Macron is not dumb. This is BAD!

[Kukulkan]

.
This is a pretty fair article that gives more details on the leasing situation, and exposes why simplistic claims such as, “Biden did it!!” do not represent a balanced analysis.

Thank you, I am going to give this a thorough read.

[Vēritās]

I don't know. I would guess it is greater than zero and less than 100. And what difference does that make? We are not comparable to OPEC when it comes to ramping up and ramping down. You can see this in the graphs in the last release of data. https://www.eia.gov/petroleum/wells/ This will be updated in December.

You've got it backwards. The shortage isn't from Saudi Arabia or the UAE and we can ramp up our oil production but oil executives have already stated that they're not going to because they're enjoying record profits for their share holders.

And why do people keep saying we "beg" for more oil only when President is a Democrat? It's like negotiations happen with Republicans and Democrats just "beg."


In terms of "not playing along" it isn't the Saudis or the UAE, both of which have increased production gradually. Compare that to what we do here domestically and you can see the problems are with US oil companies.

saudi.jpg (72.15 KiB) Viewed 353 times

uae.jpg (75.59 KiB) Viewed 353 times

usa.jpg (70.47 KiB) Viewed 353 times

[Res Ipsa]

That is hysterical. How about that EO 14008?

80 percent of leases were eliminated and the rest have already been produced. And it is onshore only. Yeah. that's the whole point. Whoever was responsible for this announcement does not want anything produced.

Here is the Executive Order in question. https://www.federalregister.gov/documen ... and-abroad

Can you quote the part that "eliminated leases."

[Binger]

Find the one with this, which ties to the one you linked.

(b) In 2015, following an exhaustive review, the Department of State and the President determined that approving the proposed Keystone XL pipeline would not serve the U.S. national interest. That analysis, in addition to concluding that the significance of the proposed pipeline for our energy security and economy is limited, stressed that the United States must prioritize the development of a clean energy economy, which will in turn create good jobs. The analysis further concluded that approval of the proposed pipeline would undermine U.S. climate leadership by undercutting the credibility and influence of the United States in urging other countries to take ambitious climate action.

[Vēritās]

Can we please dispense with this silly "Biden won't let more oil be pumped" explanation.

Texas Survey Shows Why Oil Producers Aren’t Drilling More

Oil and gas executives don’t have much love for President Biden, but he’s not the main reason they’re holding off on drilling new wells.

The latest quarterly survey put out by the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas shows that most executives are reticent about ramping up drilling because of pressure from investors and lenders, not from government regulations.

U.S. producers reluctant to drill more oil, despite sky-high gas prices

oilwlllstreet.jpg (147.5 KiB) Viewed 342 times

[canpakes]

Find the one with this, which ties to the one you linked.

(b) In 2015, following an exhaustive review, the Department of State and the President determined that approving the proposed Keystone XL pipeline would not serve the U.S. national interest. That analysis, in addition to concluding that the significance of the proposed pipeline for our energy security and economy is limited, stressed that the United States must prioritize the development of a clean energy economy, which will in turn create good jobs. The analysis further concluded that approval of the proposed pipeline would undermine U.S. climate leadership by undercutting the credibility and influence of the United States in urging other countries to take ambitious climate action.

Seriously? Lol.

Apart from the fact that the particular leg of the Keystome Pileline system that you’re referring to was barely under construction in the States with many years to go until even being close to completion, there’s this inconvenient bit of information to consider -

the pipeline promised to dramatically increase capacity to process the 168 billion barrels of crude oil locked up under Canada’s boreal forest. It was expected to transport 830,000 barrels of Alberta tar sands oil per day to refineries on the Gulf Coast of Texas. From the refineries, the oil would be sent chiefly overseas—not to gasoline pumps in the United States.

[Res Ipsa]

Find the one with this, which ties to the one you linked.

(b) In 2015, following an exhaustive review, the Department of State and the President determined that approving the proposed Keystone XL pipeline would not serve the U.S. national interest. That analysis, in addition to concluding that the significance of the proposed pipeline for our energy security and economy is limited, stressed that the United States must prioritize the development of a clean energy economy, which will in turn create good jobs. The analysis further concluded that approval of the proposed pipeline would undermine U.S. climate leadership by undercutting the credibility and influence of the United States in urging other countries to take ambitious climate action.

Nope. You claimed it. You find it.

[Binger]

Can we please dispense with this silly "Biden won't let more oil be pumped" explanation.

Oil and gas executives don’t have much love for President Biden, but he’s not the main reason they’re holding off on drilling new wells.

