The Ukraine Crisis

[CID1990]

Good ole' Romney pushing for WWIII. What a shitbag.

Romney isn’t wrong

We really should be trying to think about how to whip their Russian asses back to Moscow. His position is righteous

But the position that we should not precipitate WWIII is also righteous. Romney is no more a shitbag than Reagan was when he challenged the Soviet Union on all fronts- the unified Dem talking point during those days was “don’t piss off the Russians it might cause war! “

Yet again Dems and Republicans have flipflopped


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[SDHornet]

Good ole' Romney pushing for WWIII. What a shitbag.

Romney isn’t wrong

We really should be trying to think about how to whip their Russian asses back to Moscow. His position is righteous

But the position that we should not precipitate WWIII is also righteous. Romney is no more a shitbag than Reagan was when he challenged the Soviet Union on all fronts- the unified Dem talking point during those days was “don’t piss off the Russians it might cause war! “

Yet again Dems and Republicans have flipflopped


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Meh. We've turned our heads on all kinds of killings when we are the ones doing it, not really buying all the hype about the killing in Ukraine.

Again, all the angst from the political elite is that their money laundering schemes in Ukraine are going to dry up when Putin finally wrestles control from Ukraine away from the West. Pretty sure I read that one of Romney's kids has one of those sweetheart deals like Hunter does over there.

At this point all I care about is US troops not being sent in. For those that have read up on the End Times, you know how this war is going to end.

[BDKJMU]

Yeah, that sentence was all jacked up. What I meant to say was:
.

I figured, lol. We all make mistakes.

We’re still producing more, on avg, than during Trumps admin. If gas was cheap in 2017 when we produced less per day than today, then logically we should still have low prices.

And revoking a permit for a pipeline that wasn’t operational doesn’t have an immediate effect on our gas prices. We didn’t cut off access to an existing supply. Keystone XL wasn’t operational so I truly do not understand how one can logically say gas prices are up, in part, because a pipeline for tar sands oil wasn’t built.

Inflation, demand and other economic factors have much more weight than a proposed pipeline. I don’t buy into the sound bites.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Look at the last 8 months before the pandemic hit on the eia.gov link (Aug 2019-March 2020). The US was producing in millions of barrels per day between 12.5 and 13. And 12.8 to 13 the last 6 months. The #s under Biden this past fall have only gotten to the mid to upper 11s. I’d be curious to see what the Jan & Feb #s are. Bet they’re still under 12.

I wouldn’t say gas was cheap in 2017 (Quick look on the interwebs says $2.41 avg for the year/$2.79 inflation adjusted). To me cheap would be under $2. I remember in late 98’/early 99’ in Harrisonburg I got gas for $.799, about $1.36-$1.39 in today’s dollars. Now that was cheap. Sept 2020 got it in Darlington for $1.779 ($1.95 adjusted for Bidenflation).

We saw in the 1st week and a half that after the Russian invasion of Ukraine started, before there was any supply disruption, with no big increase in demand. there was a huge run up in prices based on speculation. I blame Biden for that, too, because I don’t believe there would have been a full bore invasion if Trump had won.

Bidens words and actions have caused a price hike, some of that speculative. Biden said during the 2020 campaign multiple times that he was going to get rid of, eliminate, phase out, etc fossil fuels- see the videos that have been posted in this thread and others. His words and EOs 1st week in office (Keystone, ANWR, fed leases) backed that up. No other donk POTUS & admin has shown that type of hostility towards the oil & nat gas industry. If you’re an investor, are you going to want to invest big $$$ in an industry that the party in power is openly hostile to, and trying to get rid of? Around election day the prices were a little over $2 a gallon. Then they started trending up to $3.50+ before the invasion. If Biden hadn’t talked about getting rid of oil during the campaign and signed all those anti development EOs his 1st days in office, I don’t think it would have risen nearly as high.

[BDKJMU]

Of the $13.6 billion we just gave Ukraine, how much of that winds back up into our politician's pockets?

No shit. The pro-war sentiment from the politicians is largely just anger at the potential loss of the money laundering opportunity the Ukrainian corruption has offered them for all these years.

Yep.

[SDHornet]

Thread on foreign legion folks getting their shit pushed in by Russian bombing. There's a reason the elite don't send their kids to fight in these shitholes.

[Winterborn]

And I said nothing about what the Keystone XL may or may not do. I commented specifically on the safety record of pipelines. Which you are conveniently sidestepping and trying to change the topic.

Look up the data and post it.

...you're the one that changed the topic to safety from gasoline prices.

News to me. My reply was after your's reply below.

Remember, cancelling the Keystone Pipeline wouldn't save a mouse fart worth of emissions but we had to nix it because white privilege (or something).

Is that the one that will be leaking into our largest aquifer?

[houndawg]

war? pandemic?

We weren’t a net exporter well before the war.

of course the war had no impact.

[houndawg]

...you're the one that changed the topic to safety from gasoline prices.

News to me. My reply was after your's reply below.

Is that the one that will be leaking into our largest aquifer?

My bad

Still, if Big Oil wants a pipeline they will get a pipeline. Period.

[AZGrizFan]

We weren’t a net exporter well before the war.

of course the war had no impact.

And we’re not a net exporter NOW. Not sure where you’re going with this? We’ve not been, ever, a net exporter under Biden’s watch. We are dependent on other countries for our energy needs. Do I need to dumb it down for you any further?

[Ibanez]

I figured, lol. We all make mistakes.

We’re still producing more, on avg, than during Trumps admin. If gas was cheap in 2017 when we produced less per day than today, then logically we should still have low prices.

And revoking a permit for a pipeline that wasn’t operational doesn’t have an immediate effect on our gas prices. We didn’t cut off access to an existing supply. Keystone XL wasn’t operational so I truly do not understand how one can logically say gas prices are up, in part, because a pipeline for tar sands oil wasn’t built.

Inflation, demand and other economic factors have much more weight than a proposed pipeline. I don’t buy into the sound bites.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Look at the last 8 months before the pandemic hit on the eia.gov link (Aug 2019-March 2020). The US was producing in millions of barrels per day between 12.5 and 13. And 12.8 to 13 the last 6 months. The #s under Biden this past fall have only gotten to the mid to upper 11s. I’d be curious to see what the Jan & Feb #s are. Bet they’re still under 12.

I wouldn’t say gas was cheap in 2017 (Quick look on the interwebs says $2.41 avg for the year/$2.79 inflation adjusted). To me cheap would be under $2. I remember in late 98’/early 99’ in Harrisonburg I got gas for $.799, about $1.36-$1.39 in today’s dollars. Now that was cheap. Sept 2020 got it in Darlington for $1.779 ($1.95 adjusted for Bidenflation).

We saw in the 1st week and a half that after the Russian invasion of Ukraine started, before there was any supply disruption, with no big increase in demand. there was a huge run up in prices based on speculation. I blame Biden for that, too, because I don’t believe there would have been a full bore invasion if Trump had won.

Bidens words and actions have caused a price hike, some of that speculative. Biden said during the 2020 campaign multiple times that he was going to get rid of, eliminate, phase out, etc fossil fuels- see the videos that have been posted in this thread and others. His words and EOs 1st week in office (Keystone, ANWR, fed leases) backed that up. No other donk POTUS & admin has shown that type of hostility towards the oil & nat gas industry. If you’re an investor, are you going to want to invest big $$$ in an industry that the party in power is openly hostile to, and trying to get rid of? Around election day the prices were a little over $2 a gallon. Then they started trending up to $3.50+ before the invasion. If Biden hadn’t talked about getting rid of oil during the campaign and signed all those anti development EOs his 1st days in office, I don’t think it would have risen nearly as high.

I'm going on the average of his entire presidency. We're producing more. Fact.

Presidential POLICIES can have an impact but they are not the only forces at play. People give presidents entirely too much credit.

[Ibanez]

He shut down pipeline CONSTRUCTION. His EO was overturned like 5 months later.

There are something like 9000 approved drilling permits , many from Trump, that are still valid. But that’s just one phase of actually drilling.

WASHINGTON— New federal data shows the Biden administration approved 3,557 permits for oil and gas drilling on public lands in its first year, far outpacing the Trump administration’s first-year total of 2,658.

Nearly 2,000 of the drilling permits were approved on public lands administered by the Bureau of Land Management’s New Mexico office, followed by 843 in Wyoming, 285 in Montana and North Dakota, and 191 in Utah. In California, the Biden administration approved 187 permits — more than twice the 71 drilling permits Trump approved in that state in his first year.

