, A company has record demand for their product, they have record sales of that product, and they make a record profit

So a 41% tax rate is not enough for you MFM?

Remember, the government take on a gallon of gas if 4 to 6 times what oil companies make. I do not hear you complaining about how much government takes in


like I said.... oil companies could give a shit if oil prices go through the roof. They LOVE turmoil in oil markets...it just means money in their pockets....

and there two oil men are at the top of the executive branch starting a stupid war in Iraq that causes turmoil in the oil markets.

coincidence?:laugh2:

[red states rule]

like I said.... oil companies could give a shit if oil prices go through the roof. They LOVE turmoil in oil markets...it just means money in their pockets....

and there two oil men are at the top of the executive branch starting a stupid war in Iraq that causes turmoil in the oil markets.

coincidence?:laugh2:

and what have Dems offered to LOWER the price of gas and INCREASE supply?

Higher taxes will not get the job done

Keep demonizing the oil companies MFM, that is what Dems do best. Not only to oil companies. but most US corporations

[JohnDoe]

JD, so if you remove the tax breaks (remeber Exxon paid $30 billion last year in taxes) the price of gas would go even higher

Government should do all it can to make it easier for oil companies to explore, and drill for oil. They remove restrictions so new refineries can be built

For years libs said how gas should be more cost more - now they have it and they are the ones whining the loudest. While at the same time they are the ones blocking all attempts to increase production

Looking forward to the cat pics JD


if the price goes up because we stop the corporate welfare, then that is what is called "The Free market" at work....

Why should all those people that do not drive cars in the USA have to use their taxes to make gasoline lower for you and me?

That's not fair to those tax payers, they don't use the product to the extent that us car drivers do?

And as I said, it is not fair to the other corporations out there when one corporation or business is given the welfare to make them more profitable and other corporations are not!

jd

[red states rule]

if the price goes up because we stop the corporate welfare, then that is what is called "The Free market" at work....

Why should all those people that do not drive cars in the USA have to use their taxes to make gasoline lower for you and me?

That's not fair to those tax payers, they don't use the product to the extent that us car drivers do?

And as I said, it is not fair to the other corporations out there when one corporation or business is given the welfare to make them more profitable and other corporations are not!

jd

JD, why should I have to pay for schools when I do not have any kids in them?

Why should I pay for someone elses retirement (social security)

Why should I pay for someones elses health care?

See where you are going here?

Oil companies do a remarkale job for a dime profit

If the enviro wackos and Dems would take the handcuffs off the oil companies, and let them dp what they do best - you would see a huge drop in the price of oil and at the gas pump

[Dilloduck]

if the price goes up because we stop the corporate welfare, then that is what is called "The Free market" at work....

Why should all those people that do not drive cars in the USA have to use their taxes to make gasoline lower for you and me?

That's not fair to those tax payers, they don't use the product to the extent that us car drivers do?

And as I said, it is not fair to the other corporations out there when one corporation or business is given the welfare to make them more profitable and other corporations are not!

jd

People who do not drive still benefit from lower fuel prices. I assume they still eat ?

[red states rule]

People who do not drive still benefit from lower fuel prices. I assume they still eat ?

Gas prices influence the price of everything. Shipping costs, heating and cooling costs, ect

[JohnDoe]

People who do not drive still benefit from lower fuel prices. I assume they still eat ?



minutely, compared to you and me, who drive our own cars....#1 user of oil/gas

So YOU AGREE with Corporate welfare given to one corporation over another and agree to use tax dollars to make one group of share holders more profitable than another group of shareholders?

Who is a true conservative on this board? I can't find any.... :(

jd

[Dilloduck]

minutely, compared to you and me, who drive our own cars....#1 user of oil/gas

So YOU AGREE with Corporate welfare given to one corporation over another and agree to use tax dollars to make one group of share holders more profitable than another group of shareholders?

Who is a true conservative on this board? I can't find any.... :(

jd

I'm against any kind of welfare but lets not pretend federal help to big oil only helps people who drive cars.

[JohnDoe]

I'm against any kind of welfare but lets not pretend federal help to big oil only helps people who drive cars.

I am not pretending...you are...especially when you want to say that people who drive cars, the number one guzzler of refined oil in this country, are not the ones that benefit MUCH MORE SO, than the person who does not drive.

Of COURSE gas affects the price of everything, that does not have to be said!

I'm not an idiot....i can understand reality, and what I said is fact.

jd

[red states rule]

I am not pretending...you are...especially when you want to say that people who drive cars, the number one guzzler of refined oil in this country, are not the ones that benefit MUCH MORE SO, than the person who does not drive.

Of COURSE gas affects the price of everything, that does not have to be said!

I'm not an idiot....i can understand reality, and what I said is fact.

jd

True to their nature, Congressmen Dingle (D-MI) want to increase the Federal gas tax by 50 cents per gallon

Dems have this obsession with milking more of our money from us no matter what the economic conditions are

How the hell raising the federal gas tax will increase the supply of oil and bring prices down excapes me

[JohnDoe]

True to their nature, Congressmen Dingle (D-MI) want to increase the Federal gas tax by 50 cents per gallon

Dems have this obsession with milking more of our money from us no matter what the economic conditions are

How the hell raising the federal gas tax will increase the supply of oil and bring prices down excapes me

there is NO possibility of this EVER passing!!!!

congressmen and senators are ALL in to keeping their own power....and don't want to be voted out of office!!!! 50 cents a gallon additional tax would cause a riot among the citizens!!!! maybe even calls for a lynching at this point!!!

jd

[red states rule]

there is NO possibility of this EVER passing!!!!

congressmen and senators are ALL in to keeping their own power....and don't want to be voted out of office!!!! 50 cents a gallon additional tax would cause a riot among the citizens!!!! maybe even calls for a lynching at this point!!!

jd

JD, have you seen the Dems budget blueprint they passed? While the gas tax increase was not included, they are going to screw you with other tax increases. If you make more then $31,000/yr - you are considered "rich" and they will raise your taxes

And If a Dem is elected President, who will stop them from raising the gas tax? I know how these clowns think. they will tell us it is for our own good. We will not reduce our consumption of oil, so this is needed to force us to do so

They will claim the money will be used to find other types of fuels, but it wil not. It wil be used for even more pork projects and handouts

[retiredman]

JD, have you seen the Dems budget blueprint they passed? While the gas tax increase was not included, they are going to screw you with other tax increases. If you make more then $31,000/yr - you are considered "rich" and they will raise your taxes

And If a Dem is elected President, who will stop them from raising the gas tax? I know how these clowns think. they will tell us it is for our own good. We will not reduce our consumption of oil, so this is needed to force us to do so

They will claim the money will be used to find other types of fuels, but it wil not. It wil be used for even more pork projects and handouts


:link:
I'll need a link to that $31K figure.

[DragonStryk72]

and exxon STILL made more after tax profit than ever.....

clearly...as far as exxon goes, the more expensive oil is, the greater their profits. demand for gasoline and diesel fuel is nearly inelastic. They can add their profit margin onto a gallon of gas and the more it costs US, the more THEY take home in profits.

Follow that thought through though, do you really believe that, should the government drop more taxes on them, more regulations, and more fees, that they're going to just let it eat at their profits? Or is it more likely they'll simply increase the price?

[DragonStryk72]

:link:
I'll need a link to that $31K figure.

well, not rich, but you shift up a tax bracket, and yes, that changes a heck of alot. Say you kick ass at your job, and you're making $30k, then they give you a 10% raise, putting you to $33k, in all technicality, you would lose money on this, because the new tax bracket will take away more money than what your raise covers.

[red states rule]

:link:
I'll need a link to that $31K figure.

