PDA

View Full Version : Economics U.S. to Release 30 Million Barrels of Oil from Strategic Reserve


mlyonsd
06-23-2011, 08:38 AM
U.S. to Release 30 Million Barrels of Oil from Strategic Reserve


Published June 23, 2011 | FoxNews.com

The U.S. is releasing 30 million barrels of oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve as part of an international effort to make up for the loss in supply from the disruption in Libya's production in the face of ongoing "kinetic military action," the Energy Department announced Thursday.

The release coincides with another 30 million barrels to be released in the coming month from other nations in coordination with the International Energy Agency.

U.S. Energy Secretary Steven Chu (http://www.foxnews.com/topics/politics/obama-administration/steven-chu.htm#r_src=ramp) said the SPR is currently at a record 727 million barrels in storage.

He said the situation in Libya (http://www.foxnews.com/topics/libya.htm#r_src=ramp) -- which the U.S. began bombing in March, but which has been under NATO (http://www.foxnews.com/topics/politics/nato.htm#r_src=ramp) control since May -- has caused a loss of roughly 1.5 million barrels of oil per day -- particularly light, sweet crude - from global markets.

"We are taking this action in response to the ongoing loss of crude oil due to supply disruptions in Libya and other countries and their impact on the global economic recovery," Chu said in a statement. "As we move forward, we will continue to monitor the situation and stand ready to take additional steps if necessary."

The IEA, a 28-member nation organization created to create a collective response to major disruptions in oil supply, said the coming release of oil inventory is the third time the agency has taken such action.

"I expect this action will contribute to well-supplied markets and to ensuring a soft landing for the world economy," said Executive Director Nobuo Tanaka.

The IEA said that the percentage distribution of stocks from each country is based on the proportionate share of consumption. As a result, the U.S. is releasing 50 percent of the total while European countries release about 30 percent and Asian countries provide the remaining 20 percent.

The IEA also said that even though the crisis in Libya began in February, tightening of supply by OPEC and recent European refinery outages linked to "seasonal maintenance work" along with summer demand in the Northern Hemisphere "represents an imminent risk." Chu noted that U.S. demand is at its highest in the summer driving months of July and August.

But the release causes some artificial price changes in the market, and Wall Street took immediate notice. Oil prices fell 4 percent almost immediately and energy stocks like Exxon Mobil Corp. sharply lower.

The Dow Jones industrial average was down 157 points, or 1.3 percent, in early trading Thursday.


http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/06/23/us-to-release-30-million-barrels-oil-from-strategic-reserve/

Saul Good
06-23-2011, 08:51 AM
Wow. That is 36 hours worth of consumption in the US.

HonestChieffan
06-23-2011, 08:53 AM
insanity

mlyonsd
06-23-2011, 08:56 AM
LOOK! OVER THERE!

War? What war in Libya?

Saul Good
06-23-2011, 09:05 AM
I'm not sure that the "strategic" part referred to Obama's election strategy.

That said, its $30,000,000,000 worth of revenue. Imagine if we could actually replenish it from our own wells.

Brock
06-23-2011, 09:08 AM
What's the point?

The Mad Crapper
06-23-2011, 09:17 AM
U.S. to Release 30 Million Barrels of Oil from Strategic Reserve


Published June 23, 2011 | FoxNews.com

The U.S. is releasing 30 million barrels of oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve as part of an international effort to make up for the loss in supply from the disruption in Libya's production in the face of ongoing "kinetic military action," the Energy Department announced Thursday.

The release coincides with another 30 million barrels to be released in the coming month from other nations in coordination with the International Energy Agency.

U.S. Energy Secretary Steven Chu (http://www.foxnews.com/topics/politics/obama-administration/steven-chu.htm#r_src=ramp) said the SPR is currently at a record 727 million barrels in storage.

He said the situation in Libya (http://www.foxnews.com/topics/libya.htm#r_src=ramp) -- which the U.S. began bombing in March, but which has been under NATO (http://www.foxnews.com/topics/politics/nato.htm#r_src=ramp) control since May -- has caused a loss of roughly 1.5 million barrels of oil per day -- particularly light, sweet crude - from global markets.

"We are taking this action in response to the ongoing loss of crude oil due to supply disruptions in Libya and other countries and their impact on the global economic recovery," Chu said in a statement. "As we move forward, we will continue to monitor the situation and stand ready to take additional steps if necessary."

