Obama Sets Goal of One-Third Cut in Oil Imports

[Gerald]

WASHINGTON — As a candidate in the fall of 2008, when Republicans held the White House, Barack Obama benefited politically from voters’ anger about gasoline costs hitting $4 a gallon on average. But as the incumbent facing re-election next year, he knows that will not be the case if prices are so high again.

That explains why, with pump prices nationwide at or approaching that record level, President Obama was at Georgetown University on Wednesday to demonstrate his concern and resolve. In a speech that repackaged his existing policies with some new incentives for renewable energy sources as well as domestic oil and nuclear power production, Mr. Obama called for slashing oil imports by one-third by 2025.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/31/science/earth/31energy.html?ref=us

Note: March 30, 2011

[gimpy117]

good. We need energy independence. Too long have we been sending money to people who want to kill us.

[The Third Man]

Didn't Mr. Obama tell the Brazilians last week that he hoped that the US would be a big customer for Brazilian oil?

“And when you’re ready to start selling, we want to be one of your best customers,” said Obama to Brazil.

http://www.thenewamerican.com/tech-mainmenu-30/energy/6824-obama-commits-american-support-to-brazilian-oil

Is it just me, or has it become a very bad habit of Mr. Obama to contradict himself in such an obvious way.

[Tribesman]

Is it just me, or has it become a very bad habit of Mr. Obama to contradict himself in such an obvious way.
It is just you as there is no contradiction there:har::har::har::har::har:
Its as easy as 123
1 reduce imports
2 reduce dependancy on middle east oil
3 invest in more local imports
No contradictions whatsoever

[Gerald]

Politicians have short memories, :yawn:

[The Third Man]

It is just you as there is no contradiction there:har::har::har::har::har:
Its as easy as 123
1 reduce imports
2 reduce dependancy on middle east oil
3 invest in more local imports
No contradictions whatsoever

But if we stop buying from the Mideast and start buying from Brazil it doesn't reduce the dependency, it just shifts it. So it is a contradiction. While we're at it how does a reduction of 1/3, which is not going to happen (like Gtmo closing) by 2025, help me at the gas pump today or a better question, help Obama in the 2012 election?

[UnderseaLcpl]

You had all kinds of slogans and gimmicks and outraged politicians — they were waving their three-point-plans for $2-a-gallon gas,” he continued, singling out the Republicans’ “Drill, baby, drill” cry. “And none of it,” he added, “was really going to do anything to solve the problem


And neither has anything the government has done since or before.

Actually, that's not entirely true. During the oil crises of the 70's, the government imposed price controls meant to keep the price of gas down, but instead ended up cutting off the supply altogether. In response, US automakers lost a good share of the domestic market and smaller, imported vehicles gained market share until we got to where we are today, with US automakers needing bailouts and subsidies and whatnot, but still not quite able to compete. So I guess that's good, from an energy-independence perspective, anyway.


The only way for America’s energy supply to be truly secure is by permanently reducing our dependence on oil.

That's untrue on so many levels it makes my head hurt.

Even if we managed to reduce our oil consumption by one third, we'd still be importing virtually all of our oil because that's what we do right now. Our reserves are largely untapped or capped because the national interest has made it unprofitable to run them, and they're still a presumably very finite resource, not counting synthetic oil.

Besides that, the largest market for oil in the US comes from cars. Until someone finds a way to power an automobile more efficiently or cost-effectively, that's not going to change. And believe me, there are a lot of resources being directed at that goal from both the public and private sectors already. Changing power plants on a federal whim that came thirty years too late is not going to reduce our dependency on oil.

[Gerald]

Brazil is a little closer, from a transport perspective, or quite similar, also maybe you can pay with pesos, :D

[The Third Man]

Brazil is a little closer, from a transport perspective, or quite similar, also maybe you can pay with pesos, :D


The Gulf of Mexico is closer still, and ANWR if not closer would certainly keep the capital investment and jobs within the US.

[mookiemookie]

Oil prices are high due to speculation. It has nothing to do with supply, demand, whether we import it or drill it ourselves. This is all political kabuki theatre meant to draw everyone's attention away from the truth.

[The Third Man]

Oil prices are high due to speculation. It has nothing to do with supply, demand, whether we import it or drill it ourselves. This is all political kabuki theatre meant to draw everyone's attention away from the truth.


