| Author |
Message |
    
Boogiman1981
| | Posted on Monday, May 16, 2011 - 03:06 pm: | 
|
so what was the total profit of the big oil companies in the last 3yrs? for crying out loud one of them made 10B PROFIT in the first quarter of this year alone. how much cash is needed to invest and how are we sure that they are actually investing it where it's needed?
further what are the actual investment needs? more refinery capacity more drilling both. do they have a plan to reach equilibrium or even GASP have more capacity than needed for a bit?
yes we all need to do what we can to keep our waste down no doubt and most of us have very very limited choices in how much we use on the daily for commuting and other basic needs. seems like there are shopping outlets springing up on every corner so for some of us that may help a little.
as for re-mewed tech that's all fine and good. it does however raise the question of the total energy put into a product and it's waste stream as well. not just how many gas stations can i pass?
there really are simple solutions however there are no simple realities of actuation of those solutions.
we've got so many people fussing and fighting over what needs to be done meanwhile it would seem that the big oil companies are just stacking fat cash. |
Aesquire
| | Posted on Monday, May 16, 2011 - 06:58 pm: |
|
Actually it's the politicians that are making out. Lots of taxes going on.
Blaming the dirty rotten oil companies is looking at the wrong villain. It's the politicians that take the bribes from the dirty rotten oil companies that are to blame.
I favor coal to gasoline conversion. Fuel recovered from a WW2 Focke Wulf 190 at the Smithsonian ( in storage since arrival in 1945 ) seems to run an engine fine. It was the "synfuel" that the Germans developed when we cut their oil supply. We paid for it to be re-developed back during Carter's admin. then the Saudis dropped the price of oil. I don't think they can this time, so we should take the huge coal fields in Utah, ( the ones that the Indonesians bribed Clinton to make a park ) and convert it to fuel and fix the price at, say, $60. That will collapse the middle east, screw Russia, and generally make me happier. Like the $2 gallon gas that doesn't have alcohol in it..... |
Blake
| | Posted on Monday, May 16, 2011 - 11:17 pm: |
|
Boog,
You seem impressed by $10B profit. What does that amount to as a percent of the comany? The reportedly make less than ten cents per gallone of gasoline. The fed gov't taxes it at three times that.
How much did the federal government spend in that quarter on discretionary items?
Don't be hoodwinked by large numbers. The fed gov't has much much larger ones. The debt for instance. |
Boltrider
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 17, 2011 - 02:43 am: |
|
Johnny deserves an award of some sort.  |
Hootowl
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 17, 2011 - 09:05 am: |
|
"more refinery capacity"
Building the plant isn't the problem, getting the permit is. It has proven to be impossible, for all practical purposes. Besides, it is cheaper, and more efficient to expand existing capacity...but they can't get a permit for that either. In fact, some major refiners are having to cut production to hit mandatory emissions caps. The reasons for high energy prices are many, but they start on the left, not in the board room (for the most part). Our president has stated that his goal is to make energy prices "necessarily skyrocket". I guess people didn't believe him. |
Boogiman1981
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 17, 2011 - 03:42 pm: |
|
Blake believe me i am not confused at all on this topic. The US government is the single biggest spender and consumer on planet earth.
At the same time I do wonder where the profits they are making are going besides the quip response of lining washingtons pockets(yes i know that some of it is).
Hoot yes i know that is the bigger hurdle of building up more refinery capacity. as no one wants them in 'their backyard' nor do they want them in completely desolate areas of land that in reality no one is likely to ever use to live on or grow anything of any serious amounts on.
i am all about being responsible with what we have. i do wonder how irresponsible we have been with our ability to 'take care of ourselves' vs being dependent on others i think most would agree we have been lacking to say the least.
i'd love to see turbo diesel hybrids running about fully electric cars and bikes enmass with the caveat that the total waste stream must be less than currently produce all gas/diesel cars. going to all diesel for most of our transpo is def a good long step in the right direction. fords eco-boost i'm afraid is to little to late... i've driven diesels from overseas and the ones i've driven are right up there on acceleration with their gas counterparts just a smidge noisier and get way better mileage. now for the even newer cars and trucks that are diesels they are jsut as quiet as gas motors.
even big trucks are getting quieter i drove next to a brand new pac-car rig yesterday with the windows done and even cruising right next to it all i could hear was the tire noise |
Hootowl
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 17, 2011 - 03:56 pm: |
|
I'm kind of excited about this energy stream:
artificial leaf --> hydrogen stored in chicken feathers --> fuel cell.
