Related MRC content linked below.
NBC Today co-host Meredith Vieira opened her Today at the Pump segment cheering the recent decrease in gas prices as "sweet relief" but then wondered: "Would we be better off...if gas prices were even higher?" On this morning's Today show, Vieira invited on Chevron’s CEO, David O’Reilly, to harass him about getting America off its "dependence" on oil and cited critics of Chevron’s allocation of profits to find alternative sources of energy as merely, "symbolic."
The following exchange occurred on the June 21st edition of Today:
Vieira: "Would, would we be better off, sir, if gas prices were even higher, if it were four, five, six dollars a gallon? Wouldn't that provide the incentive we need to come up with alternative forms of gas and to stop this dependence that we have on foreign oil?"
David O'Reilly, Chevron: "Well I think, I don't think many people would like to see gasoline that high."
Vieira: "But would we be better off?"
O'Reilly: "I'm not sure that we would because it's a very important part of our economy. Our people drive to work, all of us drive to work. I'm sure you come to and from work in an automobile or a taxi and we need the people of America need affordable gasoline. So I think it's important that we supply that and that's why there's a lot of work going on to expand gasoline supply. Our refining system, for example, has been expanded to produce a million gallons a day more, over the last couple of years alone."
Vieira: "Let's talk a little bit about Chevron and, and profits. Since 2003 you've gone from, I think, it's $7.2 billion profits to, $17.1 billion. Where has that money gone and how much of it have you put into research and development of alternative sources of energy?"
O'Reilly: "Well the most important thing is that we made $17 million last year, that's the correct number, $17 billion. We've, and this year we are investing $19.6 billion in increasing supplies of energy of all types, gasoline, of course, which is very important. Jet fuel, diesel. We're also working on bio-fuels. We're working on other alternatives and we have our own energy efficiency company that actually sells energy efficiency as a, as a product, Chevron Energy Solutions. So I think we're investing both in the supplies of all types of energy as well as the demand."
Vieira: "But how do you answer critics who say it really amounts to just one-tenth of one percent of total sales? That it is symbolic, is more than symbolic, but not much more than symbolic?"
O'Reilly: "Well all new businesses start small. When we got into businesses in the past, they started small and they grew. So this is a business that was $50 million just five years ago. It's now in the three to $400 million range, so it's growing. And naturally you start small before you get bigger. But we're optimistic. We wouldn't be in this business if we didn't think energy efficiency was a very, very important value, given that, that, the crude oil is not renewable."
Vieira: "But, again, why not invest more than one-tenth of one percent of your total sales?"
O'Reilly: "Well we're investing $2.5 billion, which is substantially more than, than, than you've just calculated in our, in our total, alternative energy suite of products. Geo-thermal, other alternatives, bio-fuels, bio-fuels research but you have to start small before you can get bigger."
Related Items: "Big Oil" just can't win. The MRC's Business & Media Institute (BMI) has a new report about how the media hype high gas prices, sometimes as a pretext for government intervention in pricing or to levy new taxes. Also, BMI has noted that Vieira isn't alone is wanting higher gas prices. For example, CNN's Jack Cafferty advocated higher gas prices for SUV owners.
—Geoffrey Dickens is the senior news analyst at the Media Research Center.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Well, Meredith, it would get
June 21, 2007 - 11:40 ET by RackieWell, Meredith, it would get the riffraff off the road so you could get about more quickly in your limo.
feeling gassy...
June 21, 2007 - 14:39 ET by TruthMongerDing...the light bulb finally goes on...only took you a few years, Meredith...just awesome...nice to have you with us...
From the people who can't wait to raise our taxes: "Gas is getting so damn expensive! (which generates more tax revenue in the process)"
Not saying Meredith is making a correct analogy of course but maybe Leon can send her the definition of C-O-N-S-I-S-T-E-N-C-Y? Get that one going and then let's talk logic and reason...a couple of more advanced topics that will help...
Once she has that going we can talk about conservationism. Conservatives own that one, too. The new verbage is also nice such as "environmentalist" or "going green" so lets party with all of it!
