about this blog
- Elizabeth MacDonald is the stocks editor for Fox Business Network. She is recognized as one of the top prize-winning business journalists in the country, and has received 14 awards, including the top prize in business journalism, the Gerald Loeb Award for Distinguished Business Journalism, and the Newswomen's Club of New York Front Page Award for Excellence in Investigative Journalism.
most popular posts
-
- There are no viewed posts at this time.
Greedom
I didn't see much referenced that was non-oil or non-coal. Again, that prius now comes with built in solar panels ! heh Well - I for one have decided 100 years approx of petro is enough. Maybe people before me were tolerant to just pour it in and ignite it. I think there are better - cleaner solutions here. Hey, if it IS all supply and demand, once demand stops - the problem will just go away - with the petro I suppose.
jeronne
If Richard Nixon was able to identify the stupendous problem of oil dependency back in the '60s and '70s then what has Congress been doing all this time to try to correct it?? The answer, of course, is NOTHING!! 4 decades of NOTHING!! -- Congress does a little loud talking from time to time, but it is just grandstanding to lull the voters back to sleep.. Big Oil, oil lobbies, and oil money are controlling Congress.. Why should Congress let something as trivial as the health and welfare of the citizens and the security of the country get in the way of having a good time ...
Arthur M. Collins
First Problem: Hypocracy: a. No nuclear reactors in California, but they are OK in Baja. b. No offshore natural gas terminals in California, but they are OK in Baja. c. No offshore drilling in California, but 'blood for oil' resource wars are OK, give or take 850,000 Iraqi casualties, but who of the NIMBYs is counting. Second Problem: Politicians pandering to a spoiled, emotional, technically illiterate electorate: c. Solar energy is claimed to be our salvation, but look at the engineering reports on the problems with Solar 1 and Solar 2: bugs, pollen and dust sticking like glue to the mirrors, etc. Proponents simply do not live in the real world. d. Some believe that 'renewables' will save us, yet the proponents, not opponents, of renewables estimate 30-80 cents /kilowatt-hour. If you love these values, then I will sell you gasoline for $80 / gallon. Nuclear is 2.5 cents /KWH, which corresponds to $6 / gallon of gas. f. Engineers say that nuclear is our "best shot" economically and environmentally, and we engineers are labelled "the Devil Incarnate". Nuclear is environmentally benign, and the waste disposal problem is solvable - ask the French. The solution is simple to state (ask Nixon): 1. Foreget your fears, biases, hates, rages and emotions. This is difficult if only passion, commitment and advocacy is what you have been taught in school. I would suggest logic, analysis, tradeoffs of economics, technical feasibility and environmental impacts as the currency of the realm. 2. Build plug-in hybrid electric vehicles, thereby rejunvinating Detroit's obsolete vehicle technology. Most trips are less than 20 miles, so only battery electric power would be used, not fuel. 3. Build advanced technology nuclear reactors, to provide the electricity for the plug-in hybrids, and the rest of our economy. Manufacture hydrogen and ammonia as fuels from nuclear reactor power, thus eliminating global warming problems. 4. This eliminates oil imports, 'blood for oil' resource wars and the resultant endless stream of body bags. Plus you can thereby forego hating your President, whoever he may eventually be (Hillary would have been nice, but Ce La Guerre!). 5. Shut off from their massive revenue stream, the fundamentalist and radical societies would become too busy working for a living, and feeding themselves, to be providing us with the 'benefit' of their terror and paranoia. Nothing like hard work to boil off emotional hate and rage, both abroad and here at home. Regards, Art Collins, Nuclear Engineer (Ha Ha!, Got Ya!)
Sinomania!
"Also, in preparation for the Olympics this summer, China is likely hoarding oil, gas diesel to prevent embarrassing shortages." EMac, this talk radio sound bite is total conjecture. China is certainly building the country's strategic reserves of oil and that might have an impact (although most analysts think not much) on overall oil prices. The USA of course always maintains a healthy stratgic reserve. China is just now protecting its supply and is late to the game.
A to Z Energy ETF » Blog Archive » DrumBeat: July 10, 2008
[...] Energy Independence: The Final Frontier Who said the following? “Our ability to meet our own energy needs is directly linked to our continued ability to act decisively and independently at home and abroad in the service of peace, not only for America, bur for all nations in the world.” Answer: Richard Nixon. Amidst Watergate and the Viet Nam War, Nixon said we need a top-level government focus on energy independence equivalent to the US’s program to put a man on the moon. Nixon also wanted more public funding to explore Alaskan oil and gas, offshore oil reserves, nuclear energy and synthetic fuels from coal and oil shale. The United States, Nixon said, should be independent of all oil producing countries, “including our Canadian friends,” by 1976, saying that the United States must be independent in this area, and we can be.” [...]
