63
Why does the headline specify Biden-Harris but not trump-Pence?
Because Harris is running for president and Pence is just running from a noose.
"The Biden-Harris administration focused on replacing them with clean energy."
Did they though? I don't know how record fracking approvals and 100% tariffs on EVs help with that.
I wonder why? Renewables are at an all time high, and people are starting to buy electric cars and lawn equipment. Where’s the extra demand coming from? Is it related to cars getting bigger and bigger?
With the invasion of Ukraine, there’s been a big push in the US to produce to help stabilize global energy prices.
Wonder how that happened what?!?!?!?!?!??!!?!!?!??????!! It's almost like: Different energy goals; Same monetary goals.
It's fracking. Domestic oil production has increased because it's gotten cheaper and easier. This has been happening for a long time now.
It’s 2024. Let’s maybe stop farming and consuming the fossil fuels that we know are irreversibly fucking the planet???
I’d really like to know the long term affect of Biden policies ….. I hope it’s to turn this travesty around. I understand we’re currently in record “drill baby, drill” territory here but many of these are long term decisions and the article did note several limiting factors achieved by the Biden administration. Clearly it’s not helping in the short term but will it in the long term?
Given Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the need to support allies foolish enough to depend on Russian gas, I’m even fine with an intentional temporary increase, but it’s got to be winding down and reversing asap
The Conversation - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for The Conversation:
MBFC: Least Biased - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: Very High - Australia
Wikipedia about this source
Media Bias Fact Check | bot supportSearch topics on Ground.News
https://theconversation.com/us-oil-and-gas-production-surged-to-record-highs-under-both-trump-and-biden-harris-despite-very-different-energy-goals-236859
Gas prices are rumbling. OPEC is busy trying to prop them up.
But OPEC propping up prices is actually them reducing production, isn't it?
I don't think they've quite decided what to do. Some say that there is really nothing they can do. The problem is soft demand from China and huge US production
But OPEC is the solution to that. If OPEC were willing to take the hit, they can still profit even with a surplus large enough to lower prices and drive frackers out of business
The US is the biggest producer and is not part of OPEC. There is no reason for the US to comply with OPECs supply targets, which is the way OPEC controls the market.
True enough, but between higher costs of drilling plus yet more cost for fracking, US oil is more expensive. US drillers can only be profitable if they can sell at a fairly high rate. OPEC can flood the market to lower all prices while still making a small profit, yet US drillers would be losing money
Oil is sold on the market at barrel cost, set by OPEC. Should that barrel cost be below US pumping costs the US will lower production. So far that isn't the case and the result is a lower market and lower gas costs. I'm sure OPEC can flood the market making prices even lower. Speaking for the American consumer, I say "Bring it on".
this post was submitted on 09 Sep 2024
63 points (100.0% liked)
politics
19144 readers
2328 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! 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.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS