What would the Pharaohs think?

[999969999]

So, what do you think about the riots in Egypt?

I personally could not care less about Egypt as a country, but I can see that my gasoline costs are going to go through the roof now. And that sucks.

Which is why we should be drilling for oil and natural gas here in the United States so we are not dependent on petty third world countries like Egypt for anything.

[clocker]

We haven't enough oil to make a difference and natural gas production is so ecologically destructive that it's hardly worth it.

Your gasoline costs are skyrocketing because of speculators- the down and dirty trenchmen of the "free market" you're so fond of, not because of Egypt (or the miniscule amount of oil we may get from them).
Take pride as you fill up your tank...somewhere someone has just profited at your expense, which is exactly how capitalism is supposed to work.
You'll feel even better as gas rises to $6/gallon and higher.

[Mivaro]

As far as i know (i admit that's not a lot) Egypt doesn't have a lot of oil. In fact the egyptian oilreserves seem to decline rapidly, so you don't have be burdened with the troubles in Egypt

[devilsadvocate]

Just for the sake of debate, we open up every source of oil/gas we have and produce enough to supply our demand, we become self sufficient.

How likely do you think it would be that.

Our fuel price would be lower than the world market?

Oil companies would only sell to us and not the more profitable world market?

Oil companies would drill more to keep prices lower when demand rises?

There are many drilling sites available for production that are not opened, it's not in the financial interest of the oil companies to increase supply.

Edit.

As for Egypt, we should keep our noses out.

[Quarterquack]

...

Don't worry. You'll grow up and eventually understand that what happens in one country can affect another in ways that don't relate to how you get to your slumber parties and back.

EDIT: My apologies, I thought this was the lounge. Considering this is the drawing room, I'll elaborate (but not edit out the first part of my post; it still stands):

The problem with the Egyptian riots is the fact that they hit a political critical spot. If the country falls, then so does the political stability of half the middle east (not only due other riots/uproars, but also due to Egyptian political influence on other countries in the area). It would be in everyone's best interests that no such thing happens or a world war will be on people's hands. Can't imagine that? Israel finally overpowers Palestine. Iran gets involved since Egypt isn't there to control that situation any longer. The US gets involved. Then both the Russians and Chinese get involved for personal/political issues. There you go, two continents dragged into a war, simply because the people supposedly in charge of maintaining peace talks (even though they never actually do so), and governing a lot of Western influence in the Arab world have been taken out of power.

It's why the V.P. appointed had to be who he is (you can be sure he was sanctioned by the US as such, even before Mubarak thought of him as a possible candidate), and why no one is taking a further active part in giving the people what they "want".

So, let me put this in terms you would understand: If Egypt falls, gas prices will soar even higher (thanks to war, especially with so many parties involved). That is a bad thing. You don't like bad things. You should consider finding a better opinion that worrying about just the gas prices.

[sandman_1]

We haven't enough oil to make a difference and natural gas production is so ecologically destructive that it's hardly worth it.

Your gasoline costs are skyrocketing because of speculators- the down and dirty trenchmen of the "free market" you're so fond of, not because of Egypt (or the miniscule amount of oil we may get from them).
Take pride as you fill up your tank...somewhere someone has just profited at your expense, which is exactly how capitalism is supposed to work.
You'll feel even better as gas rises to $6/gallon and higher.

True. The main reason Egypt is so important and the reason why we want some sort of stability in that region is because of the Suez Canal. Egypt isn't a huge oil producer but there is a lot of goods that goes through the Suez Canal. That is why oil is spiking on speculation that shipments could be significantly delayed or cut-off, with the worst case scenario being $200/barrel of oil. If oil spikes to that high, everything will rise in price because oil is what moves our goods from point A to B. Here in the USA, we could see $9 loaf of bread or $6-9/gallon of gas. That would be a major shock to our economy and to the world. It is obvious that Mubarak is on the out and that the USA should support the people. If we don't support the people in this situation, a regime could be put in place hostile to the USA and cause all kind of problems for Americans. Not only is it the right thing to do since that guy has been in control for 30 years, but it is the thing to do if we wish to have some sort of economic security in the long run in that particular area.

On an aside, the main reason gasoline has been rising in the USA is mainly due to the devalued dollar. Look for the Fed to devalue the dollar probably in Q3 of this year and then see oil prices rise even further.

[clocker]

I think the Suez Canal is merely a red herring when considering the price of oil.
Only a tiny fraction of world oil stock actually travels via that route (and about half of that fraction is in a pipeline, not tankers) and on any given day, the amount of oil that crosses Egypt is dwarfed by the amount that is floating the oceans as oil companies jockey to find the best market.
A simple aside...
We've become conditioned to constant price spikes at the pump- you hear on the news that barrel prices on Wall Street went up and sure enough, a few days later the pump price down the street bumps a few pennies.
The obvious implication is that there is a direct link between the Saudi sands and the nearest 7-11.
This is not true.

