PDA

View Full Version : More on High Gasoline Prices



Essex502
05-17-2004, 10:08 AM
Gasoline Surges Under Bush Following Refinery Mergers (Update1)
May 17 (Bloomberg) -- President George W. Bush allowed an increase in oil refinery mergers to go unchecked since he took office and may have contributed to the highest gasoline prices in 20 years as the November election approaches.
The Bush administration approved 33 takeovers totaling $19.5 billion, on top of 21 deals worth $7.3 billion under President Bill Clinton, Bloomberg data shows. Reduced supplies were already pushing up gas prices in Clinton's term, according to a Federal Trade Commission study conducted after pump prices rose to more than $2 a gallon in Milwaukee and Chicago in 2000.
``We're in a much worse position than we were when the federal government broke up the Rockefeller oil companies of the early 1900s,'' Jon Meade Huntsman, a registered Republican and founder of Salt Lake City-based Huntsman Co., the largest privately held chemicals maker, said in an interview. ``The average guy on the street is getting killed because this administration does not care.''
Americans are paying 30 percent more for regular gasoline than a year ago, an average of a $1.94 a gallon, and a poll by American Research Group May 3-6 showed voters becoming concerned. Oil futures have averaged $28.62 a barrel since Bush took office, 42 percent higher than the average during Clinton's two terms. Oil reached a record $41.38 a barrel on Friday.
Energy Bill
Bush, 57, who owned a Texas oil company, Arbusto Energy, before getting into politics, and Vice President Dick Cheney, 63, former chairman of Halliburton Co., the world's biggest oilfield services company, chose to focus on broadening access to federal land for oil exploration and developing renewable energy sources such as corn-based ethanol to minimize price volatility. The administration's proposed energy bill remains stalled in Congress.
Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry, 60, a four- term Massachusetts senator, has called on Bush to ``come up with a real plan'' to lower gas prices that considers more options such as cutting back on oil going into the U.S. Strategic Petroleum Reserve. Bush has rejected a reduction in the oil reserves.
``With gas prices expected to go over $2 a gallon next month, the White House needs to do more than just pay lip service to a problem that is threatening to exacerbate the weak economy,'' Kerry campaign spokesman Phil Singer said.
Refiners Benefit
Under Bush, the FTC hasn't tried to block any proposed refinery takeovers. During Clinton's eight years in office, the government sued once to block an oil industry merger. In February 2000, the FTC sought to stop BP Plc's $33.1 billion purchase of Atlantic Richfield Co. after concluding the combination could lead to higher prices of oil pumped from Alaska. BP completed the purchase in April 2000 after agreeing to sell oil fields in Alaska and terminals and pipelines in Oklahoma.
The rise in gasoline prices helped refiners generate the highest margins from refining crude oil into gasoline and other fuels in the first quarter since at least 1990. ConocoPhillips, the largest U.S. oil refiner, last month posted its biggest quarterly profit since the 2002 acquisition that formed the company. ChevronTexaco Corp., the second-biggest U.S. oil producer, said earnings rose 33 percent to the highest level since a 2001 merger formed the company. Chevron's first-quarter refining profit doubled.
Exxon Mobil Corp., the second-largest U.S. refiner, on April 29 reported its highest first-quarter refining earnings in 13 years. Valero Energy Corp., the No. 3 U.S. refiner, said on April 28 that profit will almost triple in the current quarter after increased demand for gasoline spurred a 46 percent earnings gain in this year's first three months.
Chicago and Milwaukee
The FTC investigated soaring gas prices in Chicago and Milwaukee in the spring of 2000, concluding that three companies contributed to the increase by cutting production 23 percent for summer gasoline blends required by the Environmental Protection Agency to control pollution.
The March 2001 report, two months after Bush took office, said the companies produced only enough to supply their own gas stations. The cuts weren't illegal because the companies acted independently of each other, according to the report prepared under Clinton's FTC chairman, Robert Pitofsky.
``Continuing to approve mergers within the domestic refining industry was counterproductive in light of the very high prices consumers were paying,'' said Tyson Slocum, energy policy research director for watchdog group Public Citizen.
Concentration
From 1993 to 2003, the market share of the five-biggest U.S. refiners grew from 35 percent to 52 percent, according to Public Citizen. For the top 10 refiners, market share rose from 56 percent to 79 percent. The Consumer Federation of America says 77 percent of the market on the East Coast and 67 percent on the West Coast were controlled by the top four refiners as of 2000.
``Any time you have a Republican administration there's going to be more reception to these larger corporate deals,'' Bill Andrews, who helps manage $3 billion at CS McKee & Co., said in an interview. ``The change of administration had an impact.''
Senator Carl Levin, 69, a Michigan Democrat and ranking Democrat on the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, said in 2002 that the FTC ``needs to be more cautious about approving mergers.'' Congress should consider requiring oil companies to hold set levels of gasoline inventories, Levin said.
Regional Rules
The FTC reviews regional concentration when considering refinery mergers, said general counsel William Kovacic.
``It may be possible in selected markets for individual firms to unilaterally increase prices, particularly where there are specific supply disruptions, but the capacity to do that is a separate question from the question did the mergers make it easier,'' Kovacic said. ``We think, and again it's a fair point for debate, the mergers haven't contributed to this.''
Kovacic said regional fuel requirements that prevent some types of gasoline from being sold in different markets may be more to blame for crimping supply. Different states have their own requirements for additives such as ethanol used to meet federal pollution rules. California, for example, won't allow the use of gas blended with an ethanol alternative, methyl tertiary butyl ether, or MTBE, because of concerns the petroleum-based chemical will foul water supplies.
``We have suggested in our comments to other agencies that it would be helpful if there were a more integrated approach to competition policy,'' Kovacic said.
`Crazy Quilt'
California and New York have requested waivers from Clean Air Act requirements to help lower gas prices. Guy Caruso, head of the Energy Department's statistical arm, said waivers would do little to lower gas prices this summer because refiners have already decided what gasoline blends they will produce. Different fuel blends can't be mixed without violating separate federal regulations.
``This whole crazy quilt patchwork system of environmental regulation'' needs to be addressed, CS McKee's Andrews said. ``I don't think there's anything they can do'' between now and the Nov. 2 presidential election, he said.
