![]() | Tuesday Open Thread: W's Speech and Why We Should Love High Gas Prices... | The Oil Drum | Record Oil Company Profits and High Gas Prices: A Connection? | ![]() |
125 comments on Perhaps we are getting a little more attention
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
125 comments on Perhaps we are getting a little more attention
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
The contents below are paid advertisements. Their appearance does not imply an endorsement by The Oil Drum.
“Every time I see an adult on a bicycle, I no longer despair for the future of the human race.”
—H. G. Wells, 1904
Search The Oil Drum with Google
User login
Contact
- Content: editors at theoildrum dot com
- Tech support: support at theoildrum dot com
Personnel
- Editors: Prof. Goose, Heading Out, Stuart Staniford, Nate Hagens
- DrumBeat Editor: Leanan
- Contributors: ace, Engineer-Poet, Gail the Actuary, jeffvail, JoulesBurn, Khebab, Robert Rapier
- TOD:Local: Glenn
- TOD:Europe: Chris Vernon, Euan Mearns, Francois Cellier, Jerome a Paris, Luís de Sousa, Rembrandt, Rune Likvern, Ugo Bardi
- TOD:Canada: benk, Libelle
- TOD:ANZ: Big Gav, Phil Hart, aeldric
- Technician: Super G
Recently on TOD:World
TOD:Local
- Summer Streets a Success!
- Plan for Hydro-Fracture Drilling for Unconventional Natural Gas in Upstate New York
- Enjoying Life Close to Home: Fun Streets
TOD:Europe
- Russian gas and European energy security - a reprise
- Russia: There Is Life After Peak Oil
- Should EROEI be the most important criterion our society uses to decide how it meets its energy needs?
TOD:Canada
- Compressed Air Energy Storage - How viable is it?
- Oil Megaproject Update (July 2008)
- Weekend Energy Listening: Wind Power with Paul Gipe
TOD:ANZ
Peak Oil Primers
Blogroll
Energy Sites
- The Coming Global Oil Crisis
- Die Off
- Dry Dipstick
- Energy Bulletin
- From the Wilderness
- Life After the Oil Crash
- Peak Oil Crisis
- Peak Oil News and Message Boards
- Powerswitch
- Rigzone
- Matthew Simmons
- Wolf at the Door
Environment & Sustainability Sites
- The Daily Green
- EcoGeek
- Eco Street
- Green Car Congress
- Green Options
- green.alltop.com
- Gristmill
- RealClimate
- Sustainablog
- Treehugger
- WorldChanging
Blogs
- The Big Picture
- Casaubon's Book
- Cleantech Blog
- Clusterf
k Nation (Jim Kunstler) - The Cost of Energy
- Ecological Economics
- David Strahan
- Econbrowser
- The Energy Blog
- Entropy Production
- Environmental Economics
- European Tribune
- GraphOilology
- jeffvail.net
- The Mess That Greenspan Made
- Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis
- Mobjectivist
- Peak Energy (Australia)
- Peak Energy (USA)
- R-Squared
- Resource Insights
Organizations
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.






GAIA Host Collective
RR
The president's statement notwithstanding, this MTBE purge will continue until all of the MTBE gas is out of the system. Whether the gas going out for sale is reformulated with ethanol or straight-up gasoline is another story altogether. As soon as these declines are wrapped up, I cannot fathom continued declines in gas stocks, given most refineries seem to be up to speed at the moment.