Congress' $3,000 per Household Tax Increase
by Brian Riedl


Washington has no budget problems that higher taxes cannot solve. So seems the message from Congress.

The House- and Senate-passed budgets would raise taxes on every American taxpayer by an average of $3,000 per household. But don’t expect Congress to share in the sacrifice: The budget would hike discretionary spending by 8 percent, and not cut a single government program.

First, the tax increase. The largest four-year revenue surge in 40 years has pushed tax revenues to 18.8 percent of GDP -- well above the historical average. Yet the House-passed budget tied itself to a revenue baseline that assumes the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts will expire, and that the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) will catch another 20 million Americans. That baseline also assumes the child tax credit would be halved, the marriage penalty reimposed, and the 10 percent tax bracket raised to 15 percent. Investment taxes would likely rise, and the 55 percent “death tax” would be reinstated as well. (The Senate budget would prevent some of the lower-income tax hikes.)

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=25650&page=1

[retiredman]

Congress' $3,000 per Household Tax Increase
by Brian Riedl


Washington has no budget problems that higher taxes cannot solve. So seems the message from Congress.

The House- and Senate-passed budgets would raise taxes on every American taxpayer by an average of $3,000 per household. But don’t expect Congress to share in the sacrifice: The budget would hike discretionary spending by 8 percent, and not cut a single government program.

First, the tax increase. The largest four-year revenue surge in 40 years has pushed tax revenues to 18.8 percent of GDP -- well above the historical average. Yet the House-passed budget tied itself to a revenue baseline that assumes the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts will expire, and that the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) will catch another 20 million Americans. That baseline also assumes the child tax credit would be halved, the marriage penalty reimposed, and the 10 percent tax bracket raised to 15 percent. Investment taxes would likely rise, and the 55 percent “death tax” would be reinstated as well. (The Senate budget would prevent some of the lower-income tax hikes.)

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=25650&page=1

"Although those tax increases are assumed in the congressional baseline..." Reidl made it up...why am I not surprised????

now...be a good boy and get the Thomas link to the House Bill that would show a tax increase on folks earning more than $31K, or don't you know how to DO that?

[red states rule]

"Although those tax increases are assumed in the congressional baseline..." Reidl made it up...why am I not surprised????

now...be a good boy and get the Thomas link to the House Bill that would show a tax increase on folks earning more than $31K, or don't you know how to DO that?

Still lying about the Dems desire to jack up our taxes?

[retiredman]

Still lying about the Dems desire to jack up our taxes?

haven't figured out how to use Thomas yet?:laugh2:

[red states rule]

haven't figured out how to use Thomas yet?:laugh2:

You did this last year when you tried to lie about how Dems were not out to raise taxes

Party above all else with you.

I posted the link - and you ignore it.

Situation normal

[retiredman]

You did this last year when you tried to lie about how Dems were not out to raise taxes

Party above all else with you.

I posted the link - and you ignore it.

Situation normal

you posted a link that didn't mention $31K.

You posted a link to a conservative editorial about how the Bush temporary tax cuts will sunset. That is how they were written in the first place. If Bush didn't want them to sunset, he ought not to have signed them into law.

Now...be a good boy and go get that link from Thomas that shows how democrats think that anyone who makes more than $31K is "Rich".

I'll wait.

[red states rule]

you posted a link that didn't mention $31K.

You posted a link to a conservative editorial about how the Bush temporary tax cuts will sunset. That is how they were written in the first place. If Bush didn't want them to sunset, he ought not to have signed them into law.

Now...be a good boy and go get that link from Thomas that shows how democrats think that anyone who makes more than $31K is "Rich".

I'll wait.

So now Dems letting the Bush tax cuts exopisre is NOT a tax increase?

