Low oil prices

Low oil prices

This article points out how low oil prices, primarily because of exploding North American production, are causing immense pressure on Putin, Assad, and other bad actors who depend on oil revenue to keep going.

Does anyone remember how the Republicans were mocked for their naïve "drill, baby, drill" mantra, and the foolish notion that increasing domestic production would have any effect whatsoever on world oil prices?

The article notes that our expanded oil production puts us in a temporary position of strength, and wonders if we will be able to use it effectively. My take: no, because politics.

Brian H | 3 december 2014

Loverly article. Hope for America: Obama continues to kick way wide of his goalposts.

Red Sage ca us | 4 december 2014

Wake me when it's $32 a barrel.

bigd | 4 december 2014

Sage, It could be if the federal Govt would open up and let the US drill baby drill

Red Sage ca us | 4 december 2014

Then I'll roll over and go back to sleep, dreaming of EV awesomeness.

bigd | 5 december 2014

good point

Guy2095 | 5 december 2014

The faster we pump it the sooner it will be gone.

MitchP85D | 5 december 2014

Oh, I very well remember the liberal media mockery of Palin and her drill baby drill comment. You see, liberals have these hyper-active neurons in their brains the rest of us don't have. And their super intelligence made damn sure that we learn that increasing supply does not lower price!

Don't have to worry about pumping it so fast it will be all gone. The highly leveraged operators will all go broke before that happens. When the price of oil gets low enough, shale oil will be put on hold until the price rebounds up again.

Red Sage ca us | 5 december 2014

Precisely my point. Either way, EVs win.

Conserve, reduce, reuse, recyle... Produce vehicles that use less and less fuel... Replace older vehicles with electrics, until the weight of market share makes ICE irrelevant.


Drill baby, drill... Burn those dinosaurs... until its all gone. Oh. Nothing to power the HEMI anymore? Don't wanna burn everclear, when you'd rather drink it? Cool. We do have these electric cars, you know...

lph | 6 december 2014

A financial forecasting service I use says expect oil prices to vary between about 70 to 90 a barrel for the next 3 years with 75 to 85 most likely.
But like anything looking into the future it is only a guess.

aljjr2 | 6 december 2014

For the drill baby comes CO2 baby CO2. With 25% of the animals extinct and the oceans becoming so acidic that shell fish are dying off we will have cheap oil as the human race diminishes in the coming century.

Look your kids and grand kids in the face and say "but we wanted Cheap oil. Sorry, opps our bad!"

Mattski | 6 december 2014

Um, climate change? Contaminated ground water? Oil spills, tanker train derailments/explosions, pipeline breaks? I'm as happy as anyone to put a big hurt on Putin and the nut jobs in the Middle East (not to mention Exxon, BP, and Shell), but the best way to do that PERMANENTLY is to get our energy base off oil. Renewables are ready. Batteries are getting better. Bye-bye oil.

MitchP85D | 6 december 2014

Oil, natural gas, and coal will be with us for not only decades, but for the next few centuries to come! The reason is simple. It is abundant and cheap. The hard part is getting to it and bringing it to market. The other hard part are goofy liberal democrat politicians getting in the way. In the meantime, alternative sources for energy will be developed. And if the government would just get out of the way, the free market will determine what the best alternatives are. "Bye-bye oil?" Maybe in 300 years.

Brian H | 6 december 2014

CO2 is benign, and currently responding, as always, with an 800 yr. time lag, this time the the Medieval Warm period.

Brian H | 6 december 2014

typos: this time to the... Warm Period.

MitchP85D | 6 december 2014

Untrue. Airplanes use aviation fuel. Boats use gasoline and diesel. Plastic is made from oil. Those are not going away. "When" EV's take over the auto industry, this will leave move fuel available for marine and aviation purposes, which will lower the cost of transporting goods, and improve the standard of living for everybody. ICE machines will not go away that easy. They know they have to compete against EV's, which means the ICE will become more efficient, and cheaper. I see a big WIN for everybody in the next few decades.

bigd | 6 december 2014

rmitchell108 +10

Mattski | 6 december 2014

Shensierra, I couldn't have said it better myself.

Mitchell108: this is a board on EV's in general. I think we're basically in agreement. "Bye-bye Oil" refers to automotive transportation, probably in about 20 years. Maybe sooner. The reason? EV's will be cheaper to operate, more convenient, and offer better performance and driving experience. AND will dramatically lower auto emission pollution and our carbon footprint, due to the sheer number of automobiles. As one investment bank recently put it, "It won't be a fair fight." EV's are better and cheaper to operate. Heck, even the Chevy Volt is a blast to drive in "Sport" mode.

