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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: sylvester80 who wrote (1347499)3/8/2022 11:46:46 PM
From: Broken_Clock  Respond to of 1574679
 
Alberta is ready to pump 1,000,000 barrels a day...Biden says "No. I'd rather suck Maduro's di*k."
===

Biden: Gas Prices Are "Going to Go Up... Can't Do Much Right Now... Russia Is Responsible"

by Tyler Durden

Tuesday, Mar 08, 2022 - 04:49 PM
President Joe Biden said gas prices in America that are already at historical highs are going to continue to go up and that there’s not much that can be done about it at this time.

On Tuesday the president announced a ban on Russian energy imports as the latest move from the United States to isolate Russia’s economy in response to its invasion of Ukraine. Later in the day, as Biden landed in Texas, a reporter asked for his message to the American people on gas prices, which reached a record $4.173 on Tuesday, according to the American Automobile Association (AAA).

“They’re going to go up,” said Biden of the prices.

When asked what he can do about it, the president responded: “Can’t do much right now … Russia is responsible.”

Just so everyone is on the same page, here is the Russian invasion in the context of the average US gas prices.

[url=][/url]

Gas prices have been on the rise ever since dropping below $2.00 a gallon during the COVID lockdown measures in 2020. Those increases have accelerated since around the start of 2022 as Russian tensions with Ukraine escalated and Russia later invaded.

Biden has moved to release a total of 90 million barrels of oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve this fiscal year, but that amounts to a drop in the bucket as the United States consumes an average of about 20 million barrels per day. The national average price of gas has increased by more than 71 cents over the past month, according to AAA.

“Americans are paying a higher price at the pump because of the actions of President Putin,” said White House press secretary Jen Psaki Tuesday aboard Air Force One. “This is a Putin spike at the gas pump, not one prompted by our sanctions.”

Needless to say, that statement is misleading at best: despite explicitly provisioning for Russian energy exports across the first round of sanctions in late February, the relentless jawboning by western powers spooked potential buyers that an even harsher round of sanctions was coming and they decided to "self-sanction" and balk at buying Russian oil. Shell, which was the only major that publicly purchased Russian Urals Brent (at a massive $28.50 discount last week) after getting explicit government approval to do so, was publicly shamed and ostracized and today announced it would not purchase any more Russian oil. As a result, while Russian oil went bidless, the price of non-Russian oil went offerless...

... and since it was already effectively pricing in de facto sanctions, the White House saw little downside in pulling the cord and at least getting some optic virtue signaling points (the only reason it can do that is because Russian oil exports to the US are relatively modest; the reason Europe hasn't followed the US in banning Russian oil is because the continent imports far more Russian crude). After all, the damage was already done.

Meanwhile, some members of Congress have called for the United States to increase its domestic oil production as a means of stabilizing gas prices, though this runs counter to the Biden administration’s effort to move the United States away from fossil fuels, a core impartive of the ultra-progressive (and vocal) flank of the Democratic party.

Biden signed an executive order during his first days in office, putting a halt to new fossil fuel drilling leases, prioritizing goals meant to "mitigate climate change." But the White House has since repeatedly denied its policies are limiting oil production, pointing to an increase of production compared to President Donald Trump’s first year in office and 9,000 unused permits for oil companies to drill on federal land.

“They have 9,000 permits to drill now. They could be drilling right now, yesterday, last week, last year. They have 9,000 to drill onshore that are already approved,” President Joe Biden said of U.S. oil companies Tuesday as he announced the ban on Russian oil imports. “So let me be clear—let me be clear: They are not using them for production now. That’s their decision. These are the facts. We should be honest about the facts.”

White House press secretary Jen Psaki has repeatedly made the same point to reporters during press briefings.

“We’ve actually produced more oil, it is at record numbers, and we will continue to produce more oil. There are 9,000 approved drilling permits that are not being used,” Psaki said on Monday. “So, the suggestion that we are not allowing companies to drill is inaccurate.”

But American Petroleum Institute spokesman Kevin O’Scannlain calls this argument “a red herring, a smokescreen for energy policies that have had a hamstringing effect” on U.S. natural gas and oil production.

O’Scannlain says the White House is mischaracterizing the way leases work. He points to “use it or lose it” requirements that oil companies produce gas or return leases to the federal government. He also notes the significant time and financial investment needed to lease land and search for oil, as well as federal limits on companies locking up excess unproductive land.

Kathleen Sgamma of Western Energy Alliance called Psaki’s comments a “cynical attempt to deny the effects of the president’s own ‘no federal oil’ policies.” Sgamma said many lease are held up by environmentalist groups and federal red tape.

Since before Russia decided to invade Ukraine, the White House has said it was in discussions with large oil producers around the world to negotiate ways to stabilize the energy market. These have included Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Venezuela.

Reports from over the weekend were later confirmed by the White House that high-level Biden administration officials were travelling to Venezuela to meet with the regime of socialist dictator Nicolás Maduro.

Republican National Committee (RNC) Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel released a statement blasting Biden during his visit to Texas.

“Instead of witnessing his border crisis or meeting with American energy producers, Biden would rather buy oil from terrorist regimes and let millions of illegal immigrants flow into the country,” the statement reads. “Americans are paying for Biden’s abject failure.”

Biden travelled to Texas Tuesday with a bipartisan group of lawmakers to meet with veterans groups and deliver remarks on veterans’ health.

Meanwhile, as we reported last night, there is a one simple thing that the White House can do to offer immediate, if modest, relief at the pump: it can reactive the Keystone XL pipeline: this weekend, the top officials of the oil-producing province Alberta said that Canada’s oil could easily replace American imports of Russian crude.

