Bush Eases Environmental Rules on Gasoline (AP)

[rodeodance]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060425/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush;_ylt=Au3JhB8ik7m7D1IEfoCzNEus0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA2Z2szazkxBHNlYwN0bQ--

Bush Eases Environmental Rules on Gasoline

By NEDRA PICKLER, Associated Press Writer 3 minutes ago

WASHINGTON -
President Bush on Tuesday ordered a temporary suspension of environmental rules for gasoline, making it easier for refiners to meet demand and possibly dampen prices at the pump. He also halted for the summer the purchase of crude oil for the government's emergency reserve.
ADVERTISEMENT

Bush also announced steps to ease environmental standards governing fuel grades.

The moves came as political pressure intensified on Bush to do something about gasoline prices that are expected to stay high throughout the summer.

Bush said the nation's strategic petroleum reserve had enough fuel to guard against any major supply disruption over the next few months.

[skooooo]

1. here we go..

this is exactly what the oil companies wanted

[Carni]

26. YEP!

THis whole damned thing has been contrived for this very purpose!

[rodeodance]

28. going, and going. the enviroment be dammed!

[cantstandbush]

74. "...and POSSIBLY reduce prices at the pump."

There are no guarantees and Bush's actions are just a PR stunt. He will not impose the windfall profits tax..that's why he and Cheney are there...to protect the oil companies. And BTW, when will people start talking about CHENEY'S SECRET MEETINGS WITH THE ENERGY PANEL that put together the fine energy policy that has brought us to this point?

[wordpix2]

76. first rules relaxed will be to drill anywhere, everywhere & give NEPA the

boot, "temporarily" to get over the crisis that BushCo largely created.

Fu**$$$!!*ers

[Triana]

2. what a bassackwards regressive way to handle high oil prices...

the PROPER way would be to initiate a windfall profits tax and slam down on price gouging - NOT allowing oil companies to further rape the environent.

How friggin REPUBLICAN of him. Pig.

[bluerum]

3. And gas prices will immediately drop 25%! HA HA HA HA HA.

[neuvocat]

4. No they won't.

They won't change at all because there are too many greedy oil barons out there.

[bluerum]

66. Sarcasm is a beautiful if sometimes elusive thing. nt

[neuvocat]

67. Ah. Right you are.

My goof.

[rodeodance]

5. Bush said high energy prices are disturbing.---well, gee how did this

happen Mr. Bush---maybe invading Irag and setting the ME into turmoil?



.....Bush said high energy prices are disturbing.

"Our addiction to oil is a matter of national security concerns," the president said in a speech to the Renewable Fuels Association, which advocates alternate energy sources. "After all, today we get about 60 percent of our oil from foreign countries. That's up from 20 years ago, where about 25 percent of our oil came from foreign countries."

Bush said gasoline prices are expected to remain high throughout the summer and "that's going to be a continued strain on the American people."

Bush said the Federal Trade Commission, the Justice Department and the Energy Department were investigating whether the price of gasoline has been unfairly manipulated. The administration also contacted all 50 state attorneys general to offer technical assistance to urge them to investigate possible illegal price manipulation within their jurisdictions.

[rodeodance]

6. So bush hits enviromental laws now. !!

DAMM.

[rodeodance]

10. gee whiz, gas prices have become a political issue! dah!

.....Easing the environment rules will allow refiners greater flexibility in providing oil supplies since they will not have to use certain additives such as ethanol to meet clean air standards. The suspension of oil purchases for the federal emergency oil reserve is likely to have only modest impact since relative little extra oil will be involved.

The high cost at the pump has turned into a major political issue, with Democrats and Republicans blaming each other for a problem that is largely out of Congress' control. Republicans are worried that voters paying more than $3 per gallon would punish the party in power. Democrats want to make that happen.

Bush said that high gasoline prices are like a hidden tax on consumers and businesses, although he said the nation's economy was strong. He urged Congress to take back some of the billions of dollars in tax incentives it gave energy companies, saying that with record profits, they don't need the breaks. He urged lawmakers to expand tax breaks for the purchase of fuel-efficient hybrid automobiles.

