Oil

bdgan

Well-Known Member
May 29, 2008
61,070
37,490
1
Sure, the number of refineries shrunk under Trump, they can't produce another ounce of gas, oil companies insist they won't pump another drop, but it's all Biden's fault. Fvcking moron.
Why would Biden ask the middle east to increase production if we couldn't refine it anyway?

U.S. oil production was 13 million barrels per day before the pandemic and it just got back to 12 million in June. Did the refineries shyt the bed?

I never claimed that Biden caused the whole problem but I definitely think he has contributed to the problem.

You just deny and deflect. Fvcking moron.
 

bourbon n blues

Well-Known Member
Nov 20, 2019
21,783
25,371
1
I don't know enough about things like safety andcdisposing of spent rods. Advocates say there have been advances and the risk is minimal. I know for years they have been threatening to close the nuclear facility near me.

It seems that we have pro fossil fuel people and pro wind and solar. Not as many advocates for nuclear. It seems to be working for France although rates are 50% higher than in USA.
I’m pro fossil and pro pro nuke . Wind and solar are like a hobby, I don’t take them seriously on a large scale .
 
  • Like
Reactions: bison13 and Ski

bourbon n blues

Well-Known Member
Nov 20, 2019
21,783
25,371
1
My God....BDgan is one of the few conservatives on here that doesn't just look to argue back and can admit the right was wrong for their actions on January 6th. You guys are just so addicted to firing back, you don't want to believe this can be true. I don't care if it's just one guy. It's a guy who works directly in the oil field and has for many years.

That's way more first-hand credible knowledge than any politician with an agenda.
How do you know the guy worked in the industry or not? However I do know people that do and they would say that the information is correct .
 

MaconNitt

Well-Known Member
Oct 18, 2016
2,704
3,168
1
My God....BDgan is one of the few conservatives on here that doesn't just look to argue back and can admit the right was wrong for their actions on January 6th. You guys are just so addicted to firing back, you don't want to believe this can be true. I don't care if it's just one guy. It's a guy who works directly in the oil field and has for many years.

That's way more first-hand credible knowledge than any politician with an agenda.

How do you know the guy worked in the industry or not? However I do know people that do and they would say that the information is correct .
Because his source is a facebook post from a funny memes website. :rolleyes:


 

bdgan

Well-Known Member
May 29, 2008
61,070
37,490
1
Because his source is a facebook post from a funny memes website. :rolleyes:


I've never been to that site in my life. I can't speak to the intellect of the author but most of what he said sounds sensible to me.

You would have more credibility if you challenged the points that were made instead of simply dismissing the source.
 

PaoliLion

Well-Known Member
Nov 2, 2003
12,099
6,085
1
Why would Biden ask the middle east to increase production if we couldn't refine it anyway?

U.S. oil production was 13 million barrels per day before the pandemic and it just got back to 12 million in June. Did the refineries shyt the bed?

I never claimed that Biden caused the whole problem but I definitely think he has contributed to the problem.

You just deny and deflect. Fvcking moron.

The lack of basic intelligence you have is absolutely staggering.

The oil market is global, If Saudi Arabia pumps more oil and sells more oil to Europe, it lowers the price of oil in the US.

Saudi Arabia exports both refined petroleum products and crude oil.

Refinery capacity is down significantly compared to before the pandemic and they are operating at capacity

 

MaconNitt

Well-Known Member
Oct 18, 2016
2,704
3,168
1
I've never been to that site in my life. I can't speak to the intellect of the author but most of what he said sounds sensible to me.

You would have more credibility if you challenged the points that were made instead of simply dismissing the source.
Fine, you have never been to that site. But you still quoted it word for word, as the basis for the thread, from some where. Where ever you got it, it is bogus.

You got caught using something bogus that is on you. You should check out your material before posting it, not just because it fits your narrative. It seems you are the one with a credibility issue. Just because it is on the internet doesn't mean it is true. :rolleyes:

EDUCATE YOURSELF....
 

bdgan

Well-Known Member
May 29, 2008
61,070
37,490
1
The lack of basic intelligence you have is absolutely staggering.

The oil market is global, If Saudi Arabia pumps more oil and sells more oil to Europe, it lowers the price of oil in the US.