I realize aviation, plastics, and heavy equipment will continue to use fossil fuels, but even they will be converted to using cleaner burning fuels and natural gas. Utilities can start using more solar and wind energy, especially if they have a better, and cheaper, energy storage solution (read Tesla batteries).

And BTW, it was those "goofy liberal Democrats" AND Republicans (before most became shills for Corporate America) that worked together to get rid of lead in gasoline and reduce other pollutants in automobile exhaust. Take a look at any photo of the Los Angeles skyline in the late '60's or early '70's and you'll see an ugly, smoggy mess that looks an awful lot like Beijing and Shanghai today. The free market clearly wasn't working to the benefit of citizens in that instance. It took regulations to clean it up. And the free market won't work in the case of climate change, either, since the "costs" aren't apparent for years or decades to come (I.e., after it's too late to negate the worst effects). And please know.. It ain't the Earth I'm worried about. The planet will be fine. Human civilization on the other hand may not be so lucky. Call it mass starvation, extinction events, or a "self-correcting mechanism," the Earth will do what it has always done for the 99.99% of it's 4.5 billion year existence before humans came along when things got out of balance. And that isn't pretty! I'd rather WE come up with a solution before Mother Nature does.

Oil & gas will be a significant part of our economy in a number of ways for years to come. But there are some ways we can significantly reduce and change the way it's used and its resulting environmental and atmospheric impacts starting now. I prefer to support and be apart of that change, since it will be for the better. My cars will now be EVs (Tesla's), and so for me and others, it's "Bye-bye Oil!" Solar panels for my house are next. Bye-bye Utilities. Ain't freedom great?

bigd | 6 december 2014

"And the free market won't work in the case of climate change, either, since the "costs" aren't apparent for years or decades to come (I.e., after it's too late to negate the worst effects)." And yet more unverifiable nonsense as none of the predictions of catastrophic events have come true or are even close. sigh

Red Sage ca us | 7 december 2014

bigd: Tell me... What's the over/under for a hurricane striking New Jersey, New York, and New England? Where's the fundamental ecological benefit of oil spills in the Gulf of Mexico? Will my Mom not have to worry about seeing tornado and flash flood warnings in surrounding counties of Mississippi during 2015? If catastrophic events are not bound to happen one day, then what will replace them? Sunshine, butterflies, and unicorns, perhaps? Shall we do nothing to prepare for such eventualities? Will New Orleans be perfectly safe to build and rebuild below sea level with impunity and without sufficient levees and drainage?

Mike83 | 8 december 2014

Since Obama became President the stock market and US economy boomed and is still strong as his executive actions overcame the monkey wretches the GOP threw in the way. After the worst depression instigated by Bush/Chenny and the energy production incentives that almost killed the US economy Obama pulled us out of it and that pisses off the good ole boys.
Oil boom? We still import more oil than we export. Destroying the environment is making us a banana republic. And the temporary increase in oil may only last 3 years according to DOE. Fracking works for a little while and then production slumps. This is why the big oil producers sold their fracking interests to those gullible enough to buy the propaganda.
It amazes me how many have rose colored glasses of their own opinions with little objectivity about real solutions.
Luckily we have 2 more years of President Obama and then who knows. Maybe another Bush and another self inflicted recession.

bigd | 8 december 2014

1)"What's the over/under for a hurricane striking New Jersey, New York, and New England?" you get good odds here as hurricanes are at historical lows

2)"Where's the fundamental ecological benefit of oil spills in the Gulf of Mexico?" Hmm good point, unless we consider more birds are killed from windmills each year and wonder about the ecological benefits of that :-)

3)"Will my Mom not have to worry about seeing tornado and flash flood warnings in surrounding counties of Mississippi during 2015?" Same as number one, But if it flooding id be glad to put your sweet mother up in a cabin I have in Tenn. It is on the highest mountain there so she will be safe.

4)"Shall we do nothing to prepare for such eventualities?" Absolutely not, I am all for being prepared till someone had to go to the part I quoted. If not trying to blame CO2 Id not have said a word, well you know me, id have said something, but it would have been positive :-)

5)"Will New Orleans be perfectly safe to build and rebuild below sea level with impunity and without sufficient levees and drainage?" That was the worst case of neglect by a city as can be found in history. Common sense says you better make sure you are prepared for an event when you build bellow sea level.

However, I write this knowing you are more than intelligent enough to know my reference was to that I quoted. You just had to try to ruin my day but it didn't work. I have unicorns in my head now :-)

Brian H | 8 december 2014

Note that every attempt to tie a weather event to AGW has failed to get past the stage of bald ignorant assertion. And will continue to do so.

blue adept | 9 december 2014

Lower oil prices do nothing to detract from the fact of the toxic emissions produced from its use that are affecting our environment and even our very lives, even the lives of our children and their children's children.

Death is still death no matter how cheap of a price tag it might come with.

vgarbutt | 9 december 2014


Are you forgetting that very soon, in less than 10 years, solar and wind coupled with grid storage will be cheaper than coal and gas ?

Dramsey | 10 december 2014

Are you forgetting that very soon, in less than 10 years, solar and wind coupled with grid storage will be cheaper than coal and gas ?

Said many people in the 1960s...

I laughed at this then since I knew that we'd have fusion power first!


Red Sage ca us | 10 december 2014

Doc Brown is working on Mr Fusion... Should be ready by October 2015. It'll plug right into the frunk. Just like a blower!

MitchP85D | 10 december 2014

If oil, gas, and coal become obsolete, I have no problem with that whatsoever - as long as that gets accomplished by consumer choice - NOT by government force!

Since I am in the prediction business, I predict oil, coal, and natural gas will remain an integral part of our energy requirements for many decades to come! Yep, I remember those funny predictions in the 1960s and 1970s as well. The one I liked best was that we would run out of oil by the year 2000!

Model ☰ | 10 december 2014

Since I am in the prediction business, I predict oil, coal, and natural gas will remain an integral part of our energy requirements for many decades to come!

I predict you are absolutely right - as long as it is left to consumer choice - and NOT to government force! :p

... and I predict that if your prediction is right, your grandchildren will hate you for what you left them.

MitchP85D | 10 december 2014

I am most certain that your prediction about my grandchildren will have the same result as Al Gore's prediction about the Arctic ice cap!

Red Sage ca us | 11 december 2014

rmitchell108 expressed, "The one I liked best was that we would run out of oil by the year 2000!"

There were a lot more cars on the road in 2000 than there were in 1975. If they had all been mandated, from then until now, to be three ton plus V8 powered gas guzzling behemoths that struggled to achieve 12 MPG highway mileage, and 3 MPG while sitting in gridlocked traffic, then yes, we would have run out of oil a whole lot sooner. Thank God for Volkswagen, Datsun, Honda, and Toyota.

Even with the efforts of the EPA, beginning in the mid-1970s, to improve Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE), fought at every turn by traditional automobile manufacturers, most especially those based in Detroit, the United States of America still uses exponentially -- logarithmically -- more fuel today than forty years ago as a whole, if not per vehicle.

Without necessary improvements in drilling technology, combined with mandated improvements in fuel economy...? Oil would have been so incredibly hard to find and refine that by now, yes, it would effectively be 'gone', used up, tapped out. And whomever was willing to sell it would be asking a whole lot more than $90 per barrel today. Meanwhile, everyone willing to buy it would spill plenty blood for the privilege.

Alternate fuel technologies have been the butt of the joke, while attempting to be the carrot and the stick, leading the way to a bright future. Electric cars re approaching a point where they can be used as a big stick in a dark alley and a foot up the bum.

carlk | 11 december 2014

That is so short sighted. The Saudis can sell all the oil they have and take the money which they already have more than what they ever need. So are CEO's of oil companies who only care about the years they are in tenure. So are the politicians.

What about the rest of the humanity?

Red Sage ca us | 11 december 2014

Copied from another fun thread, just because:

Tin foil hat conspiracy theorists have long told that any inkling of perpetual motion, free energy, water power, cold fusion, etc. developments have already been bought off or buried or waylaid or otherwise discredited and are being held in secret en lieu of such an eventuality.

Personally? I have no faith in petroleum fuel companies morphing into energy companies at all. I think they are run by people who honestly believe crude is eternal, or that it will last until they retire and their stock options mature.

In the meantime, they have no interest whatsoever in building any alternative infrastructure in any sincere fashion that goes beyond being able to pose for photo opportunities to go in marketing packets. And if they bothered to address the tin foil hat crowd it would be to say they have no hit squads and don't abduct people or wipe their minds or pay them off...

Because that work is handled by the DEA, ATF, FBI, CIA, NSA, Die Vaterla... err, I mean, Homeland Security, the Illuminati, Majestic 12, the Council of Three, and the Men In Black.


Grinnin'.VA | 13 december 2014

@ Red Sage ca us | December 11, 2014

Tin foil hat conspiracy theorists have long ...

BTW, are you one of these 'tin foil hat conspiracy theorists'?
I didn't think so.

Would you care to address issues instead of writing contemptuous insults? Or is that the best you can do?

Go Tesla!

Dramsey | 13 december 2014

Oil below $60! [insert evil laugh]. Watch Russia, Venezuela, OPEC, et al thrash as their kleptocracies crater.

Of course the effects on the stock market have reduced my personal net worth somewhat. But it's worth it!

rlwrw | 13 december 2014

Amusing thought: Low oil prices are perpetrated by the entire world solely for the purpose of driving Tesla out of business. At any cost!
When one has a great car, it almost does not matter what kind of propulsion is used to power it.
Amusing thought null and void.

blue adept | 13 december 2014

The real question is how much do we value Life as Death, no matter how inexpensive, is still Death.