The president said Democrats in the past have urged higher taxes on fuel and price caps to control fuel expenses, but he said neither approach works. Instead, he called for increased conservation, an expansion of domestic production and increased use of alternative fuels like ethanol.

[librechik]

7. how convenient! And now nobody will complain

since prices are so high. But they couldn't have coordinated these two events. No way.

:sarcasm:

[Debau2005]

8. This is his dumbass idea

to solve the problem? What an moran!!!

[OneBlueSky]

9. no opportunity left unexploited . . .

to fatten the already bulging-to-bursting pockets of the oil companies . . .

that's what we get for allowing the Supreme Court to install oilmen in the two highest executive positions in government . . .

and for allowing them to re-steal their offices four years later . . .

[wordpix2]

77. no oil executive left behind

[partylessinOhio]

11. This is pure BS! What more is Decider goin'a do for the Oil Companies?

What he should do is warn the oil companies that they must reduce the price and cut their profits(extortion) immediately or HE will institute price controls immediately.

The coward won't do it but he must!

[Bozita]

12. The environment takes another one right up the ass

It's the compassionate thing to do.

[wordpix2]

78. yeah BushCo loves to rape our American heritage every chance they

can get

[kysrsoze]

86. why not use the environmenallly friendly blend all year, everywhere?

I'm sure much of the cost is associated with running different formulations. We'd pay less and have less polution running this stuff everywhere. Of course, that wouldn't be quite as immensely profitable, now would it?

[yellowcanine]

13. He is JUST NOW suspending filling the reserve? Am I missing something?

Shouldn't the government buy crude for the reserve when prices are low and suspend buying when prices go above some threshold - say $60 - and then only resume buying when crude gets down to some threshold? Buying to fill the reserve when prices are high is just plain stupid - drives prices even higher and also costs the government more. Am I missing something?

[laruemtt]

14. should have seen this one coming.

the last few days when you read about it on the MSM sites, they blame the cost of meeting the clean air standards. :mad:

[rodeodance]

15. yes, they have been chatting about it for two weeks now--and convinced

many Americans it will solve the problem.

[partylessinOhio]

16. "They" have blamed everything but the problem, the PRICE!

[Klukie]

56. You are so right...

Faux news has been spouting this nonsense for the last few days. Go figure.

[rodeodance]

17. needs more nominations. --this is important.

[RamboLiberal]

18. I can't believe I'm going to defend him - but at this point it's not

a bad move. Blame the damn oil companies but they are apparently not prepared this season for the switch from MTBE to ethanol. Relaxing the rules for 1 summer is not going to be that damaging to the environment IMHO - but let's limit it to this summer only and tell them they damn better make sure they are ready next summer and they cannot use it as an excuse to rape the consumers.

Let's see if this will help ease shortages on the East Coast and lower the prices. I'd rather see this than see the poor and middle class just screwed by the current prices.

Looks like the 32 rating and the earful congress critters got from their constituents actually have the idiots in the WH doing something besides telling us it's going to be a "tough summer"

[progressivebydesign]

34. Hate to disagree with you.. but I will.

It's not the oil companies lack of preparation from the MTBE. We are not having shortages right now. That's not the case. The problem is the traders in the oil/gas market who raise the price of oil every time Bush says "boo" about Iran. I would buy that it's some issue of availablity, etc., if the oil companies and the traders had not jacked up the prices continually throughout the last few years, WHILE making RECORD profits.... The oil companies ARE to blame.. they are making profits to the tune of 8 BILLION per quarter throughout these past few years of record prices... it's profiteering, and it's oil speculation. Easing environmental rules does nothing but dirty the air, and allow the robber baron oil companies to NOT comply. They had billions of dollars of OUR money for the past few years to comply with this, but they refuse to build new refineries or deal with the ones they have for the right production because they KNOW they can jack up prices.

[RamboLiberal]

44. I did say blame the damn oil companies

but at least on the east coast there are shutdowns cause they are not getting the new blend out to the stations. If suspending the rules temporarily does ease a shortage and prices then I say ok for now. Not a perfect solution but better than the consumers taking it up the butt for the screwups by the Repugs and their damn friends in the oil industry.

