Talk:1979 oil crisis

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Energy High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Energy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Energy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnergyWikipedia:WikiProject EnergyTemplate:WikiProject Energyenergy articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Iran High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Iran, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles related to Iran on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please join the project where you can contribute to the discussions and help with our open tasks.IranWikipedia:WikiProject IranTemplate:WikiProject IranIran articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. International relations Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Economics High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Economics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EconomicsWikipedia:WikiProject EconomicsTemplate:WikiProject EconomicsEconomics articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

I believe this is incorrect. Price controls set by the US gov't caused a shortage (due to the price) that had more of an effect than the actaul shortage in resources (scarcity). Any ideas?--Vince251 16:58, 31 Jul 2004 (UTC) or wait.. this was 1973 not 1979..--Vince251 17:05, 31 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I've added some sources that assert that very thing. The amount of oil sold in the US was only 3.5% less than the previous year... not really enough to be a shortage. Price controls do cause shortages, however, because they don't provide enough supply to meet demand.--Gloriamarie (talk) 19:34, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What is meant by "Yet oil lines did not reappear in the United States"? --Worldly 16:27, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I removed some vandalization. - 216.238.203.85 20:30, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It would be good if someone could provide some context for the otherwise interesting statistic of 150,000 barrels of oil wasted per day idling in gas lines. How much gas was being consumed per game would be useful here. 216.15.125.156 00:41, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone explain the logic for this claim: "Deregulating domestic oil price controls allowed domestic U.S. oil output to rise sharply from the large Prudhoe Bay fields, while oil imports fell sharply."?? The pipeline had begun operating only two years earlier, so production from Alaska was ramping up as drilling and consruction made more producion possible. Further, the price controls applied to only "old" oil, oil production in place in 1972, so all Prudhoe bay oil production was unregulated price "new" oil subsidized at the refinery by "old" oil refining price leveling. Deregulating "old" oil would reduce the subsidy to the "new" oil that required refinery modifications and more costly transport to the refineries, thus reducing the profit incentive to increase production more rapidly by paying for overtime labor, early completion bonuses, etc. The data for US oil production shows a decline after 1979 until prices had fallen significantly and Prudhoe bay production ramped up to its peak in the late 80s. Mulp (talk) 21:26, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I made 1 small change to this article based on a purely factual mistake. This should in no way be taken as an endorsement of the content of this article, nor of the quality of the original statement i made factual changes to.

This entry needs serious reworking, and, when done, will probably provoke considerable disagreements between users. There are almost 2 camps when dealing with the energy crisis, those who see it as a product of government regulation and those that see it moreso as a product of international economic circumstances.

I deleted the references that were there. There was nothing in either of the links that, even vaguely, related to the article. It certainly didn't back up the statistic provided. When putting back in the template, I used the older date, because the references were really never there. Zreeon 02:12, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It would be useful to reference this. Wikipedia is useless without reliable sources, and is, in all cases, not to be used as an authoritative source (as it simply tries to convey the meaning of others sources). One might wonder why I say this. Have, then, a look at Gary Becker's (Nobel Prize) blog. Cheers! Tazmaniacs

While I agree this article needs cleaning up, I don't think the weasel words tag really is needed here. Fanra 01:37, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

About the Malaise speach, this article is weak.I read that speach and almost every Carter's promisse was a failure.To example, he promissed that USA would be importting less oil in the future, than at that times.In fact, the american oil's importation is now more the double than in 1978.Caretr also promissed million of brents of oil from coal, every day in 1990.In fact, nothing was being produced and Syntetic Oil Corporation produced no syntetic oil, just burned money from american public.201.9.78.138 (talk) 00:56, 20 April 2008 (UTC)daltonagre[reply]

That's not really Jimmy Carter's fault. He lost the 1980 presidential election and was in no position to make good on his promises thereafter. The subsequent administration was not minded to continue his policies. -Ashley Pomeroy (talk) 19:28, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Carter put solar hot water panels on the White House roof, not solar power panels, which were still far to expensive for the average household. Solar hot water was much more economical and efficient during that period of high oil prices. Regan had a much larger area of solar PV (electric power) panels installed on a large maintenance building on the White House grounds, to the left when you look at the White House across the big lawn, but never trumpeted the fact, and is usually ignored by the media. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.173.221.81 (talk) 19:07, 19 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you are referring to this: http://www.solardesign.com/pdf/SolarToday-WhiteHouse.pdf that was actually Bush Jr.'s administration, not Reagan. CherylJosie (talk) 03:50, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The section about automobile fuel economy comes across as a non-sequitur. It starts off by talking about the Corporate Average Fuel Economy regulations of 1978, which is sensible, but it then goes on about the transition in the US market from rear-wheel-drive to front-wheel-drive. I understand that American cars of the 1970s tended to have poor fuel economy, and they also tended to be rear-wheel drive, but the section doesn't make it clear that the two are linked. -Ashley Pomeroy (talk) 16:59, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You raise some interesting points. I've taken the liberty of editing this bit out; it strays from the topic into a general essay on US automobile platforms in the mid-80s, and really belongs in another article. -Ashley Pomeroy (talk) 19:25, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This article describes only oil-related events. It should be renamed 1979 oil crisis to be in line with the 1973 oil crisis of similar content, 1979 world oil market chronology, 1980s oil glut, etc.--Environnement2100 (talk) 23:55, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In November 1979, the Carter administration decided an embargo over Iran oil, as a retaliation against the hostage crisis. I confirmed and reffed this fact. It is interesting to note that a a bona fide website such as the DoE's website seems oblivious of the fact: link to DoE's timeline. --Environnement2100 (talk) 11:02, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

But I think the energy crisis started in the Spring. (And it's perhaps natural and expected for writers and researchers to focus on the beginning, and basically to run out of steam. And miss aspects of the end game, and the transition out of the crisis.) FriendlyRiverOtter (talk) 19:47, 12 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Deregulating domestic oil price controls allowed domestic U.S. oil output to rise sharply from the large Prudhoe Bay fields, while oil imports fell sharply. Hence, long lines appeared at gas stations, as they had six years earlier during the 1973 oil crisis."

