Energy thread

[NorthSideSox72]

I'd be more than happy, as would a lot of Dems btw, to drop opposition to drilling in a lot of areas (although the offshore stuff is still troublesome for other reasons, especially in tourism-rich areas...oil spills aren't that great for Miami beach) in exchange for a legit program to do exactly that along with a legit carbon price. Considering that all the drilling this country could possibly do can't disguise the fact that Saudi Arabia has 10x more oil than we do and their production is peaking and domestic U.S. production peaked 30 years ago...I'd be willing to sacrifice a bit of the environment to finally get a real program started.

If we got a real, serious program going - real investment in solar and winds (both research and actual facilities), better tax incentives for consumers, etc. - then I too would be willing to drop opposition to offshore and ANWR.

 

Unfortunately, we no longer have a Congress that is good at compromise. Those days have been gone since the late 90's.

 

What we'll actually get is offshore drilling, but no ANWR, and a lame excuse for alternative energy funding.

 

[HuskyCaucasian]

I'd be more than happy, as would a lot of Dems btw, to drop opposition to drilling in a lot of areas (although the offshore stuff is still troublesome for other reasons, especially in tourism-rich areas...oil spills aren't that great for Miami beach) in exchange for a legit program to do exactly that along with a legit carbon price. Considering that all the drilling this country could possibly do can't disguise the fact that Saudi Arabia has 10x more oil than we do and their production is peaking and domestic U.S. production peaked 30 years ago...I'd be willing to sacrifice a bit of the environment to finally get a real program started.

 

It really is something that you can think of like an addiction. Going cold turkey is hard. But your choices are cutting back starting right now or, well, death. You can have a little bit more, but if you dont' cut back you're screwed.

Could the US government put in place some sort of a program where they agree to open up areas for drilling in exchange for a promise or some sort of a heavy tax to put into solar / wind deployment?

 

Maybe open up the areas for 10-15 only and use those profits / taxes to fund the next generation energy.

[Balta1701]

What we'll actually get is offshore drilling, but no ANWR, and a lame excuse for alternative energy funding.

The one potential silver lining is...even if Congress starts all the drilling you could ever ask for everywhere you want...it's not going to make any legit dent in oil prices as the mideast peak hits, so the price of fossil fuels is just going to keep going up, and that alone is going to continue forcing alternative energy development. It'd be nice if the government would realize that there's a huge public benefit in to adding several tens of billions of dollars early to force that system...but at this point, the geology says that even if they don't, within a few years prices are going to be so high that it's not going to matter.

[BigSqwert]

Here's an interesting way to produce energy.

[Balta1701]

On the heels of Gore's "Carbon free energy" speech today, here's an analysis from an admittedly biased person from within the wind energy community saying that if you focus on wind power and you put the money in to the system that we're going to have to spend on new plants anyway, it's actually possible to get to somewhere between 50 and 90% of our electric demand from wind within 15 years...but the most important requirement in doing so is fixing the regulatory schedule at the national level which has served to absolutely kill wind energy development thanks to the fact that the Congress keeps allowing the wind energy tax incentives to expire every other year. Even if he's wrong, it's still an interesting analysis, take a look.

[NorthSideSox72]

What happens when a bunch of Congressmen, who apparently know nothing about the financial markets, decide they need to lower the price of oil?

 

You get this: the "Stop Excessive Speculation Act".

 

Main points of the bill:

 

It would provide more resources and authority to the Commodities Futures Trading Commission to detect and punish speculation, stop speculators from using foreign markets to manipulate the price of oil in the U.S., require more transparency in oil markets and limit the trading of market players who do not intend to take delivery of the oil they purchase.

 

Ugh. Now, I am all for more CFTC market surveillance. They are shorthanded. And transparency could be good.

 

But look at the two bolded parts. This is idiotic. Do they know what a futures contract is? Do they know anything about how the markets work? Without speculators, THERE IS NO MARKET. With no market, two very bad things can happen. One, the buyers of oil can't hedge anymore, so they will be subject to even wilder price fluctuations than the already are. Two, the oil producers have much more control over the sale of their product, and now THEY can game the system, which is far worse than the current scenario.

 

Hang on to your wallets, folks. If these laws actually go into effect, and if the CFTC actually tries to do these things, the price of gas and oil will go wild, and mostly wildly up.

 

Idiots.

 

[southsider2k5]

What happens when a bunch of Congressmen, who apparently know nothing about the financial markets, decide they need to lower the price of oil?

 

You get this: the "Stop Excessive Speculation Act".

 

Main points of the bill:

 

 

 

Ugh. Now, I am all for more CFTC market surveillance. They are shorthanded. And transparency could be good.

 

But look at the two bolded parts. This is idiotic. Do they know what a futures contract is? Do they know anything about how the markets work? Without speculators, THERE IS NO MARKET. With no market, two very bad things can happen. One, the buyers of oil can't hedge anymore, so they will be subject to even wilder price fluctuations than the already are. Two, the oil producers have much more control over the sale of their product, and now THEY can game the system, which is far worse than the current scenario.

 

Hang on to your wallets, folks. If these laws actually go into effect, and if the CFTC actually tries to do these things, the price of gas and oil will go wild, and mostly wildly up.

 

Idiots.

 

Yup. No speculators=No liquidity, which means the markets get left up to a very few people who are willing to take delivery. This goes into the monumentally stupid pile along with Sarbines Oxley.

 

[StrangeSox]

What happens when a bunch of Congressmen, who apparently know nothing about the financial markets, decide they need to lower the price of oil?

 

You get this: the "Stop Excessive Speculation Act".

 

Main points of the bill:

 

 

 

Ugh. Now, I am all for more CFTC market surveillance. They are shorthanded. And transparency could be good.

 

But look at the two bolded parts. This is idiotic. Do they know what a futures contract is? Do they know anything about how the markets work? Without speculators, THERE IS NO MARKET. With no market, two very bad things can happen. One, the buyers of oil can't hedge anymore, so they will be subject to even wilder price fluctuations than the already are. Two, the oil producers have much more control over the sale of their product, and now THEY can game the system, which is far worse than the current scenario.

 

Hang on to your wallets, folks. If these laws actually go into effect, and if the CFTC actually tries to do these things, the price of gas and oil will go wild, and mostly wildly up.

 

Idiots.

 

We need to make a law where any Congressman/ woman who proposes something that transparently stupid is immediately removed from office. No votes, no notice, no severance. They hand you a box and you're gone by the end of the day. Security will see you out.

 

[kapkomet]

We need to make a law where any Congressman/ woman who proposes something that transparently stupid is immediately removed from office. No votes, no notice, no severance. They hand you a box and you're gone by the end of the day. Security will see you out.

We would have no one left in government.

[NorthSideSox72]

Yup. No speculators=No liquidity, which means the markets get left up to a very few people who are willing to take delivery. This goes into the monumentally stupid pile along with Sarbines Oxley.

I think this would dwarf SarbOx if it goes into law. SOX is costly and accomplishes little, other than creating extra overhead. But this would actually do the exact opposite of what they are trying to accomplish.

 

[southsider2k5]

I think this would dwarf SarbOx if it goes into law. SOX is costly and accomplishes little, other than creating extra overhead. But this would actually do the exact opposite of what they are trying to accomplish.

 

No doubt about that. Yet another example of why oversight of the finanical markets is best served by people who actually understand financial markets.

[NorthSideSox72]

No doubt about that. Yet another example of why oversight of the finanical markets is best served by people who actually understand financial markets.

That's my one thread of hope here. Congress gives the CFTC a bunch of money and manpower (which they do actually need), and says, GO GET THE BAD GUYS! CFTC, understanding the markets, says, "um... OK". And goes and catches bad guys. They leave the "people who don't intend to take delivery", otherwise known as MARKET MAKERS, alone.

 

I hope that's what happens.

 

[lostfan]

You guys are too smart for me.