One must prioritize their necessities (like fresh air to breathe, fresh water to drink and toxin-free food to eat).

bigd | 13 december 2014

JAA, I ask you one question, do you believe that giving vaccines is a good thing ?

bigd | 13 december 2014

@ Red Sage -- Grinnin wrote "Would you care to address issues instead of writing contemptuous insults?" Please do not listen to him. Even when you are "insulting" me I find your wit original, hilarious, and refreshing, on this forum :-) Some just have insecurity issues and can not enjoy your creativity, but most do enjoy it.

blue adept | 13 december 2014


On the one hand there's strong precedence for the inherent adaptability of our genetic constitution, our phenotypic elasticity as it were.

Then there's the equally compelling argument for preventative measures to guard against the exposure to toxic agents that might be/have been unintentionally introduced into our environment, though it's always wise to obtain inoculations before traveling to a third world country due to differing environmental norms from one region to another.

The choice of which avenue to pursue is best left up to the individual.

How's that for an answer, bigd?

Dramsey | 13 december 2014

The efficacy of vaccines is debatable? Really?

Funny: I feel the same way about AGW...

bigd | 13 december 2014

JAA Since you avoided that one ill ask another. What about seat belts and airbags, should they be required ?

bigd | 13 december 2014

Dramsey Good point LOL.

P.Mac | 14 december 2014

Interesting. There are so many divisive topics these days related to ecology, taxes, education, etc. On any of these issues there are a great many people that simply do not care. But among those who are passionate about things that affect them, the divide is invariably along political lines. The Tesla Model S seems to be one of the few things (ideas?) that inspires significant passion while attracting people from all persuasions.

I am not sure what this means, but it is one more thing that I really love about my car.

Red Sage ca us | 14 december 2014

For those who may care... I don't bother wearing a tin foil hat, because I figure that THEY have been watching me since I was like, three years old or something. If THEY haven't figured out what I'm up to by now, then THEY must not be very good at their jobs. Also, please note the final paragraph of my previous reply.


blue adept | 14 december 2014


Oh, I answered your question, it was just more contextually substantive than what you were likely looking for, a practice I'm in the habit of doing as I've often found it necessary to explain my answers.

That and, in today's world, it seems that nothing is ever as simple as a 'yes' or 'no' answer these days, most of the time anyway.

As for your second question...Yes.

blue adept | 14 december 2014


Not the "efficacy", just the desire/necessity, though there's no longer really any question about the reality of AGW.

Hell, we were aware of the harmful side effects of our industrial efforts on the environment in the very beginning, just research the "peppered moth" and you'll see.

(Yes, there are two(2) moths in this image, one as they naturally were and the other depicting the abnormal influence our industry has had on their evolution)

Dramsey | 29 december 2014


Yeah, because when I look at the Catholic Church's historical positions on science, I am filled with confidence.

No, I jape. Seriously, can you think of an organization with a worse record?

MitchP85D | 29 december 2014

For starters, why don't we reduce our dependence on WHO we get our oil from. The WHO I'm referring to are the ones who like to blow up Jews, Brits, and Americans. The current low price of oil will make that more difficult. But we can start by trading more with Canada and less with that clusterstan part of the world. Let green energy develop on its own without government subsidies. That way, the most viable form of green energy will take root and flourish.

bigd | 29 december 2014

@Dramsey - I dint mind if the AGW cult get in with Catholic's, at least Catholic is a real religion ;-)

rmitchell108 "Let green energy develop on its own without government subsidies. That way, the most viable form of green energy will take root and flourish." Because it would be the common sense approach and liberals don't understand that.

"The current low price of oil will make that more difficult." If we drilled on federal land we would reduce dependency without fracking. However, to allow that to happen takes away the reason of giving subsidies to renewable.

Sad thing is if Govt stayed out we would still move to more renewable without adding to the deficit.

Mike83 | 30 december 2014

Gregor Mendel, a Catholic priest, helped discover genetics and evolution is believed by most sane people. The Catholic Church got out of the dark ages centuries ago thanks to the courage of Copernicus and Galileo. Although we still have some who are having problems understanding the interpretation of different biblical translations. Its remarkable that we have people today who want to live in the dark ages. They go so far as to believe the propaganda put out by the fossil fuel industries living off the taxpayers.
Government should stop funding oil, coal and those industries destroying our environment. The few states with Senators and Congressmen who whine about helping the environment are those who stand to lose monies from oil, coal extraction. The republicans have a Congressional whip who gives talks to white supremacists.
If that is not ignorant I don't know what is.