I notice that * is at least talking tough about the tax breaks too - though I suspect that if prices go down a bit and consumer's bitching goes down as well that will quickly be forgotten.

Dems need to mine that consumer anger and get out there and explain what they will do to make sure if elected that this gouging will not continue to happen and to get away from this damn addiction to oil.

Personally I'd love to see a monopoly suit brought against the oil companies and jawboning and legislation against this excessive profit and executive compensation. I think one of the big problems is they now lack competition with only a few suppliers left selling. I keep asking myself why are all of them basically at the same pump price? It reeks of collusion.

[Sgent]

90. This won't affect

the price of Oil. That's set in the market.

It WILL effect the cost of gas at the pump since it makes one feul usuable in all places.

The issue isn't even ethonal vs MTBE, but rather the fact there are 30 some odd formulations of gas used in the US.

[rodeodance]

50. yes, speculation has led to price increases-(Bushco and nuke talk is

part of it)

[wordpix2]

79. remember "make the tax cuts (for the rich) permanent?" This will be:

make the suspension of environmental laws permanent.

[DUHandle]

88. Either that, or

"we can't put the standards back because the price of gasoline will go up."


This is evil by design - it's sickening.

[Mr.Green93]

19. The Price is Too High because the Taxes are Too Low

And now we won't be able to breathe the air or see the sky.

[jus_the_facts]

49. Or DRINK THE WATER...MTBE information HERE....

http://www.cyber-nook.com/water/MTBE.html

EPA - MTBE in drinking-water sources is of concern because it is a potential human carcinogen and it has low taste and odor thresholds which can make a water supply nonpotable even at low concentrations. Although there is no established drinking-water regulation, US EPA has issued a drinking-water advisory of 20 to 40 micrograms per liter (µg/L) on the basis of taste and odor thresholds. This advisory concentration is intended to provided large margin of safety for noncancer effects and is in the range of margins typically provided for potential carcinogenic effects.



On January 16, 2000 CBS News' 60 minutes reported on the concerns about methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE) contaminating the water in 49 states. MTBE is a gasoline additive which has been used since the late 1970s to help reduce automobile emissions. As 60 minutes reported, MTBE is highly water-soluble, slow to degrade, and, because of leaking underground petroleum storage tanks, has become a contaminant in 20 percent of the nation's urban wells. The city of Santa Monica, CA alone found 70 percent of its city wells contaminated, and has spend more then $3 million a year pumping in water from the Colorado River to replace those of the seven city wells it shut down due to MTBE contamination. Although MTBE has been a controversial gasoline additive for a number of years, the 60 Minute report gave it instant national attention.

As with most issues that affect issues of health, the environment, industry and politics, there is a wide range of opinions regarding this topic. I have listed a number of web sites below that address various elements of the MTBE debate. They range from purely descriptive articles to extremely opinionated. Again, as with most issues of this nature, the truth? Is likely to lie somewhere between the extremes of opinion. I believe the articles here will give you enough information to make your own informed opinions regarding the severity and danger of MTBE contamination..



About MTBE - MTBE stands for the synthetic compound Methyl Tertiary-Butyl Ether and is a gasoline additive that has contaminated drinking water across the country. Made from methanol and a by-product of the oil refining process, it was added to gasoline in an attempt to make gas burn cleaner, but studies show it has had little effect on curbing air pollution.

