For several years as oil and gas prices have exploded, a frequent media commentary has been to blame the problem on President Bush.
Either he didn’t do enough to stop a hurricane from hitting New Orleans, or it’s due to the war in Iraq, or he should talk to Iran, or it’s due to Cheney’s having run Halliburton – whatever the specious connection, the White House has been routinely at fault.
Yet, along comes Reuters on Wednesday cautioning drivers about upcoming record-high gas prices with a cause that, mysteriously and quite remarkably, had nothing to do with President Bush.
Better brace yourself (emphasis added throughout):
U.S. retail gasoline prices could hit an all-time high by the end of this month due to ongoing problems at the nation's oil refineries, automobile and travel group AAA said on Wednesday.
Problems at refineries? Surely, this has to have something to do with the President’s friends in the oil industry, or at the very least, Halliburton:
Gasoline stockpiles in the United States have dropped by 15 percent since early February amid an unusually high number of refinery outages, alongside robust demand and low imports.
AAA said it was "alarming" that gasoline prices were rising so high without the backdrop of a major geopolitical or natural event to disrupt supply, like a hurricane or a new military flare-up in the Middle East.
"Because oil prices today are at least $10 less expensive per barrel than when gasoline prices previously exceeded $3 per gallon, almost all of the price pressure on gasoline can now be attributed to America's continuing -- and increasing -- inability to supply enough refined gasoline to the marketplace," AAA said.
Hmmm. So, is it possible that in 2005 and 2006 when higher energy prices were being blamed on the Bush administration, refinery problems were also the culprit, and the White House actually had nothing to do with it?
Sadly, the article didn’t address this issue. However, you should be pleased to note that nobody in the Administration was mentioned in this piece, nor was the name “Halliburton.”
Nice for a change, wouldn’t you agree?
Of course, if this was an election year, do you think Reuters would have addressed the refinery problems, or done a better job of pointing fingers at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue?
Sadly, Reuters also chose to ignore how much ethanol is involved in the current high gas prices.
Much of last year's spring run-up was due to the new mandates for ethanol blends across the country. With corn prices currently 50 percent higher than last year at this time, it seems a certainty that this is a component of the almost $1 per gallon increase in wholesale unleaded gasoline prices since the beginning of the year.
For some reason, ethanol has become the new third rail in politics. I wonder why.
—Noel Sheppard is the Associate Editor of NewsBusters.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Give the MSM time, they'll
May 3, 2007 - 13:59 ET by derbalGive the MSM time, they'll get around to blaming Bush. They're busy covering Britney's comeback right now.
The reason for the refinery p
May 3, 2007 - 14:01 ET by SouthJersey1953The reason for the refinery problems can be pointed directly at the tree-hugging environmentalists that have routinely prevented the building of new refineries. I guess it would have been expecting too much to have Reuters mention this, though.
"You can lead a man to Congress, but you can't make him think." - Milton Berle
Yes and even if, a company go
May 3, 2007 - 14:07 ET by upcountrywaterYes and even if, a company got a permit to build TODAY. Oil refineries are HUGE some cover 1,200 acres.. the construction job would take 10 years.
1300 IRANIAN GAS CENTRIFUGES MAKING H BOMBS, 24-7
But still they vote NO to bui
May 3, 2007 - 14:12 ET by SouthJersey1953But still they vote NO to building them. So, if we are short of gas now, what will it be like in eleven years if we still haven't built any and the old ones are 11 years older?
"You can lead a man to Congress, but you can't make him think." - Milton Berle
Ya but....have you ever seen
May 3, 2007 - 14:52 ET by tweakthetrollYa but....have you ever seen a gas station run out of gas? No. Well then I guess there is always enough oil in the system. The price of gas is tightly controlled. All be it with a wink and a nod and my guess would be much worse.
Many ran out this week. The
May 3, 2007 - 14:56 ET by JDWMany ran out this week. Then there was the 70's...
JDW
News media: Scoreboard for terrorists
Gas distribution terminals in Iowa run dry
May 3, 2007 - 15:14 ET by nkviking75Gotta do a drive-by here...
This week distribution terminals in Iowa ran out of gas, and are predicted to do so for a couple of weeks. So not only stations run out of gas, but so do points higher up the distribution chain.
When you put the clowns in charge, don't be surprised when a circus breaks out.
I am not around enough to k
May 3, 2007 - 15:34 ET by JDWI am not around enough to know most of the people, one must realize that there are too many here who know what's going on to make hit and miss posts.
The dems and ewackos who are prohibiting America from becoming more independent are at the same time destroying the lives of those they claim to represent. Consider the pizza deliver guy who's trying to get through college or the factory worker who lives 41 miles away from the plant, how do they compensate for the additional cost? What about truckers who are paying more to deliver goods consumers need? Costs must be passed on. It's past wake-up time.
