Why are we paying high gas prices?

That is only a short-term fix, and is driven by prices. As long as it is cheaper to use their oil, we will do it. The real fix is to develop alternate types of engines for our cars.

 

Do you have proof of this? Or are you a world energy expert yourself?

Do you have any idea how much oil we have in the Gulf of Mexico or in Alaska? Just how "short-term" woould it be?

Please give us some facts to back up your statements

AJ

 

I wish someone would deal with the facts.

Fact 1. Our US PIPELINES ARE FULL - We couldn't handle more oil if we drilled it, unless you want every other 18 wheeler on the highway to be a tanker. (let me rephrase - a bomb on wheels traveling at 70mph.)

Fact 2. We don't have enough refineries to process what we already are drilling. The last refinery built in the U.S. was built in 1976.

Fact 3. We have enough oil in N.D. Alone to take care of our needs for years.

Fact 4. We export oil to other countries then turn around and buy oil from foreign sources.

Bottom Line is NNE wants a REFINERY in their BACK YARD. Just recently (last Tuesday) a county in S.D. voted to approve a huge new refinery. Already the opposition forces are gearing up to stop it.

Congress maybe could bully the oil companies into building a new refinery or two or constructing a couple of new pipelines but ultimately it comes down to local government and state government. Don't blame Congress for something your own state and local government refuses to do.

 

Increased demand does not lower prices. Your illustration has nothing to do with increased demand; it's an action by the merchant to move more merchandise.

Your example is putting the cart before the horse. Increased demand didn't lower the price of the Mt. Dew. The lowered price of the Mt. Dew increased the demand.

 

The reason for the high price of gasoline is the brainwashing we have been subjected to by the environmentalists and their enablers in the media. Some of the assinine comments above prove my point.

 

Sure, it's all the environmentalists' faults. :laugh:

It's a matter of demand increasing beyond supply combined with oil speculation.

Hardsheller's comments were spot-on.

Another big factor, though, is that the US created bedroom communities filled with people driving SUVs 30 miles to work in the heyday of cheap gas. Now that worldwide demand is increasing, we can't sustain this setup.

The environmentalists are right on one thing: we must reduce consumption. I think we have sufficient economic and national security reasons to warrant it, but if it somehow helps the environment, I guess it's an added bonus.

 

And this is why i'm working on technology that will produce a Mt. Dew powered car. I figure it kept me moving, awake, and alert while in college...perhaps this blessed citrus flavored carbonated beverage can answer our fuel issues!:thumbs:

 

-- Ed Edwards,

Actively supporting gasoline sanity since 1976.
In 1977-1984 I l had a 42MPG German Volkswagen Rabbit (deasel desil desill deasel - I can't even get close enough to the spelling to activate the spelling hope.)

I'm going to spend my carbon credits to keep my house cool in the summer (it is a matter of LIFE).

 

He can't give much info, he just listens to the wrong people and their talking points.

Whether we like it or not, oil is the lube for the industrial world. All these wind, solar, geothermal, ideas, while worthy of development, can never make even a small dent in our dependence on oil. The only proven viable method of reasonably measurable help lies in nuclear power. A comprehensive system of these would allow electrification of a significant segment of our transportation needs. This course of action would take decades, and would require a government that facilitates the enormous "red tape". Won't happen.

We currently have lawmakers that have been so afraid of the environmentalists, for so long, they now accept their rhetoric as a "given".. So I agree with the OP, congress is at fault...

 

I think you meant price will go down if supply goes up, or demand drops below production capacity.

Usually as demand increases, production is increased to meet it, but when full production is met, and demand continues to rise, price will continue rising until production can satisfy it.

If Hardsheller's post at 9:07 (minus fact 3) is correct, and it seems reasonable, we are at that point where price is continuing to rise, because production is pegged, but the rise in demand is slowing, do to less motoring because of the high prices. If that's the case we will settle at some narrow band price point, until new refineries are ramped up. Maybe between $4.75 and $5.25.. But that may be wishful thinking.

Congress could help by enacting laws, lessoning the enormous red tape and litigation, which prevents these new refineries now.

 

The ultra-secretive Bilderberg Group, a consortium of power brokers from banking, business, politics, academia and oil, met in Munich Germany in May 2005 when crude oil prices were around the $40 a barrel mark.

During the conference, Henry Kissinger told his fellow attendees that the elite had resolved to ensure that oil prices would double over the course of the next 12-24 months, which is exactly what has happened.

During their 2006 meeting in Ottawa Canada, Bilderberg agreed to push for $105 a barrel before the end of 2008. This information was gleaned from sources inside Bilderberg who have proven reliable in the past.


Source...

Note. I only posted this because Hardsheller's facts were lacking the biggest fact of all. :smilewinkgrin:

I told everyone here back in 2005 gas prices were going to climb out of sight, but y'all laughed at me cuz y'all know it all. So, go ahead and laugh at me some more. I told everyone here quite a few things that came to pass while you were all busy laughing about them, like the neocons, the Bilderbergs, the Bohemian Grove, the North American Union and a few other things. Well, the chickens are coming home to roost. I warned ya in advance so don't blame me when your little worlds start unraveling. Just laugh some more, or play your fiddle I don't really care.
​

 

Poncho: // I told everyone here back in 2005 ... //

I told everyone who would listen back in 1975 ...

Nobody listened.
Time for some changes in unknown, virtually random, direction.
Without Jesus we would be totally LOST: spiritually, temporally, spatially, physically, mentally, virtually, (room for the unknown state), ETC.

BTW, I've heard again this election (and everyone since when Truman was elected - just counting the ones I remember) that it may be the last USofA Presidential election ever. Letterman is making remarks that after all the state primaries/caucuses that the Canadian Provinces have to vote then the Euro-Asian countries, etc.

 

Reckon they can't blame either of us for not giving them the headsup well in advance then can they Ed?