Here is another link - not that facts ever mean anything to you

CAN AMERICA AFFORD BARACK OBAMA?
raves +13 -3 by Ken posted 1 day ago
The March 17, 2008 edition of Human Events sets forth the following facts:
On March 12, during senate debate on the 2009 federal budget, Senator Wayne Allard (R. - Colo.) introduced an amendment entitled the "Obama Spend-o-Rama", which proposes funding just 111 of the 188 spending proposals put out so far during Barack Obama's presidential campaign, at a cost of $1.4 trillion over five years. There are 77 other proposals with unknown cost estimates that will add billions to that total. The new spending (just 66% of Obama's total proposals) would amount to a 10% increase over Bush's FY2009 proposal; the $300 billion per annum spending proposal would cost more than 42 states' annual budgets, combined; it is more than the United States spent last year on imported oil ($294 billion); and it is more than 60% larger than any one-year federal spending increase, ever (And remember, this is only 66% of Obama's total proposals!)!

Obama promises to fund his spending proposals with tax increases on Democrats' "attractive target" of people earning over $250,000 per year, but this will generate "only" $225 billion over five years, less than one-sixth of what is needed. If congress decides to widen the pool of taxpayers footing Obama's bill, it would have to raise taxes on the top 5% by 38%; the top 10% by 32%; the top 25% by 26%; or the top 50% by 23%. The top 50% of American taxpayers, those earning more than $31,000 [adjusted gross income] already pay 96.9% of all federal income taxes!

Obama claims to want to "balance the budget and stop spending the Social Security surplus." Combining that goal with Obama's massive new spending would cause the tax bills of the average taxpayer earning $62,000 to rise by $5,300, or 61%; for taxpayers earning $104,000, the increase would be more than $12,000, or 74%; and for taxpayers in the top 1%, earning more than $365,000, their tax bill will rise by $93,500, or 132%!

To put all of this into perspective, the 1993 tax hike by the Clinton administration raised taxes by $240.6 billion over five years, approximately one sixth of the increase required to fund just two-thirds of Obama's spending proposals! And Sen. Patrick Moynihan (D. - N.Y.) called the Clinton tax hike 'the largest tax increase in the history of public finance in the United States or anywhere else in the world." Obama's proposal would far exceed that five year amount in a single year!

These facts assume that tax revenues will increase, dollar for dollar, with the tax rate increases, which is never the case Would you vote for the "Obama Spend-o-Rama" amendment if you were in the Senate? Will Obama?
http://www.sodahead.com/question/67834/

[JohnDoe]

Follow that thought through though, do you really believe that, should the government drop more taxes on them, more regulations, and more fees, that they're going to just let it eat at their profits? Or is it more likely they'll simply increase the price?hey dragon!
the money was for them to reinvest in the usa and to explore for oil opportunities here instead of them continuing to explore or just easily buy the oild from canada, mexico and most importantly saudi arabia....

this FIND in north dakota as example....should be exploited to its fullest....

these type of ventures have been ignored by the oil industry because it is more profitable for them to ignore them.

Just as it is more profitable to RESTRICT the building and investing in refineries, as noted in one of the links i provided for you....where the big 5 oil execs SAID restricting the building of new refineries ....in whisleblower evidence turned over emails....would be to the oil refinery's advantage.

we live in a doggy, dog world where profits are all that matters and companies like these expect the tax payers to supplement their bottom line profits in order for them to do the right thing.... and this war in iraq is for them too, believe it or not....maybe not in full, maybe not directly, but it did benefit them.


yes, i realize you SAY that they were burned with ANWR, but i simply believe that is not true....they NEVER paid for the geological testing and exploring there, WE DID....via congressional appropriations of such.

oil companies ALWAYS KNEW that ANWR was a wildlife refuge, off limits!

they just want and have been lobbying for the rules to change on ANWR.

they have raised their profit margin by over 40%, year on top of year since this war in iraq has started, we do NOT need to fund promising oil finds or refineries for them....they can afford it, just like all other corporations that MUST FUND their own research and development.

if they were newly establishing industry, that needed a push....i could almost understand, like when we initially began subsidizing the oil industry here in the usa a near century ago....

jd

[DragonStryk72]

minutely, compared to you and me, who drive our own cars....#1 user of oil/gas

So YOU AGREE with Corporate welfare given to one corporation over another and agree to use tax dollars to make one group of share holders more profitable than another group of shareholders?