The IEA, a 28-member nation organization created to create a collective response to major disruptions in oil supply, said the coming release of oil inventory is the third time the agency has taken such action.

"I expect this action will contribute to well-supplied markets and to ensuring a soft landing for the world economy," said Executive Director Nobuo Tanaka.

The IEA said that the percentage distribution of stocks from each country is based on the proportionate share of consumption. As a result, the U.S. is releasing 50 percent of the total while European countries release about 30 percent and Asian countries provide the remaining 20 percent.

The IEA also said that even though the crisis in Libya began in February, tightening of supply by OPEC and recent European refinery outages linked to "seasonal maintenance work" along with summer demand in the Northern Hemisphere "represents an imminent risk." Chu noted that U.S. demand is at its highest in the summer driving months of July and August.

But the release causes some artificial price changes in the market, and Wall Street took immediate notice. Oil prices fell 4 percent almost immediately and energy stocks like Exxon Mobil Corp. sharply lower.

The Dow Jones industrial average was down 157 points, or 1.3 percent, in early trading Thursday.


http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/06/23/us-to-release-30-million-barrels-oil-from-strategic-reserve/

Just another bizarre action by B.O. It doesn't make sense because the reserves are intended for a domestic emergency, not an international one.

Whatever the motive, I have no doubt, it's intended to benefit him and his friends (Soros?). Obama is an evil scumbag.

Saul Good
06-23-2011, 09:18 AM
What's the point?

Jingles keys \Obama

Iowanian
06-23-2011, 09:20 AM
Here's an idea.....drill more of our own oil and let the assholes fight it out.

Donger
06-23-2011, 09:23 AM
This isn't the first time that the SPR has been used for political purposes, nor will it be the last time.

Saul Good
06-23-2011, 09:26 AM
I'm seeing reports of 60 million barrels.

Meanwhile, the market is down 215 points.

mlyonsd
06-23-2011, 09:27 AM
This isn't the first time that the SPR has been used for political purposes, nor will it be the last time.Exactly. The ironic thing about tapping them this time is it's self inflicted.

The Mad Crapper
06-23-2011, 09:28 AM
I'm seeing reports of 60 million barrels.

Meanwhile, the market is down 215 points.

Bernanke, Geitner and Soros had to cover their shorts.

HonestChieffan
06-23-2011, 09:30 AM
It accomplishes absolutely nothing. Are they just making random moves at this point?

Dave Lane
06-23-2011, 09:35 AM
What's the point?

Making a profit? Probably bought that oil at $50 a barrel. Its a lot of cash and its very likely to scare speculators that the US could dump more. Its what killed the Silver bubble in 79.

HonestChieffan
06-23-2011, 09:37 AM
Making a profit? Probably bought that oil at $50 a barrel. Its a lot of cash and its very likely to scare speculators that the US could dump more. Its what killed the Silver bubble in 79.


It has to be replaced at going market prices. They cannot be that stupid.

well, yes, they can.

Donger
06-23-2011, 09:42 AM
It has to be replaced at going market prices. They cannot be that stupid.

well, yes, they can.

This is probably in response to OPEC's decision to not increase production. It's not really a fiscal response. It's more political. But, I'm sure they knew that the market would respond as it has.

oldandslow
06-23-2011, 10:15 AM
This is probably in response to OPEC's decision to not increase production. It's not really a fiscal response. It's more political. But, I'm sure they knew that the market would respond as it has.

IEA agreed to release 60 million - The US is doing half.

This will produce a short term market fluctuation - It does nothing to solve the long term energy problem.

Donger
06-23-2011, 10:18 AM
IEA agreed to release 60 million - The US is doing half.

This will produce a short term market fluctuation - It does nothing to solve the long term energy problem.

Yes, I know.

petegz28
06-23-2011, 10:41 AM
Oil Prices Were Already Falling, So Why Tap Reserves Now?

An aggressive global effort to drive down oil prices even further appears aimed not only at easing gasoline prices but giving a boost to a faltering economy.

Dual announcements on Thursday by the US Department of Energy and International Energy Agency that reserve stockpiles would be released came even as the price of US crude had fallen more than 16 percent in just two weeks, while the more widely used Brent crude was down about 12 percent.

Experts saw the timing, then, as curious especially considering the rarity of tapping strategic petroleum reserves. And some speculated that over the longer term, draining stockpiles actually would raise the price and defeat the purpose of the unusual move.