Federal Clean Air Act rules add from 4 cents to 8 cents a gallon to the price of gasoline, the Environmental Protection Agency estimates. In 2001, the EPA opened an inquiry into how special gasoline blending requirements should be addressed. Only Congress can change the Clean Air Act requirements, said John Millett, an EPA spokesman.
``It takes tremendous capital expenditures just to maintain a position in the industry due to the onslaught of environmental, mostly clean air, regulations,'' said Charles Drevna, a spokesman for the National Petrochemical & Refiners Association in Washington.
Market Power
Retail gasoline prices in California should be linked more closely to the price of oil than they are, said Justine Hastings, an assistant economic professor at Yale University. The correlation is also weak in Arizona and Illinois.
``In these areas where the markets don't seem to be as competitive, there's evidence that firms are able to exercise market power due to the fewer number of competitors in refining and retailing,'' Hastings said. Sound like the electricity marketplace a few years ago?
Crude oil prices account for almost half of the cost of gasoline, the Energy Department says. Refining, distribution and marketing costs make up one fourth of the price and taxes account for the rest.
Oil futures rose 30 cents, or 0.7 percent, to settle at $41.38 a barrel in New York Friday. Oil prices are up 27 percent this year partly on concern that terrorists may try to cripple exports from the Middle East, where about a third of world supply is pumped.
Missing the Point
Kerry and other Democratic lawmakers including Senators Charles Schumer, 53, of New York and Jeff Bingaman, 60, of New Mexico have called on Bush to suspend oil deliveries into the nation's Strategic Petroleum Reserve until prices drop.
The debate in the presidential campaign over crude oil supplies misses the point, ConocoPhillips Chief Executive James Mulva, 57, said at a meeting with reporters this month. ``There is plenty of oil on world markets. It's a question of limited refining capacity.''
Between 1977 and 2002, the number of U.S. refineries dropped to 153 from 282. Refining capacity over that period has increased 2.4 percent to 16.8 million barrels a day from 16.4 million barrels a day, according to the Energy Department. U.S. demand for gasoline has grown 27 percent in that period.
ConocoPhillips, which produces a sixth of the nation's gasoline, said its plants are operating at 97 percent of capacity. No new refineries have been built in the U.S. since 1976 because of the difficulty in getting approval to build plants and the cost of construction, said Drevna of the National Petrochemical & Refiners Association.
European gasoline prices are at their highest recorded levels due to demand from the U.S. Monday's prices closed at $462 a metric ton, matching record prices reached earlier in the month. The average price of wholesale European gasoline in 2003 was $293.57 a metric ton.
`Isolated Markets'
``We are getting more isolated markets,'' Richard Gilbert, who chairs the economics department at the University of California at Berkley, said in an interview. ``We do not have a coherent energy policy.'' Gee...and we have oil men running the government...could this be accidental?
Dan Tulis, who manages $20 million at Elco Management Co. including shares of ChevronTexaco and BP Plc, said mergers shouldn't be blamed for higher gas prices. Demand from Asia has boosted the price of crude oil, he said. Many refineries may have been saved from closing because of the mergers, he said.
``If they didn't put them together and they closed the refineries down, it would be worse,'' Tulis said.
The increase in different fuel blends is making production less flexible and the Bush administration should work with state governments and companies to reduce the number of fuel types, Senator Robert Byrd wrote in a May 14 letter to Bush.
Byrd, 86, a Democrat from West Virginia, also called on Bush to ask the FTC to review whether ``consumers are being unfairly squeezed'' considering the record profits posted by energy companies in the first quarter.
Voter Concern
Mark Cooper, director of research for the Consumer Federation of America, says the FTC must fine-tune its analysis of market power in the energy industry to reflect the fact that supply and demand do not respond quickly to prices.
``If the number of people in the market is small enough, they don't have to collude to extract nearly all the profits a monopolist would,'' Cooper said in an interview.
Higher prices may threaten the stability of the economic recovery, as government data released last week showed inflation rising and purchases of cars and clothing dropping. About 41 percent of Americans say the national economy is getting worse, up from 29 percent in April, according to a poll of 1,100 adults conducted by the American Research Group May 3-6. About three- fourths attribute the decline to rising gasoline prices.
World oil demand is rising at its fastest rate since 1988, outpacing supply, as economic growth accelerates and consumption surges in China, the International Energy Agency said last week. The U.S. Energy Department raised its estimate for how much Americans can expect to pay for gas next month by 19 cents to an average peak of $2.03 a gallon.
Still Driving
So far there's no evidence that high gas prices are pushing motorists out of their cars. U.S. gasoline inventories fell 1.5 million barrels to 202.5 million in the week ended May 7, the Department of Energy said. Analysts surveyed by Bloomberg expected an increase of 1.5 million barrels.
``You would think that the American consumers would start to cry uncle, but they aren't,'' said Phil Flynn, senior energy trader for Alaron Trading Corp. in Chicago.
U.S. Commerce Secretary Donald Evans told reporters last month he isn't worried that higher gasoline prices will hurt economic growth.
Gasoline prices ``have to get well above current levels to think we would see a substantive and mature impact on the economy,'' General Motors Corp.'s chief sales analyst, Paul Ballew, told analysts on a conference call earlier this month.
Monitoring the oil industry needs to include consideration of ``all the underlying factors'' that may cause prices to shift and change a company's behavior, said Diana Moss, who oversaw utility mergers at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission from 1995 to 2001. The president should ensure regulators such as the FTC review all the consequences of proposed mergers, said Moss, who is now vice president of the American Antitrust Institute.
``A new policy or a tuned-up policy may be in order here,'' Moss said.

spectratoad
05-17-2004, 10:19 AM
I heard on the news this AM that there is a station in Fullerton that was at $4/ga for full service pumps.:eek:

Essex502
05-17-2004, 10:21 AM
Originally posted by HUFFPOWER
:mad: :mad: CAN YOU SAY PURE GREED !!!!! and noone seems to care politically, they all must own alot of stocks in the oil companies, like our governor said here in az, " i sent a letter to have it investigated", oh boy, funny how gas here in mesa, az is 2.15-2.25, but in ouartzite,az at the pilot truck stop on thrusday it was 1.99 ? :mad: :mad: BUT REMEMBER THE OIL COMPANIES ARE POOR !!!
If you read up about zone pricing strategies you'll see that the farther you are away from an independent station (not major branded gasoline) the higher you pay for gas. Here in SoCal we're in the $2.35 gallon for regular as we have very few independent stations.

