2012 Gas Price surge is likely over

Didn't read through all the pages but most of us know it's only going to go back up, especially when summer is only a few months away.

 

Your graph proves you wrong as the slow steady rise in US oil imports during Nixon years demonstrates.

Not lobbying for price controls just pointing that the graph you linked to shows opposite of what you imagined.

Nixon price controls US imports rise slowly. Carter decontrols, imports increase. Exact opposite of what CATO/Reagan claimed as was true with everything CATO//Reagan. They managed to get EVERYTHING wrong as history and data have demonstrated.

FYI...the big drop in 1980 was due very deep recession in 1980-81 plus Alaska oil coming online in '77 and peaking in 1989.

Steady rise in US oil imports due to increasing US consumption and steadily decreasing US oil fields, an inexorable rise which is at the root of US economic problems of deficit/debt from oil based military spending, oil trade deficits, energy inefficiency of 50% in US products and economy.

So back to reality of getting US energy efficiency to world standards, undoing 30 years of CATO/Reaganomics energy policy that has done so much damage to US.

Using European examples and current technology (Prius for example) US can eliminate oil imports ($500B per year), eliminate military costs of oil ($500B per year) and cut greenhouse gases by 50% in 10 years.

Back to the future.

 

I suspect we are seeing a permanent increase in price that will not go down, Now that we are exporting more gasoline than importing - our internationals are feeding a hugely growing world market as China and India come on line and bid the price up. I would get used to it being higher than in the past. On top of that there will soon be factored in the real costs of oil with its CO2 pollution as companies are forced to pay to strip that stuff out of the atmosphere that was put there in the past. Imagine a world with no chimneys or smokestacks , where all the carbon pumped or dug out must be contained at its use site. We will end up loving nuclear electricity for our cars.

 

Carter was president in 1980, that was his lowest year of imports during his term. Carter average imports were much higher than Regan. He started removing the pricing regulations in 1979, not early enough to stop the shortages but enough to show progress in 1980.

Carter and Nixon had price controls reducing domestic production, favoring imported oil and encouraging oil use. The increased imports are the fastest in american history. They are not slow. Look at the slope. This was the policy that caused oil shortages. There has not been a oil shortage in the US since Regan removed this dangerous policy. Companies were able to get oil, abait expensive oil, and refined product once this government control was relaxed.

huh. look at the graph. It is about oil use. Not about military spending. Energy per capita decreased under Regan and increased under Nixon. Nixon kept oil prices low through government control. Carter continued this inept policy, but started deregulating in 1979. This deregulation was part of the drop in 1980. Regan finished the job. You are just making up your own facts not reading any figures.

I don't get this. The big damage was done in the 70s. Europe has a bankrupt economy and uses twice as much energy per capita as china. The US uses too much energy. The way we got in trouble were government control policies. It is clear to anyone that looks. Obviously you can not read a graph. A flat oil tax would be the oposite of what nixon did, and might reduce consumption. The european percentage tax seems like a failure to me, that is a huge drag on their economy. A sure loser.

The european model is a poor one. The us can eliminate the military without doing anything with oil which is the libertarian position. This position is the opposite of your favored carter doctrine, but was in the cato piece. Your dogma is even against your rhetoric. You have straw man arguments. The government in the 70s encouraged more imported oil use by price controls, its as simple as that. Please understand I am not holding up regan as a good example, but look at the failed carter and nixon policies as bad examples. We have long haul trucking that can not be done by prius. How can you say switching to prii will reduce greenhouse gasses more than the amount of cars in use.

 

Yes due to two factors.

1. 1980-83 Recession reduced demand.
2. Alaska oil was coming on line, peaked in 1989.

As many predicted once Alaska oil ran out, the trend of increased US imports would rise as there is not enough oil in US/Alaska for US levels of consumption which are 50% higher per capita and per GDP dollar than Europe.

As Alaska oil ran out, economy recovered oil imports continued their inexorable rise with huge costs to the US in oil trade deficits and military spending to secure the Middle East oil fields.