Out of curiosity which truth is being obscured by high oil prices?

[CCIP]

Out of curiosity which truth is being obscured by high oil prices?

The high oil prices aren't obscuring the truth, rather they're the lie - based on largely-fictitious reasons for oil conglomerates to rip off consumers and run away with the big buck. Oil reserves may be limited and tied to political stability, but not nearly to the degree that those selling us oil would have us believe. They just know we're addicted to oil - so in many ways, their tactics and pricing schemes are not dissimilar from those of drug dealers.

[mookiemookie]

Out of curiosity which truth is being obscured by high oil prices?

The truth that supply and demand has been relatively stable over the past decade, yet prices have increased 300%

[The Third Man]

The truth that supply and demand has been relatively stable over the past decade, yet prices have increased 300%

Are you sure it isn't the oil companies? The 401K investments of retired people? A State's investment to pay benifits to public sector workers?

[CCIP]

Are you sure it isn't the oil companies? The 401K investments of retired people? A State's investment to pay benifits to public sector workers?

I don't think anyone would argue otherwise, although more than anything the big bucks tend to settle into very few hands at the top. Retirees and public workers just get the crumbs off the table - typical example of "trickledown economics" at work :hmmm: But that's why the state buys into these stupid schemes of course.

[The Third Man]

I decided I didn't want to say what I originally wanted to say in this space.

Supply side economics does work. The last 2.5-3 years shows how gov't intervention in market economics doesn't work.

[UnderseaLcpl]

The truth that supply and demand has been relatively stable over the past decade, yet prices have increased 300%

I am also curious. I'd like to know what percentage of that increase can be attributed to non-speculative factors like corporate taxes, tariffs, quotas, and the like.

I tried searching myself but, well this is rather embarassing but, well, my mouse has developed a tendency to stick when I release the left button and it keeps closing out windows I don't want it to while I'm cross-referencing information. I'm going to have to get a new one. In the meantime, would you be so kind as to just....kind of research the question for me?:D Please?

[Gerald]

The United States imports 9 to 12 million barrels of oil per day (2010)

http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/100726/top-7-us-oil-importers

[The Third Man]

Estimated US oil reserves.........3.3×10^9 m3


This of course doesn't account for technology which could extract more oil, as it has in the past on reserves which were considered far smaller.

[mookiemookie]

A 2006 Congressional Report found that "there is substantial evidence that the large amount of speculation in the current market has significantly increased prices."
(http://hsgac.senate.gov/public/_files/SenatePrint10965MarketSpecReportFINAL.pdf)

[Ducimus]

Obama Sets Goal of One-Third Cut in Oil Imports

I don't even have to read the article to know that will NEVER happen.

For one, less oil means we need to draw upon energy elsewhere. The countries neglected infrastructure won't support that. And i seriously doubt we have enough domestic oil to drill to last us any substantial length of time.

For two, I don't think enough comittment is being put forth to replace that oil with something else. It's all mostly talk with a couple small labs here or there trying to work on something, but by no means is any large scale or national effort being put into it. Or at least, thats my impression.

For three, the real owners of this country won't have it.

For four, we as a people are resistant to change. Or at least, most people are. I think few people can imagine life without a gasoline powered combustible engine.


Reduce oil? AINT EVER GONNA HAPPEN.

Even if prices hit 5 or 6 bucks a gallon, or more, we'll all still be sucking on the OPEC tit for all of the reasons i mentioned.

[Rockstar]

For four, we as a people are resistant to change. Or at least, most people are. I think few people can imagine life without a gasoline powered combustible engine.

I'm one of those few. Haven't owned a car in five years it's cheaper for us to rent now. Get around mostly by walking or bicycle. If we travel it's by sail boat normally taking the AICWW to visit family in Charleston, SC. About 20 gallons in diesel fuel, a flattened mainsail and two to three weeks of travel time :D

[The Third Man]

A 2006 Congressional Report found that "there is substantial evidence that the large amount of speculation in the current market has significantly increased prices."
(http://hsgac.senate.gov/public/_files/SenatePrint10965MarketSpecReportFINAL.pdf)

This is 2011 and Barack Obama, the not linked to oil guy is in governance.

