Anyone that has filled up recently has noticed that gas prices have started to creep down to near $3 a gallon. The lower cost of both oil and gas would save Americans 70-200 Billion dollars. There is a very unreported reason as to why these prices are falling. The worlds supply and demand for oil and gas are changing. Demand in Europe has slowed dramatically because of the economic turmoil and supply has dramatically increased due to the fact that the United States has increased its supply by 50% since 2008. New technologies like fracking and horizontal drilling have developed more than 100,000 jobs, and have allowed the United States to greatly increase its oil supply.
What are your thoughts on the US increasing its oil supply? What are your thoughts of tracking and horizontal drilling? Are these things economically beneficial or are the costs to high for the United States?
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2014/10/21/real-reason-gas-prices-are-falling/
I think we are continuously pushing off the inevitable, which is running out of oil. We are putting our resources into new oil supplies instead of renewable resources. This is a short-term solution that I am surprisingly in favor of. There will be costs in the long-term that affect young Americans. I do think that any solution is better than standing still, at least for now. I think there are also health costs that come with fracking and oil drilling. The United States does not seem to be too concerned with these issues for the moment. Most Americans could not even tell you why gas prices are being lowered. They would assume something with "wars in the Middle-East" (a vague response), green energy, or even luck. The American public does not care as long as prices are cheap. The government is using this towards their advantage.
ReplyDeleteOverall, the article seems very positive on the topic. TJ is most likely correct in saying that Americans probably don't really know why gases prices are dropping and that they really only care that the prices are cheap. I agree more with the author's surmise on how now oil should be considered a primary accelerator, versus the opposing view of some politicians who are against the carbon-based industry. Yes, there are costs in the long run, but at the moment maybe this accelerator is needed. On a side note of the article - I have to question the validity of the author's writing based on the numerous grammatical errors throughout the text. Fox shouldn't publish an article with high purpose unless it's going to be professionally written and edited.
ReplyDeleteI'm all for the increase in oil supply. I think its important that the United States increases its own oil supply so we can become less dependent on foreign suppliers. As far as fracking and horizontal drilling go, im fine with it as long as it keeps gas prices low. I think that the current economic benefits outweigh any eventual environmental costs.
ReplyDeleteI dislike this article because it only focuses on the positive benefits of cheaper oil and does not discuss many of the negative externalities associated with new drilling techniques such as fracking. The state discusses Oklahoma being a large producer in shale gas but leaves out the fact that they are also suffering from an exponential increase in earthquakes as a result. "In Oklahoma, the study notes, seismic activity has increased 40-fold between 2008-2013." States which are producing shale gas are facing unpredicted externalities.
ReplyDeleteI also disagree that America producing oil to break up OPEC is a reason to continue our current practices. Green energy would also work to break up the cartel. If America is not buying nearly as much gas then changes in the cartel pricing will have a much smaller effect on our economy. There are other viable methods to achieve the goal without engaging in a potentially dangerous drilling method.
More info on Oklahoma's recent trend: http://www.msnbc.com/the-last-word/oklahoma-earthquakes-linked-fracking-study