Article

2006-05-03 Arabia

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Steve White 2006-05-03 00:00|| || Front Page|| [11129 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Here on Guam, and iff I heard it correctly,local talkradio has announced that as of this morning, its now US$100.00 per barrel. Local gas prices have gone up overnight to US$3.15 per gals from US$3.05/3.06 per gals. SNAFU/GLITCH IS > while price signs says US$3.05 or $3.06 per gals, a couple of stations' PUMP GAUGES/METERS per se read as high as US$3.3346 - $3.3389 per gals.

Posted by JosephMendiola 2006-05-03 00:31|| 2006-05-03 00:31|| Front Page Top

#2 The Saudi Oil Minister is quite correct that high oil prices are bad for Saudi Arabia, a country whose economy is dependant on oil even more so than the industialized West. As oil prices climb, other fuel sources and technologies become cost effective. More money is spent on R&D. Exploring and extracting from what were marginal local oil patches becomes economically feasible.

The change will not happen overnight, but it is a trend.

Posted by SteveS 2006-05-03 02:41|| 2006-05-03 02:41|| Front Page Top

#3 Sorry Steve, but the trend is increasing oil consumption everywhere. The trend may change in the future, but there is no sign of it at $75/b. The best you can say it slows the trend down.

Personally, I think it will take a major supply interruption to get people to wake up to the fact the problem needs to be fixed.

And not faux solutions like electric cars and ethnanol from corn that make the problem worse

Posted by phil_b">phil_b 2006-05-03 03:46|| http://autonomousoperation.blogspot.com/]">[http://autonomousoperation.blogspot.com/] 2006-05-03 03:46|| Front Page Top

#4 phil-b what is the prescription you reccommend since you talk like an energy expert and seem to poo poo anything anyone ever posts on the matter?

I can see 2 huge drilling operations running right now off my front porch. My son in law is in charge for the mud pulse directional drilling operations on both of them. How many oil wells or other oil infrastructure can you see from your front step? You you actually know anyone one in the energy business? How many "peakers" are with in 20 miles of your house? Do you know anyone that operates a commercial scale electrical generator? How much natural gas does your county produce and ship? How much oil? How much refined Petroleum product do you ship? Since I am surrounded by people who work in the energy field I hear opinions that differ from yours quite a bit.

Posted by SPoD 2006-05-03 04:08|| http://sockpuppetofdoom.blogspot.com/]">[http://sockpuppetofdoom.blogspot.com/] 2006-05-03 04:08|| Front Page Top

#5 SPoD... you are up too I see...
Can't sleep here so coffee and the berg.

Posted by 3dc 2006-05-03 04:11|| 2006-05-03 04:11|| Front Page Top

#6 Sorry Steve, but the trend is increasing oil consumption everywhere.

Demand is increasing, no doubt, as countries like China come online and industrialize. While increased demand does drive up prices, it doesn't change the fact that as prices rise other technologies and sources become competitive.

Posted by SteveS 2006-05-03 04:39|| 2006-05-03 04:39|| Front Page Top

#7 Look at it anyway you want to they are killing the goose that lays the golden eggs. If you are in the oil industry and don't want your jobs to go away, don't worry, there will be plenty of jobs available for you in your lifetime - pehaps not in the middle east or South America, but in other countries including our own. You can trying to convince us and yourselves of that.

But to think that at these prices, not to mention the other costs associated with wealthy dicators and Saudi princes, that we won't develop alternate fuels is just plain crazy.

Posted by 2b 2006-05-03 06:56|| 2006-05-03 06:56|| Front Page Top

#8 oops - stop try to convince us.

Which in hindsight sounds a bit rude - as I respect phil_b's posting. But it does seem to me Phil that you have a personal interest in not wanting alternative sources to take off. I don't know if that's true or not, but it just seems that way.

Posted by 2b 2006-05-03 07:00|| 2006-05-03 07:00|| Front Page Top

#9 Ethanol from corn makes the problem worse ?
Can you explain that ?
One person just cannot know everything.

