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

Skip to comments.

Trump calls for higher ethanol mandate
The Hill ^ | 1/19/2016 | Timothy Kama

Posted on 01/19/2016 12:47:48 PM PST by Nervous Tick

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 281-300301-320321-340341-360 last
To: Obadiah

1932.....Mein Kamph


341 posted on 01/22/2016 10:17:58 AM PST by annieokie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 185 | View Replies]

To: Norm Lenhart
Pillars of Styro?.........yes same/same

Becoming clearer by the minutes it seems to many, including myself.

342 posted on 01/22/2016 10:19:56 AM PST by annieokie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 198 | View Replies]

To: pollywog
I'm telling you there are going to be some very sad voters who voted for what they THOUGHT would happen with TRUMP and got the opposite.""""......

They would never admit it......

343 posted on 01/22/2016 10:21:20 AM PST by annieokie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 201 | View Replies]

To: Angels27
national single payer government run health care system.....Trump will expand 0bamacare, not repeal it!"""".....

That right there is a much bigger Problem for us than Ethanol and no one is talking more about it.

WE WANT TOTAL REPEAL......Day One of Ted Cruz's presidency among many many others. DAY ONE.....boom out of there.

344 posted on 01/22/2016 10:29:15 AM PST by annieokie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 250 | View Replies]

To: annieokie

I see Annie has left the building, turning the lights out now.....end of thread


345 posted on 01/22/2016 10:48:01 AM PST by annieokie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 344 | View Replies]

To: CA Conservative

It was a joke - for Pete’s sake. Cruz people need to lighten up.


346 posted on 01/22/2016 11:39:45 AM PST by Trumpinator ("Are you Batman?" the boy asked. "I am Batman," Trump said.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 338 | View Replies]

To: Nervous Tick

He’s pandering for votes. IMHO, that’s on the basis of Cruz MUST win Iowa to stay in contention, so if Trump can defeat him there, Cruz will lose a lot of momentum and go back to Rubio levels. Before he can recover (if he can recover), Trump will have a commanding lead in delegates.

That said, I agree 100% with Cruz - alcohol belongs in a bottle, not in a gas tank. Using corn for fuel boosts food prices worldwide, and the alcohol isn’t any good for most engines (and virtually NO small engines). The ethanol mandate was ALWAYS about getting the farm vote, and should be ditched.


347 posted on 01/22/2016 1:33:55 PM PST by Ancesthntr ("The right to buy weapons is the right to be free." A. E. van Vogt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JSDude1

Indeed he is. We Constitutional Conservatives have been trying to warn people of this very type of thing, but they simply dig in their heels and refuse to listen. I truly do not understand it!


348 posted on 01/22/2016 4:09:22 PM PST by gidget7 ("When a man assumes a public trust, he should consider himself as public property." Thomas Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Nervous Tick

THANK YOU!! Best post here. I was loosing all faith in FR before that!


349 posted on 01/22/2016 4:21:29 PM PST by gidget7 ("When a man assumes a public trust, he should consider himself as public property." Thomas Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 329 | View Replies]

To: Trumpinator
I rather give my money to Iowan farmers than Saudi Sheiks.

How about ditching the EPA and spending it on American Oil? We produce more than the Saudis. Of all the countries we import from we import the most from Canada.

350 posted on 02/01/2016 1:46:35 AM PST by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Smokin' Joe
How about ditching the EPA and spending it on American Oil? We produce more than the Saudis. Of all the countries we import from we import the most from Canada.

-----------

When I hear statements like this I wonder if people know anything about the oil business. Do I know a lot? No. But I think I am on sound footing to know that American oil seems to cost more to extract than Saudi oil. At a certain dollar level American oil does not pay.

351 posted on 02/01/2016 6:23:10 AM PST by Trumpinator ("Are you Batman?" the boy asked. "I am Batman," Trump said.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 350 | View Replies]

To: Trumpinator
I have worked in the American oil business for 35 years. You decide if it is cheaper to export billions of dollars to the Saudis or spend it here at home, where it gets spent multiple times on everything from drill pipe to vehicles to the wife's new shoes, and then those people spend it, and then those people spend it, etc.

I know the oil patch, I may not be an economist, but people came up here to North Dakota from all 50 states, Puerto Rico, and from as far away as Liberia and Nigeria to work in the US oil patch. That money got spent, mostly in the US. The local economy boomed, and that reached from North Dakota to Texas, to industries in PA and California.

Spend it there (Saudi, etc.) and some one will buy a few slave girls and a silver (not the color, the metal) Mercedes.

You tell me what's better for America.

352 posted on 02/01/2016 8:17:54 AM PST by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 351 | View Replies]

To: Smokin' Joe

How is American made corn oil exporting to the Saudis?


353 posted on 02/01/2016 8:33:39 AM PST by Trumpinator ("Are you Batman?" the boy asked. "I am Batman," Trump said.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 352 | View Replies]

To: Trumpinator
How is American made corn oil exporting to the Saudis?

That isn't the oil business I am in. Frankly, I do not understand your question.

354 posted on 02/01/2016 8:37:08 AM PST by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 353 | View Replies]

To: Smokin' Joe

I think you misread my point. As long as the Saudis have oil below a certain dollar amount then some oil wells in America will not be profitable at that level unless they are subsidized. That is what I was stating.


355 posted on 02/01/2016 8:38:57 AM PST by Trumpinator ("Are you Batman?" the boy asked. "I am Batman," Trump said.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 354 | View Replies]

To: Trumpinator
No one is asking for a subsidy for domestic oil.