Essex502
05-17-2004, 10:23 AM
Originally posted by spectratoad
I heard on the news this AM that there is a station in Fullerton that was at $4/ga for full service pumps.:eek:
That seems to be borderline gouging to me. There's no shortage of oil. The price of crude just recently exceeded a nealy 12 year old record price but 12 years ago we weren't paying over $2.00 a gallon either.

Havasu_Dreamin
05-17-2004, 10:26 AM
Bottom line I think it is price gouging and collusion on the part of the big oil companies. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for a business succeeding and making a profit but this is ridiculous!

Essex502
05-17-2004, 10:34 AM
Originally posted by HUFFPOWER
the real reason is you have to feed the expanding middle eastern population, they don't work, the king, shieks royal familys feed the kingdom. also 75% of the alaskan pipeline oil goes to japan , not the U.S.
We're getting plenty of raw crude....that's not the problem. The problems in order of importance IMHO are:
1) High refiner margins due to a uncompetitive market.
2) Consolidation of refineries - see point #1
3) Inconsistent regulations across the country making it harder for refiners to ship gasoline between markets.
4) Nobody cares in Washington.
5) No incentives to build new refiineries as long as the current lack of concern about the common folk by Washington.
Refinery capacity is about the same as it was in 1977 while the demand has gone up substantially. This is EXACTLY like the California Electricty market was in 2000/2001. Nobody in Washington cared about that and nobody cares now about gasoline prices.
Questions...If politicians paid for their own gas would they care more?

MagicMtnDan
05-17-2004, 10:36 AM
The spiraling oil prices have no where to go but up. And the reason for it as others have said is pure greed and the fact that oil companies are public companies and "need to" (want to and can) report better results (more profits) EVERY QUARTER.
They're in the unique position of being able to turn up the price every quarter and there's no one to stop them!

Dave C
05-17-2004, 10:36 AM
Not trying to defend the oil companies... yes they are greedy.
But crude oil is up almost 30% since last year. Last year it was averaging $28-30 a barrel... Now crude is $39-40 a barrel.
food for thought.
the price of crude also benefits oil companies if they own the production. which explains some of the obscene profits.

Dave C
05-17-2004, 10:39 AM
I agree.
This is very evident in Cali. Many refiners where driven out of business in the last 10 years and we cannot import gas from other states.
Not enough competition is very bad for the consumer. We need to encourage more competition and discourage more consolidation.
Originally posted by Essex502
We're getting plenty of raw crude....that's not the problem. The problems in order of importance IMHO are:
1) High refiner margins due to a uncompetitive market.
2) Consolidation of refineries - see point #1
3) Inconsistent regulations across the country making it harder for refiners to ship gasoline between markets.
4) Nobody cares in Washington.
5) No incentives to build new refiineries as long as the current lack of concern about the common folk by Washington.
Refinery capacity is about the same as it was in 1977 while the demand has gone up substantially. This is EXACTLY like the California Electricty market was in 2000/2001. Nobody in Washington cared about that and nobody cares now about gasoline prices.
Questions...If politicians paid for their own gas would they care more?

HavasuDreamin'
05-17-2004, 10:44 AM
Originally posted by Havasu_Dreamin
Bottom line I think it is price gouging and collusion on the part of the big oil companies. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for a business succeeding and making a profit but this is ridiculous!
I agree 100% and don't have a problem with it as long as the item that is the subject of price collusion isn't a necessity that every American absolutely has to have with no other alternatives.
Now we have a glorified monopoly (price collusion) and Bush isn't doing anything about it. BIG MISTAKE. I am Republican, but if he doesn't get elected to a second term, HIGH GAS prices are one main reason why.

Essex502
05-17-2004, 10:46 AM
Originally posted by Dave C
Not trying to defend the oil companies... yes they are greedy.
But crude oil is up almost 30% since last year. Last year it was averaging $28-30 a barrel... Now crude is $39-40 a barrel.
food for thought.
the price of crude also benefits oil companies if they own the production. which explains some of the obscene profits.
I agree with the cost of crude but 12 years ago the cost of crude was about where it is today the the pump price is much higher primarily due to the refiner's margin. California refinery margin is averaging about $0.60/gallon where gulf states the margin as around $0.22/gallon. Market power is the main reason. They got it and we want it.

summerlove
05-17-2004, 10:58 AM
Originally posted by MagicMtnDan
The spiraling oil prices have no where to go but up. And the reason for it as others have said is pure greed and the fact that oil companies are public companies and "need to" (want to and can) report better results (more profits) EVERY QUARTER.
They're in the unique position of being able to turn up the price every quarter and there's no one to stop them!
if this were the clinton or any other democratic admin you sure as he$$ would not be defending them, now would you MMD?
My god man, don't you ever question anything? You're too wound up - go buy yourself a big tall glass of reality!:D

058
05-17-2004, 11:31 AM
Don't look for any help from the govt. Republican or Democrat alike. With the budget crisis all forms of govt. benefits from higher fuel prices be it higher % of sales tax and less consumption meaning more public transportation use and less air pollution. When you look at all the angles of higher prices everyone wins except the consumer. Bush may be an "oil man" but Kerry pushes a $.50/ gallon tax and if he gets elected look for gas to be 50 cents [+ more sales tax] higher than it already is now. $3.50-3.75 a gallon is starting to look like a reality.

Essex502
05-17-2004, 12:49 PM
With little to no competition in the refinery business in CA we are doomed for a long time to this kind of market manipulation.

Blown 472
05-17-2004, 01:40 PM
Originally posted by HavasuDreamin'
I agree 100% and don't have a problem with it as long as the item that is the subject of price collusion isn't a necessity that every American absolutely has to have with no other alternatives.
Now we have a glorified monopoly (price collusion) and Bush isn't doing anything about it. BIG MISTAKE. I am Republican, but if he doesn't get elected to a second term, HIGH GAS prices are one main reason why.
Oh I am sure about sept or oct he will "strike a deal with the saudis" to lower gas prices, just to help his election efforts.

Dave C
05-17-2004, 01:42 PM
where did you find the margin data. I been trying to find it. hard data to get for obvious reasons.
Originally posted by Essex502
I agree with the cost of crude but 12 years ago the cost of crude was about where it is today the the pump price is much higher primarily due to the refiner's margin. California refinery margin is averaging about $0.60/gallon where gulf states the margin as around $0.22/gallon. Market power is the main reason. They got it and we want it.

Seadog
05-17-2004, 01:50 PM
1. Gas is cheaper than it was 10 years ago based on adjusted dollars.
2. The increased restrictions and jumbled regulations means no incentives to build new refineries. In fact, they predict that the new diesel regulations will put many of the smaller refineries out of business. It would cost the big oil companies billions to add capacity and take years after spending big bucks to fight the environmental challenges. The refineries sell to the highest bidder. If they do nothing, they can sell all they make, but if they spend all that money to expand capacity, the price may go down to where you are not making a profit because of the high debt load.
3. China has increased the amount of oil they use to the point where they are second to our usage now. If we do not pay the going price, guess who will. To save money, we have bought everything "Made in China" and now it has come back to bite us.
It is foolish to blame the oil companies. They are not holding a gun to your heads. You can get rid of your boats and big trucks and drive around in cars that get 40 mpg. If most people did that, then the price of gas would go down from lack of demand.

HighRoller
05-17-2004, 02:00 PM
So Bush gets blamed for the gas prices now? So what if he's an OIL MAN, good grief he was from Texas. What else do they have to do there? I still haven't seen how his connections and insider knowledge have helped him in any way. As a matter of fact, if he were actually a powerful OIL MAN he'd be able to pull some strings and get the prices to drop. The problem is simple. The oil companies are more powerful and have more money than anyone in government. How many times have they "vowed to investigate rumors of price fixing" in the oil industry? Have the investigations ever gone anywhere? No, because the oil companies are smart and use some of that pile of money to make big fat contributions to EVERYONE in congress. There isn't one of those greedy bastards, Dem or Repub, that's going to stand up to the oil companies anytime soon so get over it. They're screwing us for one reason;BECAUSE THEY CAN!!!!!

Essex502
05-17-2004, 02:18 PM
Originally posted by Dave C
where did you find the margin data. I been trying to find it. hard data to get for obvious reasons.
This I got from a Los Angeles Times article a while back...the LATIMES.COM website only keeps recent articles. It doesn't seem to search very far back.

summerlove
05-17-2004, 02:18 PM
Originally posted by HighRoller
So Bush gets blamed for the gas prices now? So what if he's an OIL MAN, good grief he was from Texas. What else do they have to do there? I still haven't seen how his connections and insider knowledge have helped him in any way. As a matter of fact, if he were actually a powerful OIL MAN he'd be able to pull some strings and get the prices to drop. The problem is simple. The oil companies are more powerful and have more money than anyone in government. How many times have they "vowed to investigate rumors of price fixing" in the oil industry? Have the investigations ever gone anywhere? No, because the oil companies are smart and use some of that pile of money to make big fat contributions to EVERYONE in congress. There isn't one of those greedy bastards, Dem or Repub, that's going to stand up to the oil companies anytime soon so get over it. They're screwing us for one reason;BECAUSE THEY CAN!!!!!
Hey HR... :p
Ditto my post to MMD....;)

Essex502
05-17-2004, 02:23 PM
Originally posted by Seadog
1. Gas is cheaper than it was 10 years ago based on adjusted dollars.
2. The increased restrictions and jumbled regulations means no incentives to build new refineries. In fact, they predict that the new diesel regulations will put many of the smaller refineries out of business. It would cost the big oil companies billions to add capacity and take years after spending big bucks to fight the environmental challenges. The refineries sell to the highest bidder. If they do nothing, they can sell all they make, but if they spend all that money to expand capacity, the price may go down to where you are not making a profit because of the high debt load.
3. China has increased the amount of oil they use to the point where they are second to our usage now. If we do not pay the going price, guess who will. To save money, we have bought everything "Made in China" and now it has come back to bite us.
It is foolish to blame the oil companies. They are not holding a gun to your heads. You can get rid of your boats and big trucks and drive around in cars that get 40 mpg. If most people did that, then the price of gas would go down from lack of demand.
Seadog....not according to this website: http://www.energy.ca.gov/gasoline/statistics/gasoline_cpi_adjusted.html (Historical Gasoline Prices)

