When Barack Obama took the podium at the University of Miami yesterday to give an address on surging fuel prices in America, he seemed to have all the right words. Fuel prices have gone up 3.3% since Wednesday night alone and promise to keep rising as demand increases and chaos in the Middle East continues. The average was $3.61 a gallon yesterday, according to AAA.
Obama stressed that there was no silver bullet for the energy crisis. "Anybody who tells you we can drill our way out of this problem either doesn't know what he's talking about or just isn't telling you the truth," he said to the approbation of the students in the audience.
He also said that we are already drilling -- there are more active oil and gas rigs in the United States than there are in any other place in the world. He said he has secured a deal with Mexico to access more of the oil stores (fossil fuels and otherwise) in the Gulf of Mexico. "Drill, drill, drill" isn't a political policy, he said. It's a bumper sticker.
Again and again, he iterated that we can't continue to pin our future on fossil fuels. Despite his administration's efforts, he said, drilling in the United States won't have a real effect on the oil market. We produce only 2% of the world's oil and consume 20%. As long as we continue down this road, we'll be subject to the vicissitudes of foreign nations, the whims of speculative Wall Street traders, and a host of other variables that influence the price of gasoline worldwide.
Obama said he would put his full attention on "investing in the development of every available source of American-made energy." He called it an "all of the above" policy. This means continued investments in wind power, solar power, and the production of powerful batteries that would reduce fuel consumption by cars, if not eliminate it altogether.
He discussed efforts to cut overall energy consumption, including the strict fuel economy requirements that have been put in place not only for cars, but also heavy-duty trucks. Those requirements will raise the average mile per gallon rating to around 55 by the middle of the next decade. The requirements, along with more efficient means of heating our homes and powering our lights, will lower US oil consumption by 200 barrels a day by that time, "hopefully sooner."
He discussed his administration's move to bring together the brightest minds our country has to offer -- scientists, engineers, and entrepreneurs -- to increase the number of cars using cleaner, more abundant natural gases. "We don't have to import natural gas. We can export it." These people are also working to find a way to use energy from algae to fuel cars, jets, and more.
Obama promised that, as long as he was president, he would not walk away from the promise of clean energy, regardless of the position of Congress. "We could replace up to 17% of the oil we import for transportation with fuel that we grow right here in the United States," he said, just moments after saying dependence on foreign oil is on the decline.
A stronger green market sector means a stronger job market and economy, a better future for the United States, and a stronger overall future. But getting the job done "will require all of us as citizens -- Democrats, Republicans, and everybody in between -- to do our part. If we do, the solution is in our reach, and I know we can do it."
I cannot comment on the plausibility of Obama's rhetoric. As for the emotion he engendered, I call it hope.
"It also doesn't make any sense that during Clinton's reign we were told it was a waste of time to increase refining capacity since it would take 10 years to make a difference. That was 25 years ago so perhaps it would be making a difference now."
@Fred Goodman, this makes one wonder how much a president hopes to accomplish for the betterment of the country over X amount of years or if they're just doing what they can to affect the time period in which they're in office. You're absolutely right, 10 years to make a difference is not a long time at all. In fact, simply acknowledging that a difference is even possible and yet doing nothing about is yet another reason why I find this phrase "audacity of hope" so empty.
Not to turn this into a religious debate or anything, but the religion card is the most important one for a potential candidate to use. Think about how scary it is that religion is what defines political parties. While this makes sense in theory, it completely violates the concept of separation of church and state. How can you claim the 2 are separate when political parties are forming around religious ideals?
And regarding "Santorum's intimation that Obama had to choose between environmentalism and Christianity". How the two could even be remotely connected in the mind of a presidential candidate scares me in ways I can't describe...
"Just think about how long it took for the general public to realize the danger of smoking - tobacco companies subsidize all kinds of so-called researches to prove there are no relationship between cancer and smoking."
Fantastic point right there, hiker. The scarier part about the smoking situation was that there was either no research to counter the pro-smoking claims (highly unlikely), or the results of the research against smoking were kept under wraps.
The same thing can also be said about many items that were common years ago such as asbestos and lead paint. I found this about abestos which I thought was interesting and relevant:
"...Years later, government officials would insist that (asbestos) industry executives had withheld vital information about the dangers of asbestos. They claimed that those executives had continued their conspiracy of silence even as new information came to light about links between asbestos exposure and cancer: Asbestos companies funded studies, then suppressed the most damning results."
