Gallup: Bush Approval Rating Lowest Ever for 2nd-Term Prez at this Point

Mentioning gas prices...

The Writing is on the Wall

[Goldman Sachs has reported that oil is likely to hit $105 per barrel and would not come down unless consumption was meaningfully reduced. They called the forecast "conservative."

In both markets and politics timing is everything.

In December of 2004 the military and intelligence community came out in unprecedented support of renewable energy. While the mainstream press remained silent, Goldman Sachs was certainly not surprised.

Three months later Goldman acquired Zilkha, a sizeable wind energy developer. They already had interests in wind farms in Wyoming, Oregon and California. Goldman showed interest in renewable energy quite early; it began dedicated coverage of the alternative energy market in late 1998, setting up a power technology team covering the entire range of alternative energy stocks.

Now, over six years later, they show the world they have concluded wind energy is a financial winner, and they are correct. Wind is one of the few renewable energy technologies that can pump out hundreds of megawatts of energy (though nowhere near what hydrocarbons provide).

Shortly after 9/11 the Energy Future Coalition was formed. Members of their advisory board and steering committee include R. James Woolsey, former CIA director, and Chansoo Joung, managing director of Goldman Sachs. This coalition has the same goal as the Apollo Alliance - energy independence for the United States.

The problem is these programs have begun too late. Apollo is calling for a one-third reduction in US oil consumption within the next 25 years. Had such a plan been supported and implemented in 1980, perhaps we would be in a somewhat stable position.

Now we are anything but stable.

This is human nature. Rarely do we see individuals stop eating fast foods, stop smoking, stop drinking, and instead start eating well, start exercising, and start drinking water regularly until they get cancer, diabetes, heart problems, or some other debilitating disease. It isn't until crisis is burning down the door that we look for an alternative way out.

The truth is most people continue their deadly practices till the end.

Dick Cheney was dead serious when he said, "The American way of life is not negotiable," but the American way of life is mass suicide - from McDonalds to Wal-Mart to Hummers. The Bush administration's energy bill has just thrown out a $2,000 tax credit for owning a hybrid car that conserves gas use at upwards of 50 miles per gallon, but kept a $25,000 tax write-off for purchasing a gas-guzzling Hummer!

The prediction of $105 oil drove the oil market to a record high of $57.25 per barrel. That's sure to help Goldman's growing investments in renewable energy. They've seen this coming since at least 1998, at which time they were already monitoring both the technology and the markets for the best moment to start moving: first, to hedge against hydrocarbon depletion by investing in renewables, and then, to help provoke an inevitable spike in oil prices.

Their timing may have been perfect. What better moment to be invested in both renewable energy projects and oil? Goldman Sachs has the best of both worlds.

As Mike Ruppert stated on September 9, 2004, at the first 9/11 Citizens Commission in NYC:
"Whether or not Peak Oil is happening, the world is behaving as if it is."

The signs are clear. The military hawks are saying it, the big banks are saying it. Peak Oil is now the barometer by which the pressure within the economic atmosphere will be forecast. The actions and statements of Goldman Sachs are pushing the inevitable ever closer.

Meanwhile the International Energy Agency (IEA) has called for police-enforced driving bans to curb oil consumption and is urging oil-importing nations to adopt emergency oil-saving policies in case world supply dips significantly. One way or another, conservation is a must. It would be nice if we (the people) had some say in that process.

Nevertheless, the suicide pact between the Bush administration and the American people has been signed in blood - the blood of American troops and civilian casualties wherever the last drops of Mother Earth's blood can be found.- MK]

Goldman sees oil spiking to $105

Says lower prices will only return when consumption is meaningfully reduced.

March 31, 2005: 4:15 PM EST
http://money.cnn.com/2005/03/31/news/international/goldman_oil.reut/

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.

LONDON (Reuters) - Oil prices could touch $105 a barrel in the next few years, the influential investment bank Goldman Sachs said Thursday.

The bank's analysts said in a research report that the world energy market is in the early stages of a "super-spike" period that could see 1970s-style price surges. The bank called its forecast "conservative."

The report sent crude oil soaring Thursday, with U.S. light crude for May delivery adding $1.41 to close at $55.40 on the New York Mercantile Exchange. U.S. oil futures on NYMEX have averaged $50.03 a barrel so far in 2005 after hitting record highs in recent weeks.

But adjusted for inflation, oil would have to hit about $80 a barrel to top the levels seen during the oil crisis of the late 1970s.

Goldman's Global Investment Research note also raised the bank's 2005 and 2006 New York Mercantile Exchange crude price forecasts to $50 and $55 respectively, from $41 and $40.