Essex502
05-17-2004, 02:27 PM
Originally posted by HighRoller
So Bush gets blamed for the gas prices now? So what if he's an OIL MAN, good grief he was from Texas. What else do they have to do there? I still haven't seen how his connections and insider knowledge have helped him in any way. As a matter of fact, if he were actually a powerful OIL MAN he'd be able to pull some strings and get the prices to drop. The problem is simple. The oil companies are more powerful and have more money than anyone in government. How many times have they "vowed to investigate rumors of price fixing" in the oil industry? Have the investigations ever gone anywhere? No, because the oil companies are smart and use some of that pile of money to make big fat contributions to EVERYONE in congress. There isn't one of those greedy bastards, Dem or Repub, that's going to stand up to the oil companies anytime soon so get over it. They're screwing us for one reason;BECAUSE THEY CAN!!!!!
Who's blaming Bush....except to say he doesn't care.
Reference:
"Senator Carl Levin recently completed Senate subcommittee hearings into the same 2001 summer price spikes and into market conditions which have boosted the average gallon price since early January of this year. The subcommittee's investigation suggested that mergers and consolidations in the industry, as well as industry practices such as zone pricing, manipulation of the gasoline supply to maximize profit, and price setting in response to competitors rather than costs of production have contributed to high prices. Senator Levin suggested that these practices, while not presently illegal, ought to be considered an "anti-competitive act."
FTC found price manipulation in the midwest gas price increases in 2001

Dave C
05-17-2004, 02:51 PM
here is some interesting stuff.
ca govt gas data (http://www.energy.ca.gov/gasoline/margins/index.html)
according to them currently,
$0.90/ gallon is the cost of crude oil,
0.74/ gallon is the cost of refinery/profit.
BOTH #'s are historically high.
plus
0.16/gal - sales tax
0.18/gal - state gas tax
0.15/gal - federal gas tax
0.03/gal - distribution costs.

framer1
05-17-2004, 04:07 PM
Who's ever fault it is it's breaking the back of the working man. The money he used to take is wife out to dinner on friday night is going in his gas tank. It really sucks.

Boozer
05-17-2004, 05:30 PM
Originally posted by framer1
Who's ever fault it is it's breaking the back of the working man. The money he used to take is wife out to dinner on friday night is going in his gas tank. It really sucks.
So much for that 2.5% raise the working man got this year.

Blown 472
05-17-2004, 05:42 PM
Originally posted by HUFFPOWER
GEE, A LITTLE GOUGING, WHERE'S YOUR GOVERNOR NOW.
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=03/10/06/160254
Right here, he is.

Essex502
05-18-2004, 05:36 AM
Originally posted by Dave C
here is some interesting stuff.
ca govt gas data (http://www.energy.ca.gov/gasoline/margins/index.html)
according to them currently,
$0.90/ gallon is the cost of crude oil,
0.74/ gallon is the cost of refinery/profit.
BOTH #'s are historically high.
plus
0.16/gal - sales tax
0.18/gal - state gas tax
0.15/gal - federal gas tax
0.03/gal - distribution costs.
Good data, Dave. Can't wait to see the numbers rise some more...does anyone want to explain why the refinery profit as a percentage of total price keeps increasing? From $0.24 /gallon Jan 4, 2004 to $0.74 / gallon now? This is profiteering pure and simple.

rrrr
05-18-2004, 05:50 AM
Here's the real answer:
The debate in the presidential campaign over crude oil supplies misses the point, ConocoPhillips Chief Executive James Mulva, 57, said at a meeting with reporters this month. ``There is plenty of oil on world markets. It's a question of limited refining capacity.''
Between 1977 and 2002, the number of U.S. refineries dropped to 153 from 282. Refining capacity over that period has increased 2.4 percent to 16.8 million barrels a day from 16.4 million barrels a day, according to the Energy Department. U.S. demand for gasoline has grown 27 percent in that period.
ConocoPhillips, which produces a sixth of the nation's gasoline, said its plants are operating at 97 percent of capacity. No new refineries have been built in the U.S. since 1976 because of the difficulty in getting approval to build plants and the cost of construction, said Drevna of the National Petrochemical & Refiners Association.
If an oil company decides to build a refinery today, I suspect it wouldn't be online for 5-7 years. Now, whether the bit about approval difficulties and cost is true, who knows?
The oil companies may have made a long term strategic decision to avoid construction of new refineries so prices would be squeezed higher.

MagicMtnDan
05-18-2004, 06:26 AM
Originally posted by summerlove
if this were the clinton or any other democratic admin you sure as he$$ would not be defending them, now would you MMD?
My god man, don't you ever question anything? You're too wound up - go buy yourself a big tall glass of reality!:D
Let me get this straight - I'm defending Bush in light of higher gas prices? When did I do that?
Bush isn't the problem in regard to gas prices. The government can't control product prices the market does that. Yes the government (your beloved Clinton and Bush both) allowed the gas companies to merge which made for less competition and that hurt everyone. But what do you expect from politicians? If they were good at managing money and bureacracy they'd be doing it in the private sector making a LOT more money!
I'm not blindly supporting Bush. I'm not at all happy with a lot of things he and his administration are doing. But he and his administration on their worst day are far better for me, my family and this country than John I'll-raise-your-taxes Kerry on his best day.
Go ahead and vote Democratic. Enjoy your tax increases and enjoy paying for "free healthcare for everyone" which means you want the government to pay the way for those who won't work. And it will be the biggest black hole in the history of this country. "Free healthcare" (no such thing) will take this country around a corner financially that it will NEVER return from.
If you Kerry supporters think paying higher taxes is such a great idea why don't you all start paying additional taxes now?! Don't wait for the election - the federal and state treasuries will be happy to cash your check each month and spend the money somewhere. Or maybe you can just find a homeless dude and start paying for his healthcare each month. :eek:

Essex502
05-18-2004, 06:46 AM
Originally posted by rrrr
Here's the real answer:
If an oil company decides to build a refinery today, I suspect it wouldn't be online for 5-7 years. Now, whether the bit about approval difficulties and cost is true, who knows?
The oil companies may have made a long term strategic decision to avoid construction of new refineries so prices would be squeezed higher.
What the govenment has to do, IMO, is stop the consolidation and prevent any closing of refineries - starting with the proposed closure of the most profitable refinery Shell Oil runs - namely Bakersfield. It produces 2% of all the gasoline consumed in California and 6% of the diesel. We cannot allow this plant to close. This will only squeeze the supply even more. With refineries in the U.S. running at 97% capacity now, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to guess where the prices of gasoline will go after Bakersfield - or any other refinery - closes its doors.
All politics aside - both the past Democratic administration and the present Republican administration are to fault for not having the foresight to see this coming. It is exactly what happened in the electrical generation industry.
Another note...who did Cheney meet with, in secret, concerning energy policy? Were refineries discussed? We will never know.