"Put together the situation in the United States—no job growth, poor housing values, which are our largest assets out there—and you juxtapose that with the potential default in Greece and it's a very precarious situation," said Stephen Schork, editor of the Schork Report newsletter.

"It's a situation where the IEA is stepping in and taking one of the biggest concerns out there—headline inflation—which you've got on the food side and they're trying to address it on the energy side."

But outside of the agencies themselves, there was a struggle to rationalize the timing of the move for a market that seemed to be shaking off speculative froth and returning to a normal trading range between $80 and $90 a barrel.

Schork said it "is only fitting that we extract some of this speculative exuberance out of the market," though others were left scratching their heads.

"That doesn't make any sense at all," said Darin Newsom, energy analyst at DTN, a commodities trading firm in Omaha, Neb. "This could have been done while prices were high and there was talk but no evidence of a tight global supply situation."

When gasoline prices soared to $4 a gallon economists had expected demand destruction to take place and consumers to pull back, naturally driving prices lower.

But the economy faces a number of other ills besides gas and food inflation.

Unemployment remains high despite nearly $1 billion in government stimulus spending that was supposed to take the rate well below 8 percent. Instead, it stands at 9.1 percent and has been trending higher, at least as indicated by weekly jobless claims figures.

Housing also remains mired in double-dip territory in terms of pricing, and food costs continue to soar.

As all that has been happening, the Federal Reserve is just days away from ending the second leg of its quantitative easing program—QE2, in market jargon—and is unlikely at present to intervene further while inflation remains a worry.

That helped drive talk that the oil move was an act of central bank-type intervention by another means.

"We're running out of tools," said Kurt Karl, chief US economist at Swiss Re in New York. "We have interest rates at zero, we have limited fiscal maneuverability and the oil price definitely has made a real dent in consumer spending over the first half of the year. So here's something that addresses that specific issue.

"But the timing is a bit odd. I would have done it when we had the run-up rather than the down slide. It would be almost self-defeating at this point. All OPEC (the Organization for Petroleum Exporting Countries) would have to do is pull back on supply in retaliation. Then we have global prices rising again. It doesn't make a lot of sense."

Markets weren't pleased, either.

On Wall Street, the major averages tumbled nearly 2 percent in morning trading, with the Dow industrials losing more than 200 points and the Standard & Poor's 500 just a few points away from going negative on the year.

The entire commodities spectrum tumbled, with both Brent crude [LCOCV1 107.35 -6.86 (-6.01%) ] and West Texas Intermediate [CLCV1 90.75 -4.66 (-4.88%) ] oil down more than 5 percent apiece and metals and grains sliding as well. Among stocks, airlines, which benefit from lower fuel prices, were one of the few gainers. Bonds, of course, did well also, with the yield on the 10-year note threatening to break below 2.90 percent on a safe-haven bid from jittery investors.

At the same time, there were questions over whether the oil move would even reach its long-term goal of alleviating pressure on the consumer. When speculators and demand return to the market, it could pressure prices if oil reserves are depleted.

"This is a desperation move that is at best only very, very temporary, very ephemeral," said Michael Pento, senior economist at Euro Pacific Capital in New York. "Prices are going to go higher than they would have been if they had never done this to begin with. Manipulation is alive and well not only on Wall Street but also in Washington."

© 2011 CNBC.com

oldandslow
06-23-2011, 10:45 AM
i agree with Pete's post and analysis from CNBC. While driving down costs in the short term (perhaps they really are afraid of inflation), this is going to cause prices to boomarang even higher. Further, eventually, we have to refill those reserves.

Hydrae
06-23-2011, 11:00 AM
We are not at war with Libya, we are just bombing the hell out of them.

We do not get our oil from Libya so this action has no direct affect on our oil supplies. But we are going to release as much oil from our reserves as the entire rest of the world is releasing. In what reality does this make sense?

alpha_omega
06-23-2011, 11:34 AM
This article says that speculators are the target...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43510170/ns/business-going_green/

petegz28
06-23-2011, 11:45 AM
This article says that speculators are the target...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43510170/ns/business-going_green/

Here's an idea, cut some of the job inhibiting regulations, lower corporate taxes, quit printing money left and right and actually create some ****ing jobs.

Then the speculators are a moot point.


