VIDEO: Energy Secretary Said Strategic Reserve Should Not Be Used to Lower Gas Prices
VIDEO: Energy Secretary Said Strategic Reserve Should Not Be Used to Lower Gas Prices
Earlier this month, Energy Secretary Sam Bodman said that the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPRo) should not be used to lower gas prices. Today, President Bush announced he’s going to stop filling the SPRo to lower prices, calling it a way to show “we’re serious” about reducing the cost of gas. Watch the two clips back-to-back:
Transcript:
SMITH: What about tapping into the Strategic Petroleum Reserve? Is that a possibility?
BODMAN: Well, the Strategic Petroleum Reserve is there if we have an interruption in supply, and that’s not the issue here today. The issue is the inability of suppliers to keep up with rising demand. And so, this is something we have, really the SPRo, as we call it, is something that’s there for emergency purposes if we an interruption, if we have an explosion or terrorist act of some kind that interrupts supply. [4/11/06]
******
BUSH: One way to ease price is to increase supply. One immediate way we can signal to people we’re serious about increasing supply is to stop making purchases or deposits to the Strategic Petroleum Reserve for a short period of time. I’ve directed the Department of Energy to defer filling the reserve this summer. Our strategic reserve is sufficiently large enough to guard against any major supply disruption over the next few months. So by deferring deposits until the fall, we’ll leave a little more oil on the market. Every little bit helps.
[Correction: An earlier version of this post said Bodman's comments were made last week. They were actually made two weeks ago.]
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
54 Responses to “VIDEO: Energy Secretary Said Strategic Reserve Should Not Be Used to Lower Gas Prices”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Read my Lips!
April 25th, 2006 at 3:30 pmWhy isn't the strategic reserve full? When have we used it?
April 25th, 2006 at 3:35 pmDeferring deposits into the SPR is different than extracting from the SPR. Dumbass.
April 25th, 2006 at 3:37 pm#3 more parsing as usual. Typical Karl Rove tactic.
Just admit that this administration deliberately lies out of both sides of its mouth in order to keep the Amurkan people stupified and eating their Happy Meals.
April 25th, 2006 at 3:39 pmThe decider strikes again!
April 25th, 2006 at 3:40 pm#2 - Good question!
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/tribune-review/business/s_341933.html
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/06/07/ap/business/mainD8AIVG3O0.shtml
I can't find anything that states the total amount of the SR.
April 25th, 2006 at 3:40 pmDeferring deposits into the SPR is different than extracting from the SPR. Dumbass.
Comment by sugar magnolia — April 25, 2006 @ 3:37 pm
"Not be used' doesn't mean 'extract'. Dumbass.
April 25th, 2006 at 3:41 pm#2 and #6 - you would think if we keep adding to it and never using it, it would be full by now? How long have they been using this reserve? How much is deposited annually? How much can it hold? Is it EVER used?
OK, OK, I will google it myself! :)
April 25th, 2006 at 3:43 pmIs this a smack down on bush's rubber stamper bodman or what? Why is there a bodman if bush doesn't listen to his advice?
April 25th, 2006 at 3:45 pmWe used some of the reserve after Katrina. [Link]
April 25th, 2006 at 3:46 pmThe DOE has a great website that answers any question you may ever have about this subject.
April 25th, 2006 at 3:54 pm
Here is what can be done to reduce the cost of transportation: Stop driving.
It will work. If you don't drive as much, you don't buy as much, the price falls. It works everytime.
Now, do it now.
April 25th, 2006 at 3:55 pmDemocrat Soldier
From your links, it says the reserve is nearly full for the first time in 30 years, so if its already more full then ever before, not adding the finishing touches to it dosn't hurt national security at all, as opposed to pulling from it which would. Sounds like Bush finally uses a nuance and he still gets slammed for it.
April 25th, 2006 at 3:56 pmI don't know much about this Bodman buffoon, but if he is anything like his predecessor in the post Spencer Abraham, he's nothing more than an occupant of space.