We ship billions of tons of oil every year and the average (this is important) transit time is 70+ days.
Let's say Exxon fills a ship with oil at $15/barrel and two weeks later fills an identical tanker at $10/barrel.
Depending on prices 6 weeks later (these tankers ain't speedy) it may be more profitable to sell off the second tanker first and sit on the more expensive cargo, hoping prices will rise (this becomes a balancing act between "potential" profit and the inexorable costs -"X" amount for the tanker rental/upkeep, docking/transit fees, etc.).

Oil companies use refineries as "choke points".
Rarely is a refinery running at full capacity, it's only outputting enough to keep the desired profit margin in reach.
Actual, real supply of crude is infrequently the reason for reduced refinery output, there is a huge cushion of excess crude stock floating on the oceans (petroleum- one single commodity- accounts for over a third of all shipped tonnage).

Big Oil has the entire system gamed, which is why the big companies have been posting record quarterly profits regardless of the seemingly important "barrel price".
Besides, by all accounts, the Suez is completely open and unimpeded...all the expressed "uncertainty and fear" about oil supply is currently without basis in fact.

The dilemma for the US is that we want to engineer "democracy" in the Middle East.
It's not enough to have a free election, we need our guy to win and Mubarak has reliably been "our guy" for decades.
How ironic that after spending all the time, money and manpower to inflict American democracy on Iraq and Afghanistan, two countries we left alone seem poised to almost spontaneously democratize themselves.
How do we claim credit for- and reestablish control over- a situation as volatile as that?

[sandman_1]

I think the Suez Canal is merely a red herring when considering the price of oil.
Only a tiny fraction of world oil stock actually travels via that route (and about half of that fraction is in a pipeline, not tankers) and on any given day, the amount of oil that crosses Egypt is dwarfed by the amount that is floating the oceans as oil companies jockey to find the best market.
A simple aside...
We've become conditioned to constant price spikes at the pump- you hear on the news that barrel prices on Wall Street went up and sure enough, a few days later the pump price down the street bumps a few pennies.
The obvious implication is that there is a direct link between the Saudi sands and the nearest 7-11.
This is not true.

We ship billions of tons of oil every year and the average (this is important) transit time is 70+ days.
Let's say Exxon fills a ship with oil at $15/barrel and two weeks later fills an identical tanker at $10/barrel.
Depending on prices 6 weeks later (these tankers ain't speedy) it may be more profitable to sell off the second tanker first and sit on the more expensive cargo, hoping prices will rise (this becomes a balancing act between "potential" profit and the inexorable costs -"X" amount for the tanker rental/upkeep, docking/transit fees, etc.).

Oil companies use refineries as "choke points".
Rarely is a refinery running at full capacity, it's only outputting enough to keep the desired profit margin in reach.
Actual, real supply of crude is infrequently the reason for reduced refinery output, there is a huge cushion of excess crude stock floating on the oceans (petroleum- one single commodity- accounts for over a third of all shipped tonnage).

Big Oil has the entire system gamed, which is why the big companies have been posting record quarterly profits regardless of the seemingly important "barrel price".
Besides, by all accounts, the Suez is completely open and unimpeded...all the expressed "uncertainty and fear" about oil supply is currently without basis in fact.

The dilemma for the US is that we want to engineer "democracy" in the Middle East.
It's not enough to have a free election, we need our guy to win and Mubarak has reliably been "our guy" for decades.
How ironic that after spending all the time, money and manpower to inflict American democracy on Iraq and Afghanistan, two countries we left alone seem poised to almost spontaneously democratize themselves.
How do we claim credit for- and reestablish control over- a situation as volatile as that?

I don't know where you are getting your information but that canal is significant to how much of the total world goods that pass through it, just not oil.

Some 16,000 vessels already pass through the canal each year, carrying an estimated 14% of world shipping and 30% of world oil supplies. Further work is underway to increase the depth of the canal by 2010, opening it up to fully-laden supertankers with a draught of 22m (72ft) against the current 16m (53ft).

Dated 2008

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7666877.stm

Not only does a lot of goods pass through the canal, if the canal was closed, goods would have to travel further to get to their destination thus using more fuel and delaying shipments by several days.

This thin blue ribbon - just 300m wide at its narrowest point - is one of the world's most vital waterways, a crucial commercial shortcut. A ship that passes along the 162km (101 mile) Suez Canal is saved a 9,654km circumnavigation of Africa; the average journey time cut from 20 days to just 13 hours.

[clocker]

Bloomberg.
Or here.

[sandman_1]

Bloomberg.
Or here.

Bloomberg article sort of supports your argument however the other does not.

If oil shipments through Egypt were disrupted, European supply—and global prices—would be “affected tremendously,” said Dalton Garis, an associate professor in petroleum-market behavior at the Petroleum Institute, an energy-research center in Abu Dhabi.