This release of oil is nothing more than a cheap political stunt aimed at preying on the ignornant. 30 mil barrels ain't shit for one. Secondly it is coming at the wrong time. This is all just to play to the people who don't know any better so they will say "Obama released oil to help us" while they have no clue of what that even means.

HonestChieffan
06-23-2011, 12:10 PM
pure unadulterated bullshit

Saul Good
06-23-2011, 12:41 PM
If I were the cynical type, I would guess that they chose to do this after the prices started falling so that they could try to claim credit for the full price drop.

If gas prices would have dropped by $0.40, and this would drop them by $0.05, Obama will point to a drop of $0.45 and pat himself on the back for causing it.

Iowanian
06-23-2011, 01:05 PM
This, coupled with the Afganistan troop reduction announcement are absolutely related to the pending election cycle.

petegz28
06-23-2011, 02:06 PM
This, coupled with the Afganistan troop reduction announcement are absolutely related to the pending election cycle.

Winner! Winner! Chicken dinner!

Stewie
06-23-2011, 03:27 PM
It cracks me up that it's the "speculators." Speculation is a zero-sum game; the government just picked a side that suits their need. Glad to see, once again, our benevolent leaders will always interfere in "free" markets at their behest.

As for OPEC not agreeing to increase output it appears more and more likely that Saudi Arabia cannot increase their supply, but used a change in discounts to twist more money out of the system. No one really knows about the Saudi's capability because they don't report anything and haven't for years.

It also makes me wonder who was on the lower price side of the bet. Hmmmm?

Iowanian
06-24-2011, 07:35 AM
If this were anything more than a short term political move to distract the peasants with something shiny, Hoperah would be clearing the way for more drilling and processing of our own oil, shale and oil sand instead of shackling it.

Saul Good
06-24-2011, 10:21 AM
Yahoo! Wasted no time doing exactly whay I said would happen. Headline today: "Why gas prices will likely drop further; President Obama's decision to open the strategic petroleum reserve could offer a jolt to the economy".

Donger
06-24-2011, 10:57 AM
Yahoo! Wasted no time doing exactly whay I said would happen. Headline today: "Why gas prices will likely drop further; President Obama's decision to open the strategic petroleum reserve could offer a jolt to the economy".

Boy, talk about a slight exaggeration.

petegz28
06-24-2011, 10:59 AM
If this were anything more than a short term political move to distract the peasants with something shiny, Hoperah would be clearing the way for more drilling and processing of our own oil, shale and oil sand instead of shackling it.

Scotty's on fire!!! :thumb:

KC native
06-24-2011, 11:06 AM
It cracks me up that it's the "speculators." Speculation is a zero-sum game; the government just picked a side that suits their need. Glad to see, once again, our benevolent leaders will always interfere in "free" markets at their behest.

As for OPEC not agreeing to increase output it appears more and more likely that Saudi Arabia cannot increase their supply, but used a change in discounts to twist more money out of the system. No one really knows about the Saudi's capability because they don't report anything and haven't for years.

It also makes me wonder who was on the lower price side of the bet. Hmmmm?

JFC, just STFU already. Speculation isn't a zero sum game. When the futures market can be easily gamed by big trading desks just because of their size (which lets them gun stops, push trades to find where others are, and flood the quote system in efforts to see trade books), then it isn't a free market. Markets have a natural upward bias. Throw in 0% money, a lack of meaningful regulation, and greed and we get commodities whose price is different in the futures market than it should be.

KC native
06-24-2011, 11:07 AM
If this were anything more than a short term political move to distract the peasants with something shiny, Hoperah would be clearing the way for more drilling and processing of our own oil, shale and oil sand instead of shackling it.

You do realize that opening up our own reserves would have no impact on the price of oil right?

Of course you don't, you're a penis obsessed little pussy from iowa.

Donger
06-24-2011, 11:16 AM
You do realize that opening up our own reserves would have no impact on the price of oil right?

Of course you don't, you're a penis obsessed little pussy from iowa.

You have no idea what you are talking about, clearly.

KC native
06-24-2011, 11:19 AM
You have no idea about what you are talking about, clearly.

We don't have enough oil to push the price down. Color me not surprised that you're trying to play games here instead of acknowledging what just about everyone other than RWNJ's recognizes.

Donger
06-24-2011, 11:30 AM
We don't have enough oil to push the price down. Color me not surprised that you're trying to play games here instead of acknowledging what just about everyone other than RWNJ's recognizes.

