Category Archives: oil industry

And The Money Keeps Rolling In From Every Side

It’s another new record for ExxonMobil: the world’s largest corporation has just reported second-quarter profits of $11.68 billion.

That’s profits. Not gross. Profits. That means the expenses are already subtracted out.

Did I mention this is for the second quarter only? Not the entire year?

Meanwhile, Shell Oil reports higher profits despite decreased production:

LONDON – Royal Dutch Shell, Europe’s largest oil company, reported a 33 percent increase in second-quarter profit Thursday, helped by a higher oil price even as production declined.

Like smaller rival BP earlier this week, Shell profited from an oil price that almost doubled in the second quarter from the year earlier, but a 13 percent drop from a record on July 11 raised some concern among investors about whether oil companies can keep up the pace of earnings growth.

Your concern is noted.

BP said earlier a higher oil price started to affect consumer demand for its gasoline, which declined as much as 10 percent in the United States and Europe.

Shell’s profit rose to $11.56 billion from $8.67 billion in the same period last year. BP reported a 28 percent increase in profit earlier this week, and Italian oil company Eni said Thursday that profit in the second quarter had risen 52 percent, citing a higher oil price.

Again, this is profit, not gross. Profit. In the billions. With a “b.” Just for the second quarter.

Looking at the gasoline front, some bloggers point out that a “surprise decline in the nation’s gasoline stockpile” (reported by CNN), coupled with a U.S. gasoline demand that is “significantly lower than the same week a year ago,” means that oil companies have cut production to inflate prices.

Could it be that the oil companies have become accustomed to a certain lifestyle, so to speak? To certain record profits every quarter? As bloated as these profits may sound to us, when investors show “concern” when one record-breaking quarterly profit might not be quite as absurdly high as the last, it’s reasonable to assume they will take appropriate action.

I read all of this as CNN touts their own poll claiming that most Americans favor off-shore oil drilling, though “Americans are divided over whether or not offshore drilling will have an immediate impact on high gas prices.”

Well, in that case, most Americans are grossly uneducated on this issue. If it were really as simple as supply and demand, then everyone would be in favor of the simple conservation measures that have been proven to lower gas prices immediately. After all, we’re told lower demand is why gas prices dropped 20 cents a gallon two weeks ago.

Unfortunately, oil is a global commodity and the oil companies are global multinational corporations. It’s not as easy as drilling off the coast of Florida or in the Alaska wilderness and all of our troubles disappear. What consumers in China and India do has as an impact on gas prices here in America too, and we have no control over that. In fact, anyone who is stupid enough to believe that increased oil drilling at home will do anything other than further inflate already obscene oil company profits is smoking something.

Oil companies don’t give a crap about $4 gasoline in the U.S., except as it affects their bottom line. And when consumers start cutting back, ExxonMobil and Chevron, like their brethren at OPEC, turn off the spigot. They’ve gotten a taste of $149 barrel oil and they aren’t backing down now.

So the American people can decide they want to trade tourism and fishing industries for the oil industry all they want. It isn’t going to change the price of gasoline or heating oil or electricity rates at home.

The only thing that will accomplish that is getting off the oil tit. And if ExxonMobil and Chevron and the rest are too blinded by profits to read the writing on the wall and get on the new energy bandwagon, well, you can’t say I didn’t warn you.

Comments Off on And The Money Keeps Rolling In From Every Side

Filed under Big Oil, gas prices, oil industry

>Oil Drilling In The Gulf

>Interesting. Building on a point I made in this post last week, I’d like to direct readers to this afternoon’s MarketWatch story:

Crude closes above $130 on Iran, tropical storm

By Moming Zhou

Last update: 3:08 p.m. EDT July 21,

SAN FRANCISCO (MarketWatch) — Crude futures rose Monday for the first time in five sessions, rebounding from last week’s biggest weekly losses, after multilateral talks over Iran’s controversial nuclear program didn’t yield progress and as Tropical Storm Dolly headed toward the western Gulf of Mexico. Crude for August delivery, which will expire Tuesday, closed up $2.16, or 1.7%, at $131.04 a barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange. Earlier it rose to an intraday high of $132.05 on electronic trading. Crude for September delivery also closed higher at $131.82 a barrel.

Fascinating. So the mere presence of a tropical storm in the Gulf of Mexico sends the price of oil soaring — there doesn’t even need to be an actual hurricane causing actual damage.

