I’ll be on CNBC at 11 a.m. on oil

cnbc2.jpgIn theory, anyway. Supposedly between about 11:05 and 11:15, delivering the great news that the public need to get used to four dollars a gallon gasoline, and then five dollars…. I should have a clip to put up at some point today. Unless, of course, I get bumped, or this turns out to be one of those dream sequences from Lost.

18 Responses to I’ll be on CNBC at 11 a.m. on oil

  1. Paul K says:

    Advises people to just get used to $4 gasoline. Apparently, the people are.

    Favorite quote “demand is increasing even in the face of rising prices.”

  2. Andrew says:

    Next time right if its EST or PST…

  3. Joe says:

    Sorry, I’m an EST guy.

    Paul — I’m not sure what your point is. They had me on to talk about what Saudi Arabia could do. They also had two other guests, rather than one, so I had no time.

    Thanks largely to conservatives, Americans are going to have to get used to $4 gasoline and then $5 and then $6. Intelligent policies will minimize the impact of those prices on individuals and the country. Conservative policies will set us up for ongoing pain.

    And people will “adapt” to whatever happens to them, much as the people of New Orleans “adapted” to Katrina. The key question is whether smart policies can avoid the worst outcomes. The answer is, “duh!”

  4. Paul K says:

    I was just surprised you didn’t take the opportunity to promote efficiencies and alternatives. Part of being on TV is getting your message out no matter what questions they ask. Your answer to the question was very good on supply and demand that higher prices are not yet slowing demand.

    Since raising the price of carbon is a pillar of your agenda, you should praise the conservatives who brought us to this point, not castigate them. I suppose it is the conservatives who prevent expansion of our own natural resources and new refinery capacity.

  5. Joe says:

    Who said we need more oil or refining? Not me!
    Part of being a regular guest on CNBC is answering their questions.

    Actually, Current prices have begun to slow demand growth — but whether they actually reversed the man, seems unlikely.

  6. paulm says:

    …you should praise the conservatives who brought us to this point,…

    I don’t think they had much to do with this…more like peak oil and up and coming developing counties.

    There must be a graph out there showing the price of oil against falling production…

  7. Reader says:

    You positively hate being called a ‘well paid alarmist’ don’t you, Joe? But it’s an accurate description of you, isn’t it?

    What goes around, comes around ….

  8. Harold Pierce Jr says:

    ATTN: Joe

    Methanex (Vancouver, BC) sells straight-run, anhyd. methanol for $US 1.50 per gallon. If racing cars can run on methanol, so can FlexFuel cars.
    Methanol doesn’t have the energy density of gasoline, but the low price makes up of for this deficiency.

    Methanol is used to make biodiesl, but this is uneccesary, for it can burned in internal combustion engines.

  9. Harold Pierce Jr says:

    I forgot to mention that the high price of gas, diesel and jet fuel is due in part to the Iraq war. The demand by military operations is straining supplies. This is why diesel in more expsensive than gasoline. Tanks have lousy fuel economy.

    When the war is over, and it will be over soon, the price of oil will plummet when Iraq oil comes on the market at full production rates.
    New estimates puts Iraq’s reserves at about 200 billion barrels.

    You should also check Shell R&D re in situ resistive heating for recovery of oil directly from oil shale deposits. These pilot projects are now underway in northwestern Colorado. If successful, many billions of barrels of oil will become available.

    GO: http://www.heavyoilinfo for the latest on recovery methods for heavy and extra heavy crude oils.

  10. Harold Pierce Jr says:

    Oops! GO:

  11. john says:


    ALARMIST: “A person who needlessly alarms or attempts to alarm others.” American Heritage Dictionary.

    With climate change causing a billion or more people to be displaced; loss of 70% of species; droughts and starvation; and rsing sea levels, any alarms raised are hardly “needless” so no, I don’t agree.

    In fact, it goes beyond whether I or anyone “agrees” with you — your posts are fatuous nonsense.

  12. Harold Pierce Jr says:


    That is absolute nonsense. What climate change? There is one not shred of empirical evidence that shows with absolute certainty that world climate is any much different than it was a century ago.

    Sure many local climates have changed due to urbanization (UHI effect) and land-use changes, etc , but it is not possible for humans to effect world climate because there are very few humans on the earth and the actual amount of the earth surface affected by them is quite small.

    Get out a recent atlas of the earth, and then estimate that actual amount of the earth surface changed by humans.

    I live in Canada and it is still unpopulated. Check Siberia. About 1/3 of there earth’s land surface is true desert and few people live there.

    Just because the white-coated welfare queens in NYC say there is climate change does not make it so.

    Go to Tombstone AZ and ask the old timers if they have experienced any significant climate change. Why don’t you go ask some rural old timers if the have experienced any significant climate. Probably not.

    [JR: Harold — this comment is outrageous, so you are on notice. BTW, everywhere I go I ask people about the climate. Oftentimes they bring up without asking. I’ve never met anybody over 40 who hasn’t noticed a substantial change in their climate in the past two decades.]

  13. steve shoap says:

    The public is going to buy lots of very small cars this year.
    A year from now the news reports will show a large increase in accident fatalities because these small cars. The death rate doubles for small cars vs large cars.

    I have invented a way to make small cars safer in collisions.
    My web site is

  14. Reader says:


    Joe has put you on notice: Be very careful of posting anything that’s too different from the party line or you could be banned. This is a ‘serious blog’, not a place for differing observations or conclusions.


    Tell me about the billion people who have been displaced, the 70% of species that have been lost, and the sea level that has risen. That’s not just alarmism, right? You have some real data?

  15. Reader says:

    Even if I were a tithe-paying member of the United Nations Church of Green Politics, I would be ashamed of you Joe.

  16. David B. Benson says:

    Reader — Read about the situation in those areas of South America tha depend upon glaciers for water. That is happening now.

  17. Reader says:

    Mr. Benson,

    Really? A billion displaced people, 70% species loss, and sea level rise in South America?

    Is this the first time that continent has seen a drought, BTW?

    Wow! Your comment is indeed impressive. Almost unbelievable, one might say.

    Are you a professional alarmist too, or an amateur?

  18. Reader says:

    Is that crickets I hear?