I'm not playing games, amigo. You obviously are aware of the facts.

The release from us and others of just 60 million barrels of crude pushed the price down $5 barrel. Are you aware of how much proven reserves we have, let alone what the estimates are for our other reserves?

go bowe
06-24-2011, 12:09 PM
I'm not playing games, amigo. You obviously are aware of the facts.

The release from us and others of just 60 million barrels of crude pushed the price down $5 barrel. Are you aware of how much proven reserves we have, let alone what the estimates are for our other reserves?

how much proven reserves have we got?

i've always seen claims that if we drilled everything we have all at once, it wouldn't last very long given our level of consumption of oil...

we could reduce our dependence on foreign oil somewhat, but from what i've read, there's no chance that drilling alone could solve the problem...

sort of like tax increases and spending cuts are both necessary to balance the budget, which would at least keep the debt from growing...

Donger
06-24-2011, 12:10 PM
how much proven reserves have we got?

i've always seen claims that if we drilled everything we have all at once, it wouldn't last very long given our level of consumption of oil...

we could reduce our dependence on foreign oil somewhat, but from what i've read, there's no chance that drilling alone could solve the problem...

sort of like tax increases and spending cuts together are necessary to balance the budget, which would at least keep the debt from growing...

Proven reserves are 21 billion barrels, if memory serves. Estimated recoverable is something like 125 billion barrels.

go bowe
06-24-2011, 12:15 PM
Proven reserves are 21 billion barrels, if memory serves. Estimated recoverable is something like 125 billion barrels.

if all 21 billion barrels were being drilled and pumped out at the current rate of production extrapolated for the increased supply, how many years would those proven reserves last at our current level of consumption?

Donger
06-24-2011, 12:17 PM
if all 21 billion barrels were being drilled and pumped out at the current rate of production extrapolated for the increased supply, how many years would those proven reserves last at our current level of consumption?

That oil alone (with no imports) would give us about three years of consumption at present usage.

go bowe
06-24-2011, 12:24 PM
That oil alone (with no imports) would give us about three years of consumption at present usage.
now that sounds more like what the doomsayers have been saying...

three years and then back to dependence on foreign oil (only this time we would have to import all of our oil)?

doesn't sound like much of a solution to me...

we need alternative forms of energy and we need them now...

Donger
06-24-2011, 12:30 PM
now that sounds more like what the doomsayers have been saying...

three years and then back to dependence on foreign oil (only this time we would have to import all of our oil)?

doesn't sound like much of a solution to me...

we need alternative forms of energy and we need them now...

I was taking issue with KCNative's assertion that us utilizing our reserves "would have no impact on the price of oil right." That is an amazingly ignorant and incorrect thing to state.

I looked up the estimated reserves. It's 134 billion barrels. That's right around 18 years. I'm not saying it's a perfect solution, go bowe, but it's just, plain stupid for us not to use it.

KC native
06-24-2011, 12:39 PM
I was taking issue with KCNative's assertion that us utilizing our reserves "would have no impact on the price of oil right." That is an amazingly ignorant and incorrect thing to state.

I looked up the estimated reserves. It's 134 billion barrels. That's right around 18 years. I'm not saying it's a perfect solution, go bowe, but it's just, plain stupid for us not to use it.

At what prices do most of those reserves become viable? Oil sands are only economical when the price of oil is above $80 (IIRC).

Just because we have oil doesn't mean it will impact prices. Also, considering start up times, the oil as it comes out would be a trickle. Again, it would do nothing for oil's prices.

Also, it is incredibly short sighted and a huge strategic error to use up our oil reserves before an alternative is developed.

go bowe
06-24-2011, 12:39 PM
I was taking issue with KCNative's assertion that us utilizing our reserves "would have no impact on the price of oil right." That is an amazingly ignorant and incorrect thing to state.

I looked up the estimated reserves. It's 134 billion barrels. That's right around 18 years. I'm not saying it's a perfect solution, go bowe, but it's just, plain stupid for us not to use it.
hell, even when i'm high as fuck i can still see that releasing spr has in fact driven down the price, as any news source can tell you...

kcnative seems to have been wrong on this one...

as far as the drilling issue goes, i agree with you that increased production should be pursued but i would still have reservations about drilling in some areas, like anwr...

offshore drilling should be increased, but only with strict safety inspections to prevent totally preventable accidents like the bp spill...

still, i don't believe we've put nearly enough emphasis (read taxpayer investment) on r&d for alternative energy sources, which is critical to bringing the costs down to the point that they can compete with oil...