So why is the McCain camp telling us that oil platforms in the Gulf of Mexico are “hurricane safe”? If that were true, the market wouldn’t respond with a jump in oil prices when drilling activities appear to be threatened by bad weather.

Brilliant. So let’s keep pumping oil out of the Gulf of Mexico so every time there’s a hint of bad weather we can all be on pins and needles about how it’s going to impact the price of oil.

Comments Off on >Oil Drilling In The Gulf

Filed under John McCain, oil industry

>Memory Holes

>I just don’t get it.

It seems like just yesterday the media was telling us about how gas prices zoomed after Hurricanes Katrina and Rita because the storms disrupted oil production in the Gulf. It became part of the “conventional wisdom” of the day: hurricanes in the Gulf = higher gas prices. President Bush even released some oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve as a result.

Look, here’s one story from MSNBC:

Gas prices in cities across the United States soared by as much as 40 cents a gallon from Tuesday to Wednesday, a surge blamed on disruptions by Hurricane Katrina in Gulf of Mexico oil production.


Katrina knocked out about 95 percent of oil production in the Gulf — a key supply point for the U.S. About a quarter of domestic oil comes from the region. The impact is being felt far from the Gulf.

Hey, here’s another story from CNN:

Rita could equal $5 gas

The timing and strength of the latest storm could cause worse spike at the pumps than Katrina did.

September 22, 2005: 9:32 AM EDT
By Chris Isidore, CNN/Money senior writer

NEW YORK (CNN/Money) – Remember when gas spiked to $3-plus a gallon after Hurricane Katrina? By this time next week, that could seem like the good old days.

Weather and energy experts say that as bad as Hurricane Katrina hit the nation’s supply of gasoline, Hurricane Rita could be worse.

Katrina damage was focused on offshore oil platforms and ports. Now the greater risk is to oil-refinery capacity, especially if Rita slams into Houston, Galveston and Port Arthur, Texas.

“We could be looking at gasoline lines and $4 gas, maybe even $5 gas, if this thing does the worst it could do,” said energy analyst Peter Beutel of Cameron Hanover. “This storm is in the wrong place. And it’s absolutely at the wrong time,” said Beutel.

Heh. Good ol’ days, indeed.

So why in the hell are people in the McCain campaign–including John McCain himself–saying that Gulf of Mexico oil production wasn’t affected by Katrina and Rita? And why in the hell aren’t interviewers calling them on it?

Has everyone forgotten that the hurricanes were the big reason everyone was given for the last big spike in gas prices? Cripes, I haven’t forgotten. It was just three years ago, for crying out loud.

Is everyone on crack or something? Don’t you people remember anything?!

Comments Off on >Memory Holes

Filed under gas prices, John McCain, media, oil industry

Mission Accomplished!


Jennifer Johnson of WSMV just sold this deal as “cheap gas for Tennesseans–eventually!”

Just shoot me now.
No one could have anticipated this:

Deals With Iraq Are Set to Bring Oil Giants Back

BAGHDAD — Four Western oil companies are in the final stages of negotiations this month on contracts that will return them to Iraq, 36 years after losing their oil concession to nationalization as Saddam Hussein rose to power.

I bet you didn’t know that Saddam Hussein threw Western oil companies out of Iraq 36 years ago, did you? I didn’t either. Funny how these things never really came up in the run-up to war. But I digress.

Exxon Mobil, Shell, Total and BP — the original partners in the Iraq Petroleum Company — along with Chevron and a number of smaller oil companies, are in talks with Iraq’s Oil Ministry for no-bid contracts to service Iraq’s largest fields, according to ministry officials, oil company officials and an American diplomat.

The deals, expected to be announced on June 30, will lay the foundation for the first commercial work for the major companies in Iraq since the American invasion, and open a new and potentially lucrative country for their operations.

The no-bid contracts are unusual for the industry, and the offers prevailed over others by more than 40 companies, including companies in Russia, China and India. The contracts, which would run for one to two years and are relatively small by industry standards, would nonetheless give the companies an advantage in bidding on future contracts in a country that many experts consider to be the best hope for a large-scale increase in oil production.

Isn’t that special! The four largest Western oil companies are preparing to sign no-bid contracts in Iraq, bringing them back to a position they had 36 years ago. Is that some long-range planning or what!

