Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

What is being done to increase the manufacture of gasoline?

Posted on 02/26/2008 4:30:47 PM PST by reaganator

Gasoline is $3.19 here in Ohio today. Is anyone fighting to lower the over reaching, restrictions on production. Is there any hope for the abilty to manufacture gasoline to dramatcally increase in the near future?

If the answer is nothing, what then?


TOPICS: Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: 110th; anwr; drilling; energy; gasprices; obstructionistdems; oil; refinery
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 201-208 next last
To: liberallarry
Environmental restrictions are in place for excellent reasons. Again you can dispute that they are unreasonable - despite consensus expert judgement that they are not

And as related to oil production from off the coasts those reasons are?

101 posted on 02/26/2008 6:02:37 PM PST by Syncro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: zimfam007
So consumption is the ONLY thing driving up prices????

When we're talking about barrelage, it's pretty much a supply and demand proposition -- with a little speculation mixed in for spice. Long-term, under current conditions, supply will grow only slowly while demand will grow at a faster rate.

When we're talking about refined products, much of the cost reflects largely irrelevant subjects -- like multiple blends, inventory, distribution, oxygenator supplements -- that are mandated by law, but have no purpose other than to enrich or assuage particular special interest groups.

In addition, refineries are operating at 97% of capacity. After downtime for routine maintenance, there's absolutely no room to accommodate any outage for storms, pipeline disruptions or accidents. Consequently, every one of these incidents is going to result in a price spike.

Net:net -- the price of gasoline is going to remain high until we have an energy policy that makes frigging sense.

102 posted on 02/26/2008 6:05:55 PM PST by okie01 (THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA: Ignorance on Parade)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: mad_as_he$$
The US uses 405,000,000 20,700,000 BPD.
103 posted on 02/26/2008 6:10:28 PM PST by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]

To: beethovenfan
The answer IS nothing, as long as the Dhimmicrats and enviro-wackos control things. No new refineries have been built for decades, and we aren’t allowed to access our own national SIGNIFICANT reserves.

My lib friend tries to tell me that it isn't worthwhile to build more refineries (since, according to her), it takes 10-12 years to get it up and running, and by that time (supposedly) the Oil companies will have seen the writing on the wall and give up on oil completely...uh...right.
104 posted on 02/26/2008 6:12:45 PM PST by swatbuznik
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: okie01

Thank you......even with the increase in demand, prices CAN be driven down with an increase in supply. However, with the tree-hugging, cross-the-isle policies from the looking glass...prices will not fall anytime soon. And with my first statement/question.....how far wil prices rise with more fuel efficient vehicles??? Oregon is already looking at policies which will tax vehicle owners on the DISTANCE they drive b/c they are afraid of losing tax revenues to more fuel efficient vehicles............


105 posted on 02/26/2008 6:18:39 PM PST by zimfam007 (America is not at war, our Armed Forces are...America is at the mall!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: reaganator

Take some cars off the roads, I can only guess but its no small amount but if there was stronger laws and detections of non registered vehicles or vehicles driven illegally by illegal immigrants there would be no shortage.

We do not need to be subservient to gasoline in the future, we should start now to lessen its use.Diesel is a fair stop gap measure and I applaud the use of E85 fuel so long as its from non-edible starches like sawgrass. I would think even sugarcane would be a good choice without spending time to research it.

Those that are crying about the price of gas are probably spending their money foolishly and not realizing just how fortunate we really are, they can take whatever they own be a ‘62 Chevy or an H2 and trying filling it up in Italy or the UK.


106 posted on 02/26/2008 6:28:27 PM PST by Eye of Unk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: zimfam007
Oregon is already looking at policies which will tax vehicle owners on the DISTANCE they drive b/c they are afraid of losing tax revenues to more fuel efficient vehicles............

Just one more example of how the people have to "tighten their belt" in tough times. But governments can't be asked to do without "their money".

107 posted on 02/26/2008 6:28:45 PM PST by okie01 (THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA: Ignorance on Parade)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: okie01

^


108 posted on 02/26/2008 6:35:19 PM PST by zimfam007 (America is not at war, our Armed Forces are...America is at the mall!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: Dog Gone
Where were you in 1999 when oil prices were $9 a barrel?

You got a source for that figure? Lowest I can find is abotu $12 per barrel, adjusted for inflation put that price at $15...