Could each home/business generate their own power? |
Aesquire
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 17, 2011 - 08:32 pm: |
|
Boog, short form, Uncle Sam makes more on the oil companies than the oil companies do. Sure, 10 billion seems big, but the actual percentage is pretty normal for a successful business. The number's just real big because the amount sold is real big.
Don't let propaganda fool you.
Didn't Uncle pull in 40+ billion from the oil companies?
So, you and I gave 50+ billion in profit to Uncle and Big oil. Mostly Uncle. Every penny out of our pocket.
While I don't have use for any current electric cars, I'm all for them. Choice is good. Remember if you want electric cars, you need MORE electric power plants. That juice has to come from somewhere. |
Billyo
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 17, 2011 - 08:51 pm: |
|
Many people have the mistaken notion that oil companies have a lot of money. Sure, they make a lot of profit, but it is a small percentage of total revenue. They have millions of shareholders; that's where much of the profit goes. If they just "stashed" their profits they wouldn't have to borrow money every time they have construction/upgrade/repair projects. They would just grab from their back pocket. Instead, just like the construction companies borrow money to meet payroll until payment is received, the oil companies borrow money for projects and have to pay it back with interest.
Gas is not necessarily the leading profit maker. Look at all of the lubricants that are produced. That thing you are typing on is loaded with petroleum products. The stuff you put your leftovers in is made of petroleum products. The road you drive on is made from petroleum products. Your Buell is loaded with petroleum products.
The oil companies don't have big mattresses that they stuff their obscene profits under. They are publicly traded companies that pay dividends and whose stocks are traded for either a loss or a gain. Almost every retirement plan or mutual fund is partially invested in oil (pharmaceuticals is another "evil" one). So many people scream when the oil companies make money but they also scream if their retirement plan isn't doing well. This makes no sense. |
Cityxslicker
| | Posted on Tuesday, May 17, 2011 - 09:02 pm: |
|
www.derringercycles.com
yep, they want us all petalling anyways. |
Boogiman1981
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 18, 2011 - 01:25 pm: |
|
i hear ya Bill
i will say that the borrowing money schemes at least on that level are a bit different than what you'd see from the local construction co and have a lot more to do with tax liability or the reduction thereof more than anything else.
i want them to be successful i want them to make a profit(which they are) and i want them to do it without handouts from you and I.
the idea that a company that is that profitable will collapse without subsidies is obscene. no they wouldn't and if they did whose fault is that? surely there own for mismanagement.
i love to see the markets go up and profits go up at a sustainable level/rate. as pointed out it's hard to be invested without being invested in energy as the energy companies(big oil) are into every single part of our lives.
until we find something that can replace oil in it's seemingly unlimited uses we are going to have to live with them. i'd rather that living be in some kind of balance vs indentured servitude.
as we all know when the cost of energy rises so does the cost of everything else and i don't know about you all but salaries haven't been going up in my neck of the woods, how could they?
so really the solution is for all of us to do what we can to not waste even a single drop of oil. make sure than when we do drive it is with purpose. when we do buy it's needed etc. if/when we can afford it our next vehicle is the most efficient one we can buy that does the job it's needed for. thermostats up in the summer down in the winter. all the same stuff that been preached for as long as i can remember that not enough of us are doing, myself included at times.
for those of you that are on the more religious side yes this is our world and yes we were/are commanded to be GOOD STEWARDS of what we have been given.
for those of you that aren't religious it's just the right thing to do.
i mean really does anyone like living in an area that is thick with smog? has dirty everything and is smelly? how could you?
it's truly sad that things got to this point. i know a lot of people claim innocence of knowledge, really? back in the day it was known that the crap being spilled poured out etc was bad. how bad maybe not but it was known that it was bad. how can something that will cause you harm be okay for the earth? the ignorance claim of my elders doesn't pass muster with me.
what do i do? well i ride to work instead of taking my jeep(which i have so i can have enough seats for my kids and not have a payment, a compromise yes i know). CFL's through out the entire house that get disposed of properly when they burn out. geothermal heat pump for a/c at the house. concrete block house with insulated attic. reusing the water from the a/c to water the lawn when it's needed. just to name a few things.
this can be 'fixed turned around' or whatever you want to call it but we are going to have to get off of our collective asses to make it happen. |
Sifo
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 18, 2011 - 01:51 pm: |
|
the idea that a company that is that profitable will collapse without subsidies is obscene. no they wouldn't and if they did whose fault is that? surely there own for mismanagement.