The latest quarterly survey put out by the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas shows that most executives are reticent about ramping up drilling because of pressure from investors and lenders, not from government regulations.

Thanks Kevin. This is the most beautiful and wonderful part of being a liberal. Nobody said, "Biden won't let more oil be pumped." It makes us feel so righteous and wonderful to say that this silly notion can be dispensed because of course it can be dispensed because nobody said it. So we are wonderful and right. I will say it with you. "Me and Kevin think that we can dispense with this silly notion that "Biden won't let more oil be pumped."

Another thing that is great about you and me being liberals is that we can rely on a survey that someone did instead of the facts if a survey is what we like. And even better, if we can twist the survey into something we like, we like that. For example, if the survey says that executives at oil producers are not ramping up production because of "investor pressure to maintain capital discipline" which was the choice in the survey, but we can add "not from government regulations" even though that answer represents 6% of the responses, and that makes us feel good, then that is great. We feel great. If we pretend that the answer that 6% of the executives gave represents 6% of production, should we be concerned about that as liberals? I mean, we don't really want to acknowledge that but just wondering.

So, let's get back to what Biden did do. Did he sign an executive order to shut down a working pipeline? Nope. He didn't do that. And as a liberal, I don't want to get busted worshiping a straw man, so I don't want to say that the executive order closed a working pipeline. Did Joe Biden sign an executive order to stop production? Nope, as a liberal I don't want to say that Joe did that, because I want to tell the truth. What did Joe Biden do? He signed an executive order to stop construction on the Keystone Pipeline. And this did what, Kevin? It stopped a project that required capital, including capital that had already been committed. And investors don't like capital to be wasted and neither do executives. Joe Biden was not lying. And nobody seems to think he was joking either.

It may be the case that prices at the pump would be this high if Biden had not signed the executive orders that he signed. But he did sign them. It may be the case that production would be exactly where it is today without those orders. But, we still have those orders. Executives are reasonable to hold back on ANY capital projects that are on the margin if their duty to investors or to employees or to their own bonus/pocket are best served by not risking capital on a project that Biden may not like one day. As liberals, we want that because batteries don't require refined gasoline from a pump at a convenience store.

[Vēritās]

Can we please dispense with this silly "Biden won't let more oil be pumped" explanation.

Thanks Kevin. This is the most beautiful and wonderful part of being a liberal. Nobody said, "Biden won't let more oil be pumped." It makes us feel so righteous and wonderful to say that this silly notion can be dispensed because of course it can be dispensed because nobody said it. So we are wonderful and right. I will say it with you. "Me and Kevin think that we can dispense with this silly notion that "Biden won't let more oil be pumped."

Another thing that is great about you and me being liberals is that we can rely on a survey that someone did instead of the facts if a survey is what we like. And even better, if we can twist the survey into something we like, we like that. For example, if the survey says that executives at oil producers are not ramping up production because of "investor pressure to maintain capital discipline" which was the choice in the survey, but we can add "not from government regulations" even though that answer represents 6% of the responses, and that makes us feel good, then that is great. We feel great. If we pretend that the answer that 6% of the executives gave represents 6% of production, should we be concerned about that as liberals? I mean, we don't really want to acknowledge that but just wondering.

So, let's get back to what Biden did do. Did he sign an executive order to shut down a working pipeline? Nope. He didn't do that. And as a liberal, I don't want to get busted worshiping a straw man, so I don't want to say that the executive order closed a working pipeline. Did Joe Biden sign an executive order to stop production? Nope, as a liberal I don't want to say that Joe did that, because I want to tell the truth. What did Joe Biden do? He signed an executive order to stop construction on the Keystone Pipeline. And this did what, Kevin? It stopped a project that required capital, including capital that had already been committed. And investors don't like capital to be wasted and neither do executives. Joe Biden was not lying. And nobody seems to think he was joking either.

It may be the case that prices at the pump would be this high if Biden had not signed the executive orders that he signed. But he did sign them. It may be the case that production would be exactly where it is today without those orders. But, we still have those orders. Executives are reasonable to hold back on ANY capital projects that are on the margin if their duty to investors or to employees or to their own bonus/pocket are best served by not risking capital on a project that Biden may not like one day. As liberals, we want that because batteries don't require refined gasoline from a pump at a convenience store.

When idiots like you and the chorus at FOX News are constantly blaming Biden for lack of production, you're effectively saying what I just said you're saying. But please, bore us with another three paragraphs that misses the point and tries a "gotcha" on the fact that this wasn't an exact quote from you.

[Vēritās]

Find the one with this, which ties to the one you linked.

Nope. You claimed it. You find it.

You know that's not how Binger rolls.