109 posted on 02/26/2008 6:44:54 PM PST by TheBattman (LORD God, please give us a Christian Patriot with a backbone for President in 08, Amen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: TheBattman; Dog Gone

Nov 98 to Feb 99

United States Crude Oil Spot Price http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/dnav/pet/hist/wtotusaw.htm


110 posted on 02/26/2008 6:48:43 PM PST by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: liberallarry
Environmental restrictions are in place for excellent reasons.

Oh, I see, like Kennedy and Biden both oppose offshore windpower because they might look out their respective seaside homes and catch a glimpse of them. Really strong reasons...

Or how about this one I happen to know first hand... Farmer bulldozes out a single tree in the middle of a 120 acre field - It rains before he got it cut up and the hole filled in - now he can't fill it in - it is officially a wetland - because there was a puddle of rainwater in it when they saw it from the air! Another excellent environmental reason...

I could go on and on, but what's the use... Until the faux conservationists begin starving, you will not see any change.

111 posted on 02/26/2008 7:07:32 PM PST by DelaWhere (I was with Fred! Then Mitt. Geesh, would have even gone with Huck - OK, now for 4th choice...Hi McC)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: DelaWhere; Syncro
I'm sure you can find lots of examples of poorly thought out or stupidly interpreted environmental laws. Even counter-productive ones. Why not? Environmentalists are just as dumb as everyone else.

But their general idea is that there are too many people and their activities are destroying the biosphere which supports us all. Environmental laws have been put in place to try and reduce or suspend the most destructive of those activities and they are generally quite good. Gutting them will only accelerate the destruction.

Objections to the laws come not from those who think they have a better way but from those who want to continue what doing what they're doing regardless of the consequences...and that tells me everything.

What's required of us is hard, even terrifying but what's the alternative? There simply is not enough oil to go around. Acting as if there was will only make things worse...and sooner.

112 posted on 02/26/2008 7:38:31 PM PST by liberallarry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: TheBattman

$8.90/bbl is close enough.

That’s not even the point.

Morons who claim the oil industry either orchestrated the current prices or are doing nothing to increase supply today are just morons on so many levels.

Not only is not remotely true, but it wouldn’t even make sense.


113 posted on 02/26/2008 7:42:02 PM PST by Dog Gone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: reaganator

Hmmmmmmmmmmm what could happen between now and the fall that would make more voters not look favorably at Clintoon, Obanana, or McRat?


114 posted on 02/26/2008 7:48:38 PM PST by free_life (If you ask Jesus to forgive you and to save you, He will.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reaganator

My husband and I have been discussing suggesting to the local Indians (WA State) that they build a refinery, they’re the only ones that can do it without a lot red tape.


115 posted on 02/26/2008 7:51:13 PM PST by Eva (Benedict Arnold was a war hero, too.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: liberallarry
Hmmm, you ping me and don't address my simple question.

Here it is again with your comment (minus the editorializing) to which I responded:

Environmental restrictions are in place for excellent reasons.
And as related to oil production from off the coasts those reasons are?

I'll add this: make them excellent OK?

116 posted on 02/26/2008 7:54:06 PM PST by Syncro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: liberallarry
Environmental laws have been put in place to try and reduce or suspend the most destructive of those activities and they are generally quite good.

Absolutely WRONG!

I have been involved as an environmentalist since the 1950's, even had a weekly radio program on the subject. Anytime you think you can improve the environment by committee or legislation, you will do far more damage than you will help!

Stop and think - US environmental laws tend to push companies to move production overseas - Gee, just think how this helps - China only produces 8 times the pollution that was created when made here... Really helps the planet doesn't it...

117 posted on 02/26/2008 7:57:07 PM PST by DelaWhere (I was with Fred! Then Mitt. Geesh, would have even gone with Huck - OK, now for 4th choice...Hi McC)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: Eva
Now that is an excellent idea!

Gas for my Pontic.

And my Indian motorcycle.

:>)

118 posted on 02/26/2008 8:00:33 PM PST by Syncro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies]

To: thackney

OOOPPSSS Not sure where the hell I got that one. Thanks for the correction. CIA fact book says 20.8 from 2005.


119 posted on 02/26/2008 8:15:30 PM PST by mad_as_he$$ (John McCain - The Manchurian Candidate? http://www.usvetdsp.com/manchuan.htm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: All

Why would they charge you $2.00/gallon when you are willing to pay $4.00 or $5.00? The demand will not fall one bit. Sure people will bitch and whine but they will keep filling up, driving 100 mph, taking off like its a Drag Strip, and then bitch and whine when they fill up again.
Simple economics...


120 posted on 02/26/2008 8:21:45 PM PST by SavannahJake (If you are willing to pay a Quarter, why would I charge you a Dime?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 201-208 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson