Conserving Oil Is No Longer an Economic Imperative

jct

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2015
Messages
3,757
Reaction score
3,783
Location
Home
they really need to get rid of the corn gas

https://www.usnews.com/news/busines...s-no-longer-an-economic-imperative?src=usn_tw

WASHINGTON (AP) — Conserving oil is no longer an economic imperative for the U.S., the Trump administration declares in a major new policy statement that threatens to undermine decades of government campaigns for gas-thrifty cars and other conservation programs.

The position was outlined in a memo released last month in support of the administration's proposal to relax fuel mileage standards. The government released the memo online this month without fanfare.

Growth of natural gas and other alternatives to petroleum has reduced the need for imported oil, which "in turn affects the need of the nation to conserve energy," the Energy Department said. It also cites the now decade-old fracking revolution that has unlocked U.S. shale oil reserves, giving "the United States more flexibility than in the past to use our oil resources with less concern."

With the memo, the administration is formally challenging old justifications for conservation — even congressionally prescribed ones, as with the mileage standards. The memo made no mention of climate change. Transportation is the single largest source of climate-changing emissions.

President Donald Trump has questioned the existence of climate change, embraced the notion of "energy dominance" as a national goal, and called for easing what he calls burdensome regulation of oil, gas and coal, including repealing the Obama Clean Power Plan.

Despite the increased oil supplies, the administration continues to believe in the need to "use energy wisely," the Energy Department said, without elaboration. Department spokesmen did not respond Friday to questions about that statement.

Reaction was quick.

"It's like saying, 'I'm a big old fat guy, and food prices have dropped — it's time to start eating again,'" said Tom Kloza, longtime oil analyst with the Maryland-based Oil Price Information Service.

"If you look at it from the other end, if you do believe that fossil fuels do some sort of damage to the atmosphere ... you come up with a different viewpoint," Kloza said. "There's a downside to living large."

Climate change is a "clear and present and increasing danger," said Sean Donahue, a lawyer for the Environmental Defense Fund.
 
..."please cite other industrialized nations who attempt to control fuel economy on the supply-side." said anyone in the auto industry with half-a-brain.

..."oh crap, they really are serious about shale and fracking." OPEC
 
..."please cite other industrialized nations who attempt to control fuel economy on the supply-side." said anyone in the auto industry with half-a-brain.

Happens all over with extra taxes!!
 
..."please cite other industrialized nations who attempt to control fuel economy on the supply-side." said anyone in the auto industry with half-a-brain.

Happens all over with extra taxes!!

That is demand (consumer) side.
 
This Fracking-love has to be nipped in the bud, asap.
And I'm not waiting for it to become my own NIMBY issue.
These fracking permits were all bought with bribe money.
 
When the oil industry blames lack of refinery capacity and storage (because they won't re-invest their profits), so we have "shortages" and high prices consumers will be bitching again. How much government subsidy $$ does the oil industry get now? and how bad are they raping the consumer already? And yes ethanol is a joke and another waste of tax dollars with that subsidy.
 
Everyone is always complaining about the price of gas! When comparing the increase in gas prices from, say 1960, to gas prices now and the price of everything else from 1960 until now, gas is actually cheap(er)! On the average, everything is now 10 - 12 times higher. Given a the price of gas in 1960 was $.30 to $.33 and using the 10 - 12 factor, gas should be $3.25 - $4.00. With regard to government subsidies for the oil industry, I hear this "political" comment a lot but no one ever states what those subsidies are. Could someone please clarify that? With regard to refinery capacity, because of government regulation and permitting it has become almost impossible to build a new refinery. I believe the last "major" refinery licensed was in the late 1970's. Blasting the oil industry is a politically expedient tool because it is something that everyone requires. Where is the nickel candy bar (has gone up 20-30 fold), where is the $3,000 Impala, where is the $.50 lb. of hamburger, what were wages in 1960 and where are they now, the price of a new home, etc. etc. etc. Furthermore, I find it amusing when I go by a drive up coffee shack or Starbucks and people are lined up to pay $2.00 to $4.00, sitting in their car, to get a cup of coffee and then complain about the price of gas. Personally, I don't complain because for what I can do and where I can go on a tank of gas is relatively cheap. I just made a trip through Montana and drove 3,300 miles and it cost me approximately $400; cheap transportation! IMHO.
 
Last edited:
I put ten gallons in @ 31.59 total. I'll put in another ten gallons for a little more here in a populated area, and enjoy every mile!

Corn subsidies for fuel ended near me a couple years ago, everyone thought gas would increase in price, losing the subsidies didn't hurt it much more than a nickel or dime a gallon before they came up with a different excuse to raise the price.
 
Compared to most parts of the world our gas is relatively inexpensive. The frustration (for me anyway) is how the and why the prices fluctuates so much and for the reasons provided.
 
  • With the relaxing of these laws and elimination of restrictions on gas guzzlers there will be no need for car companies to improve mileage in the future and maybe even make certain parts cheaper in the cars which will lead to loss off mileage. I.E. Will cost you more at the pump as you have to fill more often.
  • Then there is the idea of using ones own oil reserves first, even if it is shale oil etc, The reason they use fracking is to push out the last of the oil to the surface that is in the ground. So it isn't limitless, it is using up what little is left. Fracking and developing shale oil is more expensive so costs will go up.
  • What does this mean? America is going to use up all its own resources first, then in later years go hat in hand to foreign countries to buy oil it cannot say no to. Guess what those countries will charge then?
  • Using foreign oil first isn't a bad thing, it's good strategic thinking. Half the worlds oil reserves are now gone. There has been NO new big oil reserves discovered since the late 1960's. Use theirs first so your own country still has oil when theirs runs out.
As the article says, it ends this decade old philosophy, so the oil companies here can make some fast short term profits.
As for the oil companies getting subsidies, last I read it was about $16 billion a year in the US alone.
 
I am no expert on new cars and trucks, but I do know that fuel economy technology, pollution control technology, and other technology have priced me completely out of the market. I couldn’t buy a new car or truck if I wanted to.

What I don’t understand is why no one is studying how a larger and larger percentage of the US consumer market is getting priced out of buying a new car. If you don’t believe me, have you taken a look at the increase in used-car prices lately? What good is conservation, if you can’t get people into the cars that conserve energy?

Furthermore, the more technologically sophisticated these cars become, the harder they are to work on, so people who are stuck in the used-car market are going to have to buy simpler less fuel conserving cars, in order to afford transportation. How does any of this help with fuel conservation?

It seems to me that our policy works against our goals.
 
1.7 or 1.8 gallons of water needed, or something like that.
 
1.7 or 1.8 gallons of water needed, or something like that.

Plus all of the diesel/fuel oil need to run the tractors in the farming process, then add on the diesel/fuel oil needed to transport the grain to be distilled, then the fuel/power needed to distill... It adds up quickly.
 
Plus all of the diesel/fuel oil need to run the tractors in the farming process, then add on the diesel/fuel oil needed to transport the grain to be distilled, then the fuel/power needed to distill... It adds up quickly.
A great example of job creationism.
 
Back
Top