Alberta’s Premier Jason Kenney said that would be attending the CERAWeek conference in Houston this week, where “we will be meeting with decision-makers to secure access to markets, attract job-creating investment to our province, and argue for Canadian energy to displace Russian conflict oil.”

Kenney also said that Alberta would be delighted to welcome a visit from U.S. President Joe Biden, as one reportedly being considered to Saudi Arabia.

Kenney noted that in a visit by President Biden to Alberta “We could discuss how to ship nearly 1 million barrels of day of responsibly produced energy every day from the USA’s closest friend and ally! All it would take is his approval for Keystone XL. Easy.”

Alas, something tells us the White House doesn't really care about figuring out solutions but is far more obsessed with coming up with excuses, instead.

[url=][/url]



To: sylvester80 who wrote (1347499)3/9/2022 12:08:15 AM
From: Broken_Clock  Respond to of 1574679
 
Not All Oil Is Equal: Why Banning Russia’s Crude Is Risky By Irina Slav - Mar 07, 2022, 5:00 PM CST
    Oil prices soared to over $130 on Sunday on rumors that the U.S. and its European allies would ban Russian crude.One of the many misunderstood parts of the oil market is that not all oil is the same, and replacing Russian exports would require a very specific type of supply.Currently, the options being talked about in the media as replacements are Iran, Venezuela, and U.S. shale, all of which present their own difficulties.


Join Our Community

Crude oil prices are soaring, with Brent breaking $130 over the weekend as the United States and Europe discussed banning Russian oil imports. But according to some industry insiders, this might not be the smartest move.

"The only way to stop Putin is to ban oil and gas exports," Scott Sheffield, chief executive of Pioneer Natural Resources, told the Financial Times in an interview last week. "[But] if the western world announced that we're going to ban Russian oil and gas, oil is going to go to $200 a barrel, probably — $150 to $200 easy."

The narrative in support of a ban is that U.S. local production will make up for the canceled imports. According to Sheffield, however, the process of making up will take a while.

The U.S. shale oil industry has certainly benefited from higher oil prices, but it has also seen its fair share of problems, reflecting broader difficulties in the U.S. economy after the pandemic.

Labor shortages are ubiquitous across industries, for example, and U.S. shale is no exception. Supply chains are still suffering disruptions that began during the pandemic, with industry insiders complaining about delivery delays of various materials. A frack sand shortage is also plaguing the industry.

There are also specific difficulties for the shale oil industry. The biggest among them is that drillers seem to be running out of the so-called sweet spots where oil is relatively easily accessible. Of course, with prices of above $120 per barrel, the definition of sweet spots might well expand, but not all would be tempted to take advantage, it seems.

Public oil companies in the United States have maintained their financial discipline despite the oil price rally—something that would have been unthinkable a couple of years ago. With growing pressure from shareholders to return cash instead of growing production, most public shale industry players have resisted the call of higher prices successfully.

Indeed, it was Sheffield again who said that "Whether it's $150 oil, $200 oil, or $100 oil, we're not going to change our growth plans." Speaking to Bloomberg in February, the executive added, "If the president wants us to grow, I just don't think the industry can grow anyway."

Continental Resources is another shale major that has no plans to boost output substantially. At least it had no such plans when it released its latest financial results and issued a production update. "We project generating flat to 5% annual production growth over the next five years as we have previously noted," Continental's chief executive Bill Berry said in February.

Russian oil exports account for 8 percent of global supply. Exports to the United States are mostly fuel: according to data from the American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers association, last year the U.S. imported some 209,000 bpd of Russian crude but 500,000 bpd of refined products.

As the AFPM explains, these imports would be challenging to replace. "U.S. West Coast (USWC) refineries rely on imports of light sweet crude oil from other countries, including Russia, because access to U.S. produced light sweet crude oil is challenged by geography, transportation, and logistics.

"Our refineries in the U.S. Gulf Coast (USGC) import heavier crude and unfinished oils from Russia that our complex refineries can transform into other products including gasoline, diesel and jet fuel."

Sources of heavy crude are few and far between, although Canada is one of the biggest. Its exports to the United States, however, are not enough to satisfy the country's refining industry's needs. It was probably because of this that U.S. representatives this weekend traveled to Venezuela—a formerly big producer of heavy crude but heavily sanctioned by the United States.

According to a Reuters poll, an overwhelming majority of Americans from both parties support a ban on Russian oil. This effectively means that an overwhelming majority of Americans either support much higher gasoline prices or are unaware of the direct link between international oil prices and gas prices at the pump. Whatever the case, the government, at least, is aware that it would need to tread cautiously.

U.S. inflation hit 7.5 percent in January, and there are few signs it will be coming down soon, even with the planned rate hike the Fed is expected to announce this month. Energy costs are a major contributor to higher consumer prices, and currently, energy costs are pretty much out of control, not least because of the Russian oil export ban discussions.

Theoretically, Venezuelan and Iranian crude could make up for sanctioned Russian barrels. In reality, Venezuela's oil industry will need time to ramp up production even if sanctions are lifted immediately, which has not been suggested publicly. Lifting sanctions on Venezuela without political reforms would effectively amount to recognition of the Maduro regime by the White House after years of insisting on a change. Meanwhile, Iranian talks have stalled, reminding us all that the Iran nuclear deal is not a certainty either. No wonder analysts are talking about much higher oil prices.

By Irina Slav for Oilprice.com



To: sylvester80 who wrote (1347499)3/9/2022 3:16:41 AM
From: Bonefish1 Recommendation

Recommended By
locogringo

  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 1574679
 
Joe's been finding ww3 for over a year