The Strategic Petroleum Reserve Release Has Now Been Fully Priced In As Crude, Gasoline Surge

ZeroHedge ^ | 6/28/2011 | Tyler Durden

[mojito]

Remember how 4 very long days ago, the 60 million barrel SPR release was vaunted as being the reason for the second consumer renaissance after it was largely expected it would lead to sub $90 crude, and low $3/gallon gas, and result in every Joe Sixpack going out and buying 3 houses at least? Well, so much for that: the IEA's [International Energy Agency] action has now been fully priced in and WTI [West Texas Intermediate] is back to precisely where it was before the IEA announcement on Thursday.

[Terry Mross]

Bottom line is congress thinks of themselves as royalty and idiots keep re-electing them. I’ll never vote for anyone in the dem-rep party.

[SunkenCiv]

Thanks mojito.

Remember how 4 very long days ago, the 60 million barrel SPR release was vaunted as being the reason for the second consumer renaissance after it was largely expected it would lead to sub $90 crude, and low $3/gallon gas, and result in every Joe Sixpack going out and buying 3 houses at least? Well, so much for that: the IEA's [International Energy Agency] action has now been fully priced in and WTI [West Texas Intermediate] is back to precisely where it was before the IEA announcement on Thursday.

And now the gubmint has to buy oil on the open market to replenish it.

[JudgemAll]

It’s a fixed reserve, hence any release of it has zero effect other than conceding a future reserve of demand once the reserve will have to be refilled for emergency reasons. As a result the price will increase.

When someone use their last food savings to pay for something, common sense tells that the demand for food and nourishment will be felt even more in the near future, since it is always needed.

[BfloGuy]

So was the Obama administration just trying to generate revenue for the federal government?

Nah. He really thought it would work. Now that it hasn't, he will conclude that we don't need to drill more because it's been shown that an increase in supply does not reduce prices.

Economics was wrong!

It's just like his protestation that he tried tax cuts and they didn't work. Just like all liberals, he's unaware that different types of tax cuts have different economic results.

[JudgemAll]

Time is running short. Emergency is going to be felt, they are going to obstruct the normal taxing process and start confiscating by force left and right, because they are getting highly squeezed and feel like they have a right of emergency and “to not be gauged” by the tax payers.

Hey, screw you big gov... go to the street you all fat mentally ill squatting demons from hell.

[Gen.Blather]

“$92.79, up $2.18 today.
This WH’s track record of economic success is truly astounding.”

According to my research, the United States uses 20 million barrels a day. Thirty million barrels is a day and a half’s worth of oil consumption. Spit in the ocean. One wonders if he even knows what we use. If so, he does, then he must know all he did was damage our ability to respond in a true military emergency.

[Neidermeyer]

Follow any profits made from this ‘deal’ directly to the zer0’s largest campaign contributors.
*************************************************
ABSOLUTELY , The ability to create a 100% certainty in a short term price drop means he could be making anyone rich with a single trade... The Chicago Way dictates a Quid Pro Quo...

[Yardstick]

Now that it hasn't, he will conclude that we don't need to drill more because it's been shown that an increase in supply does not reduce prices.

Yeah, that was kind of my thought: maybe releasing the reserves was some kind of Machiavellian move to cast doubt on the law of supply and demand. Now whenever someone suggests more drilling to keep prices low -- like say in a presidential debate or something -- he can whip out the little factoid that dumping 60 million gallons on the market didn't do squat to prices. Seems far fetched, but who knows with this guy?