"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

How long do you think it will be before President Idiot is forced to
impose price controls on gasoline and diesel?

never - because doing that would be the worst thing ever... and no one in
his administration is that dumb

Not knowing of a President Idiot, I cannot answer the question.
However, price controls would have the opposite effect of that
intended, they would make gasoline scarce by removing the incentive to
produce more oil.
In the early 80s, I was a drill stem tester on oil and gas rigs. That
meant I actually went out and made the flow and pressure measurements
that would determine if a oil or gas well would be completed or plugged
and abandonded. The price controls on gas meant that most wells I
tested had to be plugged because there was no way to make them
economical. Today, most oil in the USA comes from "stripper" wells
producing less than 10 barrels/day. Thousands of such stripper wells
are pluggedand abandonded each year not because the oil ran out but
because it cannot be economically produced. Price controls will force
the abandoning of even more. Once abandonded, it is as expensive to
re-open them as it is to drill new wells so the they would not be
re-drilled because the operator would never recover his cost. Price
controls are thus a really bad idea that will force us to use even more
foreign oil. Even small increases in the price of oil can make it
feasible to keep a stripper well running so I welcome increases in the
price of oil by reasonable amounts.
I estimate that a price of $3.50/gal would be enough (for gas) to
re-plumb some older stripper wells to be economical. The greatest cost
of such wells is that of the energy to keep them running. Most of them
produce more water than oil and any method that reduces the ratio of
water to oil pumped greatly increases the probability of keeping these
wells running.

wrote in message
oups.com...
Not knowing of a President Idiot, I cannot answer the question.
However, price controls would have the opposite effect of that
intended, they would make gasoline scarce by removing the incentive to
produce more oil.

Nice theory, but the recent price hikes are in no way connected with
"incentives to produce more". You know that.

wrote:

Not knowing of a President Idiot, I cannot answer the question.
However, price controls would have the opposite effect of that
intended, they would make gasoline scarce by removing the incentive to
produce more oil.
In the early 80s, I was a drill stem tester on oil and gas rigs. That
meant I actually went out and made the flow and pressure measurements
that would determine if a oil or gas well would be completed or plugged
and abandonded. The price controls on gas meant that most wells I
tested had to be plugged because there was no way to make them
economical.

Don't you mean "maximally profitable?"
-tk

Today, most oil in the USA comes from "stripper" wells
producing less than 10 barrels/day. Thousands of such stripper wells
are pluggedand abandonded each year not because the oil ran out but
because it cannot be economically produced.

Until they get a rest, and a jolt of steam. The oil is free at that
point, or cost only what the pump consumes in energy. The oil is too
valuable to burn is where it's really at.

Price controls will force
the abandoning of even more. Once abandonded, it is as expensive to
re-open them as it is to drill new wells so the they would not be
re-drilled because the operator would never recover his cost. Price
controls are thus a really bad idea that will force us to use even more
foreign oil. Even small increases in the price of oil can make it
feasible to keep a stripper well running so I welcome increases in the
price of oil by reasonable amounts.
I estimate that a price of $3.50/gal would be enough (for gas) to
re-plumb some older stripper wells to be economical. The greatest cost
of such wells is that of the energy to keep them running. Most of them
produce more water than oil and any method that reduces the ratio of
water to oil pumped greatly increases the probability of keeping these
wells running.

Oh, yeah, the water is without value, right?

It's a dollar a litre in the supermarket. That's 200 bucks a barrel,
retail.

Terry K

Dan J.S. wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

How long do you think it will be before President Idiot is forced to
impose price controls on gasoline and diesel?

never - because doing that would be the worst thing ever... and no one in
his administration is that dumb

Oh yes they are. But it doesn't mean that they any dumber than
previous administrations. At some point, maybe $5 - $6 a gallon, they
will do something that will do no real good. It's a catch 22 - Doing
it early will cause all kinds of problems, and doing late won't solve
any.

"Curtis CCR" wrote in message
oups.com...