Blown 472
05-18-2004, 07:58 AM
Originally posted by Essex502
What the govenment has to do, IMO, is stop the consolidation and prevent any closing of refineries - starting with the proposed closure of the most profitable refinery Shell Oil runs - namely Bakersfield. It produces 2% of all the gasoline consumed in California and 6% of the diesel. We cannot allow this plant to close. This will only squeeze the supply even more. With refineries in the U.S. running at 97% capacity now, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to guess where the prices of gasoline will go after Bakersfield - or any other refinery - closes its doors.
All politics aside - both the past Democratic administration and the present Republican administration are to fault for not having the foresight to see this coming. It is exactly what happened in the electrical generation industry.
Another note...who did Cheney meet with, in secret, concerning energy policy? Were refineries discussed? We will never know.
And why is Cheney still on Haliburtons pay roll? getting 125K a year for what?

MagicMtnDan
05-18-2004, 08:01 AM
The EIA's weekly report showed the retail price for cleaner-burning reformulated gasoline, sold in polluted metropolitan areas, rose 7.8 cents to $2.095 a gallon.
The West Coast had the most expensive regular unleaded gasoline, with the price up 4.3 cents to $2.243 a gallon. Los Angeles topped the agency's city survey of gasoline costs, as the price jumped 5.4 cents a gallon to $2.304.
The U.S. Gulf coast had the cheapest fuel by region, with the price up 6.7 cents at $1.885 per gallon. Houston had the most affordable gasoline at $1.847 a gallon, up 6.4 cents.
The weekly report also showed gasoline prices were up 9 cents to $2.251 in Seattle, up 13.5 cents to $2.149 in Chicago, up 10.2 cents to $2.038 in New York City up 7.7 cents to $2.034 in Miami, and up 12.9 cents to $2.019 in Cleveland.
Separately, the EIA survey showed the average pump price for diesel fuel increased 1.8 cents to $1.763 a gallon, up 32 cents from a year earlier. Truckers on the West Coast paid the most for diesel fuel at $2.25 a gallon, down half a penny from the prior week. The lower Atlantic states had the cheapest diesel at $1.652, up 1.9 cents.

MagicMtnDan
05-18-2004, 08:01 AM
Originally posted by Blown 472
And why is Cheney still on Haliburtons pay roll? getting 125K a year for what?
Uh I don't think that's happening now - he's VP and cannot be on a company's payroll (conflict of interest).

Blown 472
05-18-2004, 08:06 AM
Originally posted by MagicMtnDan
Uh I don't think that's happening now - he's VP and cannot be on a company's payroll (conflict of interest).
Defured payroll, perhaps you should check it out.

Essex502
05-18-2004, 08:41 AM
Probably on the payroll (if he is) for services still being rendered such as secret no-bid contracts to rebuild Iraq. You gotta' hand it to Cheney...he delivers! :D

Essex502
05-18-2004, 08:43 AM
Originally posted by MagicMtnDan
The EIA's weekly report showed the retail price for cleaner-burning reformulated gasoline, sold in polluted metropolitan areas, rose 7.8 cents to $2.095 a gallon.
The West Coast had the most expensive regular unleaded gasoline, with the price up 4.3 cents to $2.243 a gallon. Los Angeles topped the agency's city survey of gasoline costs, as the price jumped 5.4 cents a gallon to $2.304.
The U.S. Gulf coast had the cheapest fuel by region, with the price up 6.7 cents at $1.885 per gallon. Houston had the most affordable gasoline at $1.847 a gallon, up 6.4 cents.
The weekly report also showed gasoline prices were up 9 cents to $2.251 in Seattle, up 13.5 cents to $2.149 in Chicago, up 10.2 cents to $2.038 in New York City up 7.7 cents to $2.034 in Miami, and up 12.9 cents to $2.019 in Cleveland.
Separately, the EIA survey showed the average pump price for diesel fuel increased 1.8 cents to $1.763 a gallon, up 32 cents from a year earlier. Truckers on the West Coast paid the most for diesel fuel at $2.25 a gallon, down half a penny from the prior week. The lower Atlantic states had the cheapest diesel at $1.652, up 1.9 cents.
Interesting that the difference in the average prices is just about the difference in refiner margins between the Gulf Coast and the West Coast refineries. Hmmmmm....and who's profiting from the gas price increases....owners of refineries, that's who.

HavasuDreamin'
05-18-2004, 09:01 AM
Originally posted by MagicMtnDan
Separately, the EIA survey showed the average pump price for diesel fuel increased 1.8 cents to $1.763 a gallon, up 32 cents from a year earlier. Truckers on the West Coast paid the most for diesel fuel at $2.25 a gallon, down half a penny from the prior week. The lower Atlantic states had the cheapest diesel at $1.652, up 1.9 cents.
Diesel is $1.639 a gallon here in Indiana. Makes me want to go out and get a diesel. I just fear that when I make that decision, diesel is going to sky rocket. Murphy's law type deal.
Anyone want to speculate on where diesel prices are going? Will the remain cheaper than 87 octane over the long haul?

Essex502
05-18-2004, 10:02 AM
Here in SoCal...diesel is about $0.10 more than premium unleaded...the stations I drove by this morning had it at $2.45/gallon.

eliminatedsprinter
05-18-2004, 10:13 AM
I don't think we can look to government to get us out of this. The Republican philosophy opposes most gov interventions and todays Democrats have either openly supported higher gas prices as a way to ease road congestion, reduce pollution, and raise money or they are in bed with those who do.
However, I just heard this weekend that right now all our refineries are running at their max capacity. So, even if the crude oil supply is increased, the refieries still won't be able to meet the demand and lower prices....Hmmmm I wonder which party is more likely to allow more refineries to be built.....:idea:

Essex502
05-18-2004, 12:31 PM
The biggest problem is that the refineries have gone from over 300 in the U.S. 15 years ago to less than 200 now. They are running at 97% capacity and are about 2% more production than the 1977 levels for gasoline. Unfortunately, demand has surged by 25% or so...just exactly like the California electricity market.