Try another. Unless President Obama is in with them also? No, he said spread the wealth around.

[mookiemookie]

This is 2011

So what? Oil's even higher today with no material changes in supply and demand. Meanwhile what's happened since 2006? Oh, lookie here (http://files.shareholder.com/downloads/ICE/1209441327x0x89523/27fa2617-6462-4314-a48c-71e0ab329d35/ICE_News_2006_1_9_General_Releases.pdf), oil futures trading is even more widespread now. Couldn't have anything to do with even higher oil prices than in 2006, could it? :har:

[The Third Man]

So what? Oil's even higher today with no material changes in supply and demand. Meanwhile what's happened since 2006? Oh, lookie here (http://files.shareholder.com/downloads/ICE/1209441327x0x89523/27fa2617-6462-4314-a48c-71e0ab329d35/ICE_News_2006_1_9_General_Releases.pdf), oil futures trading is even more widespread now. Couldn't have anything to do with even higher oil prices than in 2006, could it? :har:

In 2006 it was because GWB was in the White House and paying off his buddies in big oil. Why would oil be so high without pay offs by Obama? Or do you think black men cannot have oil interests? Isn't that racist on its face?

BTW I have been contributing to this thread in a way which contributes to the debate.

[mookiemookie]

In 2006 it was because GWB was in the White House and paying off his buddies in big oil. Why would oil be so high without pay offs by Obama? Or do you think black men cannot have oil interests? Isn't that racist on its face?

http://ranger.gamebanana.com/img/ico/sprays/keep_on_trollin.jpg

[The Third Man]

http://ranger.gamebanana.com/img/ico/sprays/keep_on_trollin.jpg

I guess it is over your paygrade to respond in a responsible manner. Because before I shut down your agrument I wasn't a troll.

BTW I have been contributing to this thread in a way which contributes to the debate.

I am offened by your personal attack placing the troll monicor on me.

[tater]

good. We need energy independence. Too long have we been sending money to people who want to kill us.

Agreed. More domestic drilling, and more nuclear plants. If the price of oil stays high enough, then oil sand and oil shale becomes feasible to extract (lucky Canada will be insanely rich).

Or do you think that massive carbon taxes, hybrid cars, and CFL light bulbs will create energy independence?

[The Third Man]

Agreed. More domestic drilling, and more nuclear plants. If the price of oil stays high enough, then oil sand and oil shale becomes feasible to extract (lucky Canada will be insanely rich).

Or do you think that massive carbon taxes, hybrid cars, and CFL light bulbs will create energy independence?


The US imports most of its oil from Canada.

[tater]

The US imports most of its oil from Canada.

Not true on a couple levels.

One, perhaps you meant to say that the country we import the most oil from is Canada? That is true. The US imports more from Canada than other countries. MOST would require that 50% of US imported oil comes from Canada, which is not remotely true. We import about 60% of what we get from Canada from Mexico, and about 50% of the Canadian total from Saudi.

Two, the US produces more than twice as much oil than we import from Canada (it's nearly 3X some years). The US imports a lot, but we also produce a lot. So the US produces more than we import from Canada.

[The Third Man]

Not true on a couple levels.

One, perhaps you meant to say that the country we import the most oil from is Canada? That is true. The US imports more from Canada than other countries. MOST would require that 50% of US imported oil comes from Canada, which is not remotely true. We import about 60% of what we get from Canada from Mexico, and about 50% of the Canadian total from Saudi.

Two, the US produces more than twice as much oil than we import from Canada (it's nearly 3X some years). The US imports a lot, but we also produce a lot. So the US produces more than we import from Canada.

I underestimated the US ability to supply its people, at the same time ridiculed Barack Obama, and placed myself on the troll list for my opinions.

Is that not the trifecta?

[tater]

I just wanted gimpy to say "drill, baby, drill." :D

The problem is that energy independence is a great idea, but unlikely in a harsh regulatory environment, particularly when nukes are off the table for a large number of people in the party in power.