Dan J.S. wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

How long do you think it will be before President Idiot is forced to
impose price controls on gasoline and diesel?

never - because doing that would be the worst thing ever... and no one in
his administration is that dumb

Oh yes they are. But it doesn't mean that they any dumber than
previous administrations. At some point, maybe $5 - $6 a gallon, they
will do something that will do no real good. It's a catch 22 - Doing
it early will cause all kinds of problems, and doing late won't solve
any.


doing it late or early will not solve any problems, as the tankers will just
sit there and refuse to off load crude at below market prices... this was
done before and it failed...

these high gas prices are not that bad for the U.S. , it's a wake up call
and it will FORCE car manufacturers to look at other renewable energy
sources... it will force people to take public transportation and finally
unlock the traffic gridlocks... --- and best of all, it will make more
people walk and ride bikes, thus decreasing our obesity...

Doug Kanter wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

How long do you think it will be before President Idiot is forced to
impose price controls on gasoline and diesel?

I would welcome that, but not for financial reasons. I'm sure that shortly
after he suggested or implemented the idea, one of his oily friends would
invite him to visit an oil rig in the Gulf, ride in a real live
hel-i-o-copter (pretending to fly it), and put on a hard hat & pretend to be
an oil rig guy. I suspect they'd arrange for him to "slip and fall in the
ocean", by accident, of course.

Should those that are calling for prosecution of Pat Robertson (for his
stupid remarks about Hugo Chavez) be going after you now? After all,
it sounds like you just threatened the president.

"Curtis CCR" wrote in message
oups.com...

Doug Kanter wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

How long do you think it will be before President Idiot is forced to
impose price controls on gasoline and diesel?

I would welcome that, but not for financial reasons. I'm sure that
shortly
after he suggested or implemented the idea, one of his oily friends would
invite him to visit an oil rig in the Gulf, ride in a real live
hel-i-o-copter (pretending to fly it), and put on a hard hat & pretend to
be
an oil rig guy. I suspect they'd arrange for him to "slip and fall in the
ocean", by accident, of course.

Should those that are calling for prosecution of Pat Robertson (for his
stupid remarks about Hugo Chavez) be going after you now? After all,
it sounds like you just threatened the president.


No, I'm simply explaining what his employers will do to their pawn if he
gets out of hand.

Doug Kanter wrote:
"Curtis CCR" wrote in message
oups.com...

Doug Kanter wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

How long do you think it will be before President Idiot is forced to
impose price controls on gasoline and diesel?

I would welcome that, but not for financial reasons. I'm sure that
shortly
after he suggested or implemented the idea, one of his oily friends would
invite him to visit an oil rig in the Gulf, ride in a real live
hel-i-o-copter (pretending to fly it), and put on a hard hat & pretend to
be
an oil rig guy. I suspect they'd arrange for him to "slip and fall in the
ocean", by accident, of course.

Should those that are calling for prosecution of Pat Robertson (for his
stupid remarks about Hugo Chavez) be going after you now? After all,
it sounds like you just threatened the president.


No, I'm simply explaining what his employers will do to their pawn if he
gets out of hand.

You said you would welcome it.

You have the right to remain silent. You should.

"Curtis CCR" wrote in message
ups.com...

Doug Kanter wrote:
"Curtis CCR" wrote in message
oups.com...

Doug Kanter wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

How long do you think it will be before President Idiot is forced to
impose price controls on gasoline and diesel?

I would welcome that, but not for financial reasons. I'm sure that
shortly
after he suggested or implemented the idea, one of his oily friends
would
invite him to visit an oil rig in the Gulf, ride in a real live
hel-i-o-copter (pretending to fly it), and put on a hard hat & pretend
to
be
an oil rig guy. I suspect they'd arrange for him to "slip and fall in
the
ocean", by accident, of course.

Should those that are calling for prosecution of Pat Robertson (for his
stupid remarks about Hugo Chavez) be going after you now? After all,
it sounds like you just threatened the president.


No, I'm simply explaining what his employers will do to their pawn if he
gets out of hand.

You said you would welcome it.

You have the right to remain silent. You should.


Curtis, using the only method available to me, I suggested to him twice that
he not take the job. He didn't listen. Now, he has to put up with employers
who are much bigger than he is. Sort of like the mob (which doesn't really
exist). He's their problem now. Really, if they want to do the country a
favor, they'd need to invite Bush, Cheney, what's his name the speaker of
the house, and one or two others for a one-way oil rig trip. Then, we'd end
up with the postmaster general, if I recall the chain of replacement
correctly. There might be some hope.