Youngstown News, Ryan bill aims to cut price of gas
- Advertisement -
  • Most Commentedmost commented up
  • Most Emailedmost emailed up
  • Popularmost popular up

Columbiana


Commercial
bedroom, bath
$1850000


Cortland


Residential
3 bedroom, 1 bath
$51000


- Advertisement -
 

« News Home

Ryan bill aims to cut price of gas


Published: Fri, April 25, 2008 @ 12:07 a.m.

photo

U.S. Rep. Tim Ryan of Niles

By Don Shilling

Opening more drilling areas would create bigger savings, one observer says.

Some U.S. congressmen, including Tim Ryan, say they have an idea to cut gasoline prices by 25 cents a gallon — stop stockpiling oil for a crisis.

Ryan, of Niles, D-17th, this week signed as co-sponsor to a bill that would suspend the filling of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve so that more oil is available in the market. More available oil should force down prices, Ryan said.

Supporters point to an independent report that says putting the additional oil on the market would cut oil prices by $2.25 to $6 a barrel. Ryan said this could reduce gasoline prices by as much as 25 cents a gallon.

“A quarter a gallon adds up for someone who does a lot of traveling,” he said. “That could amount to hundreds of dollars over several months for a family that’s trying to make ends meet.”

The bill, which was introduced in February by U.S. Rep. Peter Welch of Vermont, would stop placement of oil into the reserve for the rest of this year or until oil dips to $50 a barrel. Oil was trading Thursday at about $116 a barrel. The bill has 39 co-sponsors.

The reserve was created in 1975 to provide the country with a buffer in case oil imports were cut off. An energy bill passed in 2005 ordered expanding the capacity of the reserve from about 700 million barrels to 1 billion barrels. It also ordered that oil be added until the reserve is filled.

Brian Newbacher, a spokesman for AAA, said the question of whether to continue that policy is a good one. Does it make sense to divert oil from the market when oil prices have risen so much?

“We don’t have a position, but we appreciate the value of the question,” he said.

Timothy Considine, a Penn State University professor who has studied the issue, called the matter a diversion, however.

Politicians like the issue because it grabs the public’s attention, but the reserve doesn’t receive enough oil to make much of a difference, he said.

He doubted that stopping shipments to the reserve would create a 25-cent reduction in gasoline. Even if it did happen, however, he called it a small amount.

Much bigger savings could be achieved by opening drilling areas in the United States that have been ruled off-limits for environmental reasons, he said. These include the coasts of Florida and California and the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska.

Between 30,000 and 60,000 barrels of oil a day are being sent to the reserve, but the refuge in Alaska could produce an estimated 1 million barrels of oil a day, he said.

“If 60,000 barrels a day would save 25 cents on gas, what would 1 million barrels a day do?” he asked.

The world uses 82 million barrels of oil a day, with the U.S. using 20 million barrels, Considine said.

Ryan said he is open to the idea of opening up more areas to drilling.

He added, however, that it would have to be part of a comprehensive energy plan that included less reliance on oil and more development of nuclear power and alternative energy.


Comments

1apollo(1215 comments)posted 3 years, 9 months ago

Way to pander to the lowest common denominator Tim, your constituents. Instead of pushing for a real energy policy, Ryan will score points with the people who don't understand the problem.

Suggest removal:

2tylersclark(182 comments)posted 3 years, 9 months ago

Opening up fragile ecosystems to invasive drilling is the wrong approach. The stockpiling should be frozen, and federal gasoline taxes could be curbed, too.

Suggest removal:

3Bull_Chip(170 comments)posted 3 years, 9 months ago

Apollo, I’ve got to agree. A 0.001% cut eliminates our insurance policy in case the Middle East situation worsens, while not providing for the allowance of increasing Western Hemisphere production by in excess of 12% is not considered.

Another feel good useless plan that is much sound and furry but is of little substance. Is that Rachel Carlson singing a duet with Al Sadr?

Suggest removal:

4donnah618(4 comments)posted 3 years, 9 months ago

does anyone realize that the majority of our oil supply comes from canada? oil companies have had record profits in the billions, it's time the monopolies stop. take gas back down to 1.59 oil pigs and let consumers breathe again

Suggest removal:

5DoctorGonzo(728 comments)posted 3 years, 9 months ago

Ryan cannot vote to open drilling in the US because SanFran Nan is on the take from the greenies.
If we started maximizing our own resources coupled with strong efforts in place to reduce our reliance on gas, we would be in good shape very soon. That would get the jerks in D.C. to realize they cannot bow down to the oil companies with whom they break bread.
Oil pigs from Bush to Teddy Kennedy, screw them all.

Suggest removal:

6NachoCheese(123 comments)posted 3 years, 9 months ago

feel-good band-aids will do nothing to solve the problem. Better efficiencies would not be a bad thing, but these people need to face the reality - years of stonewalling additional production capacity in the name of fragile ecosystems has driven up the cost while keeping the supply down. Stopping the reserve program - the one thing that has been done right after the last Middle East crisis - is NOT the solution to the problem. Take a look around Tim - how many of us good old working Americans are now in a bind because we never SAVE any of our hard earned money in RESERVE for tough times? How many hard working constituents are just a couple of paycheck away from disaster? Now you want to put the entire country in this same vulnerable position in the name of saving $0.25 a gallon on gas for a few months? Get Real! Find SOLUTIONS to the problem - don't create more problems to deal with next year. This is basic supply and demand - you have restricted the supply for so long while at the same time demand has increased, logically, due to more people - even improvements in efficiencies can't offset the lack of a sufficient supply.

Suggest removal:


News
Opinion
Entertainment
Sports
Marketplace
Classifieds
Records
Discussions
Community
Help
Forms
Neighbors

HomeTerms of UsePrivacy StatementAdvertiseStaff DirectoryHelp
© 2012 Vindy.com. All rights reserved. A service of The Vindicator.
107 Vindicator Square. Youngstown, OH 44503

Phone Main: 330.747.1471 • Interactive Advertising: 330.740.2955 • Classified Advertising: 330.746.6565
Sponsored Links: