Archive for Thursday, January 3, 2008

What oil at $100 per barrel means to you now and later

January 3, 2008


— Crude oil prices soared to $100 a barrel Wednesday for the first time, reaching that milestone amid an unshakable view that global demand for oil and petroleum products will outstrip supplies.

Why is this happening? Surging economies in China and India fed by oil and gasoline have sent prices soaring over the past year, while tensions in oil-producing nations such as Nigeria and Iran have increasingly made investors nervous and invited speculators to drive prices even higher. Raids Tuesday on Port Harcourt, the center of Nigeria's oil industry, and word that several Mexican oil export ports were closed due to rough weather, helped give crude the final push to $100.

U.S. reaction: The White House on Wednesday said it would not release oil from the nation's strategic reserves to drive prices lower. As of early November, the Strategic Petroleum Reserve contained 694 million barrels of oil. The government is working to fill it to its 727 million barrel capacity.

Effect on the pump: Gas prices rose 0.6 cents Wednesday to a national average of $3.049 a gallon, according to AAA and the Oil Price Information Service. The lowest price in Lawrence on Wednesday was $2.84 per gallon.Gas prices, which typically lag the futures market, have edged higher in recent days, following oil's approach to $100.

Lasting impact? Gas prices peaked at $3.227 a gallon in May as refiners faced unprecedented maintenance issues and struggled to produce enough gasoline to meet demand. A similar scenario is expected this spring, when gas prices could peak above $3.40 a gallon, according to the Energy Department's Energy Information Administration.

Other energy: February heating oil futures rose 9.1 cents Wednesday to settle at a record $2.7404 a gallon after setting a trading record of $2.7465, while February gasoline futures climbed 7.81 cents to settle at a record $2.5689 a gallon after setting their own trading record of $2.5784.


SettingTheRecordStraight 10 years, 5 months ago

With oil at $100 a barrel, how can the enviro-fringe continue to keep its death grip on ANWR? Time to allow the collection of the vast energy resources lying below that frozen tundra.

SettingTheRecordStraight 10 years, 5 months ago


Sure, let California set it's own standards. But get rid of CAFE standards. Why is the government telling private business how to produce its products?

Next thing you know, government will want to take over our healthcare.

cowboy 10 years, 5 months ago

when president dumb A$$ took office oil was 33.15 per barrel. His magnificent management of our economy and the complete disruption of the mideast has created the 100 per barrel.

Experts say that 30% of oil price is risk dollars i.e. wars , threats , etc. If this moron had only done nothing prices would be in the 65 dollar range.

Great Job Georgie !

peppermint 10 years, 5 months ago

Cheney, Bush Sr. and the whole PNAC group are laughing their heads off all the way to the bank.

Didja think they were getting control of the Middle East oil so they could sell it more cheaply to YOU?

Congratulations, Bush supporters. You gave the oil barons everything they dreamed of.

SettingTheRecordStraight 10 years, 5 months ago

Alaskan National Wildlife Refuge. Drill it.

Then build more refineries. We haven't done that in 25 years.

Then use more nuclear energy. It's clean and safe.

Then let the market innovate, like it always does, and create solutions to our energy needs. Don't artificially control it through government interference.

And don't even get me started on healthcare. You who hate the way the government officials (Dems and the GOP) have handled the Iraq war, just wait until bureaucrats get their hands on your healthcare. We'll wind up with 70% tax rates like in Sweden and healthcare rationing like they have in Canada.

50YearResident 10 years, 5 months ago

What $100 a barrel oil price means to Bush and Chaney: Millions of more dollars in their Swiss Bank Accounts.

staff04 10 years, 5 months ago


Worth 1 cent per gallon of refined fuel. Even the DOE admitted to that during the energy debate in 2005.

If 1 cent per gallon is worth trampling some of the only non-commercialized acreage left in this country, then I suggest you have no soul.

Clickker 10 years, 5 months ago

Jeez, the jig is up: EVERY other western country has better health care than we do. And they do it for less. Kind of like Global Warming: The data is in, and the American Govt. is the only one denying it.

Oh please. I hope you are being sarcastic.

Erin Parmelee 10 years, 5 months ago

SettingTheRecordStraight (Anonymous) says:

With oil at $100 a barrel, how can the enviro-fringe continue to keep its death grip on ANWR? Time to allow the collection of the vast energy resources lying below that frozen tundra.

Sure. Continue the rape of the natural world for lower gas prices. Why not? We're only here for a little while, right?

Jason Bowers-Chaika 10 years, 5 months ago

This $100.00/barrel mark is hopefully the alarm clock wake up call to the USA driving public. If we all don't hit the snooze button again some might actually dump their gas hogs and try other conservation methods like car pooling, taking a job closer to home, investing in alternative fuels.

More drilling of oil is not the answer. We will run out of clean air and wilderness at our current rates of destruction.

salad 10 years, 5 months ago

Drilling ANWR will not make an appreciable difference in our reserves. There's just not that much oil under there, and it's pretty hard to get at. Canadas oil sands; now that's a huge reserve, but it takes energy to free up the oil and remove it from the sands. Conservation, on the other hand, is free and will make an appreciable difference. If you're against conservation and higher fuel mileage standards, then by default, you're in favor of waste and higher fuel prices. There's no third choice and there's no free lunch.

SettingTheRecordStraight 10 years, 5 months ago

Conservation is a great concept, but it's only a tiny part of this issue. We need real answers and real solutions. See my comments above.

average 10 years, 5 months ago

The 'we haven't built refineries' line is bogus. The oil industry has continually improved and expanded the ones that they have, while closing some smaller unprofitable ones. And there's little stopping them from building another, if they felt like it. There is a proposal for a new very large refinery in southeastern South Dakota. The governor, state legislators, and regulators are absolutely bending backwards to encourage it to happen.

As for nuclear waste... we're not asking for it to be in anyone's yard. We're talking about putting it many miles from anyone. And, yes, I would move right outside the facilities' exclusion zone, just like I'd move right outside the plant area of a nuclear power plant and apply for a job.

sfjayhawk 10 years, 5 months ago

Drill/refine more is not the answer. More oil gets us nowhere and solves nothing. How about we try and get off oil once and for all?

Try and imagine a world where we dont need oil - energy prices wouldn't eat up so much of our GDP, no more entanglements in the middle east, less inflationary pressure and a less carbon emissions. Sounds like a good goal to me. Dont say that this is an impossible goal, I have full confidence in the American entrepreneur and state and local governments to solve this. State governments are already stepping up to the challenge by passing new mileage and emission standards - although they are being challenged by the oil men currently in charge in Washington DC - disgusting, yet typical behavior from these retards.

salad 10 years, 5 months ago

"Try and imagine a world where we dont need oil" mean like 1850? Are you suggesting we just get rid of cars, ships, & airplanes? I'm trying to imagine it, but all I keep thinking about is how long it takes to get everywhere and trying to avoid stepping in horse dooky.

lounger 10 years, 5 months ago

Oil is dead! Lets put the nail in the coffin and get on with it! There is no one silver bullet-it will be a host of new technologys. Maybe its time for the yuppys to stop taking cruises that get basically no miles per gallon (it takes about a gallon of gas to go just the length of a cruise ship). We can enjoy life without oil it just takes a little smart thinking and perserverance. Think positive-its the only way to fly!!!

sfjayhawk 10 years, 5 months ago

Salad, how about electric motors? How about Nuclear (or as some call it Nukulur) power plants, how about biofuel, How about switch grass - Brazil uses switch grass to make biofuel and has millions of cars on the road. How about wind and solar, how about hydrogen, how about geothermal. Use oil, but only what we can produce domestically and diversify the rest of our energy portfolio.