This isn't farming.

I'm just saying that if we use our own, our economy does well.

If we use theirs, we fund terrorism.

They may be selling it cheaply, but they are messing up their economy doing it and hoping they can outlast us (and the Russians).

For us, though, sometimes a lower price means a higher cost.

Where is the big economic boon from cheaper gasoline?

Gross domestic product expanded at a glacial 0.7% annual rate in the fourth quarter, down from gains of 2% in Q3 and 3.9% in Q2, the Commerce Department said Friday.

from U.S. Economy Ran Out Of Gas In Q4; Will Consumers Spend In 2016?

It doesn't seem to be present. US oil drilling dropped off by roughly 70% from 4th quarter 2014 to 4th quarter 2015. Maybe that had a ripple effect that helped cause the slump.

356 posted on 02/01/2016 8:50:03 AM PST by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 355 | View Replies]

To: Smokin' Joe
I'm just saying that if we use our own, our economy does well. If we use theirs, we fund terrorism.

-----

I agree - but to use our own oil without subsidies is hard when oil is cheap. Maybe technology will make it cheaper to extract in the states.

357 posted on 02/01/2016 9:00:43 AM PST by Trumpinator ("Are you Batman?" the boy asked. "I am Batman," Trump said.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 356 | View Replies]

To: Trumpinator
Technology already has. It may not seem that way because there was a boom on and there were development costs, construction costs and all that came at a higher price.

To drill and complete some of the earlier Bakken wells was profitable at $40, but leases were substantially cheaper then.

When things got going, by 2010 there was a shift from the older, static rigs (had to be rigged down and reassembled at the next wellhead) and isolated wells (one well per drilling location) to pad wells (4 to eight wells drilled from a single pad) and 'walking' rigs--rigs that could move without taking them apart.

That cut downtime between wells from 2 weeks to 2 days, saved a lot of money on earthwork, had a smaller environmental footprint, and saved the cost of bringing in crews to rig down and rig up again for each of the wells on the pad.

Considering a rig move cost about 250K at the time, the savings on a 4 well pad was 750K or more, just in the rig move crew costs alone. (Of course, that wasn't a good deal for companies who specialize in moving rigs).

Drilling 9500 +/- ft. in the productive strata didn't hurt (especially when those layers are sometimes as little as 4-6 ft. thick), and the drilling (with casing strings) costs went from about 5 million to 3.5 million.

Completion costs varied, but were reduced to about 4 million dollars. (that's the cost of hydraulic fracturing, surface equipment, lines, valves, treaters, separators, and holding tanks, plus gas feeder pipelines to take raw wellhead gas to processing facilities).

Much of that drilling cost reduction came from increased drill rates, from 500 ft. a day at the start to 3000 ft. a day more recently.

So total well costs went from about 10 million to under 8 million.

I expect those costs will drop further as service company rates become more competitive.

It is a buyers market when in decline, a sellers market when expanding.

But the price of oil isn't set by the seller, it is set in the futures market by the buyers (and some speculators, granted).

That price depends on global supply and demand. With the current global economic malaise, demand is down, and with Iran, Libya, and ISIS selling oil along with everyone else, the supply exceeds demand.

There have been calls for OPEC meetings to cut back their production, but that has failed to happen.

Just today, the article Saudis to look at economy diversification due to oil price crash was posted, so ours isn't the only part of the oil patch that's hurting, and the Saudis heavily subsidize their economy (and have been putting a significant dent in their treasure continuing those subsidies) from oil revenues.

I expect US oil exploration will remain slower until we see oil pass $50, and pick up around $65 to $75/bbl.

Until then, most of us will be looking for other work to get by.

While there will be auctions of equipment and vehicles for dimes on the dollar, when you aren't sure when the flow of dollars will resume, you get pretty tight with your savings. Unless you can see where you can make money with something, you hang on to your money.

The effect is that vehicle fleet and truck purchases, along with heavy equipment are down and will lag the resurgence when it comes.

A lot will be scrapped, eventually, especially older equipment or equipment that cannot be refit to drill pad wells without complete rig downs.

The only way an acceptable price floor on oil might be set would be to place a sliding tariff on imported crude, which would phase out at a floor price. That would raise the price of imported crude oil to a floor price, which would be stable as a bottom price for domestic oil, and even select countries oil as well.

Recall, of all the countries we import oil from, we get the most from Canada.

The problem with that, although it would enable the development of considerably more resources (enough to survive without imports outside North America), is that the increase in price would cause hardship for those who would not benefit from the higher price, directly or indirectly.

At the same time, though, the tariff (which would be a Constitutional revenue means) would put money in the Federal Coffers which could be earmarked for anything from infrastructure to paying down the debt.

It would have to be carefully considered, and I can't say I support the idea, even though I find it personally attractive because it could enhance my income.

The Federal Government needs some discipline when it comes to spending, and the reduction in size and scope thereof would be getting back to what the Founders intended.

Fiscal responsibility has not been the Government's strong suit.

358 posted on 02/01/2016 9:50:38 AM PST by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 357 | View Replies]

To: Smokin' Joe

Good info thanks.


359 posted on 02/01/2016 9:58:57 AM PST by Trumpinator ("Are you Batman?" the boy asked. "I am Batman," Trump said.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 358 | View Replies]

To: Trumpinator

You’re Welcome.


360 posted on 02/01/2016 10:11:15 AM PST by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 359 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 281-300301-320321-340341-360 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