5 ms·

no one here buys the 'putin price hike' excuse

by fibers 4y ago

rolobio 4y ago
I was blown away when the president claimed he "has never seen anything like Putin’s tax on both food and gas". When did Putin get the ability to raise taxes in the US??
- voidfunc 4y ago
  Bidens desperate to reframe the narrative that Dems fucked the economy before the midterms. I dont think this is going to work tho. Voters dont have enough understanding to see the cascade failures that have gotten us here over the last several years.
- bombcar 4y ago
  When America shuts down or reduces its own oil supply, those holding the rest of the world's supply get more leverage.
  - hunterb123 4y ago
    We reduced our oil production before the invasion. Gas prices were multiplying before the invasion. Putin did not force the reduction of our own supply. The current administration did. The invasion may have been the consequence of the reduction of our production and amplified the "price hikes", but it wasn't the cause of the "price hikes", the initial action of reducing production and relying on foreign imports was.
    - bombcar 4y ago
      Exactly. Russia has been a distraction to all this, and it was well in play before Ukraine kicked off.
    - hindsightbias 4y ago
      The administration did not cut production. Covid did. The oil industry is dragging their feet.
      - hunterb123 4y ago
        We were net exporters during covid under the last admin. This is the policy the current admin enacted that cut our production: https://www.csis.org/analysis/biden-makes-sweeping-changes-oil-and-gas-policy https://www.csis.org/analysis/biden-makes-sweeping-changes-o... Please point to something that supports your theory that "covid did it" and oil companies are "dragging their feet". - edit, at my post limit - @vel0city: Banning new leases two years ago hurt our production output. Banning new subscribers and preventing renewals would hurt your revenue, why would you think it wouldn't apply here? It seems you're trying to rationalize away the obvious change in policy and its effects because of some reason unknown to me. Would you support retracting this policy decision since in your mind it has little effect and in my mind it's the leading cause of our loss of net export status? @deeg: the article says offshore leases may not show declines for 10 years as the leases are longer, but onshore could "conceivably show up faster". Your point seems to be this policy hasn't hit us fully yet? Are you for it? How confident are you that it didn't cause the loss of our net export status?
        JaimeThompson 4y ago
        Here is one example. "Not Even at $200 a Barrel: Shale Giants Swear They Won’t Drill More" [1] https://energynow.com/2022/02/not-even-at-200-a-barrel-shale-giants-swear-they-wont-drill-more/ https://energynow.com/2022/02/not-even-at-200-a-barrel-shale...
        hunterb123 4y ago
        First, the title is not the quote, the quote was "Whether it’s $150 oil, $200 oil, or $100 oil, we’re not going to change our growth plans". Second, that has nothing to do with our production capacity, doesn't prove that "covid" caused us to drop our net export status, or that the industry is unwilling to fill production. It's one misconstrued quote from an exec. He was talking about not collapsing the price when we overproduced for a brief period during our time of net exporting. This is the REAL response from the oil & gas industry and it's concerning the federal lease bans: https://www.api.org/news-policy-and-issues/exploration-and-production/federal-leasing-and-development-ban-study https://www.api.org/news-policy-and-issues/exploration-and-p... When you're looking for the perspective of the oil & gas industry, API statements are a lot more reliable than an EnergyNow article. Now that I've addressed your article, would you like to address the administration policy decision I linked above? -- edit, at my post limit -- In short, this is the effect of the federal leasing ban: https://www.api.org/-/media/Files/Policy/Exploration/2020/federal-leasing-and-development-ban-one-pager.pdf https://www.api.org/-/media/Files/Policy/Exploration/2020/fe... -- edit2 -- @vel0city: the "if" was contingent on the federal ban on new leases, which happened... two years ago. We are seeing these predictions play out. Tech support using the covid excuse is annoying, but when government leaders use it to hide behind poor policies, it's dangerous.
