OPEC chief joins $200 oil chorus

Bush, Big Oil offer more of the same

Posted by Josh Dorner (Guest Contributor) at 1:58 PM on 29 Apr 2008

Yesterday, David noted comments by an oil analyst who predicted $200 oil by 2012.

Today, that analyst was joined in his prediction by none other than the chief of OPEC, Chakib Khelil (who's also Algeria's energy minister). Mr. Khelil's comments were not date-specific, though this article leads me to believe he was thinking $200 oil could come much sooner than 2012.

Meanwhile, we saw more of the same from both President Bush and Big Oil.

For its part, Big Oil began yet another round of record quarterly profit reports, with Royal Dutch Shell raking in $9.08 billion and BP pulling down some $7.62 billion. It's remarkable that each company's take is not only record-breaking but each beat analysts' expectations by around $1 billion. Even more extraordinary is that BP made nearly $3 billion more than the same quarter last year, with Shell improving its profits by almost $2 billion. And all of this while BP had nearly zero growth in year-on production and Shell's production grew just 1 percent.

As both gas and diesel prices set new records ($3.607 and $4.244, respectively), President Bush's main strategy for dealing with the present energy and economic crises was to berate Congress and call for more of the same failed energy policies we've seen for the last seven years. This included the same tired call for drilling in the Arctic Refuge -- something that would do little more than boost Big Oil's profits.

As Carl Pope said:

Two years ago President Bush said America was addicted to oil but today he complained that we just need a bigger fix.

In regard to the president's wrongheaded call for drilling in the Arctic, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) echoed Pope, reports The New York Times:

In his remarks on Capitol Hill, Mr. Schumer took particular issue with Mr. Bush's characterization of the energy crisis, saying that the president's proposed solution of drilling in ANWR would reduce the price of oil by a single penny in 20 years. During that time, Mr. Schumer said, Americans would continue to pay higher gas prices at the pump, while profits for oil companies would soar.

Update [2008-4-29 14:9:42 by Josh Dorner]:: House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) also shot back at the President for scolding Congress while threatening to veto a bill passed overwhelmingly by the House that would take back $13.5 billion in taxpayer-funded giveaways to Big Oil and use the money to support tax incentives for renewable energy:

"The President can take three actions today to help our economy: lower gas prices by halting deposits to the Strategic Petroleum Reserve; save 116,000 green jobs and create hundreds of thousands more by dropping his veto threat from House legislation creating tax credits for renewable energy..."

The Associated Press also offers a thorough debunk of the speech here.

For story: OPEC chief joins $200 oil chorus
6 Comments | Post a Comment

Let's take action on the ground!

It's familiar news that most political leaders and business leaders are married to an oil-addicted, business-as-usual scenario, despite the now-famous need for us to sharply reduce our emissions. We citizens need to show leadership on the ground, by consuming less oil and creating fewer emissions. If even a small but solid minority of us do this, it can spur economic transformation and show politicians and businesspeople that change has GOT to happen -- and they'd better not get left behind. For one example of emissions reductions coupled with financial benefits, see my post on Carpooling Is Cool at http://alison97215.wordpress.com.
best,
Alison in Portland, Oregon

by Alison Wiley at 2:46 PM on 29 Apr 2008

How soon $200 oil?

I don't think it is a stretch to believe that oil will hit $200/barrel long before 2012. If so, gas prices are likely to go far above $4/gallon. Not simply higher prices, but the possibility of shortages may also become a reality. This would be a serious condition. By some estimates, the price of gas is the number one issue in the nation. By 2012, the price energy (along with the price of everything else), and even the availability of energy may be the only issue anybody will care about.

by LPS at 5:24 PM on 29 Apr 2008

Shortages

I'm not saying there are shortages of gas but I'm seeing closed pumps at gas stations a lot more than I remember ever seeing before. I would say that supplies are tight.

Put the Carbon Back

by Pangolin at 5:43 PM on 29 Apr 2008

Supply...demand...whatever...

I would say that supplies are tight.

Or, you might say that demand is slow.

There's more unknowns than equations.

Gas usage in the Puget Sound per capita is down to 1966 [sic] levels according to the Seattle Times!

Refineries are cutting supply.

I think we're going for it -- Cold Turkey from oil with some solar and wind methadone to ease the transition.

Texeme.Construct(Participant)

by jabailo at 6:17 PM on 29 Apr 2008

Conservatives are frightened...

...'cause when gas reaches $4 a gallon, people tend to vote Democrat.

by Tasermons Partner at 8:57 PM on 29 Apr 2008

The oil catastrophy persists

Oil at $120 is already a disaster, threatening hundreds of millions of poor people. High oil is the key factor responsible for pushing up food prices and prices for everything else.

More than 50 governments in the South are already seeing all their development efforts destroyed because of crazy oil.

When oil stood at $60, the UN's bioenergy task force said:

"Recent oil price increases have had devastating effects on many of the world's poor countries, some of which now spend as much as six times as much on fuel as they do on health. Others spend twice the money on fuel as they do on poverty alleviation. And in still others, the foreign exchange drain from higher oil prices is five times the gain from recent debt relief."

Now, with prices twice as high, we are dealing with the biggest socio-economic catastrophy since the Second World War.

Oil at $200 is unimaginable and basically means the death call for most developing countries.

What can we do to limit the already catasrtophic damages? Our safest bet is of course to invest massively in biofuels in Africa and Latin America.

by Jonas at 11:11 AM on 30 Apr 2008

ADVERTISING POLICY

You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have an account, log in. If you don't have an account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.