Bush Suspends Environmental Gas Rules

Amid growing political pressure to respond to rising gas prices, President Bush temporarily suspended federal clean-burning gasoline rules for refineries in order to increase the domestic supply of gasoline. The suspended rules halt the requirements that refineries replace the gas additive MTBE with cleaner burning ethanol and reduce the sulfur content of gasoline and diesel fuel.



You can't help but wonder whether Bush is secretly laughing to himself on this one....

[edit on 25-4-2006 by loam]

This is another make believe attempt to the public to show that he is doing something while his fellow Republicans are biting their nails because the popularity of Bush is failing.

He is not attacking the real issue about the oil companies in the US.

He will not because you do not bite the hand that feed you.

Oil companies are controlling the refine of crude and like that control the depending on demand.

They can make demands to get higher while refining less oil.

They get money trough incentives and tax brakes.

They actually get rewarded for their practices.

Oil companies will keep pushing their business way of dealing with demand until they get the desirable prices on gas even if the price of crude roles back.

They are setting the new high on gas prices to be the new standard for the hole nation.

I highly doubt he is laughing, but you can best be assured, I am not laughing.
Furthermore, I am not laughing at the antics of environmentalist, who are partially to blame for the situation that 'we' are experiencing in the U.S.

How so?

The environmentalists have steadily and continually impeded and blocked any and all attempts to drill for oil and gas of the East and West Coast and in areas of the U.S. known to have super large quantities of oil and gas, such as ANWAR.

This can be debated which ever way is blue, but it does not, in no uncertain terms, remove what blame there is to be placed upon those environmentalists.

And Marg, this is not all and solely about just oil companies--this is about U.S. energy policies, past and present, that have put this country in the position that it is currently in over our oil and gas needs.




seekerof

[edit on 25-4-2006 by Seekerof]

I was waiting for the blame game to start. ANWR will only produce at most 1.5 mill/bar a day. Only enough to stabalize prices temporarily. The Geopolitical premium plays a much more significant factor.

And another thing, the more you americans whine about how high gas prices are, the more you guys look like a bunch of spoiled brats.

[edit on 25-4-2006 by sardion2000]

Originally posted by sardion2000

I was waiting for the blame game to start. ANWR will only produce at most 1.5 mill/bar a day. Only enough to stabalize prices temporarily. The Geopolitical premium plays a much more significant factor.

Hey sport, I am not strictly and solely talking about just ANWAR, k?
The point here is cutting down the amount that 'we', the U.S., have to rely on the manipulated and extorted amounts of foreign oil that 'we', the U.S., does rely on.

And another thing, the more you americans whine about how high gas prices are, the more you guys look like a bunch of spoiled brats.

Then you wonder why some American's give little credence to world opinion, more specifically, European opinion? And please, do not tell me your Canadian, cause thats even worse.
"Spoiled brats" is an 'a' typical response given by Europeans, such as yourself, whose own centuries old bravado still grates the best of us in the U.S. Do not even start talking about "spoiled brats"....






seekerof

[edit on 25-4-2006 by Seekerof]

You know what it bothers me the most.

The US is the third largest country that produce crude oil but we depend heavily on foreign oil.

Why us the people in this nation can not have our own oil for our own consumption?

Who owns our reserves? why it has to be tucked away?

It makes not sense unless is to benefit against the oil companies that rules our nations oil market.

Have we been told a lie all our lives about our reserves?

It makes no sence that we struggle with oil prices when we have peanty.

We ARE spoiled brats! We should be paying 6-8 bucks a gallon and riding our bikes, walking, carpooling and taking public transportation, but no. We have to have the Jimmy to go to lunch and the Hummer to make us look like we have big units.

And it's the antics of the environmentalists that are to blame? Yeah, that's so funny, it's not. Shame on them for not letting us suck the planet dry! That's just like blaming the liberals for the situation in Iraq. And yes, there are plenty of people who do.

Bush is famous for stunts like this. Air too dirty? Then lower the standards and call it the Clean Air Initiative! There all better! Next?

I can't believe people are still defending this moron!

BH, we are a nation of expanding people that needs big cars to fit in.

Today I noticed that instead of people purchasing smaller economic cars. . . it was actually an increased amount of big SUVs like expeditions that looks like small buses in the road with temporary tags.