Kudos to Nixon for establishing the EPA - which was not easy due to his inheritance of the DEMOCRATS VIETNAM consuming an enourmous amount of his extremely valuable conservative time...without the DEMOCRATS VIETNAM and Nixon's impeachment he probably would have already saved the world from global warming/cooling/whatever...
Kudos to Bush for actually practicing what Gore and fellow sycophants can seem to only hypocritically preach - living on a Texas ranch that saves more energy than an Amish afternoon nap...
Alternative energy. Ah yes, the "alternate lifestyles." What else do we have to choose from there? Gay marriage. Pedophilia. Heroin addict. Porn star...just look what they've added to our quickly degrading culture. Maybe "alternative" energy can also bring us more AIDS, abused children, whacked out druggies, and shocking popups when the kids go internet browsing...
I'm not mad at the left actually. Everyone needs to feel like they have a purpose. And when your philosophies on life can't rise to the occasion - it only makes sense to make them up or borrow someone else's - these are the artists after all, very creative people, they "see" things that the rest of us are very glad to miss - not that I don't appreciate it when they always force us to check out the latest "pissChrist" of the month anyway...
So what kinds of alternative energy do we have available? The sun. The wind. The ocean currents. Hmmm. Just like oil. Things that belong to the earth. So let's rape and pillage all that stuff, too!! That's really going to help with all of the "consumption guilt" I'm really supposed to be feeling as a new member of the Albert Gorethalic Church...
Or we could all just live like the Amish. Basically a hippie commune. All the guys have long hair and beards. And nary a female would dare shave the armpits. No electricity, no running water, no cars, no stress, no disease, no bills, no crime, no guns, tune in, turn on, drop out...it goes on and on and on...
The Amish are showing us the way! It's the most "alternative lifestyle" on the planet. No carbon footprints - these people even walk on water...so what are we waiting for?!?!?!?!? Merdith would look absolutely fantastic in a big black dress...
The only pumps Viera deals wi
June 21, 2007 - 16:28 ET by Chris NormanThe only pumps Viera deals with are probably Guccis...
The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on.
- Arabian Proverb
Would we be better off Vieira, if you had a higher IQ?
June 21, 2007 - 11:46 ET by acaiguanaWould we be better off Vieira, if you had a higher IQ?
"Vieira: "Would, would we be better off, sir, if gas prices were even higher, "
"Vieria: Well...um...I...don't think so."
We know Vieria, we know.
ACA
...
Quoted from: 'Acaiguana Notes from the Bomb Shelter' (soon to be a movie at theaters near you)
If cigarettes were to double
June 21, 2007 - 11:51 ET by Hero SquadIf cigarettes were to double in price, would that encourage people to quit smoking?
Not too many.
*****
"I'm sorry, you must have mistaken me for a clown that gives a damn!" - Sticky the Clown
Hero,I used to be a smoker wh
June 21, 2007 - 15:06 ET by LeonHero,
I used to be a smoker when I lived in NYC where cigarettes were about $7 - 8 (double many other places in America) and I definitely started smoking less. I went from about a pack a day to less than half a pack a day.
I simply couldn't justify the costs.
But I think for the real, hardcore smokers price is almost irrelevant.
}}----> Vieira
June 21, 2007 - 11:53 ET by Cool ArrowVieira: "But how do you answer critics who say it really amounts to just one-tenth of one percent of total sales? That it is symbolic, is more than symbolic, but not much more than symbolic.
Translation: I'm too chickensh#t to accuse you directly because we both know how stupid I am, but shouldn't your company pay more in taxes so Americans could pay less at the pump?
Who says Vieira is dum?
The libs are absolutely sch
June 21, 2007 - 12:06 ET by lnthompThe libs are absolutely schizophrenic.
Lee T.
U.S. Navy (ret.) / Vancouver, Washington
The history of the race, and each individual's experience, are thick with evidence that a truth is not hard to kill and that a lie told well is immortal.-- Mark Twain
OMG!! Vierra is high! She
June 21, 2007 - 12:09 ET by whatajoyOMG!! Vierra is high! She is delusional. She obviously has NO CLUE what she is talking about. When was the last time she herself pumped gas? Why would she say something so horrific? I live in Arizona and the bus system here is a joke. Slow, unreliable, routes don't even go that far outside the city to the suburbs where I live. I'd have to have THREE bus transfers and get up 2-3 hours before my work shift to do the bus system and then get home at 8pm. Phoenix isn't organized in public transportation like New York is. If gas got higher, I'd freak out!!
SHUT UP! SHUT THE FREAK UP, MEREDITH!!! YA DELUSIONAL WHACKO!!
-------------------------------------------------------------
Take it easy! We're not making a western here.
~ Uncle Junior (The Sopranos)
Bus schedule
June 21, 2007 - 12:17 ET by florida_chadI live in a college town that has been trying to get people to get rid of their cars for the last few years. I'm with you whatajoy. I couldn't take a bus even if I wanted to (which I don't). I take my kids to school each morning (no bus service for them either). Plus, how am I supposed to take home my groceries on a bus. Usually I have 5-7 full paper (yes-paper, no crappy plastic bags) bags of groceries. I also have horses and usually a cow. How do I bring home 300 pounds of feed on the bus. Idiots.......
I agree completely. When I wa
June 21, 2007 - 13:46 ET by Hero SquadI agree completely. When I was a student in England, I managed to ride the bus, train, etc. to get where I needed to go. But a) The infrastructure over there was quite different, due in no small part to it being a smaller country, and b) I was a student, with more modest transport means. For me at least, taking the bus is far more of a hassle than paying for gas. It is not a viable option.
One question: How do you "usually" have a cow?
*****
"I'm sorry, you must have mistaken me for a clown that gives a damn!" - Sticky the Clown
One question: How do you &q
June 21, 2007 - 15:05 ET by GalvanicOne question: How do you "usually" have a cow?
I hold my breath until my face turns beet-red (for the effect), then scream angry threats while shaking my fist. :-)
whatajoy, when these idiots s
June 21, 2007 - 15:03 ET by Unsanewhatajoy, when these idiots spend large blocks of their lives in and around New York, they quickly begin to assume that the entire world is exactly like that. They are completely clueless to how the rest of the United States is constructed. Take Houston for example: no subways, ONE light rail line, HOV lanes, and a bus system that doesn't get you everywhere you need to go. Car ownership, as bad as traffic is here, is a MUST. The New York-centric reporters and anchors cannot and will not understand that.
MAKE WAY FOR THE SAN ANTONIO SPURS!!! THE 1999, 2003, 2005, AND 2007 NBA CHAMPIONS!!!!
Obviously, gasoline @ $6.00/g
June 21, 2007 - 12:11 ET by GalvanicObviously, gasoline @ $6.00/gal wouldn't bother Vieira, because she makes millions of dollars each year, and thus has no incentive to cut back on consumption to save the environment.
So, let's have a pro-rated price on gasoline based on an individual's net-worth. Thus, the working poor might pay $2.00/gal, while celebrities like Ms. Vieira pay $200.00/gal. And same for aviation fuel for private jets. The working poor pay $10/gal to fuel their Gulfstreams, while the wealthy pay $1000.00/gal to fuel theirs.
How 'bout it, Meredith?
Galvanic: I totally agree. Ho
June 21, 2007 - 16:24 ET by shannon20Galvanic: I totally agree. How dare someone that makes that much money and lives in a city where everyone has access to mass transportation,(not that she uses it)encourage him to raise gas prices. I live outside Atlanta about 25 minutes and outside of Atlanta with few exceptions there is no mass Transportation. We already spend about $230 a week for gas as is. Does she not realize that gas prices going higher can really bring our economy to a halt. Does she not realize that if gas prices went any higher, some people would loose their jobs from not being able to afford to go to work. Wouldn't be able to feed their families because food costs would be outragious. These people are so out of touch with the real America. BTW my gulfstream is broke-down....
Great idea. Anyone making $
June 21, 2007 - 16:26 ET by buddycGreat idea. Anyone making $500,000.00 or more pays 100% tax on any vehicle they purchase and pays $200.00 a gallor for gas and if they have a house that is larger than the average size for entire state, they pay a 100% excess energy usage tax on their utility bills.
I love the quote, 'rely on fo
June 21, 2007 - 12:50 ET by BinxlyI love the quote, 'rely on foreign oil.' We have rediculous amounts of oil here within our own borders but due to unfounded enviro-nuts, we 'aren't allowed.' I remember when they said the Alaskan Pipeline would harm the local wildlife, when in fact, *since* the pipeline, wildlife in the surrounding area has been *on the rise.*
I wish people would just pay attention, then instead of America whining over the last hollywood blunder they could get behind a valid cause, like opening up our own nation for oil drilling and therefore not only relying less on potential 'terror nations' but also drop our gas prices signifigantly.
}}----> $29 Billion axed
June 21, 2007 - 13:00 ET by Cool ArrowDemocrat proposed $29 Billion tax increase on oil companies just got axed.
No Reverand Al, not asked.
Sheesh.
Thank goodness the Repubs had
June 21, 2007 - 13:27 ET by dscottThank goodness the Repubs had the where withall to block this stealth tax increase on the poor. Since when do corporations not pass on all costs???
Some here seem to think Meredith Vieira by her advocacy is a dolt or so wealthy she could care less what gas costs. We can debate that ever so popular point, but quite frankly Meredith was dutifully doing her job as the mouth piece for the Dem Party by floating a trial balloon to gage public reaction.
Does it not occur to anyone that liberals representing themselves as champions of the poor can not openly justify a regressive tax increase that hurts the poor? The Dems know the price of gas has to go up in order to restrain demand to appease their monied environut constituency. The environuts or econuts have the money and the poor have the votes. The fact is the Dems want the money for government programs (to buy votes) instead of going into the pockets of us, the stockholders (you know, everyone of us who has a 401k or IRA). Let us be honest about this, the greedy corporate bast$%%#$ds are us! It's us versus the Dems.
“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
Cool....I watched that vote t
June 21, 2007 - 16:37 ET by bigtimerCool....
I watched that vote to...
Cool wasn't it?
Drill Often!...Drill Everywhere!
}}----> tax axed
June 21, 2007 - 16:44 ET by Cool ArrowI was surprised the Republicans found their cajones long enough to vote it down.
My theory is that my Senator Kay Bailey Hutchinson told the little weasels top man-up.
Cool....Yep...I'm waiting pat
June 21, 2007 - 17:02 ET by bigtimerCool....
Yep...
I'm waiting patiently to see what is coming up with this so-called Energy Fiasco they call a Bill...
Not one drop of guaranteed self-dependency is included so far...same as they have done for the last 35 years now or more...we can't have that...nope, we like paying/contributing to some the terrorists who have control of where we import most of our oil...you know..that bad word....OIL...we would have had it on line long ago if it weren't for the enviro lobbyists ect...
This during a time of war when as far as I am concerned the President could and should of ordered enviro safe drilling the minute that we got hit here 9/11 along with closing the borders..under National Security.
Just a bunch of leftist lobbying group mish-mash gibberish we have now for a Bill....
I hope it goes DOWN in flames...
I have my doubts.
}}----> Please Mr. Enemy
June 21, 2007 - 17:10 ET by Cool ArrowPlease Mr. Enemy, can I buy some more of your oil so I can fuel my tanks and jets so I can kill you?
"Vieira: "But how
June 21, 2007 - 13:15 ET by ckc1227"Vieira: "But how do you answer critics who say it really
amounts to just one-tenth of one percent of total sales? That it is
symbolic, is more than symbolic, but not much more than symbolic?""
I agree, it probably is symbolic, and the reason why is simple, viera: they are in the oil business, not the alternative energy business. May as well ask Walmart or Bank of America, or even ABC how much of their profits are being invested in alternative energy research.
"Would, would we be better off, sir, if gas prices were even
higher, if it were four, five, six dollars a gallon? Wouldn't that
provide the incentive we need to come up with alternative forms of gas
and to stop this dependence that we have on foreign oil?"
Isn't that how high gas is in the UK, and has been for years? Yet, for some reason, they haven't been motivated to cut down on gas consumption, or motivated to create an alternative energy source.
"For example, CNN's Jack Cafferty advocated higher gas prices for SUV owners."
Which is ridiculous, as SUV owners already pay more in taxes on their consumption because they have to buy more gas, all things being equal. Additionally, I drive an SUV, and I can almost guarantee I consume less gas than 90% of vehicle owners.
Chevron is an OIL company
June 21, 2007 - 13:23 ET by ZippyTheChimpWhen did it become Chevron's or *any* oil company's responsibility to find an alternative fuel source?
They're in the business of selling oil-based products! So what if they don't spend a nickel on researching an alternative fuel? It may make smart business sense to do so, but if they don't and end up out of business when the oil dries up (or someone else develops an alternative), who cares? (Other than their sharholders)
--Zippy
}}----> Good Get Zippy
June 21, 2007 - 13:30 ET by Cool ArrowThat's their business. and if they fail to keep up (in the same way Swiss watchmakers failed to see a market in digital watches) then it's their funeral.
Companies have a right to fail as well as succeed. And you are correct. It is their right to keep on dancing with the girl that brung them.
Soros - Move-on - let them invest in alt energy
June 21, 2007 - 13:41 ET by Gary HallWouldn't it be nice if one of these fine days, a reporter would pop the question at someone with a big mouth and $billions in their pocket, "Well sir, while you are busy ponding on the oil companies for not investing more into the devolopment of alternative energy, what are you doing with your $billions of dollars - besides propping up an entire generation of hate spewing idiots? Seeing as you are so convinced that there is a great future in alternative energy Mr. Soros, why not invest your $billions into a development company to do just that. In fact you could team up with the Kennedy's, Redford, Brad sombody, and a host of very wealthy Hollywood elites, etc., and create your own alternative energy conglomerate?"
Oh. We see. It wouldn't be a solid investment. Mmm.
It could be a good investment
June 21, 2007 - 14:23 ET by Agnostic frontIt could be a good investment. The person or company that does create viable alternative to oil is going to be one rich bastard.
You mean like all those sucke
June 21, 2007 - 14:54 ET by dscottYou mean like all those suckers who invested in nuclear power???? Don't worry, as soon as they figure out a way to expoit the alternative energy source, shortly there after, the libs and econuts will find an objection. Ted Kennedy doesn't like wind farms and neither do the econuts. And didn't an econut group already start objecting to solar collectors in the desert a year or two back?
“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
I am a self-proclaimed lib (i
June 21, 2007 - 15:04 ET by Agnostic frontI am a self-proclaimed lib (in case you didn't know) and I have absolutely no problem with nuclear power. I think it just silly that all of our power plants are nuclear at this point. The power is clean (relatively) and cheap. As far as bitching about wind and solar power, those people are dumb asses.
But its not really about gett
June 21, 2007 - 15:07 ET by florida_chadBut its not really about getting clean power, is it. Or else we could have lots more nuclear plants. The enviros don't like nuclear either. To me, it seems to be about slowing down the US economy.
It is scary when I find commo
June 22, 2007 - 00:32 ET by UnsaneIt is scary when I find common ground with a hardened Leftist...
Indeed, France gets 78.5% of their power from nukes. What would be the problem with doing that in the United States? France doesn't even have a permanent waste disposal facility - in fact, only Finland and the United States do.
MAKE WAY FOR THE SAN ANTONIO SPURS!!! THE 1999, 2003, 2005, AND 2007 NBA CHAMPIONS!!!!
Agnostic..
June 21, 2007 - 15:00 ET by Gary HallOh, I'm sure eventually it will be. But in the meantime... they should put their money where their mouth is, and lead in what they believe in.. what they are smearing others for not doing.