KC native
06-24-2011, 12:41 PM
hell, even when i'm high as fuck i can still see that releasing spr has in fact driven down the price, as any news source can tell you...

kcnative seems to have been wrong on this one...

as far as the drilling issue goes, i agree with you that increased production should be pursued but i would still have reservations about drilling in some areas, like anwr...

offshore drilling should be increased, but only with strict safety inspections to prevent totally preventable accidents like the bp spill...

still, i don't believe we've put nearly enough emphasis (read taxpayer investment) on r&d for alternative energy sources, which is critical to bringing the costs down to the point that they can compete with oil...

The market is a fickle thing. Also, there are several structural issues with the futures market that distorts pricing of commodities. Do you really think that the drop in the barrel amount that is going to be released alters supply and demand in any meaningful way?

Donger
06-24-2011, 12:43 PM
At what prices do most of those reserves become viable? Oil sands are only economical when the price of oil is above $80 (IIRC).

Just because we have oil doesn't mean it will impact prices. Also, considering start up times, the oil as it comes out would be a trickle. Again, it would do nothing for oil's prices.

Also, it is incredibly short sighted and a huge strategic error to use up our oil reserves before an alternative is developed.

Those reserve numbers don't include oil sands, amigo.

No, just having it doesn't mean very much. Producing it does. Even us announcing that we (the largest consumer of crude) were going to go after our reserves with vigor would have a large impact on pricing, let alone when crude would start flowing into the market. So, again, your re-stated assertion is wrong, again.

Donger
06-24-2011, 12:46 PM
The market is a fickle thing. Also, there are several structural issues with the futures market that distorts pricing of commodities. Do you really think that the drop in the barrel amount that is going to be released alters supply and demand in any meaningful way?

Look, if you really think that us saying, "We are going to tap our reserves and import 50% less crude per year" (just an example, make it 5%) wouldn't have a massive influence on crude oil pricing (let alone nothing like you assert), you're nuts. And wrong.

KC native
06-24-2011, 12:49 PM
Those reserve numbers don't include oil sands, amigo.

No, just having it doesn't mean very much. Producing it does. Even us announcing that we (the largest consumer of crude) were going to go after our reserves with vigor would have a large impact on pricing, let alone when crude would start flowing into the market. So, again, your re-stated assertion is wrong, again.

And the dodo may come back from extinction.

ROFL at "announcing that we are going to go after our reserves" would alter the oil market in any significant fashion.

We don't have enough oil nor the ability to bring it to market fast enough to make a dent in our usage numbers in a short enough time frame to where it would alter supply and demand in a significant fashion.

KC native
06-24-2011, 12:50 PM
Look, if you really think that us saying, "We are going to tap our reserves and import 50% less crude per year" (just an example, make it 5%) wouldn't have a massive influence on crude oil pricing (let alone nothing like you assert), you're nuts. And wrong.

And what magic are you going to use to drop imports 50% per year? Enlighten us as to how we get that much oil out of the ground fast enough to do that.

Donger
06-24-2011, 12:52 PM
And the dodo may come back from extinction.

ROFL at "announcing that we are going to go after our reserves" would alter the oil market in any significant fashion.

We don't have enough oil nor the ability to bring it to market fast enough to make a dent in our usage numbers in a short enough time frame to where it would alter supply and demand in a significant fashion.

Okay, I think I'll go and discuss quantum theory with my dog now.

Donger
06-24-2011, 12:57 PM
And what magic are you going to use to drop imports 50% per year? Enlighten us as to how we get that much oil out of the ground fast enough to do that.

I just gave you the numbers, amigo. Feel free to use them.

It's okay; you were just wrong. I don't think anyone was under the impression that you were infallible. I certainly wasn't.

The Mad Crapper
06-24-2011, 01:05 PM
Okay, I think I'll go and discuss quantum theory with my dog now.

LMAO

I love it when KC Naive is here. Especially since Flunkie Disappeared.

Otter
06-24-2011, 01:10 PM
Okay, I think I'll go and discuss quantum theory with my dog now.

