Energy Literacy Advocates Newsroom
Shale Gas
Tuesday, May 3, 2011
Read the article...
Labels: efficiency, energy sources, National Security
posted by
Jamie Lang
at
1:29 PM
0
comments
Rising Oil Prices Beginning to Hurt Economy
Thursday, April 21, 2011
| Apr 6, 2011 | Associated Press Online | |
| PAUL WISEMAN WASHINGTON, Apr. 6, 2011 (AP Online delivered by Newstex) -- WASHINGTON (AP) — Just when companies have finally stepped up hiring, rising oil prices are threatening to halt the U.S. economy's gains.
Some economists are scaling back their estimates for growth this year, in part because flat wages have left households struggling to pay higher gasoline prices.
Oil has topped $108 a barrel, the highest price since 2008. Regular unleaded gasoline now goes for an average $3.69 a gallon, according to AAA's daily fuel gauge survey, up 86 cents from a year ago.
The higher costs have been driven by unrest in Libya and other oil-producing Middle East countries, along with rising energy demand from a strengthening U.S. economy.
Airlines, shipping companies and other U.S. businesses have been squeezed. The rising prices are further straining an economy struggling with high unemployment and a depressed housing market.
"The surge in oil prices since the end of last year is already doing significant damage to the economy," says Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody's Analytics.
Unlike other kinds of consumer spending, gasoline purchases provide less benefit for the U.S. economy. About half the revenue flows to oil exporting countries like Saudi Arabia and Canada, though U.S. oil companies and gasoline retailers also benefit.
For consumers, more expensive energy siphons away money that would otherwise be used for household purchases, from cars and furniture to clothing and vacations.
High energy prices are "putting a drain on consumer budgets," says James Hamilton at the University of California, San Diego. "To the extent they're having to spend more on gasoline, they have to make cutbacks elsewhere."
Two-thirds of Americans say they expect rising gasoline prices to cause hardship for them or their families in the next six months, according to a new Associated Press-GfK Poll. The telephone poll conducted March 24-28 had a sampling error margin of plus or minus 4.2 percentage points.
Seventy-one percent say they're cutting back on other expenses to make up for higher pump prices. Sixty-four percent say they're driving less. And 53 percent say they're changing vacation plans to stay closer to home.
"I try to leave the car parked at home all day Saturday," says Curt Lindsay, who commutes an hour each way to his job as a computer systems administrator outside Washington, D.C. "I'd rather not spend the money on gasoline."
Since gasoline prices topped $3 a gallon, Lindsay has also been trying to drive more slowly to conserve fuel.
His co-worker Albert Zaza canceled family trips to New York and Boston after the cost of filling up his Honda CRV surged from $35 to $47. Zaza spends four to five hours in traffic each day and has to fill up every other day.
Rising fuel prices are pinching businesses too.
In Tipton, Iowa, Grasshopper Lawn Care is tacking 5 percent onto customers' bills to compensate for higher fuel costs. The company has to buy more than 8,000 gallons of gasoline a year. It plans to keep the surcharge until gasoline prices dip back below $3 a gallon, owner Dan Kessler says.
The oil shock and global instability are diluting the benefits of an improving job market. The unemployment rate, though still high, is at a two-year low. And the economy has just produced the strongest two months of hiring since before the recession began.
Bernard Baumohl, chief economist at the Economic Outlook Group, has slashed his estimate for growth this year to 2.8 percent from 3.5 percent. In 20010, the economy grew 2.9 percent.
Consumer spending accounts for about 70 percent of the economy. After adjusting for inflation and for seasonal factors, consumers spent 0.3 percent more in February than in January.
But that's unlikely to last. Gasoline prices are surging just as inflation-adjusted incomes are falling. More expensive gas is draining much of the cash Americans are receiving from a cut in Social Security taxes this year.
Zandi estimates that higher oil prices shaved 0.5 percentage point from growth in the January-March quarter. He predicts the economy grew 2.6 percent during the quarter.
