Comments on: Our Strategic Oil Reserve Won’t Help America At The Pump! http://www.bloggernews.net/17028 High-quality English language analysis and editorial writing on the news. Fri, 09 Jan 2009 21:01:45 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.3 By: Hoolie http://www.bloggernews.net/17028#comment-396848 Hoolie Mon, 30 Jun 2008 14:06:51 +0000 http://www.bloggernews.net/17028#comment-396848 Understanding all that this article has tried to put forth, I only ask the following two questions. Who are these highly informed people who claim to know the number of barrels in our "invisible to the public Strategic Reserves." This known number is highly secreted, thus a national secret, and would not be supplied to "joe public" due to the fact of possible future enemies knowing just how much supply and time we have to fight the next major conflict. With this knowledge, would you really expect the countries of Venezulea, Iran or anywhere else in the Middle East or even Russia to give their "Strategic Reserve" numbers to these "so-called experts" who claim to know the "total number of barrels on supply in the world" today? I just don't see how anybody in today's world can claim to have an accurate number of what todays world supply of oil truly is. Understanding all that this article has tried to put forth, I only ask the following two questions. Who are these highly informed people who claim to know the number of barrels in our “invisible to the public Strategic Reserves.” This known number is highly secreted, thus a national secret, and would not be supplied to “joe public” due to the fact of possible future enemies knowing just how much supply and time we have to fight the next major conflict.
With this knowledge, would you really expect the countries of Venezulea, Iran or anywhere else in the Middle East or even Russia to give their “Strategic Reserve” numbers to these “so-called experts” who claim to know the “total number of barrels on supply in the world” today? I just don’t see how anybody in today’s world can claim to have an accurate number of what todays world supply of oil truly is.

]]> By: Dokken http://www.bloggernews.net/17028#comment-277242 Dokken Wed, 02 Apr 2008 22:43:30 +0000 http://www.bloggernews.net/17028#comment-277242 Lets not forget one unspoken reason for the reserve. In it, we have enough fuel to power our military at full capacity for about three months. If our supply is cut off, we will go and get it. FYI, that's why Japan attacked the US at Pearl Harbor. We cut them off during a war with China (yes, we once exported lots of oil). They needed oil (and steel) to fight and they wanted to get it from the Indonesia area. Only one thing stood in their way, the US Navy. So, with about six months of fuel on hand and no more coming in, they were in a use-it or lose it situation. They used it. So would we. Is the reserve a bad idea for the US economy, maybe. Is it a good idea for US security, well, if a major war over oil is good then we're ready to do it. Overall, I am very in favor of serious conservation now and investing in alternative energy for the future. If not, this could get ugly. Lets not forget one unspoken reason for the reserve. In it, we have enough fuel to power our military at full capacity for about three months. If our supply is cut off, we will go and get it.

FYI, that’s why Japan attacked the US at Pearl Harbor. We cut them off during a war with China (yes, we once exported lots of oil). They needed oil (and steel) to fight and they wanted to get it from the Indonesia area. Only one thing stood in their way, the US Navy. So, with about six months of fuel on hand and no more coming in, they were in a use-it or lose it situation. They used it. So would we.

Is the reserve a bad idea for the US economy, maybe. Is it a good idea for US security, well, if a major war over oil is good then we’re ready to do it.

Overall, I am very in favor of serious conservation now and investing in alternative energy for the future. If not, this could get ugly.

]]> By: obewan http://www.bloggernews.net/17028#comment-29167 obewan Wed, 23 May 2007 19:06:08 +0000 http://www.bloggernews.net/17028#comment-29167 I don't see it as being very significant. Some say it will only supply our nation for 30 days. When the real crunch comes, it will never prevent a crash. I don’t see it as being very significant. Some say it will only supply our nation for 30 days. When the real crunch comes, it will never prevent a crash.

]]> By: Tony http://www.bloggernews.net/17028#comment-29107 Tony Wed, 23 May 2007 16:09:40 +0000 http://www.bloggernews.net/17028#comment-29107 I agree with much of what you have to say. However, I do not agree that the Bush administration's increase in the SPR caused oil to go from $30 to $70. As you state, this led to an increased demand of about 125,000 bpd. BUT, the USA alone uses about 21 M ppd, and the world about 82 M bpd. Thus, the extra 125,000 bpd of demand cannot be the reason energy prices have gone up. The real reasons, are our insatiable appetite for more and more oil and energy; 3 ton, 500 horsepower, 8 passenger SUVs, and our ever sprawling lifestyle which forces us to drive 50-100 miles each day. Also China and India, are rapidly modernizing and becoming more and more like the USA each day. China has 5 times more population than the USA, but uses 2 time LESS oil. That means the average person in China uses 10 times less oil in a given time period than an American. Our lifestyle is based on cheap oil. So we have unabated worldwide demand...what about supply? Many oil experts, including those from major oil companies like Chevron, agree that we are at or near (within a several years) of a peak in global oil extraction. Even if we are not there yet, we have reached what some call peak infrastructure. Even if we haven't reached the theoretical geologically constrained peak, we have reached a peak because we cannot build up upgrade more pipelines, cargo ships, refineries, and train enough new people to keep up with demand. Thirdly, all of the fundamentals I just mentioned are amplified for 2 reasons. One, since the supply/demand cushion is so small, any minor disruption such as a hurricane of political turmoil gets amplified because there is no country that has any spare production capacity to make up the slack. The other amplifying cause is speculators in the oil market. I would say a there's probably a good 10-15% of froth added to the price of oil due to speculators. Finally, the $80 we saw in 2006 was simply due to all I mention above, plus the fact that Iran was playing games with its nuclear ambitions, and also because of the short war between Lebanon (or actually Hamas) and Israel. This little war also created fears in the market. The SPR's real reason is not only to pacify market prices, but rather it is also a military stockpile. All the F16's, tanks, and weapons in the world are useless without fuel. If the USA were to ever get into a situation where many countries refused to ship oil, it could use the SPR to power it's war machine for quite some time. With the SPR alone, America's oil appetite could be satisfied for about 700M/20M = 35 days. Certainly, the military wouldn't use as much as the entire USA. So the military could function for well over a year solely with the SPR. I agree with much of what you have to say. However, I do not agree that the Bush administration’s increase in the SPR caused oil to go from $30 to $70. As you state, this led to an increased demand of about 125,000 bpd. BUT, the USA alone uses about 21 M ppd, and the world about 82 M bpd. Thus, the extra 125,000 bpd of demand cannot be the reason energy prices have gone up. The real reasons, are our insatiable appetite for more and more oil and energy; 3 ton, 500 horsepower, 8 passenger SUVs, and our ever sprawling lifestyle which forces us to drive 50-100 miles each day. Also China and India, are rapidly modernizing and becoming more and more like the USA each day. China has 5 times more population than the USA, but uses 2 time LESS oil. That means the average person in China uses 10 times less oil in a given time period than an American. Our lifestyle is based on cheap oil. So we have unabated worldwide demand…what about supply? Many oil experts, including those from major oil companies like Chevron, agree that we are at or near (within a several years) of a peak in global oil extraction. Even if we are not there yet, we have reached what some call peak infrastructure. Even if we haven’t reached the theoretical geologically constrained peak, we have reached a peak because we cannot build up upgrade more pipelines, cargo ships, refineries, and train enough new people to keep up with demand. Thirdly, all of the fundamentals I just mentioned are amplified for 2 reasons. One, since the supply/demand cushion is so small, any minor disruption such as a hurricane of political turmoil gets amplified because there is no country that has any spare production capacity to make up the slack. The other amplifying cause is speculators in the oil market. I would say a there’s probably a good 10-15% of froth added to the price of oil due to speculators.

Finally, the $80 we saw in 2006 was simply due to all I mention above, plus the fact that Iran was playing games with its nuclear ambitions, and also because of the short war between Lebanon (or actually Hamas) and Israel. This little war also created fears in the market.

The SPR’s real reason is not only to pacify market prices, but rather it is also a military stockpile. All the F16’s, tanks, and weapons in the world are useless without fuel. If the USA were to ever get into a situation where many countries refused to ship oil, it could use the SPR to power it’s war machine for quite some time. With the SPR alone, America’s oil appetite could be satisfied for about 700M/20M = 35 days. Certainly, the military wouldn’t use as much as the entire USA. So the military could function for well over a year solely with the SPR.

]]>