April 25th, 2006 at 3:58 pmWe all know who directs energy policy, and they aren't appointed or even elected officials.
In trying to mollify the public by using the SPR as a way to lower (yeah, RIGHT) gas prices, the little king sets the stage for another invasion of an oil rich country, and for the need to drill in ANWR.......
And as far as why we keep getting mixed messages from the current administration, there's a dead horse no point in flogging any longer.........
And, oh, please please hire Tony Snow..........
Unfortunatly, I think that's all a ...ahem... snow job, just like the Harriet Miers nomination...........
Gasoline goes bad after a while. Logically a stockpile of Gasoline must be constantly refurbished. Most likely what occurs is, that the stockpile is sold off after a certain amount of time and repurchased at the same time, to keep the amount consistent.
April 25th, 2006 at 3:58 pmWhy isn’t the strategic reserve full? When have we used it?
Comment by squegeeboo
They sold some after Katrina.
April 25th, 2006 at 4:02 pmI don't think the SPR is gasoline, I believe it is oil in its raw form. I could be wrong. Anyone have any idea?
April 25th, 2006 at 4:07 pmhttp://www.fe.doe.gov/programs/reserves
This website will answer any questions you may now have, or will ever have about the reserves.
April 25th, 2006 at 4:10 pmWhy was Bush's speech so slurred? Gawd, he sounds like Otis the Drunk from The Andy Griffith Show!
April 25th, 2006 at 4:11 pm#13
April 25th, 2006 at 4:12 pmWhile I agree that it won't ruin this country to stop putting in to the reserve and use that gasoline, I don't think it is going to help a whole heck of a lot at the pump. It is just a windowdressing maneuver. And that Bush used a nuance and is still slammed for it...well ya can't blame people to react strangely to something they have never seen before.
The trouble is that the value of the dollar is tied to the price of oil and the decider is dancing on very thin ice that could plunge us into a depression.
April 25th, 2006 at 4:16 pmBush Contradicts Energy Secretary on SPRo...
Think Progress caught another gem of Bush administration dysfunctionality and incompetence. This time it regards the skyrocketing gas prices and our oil reserves. Check out President Bush completely contradict his own Energy Secretary!
April 25th, 2006 at 4:17 pmSMITH: What abo...
#6 - I can’t find anything that states the total amount of the SR.
Comment by Democrat Soldier
Could it be because it's "strategic?"
April 25th, 2006 at 4:26 pmI'm not trying to be snarky, I value your opinion on this as a former (?) military person.
May 2, 2001 - ah, the good ol' days:
In a speech in Toronto, Mr Cheney said that "conservation may be a sign of personal virtue, but it is not a sufficient basis for a sound, comprehensive energy policy."
April 25th, 2006 at 4:28 pmAnd now shutting off bold.
April 25th, 2006 at 4:29 pmLook...whether you are drawing from the SPR or halting the refilling of same, either way you are increasing the amount of oil available to everyone else.
Here's the issue: there are now at least 3 instances (2 from TP and one, below, that I found on Fox) in which the administration or Bush himself has rejected this proposal after supporting it in the past. No good reason has been given for this, nor will we get one, at least from the admin. Bottom line, he'll support it when it will best help out him or his Republican buddies. We've got an election coming up in about 6 months and things are not looking rosy for the Repubs. Short of tinkering with the electronic voting machines, odds now are that the Dems will regain control of at least one house of Congress. Things may change between now and Nov., but in the meantime, things are going to get ugly and Bush knows it.
Speaking of elections, one may ask, "Yeah, but why didn't Bush use the SPR to help lower prices in 2004 and help himself out?" Well, I think the reason Bush did not support using the SPR at that time was because he didn't need it...he had a couple of other aces in the hole, namely the fear of terrorism that his campaign had put into most Americans, which lead to the belief that Bush, and only Bush, could save us from another attack, and a little help from Diebold.
Just my $0.02.