Those problems, rooted in Reagan/CATO pro-Saudi, pro-oil industry policies, continue today largely responsible for the $14T in US debt ($907B pre-Reagan), 20 years of US oil wars, $500B per year oil trade deficits, $1.3T per year military spending.

By actual measures, all the damage to US economy began with Reagan to Bush II with a brief respite of balanced budgets and reduction in Debt/GDP under Clinton.

US/Debt GDP ration 1980 33%.
US/Debt GDP ratio 1992 65%
US/Debt GDP ratio 2008 72%

US Debt 1980 $907B
US Debt 1992 $4.1T
US Debt 2008 $9.T

Oil price controls ended in 1979. US troubles began in 1980 to current terrible state of US being 50% less energy efficient than Europe. This due the lack of smart regulations and the "greed is good" unregulated craziness of Reagonomics.

Smart energy regulation has resulted in Europe being 50% more energy efficient than the US. Germany alternative energy industry is booming due to government policies. Japan makes very efficient cars. Smart government policy in Europe and Japan is why you drive a Prius and not a GM or Ford vehicle.

The numbers prove you wrong.

 

Can you read a graph. Reread those other ones. Read this one again. OIl consumption was higher in nominal and per capita terms during carter than each of the reagan terms.
http://www1.eere.energy.gov/vehiclesandfuels/facts/favorites/fcvt_fotw191.html
There were no oil shortages after regan removed the price controls. Just in case you still have your head stuck so far in the sand you will notice the prices, and anouther source telling you nixon's controls caused the shortages.

InflationData: Historical Oil Prices Chart

Somehow the charts don't follow your fairy tale.
Oil consumption only rose as high as the carter years during clinton. There were 12 years of lower consumption.

Although anti market measures by nixon and Carter created higher demand and shortages, they punished the american people not the oil companies. A market driven approach to lower demand would have been to remove all price controls, remove all subsidies, and have a slowly rising oil tax. The Nixon policies resulted in higher imports, higher demand and shortages. You can see the numbers follow the theory.

I don't understand are you trying for a political thread. There were no oil shortages after the price controls were lifted. The shortages were caused by these bad policies. Stop your rant and read the g.d. figures. They say the opposite of your claims.

This is what pbs said about the price controls -
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/commandingheights/shared/minitextlo/ess_nixongold.html

I would like to end the Carter doctrine too. Read that from the previous link, but that isn't what caused the shortages or eliminated them.

 

We aren't. US is huge oil importer.

 

Yes. It seems very clear.

See above graphs for US oil imports.

Key is fixing the problem. US is 50% less energy efficient so by using European technology and regulatory policies US can be as successful and cut US energy and oil use by 50%.

 

That is the discredited CATO Institute/Reaganomics theory. 20 years of oil wars have certainly proved that wrong.

As far as the natural gas which US also imports, here's a PriusChat link to issues involved in natural gas extraction.

http://priuschat.com/forums/environmental-discussion/107324-green-news-more-v3-15-a.html

Specifically this link.

 

Both are true. The U.S. is a huge importer of crude petroleum, but a net exporter of refined petroleum products.

Of course, the former is much greater than the later.

 

It's a bogus stat since US doesn't import or export much gasoline in the first place and the stat was a weekly blip.

Total US oil imports week of April 6, 2012 10,350.000 barrels
Total US gas imports week of April 6, 2012 705,000 barrels
Total US gas exports week of April 6, 2012 380,000 barrels.

Whoopsie the "export boom" is over. Back to reality now.

 

You counted only the motor gasoline, and excluded all the other refined products.

Total products imports week of April 6, 2012 1,828,000 barrels
Total products exports week of April 6, 2012 2,696,000 barrels
Net products exports week of April 6, 2012 868,000 barrels

This 'single week blip' started the week of June 18-24, 2011, hasn't skipped a week since, and doesn't appear close to abating.

 

Hmmm. Wonder why?

Already over for gasoline as you saw. The 9 month anomaly will go away as US economy pulls out of the Reaganomics Great Recession. We'll soon be back to the oil industry lament of "not enough refineries" and gasoline shortages and price spikes. Typically the oil industry shuts the refineries down for "maintenance" as demand picks up in the summer. That helps get the price up.