Who is a true conservative on this board? I can't find any.... :(

jd

It's only minute if you only look at the individual business savings, and do not look to the whole. Since prices on heating/cooling, shipping, and such would drop, the business-to-business sales costs would drop as well.

We should not be taxing business at all, it doesn't work, never has, and it never will, because we will always pay any tax levied against businesses, big or small, in the way of increased costs to us. In this country, the following is punished by he government by way of taxation: Saving & earning, investing (get hit three times on this one: Once when you buy the stock, each time you get your dividend, and once when you withdraw), and working hard (thanks for that overtime you put in, here's a new tax bracket). Now somehow, this in no way effects the economy, including the speculation market.

This is the market economy our government has created with a 76,000 page tax code that requires whole departments of accountants to oversee it for each company out there, but again, that apparently has no effect on the economy, or the price of drilling, it's only untold millions of dollars beyond the $30 billion in taxes, I mean it's not like that really effects the price of gas.

Again, this is why we need the Fair Tax, to get the leash off all of our businesses, so that supply and demand can work properly

[Kathianne]

Glad to see the topic come back a bit.


hey dragon!
the money was for them to reinvest in the usa and to explore for oil opportunities here instead of them continuing to explore or just easily buy the oild from canada, mexico and most importantly saudi arabia....

this FIND in north dakota as example....should be exploited to its fullest.... Thanks for getting back on topic.


these type of ventures have been ignored by the oil industry because it is more profitable for them to ignore them. Not exactly, it would not have been worth the cost to bring it up, when oil was at $50 a bl or even more. It's gone from $50 to over 100, very quickly. Since that time, it's been looked at and acted upon.


Just as it is more profitable to RESTRICT the building and investing in refineries, as noted in one of the links i provided for you....where the big 5 oil execs SAID restricting the building of new refineries ....in whisleblower evidence turned over emails....would be to the oil refinery's advantage.

we live in a doggy, dog world where profits are all that matters and companies like these expect the tax payers to supplement their bottom line profits in order for them to do the right thing.... and this war in iraq is for them too, believe it or not....maybe not in full, maybe not directly, but it did benefit them. So you would have the government take over the oil industry? Seems logical, companies are not going to act solely in the public interest.



yes, i realize you SAY that they were burned with ANWR, but i simply believe that is not true....they NEVER paid for the geological testing and exploring there, WE DID....via congressional appropriations of such.

oil companies ALWAYS KNEW that ANWR was a wildlife refuge, off limits!

they just want and have been lobbying for the rules to change on ANWR.

they have raised their profit margin by over 40%, year on top of year since this war in iraq has started, we do NOT need to fund promising oild finds or refineries for them....they can afford it, just like all other corporations that MUST FUND their own research and development.

if they were newly establishing industry, that needed a push....i could almost understand, like when we initially began subsidizing the oil industry here in the usa a near century ago....

jd

[red states rule]

By all means, lets have the same outfit that runs our public school system run the oil business

[JohnDoe]

Glad to see the topic come back a bit.

Thanks for getting back on topic. Not exactly, it would not have been worth the cost to bring it up, when oil was at $50 a bl or even more. It's gone from $50 to over 100, very quickly. Since that time, it's been looked at and acted upon. So you would have the government take over the oil industry? Seems logical, companies are not going to act solely in the public interest.

I believe it is over slightly over $20 a barrel is when it is cost effective to drill new places, NOT $50 a barrel.

Since then Congress passed another tax credit for them to explore, RIGHT when they did not need the tax incentive....because they were MORE than making enough to drill at a profit...a waste of tax dollars

jd

[JohnDoe]

By all means, lets have the same outfit that runs our public school system run the oil businessOur individual States run our school systems, the feds contribute about 7%-9% towards the cost of our schools....

unless of course you are talking about the Bush/Kennedy no child left behind?