Anyway...from Fox.com:
The presumptive Democratic nominee (Kerry) complained that Bush has not taken steps to drive prices down, calling on the administration to stop pumping oil into the nation’s emergency stockpile until Americans see cheaper prices. The administration has rejected that notion.
White House spokesman Scott McClellan said Tuesday the administration opposed using supplies from the reserve because independent analysts have concluded the impact on prices would be minor and that it is important to have necessary resources in case of a severe disruption in supplies.
Source: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,115594,00.html
Oh, and #3, I guess that makes Scott McClellan a dumbass too...
April 25th, 2006 at 4:30 pmDemocrat Soldier, didnt notice the last part of your first post
"I can’t find anything that states the total amount of the SR."
The upcoming lull in filling the SPR, whose total capacity was recently revised upward to 727 million barrels, is likely to be short-lived.
I got it from one of your own links
April 25th, 2006 at 4:33 pmCan you spell F-L-I-P F-L-O-P ??? Neocons can't.
April 25th, 2006 at 5:14 pm". Our strategic reserve is sufficiently large enough to guard against any major supply disruption over the next few months. "
Maybe this is true, maybe it isn't. With Bush, you never know what to believe and that may be the biggest danger facing the US and the world today.
April 25th, 2006 at 5:20 pmMay work until we bomb Iran - then all bets are off - all oil supplies will stop. Bush may need to "make nice" with Chevez if that happens.
Listening to the two videos gives one the impression that Bush's Cabinet and Bush are not communicating with each other. This is what happens when the Chimp is left on his own while Traitor Rove is working to defeat Democrats in November 06.
April 25th, 2006 at 5:52 pm#14 - I agree.
Bush's plan will do very little to lower gas prices, unless you think 2 or 3 cents/gallon less is significant. This is all part of their game. Keep the public focused and upset about gas prices and then all the crimes committed by this administration will become background noise. Then, in October, it happens - gas at $1.50 gallon. If the SPR is full then what Bush annouced today is no big deal. And for ANWAR - it will be years until that oil is ready to be used as gasoline and then it will be sold to Japan.
So all you Koolaid drinkers, WAKE THE F**K UP and admit that you have been snookered by this administration. You voted for the nazis and guess what, you are losers because these Neocons don't give a rip about you. It's all about them and you are their obedient dogs.
April 25th, 2006 at 6:03 pmHey liberal wankers, let us know when it gets to 8$/gallon like it is in Britain. Quit your whining, dumbasses.
April 25th, 2006 at 6:57 pm"Deferring deposits into the SPR is different than extracting from the SPR. Dumbass."
Comment by sugar magnolia — April 25, 2006 @ 3:37 pm
God Bless you Sugar, though the sheeple here most likely still dont get it. They are used to being led around by the nose. They take the topics here on TP as gospel though truth be known if it were in print it would only be good for use as TP.
April 25th, 2006 at 7:03 pmBush talks to the public as if we were unable to grasp complex messages - or is it because he cannot comprehend complex messages himself.
April 25th, 2006 at 7:07 pmBush spoke strongly today about how he feels about the gas crisis and the oil companies -- he sounded so determined, it was almost like hearing him in the past saying that he would fire anyone in his administration who leaked the name of a CIA agent.
POTUS = POS
#36 - Marie
April 25th, 2006 at 7:17 pmYeah, Bush is all passion and no substance.
Troll,
TP is also known as thinkparanoid.org
http://karws.gso.uri.edu/JFK/conspiracy_theory/the_paranoid_mentality/Rational_thinker_versus_paranoid.html
April 25th, 2006 at 7:58 pmYes sour tree but Bush directally falls under the column titled the paranoid, and his minions seem to follow him like lemmings, however those who exibit the characteristics of the rational thinker like Former treasury secratury O'Neil do not last long.......or does thr cabal in the White House or the Capital building listen to those who exhibit the rational thinking side....they rely of the faith based ie(paranoid) approach........
