Gas Prices Climb, No Relief Before The Holidays

Cars don't and cannot currently run on nuclear energy. That was the point of the observation. Cars might be capable of a limited amount of range if they are battery powered alone. The market provides almost ZERO options that cost less than 40K in the US market. So, no gas, no transportation for those who cannot afford the smug mobiles you would shackle them to. More, those current choices don't have much range, say 200-300 miles, at best. So, no more transcontinental road trips, unless you're willing to invest weeks to get there.

And, while we're on the subject, how much oil goes into the production, maintenance, etc for those electric cars?

 

It takes 5-7 years before construction of a nuclear power plant is completed. The bleeding hearts will never go for it. They think we can rely on solar and wind, but we are some time away from it being more than supplementary.

It's not likely that economies will decrease energy use. Just look at the amount of energy used by a new industry like crypto miners. The more advanced our machines and processor, the more energy they'll need. Play Xbox for a few hours and check out how hot it is on the surface. There's a fan inside just to keep it cool.

 

Practical has its value. NG, Oil, etc would still be highly necessary in your world. And as folks need lighter vehicles to enable your dream of nuclear powered cars, you don't seem to have removed much reliance on fossil fuels. Just sayin.

 

well, your reading comprehension is as good as your judgement. If you read carefully you’ll see that I said to use fossil fuels for privately owned vehicles while transferring all other energy use to nuclear.

as battery or alternate vehicle power sources become more available and efficient they can be worked in.

you seem like you want to keep wrecking the planet with fossil fuel use just on principal, because your ideology/religion tells you it is the one true way.

 

LNG/EV Hybrid would work given the increasingly better technology of NG low-emission systems, but battery technology needs to improve leaps and bounds.

Nuclear powered vehicles could be as heavy as you want them. It's just a bit too dangerous for personal use.

 

Higher demand equals higher prices.
All of the busses Biden is using to drop of loads of covid infected illegals in red states requires a lot of gas
Hail Xoe Bi Den!

 

In the military, that's called an about face..LOL. Let's be clear, you told us the fastest way to remove 40-50% was addressing private transportation. No worries, you now see the error of your ways. I drive a hybrid. I bought it because I couldn't rely on the range of just electric. We are super far away from batteries that charge quickly enough to be reasonable. And for the time being, most all electric cars are fueled by fossil fuel today. That won't change rapidly either.

 

who said anything about nuclear power cars?

oil is becoming les and less “practical”. All the easy to reach sources are long gone. All new discoveries are more and more energy intensive to extract. The energy return on investment has decreased steadily, and eventually it will take more energy to extract than you actually receive from it. That point is coming up very quickly. In 2015 the estimate of 53 years was made until oil is gone, but that was “at present rate”. However, our power requirements increase exponentially. In the next 50 years we will use more energy than we have across humanity’s entire existence. Fossil fuels are a foolish thing to invest in. We need to transfer to nuclear, and do it as soon as possible to get us to the point where fusion becomes feasible. Fossil fuels will not get us there.

 

I doubt we will reduce energy consumption, but we should always pursue more energy efficient devices to help alleviate the strain on the power grid.

 

lol, this is what I said:

“Private automobile use makes up some 40-50% of oil consumption in the US. Take that other 50-60% of oil consumption and have it run on nuclear power instead. That would cut oil consumption in half, which is massive.”

That clearly says take the portion of power NOT being used in automobiles and switch it over to nuclear.

 

Two things. No one is building nuclear power. Fantasize this away, but it is still the observable fact. If nuclear power generation to power electric vehicles is your goal, you have to overcome the fact no one is building the plants, 1. And even using EV power for cars doesn't reduce or otherwise change your dependence level on oil products. You aren't addressing your own issue with any solutions that actually address your concern.

 

It's not that as simple as let's go nuclear and phase-in other sources of technology. It takes many years to plan such an operation. You need new power plants, grid systems, transportation infrastructure, and waste sites.