JDW
News media: Scoreboard for terrorists
Gas Shortage
May 3, 2007 - 16:11 ET by River CityGas shortage in Iowa?
The HQ of Ethanol?
This can't be possible. Someone is lying. Does Algore know about this? Get him on the phone, NOW!!!!
That's a myth, at least 10
May 3, 2007 - 18:11 ET by Night WatchmanThat's a myth, at least 10 refinerys were closed since 2000. The
current ones are constantly being upgraded. You'll never see a new one,
nobody wants them in their backyard -- and they are not needed.
"Nobody wants them in th
May 3, 2007 - 21:47 ET by Unsane"Nobody wants them in their backyard" - Really? That hasn't stopped Houston any, nor surrounding areas. And remember, Houston has no zoning.
"and they are not needed" - Are you the market? Or perhaps you are hell-bent on shackling the United States economy?
I doubt the current ones are "constantly being upgraded". There was a refinery fire back in late February near Houston at a facility that was last upgraded in the 1950s.
"HAV3 TH3 BRIDG3S OF INSANITY B33N CROSS3D AND FOR3V3R R3TRACT3D???." - Meshuggah, "3ntrapm3nt", from Catch Thirty Thr33 (2005)
A refinery was hit by light
May 3, 2007 - 14:14 ET by JDWA refinery was hit by lightning in OK and destroyed two 80k barrel tanks. America simply is not taking advantage of it's resources in order to eliminate foreign dependence every time this occurs. It's the dems fault you are paying more! At what price will people realize it?
JDW
News media: Scoreboard for terrorists
Increasing refinery capacity - the President's Energy agenda?
May 3, 2007 - 14:42 ET by Ten7sWasn't increasing refinery capacity part of the President's Energy Policy agenda? The one that the Bush Administration has been pushing for the last 5 years? Its been discussed so much here and elsewhere that its hard to remember all of the details.
Just some random thoughts, but... I wonder what sort of long term effects Hugo Chavez's seizing of oil rights will have? Add the foiled terrorist plot to disrupt oil production in Saudi Arabia with Chavez and the Eco-Left's long-standing war against increasing domestic capacity from drilling to refining with increasing world-wide demand, and to this common man, it seems like a motley array of forces tending and intending to driving up oil prices. Though the bottle-neck at our refineries seems to be the main problem at the moment...?
Sadly, the White House seems
May 3, 2007 - 14:57 ET by mattmSadly, the White House seems to have gone over to the enviros on this issue. Note (in the link) all the emphasis on "alternative fuels" and "reduced consumption"... nothing wrong with those ideas, but the immediate need is increased refining capacity and domestic drilling.
Well, here's the bugaboo on t
May 3, 2007 - 15:33 ET by dscottWell, here's the bugaboo on the ethanol issue, it is added at the Refinery in the process not mixed afterwards. Hence, the growing demand for gasoline is not offset by the increase in the availability of ethanol, in other words a supply bottleneck has occured because the Democrats with support of the enviros have blocked every attempt to increase refining capacity. This is their stealth tax which of course they then use to justify increasing the federal tax and accuse the oil companies of gouging. Dems are a sneaky lot, never think they are stupid no matter how rediculous their position is.
“The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane.” – Marcus Aurelius
m, President Bush, wants ALL
May 3, 2007 - 15:49 ET by upcountrywaterm,
President Bush, wants ALL energy options on the table, we need all we can get. He is shut down by leftoids, in energy areas that will really make a differnce like; Coal, gas, oil fired power plants and evilll Atomic power plants.
1300 IRANIAN GAS CENTRIFUGES MAKING H BOMBS, 24-7.
With corn prices currently 50
May 3, 2007 - 14:52 ET by MidAmericaWith corn prices currently 50 percent higher than last year at this time, it seems a certainty that this is a component of the almost $1 per gallon increase in wholesale unleaded gasoline prices since the beginning of the year.
...and don't forget your cost of fuel is also included in your grocery bill so the cost of fuel is actually much higher than what's at the pump. Everyone is now paying for fuel even if they don't have a car.
By not drilling for our own oil, using nuclear plants or using clean coal technology this reliance on a food for fuel will cause a lot of environmental damage to the corn producing regions. The farmers will plant on any soil that they can drive a tractor on. Poor timber soil and swampy soil will be bulldozed and drained to make more fields. I'm not trashing the farmers they have struggled too long. They have lived on the economic edge for..... almost forever.