With the Keystone Pipeline in limbo. perhaps we should be looking at options. One trial balloon someone floated involves building new refineries at the U.S.-Canada border -- close to the source of a lot of the oil now being produced.
These refineries could create permanent long-term jobs and also avoid many of the pipeline's inherent environmental hazards, especially the contamination of clean water supplies such as the supremely important Ogallala aquifer, which affects at least eight states. One other benefit would be the avoidance of refinery shutdowns due to hurricane threats in the Gulf of Mexico.
I think Obama did a good job of stating the problem, but he ( and most others) seem short on a solution. We have an excess of natural gas, but we are not using iot to the extent we could. We also have a very fragmented policy on renewables. I agree nothing we can do will drive down prices next week, but we do need to have a policy and follow it.
@Street Smart, you are right. Whoever is calling the shots for Romney right now is a failure. They have no clue what to do because they find themselves in a predicament that they didn't prepare for. Cant he call in some of his private-equity buddies from the past to help make decisions? The man must know some very intelligent people. Just doesn't seem like he hired any on his campaign.
As consumers, perhaps we should be asking why the industry is shutting down so many refineries at a time when the average price of gas is up more than 10% since the start of the year. Since December, the U.S. has lost about 4% of its refining capacity, says Fadel Gheit, a senior oil and gas analyst for Oppenheimer.
As investors, however, the move makes sense:
Over the past year, refineries have faced a classic margin squeeze. Prices for Brent crude have gone up, but demand for gasoline in the U.S. is at a 15-year low. That means refineries haven't been able to pass on the higher prices to their customers.
Older refineries on the East Coast -- which handle "sweet" Brent crude -- are hemorrhaging cash and shutting down, while refineries in the Midwest -- which can handle the heavier, cheaper sour crude from Western Canada, the deep water of the Gulf of Mexico, and South America -- are flourishing.
Anyway, the point is, it all comes down to money -- and the conflicting agendas of consumers and investors.
Words! Words! Words! I'm so sick of words! I get words all day through; First from him, now from you! Is that all you blighters can do? Don't talk of stars burning above; If you're in love, Show me!
You said; "We produce only 2% of the world's oil and consume 20%."
And then you quoted Obama; "Anybody who tells you we can drill our way out of this problem either doesn't know what he's talking about or just isn't telling you the truth,".
These two phrases held together make no sense, if we are consuming 10 times more than we produce why shouldn't we produce more? Why stop the Keystone pipeline? Why prevent drilling by the US in the gulf while permitting everyone else to continue? Why support oil drilling in Brazil at our expense and stop it here?
It also doesn't make any sense that during Clinton's reign we were told it was a waste of time to increase refining capacity since it would take 10 years to make a difference. That was 25 years ago so perhaps it would be making a difference now.
I am not suggesting that we should not explore all avenues of energy production, even at the expense of wasting 1/2 a billion dollars with Solyndra, some of which went to cronies of the administration and produced only 3 jobs, one of which was for Nancy Pelosi's brother-in-law. (Google PCG)
We are being told in fancy words repeated by those who would convince us to support current policies that the answer is to subsidize alternate energy sources at the exclusion of oil to drive the price higher so we will be forced to continue in this direction.
I suggest that you look a bit beyond the ruling media. Start by Googling "Ceridian Index" to learn that the consumption of diesel oil in the US has recently been plunging. You may also learn if you look beyond the speeches that we are currently exporting gasoline at the same time that prices are being raised at home.
The President has had three years in office, two of which were spent with majorities in both Houses of Congress. Please direct me to the improvements that I was audacious enough to hope for that have actually occurred since he was inaugurated.
The blogs and comments posted on Investor Uprising do not reflect the views of Investor Uprising, PRNewswire, or its sponsors. Investor Uprising, PRNewswire, and its sponsors do not assume responsibility for any comments, claims, or opinions made by authors and bloggers. They are no substitute for your own research and should not be relied upon for trading or any other purpose.
To save this item to your list of favorite Investor Uprising content so you can find it later in your Profile page, click the "Save It" button next to the item.
If you found this interesting or useful, please use the links to the services below to share it with other readers. You will need a free account with each service to share an item via that service.
Tweet This