It might just be easier to build technology that can pull Carbon Emissions out of the atmosphere. I know it exists. My neighbor has a device that can pull water vapor out of the air, so why no CO2? And I'm not talking about that BS land-based carbon capture.

 

no one is building the plants because there is a stigma attached to it, due to things like Chernobyl, when the truth is fossil fuels kills millions every year from air pollution, and absolutely wrecks the environment. Nuclear is far safer and cleaner than fossil fuels.

 

lol, you call nuclear unfeasible and then you start talking about pulling carbon out of the air. Hey, by all means, let’s do it if such a thing is feasible.

As far as the time, we should have started long ago. How long are we going to wait? Oil is dwindling, energy returns on investment in fossil fuels are dropping… what are we waiting for? If everyone would demand it instead of riding the fossil fuel train until it goes off a cliff, we could already be there.

 

There are/will be charging stations. There are also vehicles with a gas motor that charges the battery that have a range of 600 miles.
You seem to see conspiracy in every corner. If the sun goes down in the evening, do you think it's a liberal plot to keep everyone in the dark?

 

<COMMENTS EDITED>



All the exploration and drilling in the world will not alter one fundamental fact to which you are totally clueless, and that is the number of oil refineries in the US is fixed at 168 refineries.



Only 13 of those oil refineries are owned by "Big Oil" (snicker) companies, namely, Lukoil (Russian), Citgo (Venezuelan), Royal Dutch Shell (the Netherlands), Exxon (formerly Standard Oil of New Jersey)-Mobil (US), Amoco-BP (US/British), Marathon (US), etc.

How is it you don't know that?

The remaining 155 oil refineries are owned by non-oil companies, meaning those companies do not conduct oil exploration, nor do they own any oil fields. They merely buy oils on the global market and refine them. The companies that own those are Valero, Tesoro, Goodway, Hunt, Nustar, WRB, PDV, Frontier, Motiva and about a dozen others.

How is it you don't know that?

Out of your 168 operating oil refineries, only 16 produce gasoline.

How is it you don't know that?

That fact means that, assuming those refineries are operating at 100% capacity, running them flat out 24/7 gives a fixed Supply of Gasoline of N-gallons per year and not one drop more.

How is it you don't that?

Explain why you can't wrap your brain around the simple reality that whether you drill 100 Million barrels or 1 TRILLION barrels per day, your gasoline is Supply is fixed and unchanging.

The rest of the world has lots of various light oils, some high Sulfur and some low-Sulfur, while the US has mainly various intermediate grades, heavy grades, tars and waxes.

How is it you don't know that?

Light oils give the highest yield of gasoline per barrel, followed by intermediate grade oils, heavy oils, and the tars and waxes.

How is it you don't know that?

Dubai Light = 29 gallons of gasoline per 42 gallon barrel
Saudi Light = 26 gallons of gasoline per 42 gallon barrel
West Texas Intermediate (WTI) = 19 gallons of gasoline per 42 gallon barrel
Illinois Intermediate = 13 gallons of gasoline per 42 gallon barrel
California Heavy = 9 gallons of gasoline per 42 gallon barrel
Canadian Tar Sands = 3 gallons of gasoline per 42 gallon barrel

How is it you don't know that?

I sure hope you're not gonna scream, "Keystone Pipeline!" until you start frothing at the mouth, pee your pants and fall over backward.

100% of crappy Canadian Tar Sands is designated for sale to China, with not even one drop being refined in the US.


Let's look at Peace River in situ:

Light Gas Oil: Yield, volume% 7.66

That means you get roughly 3.2 gallons of gasoline from a 42-gallon barrel of Canadian Peace River Tar Sands.

That's why you became "dependent" on foreign light oils from the Middle East.

How do you increase your Supply of Gasoline without building new refineries?

Simple: You import light oils that provide higher yields of gasoline per barrel.

Compare: Illinois Intermediate with Saudi Light (or Iranian Light). You just doubled your supply of gasoline from 13 gallons per barrel to 26 gallons per barrel.

How can you not know that?

How can you not know what EPA Tier III is?

EPA Tier III says gasoline can only have 10 ppm. 10 ppm is the same as 0.001%.