MTBE - To what extent will past releases contaminate community water supply wells (This is a PDF file and you will need Adobe Acrobat Reader)
The increasing frequency of detection of the widely used gasoline additive methyl tert-butyl ether (MTBE) in both ground and surface waters is receiving much attention from the media, environmental scientists, state environmental agencies, and federal agencies. At the national level, the September 15, 1999, Report of the Blue Ribbon Panel on Oxygenates in Gasoline (1) states that between 5 and 10% of community drinking water supplies in high MTBE use areas show at least detectable concentrations of MTBE, and about 1% of those systems are characterized by levels of this compound that are above 20 µg/L. In Maine, a desire to determine the extent of MTBE contamination led to a 1998 study (2) that revealed that this compound is found at levels above 0.1 µg/L in 16% of 951 randomly selected household wells and in 16% of the 793 community water systems tested in that state (37 wells were not tested). The study also suggested that between 1400 and 5200 household wells may have levels above 35 µg/L, although no community water supplies were found to be above that concentration. For comparison, Maryland, New Hampshire, New York, and California have set MTBE remediation "action levels" at or below 20 µg/L, and EPA has set its advisory level for taste and odor at 20-40 µg/L.
........ Use of MTBE as a gasoline additive began in the United States in the late 1970s when it was introduced as a means of maintaining adequate octane ratings during the phaseout of alkyl lead additives. MTBE use expanded dramatically in the mid-1990s with the implementation of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, which mandated efforts to reduce carbon monoxide emissions, as well as ozone levels in urban air. For carbon monoxide, MTBE was selected by some gasoline producers as a means of producing "oxygenated fuel" (oxyfuel) that allowed the more complete combustion of gasoline hydrocarbons.
........ MTBE is very soluble in water and is therefore very mobile in groundwater systems. And, the absence of any carbon branches more than one carbon long on the MTBE molecule make MTBE very resistant to biodegradation. Thus, like the chlorinated solvent compounds TCE and PCE, MTBE has been found to persist in groundwater, and cases of MTBE plumes extending kilometer-scale distances in the subsurface have now been documented.
....... Subsurface contamination has the potential to threaten local community water supply wells for tens to hundreds of years. This is because leaking underground storage tank sources can persist for decades and because it can take tens to hundreds of years for groundwater to flow from source areas to a CWS well.
...... Some MTBE plumes have originated from very small spills, as from the gasoline in the tank of a single over-turned auto. Ten gallons of a gasoline that is 11% by volume MTBE will contain 3 kg of MTBE. If such an amount were to reach the water table (either by direct seepage of the gasoline or as assisted by infiltration of precipitation), subsequent dissolution and transport could lead to the contamination of millions of liters of water at the tens of µg/L level. .... For example, a spill resulting from a single automobile accident in Standish, ME, led to MTBE transport through more than 0.7 km of fractured rock and to the contamination of more than 20 domestic wells.

MORE...

[Karenina]

60. Here's the link to 60 Minutes

http://www.pei.org/FRD/60_Minutes_Transcript.htm

Date January 16, 2000 ~ Time 07:00 PM - 08:00 PM
Station CBS-TV
Program 60 Minutes

President George Bush: (Clip from file video) Every city in America should have clean air. And with this legislation I firmly believe we will.

(Visual of countryside; smog; gasoline pumps with close-up of labels: Contains MTBE; gas station; gas pump; person replacing cap on fuel tank with close-up of gas spill on ground)

Steve Kroft, co-host:

The only trouble with that legislation is that what it required us to do to clean up our air is now polluting our water. And the culprit is something called MTBE, a chemical that the oil companies say they have no choice but to add to their gasoline. Even the government now says that we're facing a national crisis if something isn't done to stop MTBE from leaking into our drinking water.

[corporate_mike]

20. Why not build new refineries?

Wouldn't that solve the capacity shortage problem?

[Canuckistanian]

40. Supposedly because we "libruls" have prevented it

All them "envirun-mental" contols have killed off any possibility of EVER building new refineries.

Damn them libruls, thay have so much governmental, corporate and media power, the oil companies can't do a thing!

[RamboLiberal]

45. Executives too busy compensating themselves

Next time they cry about needing new refineries Dems need to wave that Exxon's CEO comp package in front of consumers.

[4_TN_TITANS]

51. It's a dead end investment......

to build more refineries, as obvious by their actions. Big Oil sees the end in sight, hence no new refineries, no new significant oil fields, but a last ditch effort to suck as much cash out of us as possible.

It wouldn't surprise me if oil is unaffordable to the average American within 15-20 years.

[Coventina]

21. How much you want to bet this "temporary" move will be permanent?

Oh well, we just kill ourselves and the planet a little quicker, I guess.

[Bozita]

23. Just think of the "temporary" military bases being built in Iraq

[Canuckistanian]

36. Temporary, my ass

What a transparent move.

[deminks]

22. We lose clean air, just like we lost civil liberties with the Patriot Act

We sit back watching everything go, eating our popcorn. This is exactly what the oil industry wants. It won't do a lick for prices, and now they don't have to do a thing for the environment.

