And the rest of the story is below....

The Obama Energy Policy is a Disaster


By Bill Wavering, on February 27th, 2012

An energy policy based upon ‘shared’ pain is no policy at all.


As I write this, gasoline prices across this nation average $3.539 a gallon. This price is up a quarter since January and almost 96% since Dear Leader Kim Jung Obama took office. Costs for gasoline are predicted to reach $4.259 before the end of April.

Robert Gibbs (remember him?) says; “Our domestic oil production is at an eight-year high, and our use of foreign oil is at a 16-year low. So we're making progress”. We’re on track to produce 55 thousand more barrels per day this year than eight years ago: Yippee!

Apparently; the administration’s definition of progress is to drive gasoline prices to the point that we all decide to saddle horses.

This US Energy Information Administration chart shows we are producing 5.4 million mbbls/day. 1970 was the last year we produced 100% of our requirement domestically. Averages of the numbers show that there has been no appreciable difference in the 5.4 mbbls/day amount in over a decade.

The US currently consumes 19.6 mbbls/day. About 20 % of this is refined into gasoline. The balance is used to create plastics, chemicals, lubricants, and other materials for industry. So that’s 3.9 mbbls/day just to push our vehicles around.

Current refining capacity in this nation is 16 mbbls/day. Our peak refining capacity was in 1982 when we achieved 18.3 mbbls/day capacity. Our nation has closed several refineries since then. When Elk Point South Dakota approved the construction of an oil refinery to process crude from oil sands that exist both in Canada and the US it became the first new oil refinery to be permitted in this nation since 1976.

You see; one of the most challenging issues in today’s refining business is the ability of environmentalists to tie the industry in knots. Enviro-weenies not only disagree with every person on the planet that refuses to worship Gaia they can’t even agree themselves.

The US Government Accountability Office estimates there are eleven distinct ‘blends’ of automobile fuel. “The 11 special blends GAO found are often used in isolated pockets in metropolitan areas, while surrounding areas use conventional gasoline.” So while the balance of the country uses ‘standard’ unleaded gasoline year-round; ‘isolated metropolitan areas’ demand special attention. Switching between locally approved ‘summer’ and ‘winter’ blends in a futile effort to further influence air quality. That the air is already 90% cleaner than a generation ago, and that any further improvement will cost a thousand fold without achieving any meaningful reduction doesn’t enter into the equation. After all; it’s not their money, nor their pain.

This means that the City of San Diego, California has bureaucratically established standards for air quality. And their blend is mandated by the local Air Quality Board. The Los Angeles Air Quality Board does the same, as do other bureaucrats in cities such as San Francisco, Chicago, New York, Miami, and Dallas/Ft. Worth.

Here’s the kicker. Each of these cities has its own mandated mix. San Diego’s formula isn’t good enough for Los Angeles, San Francisco, or anyone else; and no one else’s is good enough for them. So not only are the refining operations of this country supposed to make 12 different blends; one standard and eleven special recipes; but they have to predict when they have enough of one, shut down and purge the entire refinery of that blend, and tool up to manufacture the next.

There’s no economy of scale by scheduling long production runs. There’s no accurate method to predict if the amounts generated are correct as they are subject to outside market forces, and transportation costs are significantly higher as a refinery making gasoline in Texas isn’t likely to purge an entire pipeline each time before sending gas to three west coast cities; so we send it all out by tanker. The result is peak prices that spiral ever upward.

The joke in this story is the total amount of ‘proven’ reserves in the US. This US Energy Information Administration chart states that proven oil and natural gas reserves are 20.6 mbbls of oil and 255 tcf (trillion cubic feet) of natural gas.

By now I’m certain that you are asking; “Why lead us through this convoluted path only to prove the administration correct on our vulnerability if we don’t discover immediate alternatives to oil?” It’s because the punch line is another oil source that is deliberately ignored in ‘official’ government statistics: Tar sands.

Tar sands are what the Canadians are exploiting and what they intended to pump through the Keystone XL Pipeline. Tar sands are the death knell for environmentalism. The total estimated reserve for North America (Canada and the US combined) is 1.75 trillion barrels. This dwarfs the reserves of Saudi Arabia by 98%! Adding together the US and Canadian consumption rates equals 21.8 mbbls/day. At that rate, North America has 220 years of potential domestic energy to be exploited while we responsibly research alternatives.