[Tribesman]

@the tird man
But if we stop buying from the Mideast and start buying from Brazil it doesn't reduce the dependency, it just shifts it.
Not in the slightest, if you stop buying so much from the middle east and then buy part of what you used to buy there from another source it is reducing imports.
For your strange theory to be true they will either have to replace all middle eastern imports with equal imports from elsewhere and then add more.....which no one has said they are going to do. Or maintain all the current imports from the middle east and increase imports from south America....which no one has said they are going to do.
That is why the "contradiction" in the statements exists only in your mind.

[CaptainHaplo]

Reducing oil imports is a great idea.

Lets see the plan that makes it happen.

Not slamming Barry, no pres yet has come up with a real, viable way to do it.

Drilling domestically is the only way to do it - because without a major technological breakthrough in the energy field, we will remain a petroleum based economy. As our economy grows, so to does the demand for oil.

Demand has drastically increased around the world for petroleum. As countries build themselves into "1st world" entities, their economies become more dependant on oil. Asia alone was expected to account for half the growth demand in 2010.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/mobile/business/8563985.stm

As countries economic engines grow, so does their oil consumption. So demand IS greater. Now, supply on the other hand, has remained fairly steady, though OPEC has opened the spigot more and more a few times in the last decade.

But here is the thing - supply still meets demand - but now the margin between the two is drastically reduced. Thus, the price rises. Add in the market manipulation that futures trading creates, and its easy for the price to be "adjusted". Even as this happens, the taxes often are raised as well. Result - pain at the pump for the average consumer.

I will say this - mookie is right when he talks about "futures" trading. This is one of those practices that has made and lost fortunes - but has also done so on the backs of the consumer. I would not mind a bit if futures trading were banned - though that statement is EXTREMELY unpopular with the suits of the world.

[The Third Man]

I would not mind a bit if futures trading were banned - though that statement is EXTREMELY unpopular with the suits of the world.

Who are buying these futures? Large fleets of city services (cops and firefighters), airlines, trash removal companies, oil companies, etc.

Why are they buying the futures? Because the price isn't going down its going up. better for the consumer (read customer) to lock in todays price than to wait until tomorrows is out of reach. The 85 yo lady nextdoor prolly has money in the market.

[gimpy117]

I just wanted gimpy to say "drill, baby, drill." :D

If i uttered those words I'd puke. actually i'd vomit from any catch phrase Sarah Palin has said.

[UnderseaLcpl]

A 2006 Congressional Report found that "there is substantial evidence that the large amount of speculation in the current market has significantly increased prices."
(http://hsgac.senate.gov/public/_files/SenatePrint10965MarketSpecReportFINAL.pdf)

19 pages to go, and tired after work at the moment, but I'll get to it before this thread drops to the second page.

[mookiemookie]

Who are buying these futures? Large fleets of city services (cops and firefighters), airlines, trash removal companies, oil companies, etc.

Why are they buying the futures? Because the price isn't going down its going up. better for the consumer (read customer) to lock in todays price than to wait until tomorrows is out of reach. The 85 yo lady nextdoor prolly has money in the market.

If they were hedging their exposure to oil prices, then they wouldn't be speculators would they?

The hedge funds and investment banks who are pushing these markets are not hedging oil prices. They're playing the price movement for a trading profit. Goldman Sachs is not taking physical delivery of an oil futures contract.

[The Third Man]

If they were hedging their exposure to oil prices, then they wouldn't be speculators would they?

The hedge funds and investment banks who are pushing these markets are not hedging oil prices. They're playing the price movement for a trading profit. Goldman Sachs is not taking physical delivery of an oil futures contract.

Before I claim you a troll I'll say hedging / speculating? A rose by another name perhaps?

[mookiemookie]

Before I claim you a troll I'll say hedging / speculating? A rose by another name perhaps?

If you don't know the difference, I'll go so far as to say you're not qualified to debate the subject.

[The Third Man]

If you don't know the difference, I'll go so far as to say you're not qualified to debate the subject.


once you strip away the BS its all speculation.

Hedging is just a word for being afraid of your position, but it is still speculation.

BTW I haven't done or been involved in many things. Does that disqualify me from all debates on those subjects? Doesn't seem right to me.

[Gerald]

A 2006 Congressional Report found that "there is substantial evidence that the large amount of speculation in the current market has significantly increased prices."
(http://hsgac.senate.gov/public/_files/SenatePrint10965MarketSpecReportFINAL.pdf) Link,gone....