I don't undersand this "hence". Whether total production rose or fell (which isn't specified anyway) it does not follow that gas lines should appear. --ScottJ (talk) 18:13, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=U18uAAAAIBAJ&sjid=wtkFAAAAIBAJ&pg=1213,1960377&dq=iran+energy-crisis&hl=en

U.S. Acts To Bar Shortages Of Unleaded Gas, Average Cost Would Rise By 3.4 Cents, The Blade (Toledo, Ohio), Washington (T-P), page one, top of the fold, March 2, 1979.

Texaco To Close Area Gas Stations, Other Companies Limiting Fuel Sales To Retailers, The Blade (Toledo, Ohio), Associated Press, page 9, March 2, 1979.

Timeline of the accident at Three Mile Island, The Patriot-News [Central Pennsylvania], March 22, 2009.

I'm not sure this is at all relevant to the article. Maybe as an aside in another section (perhaps one about U.S. attitudes on energy?) but it doesn't really warrant such a large portion of the article. I'd like to have a discussion at removing this part. Owenh10 (talk) 15:43, 20 September 2020 (UTC)Owenh10[reply]

Carter demands energy sacrifices, Telegraph Herald, [Dubuque, Iowa and East Dubuque, Illinois], Washington (UPI), page 2, Friday, April 6, 1979.

‘A somber President Carter announced Thursday night he will lift oil price controls starting June 1 and demand other energy-saving sacrifices “in a great national effort to give us energy security.”

‘“I’ll give it to you straight: Each one of us will have to use less oil and pay more for it,” he said in a nationally broadcast, 24-minute energy policy address from the Oval Office. . . ”

‘ . . . Carter promised to fight for congressional enactment of taxes on the “huge and undeserved windfall profits” the oil companies will reap from decontrol. . . ’

‘ . . . But Carter made clear that, with or without such a tax, he will start lifting federal price controls from U.S.-produced oil as of June 1 and will complete that process by October 1981. . . ’

http://books.google.com/books?id=mcY0NN_5dpoC&pg=PA310&dq=%221979+energy+crisis%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=Cqg_UbDLL4ae2QX43YEY&ved=0CDcQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=%221979%20energy%20crisis%22&f=false

Wow. A great variety of sources for those who have the time. FriendlyRiverOtter (talk) 22:18, 12 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Energy crisis still doubted by public, Free Lance-Star [Virginia], Evans Witt, Associated Press Writer, page 5, May 4, 1979.

" . . . Americans say energy shortages are a hoax and that they don't like Carter's decision to lift price controls on domestic crude oil. However, the public's distrust of oil companies runs do deep that, when faced with crude oil decontrol, they overwhelmingly favor a windfall profits tax on oil company profits. . . "

" . . . Fifty-four percent said the nation's energy shortages are a hoax. Only 37 percent say the shortages are real. Nine percent of the 1,600 adults interviewed nationwide by telephone were not sure. . . "

" . . . Those who say the energy crisis is a hoax come down 58-31 against lifting controls."

Whether or not the public is right, this widespread perception is one more fact which we should have in our article. FriendlyRiverOtter (talk) 00:34, 14 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Poll: Americans Believe Gasoline Shortages Hoax, The Sumter Daily Item [South Carolina], New York (AP), page 9B, May 4, 1979. [<---pretty much the same article, which is to be expected for both are sourced to Associated Press.]

This statement: "The price of crude oil rose to $39.50 per barrel over the next 12 months" is meaningless without context. It rose to 39.50 from where? What was the oil price before the shock? What was the % change? By itself, throwing out this number at the reader tells them nothing.Volunteer Marek (talk) 14:34, 12 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on 1979 energy crisis. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://www.webcitation.org/5iRp7rbz0?url=http://millercenter.org/scripps/archive/speeches/detail/3402 to http://millercenter.org/scripps/archive/speeches/detail/3402
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160304110442/http://www.unep.org/Documents.Multilingual/Default.asp?DocumentID=2718&ArticleID=9542 to http://www.unep.org/Documents.Multilingual/Default.asp?DocumentID=2718&ArticleID=9542

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:53, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

On the third paragraph additionally does not need to be there, add on a semicolon to the word before it. On the Iran section, remove what is inside the parentheses, remember it has to be neutral although it is helpful I would still recommend to remove (a long time opposition leader) and (skilled oil workers). However, if you do not want to remove them I would suggest adding it before or wording it differently in a way that will sound neutral. Lastly, on the Other Oil section describe what OPEC is first before you abbreviate it and remove the semicolon on [25].—Dlozano04 (talk) 18:36, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Richard Nixon imposed price controls on domestic oil. Gasoline controls were repealed, but controls on domestic US oil remained." The author could have mixed up the 1973 crisis with the 1979 crisis and if that is the case this section should be removed. Since there is no citation it is unclear if this is the case or if the author meant to say president Ford or if they meant the price controls had remained in place since 1973. Either way more clarity is needed Bad Historiography (talk) 23:25, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]