[underpants]

24. He did this *IN* the speech to promote ethanol?

Set against a backdrop promoting ethanol, President Bush delivers a speech on his energy plan in Washington, April 25, 2006. (Kevin Lamarque/Reuters)

[underpants]

25. **Haven't the refineries already made the summer blend adjustments?**

Am I missing something here?

[liberal N proud]

27. Did anyone really expect him to make his oil cronies accountable?

the regime has no respect for the environment but they do love the oil money they get from Exxon and Saudi Royals.

[rodeodance]

29. what scares me is that people will believe Bush is actually working-

and doing something of substance- (damm the enviroment)--and he will get a boost in the polls.

[wordpix2]

81. today his big propaganda backdrop promoted alternative fuels

Clever move on Janitor Baker's part to make it look like * is all for the Amurrican people, when we really know * is just out to make his oil cronies rich, along with himself.

[progressivebydesign]

30. That fucking bastard! He KNOWS that is NOT THE ISSUE!

My god.. that man has NO SHAME. Are the American people dumb enuff to buy that? It's NOT THE ENVIRNOMENTAL RULES! (sorry, I was yelling again!)... it's the traders that are jacking up the prices whenever Iran farts! ANd.. it's the profiteering at the oil companies. THe freakin' oil companies are NOT losing money, they are NOT staying at the same profit levels from when gas was a staggering $1.50 a gallon, they are making RECORD profits of at least 8 Billion PER QUARTER!!!

And OF COURSE NEdra Pickler, Bush's favorite little stenographer/poodle is the one to write that story. Does she have an office right there in the White House???

[onehandle]

31. Temporary? Just another oil company payoff. nt

[Canuckistanian]

32. OMG, what a shameless move....

What a farce! I think this whole price increase has been formulated just to facilitate this little gift to the oil companies!

America (and the rest of the world), you've just been had!

[Ghost Dog]

53. Rest of world watching

I think. :-(

[wordpix2]

82. that is why we need to peacefully overthrow this regime THIS YEAR '06

with a Dem Congress

[gordianot]

33. Maybe we can get leaded gas again! (or something close)

Pure Sarcasm :sarcasm: It would not surprise me, they really would like to turn back the clock.

[Canuckistanian]

35. REMARKABLE timing for this announcement!

Just when the country is up in arms about high gas prices, voila! Finally some relief!

I wonder how long they've been sitting on this little gem????

:puke:

[gordianot]

37. I figured this was made up anyway so they could take credit .

Notice how OPEC is never blamed for high gas prices anymore now that big oil is in power.

[stepnw1f]

38. Bush is Evil

always playing a fucking game with the people.

[w4rma]

39. Bigger profits for oil companies when they are already price gouging us.

I think any price drop will only be collusion to help Bush, and not as a result of market forces resulting from this. He is only trying to give the appearance of doing something while helping his billionare oil buddies.

[kurth]

41. Die, polar bears, die!!!

Says the Evil Moron.

[Jack Rabbit]

42. But don't do anything serious to ease oil addiction

The artificial people who own Bush won't like that.

[bj2110]

43. It never fails... He always protects the profits... Screw the impact

[Nothing Without Hope]

46. Brilliant! Yet ANOTHER way to increase the windfall profits of the oil

companies: reducing processing costs and stringency of product quality/safety. Anybody actually think this will result in a reduction at a pump? (Yeah, just kidding.) And of course these new rules will never be rescinded even if supplies increase. It's a direct deal: permission to the already-glutted oil companies to increase global environmental contamination while also increasing their massive profit margin.

[realFedUp]

47. gee, are we real fed up yet holding our ankles for 5 years?

How much longer can Bush Inc. et al get away
with this stuff?

[Roland99]

48. Eliminating prevailing wage laws, repealing environmental laws

just how are Americans getting any benefits from this administration?


If this keeps up, all Americans will have to convert themselves into corporations to stay alive.

[Danieljay]

52. A Bush blow job for big oil and a Bush screwing to us and the enviroment!

These people make me sick. This amounts to exactly what the oil companies wanted.