Dave C
05-18-2004, 01:02 PM
Yes its getting pretty high. but note that "distribution costs" goes down and refinery expense goes up so we should net the two together. Plus look at the seasonal changes, the refinery costs get up to $0.70 but go down to as low as $0.25.
Regarding Cheney. If he is being paid then its probably non-qualified deferred compensation, which is basically a retirement pension. Fairly common among execs. I know he severed most, if not all financial ties, before he became VP, because it would be a conflict of interest to have financial ties to Halliburton as VP.
Originally posted by Essex502
Good data, Dave. Can't wait to see the numbers rise some more...does anyone want to explain why the refinery profit as a percentage of total price keeps increasing? From $0.24 /gallon Jan 4, 2004 to $0.74 / gallon now? This is profiteering pure and simple.

eliminatedsprinter
05-18-2004, 01:26 PM
Originally posted by Essex502
The biggest problem is that the refineries have gone from over 300 in the U.S. 15 years ago to less than 200 now. They are running at 97% capacity and are about 2% more production than the 1977 levels for gasoline. Unfortunately, demand has surged by 25% or so...just exactly like the California electricity market.
Good point.
One thing that I would find amusing (if it didn't cost me money) is the idea, that in spite of this, some people think Kerry might help us with this problem. I mean can anyone in their wildest dreams imagine a Kerry administration that would allow for an increase in oil refineries. That would be like expecting a shark to save a drowning swimmer......

Seadog
05-18-2004, 01:45 PM
If the democrats are in charge, they will increase the taxesa nd not allow any more refineries to be built. The Republicans will allow the market to sort things out. Even if more refineries are built, the latest info says that OPEC is running at near capacity, so even if we had more refineries, we may not have more oil to make into gasoline.
As for forcing them to keep refineries open, that is about as dumb as it gets. You cannot force a business to stay open. What's next, telling K-Mart that they cannot close any stores because it would be uncompetive for them to leave the market to Wal-Mart? The refineries that are closing are the ones that cannot meet future regulations. What the experts are saying is that we have to allow the market to work and ride this out. If we try to fix this with the usual government efficiency, it will just make things worse.

NorCal Gameshow
05-18-2004, 02:18 PM
Originally posted by framer1
Who's ever fault it is it's breaking the back of the working man. The money he used to take is wife out to dinner on friday night is going in his gas tank. It really sucks.
That's what I was thinking as i was putting the $2.25 per gallon GO- JUICE in the supercrew. we'll pay at the pump and cut back in other ways....trickle down economics:(
it's curious how 30% increase in crude, means 50% increase at the pump...
i'm not big on regulations, but energy should be a candidate for it...
if we all drove 40 mpg cars gas would be at least $5.00 per gallon
NG--->goin' to hide his soapbox now....

Essex502
05-18-2004, 02:20 PM
Encouraging oil companies to build more refineries is what the administration should be doing instead of doing nothing. Allowing Shell to close the Bakersfield refinery should not be done - it should be mandatory the Shell sell the refinery instead. The FTC still has Shell in some control due to the merger restrictions that Shell agreed to. The FTC needs the think about the people. The oil companies have been allowed to consolidate through merger to a point where they wield market power to the detriment of the motoring public.
Why didn't the government "let the market sort itself out" when it came to Microsoft? Hmmmm... seems with that logic there wouldn't have been any anti-trust action against Microsoft.
OPEC can produce far more oil than we can consume but that ain't the problem when we can't refine it.
Oh...btw...I do commute in a little 40+ MPG car that saves my gasoline dollars for my big block in the boat and the truck that tows it.

HCS
05-18-2004, 02:25 PM
I got major gas. I don't know how much it sells for.
I'm with you NorCal Gameshow. I'll fill up my tank and burn the
fuel. I'll cut back somewhere else. It cost me about 80 bucks
a day to go boating for a day last year. I figure it will run around
100 bucks this year. Gas, beer, launch fees, & food.

eliminatedsprinter
05-18-2004, 03:05 PM
Originally posted by Essex502
Encouraging oil companies to build more refineries is what the administration should be doing instead of doing nothing. Allowing Shell to close the Bakersfield refinery should not be done - it should be mandatory the Shell sell the refinery instead. The FTC still has Shell in some control due to the merger restrictions that Shell agreed to. The FTC needs the think about the people. The oil companies have been allowed to consolidate through merger to a point where they wield market power to the detriment of the motoring public.
OPEC can produce far more oil than we can consume but that ain't the problem when we can't refine it.
Oh...btw...I do commute in a little 40+ MPG car that saves my gasoline dollars for my big block in the boat and the truck that tows it.
Well said, however, who will have the political guts to take on the eco-nazi's, and the hollywood- left -types, who will get their drawers all in a bunch at the idea of the administration encouraging oil companies to build more refineries. I can just see Al Gore, John Kerry, Hillery Clinton, and thier ilk ranting on about how Bush is in the oil co's pocket and how he is raping the evironment, etc...
P.S. My wife and I both drive small fuel effecient cars and live close to work. We save the gas for our boat and motorhome.
In fact, even my boat has a weedwacker that burns less gas, so I can save some money to give to my mechanic....

Mandelon
05-18-2004, 07:02 PM
Dammit that settles it. I'm callilng my broker in the morning and buying more oil company stocks.
If you can't beat em, join em. Cut myself in for some of those fat profits.