Let me play a little devil's
June 21, 2007 - 21:06 ET by mulerider24Let me play a little devil's advocate here. The problem with Vieira is we know her intent, and that spoils the question. I, like most people, look forward to the day we no longer need hostile theocracies for oil. Basic economics states the market will dictate when the gradual transformation to alternative energy will begin - as soon as market conditions provide companies with an incentive to make a better return elsewhere.
So let me repackage the question. Assuming the libs thwart all efforts to expand refining capacity and disallow attempts to increase supply, would gas at $6, $8, or $10 a gallon give companies the incentive to pour billions of dollars into R&D for alternative fuels? Would it make us rely less on Iran and Saudi Arabia for our transporation needs? Would it make automobile owners drive less and force municipalities to think about a more efficient public transportation system? I believe the answer is obvious.
The problem I have is that libs want to force the transition through taxes and scientific fraud (global warming hysteria). Vieira forgets the fact that we are driving cars as a result of capitalistic intuition and ingenuity, not by overly taxing horse ownership. The transition to hydrogen-based fuel (or whatever the next step is) will take place under the same pretense and without political meddling from inept reporters.
mulerider24
June 21, 2007 - 21:45 ET by Gary HallAssuming the libs thwart all efforts to expand refining capacity and disallow attempts to increase supply.. Oh, I've proposed before that CA just go ahead and build their own refinery.. yea, why not? A demonstration project. It would be one of them old fashioned "municipal plants." They should be able to churn out refined gasoline for about 40-45% more than the cost of corporately produced gasoline. In the end, it will settle a lot of issues.
would gas at $6, $8, or $10 a gallon give companies the incentive to pour billions of dollars into R&D for alternative fuels? No.
gotta go to dinner.. or we could have some more fun..(;~> gary
No worries Vieira, we will ha
June 21, 2007 - 14:02 ET by upcountrywaterNo worries Vieira, we will have higher gas prices, and it will not be pretty.
IRANIAN URANIMUN, how much did they make today?
}}----> What? Vieira worried?
June 21, 2007 - 21:58 ET by Cool ArrowMeredith is looking forward to the Million dollar interview next week with Paris Hilton. After that she will offer Matt Lauer 50 cents to lick her boots.
Guys, the big oil companies d
June 21, 2007 - 14:10 ET by MikeBGuys, the big oil companies don't need to do research on alternative fuels. The knowledge and technology have been around since the 1940s. The Nazis perfected a way to make gasoline from coal. South Africa used this technology in the 1970s to make fuel when the rest of the world was piling on to them about their apartheid policies. The technology exists, it's just that the fuel produced by this technology is much more expensive than gasoline refined from oil.
If Ms. Viera were truly wanting the U.S. to be independent of foreign oil, she would be doing stories on how the enviros have been blocking the construction of new refineries, have been blocking drilling in ANWR and off the coasts, have been blocking exploitation of oil sands and shales in Colorado, Utah, and other western states, have been blocking construction of nuclear power plants.
In fact, the big oil companies have known of this technology and have been researching improvements for it for years. They just want the federal government (the taxpayers) to pay for building pilot plants, etc. They objected to utilizing the technology when oil was $10/barrel because it wouldn't be economically feasible. Well, oil is now in the $60/barrel range. When will this fuel source become economically feasible? Why should the taxpayers foot the bill for their research and development?
"A communist is someone who reads Marx. An anti-communist is someone who understands Marx." Ronald Reagan
On Hyper Evil Big Oil
June 21, 2007 - 15:06 ET by UnsaneIt is ALL about those Hyper Evil Big Oil Companies. EVERYTHING is their fault. Period.
MAKE WAY FOR THE SAN ANTONIO SPURS!!! THE 1999, 2003, 2005, AND 2007 NBA CHAMPIONS!!!!
Muhuhahaha... Did I say t
June 22, 2007 - 07:18 ET by dscottMuhuhahaha... Did I say that out loud?
“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