Crappy Canadian Tar Sands is 56400 ppm.

Do you think refinery workers stand around a barrel of high-Sulfur oil holding hands and signing Auld Lang Syne until the Sulfur gets depressed and jumps out of the oil?

No, it takes a lotta money and a lotta time. Yeah, the catalysts you need to shorten the Sulfur redux process are expensive as hell.

How can you not know that?

You can't run any oil you want through any cracking still just because you wanna.

How can you not know that?

Cracking stills are built to a certain API +/- 2°.

For example, a cracking still built for API 40° can handle Brent Blend (a blend of 7 light oils) and WTI, but it cannot refine crappy Canadian Tar Sands, or Illinois Intermediate, or California Heavy, or Oklahoma Heavy, or Unita Basin Black Wax or Saudi Light, Murban,
Magallenes, Kuwaiti Light, or Cano Limon.

Even a cracking still set for WTI can't refine other intermediate grade oils like Forcados (Nigerian), Minas and Troll Blend (yeah, there really is such an oil).

How can you not know that?

So, with your oil refineries being fixed, and since the 16 refineries producing gasoline can only refine certain specific oils, it doesn't freaking matter how much oil you produce.

And, obviously, you don't understand the meaning of "Benchmark."

Why don't oil refinery operators switch up and produce more gasoline?

It ain't worth the cost and it ain't profitable and you save exactly $0.

For one thing, every economist in the world -- including those who work for oil and non-oil companies -- has said gasoline Demand in the US is flat over the long term.

Why?

Because consumer Demand and government regulation results in more fuel efficient cars which lowers gasoline Demand.

And, because hybrids and electric vehicles are entering the market and are here to say, that lowers gasoline Demand.

So, give us a list of names of idiots who are willing to spend $120 Billion and 17 years to build an oil refinery to produce gasoline and never see a return on their investment.

The other thing is petrochemical feed-stocks get higher profits.

I get more profit refining the petrochemical feed-stocks for Active Pharmaceutical Ingredients (APIs) than gasoline.

I get more profit refining the petrochemical feed-stocks for the artificial colorings, flavorings and preservatives in your food than gasoline.

I get more profit refining the petrochemical feed-stocks for inks and dyes in your packaging, clothing and cosmetics, and pigments in your paints than gasoline.

I get more profit refining the petrochemical feed-stocks for your personal hygiene products than gasoline.

I get more profit refining the petrochemical feed-stocks for you liquid laundry detergents than gasoline.

I get more profit refining the petrochemical feed-stocks for the base ingredients in cosmetics (not the colors) than gasoline.

Best case scenario for you is you break even.


But, hey, keep railing about things you know nothing about, because you're a lotta fun.

 

Ouch!

 

I never said unfeasible. It's just an enormous task. I've wanted to go nuclear for decades. I use to go to the climate and meteorology conventions to discuss weather and alternative energy solutions. Every time someone brought up nuclear energy, the idea was always shutdown cause lefties don't like it.

And I'm just spitballing with the carbon capture idea.

My point is that I think you're right about nuclear, but it's never going to happen with the current breed of Democrats leading the charge. I have experience in construction, government, logistics, setting up solar energy systems, city planning, etc. Your average activist can only parrot talking points, but doesn't have any real knowledge or experience to comprehensively understand the issue. Just a bunch of academics. Then you go to the Republican bar for one of their meetings and you have general contractors, electricians, Florida Power & Light employees, and owners of solar power installers. Experienced guys with and without degrees. And then you have dudes that don't believe in Global Warming.

 

We live in the USA. We can be energy independent. Democrat voters did not want that

 

it's ok to want to hug a tree but it doesn't solve the near-term issue. Folks need to heat their homes, drive to work and be able to afford groceries etc

Democrat voters wanted this and boy did we get it

 

It woulda done the same if Trump were sworn in. Tough talk on that.

Did your wages increase 44.5%?

No? That's right they didn't, because this is Demand-pull Inflation caused by you and not by Joe Hiden.