The scariest kind of stupid is people who don't know their stupid but think their smart.

mlyonsd
06-24-2011, 01:11 PM
The scariest kind of stupid is people who don't know they're stupid but think they're smart.:thumb:

mlyonsd
06-24-2011, 01:11 PM
The scariest kind of stupid is people who don't know they're stupid but think they're smart.:LOL: LOL, you beat me to it. Couldn't help myself.

Otter
06-24-2011, 01:12 PM
:LOL: LOL, you beat me to it.

Hehe, I just saw that and fixed it because of the context of the post. :p

Iowanian
06-24-2011, 01:21 PM
You do realize that opening up our own reserves would have no impact on the price of oil right?

Of course you don't, you're a penis obsessed little pussy from iowa.


Hey poncho, if you noticed, my comments have been under the premise that this was a political move and of little value.


Of course you didn't know that, because you're the product of a donkey show cleanup towel used to wipe a tranny's ass. I'd poop on your face.

petegz28
06-24-2011, 01:37 PM
So we won't drill for our own oil...but we will take the oil WE bought for reserves and disperse it into the population to help ease the price.....

Something just screams "illogical" with that picture.

petegz28
06-24-2011, 01:39 PM
FTR, this little stunt will do little for oil prices. All it did was provide a brief spook in the market and traders (speculators) jumped on the well forseen emoitional reaction and went short for a couple. It won't last because there is nothing significant to this at all.

That being said, if more oil = lower prices then WTF are we not drilling more for oil???

I should correct myself and say the price of oil was already declining and this just add a reason for traders to exploit a shorting opportunity.

BucEyedPea
06-24-2011, 01:45 PM
Bernanke, Geitner and Soros had to cover their shorts.

Douse them with some of it, toss in the UN and some socialist flag as well. Then light a match.

MOhillbilly
06-24-2011, 01:47 PM
**** this government.

The Mad Crapper
06-24-2011, 01:52 PM
**** this government.

Yup.

KC native
06-24-2011, 02:55 PM
I just gave you the numbers, amigo. Feel free to use them.

It's okay; you were just wrong. I don't think anyone was under the impression that you were infallible. I certainly wasn't.

No, you're being intentionally obtuse again. Saying we are going to reduce imports by 50% and actually being able to do that are two different things. I hate to bring reality to your little world, but if you think we are even remotely close to being able to ramp up production fast enough to impact prices without OPEC ramping down production to keep prices up, then I have a bridge we should talk about.

KC native
06-24-2011, 02:56 PM
FTR, this little stunt will do little for oil prices. All it did was provide a brief spook in the market and traders (speculators) jumped on the well forseen emoitional reaction and went short for a couple. It won't last because there is nothing significant to this at all.

That being said, if more oil = lower prices then WTF are we not drilling more for oil???

I should correct myself and say the price of oil was already declining and this just add a reason for traders to exploit a shorting opportunity.

No, pete, short term noise in the market means that we can materially impact the price of oil. jeez /sarcasm

Iowanian
06-24-2011, 02:57 PM
Reality to kcnaive is a small herd of orange people from New Jersey getting drunk and acting half of their age.

Donger
06-24-2011, 03:21 PM
No, you're being intentionally obtuse again. Saying we are going to reduce imports by 50% and actually being able to do that are two different things. I hate to bring reality to your little world, but if you think we are even remotely close to being able to ramp up production fast enough to impact prices without OPEC ramping down production to keep prices up, then I have a bridge we should talk about.

I'm well-aware that we aren't tapping our reserves. That's the point, you twit.

You claimed that "opening up our own reserves would have no impact on the price of oil." That is just plain wrong. Just the news of the release from our SPR dropped the price of crude by $5/barrel. Again, just the news of it. None has actually hit the market yet, so there goes your entire premise, amigo.

Now, imagine if we said that we are actually going to start production from our reserves. Reserves which have the capacity to supply us with all the crude we need for 18 years.

Get it yet?

HonestChieffan
06-24-2011, 03:29 PM
Reality to kcnaive is a small herd of orange people from New Jersey getting drunk and acting half of their age.

Give him a break, he does say stupid shit with a great deal of conviction.

The Mad Crapper
06-24-2011, 03:39 PM
No, you're being intentionally obtuse again. Saying we are going to reduce imports by 50% and actually being able to do that are two different things. I hate to bring reality to your little world, but if you think we are even remotely close to being able to ramp up production fast enough to impact prices without OPEC ramping down production to keep prices up, then I have a bridge we should talk about.

LMAO

What an asshole.