"We believe oil markets may have entered the early stages of what we have referred to as a 'super spike' period -- a multi-year trading band of oil prices high enough to meaningfully reduce energy consumption and recreate a spare capacity cushion only after which will lower energy prices return," Goldman's analysts wrote.

Goldman is the biggest trader of energy derivatives, and its Goldman Sachs Commodities Index is a widely-watched barometer of energy and commodities prices.

Goldman said its predictions were supported by thin spare capacity in the energy supply chain and long response times for bringing on additional supply. The report also pointed to robust demand in the United States and in developing heavyweights China and India, despite the recent rapid increase in energy costs.

Back to the '70s
Goldman said the current oil market environment was much like that seen in the 1970s -- when oil prices spiked dramatically following the Arab oil embargoes on supply to the West and Iran's revolution.

High energy prices threw the world into recession, and triggered several years of declining oil demand.

During 1980-1981, gasoline spending in the United States corresponded to an average 4.5 percent of GDP, 7.2 percent of consumer expenditures, and 6.2 percent of personal disposable income, Goldman said.

"Our new $50-$105 per (barrel) super spike range perhaps conservatively corresponds to gasoline spending in the United States that reaches 3.6 percent of forecasted GDP, 5.3 percent of consumer expenditures, and 5.0 percent of personal disposable income.

Goldman said that assuming gasoline spending needs to reach 1970s levels to destroy demand, its upside super-spike estimate would be $135 per barrel for New York crude.

"Perhaps the ultimate answer to how high oil prices need to go before demand destruction occurs is derived from knowing when American consumers will stop buying gas guzzling sport/utility vehicles and instead seek fuel efficient alternatives," the analysts wrote.

"Based on our analysis of gasoline spending and the economy noted above, we estimate that U.S. gasoline prices may need to exceed $4 per gallon," they said.

 

I hate to trot out a cliché, but I will anyway. Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it. Everytime a political party in this country has seemed in an unassailable position, they have been brought back down to earth. It will happen to the Republican Party of today, and I think it will start with the '06 Congressional elections. Time will tell.



Keep D&D Civil!!

 

Svpernaut....I certainly hope you aren't asserting that President Bush has been under MORE Media scrutiny than Clinton?

I'm not trying to make this into an "I-hate-Bush-lets-pile-it-on" hate fest, even though I LOVE to Bash him...SURELY you jest?! Clinton never got one single pass from ANY news network, liberal or not, while he was attacked unmericifully by a hostile Legislature and a scandal hungry public.

Sorry if I'm being inflammatory, I'm not trying to bait you. However, this conservative mantra, wingnut wining about unfair press and the Liberal media bias is tiresome. Bush has gotten pass, after pass after pass by the media and only accepts softball questions on his policies all under the guise of "9/11 changed everything".

 

LOL. Looks like the liberals are still fuming mad about losing the election.

Keep trying to show that you were right, "progressive" Americans! It seems you are frustrated and beaten.

 

Why do Republicans remind of Dallas Cowboy fans?

 

I completely agree. And I summon a previous thread:

http://bbs2.clutchfans.net/showthread.php?threadid=93830

Offtopic - I hate it when I don't auto-login. I have to see all the idiotic posts normally on my ignore list.

 

are the low ratings only because of gas prices?

 

Hehehehe...because they are one-in-the same.

BUT, in fairness to TJ and Texxx, I'm sure they jump on the trash-Dallas-bandwagon when it comes to pitting Houston teams agains the upstarts 3-1/2 hours to the north!

 

Why do Democrats remind me of Chicago Cub fans?

 

What do you base this comment on? Do you deny that environmentalists have prevented the US from building new oil refineries?

 

You proved my point.

 

Everytime a political party in this country has seemed in an unassailable position, they have been brought back down to earth. It will happen to the Republican Party of today, and I think it will start with the '06 Congressional elections.

Before the Republicans took over in '94, how long did the Democrats control Congress?

 

Between 1932 and 1980, Democrats possessed majorities--generally comfortable ones--in both houses of Congress in all but four years (1947-49 and 1953-55). Since the Republicans seized control of the Senate in 1980, however, neither party has possessed a stable majority. Though Republicans' six-year Senate reign ended abruptly in 1986, the Democrats ceded back control of the upper chamber in 1994, only to regain it when Vermont senator Jim Jeffords left the GOP in 2001.

http://hnn.us/articles/8541.html

 

I didn't say to deplete our reserves. I'm against that. Although when it was done before gas prices did come down. I was in favor of holding off increasing the reserve. I was not in favor of decreasing it.

 

you've got the correct data, but drawn the wrong conclusions. americans are probably better informed because there's so many more outlets to get news from, ie, online, print, TV, radio, etc. the MSM is in trouble because it's lost its monopoly, and uses sensationalism in panic mode while it tries to figure out how to compete in this new reality.