This is an interesting turn of events, since the last time an American oil company was signing deals in Iraq, the Bush-connected Hunt Oil of Dallas, the Bush Administration was none too happy that the news had leaked out, since it would undermine the Iraqi government’s attempts to write an oil revenue sharing law. President Bush himself claimed to “know nothing about the deal,” but hey, he always claims to know nothing about everything so that’s no surprise.

This deal certainly looks bad, since critics of the American invasion have said all along that the occupation of Iraq is and always has been about the oil. Well, duh.

For their part, the oil companies claim they are “helping Iraq rebuild its decrepit oil industry.” It’s a humanitarian gesture! They get nothing out of it, nothing at all!

Er, except this:

The first oil contracts for the majors in Iraq are exceptional for the oil industry.

They include a provision that could allow the companies to reap large profits at today’s prices: the ministry and companies are negotiating payment in oil rather than cash.

Mission accomplished! Heckuva job, Bushie!

Look, if invading and occupying Iraq to secure their oil reserves for Western oil companies is part of our energy security policy, then why didn’t they just tell us that? Why not be honest about it? Why tell us our soldiers are dying for some big cause like spreading Democracy across the Middle East, or fighting terorrism? That’s obviously bullshit.

And I have to wonder if this timely announcement, coming as Americans are feeling the tightest gasoline pinch in decades, wasn’t somehow intentional. Americans are more likely to support invading a foreign country to secure their oil when gas is at $4.50 a gallon than at $1.50 a gallon.

Anyway, this proves that we DFH’s on the left were right all along: we’re in Iraq for oil, and you wingnuts who bought the administration line about mushroom clouds and mobile weapons labs were all a bunch of chumps. You do not deserve to be listened to about anything ever again. Yes, I am talking to you, William Kristol, and you Fred Hiatt, and all of the Little Green Snotballs and Johnny Assrocket and all the rest of you Kool-Aid drinkers. You were fed lies by the Administration, hey we all were, but you were the idiots who believed them.

And God help us if you and your cohorts in the GOP are ever allowed near the reins of power again.

Comments Off on Mission Accomplished!

Filed under ExxonMobil, Hunt Oil, Iraq War, oil, oil industry

Public Land, Public Resources

A conversation over at Eschaton yesterday prompted me to do a little research into Norway’s State Petroleum Fund.

Norway is the world’s third-largest oil producer, pumping crude out of the North Sea since the 1960s. Instead of allowing just a privileged few to profit from this national resource, Norway takes the approach that the oil belongs to all Norwegians. So, oil profits are placed in a state fund, and the proceeds benefit every citizen:

Parliament created the oil fund in 1990, but the state had its first budget surplus only in 1995. Until then, oil income was used to pay down Norway’s staggering foreign debt from the tough years before North Sea riches could be exploited. A substantial amount of the profits from the exploitation of a resource that is viewed as belonging to all Norwegians, not just the current generation, is invested in foreign stocks and bonds. The state-owned fund guards against spending too freely on public sector services in boom years so as not to lay off droves of state workers when the economy goes bust.

The Petroleum Fund is an instrument designed to prevent Norway’s substantial oil profits from being taken too rapidly into the economy. State bank officials and government leaders believe that dispersing oil revenues directly would overheat the Norwegian economy and suppress private sector growth. Their view is that the resource rent collected from the sale of their natural wealth of oil should be conserved.

From the perspective of some, Norway focuses more on how to administer and distribute the assets already acquired than on how new value is to be created. There are generous benefits for both men and women of eight weeks’ vacation, liberal sick leave and day care that is reliable and inexpensive. Three-year maternity leaves, broad part-time opportunities and creative application of telecommuting help keep women in the work force. State assistance to single mothers is so generous that there is no need for a father’s income.

According to the U.S. State Department, Norway’s State Petroleum Fund exceeded $388 billion by the end of December 2007.

This approach contrasts sharply with the American model, in which corporations like ExxonMobil and Chevron bear the investment burden, then post record profits with little benefit to anyone else. In the case where resources like oil and natural gas are pulled out of public land which belongs to everyone, this strikes me as rather unfair.

Of course, I’m not suggesting that America nationalize its oil companies. I don’t think it would ever fly here, the American public is far too allergic to the notion of “nationalized” anything to even consider it.

But it certainly brings up an issue seldom raised in debates over resources on public lands, where so much mining and drilling takes place. This stuff is supposed to belong to all of us, but when oil and gas leases are given to private corporations, they’re the only ones who profit. Heck, half the time these leases are given out virtually royalty-free.

