Since very little oil is drilled here anymore, we are at the mercy of what ever the prices are set at in the other oil nations. China is demanding more oil than ever too from the same source. We have to pay the barrel price they set - not what we set. When ever the price of gasoline goes up, congress launches an investigation in to the refineries. And nothing is ever found except most get about 7 cents per gallon of gasoline for refining. Only 27 percent of all imported oil is refined in to gasoline. The rest goes for fuel for production, heat, and plastic. If we were allowed to drill our own oil here, that would cut dependence on foreign oil, saturate the market and bring down prices. But, no one yet has strongly challenged the environmentalists about producing our own oil.
2007-11-17 10:26:52
·
answer #1
·
answered by Derail 7
·
1⤊
2⤋
Demand from China and India have skyrocketed as their population . . . which together is about 15 times that of the U.S. . . . becomes wealthier and more able to afford cars, homes, appliances and other fuel-intensive commodities.
Thus there is a supply and demand function to the situation. That said, however, we can do MUCH, MUCH more to maintain the average American lifestyle on much less fuel.
Examples:
On average, the least energy efficient brands/models of major appliances use 3 times the energy of the most efficient models.
Diesel technology as a short-term fix-- a modern turbo diesel will not only get approximately twice the mpg of a comparable gasoline model, but they can run on clean, renewable biodiesel.
Bottom line -- If we invested the trillion or so dollars blown on the Iraq invasion, instead on developing alternative energies, we'd be virtually energy self-sufficient and the envy of the world instead of the pariah they most of the world now considers us. Thus even the real reason for the invasion, oil, would have been totally bogus!
2007-11-17 13:57:20
·
answer #2
·
answered by worldinspector 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
Some of you want to blame " THE BIG AMERICAN OIL COMPANIES". Lets break it down, we will use the national standard cost of a $2.89 per gallon. Little do people know that average cost on a gallon retail has a 3 to 4 cent profit to oil companies, like mobile, conaco, sunoco.you hear of the billions of dollars that the oil companies make this because of the billions of gallons sold. the wholesale cost is based on an international market and the members of OPEC. as the demand for oil and fossil fuel internationally increases so does the cost.not American companies.now back to the cost increase there are taxes added by the fed and state, and local gov's. this is on a average is about 40 to 60 % of the cost on a retail gal. then there are enviroment fees. ask any of our political figure heads if the would reduce the tax on a gallon to make it affortiable, this falls on deaf ears, then there is the the restriction on our drilling and the constuction of new refineries,granted we could conserve and use less but that isnt in the culture of america,walking, car pooling,buying smaller, more fuel effictant vehicles, if we as americans were to be forced to cut back we would revolte. if we would alow exploration and drilling domesticly and elimitate our need for forgien oil that would cut the cost but even more having the reduction in the taxes and fees here would help
2007-11-17 12:00:14
·
answer #3
·
answered by thomas w 2
·
0⤊
2⤋
Greed & Power and the reality there is a finite limit to fossel fuels. The way the local, state and national government could help out is abolish all diesel, aviation home heating oil and gasoline taxes.
In addition, tell the states no more new highways. Maintain the roads you already have. Take the Highway Trust Fund and Turn it into the Local-National Rail Trust fund to build a nationwide-urban mass transit system.
By the way, we had one of those transit systems prior to the end of WWII, but guess what our luv of the auto and the disdain the railroad powers had for passenger rail led to the dismantling of practically the entire passenger rail system. The rest of the world had more foresight, especially Europe.
2007-11-17 10:26:56
·
answer #4
·
answered by LEE 3
·
1⤊
1⤋
Mostly because
1 China and India are using up a lot more of the word wide supply.
2 The environmentalist wackos won't let the US build any more refineries or drill for our own oil here.
3 More consumption thanks to SUV's Hummer"s ,etc.
What's the problem? This is exactly what the left wing tree huggers wanted. Stop complaining and feel good about the environment.
2007-11-17 10:31:22
·
answer #5
·
answered by Michael 6
·
1⤊
2⤋
No, it extremely is just one extra dumb speaking element, he needs to spur replace capability supplies, and renewable capability, this could be a logical difficulty, we can run out of oil at some point, and with China and India beginning to apply extra oil the charges will on no account flow down returned, till that decision is stumbled on. yet he himself pronounced this week at a press convention that he would extremely prefer to be certain gas fees flow down, yet he has no administration over the assumption in step with Iran being, or attacking interior the Gulf and deliveries being disrupted. till your are waiting for nationalization the oil would not belong to us, we in basic terms sell leases, the oil corporation sells it for the main suitable cost they might get. The president hasn't have been given administration over it, and if he did he'd keep it low so no person would be mad while some human beings pointed arms at him over fees. the government would not drill, would not very own a drill, and the Keystone pipeline is going from Canada, no longer the U. S., to a Texas port, the place it is going to likely be shipped foreign places, and that they already produce different pipelines its no longer a sparkling difficulty, this one in basic terms happens to be routed over an aquifer that centers the persons of Nebraska. they might decrease federal taxes, because of the fact the states would desire to decrease their taxes, thus far i've got no longer seen any state decrease the taxes to make it extra convenient for Hummer drivers. unhappy because it form of feels, you will purchase any automobile you prefer, yet you do would desire to pay for it. and that isn't going to alter.
2016-10-17 03:02:58
·
answer #6
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think they are trying to tell us we had better get used to it at least until it has extremely bad effects on the economy which hasn't quite happened yet. Getting there.
2007-11-17 10:24:44
·
answer #7
·
answered by BekindtoAnimals22 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
Congress refuses to authorize drilling in ANWR and our offshore coastal areas. Since the libs and Dems are the biggest movers in that, I'd guess they want you to scream as your wallet is stripped of funds so you'll vote them into office and they can then squeeze your paycheck.
***
the solution for individuals and families is simple and obvious -- make more money.
2007-11-17 10:21:51
·
answer #8
·
answered by Spock (rhp) 7
·
1⤊
2⤋
Because there are more automobiles on the road today throughout the world than there were seven years ago.
2007-11-17 10:23:35
·
answer #9
·
answered by Mr. Knowledgeable VI 7
·
0⤊
2⤋
Oil man prez = higher gas profits.
2007-11-17 10:19:50
·
answer #10
·
answered by The President 3
·
2⤊
3⤋