 

There's more information in total, but there's less GOOD information, both absolutely and proportionally, which is why Americans mistakenly believe that they found WMD's, Saddam planned 9-11, etc etc etc.

You will of course call this elitism on my part - I call it realism, opera man.

 

Agreed. It is telling that watchers of The Daily Show are more accurate when asked questions about current events than viewers of Faux News, CNN, and MSNBC.

 

I think its really both. Americans have access to more news sources than ever but don't take advantage of it. In the age of mass competition major news services have turned to becoming more sensational and more entertainment oriented to protect their slice of the market. When it was just three networks and one or two newspapers ruled local markets reporters and editors could afford to be more indepth about stories they covered. At the same time there were less stories covered.

Now we've got an almost infinite number of sources covering everything from global warming to what was sold at the church bake sale. In an sea of info many news services are taking up the dictum "If it bleeds it leads" to separate themselves from the herd.

It comes down to whether people take advantage of all of the news out there and evaluate it with a critical eye.

 

About a month ago, I read an article saying BMW was making some good progress with hydrogen powered cars. A few weeks later, this article came out. I don't remember reading much about this on here, but I thought this was pretty encouraging. I wish it could be a bit faster, and it's a shame we didn't start this 10 years earlier, but it's better than what has happened in the past couple decades:


http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/breaking_news/11269743.htm


GM will distribute hydrogen cars in California, other places

KEN THOMAS

Associated Press

WASHINGTON - A group of automakers and energy companies will develop and build hydrogen fuel cell vehicles in a multimillion-dollar partnership with the government, aiming for possible mass marketing of the vehicles within 15 years, Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman said Wednesday. The marketing will start in California.

His department announced plans for several "learning demonstration teams" involving automakers General Motors Corp., DaimlerChrysler AG, Ford Motor Co., Hyundai Motor Co. Energy companies ChevronTexaco, BP, and Shell. Ballard Power Systems, a leading manufacturer of hydrogen fuel cells, will also join in the partnership.

"If our research program is successful, it is not unreasonable to think that we could be approaching commercialization and mass marketing of these kinds of vehicles in maybe 15 years," Bodman said at the National Hydrogen Association's annual conference in Washington.

Bodman said the teams would share in at least half of the project funding, estimated at about $380 million. The companies will evaluate the fuel cells under hot and cold conditions, consider production options and ways of evaluating hydrogen infrastructure.

As part of the program:

_ GM plans to build a fleet of 40 hydrogen fuel vehicles and distribute them in California and Michigan as well as in Washington, D.C., and New York City. It plans to spend $44 million in total for their manufacture, transportation and upkeep and the building of hydrogen refueling stations in California and the East Coast corridor from New York City to Washington, D.C.

_ DaimlerChrysler, which now has the largest fleet of fuel cell vehicles of any automaker, and three energy partners will also invest $44 million to place such vehicles with consumers who will provide feedback on their performance.

_ Others companies will search for the best way to produce hydrogen and test the fuel cells and how the technology would fare in hot, humid climates.

The fuel cells run on the energy produced when hydrogen and oxygen are mixed, rather than using gasoline. The only byproduct of a fuel cell is water. The technology has been used in experimental vehicles and as a power supply for some buildings.

President Bush since 2003 has pushed a 5-year, $1.7 billion research program to develop hydrogen as America's next energy source. He has predicted Americans will drive cars operated by hydrogen-powered fuel cells in less than two decades.

The program has involved workshops with state and local officials on the benefits of hydrogen power and conducted demonstration projects nationwide, Energy Department officials said.

Most major automakers are developing hydrogen fuel cells but say the cost of the vehicles and a lack of fueling stations make them unmarketable for now.

In separate efforts, Ford has announced plans to deliver eight hydrogen-run shuttle buses to Florida and to distribute Ford Focus fuel cell vehicles in the United States, Canada and Germany.

DaimlerChrysler, meanwhile, is developing a range of fuel cell vehicles, including a four-door passenger car called the Mercedes F-Cell, the Dodge Fuel Cell Sprinter van and a fleet of fuel cell-powered Mercedes Citaro buses.

Among Japanese automakers, Mazda is road-testing a hydrogen-fueled, rotary-engine version of its RX-8 sports car that allows the driver to select hydrogen or gasoline with the flick of a switch. Toyota is developing a fuel cell hybrid vehicle based on the Toyota Highlander, a mid-size sport utility vehicle.

 

actually, WMD were found, just not in the quantities that we expected. so i'd say you were mis-informed, or you allowed your own biases to color the information you received.