Saudi Arabia exports both refined petroleum products and crude oil.

Refinery capacity is down significantly compared to before the pandemic and they are operating at capacity

I can't read your article because it's behind a pay wall. That said....

You argue that oil is a global market which it is. It's also true that the U.S. could sell unrefined oil into that world market and help lower the price. In other words it makes no sense to be producing 1 million barrels less per day than we did pre pandemic. Besides, your side previously claimed that oil companies were limiting production to maximize profits. Joe was yelling at U.S. oil companies to increase production. You libs can't keep your story straight.

P.S. Refinery capacity declined because of damage from hurricane Ida. Even so, U S. Refinery capacity is still 17.9 million barrels per day.

 
  • Like
Reactions: bourbon n blues

bdgan

Well-Known Member
May 29, 2008
61,070
37,490
1
Fine, you have never been to that site. But you still quoted it word for word, as the basis for the thread, from some where. Where ever you got it, it is bogus.

You got caught using something bogus that is on you. You should check out your material before posting it, not just because it fits your narrative. It seems you are the one with a credibility issue. Just because it is on the internet doesn't mean it is true. :rolleyes:

EDUCATE YOURSELF....
As usual you dismiss the source because you have a problem disputing the claims.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bison13 and Ski

PaoliLion

Well-Known Member
Nov 2, 2003
12,099
6,085
1
I can't read your article because it's behind a pay wall. That said....

You argue that oil is a global market which it is. It's also true that the U.S. could sell unrefined oil into that world market and help lower the price. In other words it makes no sense to be producing 1 million barrels less per day than we did pre pandemic. Besides, your side previously claimed that oil companies were limiting production to maximize profits. Joe was yelling at U.S. oil companies to increase production. You libs can't keep your story straight.

P.S. Refinery capacity declined because of damage from hurricane Ida. Even so, U S. Refinery capacity is still 17.9 million barrels per day.


Let me help you out. The US oil industry has no motive to rock the boat and lower global oil prices. That's a very bad outcome for them. A lot of the wildcatters went out of business or were bought out in 2020. The consolidation has given fewer players more control over US oil production. Refining oil is a capital intense, low margin business and, as such, no one is build refineries and, in fact, they're shutting them down. If the US wants to increase world oil production, it either needs to appeal to state run oil industries or build mechanisms that allow the US govt to control the output and export rate of oil in the US.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Catch50

MaconNitt

Well-Known Member
Oct 18, 2016
2,704
3,168
1
As usual you dismiss the source because you have a problem disputing the claims.
You used a bogus source and got caught. It's ok. It happens to the best of us. Keep checking your email for a letter from a Nigerian Prince. He wants to share his fortune with you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Catch50

bdgan

Well-Known Member
May 29, 2008
61,070
37,490
1
You used a bogus source and got caught. It's ok. It happens to the best of us. Keep checking your email for a letter from a Nigerian Prince. He wants to share his fortune with you.
The source doesn't matter. You can agree with the statements or explain why they're wrong. Instead you keep deflecting.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bourbon n blues

MaconNitt

Well-Known Member
Oct 18, 2016
2,704
3,168
1
The source doesn't matter. You can agree with the statements or explain why they're wrong. Instead you keep deflecting.
deflect this

the source does matter

Here are some sources to debunk your OP. I don't have the time or desire to do what you could have done in the first place. Happy reading.


 

bdgan

Well-Known Member
May 29, 2008
61,070
37,490
1
deflect this

the source does matter

Here are some sources to debunk your OP. I don't have the time or desire to do what you could have done in the first place. Happy reading.


Lame! So what if it's 100 years instead of 400 years? Also, you assume no new areas to explore and no new technology. We've got Green River, Alaska, and more.

You're dishonest.
 

MaconNitt

Well-Known Member
Oct 18, 2016
2,704
3,168
1
Lame! So what if it's 100 years instead of 400 years? Also, you assume no new areas to explore and no new technology. We've got Green River, Alaska, and more.

You're dishonest.
I provide real sources to dispute some rando item you "found" on the internet with no sources to back it up and your comeback is "Lame!" and "So what"

The only thing I assumed was that you couldn't possibly keep digging yourself into a deeper hole, and making a fool out of yourself.