Off topic, but yesterday someone from the U.S. House of Representatives domain was visiting my blog. I was feeling pretty good about that. This morning, someone from the CIA domain ws visiting it. I wonder if I should be concerned? Both were reading my essay on windfall profits. I captured a screenshot:
http://img85.imageshack.us/my.php?image=ciavisittomyblog12fm.jpg
RR
Crude oil stocks fall by 200,000 barrels. Gasoline stocks fall 1.9 million barrels. Both are larger declines than expected. More soon
Also, in the other thread I reported on today's COP earnings release:
HOUSTON, April 26, 2006 --- ConocoPhillips [NYSE:COP] today reported first-quarter net income of $3,291 million, or $2.34 per share, compared to $2,912 million, or $2.05 per share, for the same quarter in 2005. Total revenues were $47.9 billion, versus $38.9 billion a year ago. During the quarter, the company reinvested 141 percent of its net income into the development of oil and gas resources and its global refining business, excluding the acquisition of Burlington Resources.
Emphasis mine.
RR
Anyway, thanks for the info. I have to admit I did a double-take when I saw that this morning.
RR
I don't think it's automatic spidering, because I run several personal sites for friends and family, and I never see government agencies on the visitor source list. Google, yes, the CIA, no.
(McKillop has been predicting, for some time, that higher oil prices, at least up to the $75 range, would not slow the economy.)
http://www.financialsense.com/editorials/mckillop/2006/0425.html
Whatever Happened to Oil Price Elasticity?
by Andrew McKillop
Author & Consultant
April 25, 2006
Excerpt:
Getting back to the narrow question of why oil demand (and world gas demand now growing at around 5%-per-year) are much less than unaffected by rising prices, but are directly increased by higher oil and gas prices, we finally call on facts. We can use theory first, but finally we call on facts, because scientific theory is based on and comes from facts. The other way round is called economics - that is, bending facts to fit brokenback theories.
Price elasticity of anything has an underlying notion, hard to quantify, of `satisfaction', and another of `substitution'. Neither of these have much place for the vast majority of oil and gas users. Nobody uses oil and gas `for the fun of it', or at least very few persons. Equally, the famous `hi-tech emerging new energy' substitutes and alternatives simply don't exist. They may exist on the Nasdaq or in people's heads and PCs, and in cute business video presentations, but not in the real economy.
So the simple fact that oil and gas demand is increasing much, much faster than during the cheap energy 1990s, with much, much higher oil and gas prices should at least allow us to accept reality, and find or develop theories that fit. When we go back to economic theory notions of `elasticity', as mentioned above, we soon see that they don't apply in large measure, or any convincing way to explaining what is happening. The bottom line is however very simple: until and unless interest rates are sharply raised, to double-digit annual rates, oil and gas prices can go on crawling ever up. With the ever surer approach of Peak Oil, they will in any case have no other direction to move.
Demand is INCREASED by higher oil prices.
The economy is not slowed by it.
I truly don't understand how this works. I mean, my own discretionary spending diminishes. The extra money I'm spending on gas is somehow being recycled to my benefit?
Anyone care to light my lantern on that?
http://www.energypulse.net/centers/article/article_display.cfm?a_id=1019
Oh, then what's NASCAR? - and won't it be looked back upon similarly to the Roman spectacles?
Crude oil stocks fall by 200,000 barrels. Gasoline stocks fall 1.9 million barrels. Both are larger declines than expected.
Who was it that suspected the inventory report had bad news, and Bush saw it early, hence yesterday's speech?
Anyway, it looks like it's back up to where we started, and a few cents more...
IMO, in regard to oil prices we are going to see steadily higher highs and higher lows, as the markets allocate declining crude oil and product supplies to the highest bidders.
This is what is ironic about the US Congress complaining about high prices. IMO, the only thing keeping the US market supplied is higher prices.
The article is quite supportive of westexas' theory about declining net export capability:
Iran is one of top four net oil exporters. The bottom two, Iran and Norway, are definitely declining. The top two, Saudi Arabia and Russia are, at best, flat to slightly up. The economies in all four countries are growing fast, and domestic consumption in at least three, all but Norway, is increasing fast.
This is the reality of 2006. What the top exporters can, or will, export is declining. What the top importers want to import is increasing. Price is where the battle will be fought, if we are lucky. If we are not lucky, the battle may involve weapons, conventional and otherwise.
We are now below the average range.