Not when you look at the big picture. What you claim to be subsidies is really only a tax break. The oil companies are still paying a but load of taxes. I understand that the bulk of "subsidies" that go toward the gas that you put into your tank has to do with the creation of ethanol to mix with the petroleum products. This is required by the mandate of the government. At this point the government is already stepping in making an un-level playing field.
Then we seem to want the government to truly subsidize a variety of competing energy solutions. When you subsidize A to compete with B you are picking and choosing the winners and losers. Government has a terrible track record on picking winners and losers.
The real insanity is subsidizing an industry that can't compete. This is unfair to industries that otherwise could be profitable on their own, and unfair to the consumers who wind up paying more (indirectly or not) for the products they receive. |
Kenm123t
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 18, 2011 - 07:47 pm: |
|
Sifo you are describing Cap and Trade or rip me off |
Aesquire
| | Posted on Thursday, May 19, 2011 - 07:26 am: |
|
http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/345902e2-817a-11e0- 9c83-00144feabdc0.html#axzz1MnQXsyXX
How about a drone attack on the OPEC meeting? please? huh? please? Someone tell Michelle that they are serving pate and transfats. Maybe that'll help. |
Billyo
| | Posted on Thursday, May 19, 2011 - 10:03 pm: |
|
Actually, I wouldn't expect a local construction company to have to borrow to meet payroll. Construction companies that do work at refineries, especially larger ones that may have several big jobs nationally, can go from a couple hundred employees to a few thousand in a matter of days. These corporations have assets but small (relatively speaking) bank accounts, that's why payroll loans are needed. Likewise, oil companies also have assets but small (again, relatively speaking) bank accounts and they also need to borrow for projects. It's not a silly scheme-it's how corporations work. Also, tax incentives are available to many businesses. Oil companies get tax breaks and incentives just like many other industries do.
The one that really bothers me is ethanol. The government spends billions to get us to burn our food! What kind of imbeciles do they think we are? If it burned better and gave us better mileage maybe I could see it. Funny thing is, from planting through production and shipment, a lot of oil is used to make a little ethanol. It would be cheaper to just use the oil in the first place.
I hope you don't think that riding for enjoyment is wasting a single drop of oil. Perhaps going out for ice cream is wasteful, also. Riding with a group could be considered wasteful, we could all take turns on the back seat and only use half as many bikes. Perhaps riding a Buell even to work is extremely wasteful, a smaller scooter would be more efficient and do the job.
Look back farther than 30 or 40 years. What has been preached to us for so long has been hijacked. It used to be "thermostats up in the summer and down in the winter" to not waste money. |
Aesquire
| | Posted on Thursday, May 19, 2011 - 10:17 pm: |
|
I was all happy about the ethanol thing, until it became the famine causing religious/political bribery cult it became.
The pluses are many, you can run higher compression, get good power, and the only drawbacks seemed the decreased range on the same size fuel tank. That's if you make it from garbage and don't have to transport it long distances.
Oops. Making it from food and trucking it all over made it an energy and money sink instead of a gain. Never mind the inflation, famine, and political ramifications of hungry people falling for the leftist/islamist lure of "one person, one vote, one time" that seems to be sweeping the more volatile parts of the planet.
I'm all for conservation. Also for orbital solar. Cheap power gives everyone wealth. Expensive power give a self anointed elite wealth and power, and you the tab. |
Strato9r
| | Posted on Friday, May 20, 2011 - 01:29 am: |
|
Coal to Gasoline conversion; certainly nothing new there, (not to pitch a bunch of conspiracy theory fodder around), but Standard Oil had assisted I.G. Farben with financial and technological support back in the 1930's to convert German soft coal to fuel. Furthermore, the American division of I.G Farben, American I.G., changed it's name to General Aniline and Film Corporation to disguise their involvement in building up the Nazi war machine. Among the board members of American I.G. were: Carl Bosch, Edsel Ford, Max Ilgner, (director of Farben's Nazi intelligence office in Berlin), and Paul Warburg, of the bank of Manhattan.
Sometimes, it's all about who profits..... |
Glitch
| | Posted on Friday, May 20, 2011 - 07:22 am: |
|
|
|