[red states rule]

Our individual States run our school systems, the feds contribute about 7%-9% towards the cost of our schools....

unless of course you are talking about the Bush/Kennedy no child left behind?

I am talking about government period JD

We all know what a well oiled machine, and how efficent government is in implementing programs and spending our tax money

NCLB held teachers and schools accountable. That is our of the question to the Teachers Union

Which is a wholly owned subsidiary of the DNC

[Said1]

j


As to the ME, yes we had a little tiny hiccup of a difficulty, and corrected it within a month or so. Not precisely the kind of stuff that alters economies. what does alter economies is overburdened governments voting itself more and more money, devaluing the dollar to such extent that now, Canada, who's dollar has never been what ours was, is now even up with us. You can't tell me that hasn't changed the landscape. We have an economy that is poised on the brink of a severe recession, and you question why investors may not be investing? Because they know how to get rich, and keep themselves that way, and part of that is not throwing their money away foolishly.


Canada's dollar was actually worth more than yours, years ago. :finger3:




And for those who care, modern technology aside, directional (slant, horizontal) drilling is really expensive. It can get to places direct drilling can not, including fields that were considered 'dry' (because of it's ability to go a lot deeper and around obstacles ie lakes) and protected areas like parks and such. It's really an amazing technology.

People also need to consider the reasons why this type of drilling was not pursued until the price of oil was so high - perhaps using this type of drilling, in certain locations was not feesable when prices were considerably lower?


Edit: I didn't read the entire thread before posting above, so s'cuse moi if this was mentioned already. :)

[Kathianne]

I believe it is over slightly over $20 a barrel is when it is cost effective to drill new places, NOT $50 a barrel.

Since then Congress passed another tax credit for them to explore, RIGHT when they did not need the tax incentive....because they were MORE than making enough to drill at a profit...a waste of tax dollars

jd

Not my understanding, even when it hit $40 there were financial analysts that said it would not be cost effective, I think they actually put the number in the 60-70$ range.

[Pale Rider]

And I still haven't heard zip about this on ANY of the news. Why? I'd think this would be the biggest story since clinton left his DNA on lewinski's dress.

[Kathianne]

And I still haven't heard zip about this on ANY of the news. Why? I'd think this would be the biggest story since clinton left his DNA on lewinski's dress.

I'm hoping it will be, when the report is released.

[Pale Rider]

I'm hoping it will be, when the report is released.

I hoping with this being an election year, and everyone sick to tears of the rising price of gas, the dems will NOT be standing in the way of drilling for it.

[red states rule]

I hoping with this being an election year, and everyone sick to tears of the rising price of gas, the dems will NOT be standing in the way of drilling for it.

Welcome to the real world Pale. The enviro wackos are still in charge of the Dem party

[red states rule]

The Cocaine News Network gave their typical liberal moonbat explation for high oil prices


CNN's Cafferty V Gergen on Bush Role in Oil Prices
By Brad Wilmouth | April 2, 2008 - 03:00 ET

The roundtable segment of Tuesday's The Situation Room offered CNN viewers opposite takes on the Bush administration's culpability in the rise of oil prices with Jack Cafferty and David Gergen on opposite ends. Cafferty, who has a history of blaming high oil prices on President Bush, argued that the administration's "idea of an energy policy is to put Dick Cheney in a closed, locked room out of sight of the public with some guys from Enron and some oil company guys, hammer out some kind of a deal, and then sit back and watch oil prices go from $28 when Bush was inaugurated to $111 now."

But Gergen later jumped into the discussion to explain the true origin of oil prices: "I think it's wrong to argue or suggest that somehow the oil companies have been manipulating these prices upward. These prices have not been, you know, rising sky high because of the Bush administration. They've been rising sky high because world demand is up so significantly."