You didn't even address the Forbes link. Who is dishonest now?

What's next in your arsenal? I know you are, but what am I?

 

pioneerlion83

Well-Known Member
May 29, 2001
15,367
9,956
1
SouthernMD, by way of NJ and PSU
It's Trump's fault
It's Covid's fault
It's Putin's fault
Soon it will be China's fault
Well, @Jason1743 did refute the nameless, anonymous, random person interviewed by some irrelevant fake news outlet, which you provide no link or citation for. And you want us to take what you post seriously? You don't even provide the original "article" to read first hand...pfffftttt...
 
  • Like
Reactions: MaconNitt

bourbon n blues

Well-Known Member
Nov 20, 2019
21,783
25,371
1
I can't read your article because it's behind a pay wall. That said....

You argue that oil is a global market which it is. It's also true that the U.S. could sell unrefined oil into that world market and help lower the price. In other words it makes no sense to be producing 1 million barrels less per day than we did pre pandemic. Besides, your side previously claimed that oil companies were limiting production to maximize profits. Joe was yelling at U.S. oil companies to increase production. You libs can't keep your story straight.

P.S. Refinery capacity declined because of damage from hurricane Ida. Even so, U S. Refinery capacity is still 17.9 million barrels per day.

True.
 

bourbon n blues

Well-Known Member
Nov 20, 2019
21,783
25,371
1
Lame! So what if it's 100 years instead of 400 years? Also, you assume no new areas to explore and no new technology. We've got Green River, Alaska, and more.

You're dishonest.
Modern discovery of oil was in 1859, think of how technology has advanced since then. It's silly to think we won't advance past this point in 100-400 years.
 

LMTLION

Well-Known Member
Mar 20, 2008
2,651
2,766
1
Confirmed by oil field worker who's been in the oil field business for 50+ years and is still in it at 82.

A whole lot of truth about gas prices, and to those that say: "the president doesn't set the price of gas"... pay close attention and maybe read it twice:

From a production worker in a refinery on the Gulf of Mexico:

"You've been lied to by the President and his phony cronies, but I want to set the record straight. I'm going to tell you the truth, so pay attention"....

1. There is enough recoverable crude oil within the continental US to supply current and projected future demand for 400+ years, and that's just the oil we know about. It doesn't account for future discoveries. That's a fact...

2. We do not need to import a SINGLE DROP of foreign crude oil. The domestic oil industry can easily meet, and even surpass domestic demand. We've done it before, and we can do it again. That's a fact...

3. The domestic oil industry currently cannot satisfy domestic demand due to oil drilling restrictions imposed by the federal government. That's a fact...

4. The price of EVERYTHING revolves around oil, and the law of supply vs demand dictates the price of oil. When oil is plentiful, commodities are cheap. When oil is scarce, commodities are more expensive. Right now, domestic oil is scarce, and the price of everything is high because of these restrictions imposed by the federal government. That's a fact…

5. We import foreign oil from countries that drill and produce it much cheaper than we're able to because they do not implement all of the environmental safeguards that we do. Their methods are FAR more destructive to the environment than ours are. That's a fact...

6. Every year, the federal government leases tracts of land to oil companies so they can explore on it for oil. If enough oil is found during exploration, the company can then apply for a drilling permit which allows them to drill a well. If no oil is found during exploration, or if the amount found is not enough to be profitable the lease expires without ever being drilled on. Leases that are active, but not being drilled on does NOT mean that oil companies are being lazy, or are trying to keep the oil for themselves, etc. etc. It means they've either explored the lease for oil and found nothing, or found oil but it's not enough to justify drilling for. That's a fact...

7. it’s not Russia's fault, or China's fault, or Ukraine, or India, or Venezuela, or Iran, or Bangladesh, or any other countries' fault as to why everything is so expensive right now. It's Joe Biden's fault, because he is suppressing the domestic oil industry for political gain.

EVERYTHING depends on crude oil... but you might not know that if you believe the lies that are being told about oil and the oil industry.

