SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (254207)6/13/2008 12:06:04 AM
From: KLP  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 793640
 
Wonder what would happen if GWB just signed some Exec Orders immediately, and said....DRILL. HERE. NOW.



To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (254207)6/14/2008 1:34:19 PM
From: greenspirit  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 793640
 
I agree Nadine, especially if it were closely timed with today's news. What I would love to see is both Presidential candidates put the country ahead of politics, stand next to eachother on a podium and do a 180 degree shift on ANWR, drilling offshore, nuclear power production and everything else they want to throw into the pile, including major subsidies for Solar, Wind, raising the gas mandate on automobiles etc. I think it would galvanize 90% of the country and launch us toward energy independence. Do it all! Do it now, make it a real race to the moon.

Every Patriot who loves America would support the effort.

I can only imagine how many billions upon billions of dollars we're pouring into the bank accounts of unelected Shieks, Dictators and despots. From Saudi Arabia, to Russia, to Nigeria, Venezuala, and Libya. This sudden transfer of wealth from stable democracies to Dictatorial regimes could seriously destabilize the planet in a decade.

It's been estimated a barrel of oil costs the Saudi's $2.00 to produce. And they are now selling that barrel of oil for over $130 dollars. Tens of millions of barrels with profit margins that would astound Exxon/Mobil's billions.

What's also interesting to consider is what our situation would look like had we not intervened in Kuwaiit and kicked Hussein out. He would have likely gone on to invade Saudi Arabia and control the worlds energy supply. Whew! And the vote was so close in Congress. I believe it came down to one vote to authorize the use of force. Most of the leftists, those with Obama's worldview, voted against the measure.

biz.yahoo.com

NYTimes.com
Plan Would Lift Saudi Oil Output to Highest Ever
Saturday June 14, 3:34 pm ET
By JAD MOUAWAD

Saudi Arabia, the world’s biggest oil exporter, is planning to increase its output next month by about a half-million barrels a day, according to analysts and oil traders who have been briefed by Saudi officials.

The increase could bring Saudi output to a production level of 10 million barrels a day, which, if sustained, would be the kingdom’s highest ever. The move was seen as a sign that the Saudis are becoming increasingly nervous about both the political and economic effect of high oil prices. In recent weeks, soaring fuel costs have incited demonstrations and protests from Italy to Indonesia.

Saudi Arabia is currently pumping 9.45 million barrels a day, which is an increase of about 300,000 barrels from last month.

While they are reaping record profits, the Saudis are concerned that today’s record prices might eventually damp economic growth and lead to lower oil demand, as is already happening in the United States and other developed countries. The current prices are also making alternative fuels more viable, threatening the long-term prospects of the oil-based economy.

President Bush visited Saudi Arabia twice this year, pleading with King Abdullah to step up production. While the Saudis resisted the calls then, arguing that the markets were well supplied, they seem to have since concluded that they needed to disrupt the momentum that has been building in commodity markets, sending prices higher.

The Saudi plans were disclosed in interviews with several oil traders and analysts who said that Saudi oil officials had privately conveyed their production plans recently to some traders and companies in the United States. The analysts declined to be identified so as not to be cut off from future information from the Saudis.

Last week, King Abdullah also took the unprecedented step of arranging on short notice a major gathering of oil producers and consumers to address the causes of the price rally. The meeting will be held on June 22 in the Red Sea town of Jeddah.

Oil prices have gained 40 percent this year, rising to nearly $140 a barrel in recent days and driving gasoline costs above $4 a gallon. Some analysts have predicted that prices could reach $200 a barrel this year as oil consumption continues to rise rapidly while supplies lag.

The growing volatility of the markets, including a record one-day gain of $10.75 a barrel last week, has persuaded the Saudis that they need to step in, analysts said.

Tony Fratto, a White House spokesman, said, “We would welcome any and all increases in oil production, including from Saudi Arabia.”

But the measure carries some risks to the kingdom and is not guaranteed to bring down prices, analysts said. Some investors doubt that Saudi Arabia has the capacity to increase its production beyond its current levels.

“This clearly represents the biggest test for them,” said John Kilduff, a senior vice president at the brokerage firm MF Global, who said the move could backfire if investors failed to respond to the extra Saudi supplies. No other producer has the capacity to quickly expand production.