Let’s take ANWR as an example. Pretend for a moment that ANWR doesn’t contain a mere six month supply of oil. Let’s pretend the resources are so vast that it would keep America awash in oil for years and years. This is public land–it’s a National Wildlife Refuge that belongs to every American, not just ExxonMobil. If we allow the destruction of this wilderness to extract oil and gas, shouldn’t we get something more out of it besides $4/gallon at the Mapco?

The Norwegian way would be to have the government sell the oil and use the profits first to pay off the national debt, then pay for such benefits as healthcare, low-cost childcare, and a free college education, and finally the rest is invested to hedge against some future day when the economy turns south, the oil runs out, etc. That way a citizenry accustomed to free education and healthcare won’t suddenly find itself in dire straits, and an economy which contains a large number of government employees won’t suddenly be laying off thousands of workers.

The American way is far different. Sell the leases (or, if you’re the Bush Administration, give your industry buddies a $10 billion break then lie to Congress about it.) The CEO of ExxonMobil gets $22 million a year and regular Americans, whose oil they are stealing pumping, get nothing.

No free healthcare. No affordable child care. No free education. But CEO Rex Tillerson and his family can now afford to buy these things.

I’m so happy for them.

I realize that the Norwegian way would never work in America. We’re just too different, psychologically and constitutionally. But I do think the current system is inequitable. Raising the royalty rate to 16.7 percent from 12.5 percent of oil and gas sales isn’t enough, not when net profits are in the tens of billions of dollars each quarter.

I don’t like the idea of a “windfall profits tax,” that strikes me as rather silly when all we need to do is get the oil companies to pay us what these leases are worth.

And then I’d like to know where this money is going. It’s certainly not going to the Interior Dept.

Comments Off on Public Land, Public Resources

Filed under Norway, oil, oil industry, State Petroleum Fund

Rockefellers Urge ExxonMobil To Go Green

There’s been an amazing development in the Corporate Overlord department this week, one mentioned little in the press since it doesn’t concern flag pins or rabid preacher types. However, it does concern America’s energy future, so I hope we’re all paying attention.

In short, it looks like one of America’s oldest dynasties is trying to put the fear of God in ExxonMobil:

Members of the Rockefeller family took a fight with Exxon Mobil Corp. public Wednesday, challenging the oil giant spawned by John D. Rockefeller to split the roles of chairman and chief executive and focus more on renewable energy.

The family members, who call themselves the company’s longest continuous shareholders, said they are concerned that Irving, Texas-based Exxon Mobil is too focused on short-term gains from soaring oil prices and should do more to invest in cleaner technology.
 Separating the leadership roles, they argue, would better position the company for challenges to come.

”They are fighting the last war and they’re not seeing they’re facing a new war,” said Peter O’Neill, the great-great-grandson of John D. Rockefeller who heads the family committee dealing with Exxon Mobil.

Wow. Let me offer a hearty round of applause–and thanks–to the Rockefeller family. The Rockefellers have sponsored four proxy resolutions–all of which the Board of Directors recommend a vote “against,” I might add–which would push the company in a green direction.

Frankly, being the indoctrinated little capitalist that I am, I always assumed ExxonMobil, Chevron and the rest would have led us to our new energy future by now, seeing as how their own futures depend on it (in fact, I wrote about it here).

That they haven’t is extremely disappointing to me. Call it my wake-up to the ways of the world, akin to learning there is no Santa Claus: corporations are only focused on short-term profits, I now realize; the long-term is someone else’s problem (a philosophy echoed by our “MBA President,” I might add). Just look at GM and Ford over the past 20 years: at least where American corporate giants are concerned, short-sightedness is a feature, not a bug.

Anyway, shareholder resolutions are notoriously ineffective, since most are non-binding, so even if a resolution gets passed the board can still do what it wants anyway. I tend to vote for them regardless, especially the ones related to executive compensation and human rights or environmental issues. The board needs to know how we feel.

But the Rockefeller resolutions are especially powerful, since they have become so public. ExxonMobil is in a sense the Rockefeller family business, so this is a very public smackdown of a corporation that continues to rake in obscene profits: another $11 billion in the first quarter of this year, in fact.

That’s billion, with a “B.” Profit, not gross.

One gets the sense that the ExxonMobil folks are pigs feeding at the trough, instead of corporate leaders guiding America into her new energy future.

