New at Reason
Ronald Bailey surveys the effort to make energy companies "pay" for their profits.
Comments to "New at Reason":
NeonCat | May 25, 2007, 2:31pm | #
What?! Expect politicians to do nothing and expect some market take care of it? Why, the concept is insane! How can politicians take credit and show how pro-active they are if they do nothing? Are you trying to keep them from having sound-bite proof that they look out for the little guy? Are you trying to keep them from being re-elected?If only it were that easy…
Alan Vanneman | May 25, 2007, 2:46pm | #
I don't expect much from Hillary Clinton, Ron, but I expect more from you. Cute animal stories are, well, cute, but the snake, raccoon, and opossum shutdowns really had little effect on production.* And I think you need to do more than channel Lundberg and Routt, who seem have a knack for erring in the oil companies' favor.As for Hillary's "legislation," this is really only an advanced form of primate bluffing. Hillary strkies me as the Richard Nixon of the liberals.
* And if refineries can be shut down by animals, doesn't it suggest that the oil companies aren't exactly prepared for terrorist attack?
LarryA | May 25, 2007, 3:16pm | #
For example, three refineries were shut down when their power supplies were shorted out by a snake, a raccoon and an opposum.Don't mess with Mother Nature.
What?! Expect politicians to do nothing and expect some market take care of it?
Well, they could:
1. Reduce taxes at the pump during high price periods.
2. Encourage the production of new refineries.
3. Waive reformulation requirements during peak periods.
4. Encourage construction of nuclear power plants to reduce demand on petroleum plants. (If there are any, I'm working off the top of my head.)
But that would be reasonable, not the government's strong suit.
Pro Libertate | May 25, 2007, 3:30pm | #
A snake, a raccoon, and an opossum--a cruel trifecta of terror. Good thing no squirrels were involved, or the body count would've been horrifying.Gahan | May 25, 2007, 3:39pm | #
The snake, the raccoon and the opposum were also picked up on robbery charges back in 2005. I hope the DA can make it stick this time.Ron Bailey | May 25, 2007, 3:54pm | #
AV: I mentioned animal outages mostly as an attempt at levity. Obviously didn't work for you.On the other hand Lundberg did supply me a list of all of reported outages and their causes since March. She sent them to me in a file that won't allow copying so I can't paste them here (and I'm not going to type in each one--it's Friday damn it!)
In any case, one take home message from the outages is that our refinery capacity and storage is way too tight and more are needed.
Pious Candy-Assed Sidewinder | May 25, 2007, 4:19pm | #
And I think you need to do more than channel Lundberg and Routt, who seem have a knack for erring in the oil companies' favor.
Because oil analysts and economists don't know much about oil production and distribution. As opposed to Hillary, whose servants fill up her limo on a weekly basis.
Pious Candy-Assed Sidewinder | May 25, 2007, 4:20pm | #
(reposting)And I think you need to do more than channel Lundberg and Routt, who seem have a knack for erring in the oil companies' favor.Because oil analysts and economists don't know much about oil production and distribution. As opposed to Hillary, whose servants fill up her limo on a weekly basis.
Alan Vanneman | May 25, 2007, 4:31pm | #
Ron,It's a well-known fact that I have no sense of humor. As for "sidewinder," those "experts" were wrong before, and their latest prediction is that prices will come down except if they don't. Somehow, I won't be too surprised if gas prices continue to slither upward.
SeeDog | May 25, 2007, 4:41pm | #
How can a "shutdown of less than one minute" caused by a chicken snake of ONE refinery cause prices to rise almost $.08 per gallon! It's insane! With the amount of profit being made by the oil companies these refinerys should be models of technological efficiency, not some run down "cinder block" building infiltrated by chicken snakes!might as well break out the ouija board if youre gonna presume to forecast the energy market. please come and bless us with your schemes for cheap and abundant oil hilary
Huh? | May 25, 2007, 5:21pm | #
As for Hillary's "legislation," this is really only an advanced form of primate bluffing. Hillary strkies me as the Richard Nixon of the liberals.I thought Richard Nixon was the Richard Nixon of the liberals.
Nick Sartin | May 26, 2007, 7:50am | #
It strikes me that while animals caused some shutdown at refineries that it probably won't reflect that negatively on all the oil companies bottom lines. The real issue here is big oil making exorbitant profits and our ruling elite (read government) winking at them and smacking their collective lips about the campaign contributions that are going to be ROLLING in. In the end it's me that is paying for it all, and I'm pretty pissed off about it.Neu Mejican | May 26, 2007, 11:32am | #
Nick S,Hate spending all that money.
Easy solution.
Use less gas.
Too little refinery capacity.
Easy solution.
Use less gas.
Want to reduce emissions.
Easy first step.
Use less gas.
BakedPenguin | May 26, 2007, 1:30pm | #
Ha ha. I live 2 1/2 miles from work. I ride my bike there most days.gouge away
you can gouge away
stay all day
if you want to
J Golden Rockwell | May 26, 2007, 3:28pm | #
It's no surprise that Senator Schemer would think about breaking up Big Oil. Think of all the taxes he could get from a bunch of smaller companies!However, Big Oil got big for one simple reason -- bigger is more efficient, for what they are there to do, which is to pump (or buy) oil, refine it, and distribute it to every town in the country with more than 500 residents (and a bunch of places that aren't even towns)!
Breaking up Big Oil would BOOST the prices on a MASSIVE scale. There is a reason that you buy jellybeans by the jar, not individually wrapped.
J Golden Rockwell | May 26, 2007, 3:51pm | #
Ron Bailey wrote:In any case, one take home message from the outages is that our refinery capacity and storage is way too tight and more are needed.
So, where are we gonna put refineries, that we don't have NIMBYs or some exotic, endangered species of mosquito . . ?
Bill McWilliams | May 27, 2007, 10:53pm | #
Big Oil comes out way ahead by ENCOURAGING conservation. All they care about is making sure the price per gallon remains high. They make out like the bandits they are, whenever they can reduce production while keeping the price high.this article is clearly a plant. it's a persuasion piece with so many holes in it i'm not even going to try and address them. when i read nonsense like this i think, blah blah blah.
Neu Mejican | May 29, 2007, 12:25am | #
Rivernet,You must be thinking macro-economics
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VVp8UGjECt4
Neu Mejican | May 29, 2007, 12:32am | #
The text versionhttp://www.improb.com/airchives/paperair/volume9/v9i2/mankiw.html
It must be nice to be a libertarian - 'pay no attention to those guys meeting with Cheney!'.