Debbolas
05-18-2004, 07:49 PM
:cool:

rrrr
05-18-2004, 09:04 PM
Bad news: I filled up the new boat today for the first time, 74 gallons of premium at $2.009= $148.00
Good news: Six months ago I bought into an oil and gas partnership, we are selling 85 barrels per day at $39.47=$100,648.50 per month.
Gotta take the good with the bad... :D :D

Mike J.
05-19-2004, 11:06 AM
Yesterday in Victorville CA On I15 the road
to Havasu and Las Vegas $2.35 87 $2.45 89
#2.55 90 And they say its going up more for
the Big weekend.
Mike

HavasuDreamin'
05-19-2004, 11:15 AM
www.gasbuddy.com
This site has become my new friend. ;) Check it out.

Dat Dude
05-19-2004, 01:11 PM
Bush will not open up the strategic reserves for a reason. You can't bomb arabs from the air w/o oil. Another reason there is somewhat of a shortage is because the govt. is busying buying up the oil trying to get the reserves filled back up.

Dat Dude
05-19-2004, 01:17 PM
Bush will not open up the strategic reserves for a reason. You can't bomb arabs from the air w/o oil. Another reason there is somewhat of a shortage is because the govt. is busying buying up the oil trying to get the reserves filled back up.

Dave C
05-19-2004, 02:06 PM
My thoughts exactly. The last thing Kalifornia needs is more consolidation.
This is simple supply and demand. If there is a 25% increase in demand and little to no increase in supply the PRICE WILL GO UP.
We need more production in Kalifornia.
I think the FTC should be acting differently by encouraging more production among different companies.
Originally posted by Essex502
Encouraging oil companies to build more refineries is what the administration should be doing instead of doing nothing. Allowing Shell to close the Bakersfield refinery should not be done - it should be mandatory the Shell sell the refinery instead. The FTC still has Shell in some control due to the merger restrictions that Shell agreed to. The FTC needs the think about the people. The oil companies have been allowed to consolidate through merger to a point where they wield market power to the detriment of the motoring public.

eliminatedsprinter
05-19-2004, 02:18 PM
Originally posted by Dave C
My thoughts exactly. The last thing Kalifornia needs is more consolidation.
This is simple supply and demand. If there is a 25% increase in demand and little to no increase in supply the PRICE WILL GO UP.
We need more production in Kalifornia.
I think the FTC should be acting differently by encouraging more production among different companies.
And while we are at it let's get a national standard mix. Goofy state formula's, like our looney dems stuck us with, can't be helping anything.

Dave C
05-19-2004, 02:51 PM
Elim,
The goofy Kalifornia blend was done for a reason. To drive the prices up in our state....
They know exactly what they are doing and CARB..

gnarley
05-19-2004, 02:56 PM
Originally posted by Dave C
My thoughts exactly. The last thing Kalifornia needs is more consolidation.
This is simple supply and demand. If there is a 25% increase in demand and little to no increase in supply the PRICE WILL GO UP.
We need more production in Kalifornia.
I think the FTC should be acting differently by encouraging more production among different companies.
Dave I partly agree with you, we need to increase supply, that would certainly help! We also need to get a waiver from the EPA so we can run generic fuel blends and lastly we need to reduce total fuel consumptions by increasing the CAFE standards some. If the average of all the vehicles on the road got 10% better mileage in turn with the other solutions prices would be significantly less.
If you drive a vehicle that gets 15 MPG as a daily driver or less you are only helping keep the prices up due to increased consumption.
We need to reduce total consumption so there becomes a glut of oil on the market. All the worlds’ oil producers can only pump so much and the world wide demand is only increasing. If we don’t find ways to cut back the usage this may be only a taste of what we will be experiencing in the future as demand and populations need more oil.

gnarley
05-19-2004, 03:00 PM
Originally posted by eliminatedsprinter
And while we are at it let's get a national standard mix. Goofy state formula's, like our looney dems stuck us with, can't be helping anything.
Don't think it's just the Dems fault, who could do something about it now but won't? I'll give you one hint and it isn't the Dems.
How about the Republicans, big business and the midwest corn lobbist's??? I don't think there are to many of them corn growers who are Dems, do you?

eliminatedsprinter
05-19-2004, 03:49 PM
Originally posted by gnarley
Don't think it's just the Dems fault, who could do something about it now but won't? I'll give you one hint and it isn't the Dems.
How about the Republicans, big business and the midwest corn lobbist's??? I don't think there are to many of them corn growers who are Dems, do you?
I'm talking about here in Ca. We now have a republican governor (sort of) but the dem's still control the legislature and all of the other elected state posts. Besides, our state still puts those idiotic MTBEs (that pollute water) in our fuel mix and now we have to pay through the nose to switch over... Of course, we should have swithched long ago when we first found out how harmful MTBEs were, but the co that makes MTBEs gave big money to Gray Davis and the dems, so naturally they have dragged their feet on making the switch (which still hasn't been completed).

ROZ
05-19-2004, 03:56 PM
Originally posted by gnarley
I don't think there are to many of them corn growers who are Dems, do you? Actually, yes I do... Plenty of Iowa farmers taking more than their fair share of government aide... So I hear from my Iowan escape father-in-law....

gnarley
05-19-2004, 04:06 PM
Originally posted by eliminatedsprinter
I'm talking about here in Ca. We now have a republican governor (sort of) but the dem's still control the legislature and all of the other elected state posts. Besides, our state still puts those idiotic MTBEs (that pollute water) in our fuel mix and now we have to pay through the nose to switch over... Of course, we should have swithched long ago when we first found out how harmful MTBEs were, but the co that makes MTBEs gave big money to Gray Davis and the dems, so naturally they have dragged their feet on making the switch (which still hasn't been completed).
I couldn't disagree with you more, in order to get a waiver to stop adding MTBE we had to agree to use the Ethanol, which was mandated by the Federal Government and lobbied heavily by the corn growers and big business like Con Agra
Originally posted by ROZ
Actually, yes I do... Plenty of Iowa farmers taking more than their fair share of government aide... So I hear from my Iowan escape father-in-law....
Roz you don't need to be a Dem to take a hand out from the federal government. The midwest is a Republican stronghold, fact.