[hunter]

54. Fuck ethanol.

MTBE was puke, ethanol blows even bigger chunks.

How many acres of land are we going to trash growing corn for ethanol?

So now we have to put up with corrosive water polluting higher vapor pressure gasoline just so people can continue their SUV joyride?????

This is bullshit.

[IthinkThereforeIAM]

68. That is pretty warped thinking...

... and also factually false where ethanol is concerned. Stop listening to what the big oil companies have to say about ethanol, that is one fuel they do not control, yet.

[hunter]

71. Please list "factually false..."

Land will be abused to grow ethanol fuel crops. In many places, especially places where sugar cane is grown, many field workers are essentially slaves.

Ethanol-gasoline fuels are an experiment very similar in nature to the MTBE fiasco.

The vapor pressure problem is a big one, so much so that ethanol-gasoline mixes are allowed to have a higher vapor pressure than straight gasoline. Higher vapor pressures means greater air pollution. The political theory for raising the vapor pressures allowed for ethanol-gasoline mixes was that the use of ethanol causes equivalent decreases of pollution in other aspects of motor vehicle operation.

Commodity ethanol fuel production is and will be controlled by very large corporations. The more ethanol that is used, the more political power these corporations gain. Large scale ethanol production is not a "mom & pop" sort of business.

Personally I don't see any ethical differences between the big oil companies and the big ethanol producers. The major difference between oil and ethanol production is that far more land is destroyed making a gallon of ethanol than a gallon of gasoline.

If we are aiming to restore earth's environment, or at least preserve what we have left of it, we should be substantially reducing the amount of land devoted to sugar cane and corn production. Both these crops are very hard on the natural environment. Increasing production of these crops in a feeble attempt to reduce our carbon dioxide emissions will do more harm than good to earth's environment.

If we are really interested in protecting earth's environment, we must substantially reduce consumerism. Filling your car with E-85 is the equivalent of a smoker switching to a low-tar cigarette, and that has nowhere near the same benefits as simply quitting smoking.

Supporting the use of ethanol in inherently wasteful motor vehicles does little to help the environment.

[dapper]

91. Ethenol is better than what the big oil co's are giving us

15% PETRO, 85% Ethenol.

I'd rather see those smoke stacks with "low tar".

http://www.e85fuel.com


Dap

[dapper]

92. joy ride...

and your SUV comparison can also be compared to your low tar cigarette statement.
A compact car is just a low tar cigarette.

Dap

[Sugar Smack]

55. We're so fucked.

[Blue_Tires]

57. and so it starts....

there are no more tax breaks left to GIVE to the oil companies (not that they pay any taxes now)...so let's pull back the environmental regulations to even further stretch their profit margin!

[wordpix2]

83. and so it must END! We need to fight this!

[PA_libertarian]

58. :)

http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?id=4599

[PA_libertarian]

59. :)

http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?id=4376


http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?id=4381

[Disturbed]

62. Neo Fascism has arrived in ...

full force.

[54anickel]

69. Heh-heh, spoken like a true libertarian. Welcome to DU

The last time we had price controls on gasoline, we had long lines of cars at filling stations, these lines sometimes stretching around the block, with motorists sitting in those lines for hours.

That nonsense ended almost overnight when President Ronald Reagan, ignoring the cries of liberal politicians and the liberal media, got rid of price controls with a stroke of the pen.

What happened is what usually happens when government restrictions are ended: There was more production of oil. In fact the 1980s became known as the era of an "oil glut" and gasoline prices declined.

Today production is being held back, not by price controls, but by political hysteria whenever anyone suggests actually producing more oil ourselves. Organized nature cults go ballistic at the thought that we might drill for oil in some remote part of Alaska that 99 percent of Americans will never see, including 99 percent of the nature cultists.

[0rganism]

70. So, what do you think of Mr. Sowell's analysis?

You posted links to two of his articles, which castigate "liberal" politicians and media for exploiting the rising gas prices for personal gain and hype, respectively, while generally ignoring principles of supply and demand. Do you agree with him? If so, why?

Do you think rising demand in India and China are primary causes of demand-side increases, while the recent natural disasters in the gulf are the sole measurable cause of recent supply shortfalls?