When we aren’t debating lame-brain ideas like summer “gas tax holidays” or drilling in a national wildlife refuge with so few oil reserves even Big Oil isn’t interested, we’re toppling unfriendly Middle Eastern dictators. Does this make sense to anyone?

Meanwhile, European countries are jumping to the front of the technology line. Thomas Friedman shared this dire news in Wednesday’s column:

While all the presidential candidates were railing about lost manufacturing jobs in Ohio, no one noticed that America’s premier solar company, First Solar, from Toledo, Ohio, was opening its newest factory in the former East Germany — 540 high-paying engineering jobs — because Germany has created a booming solar market and America has not.

In 1997, said Resch, America was the leader in solar energy technology, with 40 percent of global solar production. “Last year, we were less than 8 percent, and even most of that was manufacturing for overseas markets.”

There is money to be made in alternative energy, and jobs to be created. But President Bush and the Republicans in the Senate wouldn’t even extend solar and wind energy tax credits, although they left the ones for oil and gas.

With $11 billion in profits for one quarter, why the hell do the oil companies need tax credits? This makes no sense. Our utter lack of leadership in Washington will have dire repercussions for years to come.

Maybe proposals like the Rockefellers’ will have some impact. For heaven’s sake, no one would confuse them with a bunch of tie-dye wearing, pot-smoking hippies, right?

For crying out loud, we have to get off the oil tit. America’s future depends on it. Do we really want to be the Portugal of the new millenium?

Comments Off on Rockefellers Urge ExxonMobil To Go Green

Filed under energy future, ExxonMobil, oil industry, Rockefellers, stockholder proposals


>Well, someone’s pie is getting higher:

Exxon Mobil Profit Sets Record Again


Exxon Mobil delivered its strongest performance ever last year, earning a record $40.6 billion in net income because of surging oil prices, the company said Friday.

The figure, a 3 percent increase from the previous year, exceeded the company’s own record for profits at an American corporation, set in 2006, and is nearly twice what it earned in 2003.

Exxon said its fourth-quarter net income rose 14 percent, to $11.7 billion, or $2.13 a share. That also made it the company’s most profitable quarter ever.

Remember: $40.6 billion is the net income. Not gross. NET. Chevron also reported similar good news, posting a 29% increase in profits.

It’s not just the American oil companies. The highest-ever profit by a European company was posted this week by Royal Dutch Shell, at $27.6 billion.

So considering how flush ExxonMobil and Chevron are, would someone please explain to me why the GOP continued to coddle Bloated Big Oil at the expense of tax credits for renewable energy?

WASHINGTON (AP) — Senate Republicans on Thursday blocked a $32 billion package of tax breaks for renewable energy that would have been financed mostly by new taxes on major oil companies.

Democrats came three votes short of overcoming a threatened GOP filibuster that was keeping the measure from being attached to a broader energy bill. Republican senators argued that the nearly $29 billion in additional taxes on major oil companies would have led to reduced production and higher gasoline prices.

For the record, this was not $29 billion in “additional taxes,” it was repealing existing tax breaks that the oil companies have enjoyed since, well, forever, but especially since the GOP-controlled Congress passed the 2005 Energy Billl.

Thanks, liberal media, for getting the story wrong–again.

And can someone explain to me why, with over $40 billion in net profits in their pockets from this year alone, ExxonMobil continues to fight (all the way to the Supreme Court!) paying $2.5 billion in punitive damages to over 30,0000 fishermen and others whose livelihood was ruined by the Valdez spill? Yeah remember that? Some of you kids reading this weren’t even alive back then. It happened nearly 20 years ago, but ExxonMobil is too greedy to pay up, even after all this time.


Comments Off on >Obscene

Filed under Big Oil, oil industry

>Oil: “It’s People! Agghh!”

>Those wacky Yes Men have struck again.

Mike and Andy, the artful activists known to wreak havoc on WTO meetings and the like have pulled a fast one on the Go-Expo energy confab in Calgary, Canada.

Posing as representatives from ExxonMobil and the National Petroleum Council, the two delivered the Go Expo keynote address today. And what a keynote! According to a Yes Men news release, the speech was supposed to deliver results of a long-awaited study commissioned by US Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman. Here’s what the oil execs got instead:

In the actual speech, the “NPC rep” announced that current U.S. and Canadian energy policies (notably the massive, carbon-intensive exploitation of Alberta’s oil sands, and the development of liquid coal) are increasing the chances of huge global calamities. But he reassured the audience that in the worst case scenario, the oil industry could “keep fuel flowing” by transforming the billions of people who die into oil.