April 25th, 2006 at 8:17 pmWhatever happened with that bit about Our Leader and how he was going to "jawbone OPEC"?
April 25th, 2006 at 8:21 pm#40
I think he decided instead to let market forces control the price of oil.
April 25th, 2006 at 8:25 pm1. Grabs onto a few pieces of evidence and defends them inflexibly.
WMD's in Iraq and Saddam was in on 9-11 for example, both promoted by Bush-Cheney
2. Seemingly irrationally seizes onto something and won’t let go.
WMD's in Iraq, everything is going good in Iraq, the economy is doing real good.
3. Invokes complex, unrealistic scenarios controlled by powerful forces behind the scenes.
It's Clinton's fault...or the liberal medias fault ......or both.....
4. Deals in explanations that can never be critically assessed (unfalsifiable theories).
Mission Accomplished?....Stay the course?....
5. Demands quick, even immediate explanations.
Both Bush and Rummy wanted connections between Iraq and 9-11 on 9-11..........
6. Invents scenarios when nothing ever goes wrong.
WMD's in Iraq...Iraq was part of 9-11....
7. Approaches many other “events†in the same irrational, paranoid way. (i.e., both people are consistent across their lives.)
Staged political events so as not to confront contradictory evidence that he propagates.....
8. Feels powerless before these huge forces (victims).
Hides behind the staged events, and refuses to answer almost any NON staged questions.......
9. Will not face evidence that destroys his theory.
The world in Iraq, Katrina's damage,
10. Insists on fitting everything into his explanation, often by explaining difficult items as further evidence of conspiracy.
Bill Clinton's fault....Liberal media.....questioning his motives or actions is unpatriotic.....
11. Often seizes single pieces of evidence and blows them out of proportion.
Curveball anyone.........Aluminum tubes....yellow cake from Niger?
12. Sticks to preconceived notion regardless of new evidence.
Mission Accomplished and stay the course.............
13. Preconceived, rigid, victimlike, cowardly. ie George Walker Bush
April 25th, 2006 at 8:32 pmWhaterver happened to democrats' solution to the problem. Oh, that's right. Price controls and higher taxes. That was Jimmy Carter's failed energy policy. And what did Clinton and the democrats do when they had control in the 90's? Increase dependency on foreign oil, increase the speed limit (thumbed nose at conservation), fuel efficiency of autos in the 90's plummeted, and so on. You had your chance. Your precious gasoline is still cheaper than it is Britain and Europe. STFU.
April 25th, 2006 at 8:38 pm"Troll,
TP is also known as thinkparanoid.org
http://karws.gso.uri.edu/ JFK/ conspiracy_theory/ the_paranoid_mentality/ Rational_thinker_versus_paranoid.html "
Comment by sugar magnolia — April 25, 2006 @ 7:58 pm
Sugar that was a great link it describes the sheeple here to a T. Unbelievable should take a look. She has had to deal with exactly this with her own for the last few days.
April 25th, 2006 at 8:45 pmTroll my 8:32 post is the paranoid side with Bush examples to fit.
April 25th, 2006 at 8:53 pmI dont have time to retort. It was creative to say the least. Gnight.
April 25th, 2006 at 9:05 pmAND TRUE
April 25th, 2006 at 9:11 pmW is dependinding on the energy companies to reel in prices until November - sorta like a campaign contribution without any traces. From December on, is a different story. Expect a very (un)merry Christmas. Bless us Burl Ives, one and all.
April 25th, 2006 at 9:14 pmdependinding sb depending
April 25th, 2006 at 9:16 pmBy the way, W uses oral Depends for his condition.
April 25th, 2006 at 9:25 pmBush Regime says one thing one day, then another thing another day, then back to the original thing on a future day > lol. Hypocrites to the MAX are what they are PERIOD.
April 25th, 2006 at 10:06 pm#43
Nice try. I'm sure you voluntarily drive 55 on all major highways, all the time.