Even as a CEO of a major oil company retires with a $400,000,000 pension, do you agree with Sowell that oil company profit takings are affecting pump prices less than gas taxes? Do you know what the tax rates are for a gallon of regular gasoline compared to the profit margin? Which do you suppose would be more open to market-driven variance: economic profits or sales tax?

How will the rising gas prices affect you personally? Will you modify your driving habits at all?

[libertarianPA]

89. Re: So, what do you think of Mr. Sowell's analysis.

1. I agree with him, yes. Big oil has always been an easy villain for the masses. Oil company reps don't have a 24-hour PR pulpit from which to speak as do the media and politicians. And I think that means both liberal and conservative politicians. Proof of that is that Frist has had oil execs in Senate hearings and now Bush is calling for probes into oil company dealings to try to catch them gouging. An oil exec doesn't have time or resources to go on TV and explain the ins and outs of the R&D, exploratio, drilling, transport, refinery, regulation compliance, tax compliance, state regulations, MTBE to Ethanol transition, etc. It's a shame because what's going on proves that America is mostly ignorant about basic economics, let alone how the oil industry works.

When there's that degree of ignorance, leaders whose sole purpose in life is winning the next election feel the need to provide an easy answer to the b*tching and moaning voters who are now paying $50+ to fill up their tanks. Do you think they're going to point the finger at themselves? Do you think they're going to tell their constituents that their environmental regulations and taxes have made it unprofitable to build refineries in the United States - even 100 miles offshore? Do you think they're going to mention the 58% tariff on Brazilian Ethanol which drives the price of gas up even more?

It's far easier to point the finger at the oil execs. It requires little thought and makes for superb sound bytes. But like I said, America's lack of economic knowledge (basic supply and demand dynamics, and statist intervention mostly) has caused not only liberal politicians, but also so-called "conservative" ones to engage in this, as well.

2. The consumption of oil in India and China is now equal to the oil consumption of the United States ten years ago. So, yes. That has an affect on supply. But that is kind of irrelevant. OPEC leaders have said time and again (and backed up by analysts) that there's plenty of oil. And they can provide America with all the oil it wants or needs. The problem is we simply don't have the refining capacity. The best way to put it is by an columnist I read once, Richard Salsman:

"Fact: not a single new oil and gas refinery has been built in the U.S. since 1976; the last one built was in Garyville, Louisiana that year. Worse, today there are 54% fewer oil and gas refineries in the U.S. (149) than there were in 1981 (321). Why? Not only have environmentalists lobbied government to block new refinery construction; they’ve also lobbied to have refineries decommissioned. Moreover, environmental regulations have materially raised the cost of operating refineries, making many of them unprofitable. It has been estimated that today it would take seven years, 800 permits and $2.5 billion to build a new refinery; nearly half of that cost is due entirely to the arbitrary and unnecessary costs imposed by environmentalists and their obstructionism. The National Petrochemical and Refiners Association reports that environmentalist-related costs have totaled $47 billion over the past decade; that’s enough to have built 19 new refineries (even at today’s bloated cost of $2.5 billion per unit), or 13% more refineries than exist in the U.S. today. "

The fact is when you retard free markets from making more product, it hurts supply. A refinery hasn't been built since 1976 and there are now 54% fewer refineries. Meanwhile, the population of drivers has only rose in the past 30 years. Anyone who knows anything about economics will tell you that's a recipe for higher prices.

You have to stop thinking of prices in terms of a way to get money from the consumer. Prices are a symptom of economic conditions. A high gas price means that there's not enough supply. If the government was to come along and force gas stations to lower their prices from $3 to $2, that doesn't eliminate the problem. If you have a 103 degree fever and decide to run your thermometer under cold water, the problem doesn't go away.

When Katrina knocked out operation of refineries in the south, that limited the supply even more.

3. Over the past 20 years, oil companies have paid three times more in taxes than they took in with profits. And the thing is that there's a big misconception about corporate taxes. And there is one absolute truth you must keep in mind - CORPORATIONS DON'T PAY TAXES. The taxes are worked into the price of the product. So, really you are paying Exxon's taxes everytime you fill up. You might think it's right or wrong, but that's the reality. So taxing corporations only takes more money out of your wallet

Back in the mid and late 1990s, oil companies were actually in trouble. Remember when you could get a gas for about $1? That's because they were desperate to sell more product. No one wanted to probe their industry then. Back then, their profits were about 3%.