So, no wonder the demand for gas keeps growing, because people needs to have that big, big gas hog so they can have a big, big egos.

The last time I owned an SUV was back in 94 and have not gotten another one again.

[edit on 25-4-2006 by marg6043]

Originally posted by Seekerof
This can be debated which ever way is blue, but it does not, in no uncertain terms, remove what blame there is to be placed upon those environmentalists.

And what about the politicians who failed to fund alternative energy initiatives...except by way of fraudulent incentives to big oil?

Fortunately, very few people are buying what you are selling...

Blame yourself, blame bush, blame yourself, blame Bush.
I partially blamed the environmentalist, and will continue to do so.
Bush needs no defending on this matter, nor have I given him any--on this matter.
I blame past and present U.S. energy policies, oil companies, politicians, you, me, it, they, anyone living in the U.S. and drives a gas and oil using vehicle for not demanding a more proactive and responsible "remove the U.S. from manipulated and easily extorted dependency on foreign oil" energy policy, and yes, that would included, environmentalists.





seekerof

[edit on 25-4-2006 by Seekerof]

Originally posted by Seekerof
Blame yourself, blame bush, blame yourself, blame Bush.
I partially blamed the environmentalist, and will continue to do so.
Bush needs no defending on this matter, not have I given him any--on this matter.
I blame past and present U.S. energy policies, oil companies, you, me, it, they, anyone living in the U.S. and drives a gas and poil using vehicle for not demanding a more proactive and responsible "remove the U.S. from manipulated and easily extorted dependency on foreign oil" energy policy, and yes, that would included, environmentalists.

See, I could agree with all of the above...but singling out environmentalists is like blaming oxygen for fire. And by the way, who exactly are these "environmentalists?" Despite what you must think, not all of them are the long-haired-barefoot-granola-eating-tree-spiking types... Just to be clear.

[edit on 25-4-2006 by loam]

Oh, boy, with the money I save, I'm going to go out and buy an air purifier--I'm going to need it! Just when we were making progress on air quality. First warm day, gray air. First hot day, brown air. Maybe all this will finally force the energy issue.

Originally posted by sardion2000

I was waiting for the blame game to start. ANWR will only produce at most 1.5 mill/bar a day. Only enough to stabalize prices temporarily. The Geopolitical premium plays a much more significant factor.

And another thing, the more you americans whine about how high gas prices are, the more you guys look like a bunch of spoiled brats.

[edit on 25-4-2006 by sardion2000]

Since the entire world is competing for oil, you shouldn't be surprised when your gas prices go up in the near future.

[edit on 25-4-2006 by Desert Dawg]

Originally posted by marg6043

The US is the third largest country that produce crude oil but we depend heavily on foreign oil.

Why us the people in this nation can not have our own oil for our own consumption?

The reason is simple marg, and no politicians will say it out loud.

There is a moratorium on new refineries in the USA.

The last refinery was built in 1976.

Until that is fixed, we will continue to see rising costs.

A new refinery has been proposed on the Arizona/Mexico border, that will theoretically meet all laws on the books as of Jan 1. (although petro-legislation gets changed every 6 mos., at the whim of EPA.) The proposed refinery would import oil from Mexico via pipeline. The locals voted overwhelmingly in favor in a recent referendum because they want the jobs. The main thing they need is a license, and investment. It would cost 500 million. No oil company will invest without some kind of guarantee that EPA or Congress won't change the laws and bankrupt the refinery before its complete.

The real problem is not a shortage of oil (the price jump is mostly speculation). The real factor is the amount of REFINED GASOLINE, which they cannot produce enough of to meet demand.

We don't have a SUPPLY problem. For the thousandth time, USA has a REFINING problem.

mod edit, non-ATSNN word choices

[edit on 25-4-2006 by DontTreadOnMe]

I don't have enough smiley faces and lol's for Seekerof. Are you reading his arguement?

"The reason for high gas prices is because of Enviromentalists, who don't drive gas guzzlers, control congress or oil companies, Not Bush's, or the republicans in control of congress, or the republican owned oil companies, its the Hippies."

Anyways, if that is not the saddest attempt to defend Bush I don't know what is.

