Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
This wasn't for the industry, it was for the voters who are anti-environment, coal rolling, gas guzzling idiots who want to stick it to dem librils.
“Our stocks will be absolutely crushed if we start growing our production the way Trump is talking about it,” Bryan Sheffield, a Texas oilman who contributed more than $1 million to Trump’s latest campaign, told The Wall Street Journal.
May leopards eat face
It's almost like there are strong economic trends towards wind and solar, but conservatives only like to bleat about the free market when it favors them.
The US better start their own state owned oil company..
Oh wait that's communism 🤡🤡🤡🤡
Wow, another industry Trump thinks he's an expert on but actually knows nothing about? Shocking.
Oil prices were at basically the ideal price when he took office. Everything he's doing is only driving that price higher, which oil producers don't want because it hurts demand.
Oil is just in a precarious position with supply and demand.
High prices will accelerate demand destruction, as people and businesses move to cheaper energy sources, like solar/wind/geothermal/nuclear, plus spur the continued development of grid scale storage and demand management technologies. Sustained high prices could cause lifestyle and consumption habits to change, too: fewer gas guzzlers, fewer supercommuters, improved shipping efficiency, etc.
Low prices would put strain on the finances of producers, whether for profit corporations in the West or state owned (or closely affiliated) producers in places like Saudi Arabia or Russia, and would weaken those countries' influence on geopolitical issues.
There's a reason they want a strong cartel, which is what OPEC tries to be, but that cartel has been weakened considerably by non-OPEC Plus nations becoming huge producers. OPEC cut supply to try to hurt Biden, but it ended up being a handout to American, Canadian, and Norwegian companies, by propping up prices while losing market share. Meanwhile, sanctions on Russia (and Iran and Venezuela) add a bunch of friction (and some cost) to their exports, so that they need higher prices to break even.
For the first time in modern history, societies have access to non-fossil-fuel energy sources in competitive volume and price, to where an oil oligopoly can't push around consumers. Trump can't put that back in the bottle.
Trump obviously doesn't understand artificial demand, and demand pricing. The only way to guarantee consumers are going to pay a low baseline price is for the government to offset that price difference so that Big Oil can still make the graph go up.
Well that, or regulate them, but that's socialism communism deranged leftist talk. /s
Maybe the plan is to invade Gaza, get the Arabs to pull another Oil Boycott, and then use the chaos to get more American oil.
It's so crazy, it might just work.
s/
get the Arabs to pull another Oil Boycott
The Gulfies and the Saudis don't give a shit about the Palestinians. In fact, they hate them as a threat to their despotisms.
Business genius doesn't understand supply and demand.
Fucking lmao.
What a dunce.
A lot of Americans voted for Trump because they were hoping he would be able to bring prices down. Cheaper oil could help with that. Who doesn't want to pay less at the pump? But, also, because petroleum based fuels and other products are ubiquitous along essentially every supply chain, it could help bring down other prices, as well. I don't think it would help that much, though. It might bring down costs for producers a little (or maybe a lot, depending on the industry), but there's no guarantee those cost savings are going to be passed on to the consumer in the form of lower prices. Most producers would just pocket the savings. And why shouldn't they? Businesses exist to make the highest possible profit for their owners.
To even get cheaper oil, though, oil producers would need to over produce. They'd need to drive down the price of their own product. Why would they do that? Why would oil producers choose to reduce their own profits? That doesn't make any sense. Plus, as more and more oil is pumped out of the ground, what remains is harder and more costly to extract. So, it costs more to extract a barrel of oil than it used to, and that means that oil producers have to sell each barrel of oil for a higher price to cover the higher costs of extraction. Drop the price of a barrel of oil too much, and it no longer becomes cost effective for oil producers to extract oil from the ground. The price of oil has to stay over a certain threshold for continued oil extraction to even be financially viable.
For prices to come down, demand would have to come down, and that would likely lead to a recession. For prices to come down significantly, it would probably require a significant recession. That's it, that's how you bring prices down. So, pick your poison: higher prices or recession.
Too much oil lowers prices and burns up profitability, even though it might make consumers happy. American shale firms are already pumping historic amounts of oil. And there’s a supply glut in the global market.
"As crude prices come down, we expect the industry revenues to go down and profits to go down," ExxonMobile CEO Darren Woods told CNBC last week.
Too much oil lowers prices and burns up profitability, even though it might make consumers happy. American shale firms are already pumping historic amounts of oil. And there’s a supply glut in the global market.
Exactly, and I'm betting that glut is a result of one of two factors (or a combination of the two): either oil producers thought there would be a higher demand than there actually is and/or they were incentivized to over produce, probably through government subsidies, of one kind or another.
