Rising Gas Prices Give G.O.P. Issue to Attack Obama
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/19/us/politics/high-gas-prices-give-gop-issue-to-attack-obama.htmlWASHINGTON — Rising gasoline prices, trumpeted in foot-tall numbers on street corners across the country, are causing concern among advisers to President Obama that a budding sense of economic optimism could be undermined just as he heads into the general election.
White House officials are preparing for Republicans to use consumer angst about the cost of oil and gas to condemn his energy programs and buttress their argument that his economic policies are not working.
In a closed-door meeting last week, Speaker John A. Boehner instructed fellow Republicans to embrace the gas-pump anger they find among their constituents when they return to their districts for the Presidents’ Day recess.
“This debate is a debate we want to have,” Mr. Boehner told his conference on Wednesday, according to a Republican aide who was present. “It was reported this week that we’ll soon see $4-a-gallon gas prices. Maybe higher. Certainly, this summer will see the highest gas prices in years. Your constituents saw those reports, and they’ll be talking about it.”
= new reply since forum marked as read
...the cost of developing new fields has gone way up. The percentage of oil on the market which could be called "cheap oil" - known fields, conventionally extracted and refined - is going down every year, while the new oil on the market is more expensive to find, develop and produce every year.
Cost should drive people to embrace alternative fuels, not alternative political representatives.
So why don't they go after those nasty wall street speculators instead of pointing their finger. .
....but the costs of exploration, development and refining new oil on the market have been rising steadily for years.
As examples, we imported massive amounts of oil from Mexico's Cantarell field, which, geologically, was unique and easy to develop. The oil was easy to extract and cheap to refine, Mexico made a bundle from it and transformed their economy, and the boom-times here of the 80's and 90's were partly driven by it as well. In the last few years production from that super-giant field has gone into rapid decline, and nothing similar has been found to replace it.
A good example of what that oil is being replaced by is the Alberta Tar Sands. That started out as forest, had to be stripped down to this 
, laboriously extracted heavy oil, refined at greater cost, and the environmental destruction repaired at even greater cost. For the whole operation to be economical, oil has to be around $90 a barrel. The demand for oil is such that people will pay that much, and as there are no cheaper alternatives, the price will remain high.
If demand were half what it is, then perhaps it could be met by what is left of the "cheap and easy oil", and the old $40 per barrel would suffice. But that's not the world we live in anymore, and the high cost of developing and refining the oil that is currently coming onto the market is driving the high price of the end-products.
In any case, the conclusion is the same - we need alternatives.
But if you think that the game is rigged somehow, and if the market were handled differently we could have cheap gas and all the abundance and comfort that goes with it, then the "alternative" you are likely to look for is an alternative politician - who can never deliver on his cheap-oil promises, because a physical reality prevents it.