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/brad-wilmouth/2008/04/02/cnns-cafferty-v-gergen-bush-role-oil-prices

[JohnDoe]

Not my understanding, even when it hit $40 there were financial analysts that said it would not be cost effective, I think they actually put the number in the 60-70$ range.

When the USGS put out the estimates of the oil available in Anrw, the estimates for the cost effective recoverable oil there used a scale of $15 to $25 a barrel of oil to determine the amount of oil in the refuge.

at $15 bucks a barrel of oil...around zero but at $25 bucks a barrel the recoverable oil there was about 5.6 billion barrels....

This is what I am going by, along with a few other articles that mention $20 as the price per barrel of oil that makes drilling worth it.

I can see how this would all depend on the kind of wells that need to be used, for example in ANWR the estimates were used to recover the oil via "Side Drilling" which is generally much more expensive than the normal up and down drilling, and drilling in the gulf would be more expensive than something on land....I would imagine?

In general though, recoverable oil is cost effective at around $20-$25 bucks a barrel...I believe it might have been classact or someone else on this board mentioned this in an earlier post... also as the cost effective recoverable price of oil.



The USGS's mean curve indicates that the amount of recoverable oil in the ANWR 1002 area is likely to range from zero to 5.6 billion barrels at oil prices of $15 to $25 per barrel, in 1996 dollars.

http://www.lbl.gov/Science-Articles/Archive/EETD-wrong-number.html
jd

[Sitarro]

Let's hope it pans out:

http://www.nextenergynews.com/news1/next-energy-news2.13s.html

Rush just finished reporting on this story....... He also reported that Super Delegate Governor of Wyoming, Dave Freudenthal, announced that he will support Obamessiah because he promised him that he would make sure there would be no new drilling in Wyoming......... yea that's right, he's a Democrat! What an asshole and he's from Vice President Cheney's state.

Congrats Kath, you beat Rush by 3 days!

[Kathianne]

Rush just finished reporting on this story....... He also reported that Super Delegate Governor of Wyoming, Dave Freudenthal, announced that he will support Obamessiah because he promised him that he would make sure there would be no new drilling in Wyoming......... yea that's right, he's a Democrat! What an asshole and he's from Vice President Cheney's state.

Congrats Kath, you beat Rush by 3 days!

Thank you! I have great researchers! ;)

[red states rule]

Thank you! I have great researchers! ;)

Time to start the Kathianne show. Live from the Windy city

[Pale Rider]

Time to start the Kathianne show. Live from the Windy city

Well the silence on this story is absolutely defeaning. I'm trying to call into my local radio talk show (http://www.kkoh.com/) right now to bring this up.

[Sitarro]

Well the silence on this story is absolutely defeaning. I'm trying to call into my local radio talk show (http://www.kkoh.com/) right now to bring this up.

I saw a small blurb about it in the Houston paper, supposedly the report from the Government Geological guys is coming out next month....... we'll see if the coverage becomes a little more universal
.

[Pale Rider]

I saw a small blurb about it in the Houston paper, supposedly the report from the Government Geological guys is coming out next month....... we'll see if the coverage becomes a little more universal
.

This thread ought to get a sticky... I think it's one of the most important on the board. I want to know what happens with this.

[MtnBiker]

Ummm, I dunno. Even if there is a abundant oil reserve there, we will never see it. There probably is a three legged titmouse covey that the enviros will use to keep anybody from drilling for oil.

[Kathianne]

Report should be released tomorrow:

http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D8VTDV9G0.


...In 1995, the Geological Survey estimated that using technology available at that time, 151 million barrels of oil could be recovered in the Bakken, said Brenda Pierce, a geologist and program coordinator for the agency's energy resources program.

Pierce said she would not disclose the study's findings until Thursday. Asked whether the estimate would be an increase from the 1995 figure, she said, "There is industry in there and having success. There's your answer."