    - hindsightbias 4y ago
      https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=48636 https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=48636 "At the beginning of 2021, 129 refineries were either operating or idle in the United States (excluding U.S. territories), down from 135 operable refineries listed at the beginning of 2020. The additional refinery closures in the 2021 Refinery Capacity Report largely reflect the impact of responses to COVID-19 on the U.S. refining sector." Claims below that leases reduced production is a canard. It takes years to develop a lease. In 3 or 4 years you could blame Biden, but unless Exxon produces by time machines it has nothing to do with production issues in 2021. Domestic oil producers are sitting on 1000's of leases.
      - hunterb123 4y ago
        That's refineries. We're talking about leases for drilling on federal land, which accounts for nearly 25% of US oil & gas production. Refineries are active and will be active as you need them when importing crude oil from other countries. The issue is the reliance and importing of crude oil in the first place. API estimation of impact by federal ban: https://www.api.org/-/media/Files/Policy/Exploration/2020/federal-leasing-and-development-ban-one-pager.pdf https://www.api.org/-/media/Files/Policy/Exploration/2020/fe... -- edit to reply to below (post limit) -- New leases have been banned for the past 2 years. Companies constantly need to lease land, leases expire, new land is needed. That's like shutting down new user registrations and pausing all subscriptions and saying there will be no revenue impact because people have paid you in the past. Those existing users can't resubscribe when their cycle runs out and new users can't enroll at all. How does that not impact production?
        hindsightbias 4y ago
        > 25% And still do, today. None of those leases has been closed. If you're making some claim that Biden shut down existing leases in production, please provide a citation. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/26/business/energy-environment/oil-us-europe-russia.html https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/26/business/energy-environme... "Executives at 141 oil companies surveyed by the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas in mid-March offered several reasons that they weren’t pumping more oil. They said they were short of workers and sand, which is used to fracture shale fields to coax oil out of rock. But the most salient reason — the one offered by 60 percent of respondents — was that investors don’t want companies to produce a lot more oil, fearing that it will hasten the end of high oil prices."
- kelnos 4y ago
  You do understand that he didn't mean "tax" literally, right?
  - Mountain_Skies 4y ago
    Yes, but it's unnecessary rhetoric that is distasteful enough when a political candidate uses it but downright disgusting when an office holder does it. He knows better and instead of being the leader of the country, he's playing political games (to be fair, that's pretty much par for the course for all of the political class). He didn't have to use that word, he chose to use that word, because he, or his speech writers, liked the connotation.
Ekaros 4y ago
Anyone honest can agree that most of the increase was return to normal. After a massive anomaly in the market. The sanctions on energy sector might be part of the blame, but most of increase was just return to normal. Just look at 2018 prices.
- californical 4y ago
  The years leading up to Covid were an extreme bull market — increasing at a rate that high again is not a return to “normal”, it’s a return to a historically very high growth rate