chuck
Liz I can tell you what business has been affected by high oil prices: Pantry Inc of Sanford,North Carolina. Pantry is a midcap stock which for over the past few years has been acquiring new properties all over the southeast. That includes 39 units which Waring Oil LLC sold to them in cash over two years ago. The oil commidities pressures forced Pantry into a bind. What happen was this: last year they lost thier consumer base due to the way they priced retail gas. They priced it at 2.00 and that dramatically affected thier earnings. Wachovoia is thier bank by the way. Last year they had to close some convient stores outside of Sanford NC. Also Pantry had to lay off workers. Now the big complaints against them has been thier poor consumer service. Thier stock has dropped to 12.00. At thier last quater earnings they were bragging they were going to beat the street. Honestly I didn't believe the statements. Becouse of the high oil prices Pantry couldn't make no more aquistions. At one time Circkle K was looking into acquiring them. Just last year Pantry Inc sued Costco in a legel suit over retail gas prices in Alabamam. Wonder if Pantry lost the suit becouse they were trying to keep the gas prices high. Just check out Pantry Inc,Racetrack,and other convient store chains and see how thier faring in the market place.
jeronne
Whenever the daily price of crude inches up, the price of gasoline goes up within hours.. Crude has dropped over 10% this week.. Let's see how long it takes for the price of gasoline to go back down.. Big Oil continues the lie that they make only 9% net.. If crude has dropped over 10% this week then Big Oil just got a 10%+ boost.. How can the NET stay at 9% no matter what happens ?? Congress has been collecting so much money from Big Oil for so long that they will say NOTHING about it .. Business as usual.. Screw the consumer ...
Rakesh Saxena
Blaming Oil on Speculators. Ignorance is Bliss, Indeed. In the latest exercise in populism, senior Democrat Senators are pushing legislation to control futures market speculation. And commentators on the Right and Left are joining the bandwagon in a hurry. “It is insane to let gamblers magnify the effect of anticipated changes in supply and demand, that may not materialize, by buying and selling oil futures,” declared FOXNews contributor Dick Morris yesterday in an email blast. “Oil is just too important strategically and economically to allow that kind of speculation.” This focus on speculators relies entirely on the exponential increase in volumes on the futures markets. Beyond that, few facts are in the public domain, and it is doubtful if Senators Chuck Schumer and Harry Reid had any comprehensive analysis of the futures exchanges in hand prior to proposing new laws. In fact, leaving aside speculators for a moment, nobody in Washington is actually aware, with an acceptable degree of precision, of how much oil is produced or consumed on a daily basis. While output numbers are hopelessly impaired due to the lack of quality international-level audits, consumption statistics from the developing world are seriously flawed. Furthermore, the true impact of deeply embedded oil-related subsidies, in countries like India and China, has been grossly underestimated. Adding to the sorry absence of factual applications are a few other fundamental considerations. Firstly, lawmakers and self-styled oil experts in Washington are failing to recognize, and disclose to the American voter, the huge gap between the demand, for petrochemical products on one hand and the constraints imposed by existing refining capacity other. Secondly, it is quite apparent that nobody wants to study the balance sheets of private, listed and government-owned multinationals; the fine print in the financial statements will show that strategic issues like the timing of oil exploration and oil exploitation are resolved strictly within a corporate, i.e. capitalist, framework, without any allowances being made for public interest benchmarks. By conservative estimates, well in excess of 350 million acres of oil and gas concessions around the world are presently lying dormant; this figure does not include offshore licenses or the vast resource in the Siberian hinterland. I personally am responsible for making ongoing prices on oil and gas derivatives, and I take into a few other facts when making determinations of future prices. I take into account the fact that the most strategic of geographical locations, the Straits of Hormuz, can turn into a war zone at short notice, at the whim of Iran. I do not ignore the fact that oil flows in Africa and Central Asia are directed by corrupt governments, not be commonsense or reason. I am aware that the heavily skewed distribution of oil wealth, in Saudi Arabia and Libya for example, has created the foundations for social upheavals at some point in forthcoming years. Lastly, the developing world’s economic powerhouses can alter the oil and gas matrix quite rapidly, by simply changing subsidy rates. So, as I am asked every day, where are oil prices headed? Remember that my organization is neither a producer nor a consumer. Our job is to speculate, daily; a job made easier by our knowledge that there is an abundance of empty rhetoric and a paucity of facts. But we are unable to assess the price of oil if speculators like us are driven out of the marketplace. And nobody outside the speculative arena can present a credible assessment either. It is dangerous to pass legislation founded on unsubstantiated theory. To conclude, people like me trade in a sea of ignorance, where boldness, and the willingness to take risks, is a more durable quality than engaging in either reckless blame games or armchair intellectualism. All that said, there is an answer, a sustainable solution: the end of private capital altogether. That solution will not only sort out oil, but also food, and poverty and marginalization.