The White House is reportedly weighing a controversial measure to lower gas prices ahead of midterm

They did actually, by dipping into the strategic reserves. Dems are not going to win the midterms, and this is export ban is not going to fly, so I think its only a message to oil produces (in US and abroad).

 

I just saw some real action on gasoline I could sink my teeth into.

About 5 or 6 days ago the governor visited here and he heard about our gasoline situation. My boss just told me last night that he actually called the oil company that owns our store and ordered them to make sure we have enough gas because people need generators to run.

We went from one truck a day and a mile long line and out of gas in 2 hours to gas as normal.

This so-called move to lower it before midterms is obviously just to buy votes

 

And the vast majority of the gas released from our strategic reserves were sold overseas.

Maybe if the moron didn't shut down the pipeline on day one that could have helped. But hey at least he helped Russia get their pipeline

 

You need better sources of information. That pipeline wouldn't have done a damned thing to alleviate the situation. It is partisan disinformation.

 

Yes because I'm sure it was just a useless pipeline that wouldn't have actually carried any gas or oil anywhere....

He shuts down our production while he helps Russia. Now they're considering a complete ban on offshore drilling.

We can't get this moronical idiot out of the White House fast enough

 

Oh, this isn't political in nature at all. What happens after the election?

 

You compound your simple mistake with multiple lies trying to save face.

Socialists are all the same, they act like they are better than everyone else but are the most dishonest people.

You can ignore me, makes no difference, everyone else will still read about your dishonesty.

 

Oh please Biden, do that. It's going to be interesting to see the reactions of Europeans after Biden tells them that not only is he going to prohibit them from buying gas from the world's largest supplier, but they can't buy from us either. And I thought Trump was supposed to be the one to destroy NATO.

 

Keystone XL, an expansion of an existing North American pipeline, would have carried 830,000 barrels of crude oil from Alberta, Canada, to Nebraska daily at its peak. At the time Mr. Biden halted its construction, the $8 billion expansion was only about 8% complete, according to Reuters.

Yet many experts agree that moving ahead with the pipeline wouldn't have prevented U.S. gas prices from climbing to a record high. Expanding the Keystone would have increased global oil production by less than 1%, an amount, they explained, is "almost negligible."

"I can see why people make that connection," Nemet said."But in terms of gasoline prices and global oil prices, it's just something it's better to just ignore because it would have no impact."

More production, but higher costs for Americans

Even if the pipeline was already built, it wouldn't help with the price at the pump, Nemet added, noting that the U.S. has already doubled its oil production over the last 15 years. "And yet, we still have $100 per barrel oil."

"The key lesson there is the U.S. is not the whole story here. It's a global market," Nemet said. "And so we've got 8 billion people that are consuming oil and many countries that are producing it, and it all goes into one market."

"The Keystone was not an oilfield — it's a pipeline," she responded. "The oil is continuing to flow in, just through other means. So, it actually would have nothing do with the current supply imbalance."

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/could-...imit-rising-gas-prices-oil-cbs-news-explains/

 

I think it's a good idea. National resources belong to the nation, not the oil companies.

 

LMAOROG

Even if the pipeline was already built, it wouldn't help with the price at the pump, Nemet added, noting that the U.S. has already doubled its oil production over the last 15 years. "And yet, we still have $100 per barrel oil."

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/could-...imit-rising-gas-prices-oil-cbs-news-explains/

 

There ya go, but some people are immune to facts.

 

You should read before linking such BS

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1979_oil_crisis#United_States

 

Trae has a hot take...

 

HE'S GREAT

 

The discussion is not about the price at the pump in the short term ... and the claim that keystone would not have anything to do with the oil supply imbalance is false .. although it would help only a fraction .. the majority is due to short term supply chain disruption .. but this is exacerbated by the long term supply issues .. which the keystone was a small part .. lack of investment in the sector being another part.

Anyway you slice it or dice it .. Keystone was good for US economy .. and the environment. Canadian Crude sells at a huge discount to Brent .. is the most enviro friendly oil.

Biden's dumb and dumber "Not in my back Yard - Dump it in the Ocean" Enviro Policy.

 

The suggestion is not to nationalize oil companies. That could only happen if they all went broke and needed to be bailed out, like it was with banks which "W" nationalized during the melt-down of 2007-08.

 

Output is maxed out. What part of that do you not understand? They cannot increase output without shutting down the refinery and then doing a major expansion.

 

LMAOROG

But once more

"The Keystone was not an oilfield — it's a pipeline," she responded. "The oil is continuing to flow in, just through other means. So, it actually would have nothing do with the current supply imbalance."

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/could-...imit-rising-gas-prices-oil-cbs-news-explains/

 

Repeating the words of a moron .. does not make it any less false mate. Increasing the oil supply - changes the supply balance. Getting oil from somewhere other than the Keystone .. changes the supply balance.

Just because you find some moron blubbering nonsense on the web doesn't mean everything the moron says is true. Oil flowing in through other means changes the supply balance ... along with all all the other things mentioned.

Sorry you were not able to figure out the obvious stupidity in your link mate -- my guess is that the person mis-spoke.

 

HOW? It's NOT new drilling or wells, simply a delivery option. THINK

Yes it would make the Canadian oil company more profits, but since oil is a commodity, it's based off world market prices. You really need to think

 

Ehmmmm....nope. Which FL do you live in that has different prices?


https://www.gasbuddy.com/gasprices/florida/fort-lauderdale

 

Yes, it would have. As it would have lowered crude oil prices, at least marginally, by allowing more oil to be moved more quickly and cheaply.

 

You're clinging to a false narrative. Aside from the fact that you are wrong about prices, that pipeline would not have been in operation by now anyway.

 

Right wingers ALWAYS supporting Corp profits above EVERYTHING else, this time for the Canadian oil Corp

Kinda like these guys

Senate Republican bill would repeal Democratic drug pricing law

Senate Republicans on Friday introduced a bill that would roll back the drug pricing reforms included in the sweeping Inflation Reduction Act, including the measures allowing Medicare to negotiate drug prices and capping annual drug expenses for many seniors.
https://thehill.com/homenews/senate...lican-bill-would-repeal-dem-drug-pricing-law/

You know when they claim "caps" don't work since the GOP gave big pharma the gift in 2003 the Medicare part D program that of course, they didn't give a penny of new funding, AND RESTRICTED THE GOV'T'S ABILITY TO NEGOTIATE! . It cost US $110 billion this year out of general revenues



Prescription Drugs Department of Veterans Affairs Paid About Half as Much as Medicare Part D for Selected Drugs in 2017
https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-21-111