Ethanol's impact on prices
May 3, 2007 - 15:27 ET by nkviking75Ethanol is typically 10 to 15 percent of the makeup of fuel, unless you're talking E85 ethanol, so the price increase of corn is not that big a factor. If it was, the increase should have hit last fall and never come down. But it did come down for awhile, and it's likely to go down again when this distribution bottleneck loosens.
Corn farmers are mainly increasing corn production by producing less of other crops, such as soybeans. Farmers are far more conscientious about the environment these days. Most are not going to rape the land for a quick profit. Why? Because they need a healthy environment to stay in business.
NK
May 3, 2007 - 15:36 ET by Noel SheppardNK,
Don't agree. Yes, in regular unleaded, ethanol might represent 10 to 15 percent. However, if you have a 100 or 200 or 300 percent increase in the price of that 10 to 15 percent, how does it impact the whole?
Furthermore, last year, part of the gas shortfall was specifically due to refineries making the change from winter to summer blends. As California has experienced problems with this for many years -- problems that ALWAYS make our prices rise in the spring -- I suggest quite fervently that this was again the problem this year, and, that along with investor speculation, added significantly to the $1 rise in price.
The reality is that these federally mandated ethanol requirements have done nothing but increase gas prices, quite precipitously I might add. Unfortunately, there isn't a politician in America that wants to point this emperor out as being naked as a jailbird. ns
Ethanol stretches fuel supply
May 3, 2007 - 16:05 ET by nkviking75The National Corn Growers Association has an interesting answer to that. Using ethanol actually stretches the fuel supply. Consumers are replacing some of the gasoline they'd otherwise buy with ethanol. Increased supply tends to lead to lower prices, all things being equal. So perhaps these price spikes might have been worse without ethanol.
The increase in corn prices is not likely to be permanent. Corn production is expected to go way up this year. Unless there's massive drought, the spike in corn output should drive prices down in a few months.
Ethanol is far from perfect and definitely not the best, or the only, answer to our energy problems. There would not be nearly the demand for it if our energy problems were addressed in a sensible way. But this latest price spike is almost all about distribution and lack of refinery capacity. We need to search much more aggressively for domestic oil and build more refineries as fast as possible.
NK
May 3, 2007 - 16:12 ET by Noel SheppardNK,
You wouldn't expect the NCGA to be a completely impartial source on this, would you? :-)
At some point, you could make the case that ethanol will stretch the fuel supply. However, in the short-term, experience has shown otherwise. Why? Because refiners have to go through a shift period to switch to ethanol blends. This acts to shut down operations. Furthermore, shortages in ethanol -- which we saw last year -- act to reduce supplies of these blends, thereby driving up costs.
With that in mind, it is possible that this is all a short-term problem. However, we in California have been dealing with this problem every spring and summer for more than ten years.
How many years need to transpire before a short-term problem is recategorized to a long-term nightmare? :-) ns
Ethanol has two major probl
May 3, 2007 - 16:36 ET by JDWEthanol has two major problems, storage and transportation. Since it uses gasoline that problem remains unresolved.
Considering the cost of gas today it might appear good but I don't think gas will remain at this level. What happens when gas prices go back down? This is not a solution, it's an idea.
I also read that if we went 100% ethanol, total gasoline usage would be 90%. Why increase all of our food prices... for that?
JDW
News media: Scoreboard for terrorists
I don't know how many corn f
May 3, 2007 - 22:39 ET by MidAmericaI don't know how many corn farmers you know but I grew up with them. The ethanol production surge is still just getting started. In the Midwest millions and millions of gallons of production capacity is being built. When these new plants are in production they will use all the corn in their immediate area. That is when the prices will rise.
One concern is that corn will be followed by corn. Corn is a heavy feeder and usually rotated with soy beans, a legume. Farmers are not going to rape their own land but believe me they will make the most of what they have. ...and they do have bulldozers.
It takes thousands of people to produce ethanol .... and lots of oil. There are factories producing tractors and those tractors need fuel. The factory workers drive cars to work. There are seed companies raising, packaging and moving seed. Sometimes the seed is produced in South America to take advantage of their opposite growing season. Fertilizer, pesticides and herbicides must be produced, packaged and delivered. Corn must be harvested, hauled and stored. There is farm help, government farm agents, mechanics and many other people associated with farm production.
I'm not against farmers making money but this is a difficult way of producing a fuel when we can just pump it out of the ground.
There are two good reasons Pr
May 3, 2007 - 15:29 ET by j. frank wilsonThere are two good reasons President Bush and his Administration have been blamed for high gasoline prices.
The first: When he was running for President he blamed the then-current Clinton Administration for high gas prices. During a press conference at Tuscaloosa, Alabama, June 23, 200, Gov. Bush said:
"... this is typical of an administration that refuses to accept responsibility. This is amazing. They've been in office for seven years, the price of gasoline has gone up during their period of time."
Second: When he was running for President, he promised to reduce gasoline prices:
"Bush said today that he would bring down gasoline prices by creating enough political good will with oil-producing nations that they would increase their supply of crude. 'I would work with our friends in OPEC to convince them to open up the spigot, to increase the supply. Use the capital that my administration will earn, with the Kuwaitis or the Saudis, and convince them to open up the spigot.'”
Source: Katherine Q. Seelye, NY Times Jun 28, 2000
And then came...tada! ... 9
May 3, 2007 - 15:32 ET by MightyMouthAnd then came...tada! ... 9/11 !!!
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
Whoops!I think weenies like F
May 3, 2007 - 15:43 ET by Roger the ShrubberWhoops!
I think weenies like Frankie are to blame, blocking US efforts to drill and refine more oil until alternatives can be produced efficiently and cheaply. Oh, and for not allowing a nuclear power plant to be built in decades. At least we are saving the brown-nosed albino titmouse in the meantime.
Thx, Frankie!
Calling Frankie a weenie is a
May 3, 2007 - 20:51 ET by Dan The Man 2Calling Frankie a weenie is an insult to weenies everywhere.
Nuke em til they glow then shoot em in the dark. -- save my gun, shoot a liberal.
j frank - you call those go
May 3, 2007 - 15:38 ET by Dee Bunkj frank - you call those good reasons? Maybe it is a good reason for a partisan hack, but not for the media. Of course Bush or any Rep candidate will blame the other party just as the Dems will blame republicans. The press should sort out the politics and say this is how it really is.
And Bush did get them to "open the spigot" that isn't the problem. Read the article.
Hooo Hahahaha Good one
May 3, 2007 - 17:27 ET by c5then"Maybe it is a good reason for a partisan hack, but not for the media."
Of course...Most of the media ARE partisan hacks!Bush was blamed when prices
May 3, 2007 - 15:50 ET by JDWBush was blamed when prices dropped, now when they rise. That's a strong case.
Oil prices fluctuate based upon world supply and demand. How can Bush influence that?
The last refinery built was in the early 70's. We cannot drill in Alaska or offshore. Supply continues to decrease and demand increases. Which party is preventing Bush from signing the bill to drill?
JDW
News media: Scoreboard for terrorists
Socialist - I know you dream
May 3, 2007 - 21:50 ET by UnsaneSocialist - I know you dream of a day when the government controls the price at the pump, but until your long-wished for 1917 style revolution happens, the market controls the price of gas.
"HAV3 TH3 BRIDG3S OF INSANITY B33N CROSS3D AND FOR3V3R R3TRACT3D???." - Meshuggah, "3ntrapm3nt", from Catch Thirty Thr33 (2005)
We need to be self-dependent
May 3, 2007 - 15:57 ET by bigtimerWe need to be self-dependent here in our own country, which can be done easily and enviro friendly...
I hope McCain gets asked that tonight about his vote that could of changed everything with ANWR, drilling here and off-shore, especially during a time of war, and the Senate that has been the cause of this for over thirty years and his GW issues....of course we all know the left will love his answers but I want him exposed for what he really has done with just one of his votes that ends up hurting us here at home and aides the terrorists/dictators world-wide with our dependency on foreign oil...it is despicable.
Drill Often!...Drill Everywhere! (thanks BD)
Drilling for Oil and Gas in US.
May 3, 2007 - 23:07 ET by alamojbContrary to popular opinion, there is quite a bit of drilling going on in the US at the current time. I like to look at the BakerHughes Weekly drilling rig count on occasion. The North American Count is " number of drilling rigs actively exploring for or developing oil or natural gas.." according to the site. Some small rigs may not be included. Remember, a rig could be drilling at the same site for more than one week, so the rig count does not tell you how many new wells are completed that week. Also, the rig count does not tell you how many wells were completed earlier and are active. A cousin of mine who works near Shreveport told me they took about two weeks to drill a gas well there. I do not know if that is the national average or if he was including set up time, which would not meet Baker Hughes definition of active. Unfortunately, most of the wells being drilled in the US are for Natural Gas, not Oil. For the week of April 27, there were 1747 rigs active in US. Of that, 1460 were for Natural gas - not oil. Of the 1747 Oil and Gas rigs that week active in the US, 823 were in Texas (roughly 47%) At some point I would like to look at the places in the US where there are known oil and gas reserves and compare that to where rigs are. I strongly suspect we are not tapping into our full domestic potential and I do not just mean ANWR. As mentioned by others, we have a refining capacity issue, also. The Baker Hughes site can be found at: http://www.bakerhughes.com/investor/rig/rig_na.htm