Ok, edited amount of , as many as I put I didn't have enough.


[edit on 25-4-2006 by StarkMan]

Judging from the levels of arsenic, mercury, PCB, and other contaminants, I think it's safe to say that when Industry wants to put its foot down, it does.

When does it not put its foot down? When there's a buttload of money to be made from restricting supply.

If anything, this might be an indication that the environmentalists who spent all the time blocking new refineries were compromised, or just not thinking.

Maybe the problems with refineries could have been addressed to the satisfaction of environmentalists if the oil companies had been willing to sacrifice profits?

More likely the industry lobby was just smart enough to pick its battles, knowing it stood to lose a lot more money if it sacrificed on some other issue instead.

I must say this whole thing is bizarre. It is made to sound as if Bush is doing the consumer a favor, when really they just don't have enough ethanol to meet the demand:

"Yet state and local officials in some parts of our country worry about supply disruption for the short term. They worry about the sudden change from MTBE to ethanol -- the ethanol producers won't be able to meet the demand. And that's causing the price of gasoline to go up some amount in their jurisdictions.

"And some have contacted us to determine whether or not they can ask the EPA to waive local fuel requirements on a temporary basis. And I think it makes sense that they should be allowed to."

Jennings said later that he things the industry is doing a good job of moving ethanol into new markets and that he doubts a waiver would do much to lower fuel prices for consumers.

source

Originally posted by StarkMan
I don't have enough smiley faces and lol's for Seekerof. Are you reading his arguement?

"The reason for high gas prices is because of Enviromentalists, who don't drive gas guzzlers, control congress or oil companies, Not Bush's, or the republicans in control of congress, or the republican owned oil companies, its the Hippies."

Anyways, if that is not the saddest attempt to defend Bush I don't know what is.

Ok, edited amount of

, as many

as I put I didn't have enough.


[edit on 25-4-2006 by StarkMan]

When you get around to remotely adding some substance to this discussion, please feel free to drop me a u2u alerting me to it. :shk:

Originally posted by WrydeOne
Maybe the problems with refineries could have been addressed to the satisfaction of environmentalists if the oil companies had been willing to sacrifice profits?

You have a valid point, WrydeOne, but it still does not change the fact that environmentalists did not then and will not now allow the building of more refineries, and that brings us to the current problem that we are facing, among other energy related issues: demand has far outstretched production/refining, thus supply. According to CorpWatch, the U.S. has had to import gasoline, not just crude oil, but refined gasoline in ever increasing quantities, thus again, supporting the view that demand has far outstretched production/refining=supply. So it begs the question, is it that the U.S. is in an oil crisis or is it in a refining that oil crisis?

Let's not forget how much the Oil Futures market, with all its speculation and manipulation, is having in the oil profit game.




seekerof

[edit on 25-4-2006 by Seekerof]

Originally posted by Seekerof
Hey sport, I am not strictly and solely talking about just ANWAR, k?

How much oil is left in the US? Interesting question. Probably quite a lot if we use new technologies and are willing to rip the guts out of the country. But of course, it shouldn't get to that stage. We should have begun the shift to alternative greener fuels after the big OPEC embargo in the 70s. Better late than never...

But whatever your political stance, and whether by design or accident, it's clear that:
current US energy policy coincides with the interests of big oil.

Personally I'm all for a $100+ barrel of oil sooner rather than later (though I am sorry for the individuals who will suffer because of it). Heck, make it 200, and quick. How high must it get to wake up America?

Originally posted by Seekerof
Then you wonder why some American's give little credence to world opinion, more specifically, European opinion? And please, do not tell me your Canadian, cause thats even worse.

"Spoiled brats" is an 'a' typical response given by Europeans, such as yourself, whose own centuries old bravado still grates the best of us in the U.S. Do not even start talking about "spoiled brats"....

Hoho. This stuff cracks me up.

My understanding of the refinery issue is that oil companies were content not to have to build any more refineries, as long as American demand held. Decades ago Southern California Edison did not want to build another nuclear plant, so they championed conservation, alternatives. Why build if you don't have to and can make a profit without the investment. The refinery Shell sold in Bakersfield, California, was bought by another oil company, apparently there's still oil.