Oil prices fell on Friday, slipping $1.88 to settle at $134.86 a barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange, after reports of the prospective Saudi increase trickled into the market.

Ibrahim al-Muhanna, an adviser at the Saudi petroleum ministry, declined to comment on the production increase but said that Saudi Arabia was uncomfortable with oil prices. “Our goal is to bring back stability to the oil market,” he said.

Consumers are complaining that rising fuel prices are imposing a growing toll on their economies, and contributing to higher food costs. The Australian prime minister, Kevin Rudd, said this month that it was time “to apply the blowtorch to the OPEC organization.”

In Washington, bipartisan support is also growing to pass a law allowing the Justice Department to engage in antitrust proceedings against OPEC producers accused of curbing supplies to drive up prices.

Pressure is also mounting in consuming countries to address record energy prices. Congress is debating measures that would tackle speculators, whom many in Washington blame for driving up commodity prices.

When the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries, of which Saudi Arabia is the most powerful member, met in March, it decided against increasing production, blaming speculators and a declining dollar, not a shortfall in supplies, for driving up oil prices.

Saudi Arabia’s unilateral policy could put it at odds with other members of the OPEC cartel. In a report from the group’s secretariat on Friday, OPEC analysts said they saw no need to put more oil on the market. “Claims that the recent surge in prices is due to a supply shortage are unjustified,” the report said.

Saudi Arabia is completing a huge expansion program in its oil industry that is expected to bring its production capacity to 12.5 million barrels a day by 2009. As part of that expansion, Saudi Aramco, the country’s national oil company, is planning to start soon an oil field, called Khursaniyah, with a daily production rate of 500,000 barrels.

The production increase, which would amount to less than 1 percent of global consumption, could be made public next week at the energy meeting, which is expected to bring together a large number of consuming and producing countries, including the United States, Russia, Britain, China, India and Japan.

While the meeting is not expected to achieve anything tangible, Saudi officials hope that tackling the issue publicly will break the upward momentum that is dominating oil markets.

“They’ve created pressure on themselves to make a concrete move at this meeting,” said Adam Robinson, an analyst at Lehman Brothers. “But when the king calls an oil summit, the markets would do well to take heed.”



To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (254207)6/15/2008 1:14:59 PM
From: skinowski  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 793640
 
Everybody points out that a large chunk of the current price is not just demand but speculation, an oil bubble.

I came to the conclusion that beliefs about the price of oil being driven by speculators and "investors" in the commodity are not justified. Commodities are different from stocks - every time a long position is opened, someone else MUST agree to take a short position to offset the long. The algebraic sum of the entire open interest always remains zero.

As time of expiration approaches, the vast majority of contract holders will close out their positions. Half of their positions will have made money, the other half will have lost exactly the same amount. What will determine the outcome will be the cash price at expiration - and that is determined purely by supply and demand. At that point, the ONLY parties still at the table will be buyers who plan to take actual (physical) delivery. At that point the price is fully determined by supply and demand.

Obviously, the final cash price will be the determining factor for contracts further out in time (remember? for each long "investor" there must be someone who will *agree* to take the short side - and both will look towards the cash market for guidance).

"Long only funds" and other players that "invest" in the commodity are like people who bet on sports - the outcome will determine whether or not they make money; they will NOT influence the outcome. Makes no difference how many bets have been placed on contracts further out in time - they will cancel each other out.

That's why, I think, calls by politicians to limit "investment" in commodities in order to cure "bubbles" will not have the desired result. (They would, come to think of it, cause a bubble in oil related stocks - which would remain "unregulated")

Recently, during a discussion of this subject one of my correspondents who gave this matter considerable thought sent me the following comment - which summarises it, imo, beautifully and in simple terms:

"I'm with you on this one. I don't see exactly how speculation in commodities can ultimately drive up the final price. Ultimately, the entity that takes delivery of the crude oil is the refinery. Nobody else has any use for the black gunk. Each refinery is competing with other refineries for the supply of oil thats out there. I'm not sure how any speculation in the market can ultimately impact the final price paid by the end user, which is purely a function of supply and demand."