Your area has no bearing on gasoline prices.

Right, because Joe Hiden didn't recall all US Army units from around the world and activate National Guard units to fly oil service crews from well-to-well to uncap the wells and get them restarted.

It isn't Hiden's fault that oil and natural gas wells all over the world were capped due to slack Demand during STUPID-19.

But, thanks for your irrational view just the same.

That is a Fallacy called Non Sequitur, since neither has any bearing on the other.

But, do let us know when you understand the meaning of "Benchmark."

Um, by your own admission, the US "oil industry" was already filing for bankruptcy protection, so you refuted your own claim.

And, so what if they went bankrupt?

A Chapter 11 is merely a reorganization.

How can you not know that?

Even if they filed for total liquidation under Chapter 7, there's no harm.

Governor Mike Dickwine is a Repuke. There were many Repuke governors that shut down their economies.

To prove your claim, show us a list of those oil companies that did file bankruptcy.

Since you won't, I will.

Oil service companies are the ones that cap and uncap wells, build and maintain the wells, build, connect and maintain feeder lines to main pipelines that they also build and maintain and install, service and maintain all equipment related to drilling and pumping.

That is one reason why there is a shortage of both oil and natural gas, because they don't have any employees and may not be able to hire additional employees unless the court-appointed receiver says they can.

That basically guts one of your claims and refutes your other claim.

Those of you thinking about investing, you never invest in oil companies, rather you invest in oil service companies.

That's where the profit is. The oil service companies make profits hands and fists over the oil companies.

The claim is the US would suffer, but that is totally false because the reality is the overwhelming vast majority of US oil service workers do not work in the US.

Yeah, that's right. They work outside the US in oil fields in foreign States.

If you understand that, then you now understand why it is a global thing.

Oil wells in other countries are still capped because there's no one to uncap them.

Now you can see the folly of screaming at foreign States to increase production when they cannot because they have no oil service workers.

The oil service industry is dominated by the US, Russia and France. Those three State have contracts for the vast majority of oil fields on this Earth.

The two minor league players are German and Romania, and to a lesser extent, Britain and Italy.

It takes an oil service crew working 8-12 hours/day for 6-10 days to uncap a well and get it restarted.

Those people who think you can click a mouse and coolant magically pours into the machines that run the pumps and stuff don't need a psychiatrist, they need a team of really good psychiatrists.

Forty-six exploration and production companies and 61 oil-field service companies filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy last year, according to Haynes and Boone, a Dallas law firm tracking bankruptcies. The 107 oil and gas bankruptcies in 2020 were the most since 142 bankruptcies were filed during the last oil bust in 2016.

https://www.ogv.energy/news-item/over-100-oil-and-gas-companies-went-bankrupt-in-2020

Context is important and here, now that we have context, we can see the highly exaggerated claims made.

No oil companies filed for bankruptcy.

Oil companies contract oil exploration companies just like they contract oil service companies.

Um, you can't restart an oil or natural gas well with just a mouse click.

 

It's not as high when we had a Republican in office.

 

The price of a galon has increased by 35% since January in Saudi Arabia.

Do you think this is because the country isn't energy independent?

 

Democrats have always been that way. The problem now is that the green new deal types are pushing for even more harmful policies

Democrat votes have always had negative consequences for the folks; always.

 

Nice write-up, but...

Oil prices are based on future supply and demand. The fact that only a certain number of refineries process the oil does not negate the fact that oil prices are dictated by current and future supply and demand on the World Market.

The cancellation of land leases and the cessation of exploration and drilling has a huge impact on global prices. The local production of crude oil does have economic benefits for the refineries as transportation costs are reduced, particularly by pipelines. Excess crude oil on the world market is exported to overseas refineries. Any unused crude oil or gas is stored at facilities, and the price of storage has increased due to the shutdown.

I do understand your point. I agree with your overall point about the demand decreasing over time. But I disagree with you on the number of refineries. The world has too many refineries. Increasing production creates a greater supply for refineries and more end products. The volume of end product will lower production and transportation prices.