[southsider2k5]

That's my one thread of hope here. Congress gives the CFTC a bunch of money and manpower (which they do actually need), and says, GO GET THE BAD GUYS! CFTC, understanding the markets, says, "um... OK". And goes and catches bad guys. They leave the "people who don't intend to take delivery", otherwise known as MARKET MAKERS, alone.

 

I hope that's what happens.

 

I hope, but don't expect it. Congress is hellbent on finding someone to blame, and instead of having the testicles to say "This is your own damned fault for not conserving energy at all!", they go looking for an easy target.

[lostfan]

I hope, but don't expect it. Congress is hellbent on finding someone to blame, and instead of having the testicles to say "This is your own damned fault for not conserving energy at all!", they go looking for an easy target.

You can't be honest with America like that. It just doesn't work. The public doesn't appreciate that type of honesty when it's aimed at them even when it's true (or especially when it's true), which is why I could never serve as an elected official.

Edited July 22, 2008 by lostfan

[NorthSideSox72]

I hope, but don't expect it. Congress is hellbent on finding someone to blame, and instead of having the testicles to say "This is your own damned fault for not conserving energy at all!", they go looking for an easy target.

I think it will end up pretty much like that, because this is (as one of the energy market experts quoted in the article said) a smokescreen. Congress wants people to think they are doing something. They don't care about the actual result, because that would be down the line anyway. They just want to look like they are acting on it.

 

And by the way, I'd like it to be noted that the test vote was 94-0 in favor. That means this is a bi-partisan debacle.

 

[NorthSideSox72]

You guys are too smart for me.

This forum has 3 or 4 regular posters who work in some area of the financial markets. We actually have some real expertise here.

 

[lostfan]

This forum has 3 or 4 regular posters who work in some area of the financial markets. We actually have some real expertise here.

lol, I noticed. I learn more about what's really going on from this forum between you, SS2k5, Balta, etc. than I ever do from reading the news.

 

I've only ever had to pull my "look this is what I do for a living" card once so far. I guess I never say anything controversial enough and it doesn't look like bulls***.

[southsider2k5]

lol, I noticed. I learn more about what's really going on from this forum between you, SS2k5, Balta, etc. than I ever do from reading the news.

 

I've only ever had to pull my "look this is what I do for a living" card once so far. I guess I never say anything controversial enough and it doesn't look like bulls***.

 

I guess you need to find a career on the front page of the Op-Ed pages

[kapkomet]

I think it will end up pretty much like that, because this is (as one of the energy market experts quoted in the article said) a smokescreen. Congress wants people to think they are doing something. They don't care about the actual result, because that would be down the line anyway. They just want to look like they are acting on it.

 

And by the way, I'd like it to be noted that the test vote was 94-0 in favor. That means this is a bi-partisan debacle.

This should scare the poop out of anyone who has a clue how the market works. This could be the worst piece of legislation ever, and that's saying something.

 

[Balta1701]

This should scare the poop out of anyone who has a clue how the market works. This could be the worst piece of legislation ever, and that's saying something.

Who's going to criticize McCain and Obama for skipping this vote?

[southsider2k5]

I think it will end up pretty much like that, because this is (as one of the energy market experts quoted in the article said) a smokescreen. Congress wants people to think they are doing something. They don't care about the actual result, because that would be down the line anyway. They just want to look like they are acting on it.

 

And by the way, I'd like it to be noted that the test vote was 94-0 in favor. That means this is a bi-partisan debacle.

 

I swear it is worse when the parties work together versus when they don't.

[kapkomet]

I swear it is worse when the parties work together versus when they don't.

They're all awesome at finger pointing to someone else when it's (supposedly) not their fault.

[southsider2k5]

They're all awesome at finger pointing to someone else when it's (supposedly) not their fault.

 

Up until this point, it wasn't Congress's fault. It was the American general public's fault.

[Balta1701]

Up until this point, it wasn't Congress's fault. It was the American general public's fault.

By that do you mean energy prices themselves? Because there's an awful lot of ways in which one could find fault with the behavior of the national government in that regard.