“Biden’s runaway drilling approvals are a spectacular failure of climate leadership,” said Taylor McKinnon at the Center for Biological Diversity. “Avoiding catastrophic climate change requires ending new fossil fuel extraction, but Biden is racing in the opposite direction.”


https://biologicaldiversity.org/w/news/press-releases as/new-data-biden-slays-trumps-first-year-drilling-permitting-by-34-2022-01-21/


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

But is there actually OIL in those places? Easy to give out leases when you know they’ll never be used.

As I understand, those leases allow an entity to explore and develop the resource. It's a contract and I can't imagine companies are going to go through the legal and regulatory hassle of getting one if there isn't plenty of oil to be extracted. Right now, the onus is on industry to get drilling. There are 1000s of permits that are allowing them to start the process of investment, discovery and eventually production.

[houndawg]

of course the war had no impact.

And we’re not a net exporter NOW. Not sure where you’re going with this? We’ve not been, ever, a net exporter under Biden’s watch. We are dependent on other countries for our energy needs. Do I need to dumb it down for you any further?

Thats pretty dumb even for you - its the oiligarchs that decide how much they're going to pump and we live with it and pay as they see fit. I keep asking why they would want to increase supply and bring prices down but nobody answers. So confusing.

[AZGrizFan]

And we’re not a net exporter NOW. Not sure where you’re going with this? We’ve not been, ever, a net exporter under Biden’s watch. We are dependent on other countries for our energy needs. Do I need to dumb it down for you any further?

Thats pretty dumb even for you - its the oiligarchs that decide how much they're going to pump and we live with it and pay as they see fit. I keep asking why they would want to increase supply and bring prices down but nobody answers. So confusing.

yeah, why would they want to pump more and make record profits. Strange. Very strange.

[houndawg]

I figured, lol. We all make mistakes.

We’re still producing more, on avg, than during Trumps admin. If gas was cheap in 2017 when we produced less per day than today, then logically we should still have low prices.

And revoking a permit for a pipeline that wasn’t operational doesn’t have an immediate effect on our gas prices. We didn’t cut off access to an existing supply. Keystone XL wasn’t operational so I truly do not understand how one can logically say gas prices are up, in part, because a pipeline for tar sands oil wasn’t built.

Inflation, demand and other economic factors have much more weight than a proposed pipeline. I don’t buy into the sound bites.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Look at the last 8 months before the pandemic hit on the eia.gov link (Aug 2019-March 2020). The US was producing in millions of barrels per day between 12.5 and 13. And 12.8 to 13 the last 6 months. The #s under Biden this past fall have only gotten to the mid to upper 11s. I’d be curious to see what the Jan & Feb #s are. Bet they’re still under 12.

I wouldn’t say gas was cheap in 2017 (Quick look on the interwebs says $2.41 avg for the year/$2.79 inflation adjusted). To me cheap would be under $2. I remember in late 98’/early 99’ in Harrisonburg I got gas for $.799, about $1.36-$1.39 in today’s dollars. Now that was cheap. Sept 2020 got it in Darlington for $1.779 ($1.95 adjusted for Bidenflation).

We saw in the 1st week and a half that after the Russian invasion of Ukraine started, before there was any supply disruption, with no big increase in demand. there was a huge run up in prices based on speculation. I blame Biden for that, too, because I don’t believe there would have been a full bore invasion if Trump had won.

Bidens words and actions have caused a price hike, some of that speculative. Biden said during the 2020 campaign multiple times that he was going to get rid of, eliminate, phase out, etc fossil fuels- see the videos that have been posted in this thread and others. His words and EOs 1st week in office (Keystone, ANWR, fed leases) backed that up. No other donk POTUS & admin has shown that type of hostility towards the oil & nat gas industry. If you’re an investor, are you going to want to invest big $$$ in an industry that the party in power is openly hostile to, and trying to get rid of? Around election day the prices were a little over $2 a gallon. Then they started trending up to $3.50+ before the invasion. If Biden hadn’t talked about getting rid of oil during the campaign and signed all those anti development EOs his 1st days in office, I don’t think it would have risen nearly as high.

wrong as usual

Putin would have told Trump to sit still and shut up and thats exactly what Trump would have done, as you would expect from somebody that declared to the entire planet on TV, while standing right next him, that he believed Putin's version and not that of his own intelligence services.

Jabba the Gutless

[AZGrizFan]

Look at the last 8 months before the pandemic hit on the eia.gov link (Aug 2019-March 2020). The US was producing in millions of barrels per day between 12.5 and 13. And 12.8 to 13 the last 6 months. The #s under Biden this past fall have only gotten to the mid to upper 11s. I’d be curious to see what the Jan & Feb #s are. Bet they’re still under 12.

I wouldn’t say gas was cheap in 2017 (Quick look on the interwebs says $2.41 avg for the year/$2.79 inflation adjusted). To me cheap would be under $2. I remember in late 98’/early 99’ in Harrisonburg I got gas for $.799, about $1.36-$1.39 in today’s dollars. Now that was cheap. Sept 2020 got it in Darlington for $1.779 ($1.95 adjusted for Bidenflation).

We saw in the 1st week and a half that after the Russian invasion of Ukraine started, before there was any supply disruption, with no big increase in demand. there was a huge run up in prices based on speculation. I blame Biden for that, too, because I don’t believe there would have been a full bore invasion if Trump had won.

Bidens words and actions have caused a price hike, some of that speculative. Biden said during the 2020 campaign multiple times that he was going to get rid of, eliminate, phase out, etc fossil fuels- see the videos that have been posted in this thread and others. His words and EOs 1st week in office (Keystone, ANWR, fed leases) backed that up. No other donk POTUS & admin has shown that type of hostility towards the oil & nat gas industry. If you’re an investor, are you going to want to invest big $$$ in an industry that the party in power is openly hostile to, and trying to get rid of? Around election day the prices were a little over $2 a gallon. Then they started trending up to $3.50+ before the invasion. If Biden hadn’t talked about getting rid of oil during the campaign and signed all those anti development EOs his 1st days in office, I don’t think it would have risen nearly as high.

I'm going on the average of his entire presidency. We're producing more. Fact.

Presidential POLICIES can have an impact but they are not the only forces at play. People give presidents entirely too much credit.

So Trump’s energy policies were supposed to impact production on day 1? Averaging his entire presidency is a pretty dumb metric, Mark.

[Ibanez]

And revoking a permit for a pipeline that wasn’t operational doesn’t have an immediate effect on our gas prices. We didn’t cut off access to an existing supply. Keystone XL wasn’t operational so I truly do not understand how one can logically say gas prices are up, in part, because a pipeline for tar sands oil wasn’t built.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The problem with cancelling the pipeline is the decision impacts companies' decisions to make investments. All the money spent to date is gone, wasted. Companies look at decisions by the Biden admin and aren't going to make investments when they know it is either a dead end or could be gone with the next decision by Biden. The lack of planned future investment is being priced into the oil market.

It's a lot of wasted money, time and effort - I agree 100%.

Supply and Demand, current inventories, strength of the dollar, expectations of near-future production, the season (summer driving months, for example) are key drivers to the prices we pay. Is investment of a potential pipeline weighted that heavy? How's the construction of a pipeline today that wouldn't be complete for years impact the current pricing with such impact? Those are sincere questions, btw, not snarky ones.

They only respond to higher or lower oil prices by increasing or decreasing planned investments in new production capacity. Whether or not these investments are made has little impact on current oil supplies or prices, but may have a large impact on future oil supplies and prices.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/a ... 7X14000443

[Ibanez]

I'm going on the average of his entire presidency. We're producing more. Fact.

Presidential POLICIES can have an impact but they are not the only forces at play. People give presidents entirely too much credit.

So Trump’s energy policies were supposed to impact production on day 1? Averaging his entire presidency is a pretty dumb metric, Mark.

You're moving the goal posts.

As opposed to picking 1 year out of 4? You're picking the best year as proof that Trump's policies were the best thing since sliced bread while ignoring the other years where the US Oil Industry produced less than they do today. You're cherry picking data, i'm at least using all the data in those 4 years to give an idea of ALL production, not just 12 months.

You're blaming day 1 actions that Biden made for gas prices while saying Day 1 actions of Trump couldn't have a similar impact.

[houndawg]

Good ole' Romney pushing for WWIII. What a shitbag.

Romney isn’t wrong

We really should be trying to think about how to whip their Russian asses back to Moscow. His position is righteous

But the position that we should not precipitate WWIII is also righteous. Romney is no more a shitbag than Reagan was when he challenged the Soviet Union on all fronts- the unified Dem talking point during those days was “don’t piss off the Russians it might cause war! “

Yet again Dems and Republicans have flipflopped


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That was when we thought their mlitary was up to scratch militarily.