“We need something like whales, but infinitely more abundant,” said “NPC rep” “Shepard Wolff” (actually Andy Bichlbaum of the Yes Men), before describing the technology used to render human flesh into a new Exxon oil product called Vivoleum. 3-D animations of the process brought it to life.

“Vivoleum works in perfect synergy with the continued expansion of fossil fuel production,” noted “Exxon rep” “Florian Osenberg” (Yes Man Mike Bonanno). “With more fossil fuels comes a greater chance of disaster, but that means more feedstock for Vivoleum. Fuel will continue to flow for those of us left.”

The oilmen listened to the lecture with attention, and then lit “commemorative candles” supposedly made of Vivoleum obtained from the flesh of an “Exxon janitor” who died as a result of cleaning up a toxic spill. The audience only reacted when the janitor, in a video tribute, announced that he wished to be transformed into candles after his death, and all became crystal-clear.


According to a local news report, Go Expo attendees were not amused, especially since attendees paid $50 a head to hear a speech from what they thought were American energy policy bigwigs.

Neither Andy nor Mike were arrested, according to their news release, although they were tossed out of the event once the hoax became clear.

Comments Off on >Oil: “It’s People! Agghh!”

Filed under environment, go expo, oil industry, the yes men

>Irony Tuesday

>Hilarious. Houston oil companies are encouraging their employees to bike to work:

Rolling in on two wheels

Oil companies are among the Houston-area employers encouraging workers to make their commutes by bicycle


Some of the world’s biggest gas peddlers are encouraging their workers to pump the pedal.

Exxon Mobil, BP and ConocoPhillips are among the Houston-area employers trying to make it easier for employees to bike to work. Workers already have enough excuses: potholes, impatient drivers and the Houston heat.

But some businesses are easing the commute for those who decide the exercise and reduced emissions make biking worthwhile. They’re giving them locker rooms, shower areas and safe places to park their bikes.

Note the stated benefits of biking to work are exercise and reduced emissions not, say, saving money on gasoline. Well, what do you expect from the Houston Chronicle; to be fair, they do quote someone who saves $3 a day by biking to work. I’m going to assume he lives close to the office and doesn’t have to pay for parking.

Oil companies have always struggled to find that balance between the good PR generated from being “green” and hurting sales of their product. Conservation is a good thing, because the culture says it is, but too much conservation will eat into the bottom line.

That, by the way, is also the uneasy bargain struck in regards to gas prices. High gas prices are good for oil companies (duh), but if they get too high and people start doing things like, well, biking to work, then an oil company is shooting itself in the foot.

This of course is the only “free market” principle at work where oil is concerned, IMHO. I get frustrated when the free marketers try to tell us that gas prices are $4 a gallon because of “supply and demand.” Bullshit.

First of all, there’s nothing “free” about this market: the world runs on oil. There’s no other alternative. We all have to use it, like it or not. Even if you bike to work. Even if you have a wood stove. Unless you’re a hermit that lives like Jeremiah Johnson, you’re as much a part of the oil economy as everyone else, and you need oil.

Oil companies also control every aspect of their product’s production and distribution, from the drilling to the refining to the price at the gas station. There’s little room for the “free hand of the market” to work in a commodity monopoly.

So if you’re pissed off about the price of gasoline, there’s really very little you can do about it. You can quit sending me e-mails about not buying gas next Tuesday or telling me to boycott one company or another. It’s not going to work.

All you can do is try to lessen the impact on your wallet by using less energy yourself. And the only other thing you can do is to write your Congress Critter and demand some serious government investment in alternative energy R&D. Again, you “free marketers” can quit claiming that we should let that free hand lift some little start-up out of the depths of a Michigan basement to save the world from Peak Oil with its Big Idea. That’s a ridiculous fantasy and I really don’t think I need to explain why.

This “Apollo project for energy” is something the oil lobby has been fighting for years, for obvious reasons, and with our current government run by a bunch of oil industry executives, I don’t see it changing any time soon. But you’ve got to start somewhere, and a vocal electorate demanding change is the best first step I can think of.

Just some, er, fuel for thought.


Filed under gas prices, oil industry