Im not saying that its easy, but when the alternative is the never ending entanglement in the cesspool of the middle east, being at the mercy of a cartel for our energy (opec) and a polluted environment - it sound like its worth the effort to me. Not to mention, it would be a great source of wealth if America were to lead the way in these types of technologies - staying the course not working we need to innovate - we all know that when we don't innovate, we end up getting our a$$es kicked on the world market (see detroit/ big auto).

TongiJayhawk 10 years, 5 months ago

Brazil actually uses sugarcane to produce its biofuel. Unfortunately switch grass is not an option yet! Hopefully they will get it figured out so we can use switch grass. It will be a much better option than using corn!

salad 10 years, 5 months ago

Ahh....sfjayhawk, you mean "a world without rock-oil", but plant oil is OK. That's different. I wish we could move that direction, but the fact is humans need to be forced into big changes. Here's what I think will actually happen: A.) We ditch the middle east and use the oil-sands in Canada to make our fuel and pay $6/gal for gas. B.) We invade the middle east to secure cheap oil and supply future generations of jihadists with targets for their wrath, but have $3/gal gas for the next 10 years. C.) We keep going like we are and nothing changes....and we eventually pay $6/gal for gas.

I hope we eventually figure out a way to make coal gassification viable, and get wasteful Americans to conserve. We managed to do it in WWII (conserve that is...OK, they called it rationing, but same effect).

Confrontation 10 years, 5 months ago

Those who drive SUV and large trucks should have to pay more at the pump. Unless your vehicle is required for employment, then pay up for your waste. I know you all like to say, "but, I'm already paying more." No, you're paying same price, but you're wasting more.

salad 10 years, 5 months ago

Interesting....can you imagine limiting everyone to 35 mph today! True about there not being a fuel shortage here, and true about rubber being used for tires. The point is that we as a people were able to ration in WWII, but we seem unable to make even the most minor sacrifices today. BTW, the only tires today made almost entirely of natural rubber are aircraft tires; if they were made of the same styrene-butadine formula as car tires, they'd have to be replaced after about every landing. True story.

budwhysir 10 years, 5 months ago

I can tell you what it means to me and I didnt even read this article. This means that the T will have to raise its rates in order to cover the fuel costs on those 4 mile to the gallon road hogs.

And it means that I will have to pay more money for gas, this equates to more money in fuel taxes and they will raise the taxes on the road ways so I will cost us all too much in the end

But who realy cares? this is the future we are talking about. We wont have to worry about it.

Chris Beilman 10 years, 5 months ago

Isn't it nice how these oil and gas companies always give us a heads up notice before they jack up the price? They even have a pretty good idea on how much it's gonna cost us. Those nice people deserve all that money for being so conciderate to their customers, don't they?

Redneckgal 10 years, 5 months ago

What does it mean? Well less food on the table. More hard times already heaped on top of hard times. More people losing their houses. Bush supporters telling people having a hard time that it is either.. A) a frigment of their imagination B) their own fault or C) all of the above. And Bush and Co laughing all the way to the bank. Again.

blackwalnut 10 years, 5 months ago

Food has become so much more expensive since oil prices have skyrocketed.

People think about what it costs to fill their vehicle gas tanks, but they are paying much, much more for virtually everything.

You can boil a frog if you heat the water slowly. The prices have inched up and Americans just take it.

bisky1 10 years, 5 months ago

i am still looking for anyone who has changed anything in their lifestyle due to hgih oil prices, besides whining of course.

budwhysir 10 years, 5 months ago

Why yes bisky, I have changed my ways, I no longer except the fact that everything I do must cost too much or be taxed to hi. I find forums like this to express my concern, I keep up on what politicians vote the way I need them too.

Here is what I say, with all the bus transportation running, how does my gas consumption equal out to me paying higher prices for gas? It doesnt.

And why should the truckers pay higher prices for gas? they are already generating tax revenues in each state and county the run thru. Also they give to the communitiy by purchasing meals and other items

what do I know about it, Im just a guy that makes sure none of this effects MY bottom line at home

Commenting has been disabled for this item.