Republicans pushing for higher US gas prices

Good take, BB. Just a few years ago the Economist was predicting that the era of cheap energy was over and that OPEC would have us over a barrel, but drilling technology improvements have shown these claims to be incorrect.

BP statistical Year in Review
http://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/about-bp/energy-economics/statistical-review-of-world-energy-2013.html

Oil
In 1992 the US had 31.2 Billion Barrels of proven reserves
2011 it was 35 BB and last year the same, 35 BB. Oil newly found barely kept even with our decline.
But we did increase production from 7.868 Mill a day to 8.905 Million a day.
So with 2.7% of the worlds reserves we produced 9.6% of the worlds total. Reserves divided by our present production givce us 10.7 years.
The US consumed 18.555 Million Barrels a day in 2012, or twice what we produced.
Where is the extra? Sending Oil overseas is about greater profit in markets overseas and in the end higher prices in the US.
It is fantasy to believe the US will ever be Oil Independent.

Gas
1992 4.7 trillion cubic meters proven reserves in the US. 2011 that is 8.8 trill cubic meters.
And 2012 8.5 trill cubic meters. A 12.5 year R/P ratio.
production has increased from 2011 648.5 to 2012 681.4 Billion cubic meters.
That was good.
But while our production went up 4.7% , our consumption went up 4.1% from 2011 and 690.5 to 722.1 Billion cubic meters in 2012.
We are still short about 40 Billion Cubic meters.
Where is the extra?

In the last couple of years the Oil/Gas Industry has run a non stop feel good about fossil fuels campaign.
Like any commercial you should ask "what are they trying to sell me".

Lifting the ban on exports will increase our reliance on foreign fuel, reduce our domestic reserves and as such our security.
And raise US prices.
And greatly increase the profits of the Oil/Gas industry.

So WhiteGP, you would support a fan on food exports too so that the poor would be able to afford to eat?
Other nations ban food exports to keep the price of food lower.

Fred
This about Oil/Gas, not food.
We do have a surplus of food in this country and this IS a renewable resource.
Oil and gas are finite.

But, If the export of food to the rest of the world meant that US food prices would go up, and what was left was too little to feed America such that we had to import food at increasing costs and loss of security. And we faced in the next decade a moment where we will be quickly exhausting our reserves, as we face with Oil/Gas.
Then yes I would support a ban, If that means America eats and the rest of the world starves, so be it.

But Fred
You are comparing Apples, Oranges and Gasoline.

Ethanol production takes arable land away from food production so energy and food are more connected than you want to admit.

The problem with your energy export embargo idea is the US may not want all the petrol we produce. There are different types of oil, the oil Alaska produces isn't as high quality as the light sweet crude other nations produce. So selling off the more polluting or higher sulfur content varieties can make sense.

More polluting? The different grades are used for different products. Light sweet crude is better for gasoline as it is rich in Benzene, Toluene, Ethylene and Xylene,

PrintSmith wrote:

Something the Dog Said wrote:

Reverend Revelant wrote:
Then tell me. How is this polar vortex created by global warming?

the Polar Vortex is actually the jet stream encircling the Arctic which keeps the arctic cold in place . The deflection of the jet stream downward is allowing the Arctic Cold to move downward across North America. This is also referred to as a "stratospheric phenomenon warming event" although that sounds counter intuitive. The deflection of the jet stream (weakening of the Vortex) releases that arctic cold downward over North America. The physics of this action is complex and not fully understood as yet, but the evidence is that as the polar ice cap warms, high pressure builds over the Arctic which weakens the polar jet stream allowing it to deflect downward over North America. At the same time the mid Atlantic jet stream is being strengthened by the warming of the oceans to interact with the deflected Polar Vortex in creating the recent cold weather.

Unfortunately, this portends even further cold weather for North America.

So if I am understanding you correctly, what you are saying is a warmer climate produces colder weather, as well as warmer weather, as well as more and stronger storms, as well as fewer and weaker storms, and less ice in at the northern pole and more ice at the southern one. Maybe global warming was responsible for the severe winter when Washington was camped at Valley Forge as well?

No you are not understanding my explanation of the stratospheric phenomenon warming event. I will see if I can dumb it down even more. There is credible evidence that the warming of the Arctic creates a high pressure system that is causing weakening of the Polar Vortex, which causes deflection of the jet stream downward so that the polar cold pushes downward over North America. I tried to type slowly so maybe you can understand this time.

whitegp wrote:
Lifting the ban on exports will increase our reliance on foreign fuel, reduce our domestic reserves and as such our security.
And raise US prices.
And greatly increase the profits of the Oil/Gas industry.

Oil is a commodity. Its price is set in London, based on world market prices - independent of who it is bought/sold by.

However, gas producers buy oil on long-term contracts --- and recent increases in production technology, have generated oil surpluses in the USA (see attached graphic). When you get a surplus - prices sag. Petrol companies have been enjoying artificially low prices from oil producers (after all - the producers are forbidden from selling their oil in the global market).

Eventually, the market will adjust for the temporary trends.

Bailey
Your attached graphic shows the spot price difference between Brent and WTI (west texas intermediate).
It does not show volume or that the US Oil has a surplus.

The Oil/Gas Companies have been pushing to sell US Oil overseas for decades.
It was a major issue when Alaska came on line in the 70s.
That the people of the US now believe we have a surplus is playing into their hands.
Look at the production/consumption numbers folks.
Use the EIAs numbers if you like. Exxon and Shell both have similar charts as the one I linked from BP.
We are a long ways from a surplus.

The World is producing 86 million barrels a day with every well in every country pumping flat out. It is believed that only the Saudis could increase their production by a reasonable amount (1/2 to 1 1/2 million a day). Nearly all of it is tied up in long term contracts, only a million to upwards of 5 million barrels a day are traded depending on the situation.
That is the margin that sets the price. As our reserves decline that is the market we will have to depend on without major new finds.
The crunch comes when we have declined to the point that we need a million or two a day to make up our shortfall and we have to bid against another country/market that is also short. Odds are that country will be China.
That day comes quite soon, and even sooner if we sell American Domestic Oil overseas.

We should not believe that the International Oil/Gas companies are American or in any way loyal to the US.
We are just a Market - nothing more.

Here is BPs Statistical year in review for 2013. http://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/about-bp/energy-economics/statistical-review-of-world-energy-2013.html
Really a lot of information in this, read the intros at least.

Or we could just make it a lot easier to drill in the US and offshore if we really wanted to increase oil independence