Whip their asses and find a way to flip the script with China via conceding to keep Ukraine out of NATO. Sometimes you gotta roll the dice

[Ibanez]

In our February 2022 Short-Term Energy Outlook (STEO), we forecast that crude oil prices will remain high enough to drive U.S. crude oil production to record-high levels in 2023, reaching a forecast 12.6 million barrels per day (b/d). We expect new production in the Permian Basin to drive overall U.S. crude oil production growth.

In the February STEO, we forecast that U.S. crude oil production will increase to 12.0 million b/d in 2022, up 760,000 b/d from 2021. We forecast that crude oil production in the United States will rise by 630,000 b/d in 2023 to average 12.6 million b/d. We expect more than 80% of that crude oil production growth to come from the Lower 48 states (L48), which does not include production from Alaska and the Federal Offshore Gulf of Mexico.

From January 8, 2021, to February 7, 2022, the L48 added 220 oil-directed rigs, 114 of which were in the Permian region. We forecast that production in the Permian region will average 5.3 million b/d in 2022 and 5.7 million b/d in 2023.

https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=51318

Executives at some of the world’s biggest oil and gas producers said on Monday they are ramping up their crude production as U.S. gasoline prices surge to $4 a gallon amid expectations that President Joe Biden and Congress would ban imports of Russian petroleum — but the companies warned not to expect new supplies overnight.

Exxon Mobil and Chevron are both boosting oil production at the mammoth Permian Basin field in West Texas and New Mexico, strategies that both oil majors laid out last year but that have taken on new urgency because of the surge in oil prices to their highest level in 14 years.

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/03/0 ... a-00014778


The free market is responding.

[Winterborn]

The problem with cancelling the pipeline is the decision impacts companies' decisions to make investments. All the money spent to date is gone, wasted. Companies look at decisions by the Biden admin and aren't going to make investments when they know it is either a dead end or could be gone with the next decision by Biden. The lack of planned future investment is being priced into the oil market.

It's a lot of wasted money, time and effort - I agree 100%.

Supply and Demand, current inventories, strength of the dollar, expectations of near-future production, the season (summer driving months, for example) are key drivers to the prices we pay. Is investment of a potential pipeline weighted that heavy? How's the construction of a pipeline today that wouldn't be complete for years impact the current pricing with such impact? Those are sincere questions, btw, not snarky ones.

They only respond to higher or lower oil prices by increasing or decreasing planned investments in new production capacity. Whether or not these investments are made has little impact on current oil supplies or prices, but may have a large impact on future oil supplies and prices.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/a ... 7X14000443

Not much. But both Clinton and Obama said the exact same thing and if we built the pipelines and made the investments back then that they shutdown, we probably would not be having this conversation. The problem with that question is that it is asked every single time and they keep kicking the can down the road (which is by design).

there are multiple pipelines (both Natural gas and petroleum) that are either held up partially finished or killed after a large investment. The continued hostility to certain types infrastructure based on particular brand of beliefs are most certainly being factored into the consumer side of prices.

My question back to you is how far are you willing to kick the can down the road? Because eventually the market (it is already doing that) going to factor in aging infrastructure and then it will not matter how much one drills if you cannot transport it or finance it (see the pressure being brought by activist shareholders).

[Ibanez]

Russia has had troops in Transnistria since before Putin. I wouldn't be surprised if they were initially planning to lock it down by sweeping up from Odessa. Probably rethinking that now to bring more troops to Kyiv. Russian troops in the south seem to be heading north to Kyiv and not west to Odessa and Moldova so far. If they were greeted as liberators in Ukraine and the invasion went smoothly, the Moldova scenario would have been more likely.

And, IMO, Russia moving on Moldova stretches Russia more than it does NATO.

True, but not if they twist Belarus. They don’t need to advance in Ukraine. In fact, they aren’t stupid… they know they can’t advance in Ukraine without using tac nukes.

I literally called Clitz the other night and told him that he was right about Russia- a failed petro state with a rusting hulk of a military. The only thing that makes them relevant is the nukes.

And what a shame. What a beautiful culture and people… we should be allied with them against China but we shit the bed from 89-92 and now here we are.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's a perfect soundbite of Russia. I love Russian history, took 3 semesters of it in college and have read a great deal since then. You're spot on - per usual.