Posted by wxjames 2006-05-03 07:54|| 2006-05-03 07:54|| Front Page Top

#10 This is a continuing cycle I've seen many times before.
1. Price of oil goes up.
2. "Alternatives" are found and researched.
3. People see other fuels as viable.
4. Serious research begins into other propulsion means.
5. Price of oil suddenly retreats to about 1/2-2/3 the total rise. (New Oil reserves discovered, new Oil Fields suddenly more productive, etc.)
6. "Suddenly" alternatives do not compete against the current "Low" price.
7. Research halts, researchers go bankrupt due to funding cuts, data is lost/destroyed/stolen and buried/not viable/
8. "Alternate Energy Companies" loudly proclaim "It was only a risky gamble that didn't pan out,"
9. A few "Diehards" prove their ideas are practical.
10. The Press "Proves" that the Nuts pushing the IDEA (See above) are mentally unstable.
11. Oil reports record profits (And try hard to bury the news under a blizzard of denials)
12. Wait about 5 years, repeat.

End result? Energy prices increase and never fall.
It's a shell game.

Posted by Redneck Jim 2006-05-03 08:38|| 2006-05-03 08:38|| Front Page Top

#11 Brazil proves the alternate ways work.
Is Brazil's technology cutting edge ?

Posted by wxjames 2006-05-03 09:04|| 2006-05-03 09:04|| Front Page Top

#12 wxjames: I believe he was trying to say that big-picture wise (at current technology), ethanol is a loss. See yesterday's posting about this, but basically E85 (corn-based) basically has anywhere from 15%-40% less fuel economy than gasoline. Then, add to that, conversion costs, the ag lobby (who'd rather be paid NOT to grow corn), etc. and you begin to see that it may not be such a good idea to "switch" to ethanol. That being said, I believe alternatives should be researched and produced, but I don't believe we'll be off the oil teat anytime soon. Personally, I think a mix needs to be had...for example, move the NE off of heating oil and get them on Natural gas. Move toward a mix of natural-gas fired & nuke plants for electricity. Finally, push natural gas powered (& electrics, if needed) vehicles. Natural gas can be had from many domestic sources, from coal-gasification to methane byproducts from municipal wastewater plants and landfills to even capturing methane from animal farms, not to mention Gulf of Mexico. We may have to tell the enviros to suck it up short-term to get to the long-term effect of getting off the oil teat (or at least decrease it enough to reign in funding the middle east).

Posted by BA 2006-05-03 09:54|| 2006-05-03 09:54|| Front Page Top

#13 While we're at it, is there extant analysis on how high crude prices need to get before it becomes economically feasible to uncap wells in the US? How about all the bloody oil shale I hear about every few years?

Posted by eLarson 2006-05-03 10:11|| http://larsonian.blogspot.com]">[http://larsonian.blogspot.com] 2006-05-03 10:11|| Front Page Top

#14 All the big players are sucking hard on the straw. Kinda like they expect some oil supplier to go tits-up real sudden-like...

Posted by mojo">mojo 2006-05-03 10:21|| 2006-05-03 10:21|| Front Page Top

#15 wxjames, Brazil proves ethanol works with sugar cane. Try to grow sugar cane in Iowa. Ethanol from corn is a loser now. Even Bush doesn't push it. He's pushing the Rapeseed ethanol. Perhaps the bioengineers will come up with the miracle enzyme, but they haven't yet.

Redneck Jim is half correct. Petroleum products are not outpacing the rate of inflation over the long haul. What does change is that we import more and more petroleum. That's a problem we need to fix by attaching an oil import fee to all petroleum and petroleum derivative products imported into the US. That wil stabilize price and incent the development of domestic alternatives.

Posted by Nimble Spemble 2006-05-03 10:27|| 2006-05-03 10:27|| Front Page Top

#16 eLarson, I don't have a linkable source, but if I remember correctly, I believe the (small patch) guys in KY used to say it had to be around $30/barrel before they could make it. Of course, these are small fish (only a few barrels/day), mom & pop type operations, so with economy of scale, it could be less than that. And, of course, enough money to "make it" in KY is a lot less than to run a major operation, I'd imagine (just paying to get by for your own family up there). That was years ago, though, so the # may be higher now.

Posted by BA 2006-05-03 10:54|| 2006-05-03 10:54|| Front Page Top

#17 We are going to have to put a floor on oil prices of around $35-40/barrel to reduce the risk of investing in shale oil and coal to oil conversion. A sliding oil import tax seems the best way to implement it.

20 million barrels a day at $70 comes to $511 billion a year. For comparision, 1000 1000MW nukes (currently about $2.5 billion, but with mass production, probably $1 billion each) will provide more than enough electricity, even with conversion losses, to produce enough hydrogen to replace all US oil consumption. So basically, for 2 years of oil consumption costs, enough nukes could be built to more than offset the energy in oil. Of sourse, nuke fuel, electrolysis equipment, and operation is extra. Half that number for electic cars, but costs increase on the electric car end.