Now their profits are 9%. That's 9 cents for every dollar. I don't know how much you know about retail, but that's a horrible margin for any industry.

About the $400 million retirement package. I don't have the exact numbers, but that CEO accumulated some of those benefits over the 34 years he worked at Exxon. But nothing nearly to the final sum total. And it's not like he gets a $400 million check. He will get it in increments, much of it in stock options over the next 10 years.

But in essence, the question you pose is did that CEO, and CEOs in general make too much money? Well, if you're making $40K a year, and you read about a CEO that makes $400 upon retirement, you might feel less fortunate than he. But what does a CEO do? A CEO is charged with keeping a company in business. That also means keeping however many people work for that company employed. If a CEO makes a wrong decision, it could mean a bad year and the unenviable task of laying off hundreds or even thousands of workers. Every day, CEOs make high-pressure decisions - decisions that would make most of us piss our pants if we had to make them.

I'm not sure about Exxon's CEO, but in judging a CEOs worth, let's look at probably the most famous one - Jack Welch. Jack took over GE in 1980. Then, the company was worth $15 billion. By the time he retired in 2001, the company was worth about $500 billion. Now, if you are a shareholder of a company, and you know a CEO can increase your company's worth by that much (and remember, an increase in that much capital means lots of jobs created), how much would you be willing to pay him? Let's say that at the end of his tenure, you will give him a mere 1% of how much he increased the company's worth. In Welch's case, that means he would get $4.85 billion. While it seems like a lot, it's actually a tiny fraction of the wealth he produced.

4. Will it change my driving habits? Probably not by much. I'll probably still drive about the same amount. I'll definitely think twice about making an unnecessary trip, however. But if I don't change my driving habits at all, I'll make sacrifices in other places. For instance, I won't go out to eat to restaurants quite as much. Not going to McDonalds or TGIFridays twice or thrice a month will definitely make up the difference between what I pay now and what I used to pay. Or I will only go to the movies once a month instead of twice a month, like I normally do.

Again, you have to modify your thinking of money. Money is not a tangible object - the bills in your wallet or the coins in your pocket. Money is behavior. If you behave intelligently with your money, you will have more of it. If your expenses increase in one capacity, you must decrease it in another, or else you're now in debt (just look at our government). It's amazing. During WWII, Americans sacrificed and rationed. Today, we get offended when someone tells us we should be more frugal about when and where we drive our Hummer.

[hunter]

73. U.S. oil production peaked in 1970.

Then we went overseas.

Next we'll hit the poles, but at this point things go downhill really, really fast.

There's no way Bush can pull a Reagan out of his ass.

[Amaya]

61. that fucker!

:grr: :grr:

[Rainscents]

63. Mission Accomplished!

We can all now breath more dirty air and drink dirty poison water! :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

[HuffleClaw]

64. 'temporary' my ass

a bogus crisis to 'justify' these 'temporary' measures. they were pretty blatant about this.

[CAcyclist]

65. But I'll bet he still insists that California has to put MTBE or Ethanol

in our gas.

[hunter]

72. Yep.

Bush gotta buy the support of Big Oil and Big Ag somehow.

[flashdebadge]

75. And people are STILL buying Hummers and other SUV's. (Stupid)

[GoddessOfGuinness]

80. Fuckin' oil mafia

:grr::grr::grr::grr::grr:

[wordpix2]

84. The Don Bush & Darth Cheney have spoken & don't cross the mafia

You know what happens when you do

[meowfire]

85. Hanity was arguing that high gas prices

are simply the result of there being too many gas blends (could possibly add a slight cost imo) and because we tax the oil companies too much money. (...)

GOP in reality actually appear to be blocking legislation that would fix the tax code which is presently giving oil companies a very nice windfall by allowing them to under report their actual sales.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/25/AR2006042501738.html

[Left Coast Lynn]

87. Price gouge and the consequenses?

You can assault the environment.