Julie LeFever, a geologist with the state Geological Survey in Grand Forks, has been studying the Bakken for more than two decades. She calls it an "unconventional resource."

The oil is trapped in microscopic pores of rock, and to capture it, most companies "fracture stimulate" horizontal wells by forcing pressurized fluid and sand to break pores in the rock and prop them open to recover oil.

"It's not something you would see in most oil formations," LeFever said. With technology, she said, "the success rates are going up, but we're not all the way there yet."

She said estimates of the total amount of oil in the Bakken Formation have varied wildly over the years, from 10 billion barrels to 500 billion barrels. The higher estimate was done by Leigh Price, a USGS geologist who died in 2000 before his study was published.

Dorgan urged the agency to review Price's work part of a national inventory of the nation's oil resources.

Pierce, of the USGS, said her agency used raw data from Price's study, but also relied on agency experts and information from oil companies drilling in the Bakken.

The study does not estimate how much oil may be in the formation -- only what the agency believes can be recovered using current technology....

[Kathianne]

It's out:

http://nextbigfuture.com/2008/04/usgs-bakken-oil-study-released-365.html


USGS Bakken oil study released, 3.65 billion barrels of oil


Assessment of Undiscovered Oil Resources in the Devonian-Mississippian Bakken Formation, Williston Basin Province, Montana and North Dakota, 2008 Click on the pictures for larger view.

Using a geology-based assessment methodology, the U.S. Geological Survey estimated mean undiscovered volumes of 3.65 billion barrels of oil, 1.85 trillion cubic feet of associated/dissolved natural gas, and 148 million barrels of natural gas liquids in the Bakken Formation of the Williston Basin Province, Montana and North Dakota.


This is a lower figure than I had guessed. However, it is 24 times more than the 1995 estimate of 150 million barrels and 6 times more recent quotes of 600 million barrels. It increases the US assessment of October 2007 from 42 billion barrels to 45 billion barrels a 6.7% increase. This is a probable [50% probable] reserves number as the old proven [90% likely] reserve number was 21 billion barrels Proven reserves increases by almost 3 billion barrels. The 95% figure was 3063 million barrels of oil. The old proven reserves was 150 million barrels. So the US proven reserves number goes up to 24 billion barrels a 15% increase. Adding almost 2 years to the 12 year life of US reserves based on proven reserve calculations. The Bakken is now the largest probable reserve in the United States outside of Alaska. It is one third the size of Alaska's ANWR.

[Kathianne]

Update:

http://nextbigfuture.com/2008/05/bakken-oil-study-north-dakota-only-and.html


May 01, 2008
Bakken oil study North Dakota only and independent of USGS, Active Companies and list of new 2008 producing wells


The southern play is related to the map trends that are seen in MT and carrying them over into North Dakota. This activity is currently concentrated around McKenzie County. The northern play is related to the interval that has been producing from the middle member for a number of years. The few wells, primarily along the northern Nesson anticline, have limited production from perforations in the middle member. The Bakken in these wells was not the primary target; that was deeper usually the Devonian Winnipegosis. The Bakken was generally a bailout zone, perforated because the wells were reaching their economic limit or had no other production. [pictures and captions from a North Dakota state presentation made in Regina].....

[glockmail]

Proven reserves increases by almost 3 billion barrels. The 95% figure was 3063 million barrels of oil. The old proven reserves was 150 million barrels. So the US proven reserves number goes up to 24 billion barrels a 15% increase. Adding almost 2 years to the 12 year life of US reserves based on proven reserve calculations. The Bakken is now the largest probable reserve in the United States outside of Alaska. It is one third the size of Alaska's ANWR. Together with ANWR and plenty of nukes, we've got this bad boy licked!

[PostmodernProphet]

JD, do you know how much profit oil companies make off the sales of a gallon of gas?

Try TEN CENTS



I proved this wasn't true the last time you posted it....do we have to go through it again?