[houndawg]

Romney isn’t wrong

We really should be trying to think about how to whip their Russian asses back to Moscow. His position is righteous

But the position that we should not precipitate WWIII is also righteous. Romney is no more a shitbag than Reagan was when he challenged the Soviet Union on all fronts- the unified Dem talking point during those days was “don’t piss off the Russians it might cause war! “

Yet again Dems and Republicans have flipflopped


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Meh. We've turned our heads on all kinds of killings when we are the ones doing it, not really buying all the hype about the killing in Ukraine.

Again, all the angst from the political elite is that their money laundering schemes in Ukraine are going to dry up when Putin finally wrestles control from Ukraine away from the West. Pretty sure I read that one of Romney's kids has one of those sweetheart deals like Hunter does over there.

At this point all I care about is US troops not being sent in. For those that have read up on the End Times, you know how this war is going to end.

thats a pretty big "if".

[houndawg]

It's a lot of wasted money, time and effort - I agree 100%.

Supply and Demand, current inventories, strength of the dollar, expectations of near-future production, the season (summer driving months, for example) are key drivers to the prices we pay. Is investment of a potential pipeline weighted that heavy? How's the construction of a pipeline today that wouldn't be complete for years impact the current pricing with such impact? Those are sincere questions, btw, not snarky ones.



https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/a ... 7X14000443

Not much. But both Clinton and Obama said the exact same thing and if we built the pipelines and made the investments back then that they shutdown, we probably would not be having this conversation. The problem with that question is that it is asked every single time and they keep kicking the can down the road (which is by design).

there are multiple pipelines (both Natural gas and petroleum) that are either held up partially finished or killed after a large investment. The continued hostility to certain types infrastructure based on particular brand of beliefs are most certainly being factored into the consumer side of prices.

My question back to you is how far are you willing to kick the can down the road? Because eventually the market (it is already doing that) going to factor in aging infrastructure and then it will not matter how much one drills if you cannot transport it or finance it (see the pressure being brought by activist shareholders).

As long as the air is technically breathable?

[Winterborn]

In our February 2022 Short-Term Energy Outlook (STEO), we forecast that crude oil prices will remain high enough to drive U.S. crude oil production to record-high levels in 2023, reaching a forecast 12.6 million barrels per day (b/d). We expect new production in the Permian Basin to drive overall U.S. crude oil production growth.

In the February STEO, we forecast that U.S. crude oil production will increase to 12.0 million b/d in 2022, up 760,000 b/d from 2021. We forecast that crude oil production in the United States will rise by 630,000 b/d in 2023 to average 12.6 million b/d. We expect more than 80% of that crude oil production growth to come from the Lower 48 states (L48), which does not include production from Alaska and the Federal Offshore Gulf of Mexico.

From January 8, 2021, to February 7, 2022, the L48 added 220 oil-directed rigs, 114 of which were in the Permian region. We forecast that production in the Permian region will average 5.3 million b/d in 2022 and 5.7 million b/d in 2023.

https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=51318

Executives at some of the world’s biggest oil and gas producers said on Monday they are ramping up their crude production as U.S. gasoline prices surge to $4 a gallon amid expectations that President Joe Biden and Congress would ban imports of Russian petroleum — but the companies warned not to expect new supplies overnight.

Exxon Mobil and Chevron are both boosting oil production at the mammoth Permian Basin field in West Texas and New Mexico, strategies that both oil majors laid out last year but that have taken on new urgency because of the surge in oil prices to their highest level in 14 years.

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/03/0 ... a-00014778


The free market is responding.

Marketing. What else do you expect them to say? Sure they are going to ramp up, but it is only temporary and does nothing to address the hostility of an administration against petroleum. High fuel prices hurts both the industry's image and politicians. Politicians blame Big Oil, Big oil says here is what I can do but it is not our fault (and they are mostly right).

[Winterborn]

Not much. But both Clinton and Obama said the exact same thing and if we built the pipelines and made the investments back then that they shutdown, we probably would not be having this conversation. The problem with that question is that it is asked every single time and they keep kicking the can down the road (which is by design).

there are multiple pipelines (both Natural gas and petroleum) that are either held up partially finished or killed after a large investment. The continued hostility to certain types infrastructure based on particular brand of beliefs are most certainly being factored into the consumer side of prices.

My question back to you is how far are you willing to kick the can down the road? Because eventually the market (it is already doing that) going to factor in aging infrastructure and then it will not matter how much one drills if you cannot transport it or finance it (see the pressure being brought by activist shareholders).

As long as the air is technically breathable?

This is not the 70's. I am not sure when the last time you looked into a refinery or power plant operation but you might want to before you use tired tropes.