Keep an eye on the prize...or is that Prius.

US is massive importer of oil due to US energy inefficiency. The cost for the US over the last 30 years has been devastating in terms of oil trade deficit, national security, military budget, pollution and unnecessary with US being 50% less energy efficient than Europe, Japan etc.

 

Sure the surge is over until summer when it will continue to surge.

 

Long live the surge.

 

Obviously you can not understand graphs. This graph shows debt adjusted for gdp. There isn't anything on oil on the graph. How in the world do you expect to understand how policies effect oil imports by reading a chart about debt.

The piece I posted was against the policy of keeping oil prices artificially low with price controls and against using the military for oil. I have given you exambles that agreed that nixon's price controls created increased opec imports, oil consumption, and shortages from the EPA and pbs also. You seem to have no grasp at all about economics or history.

Again, nixon imposed wage and price controls in 1971 to keep inflation low for the election. He kept price controls on oil and natural gas as lower gas prices were popular, but . The consequence was increased consumption and import from opec as well as shortages and gas lines. Carter started to remove oil price controls in 1979 but feared a spike in oil prices so only did so partially. We got the spike anyway and anouther less sever shortage. The price controls on oil were finally removed in 1981 and there was a price spike, followed by no more oil shortages. Pretty simple stuff, bad policy bad results. We can learn lessons from this failed policy.

I guess you think a link to links means you have proved some other kind of point.

 

No it shows Debt as a percentage of GDP, considered one of key benchmarks of economic health since either number by itself lacks perspective. $10,000 in debt is a lot if one makes $15,000 a year but not if one makes $150,000 a year. You had claimed "it went wrong in 70's" under Carter and the number demonstrated Reagan was worst thing to ever happen to US.

The failure of Reaganomics is starkly evident in the graph of US Debt/GDP ratio.

For the steady rise in oil imports and the resulting problems (deficits, debt, wars, pollution, trade deficits), see the second graph, again points to Reagan as the problem.

Much of the Reagaomics debt was due to military spending to prepare US for Middle East oil wars vs. spending the same money doing things like investing in battery technology (see A123 conversation) to eliminate the threat. Easily 50% of US military spending over the last 30 years was oil based, $10T of the current US debt can be traced back to US oil use and the threat it represents to US national security.

 

I drive one because the current administration is content to allow energy prices to rise to European levels. Apparently, they think this sound strategy in an election year.

 

So you drive a Prius to save money on gasoline?

 

umm. You might remember this discussion was about oil not debt. The nixon and carter policies of price control that caused the gas shortages. Carter even knew the policy was wrong, he just didn't have the balls to do the right thing and remove them and take the medicine.

You may want to continue your anti-Regan rant in freds house of politics. Regan has not been president for over 20 years and Clinton and Obama wisely have not added back the horrible price controls.

You also may not notice but debt as a percent of gdp was highest right after WW2 when oil consumption lower and imports were lower, so you have a definite fail in reasoning. Your second lapse is holding this debt idea as the result of per capita oil consuption. You might notice europe that you tout has defaulted on some countries debt already and their is fear of contagion. Debt is a problem in the US, but it is a crisis in Europe.

Again, no that isn't what the graph shows, and that is definitely not related to this discussion.

Read the figures. The big rise was in the 70s. The shortages were in the 70s. I do note that you have presented a graph with the 70s cut off, instead of mine with them included. I take it this was a mistake and not dishonesty to hide the pertinent data. It is sad that it is still a problem, but it is less of a problem than it was in the 70s. The reason I brought up the price controls is there are some idiots without a memory that forgot what they did.

Question do you think that Watergate was justified because it was great old president nixon and not Regan?

I advocate the cafe standards that bush and obama have enacted. It would have been better if these were raised during bush 41 or clinton, but they have been done. I also support the president in removing oil subsidies. A slowly rising flat not percentage oil tax would also help reduce demand, but these high prices may do the work without it. You seem to be stuck in the 70s and have learned nothing from history but hate.