If oil prices average $100 a barrel for the year, Zandi says, growth will be 0.3 percentage point lower than if prices had stayed at last year's level — an average of less than $80 a barrel. A few months of $125-a-barrel oil would slash economic growth by a full percentage point, Zandi says. And a few months at $150 a barrel could push the economy back into recession.
Surging oil prices don't hurt everybody in the United States. Oil companies, for example, stand to gain. In 2008, Exxon Mobil Corp. (NYSE:XOM) earned $45 billion — a record for a U.S. company — after oil prices hit a record $150 a barrel.
Oil services companies such as Halliburton Co. (NYSE:HAL) , Schlumberger Ltd. (NYSE:SLB) and Baker Hughes Inc. (NYSE:BHI) also benefit as the oil industry rushes to find and produce more oil. And the products of biodiesel and other alternative energy companies become more competitive the higher oil prices go.
In a speech last week, Sandra Pianalto, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland, offered hope that higher oil prices won't persist long enough to do much damage.
"Large increases in food or energy prices tend to be temporary," Pianalto said. "History shows that they are often followed by sharp declines."
But Mark Pawlak, a market strategist at Keefe, Bruyette & Woods, says he worries about a repeat of what happened to the economy last year: It built momentum at the start of 2010, only to stall in the face of a European debt crisis and a run-up in oil prices from February to April. | ||
Labels: economy, gas prices, oil supply/demand
posted by
Jamie Lang
at
1:12 PM
0
comments
America's Addiction to Oil
Wednesday, April 6, 2011
I can't say that I am familiar with the author, but I ran across this post and found it hit the nail on the head with regards to our country's addiction to oil. I concede it is very short on solutions, but step one is admitting you have a problem first anyway.
Read the article.Labels: energy policy, oil supply/demand, u.s. energy policy
posted by
Jamie Lang
at
8:36 PM
0
comments
Geological Survey Reduces Alaska Oil Estimates
Wednesday, December 1, 2010
This is a good lesson in the volatility of oil reserve estimates, and why caution must be exercised when evaluating our future energy needs.
Read the article here.
Labels: oil supply/demand, u.s. energy policy
posted by
Jamie Lang
at
1:04 PM
0
comments
Oil Investment Now vs. Supplies Later
Tuesday, January 5, 2010
The excerpt below is from ASPO-USA's year end "best of" article series, and well articulates this issue. If you want to read more about oil supplies with those who are hard-core into it (no recommendation from ELA staff here - just another data source) try visiting the Oil Drum.
As the International Energy Agency has been warning for years, a slump in upstream oil investment now means an oil supply squeeze later; the only question is when and how bad it will be. IEA Director Nobuo Tanaka warned in November that “Sustained investment is needed mainly to combat the decline in output at existing fields, which will drop by almost 2/3 by 2030.” Tanaka added that global upstream spending was budgeted to drop $90 billion, or 19%, during 2009 vs. 2008—the first decline in a decade. While some of those declines are offset by lower costs for exploration and production work, the remaining deferred investment means less oil five to ten years out.
The super-major investor-owned oil companies report that they will maintain the bulk of their planned capital expenditures going forward. Total SA plans to keeps its capital investment budget at $18 billion, Chevron will trim theirs 5% from 2009 to $21.6 billion in 2010, while ConocoPhillips will cut their capital budget by 10% to $11.2 billion. It is the smaller companies, those that are more reliant on credit to finance drilling and other field operations that are already in more of a bind. Additionally, a large number of OPEC projects have been delayed.
The investment slowdown has already impacted Canada. During 2009, the nation’s production declined slightly for a second year in a row, despite their enormous tar sands resource. But building tar sands facilities costs more than any other commercial liquid fuel operation, so those investments were the first to be delayed and cancelled. In fact, when oil dropped below $40 a barrel, some tar sands operators shut down their operations, since at that price their costs exceeded revenues.
What few analysts mention is that the impacts of this “above ground” investment slowdown will combine with the geologic limits that are impacting an increasing number of countries worldwide.
Labels: oil supply, oil supply/demand, peak oil
posted by
Jamie Lang
at
10:48 AM
0
comments


