Was Bush warning the Saudi king to lower oil prices or we might invest in alternatives like solar and wind?

Question

"You know, when I was overseas in the Middle East, people said, did you talk to the King of Saudi about oil prices? Of course I did. I reminded him two things: One, you better be careful about affecting markets -- reminding him that oil is fungible; even though we get most of our oil, by the way, from Canada and Mexico, oil is fungible. And secondly, the higher the price of oil, the more capital is going to come into alternative sources of energy."

Answer 1

I think it was a clear warning but whether he meant it or not is debatable. All politicians constantly raise funds and since they can get a lot of money from business interests, they tend to make decisions that are in favor of those businesses.

The main reason oil prices continue to climb is that the US dollar is getting weaker every day. Even if the price stays constant, it takes more dollars to buy a barrel next week than this week.

The high price of oil has already had a major impact on energy research and alternative production. The Athabasca tar sands in Canada contain more oil than all oil fields combined, up to 1,300 BILLION barrels of oil. At current prices it's very profitable to extract it and they're doing so at a record pace.

Solar projects are going up in Nevada and other places, some using new technologies that don't require expensive solar cells, but instead use mirrors to focus the sunlight to boil water which turns a turbine to produce electricity.

There are other very promising technologies, including one that makes electrolysis of water much more efficient, from QSI Nano. That could be plugged into a car and you could essentially power an electric car with a tank of water and a small battery, using the hydrogen produced by electrolysis to power a fuel cell that runs the car. They already have test models that can run a large fan for hours using a drop or two of ethanol.

Answer 2

I think the oil companies and their lobbyists pay a lot of money so we don't develop alternative energy sources. Besides, Bush and the Saudis are like business partners. They all make money on keeping us "over a barrel" . I am surprised George Bush even used a word like "fungible" in a sentence. The use of oil at this time really is not an interchangeable commodity for Americans who literally "live" in their cars. Keep in mind the growth of the size of SUVs over the past 10 years. As the oil prices go up, the size of the cars and the amount of excess energy consumed has skyrocketed. Every "soccer mom" in the world has a Denali, or a Tahoe, or an Escalade.  American excess is ridiculous. It's all about greed, appearance and money.

Answer 3

A reality check:- All this 'papermoney' going to 'casino crawlers' (they are nothing, but) and 'whor£ mongers' (they are unable to 'master' them, so, they pay them.) Soon, they are going to have to drink it!

Answer 4

The united States is sitting on the largest supply of shale in the world.  Shale can be converted to oil and supply the US for a few hundred years.  The problem is that oil has historically been to low in price for this to be a viable solution.  It cost more to get out of the ground and convert than  $69 a barrel of oil.

Oil prices are now at $100 a barrel.  The cost is now getting to a point that it can be a viable solution.  If the US started to drill for Shale the world oil market would collapse due to an over supply.

So yes Bush was warning the King but it was about our shale reserves.

Answer 5

Sounds like simple logical advice to me.

Answer 6

LMAO!!!

Good one!

Answer 7

Knowing Bush, he was probably asking for a bigger cut for himself!

Answer 8

The Saudi's don't care anymore what bush has to say.   They are pumping oil as fast as they can right now.   Drilling more holes would make no difference in the amount of oil they could take from the ground.   I can't explain that right now, but its a fact.    For every gallon of oil they pump out of the ground, they also pump 100 gallons of salt water out of the ground.   Oil shale would have been cost effective at 59$/barrel in the 1970's.   Now, with inflation, the price is closer to $250/barrel.   Not there yet luckily, but give it time.   If we have another oil boycott like we did in the '70's the price could easily reach that level.

Answer 9

Resource is smaller and smaller if we use it. So investing an alternate fuel maybe a priority needed.