EDUCATE YOURSELF…
I am actually a fan of expanding our oil production for now until we bridge to something else (I think nuclear is the way to go.). But your “proof” is no different than announcing these facts came from the tooth fairy.
 

bourbon n blues

Well-Known Member
Nov 20, 2019
21,783
25,371
1
A chemical engineer says we aren't energy independent, ok then. If we could rely on ourselves for our own energy needs, that's independence. We could build more refineries, we could add nuclear power plants if we reduced the regulatory roadblocks preventing us from doing so.
While the OP's oil worker might be fictitious, the information is accurate in what it says.
 

bourbon n blues

Well-Known Member
Nov 20, 2019
21,783
25,371
1
I am actually a fan of expanding our oil production for now until we bridge to something else (I think nuclear is the way to go.). But your “proof” is no different than announcing these facts came from the to

The source might not be an actual oil worker but the information is correct.
 

bdgan

Well-Known Member
May 29, 2008
61,070
37,490
1
The source might not be an actual oil worker but the information is correct.
Some of the information could be wrong but IMO that's not the point. What if we have a 100 year supply of oil instead of a 400 year supply of oil? Does that mean we should sacrifice our standard of living by slowing drilling now?

The "guy" in my post said things like:
  • High oil prices impact the price of everything
  • The U.S. has enough oil available to supply all of their needs for at least a few decades.
  • It costs more to drill in the U.S. because we have more rigid regulations.
  • Oil companies enter into lease agreements but some areas are deemed unprofitable. It's perfectly logical that many of the leased areas aren't being drilled.
Yet somehow libs say this is all baloney. They're so caught up in their ideology that they refuse to use common sense.

And for the 100th time... EVs are coming if we like them or not. I'll probably buy one down the road. I think they can help reduce smog in big city traffic and they could be an economical solution for people who commute. I don't think the government has to build charging stations, especially in economically disadvantaged areas. At most we need charging stations along the expressways. Other than that people will charge at home. Furthermore the private sector will provide charging stations as demand increases. We don't need the government's involvement. Heck, I have a condo where Chargepoint installed a charging station for free because they collect the charging fees.

And as long as I'm on a rant... It hardly matters what 300 million Americans do when 3 billion people in China and India go in a different direction.
 

bourbon n blues

Well-Known Member
Nov 20, 2019
21,783
25,371
1
Some of the information could be wrong but IMO that's not the point. What if we have a 100 year supply of oil instead of a 400 year supply of oil? Does that mean we should sacrifice our standard of living by slowing drilling now?

The "guy" in my post said things like:
  • High oil prices impact the price of everything
  • The U.S. has enough oil available to supply all of their needs for at least a few decades.
  • It costs more to drill in the U.S. because we have more rigid regulations.
  • Oil companies enter into lease agreements but some areas are deemed unprofitable. It's perfectly logical that many of the leased areas aren't being drilled.
Yet somehow libs say this is all baloney. They're so caught up in their ideology that they refuse to use common sense.

And for the 100th time... EVs are coming if we like them or not. I'll probably buy one down the road. I think they can help reduce smog in big city traffic and they could be an economical solution for people who commute. I don't think the government has to build charging stations, especially in economically disadvantaged areas. At most we need charging stations along the expressways. Other than that people will charge at home. Furthermore the private sector will provide charging stations as demand increases. We don't need the government's involvement. Heck, I have a condo where Chargepoint installed a charging station for free because they collect the charging fees.

And as long as I'm on a rant... It hardly matters what 300 million Americans do when 3 billion people in China and India go in a different direction.
All true .
 

GSPMax

Well-Known Member
Jun 21, 2018
2,404
3,503
1
Producing from shale and oil sands is considerably more expensive than mid-east oil. Even after the shipping costs are factored in.

Shale oil can be produced for $35/barrel. Saudi's can produce for $10/barrel (Jan 22 numbers) so you are correct in that middle east oil is cheaper to produce. I don't know what transportation cost adds to that $10/barrel.