no one here buys the 'putin price hike' excuse

by fibers 4y ago

no one here buys the 'putin price hike' excuse

I was blown away when the president claimed he "has never seen anything like Putin’s tax on both food and gas". When did Putin get the ability to raise taxes in the US??

voidfunc 4y ago
Bidens desperate to reframe the narrative that Dems fucked the economy before the midterms. I dont think this is going to work tho. Voters dont have enough understanding to see the cascade failures that have gotten us here over the last several years.
bombcar 4y ago
When America shuts down or reduces its own oil supply, those holding the rest of the world's supply get more leverage.
- hunterb123 4y ago
  We reduced our oil production before the invasion. Gas prices were multiplying before the invasion. Putin did not force the reduction of our own supply. The current administration did. The invasion may have been the consequence of the reduction of our production and amplified the "price hikes", but it wasn't the cause of the "price hikes", the initial action of reducing production and relying on foreign imports was.
  - bombcar 4y ago
    Exactly. Russia has been a distraction to all this, and it was well in play before Ukraine kicked off.
  - hindsightbias 4y ago
    The administration did not cut production. Covid did. The oil industry is dragging their feet.
    - hunterb123 4y ago
      We were net exporters during covid under the last admin. This is the policy the current admin enacted that cut our production: https://www.csis.org/analysis/biden-makes-sweeping-changes-oil-and-gas-policy https://www.csis.org/analysis/biden-makes-sweeping-changes-o... Please point to something that supports your theory that "covid did it" and oil companies are "dragging their feet". - edit, at my post limit - @vel0city: Banning new leases two years ago hurt our production output. Banning new subscribers and preventing renewals would hurt your revenue, why would you think it wouldn't apply here? It seems you're trying to rationalize away the obvious change in policy and its effects because of some reason unknown to me. Would you support retracting this policy decision since in your mind it has little effect and in my mind it's the leading cause of our loss of net export status? @deeg: the article says offshore leases may not show declines for 10 years as the leases are longer, but onshore could "conceivably show up faster". Your point seems to be this policy hasn't hit us fully yet? Are you for it? How confident are you that it didn't cause the loss of our net export status?
      - JaimeThompson 4y ago
        Here is one example. "Not Even at $200 a Barrel: Shale Giants Swear They Won’t Drill More" [1] https://energynow.com/2022/02/not-even-at-200-a-barrel-shale-giants-swear-they-wont-drill-more/ https://energynow.com/2022/02/not-even-at-200-a-barrel-shale...
        hunterb123 4y ago
        First, the title is not the quote, the quote was "Whether it’s $150 oil, $200 oil, or $100 oil, we’re not going to change our growth plans". Second, that has nothing to do with our production capacity, doesn't prove that "covid" caused us to drop our net export status, or that the industry is unwilling to fill production. It's one misconstrued quote from an exec. He was talking about not collapsing the price when we overproduced for a brief period during our time of net exporting. This is the REAL response from the oil & gas industry and it's concerning the federal lease bans: https://www.api.org/news-policy-and-issues/exploration-and-production/federal-leasing-and-development-ban-study https://www.api.org/news-policy-and-issues/exploration-and-p... When you're looking for the perspective of the oil & gas industry, API statements are a lot more reliable than an EnergyNow article. Now that I've addressed your article, would you like to address the administration policy decision I linked above? -- edit, at my post limit -- In short, this is the effect of the federal leasing ban: https://www.api.org/-/media/Files/Policy/Exploration/2020/federal-leasing-and-development-ban-one-pager.pdf https://www.api.org/-/media/Files/Policy/Exploration/2020/fe... -- edit2 -- @vel0city: the "if" was contingent on the federal ban on new leases, which happened... two years ago. We are seeing these predictions play out. Tech support using the covid excuse is annoying, but when government leaders use it to hide behind poor policies, it's dangerous.
  - hindsightbias 4y ago
    https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=48636 https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=48636 "At the beginning of 2021, 129 refineries were either operating or idle in the United States (excluding U.S. territories), down from 135 operable refineries listed at the beginning of 2020. The additional refinery closures in the 2021 Refinery Capacity Report largely reflect the impact of responses to COVID-19 on the U.S. refining sector." Claims below that leases reduced production is a canard. It takes years to develop a lease. In 3 or 4 years you could blame Biden, but unless Exxon produces by time machines it has nothing to do with production issues in 2021. Domestic oil producers are sitting on 1000's of leases.
    - hunterb123 4y ago
      That's refineries. We're talking about leases for drilling on federal land, which accounts for nearly 25% of US oil & gas production. Refineries are active and will be active as you need them when importing crude oil from other countries. The issue is the reliance and importing of crude oil in the first place. API estimation of impact by federal ban: https://www.api.org/-/media/Files/Policy/Exploration/2020/federal-leasing-and-development-ban-one-pager.pdf https://www.api.org/-/media/Files/Policy/Exploration/2020/fe... -- edit to reply to below (post limit) -- New leases have been banned for the past 2 years. Companies constantly need to lease land, leases expire, new land is needed. That's like shutting down new user registrations and pausing all subscriptions and saying there will be no revenue impact because people have paid you in the past. Those existing users can't resubscribe when their cycle runs out and new users can't enroll at all. How does that not impact production?
      - hindsightbias 4y ago
        > 25% And still do, today. None of those leases has been closed. If you're making some claim that Biden shut down existing leases in production, please provide a citation. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/26/business/energy-environment/oil-us-europe-russia.html https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/26/business/energy-environme... "Executives at 141 oil companies surveyed by the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas in mid-March offered several reasons that they weren’t pumping more oil. They said they were short of workers and sand, which is used to fracture shale fields to coax oil out of rock. But the most salient reason — the one offered by 60 percent of respondents — was that investors don’t want companies to produce a lot more oil, fearing that it will hasten the end of high oil prices."
kelnos 4y ago
You do understand that he didn't mean "tax" literally, right?
- Mountain_Skies 4y ago
  Yes, but it's unnecessary rhetoric that is distasteful enough when a political candidate uses it but downright disgusting when an office holder does it. He knows better and instead of being the leader of the country, he's playing political games (to be fair, that's pretty much par for the course for all of the political class). He didn't have to use that word, he chose to use that word, because he, or his speech writers, liked the connotation.

Ekaros 4y ago

Anyone honest can agree that most of the increase was return to normal. After a massive anomaly in the market. The sanctions on energy sector might be part of the blame, but most of increase was just return to normal. Just look at 2018 prices.

californical 4y ago
The years leading up to Covid were an extreme bull market — increasing at a rate that high again is not a return to “normal”, it’s a return to a historically very high growth rate