But once built, a nuke plant will operate for at least 40 years. We should be building at least 100 large reactors a year.

Posted by ed 2006-05-03 11:09|| 2006-05-03 11:09|| Front Page Top

#18 If I remember right, planting sugar cane for conversion to ethanol has 5 times the return of corn.

Posted by ed 2006-05-03 11:12|| 2006-05-03 11:12|| Front Page Top

#19 FYI, I know enough to know I don't know all the answers. Take anything thats biodegradable, zap it in a closed container. Keep the process under pressure and the feed material turns to plasma. Plasma is around 3000 degrees or something close to that. Use the expanding gas to power a jet like engine, and/or make steam and turn generators for electricity. Finally, some or most of the byproduct can be isolated and sold as bottled gas. Once the temperature and pressuer reach the desired range, turn off the juice and count your kilowatts. The feeder has to be 'tuned' to keep up, and the process becomes continuous.

Posted by wxjames 2006-05-03 12:20|| 2006-05-03 12:20|| Front Page Top

#20 It's pretty simple if anyone in political power had the will to solve this problem. Slap a sliding fee on all oil and refined products imported. The proceeds to be used to make this country energy independent and for no other use. Keep the price at a floor of 50 dollars a barrel to spir innovation.

Posted by SPoD 2006-05-03 14:05|| http://sockpuppetofdoom.blogspot.com/]">[http://sockpuppetofdoom.blogspot.com/] 2006-05-03 14:05|| Front Page Top

#21 Right now what the US needs: more nuke power plants to cut down on the use of coal, natural gas, and oil by reducing the price of electricity; increased refinery capacity and better maintenance of existing refineries (refinery efficiency drops with age, increasing cost of refining products - corrected with a full shut-down and refurbishment); additional domestic drilling (currently halted due to the high cost of environmental lawsuits); and an expanded national pipeline network (only about 75% of the nation is served by the national grid). There are somewhere in the range of 1 TRILLION BARRELS of untapped domestic production, mostly in deep areas of the south and some areas of the upper midwest. It's currently not financially profitable to drill these areas because of litigation, and for no other reason. And yes, I have LOTS of friends in the oil and energy business.

Posted by Old Patriot">Old Patriot 2006-05-03 16:29|| http://oldpatriot.blogspot.com/]">[http://oldpatriot.blogspot.com/] 2006-05-03 16:29|| Front Page Top

#22 Those are not the only places oil is locked up and can be extracted at a profit and in useful quanities.

The big thing is opening up areas that are out bounds because to NIMBY and luddite enviros and and enviromental litigants for hire.

We need to be building 100 Nuclear power plants right now and 100 every year until power from improved Nuclear Technology is common as the clean air they will help create. Their is plenty of stuff electricity is practical for that we just are not utilizing it for.

Posted by SPoD 2006-05-03 16:36|| http://sockpuppetofdoom.blogspot.com/]">[http://sockpuppetofdoom.blogspot.com/] 2006-05-03 16:36|| Front Page Top

#23 NS: wxjames, Brazil proves ethanol works with sugar cane.

Actually, it doesn't. Even with today's high oil prices, and a huge tax on gasoline in Brazil, ethanol is not competitive with gasoline there. What does this say about ethanol as a solution to high energy costs?

Posted by Zhang Fei 2006-05-03 22:34|| http://timurileng.blogspot.com]">[http://timurileng.blogspot.com] 2006-05-03 22:34|| Front Page Top

#24 Zhang Fei it says that in the long run it's cheaper than fighting Crazy muslims, Arabs and Peraians and keeping shipping lanes open for other people to free load on while they clean our clock in the world economy.

Posted by SPoD 2006-05-03 23:07|| http://sockpuppetofdoom.blogspot.com/]">[http://sockpuppetofdoom.blogspot.com/] 2006-05-03 23:07|| Front Page Top

00:05 JosephMendiola
23:54 Sgt. D.T.
23:52 Whose Creretch1473
23:47 AlmostAnonymous5839
23:42 Whomotle Phiter3901
23:30 Redneck Jim
23:30 Flereng Angaving6956
23:28 Whong Whoting4646
23:16 DMFD
23:16 DMFD
23:10 DMFD
23:08 Frank G
23:07 SPoD
23:06 Fred
23:05 Fordesque
23:01 SPoD
22:58 Danielle
22:55 Frank G
22:54 DMFD
22:54 trailing wife
22:52 trailing wife
22:51 Jort Angairong4948
22:42 trailing wife
22:41 Glenmore