The fact remains, isn't $35/barrel domestic better than the current price of Brent approaching $100/barrel and depending on foreign?
 

bourbon n blues

Well-Known Member
Nov 20, 2019
21,783
25,371
1
  • High oil prices impact the price of everything
  • The U.S. has enough oil available to supply all of their needs for at least a few decades.
  • It costs more to drill in the U.S. because we have more rigid regulations.
  • Oil companies enter into lease agreements but some areas are deemed unprofitable. It's perfectly logical that many of the leased areas aren't being drilled.
All of this is accurate.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JR4PSU

JR4PSU

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Sep 27, 2002
40,568
11,574
1
SE PA
Shale oil can be produced for $35/barrel. Saudi's can produce for $10/barrel (Jan 22 numbers) so you are correct in that middle east oil is cheaper to produce. I don't know what transportation cost adds to that $10/barrel.

The fact remains, isn't $35/barrel domestic better than the current price of Brent approaching $100/barrel and depending on foreign?
$35/barrel may be the "cost" to produce that barrel of oil from Shale, but that doesn't mean that is what the refinery pays for that barrel of oil. The refineries pay the market price, which is not dictated by the producers of the oil.

If you and I can both make a widget, and it costs me $2/widget to make that widget, but takes you $3/widget to make, but both of our widgets get on the Walmart shelf together and sell for the exact same price of $5/widget, then I simply make more money than you.
 

Catch50

Well-Known Member
Feb 5, 2003
35,286
2,102
1
Some of the information could be wrong but IMO that's not the point. What if we have a 100 year supply of oil instead of a 400 year supply of oil? Does that mean we should sacrifice our standard of living by slowing drilling now?

The "guy" in my post said things like:
  • High oil prices impact the price of everything
  • The U.S. has enough oil available to supply all of their needs for at least a few decades.
  • It costs more to drill in the U.S. because we have more rigid regulations.
  • Oil companies enter into lease agreements but some areas are deemed unprofitable. It's perfectly logical that many of the leased areas aren't being drilled.
Yet somehow libs say this is all baloney. They're so caught up in their ideology that they refuse to use common sense. (B.S. Drilling costs matter!)

And for the 100th time... EVs are coming if we like them or not. I'll probably buy one down the road. I think they can help reduce smog in big city traffic and they could be an economical solution for people who commute. I don't think the government has to build charging stations, especially in economically disadvantaged areas. At most we need charging stations along the expressways. Other than that people will charge at home. Furthermore the private sector will provide charging stations as demand increases. We don't need the government's involvement. Heck, I have a condo where Chargepoint installed a charging station for free because they collect the charging fees.

And as long as I'm on a rant... It hardly matters what 300 million Americans do when 3 billion people in China and India go in a different direction.
 

SLUPSU

Well-Known Member
Aug 5, 2018
4,556
2,627
1
I’m pro fossil and pro pro nuke . Wind and solar are like a hobby, I don’t take them seriously on a large scale .
Even when accounting for capacity factors, anyone who looks at these numbers/trends and calls them a "hobby" is an idiot.
I have no problem with nukes. But the reality, in their current form, is they are way too expensive to build without government involvement, and they take way too long to build.

 

GSPMax

Well-Known Member
Jun 21, 2018
2,404
3,503
1
...and they take way too long to build.

Why? They are only too long to build because of self-imposed impediments.

We've heard the "it takes too long" argument for 40 years or more now. Quite tiresome.

The technology for natural gas energy production is here now. Use it to transition to nuclear and kick start nuclear now instead of using the "it can't be done fast enough" bs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jjw165

SLUPSU

Well-Known Member
Aug 5, 2018
4,556
2,627
1
Why? They are only too long to build because of self-imposed impediments.

We've heard the "it takes too long" argument for 40 years or more now. Quite tiresome.

The technology for natural gas energy production is here now. Use it to transition to nuclear and kick start nuclear now instead of using the "it can't be done fast enough" bs.

Why??? Because they are complicated, it doesn't matter where or who is building them or the regulations or lack thereof in place, they take about 10 or more years just to build. Plant Vogtle in GA has been a construction nightmare, one of the two units is about to fuel the reactors after 9 years of construction, and the other unit is planned for fueling next year. Commissioning will take 1 to 2 more years if all goes smoothly and costs have doubled to over $30 billion.

You'd be whining luck a stuck pig if your electric bills were going up like those in that region are going to face for decades to come.