As for the double-nickle...
The speed limit on rural highways was raised to 65 in 1987, under Republican rule of the White House.
In 1995 the remaining urban areas limit of 55 mph was trashed. Who was leading the charge? Republicans.
Per the National Motorists Association:
"Thanks to bills introduced by Representatives Larry Combest (R-TX), Scott Klug (R-WI), and Senator Don Nickles (R-OK), we had the vehicles we needed to promote repeal of federal speed limits. Subsequently, Senator Lauch Faircloth (R-NC) and Representative Bill Brewster (D-OK) adopted these bills as amendments to the National Highway System Act.
"Again, we were confronted with opposition on the part of leadership in both the House and Senate committees. However, a bipartisan majority of committee members overcame this opposition and voted in the interest of their constituents. Repeal of the 55 mph National Maximum Speed Limit became a component of both the House and Senate bills. This marked the beginning of the end of a law that had started 21 years ago, as a temporary measure."
(Source: http://www.ibiblio.org/rdu/nma-prsl.html)
As for fuel efficiency, a quote from a Wall Street Journal article in 1995:
Certainly, the original reasons for imposing one of the world's slowest speed limits -- the 1973 oil embargo and ensuing fuel-conserving craze -- have evaportated. Even at higher speeds, today's cars and light trucks are significantly more fuel-efficient than the gas guzzlers of the early 1970s. And gasoline prices today are lower on an inflation-adjusted basis than before the oil crisis.
(Source: http://www.ibiblio.org/rdu/a-why55.html)
I used bold-type so that you wouldn't miss the info.
Oh, and I have a question for you. What happened to efficiency and conservation during 12 years of Republican rule?
April 25th, 2006 at 10:27 pmThere is only one way to reduce short term oil costs: increase domestic production in ANWR and the continental shelf, and build a whole bunch of new refineries. If we had done that 10 years ago, when Congress last sent ANWR drilling legislation to the White House, we now would be producing an extra 1,000,000 barrels of domestic oil per day, without any discernible harm to the environment (the proposed ANWR drilling area is no bigger than the size of a postage stamp on a football field). Unfortunately, our president in 1996 (I forget his name) was thinking more about drilling interns and campaign donors than about drilling for oil.
April 25th, 2006 at 10:28 pmBSR the oil from Alaska primarily goes to Asia and it is not a lack of oil but the fact that refineries have been shut down for the industry to maximise profits from the ones the stiull operate, plus the shortages during higher demand times keep the prices higher. It is actually refinery capacity more than oil availibility that drives prices up here.
April 25th, 2006 at 10:49 pmIf all the oil was pumped out of the ANWR area of Alaska it would satisfy the U.S. needs for about 6 months! It is a small pocket of petroleum that would be sold to Japan, so screw that idea, and leave ANWR alone as a nature reserve! Someday in the future when the world's oil supply is exhausted, then open it for drilling! Until then leave it alone!!!
April 25th, 2006 at 11:19 pmI am done with President Bush~~
~~In the year 2001 before 9-11 ~~ he deeply embarrassed me personally by profusely apologizing to the Chinese ~~ it was REALLY EMBARRASSING to see the two week ~~ rewriting of an apology to the damn Chinese ~~ but after 9-11 I realized President Bush had a good idea to go into Afghanistan with worldwide support ~~ continue our Iraq Policy ~~albeit without world support ~~ but since mid-2004 ~~I started to notice odd quirks and pathetic missteps ~~ Then right now I have serious problems ~~ our foreign policy mirrors that of Israel exactly ~~ North Korea is appeased (maybe because they are not threatening Israel) ~~ so all in all the below poll will give you an idea of what I think of President Bush at this moment:
Judging from his stances and actions, President Bush is actually: (pick 1)
April 26th, 2006 at 5:08 amPresident of Israel
President of Iraq
President of Mexico
President of Saudi Arabia, UAE and Kuwait
President of Spending
Vice President of the USA