No wonder the administration and the environmentalists are so dead set against Keystone XL. If Americans make the connection and figure out that we have the potential to put tens of thousands of people to work finding, processing, and delivering almost two centuries worth of ‘on shore’ North American oil supplies, well…
http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2012/02/27/the-obama-energy-policy-is-a-disaster/

 

Call me names. Go ahead.

It sounds crazy, yet it is true.

You have nothing to say about the HOVENSA closure. Nothing whatsoever. FORCED BY THE EPA, a shakedown, pure and simple.

Listen, Stumbler, I am not blaming Obama for the EPA. In fact their autonomy-- the fact that they are empowered to write extra-legislative regulation without any regard to its impact on industries-- probably dates back to Bush.

But Obama owns this today. Not Bush. Bush is gone. Obama is president, today. He is in charge, today. And he enables the EPA, today, by doing nothing about it.

In fact, he would have nothing whatsoever to say about it, if this were not a general election year. If the petrol debacle did not have a shred of a chance of impacting his second term, responding to the petrol issue would be beneath his payscale.

The coal plants are the next big surprise. Thanks to the EPA. And it will be a big item here this summer, when everyone in the U.S. is surpised by the rolling blackouts due to urban air conditioning use. No one is paying attention to it now, because Huffington Post hasn't spoonfed its pap talking points to the liberal bloggers. But in a few months, you'll have all the answers to that one, too, with plenty of crap to cut and paste.

Keep defending him. It is not hard. Plenty of fodder out there on the Internet. Find some more crap and paste it.

 

What ever the fuck you are and what ever the fuck you do nobody's body and life ever depended on what you did in the next fraction of a second. That's why you can afford to be an hysterical brainwashed parrot. *Edit. In Clarisse's case I meant "Reactionary" not parrot but brainwashed all the same not even owing its own knowledge).

Myself I spent most my whole life working out there in the oil field where THINKING YOU KNEW SOMETHING got people killed in an instant right in front of you. And it could be anything from some worm on a wench to a company man with the wrong numbers. 11 of those ignored and forgotten fuckers died like that out on deep horizon for not much more than laziness.

And you want to invent some reality that fits your plastic self inflated bubble? Well go ahead. But don't even pretend like you know what the fuck you're talking about. At least not in front of me.

Want to know how stupid you really are? What regulations? What Federal Agency; do individual natural gas wells fall under?

 

Page 7 and now people think electric cars are the solution.




LOLOLOLOLOOLLLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

 

A month ago gas was selling here for $3.23 a gallon and diesel was at $3.65. Gas peaked at $3.99 yesterday and is now at $3.94. I don't call that a drop compared to where we were a month ago. Diesel is currently at its peak of $4.04. It has not dropped at all yet.

I have no explanation or conclusions at this time.

 

First of all look at this. And I must have explained it 5,000 times by now. If the price of oil goes up the price of gasoline goes up. But the bullshit is that the price of the oil that produced that gasoline was 90 days ago. That's the first rip off. They bought the oil 90 days before and are selling the gas on the increased price of oil that day. Second rip off. The price of gasoline never follows the price of oil when the price of oil is going down, The price of oil might drop 50% overnight but you never see gas fall that much. Third rip off once the price of oil rises or sets a new record it might crash dramatically but it always trends higher.

And ask yourself again why does diesel cost more than gasoline? Especially when we think of domestic production?

 

Gasoline up 100% under Obama


Feeling pain at the pump? Gas prices have doubled since Mr. Obama took office. According to the GasBuddy gasoline price tracking web site, the price of a gallon of regular gas was around $1.79 when Mr. Obama took office. Today the national average is $3.58. The lowest average price in the continental United States is $3.31 in Tulsa Oklahoma, the highest is $4.14 in Santa Barbara, CA. Four-dollar-a-gallon gas has arrived on average throughout California, and a number of other states are headed in that direction.

Consumer price index (CPI) figures from February show an unadjusted 12 month gasoline inflation rate of 19.2%, but in the last month alone prices jumped 6.8%, probably because of oil price increases due to instabilities in the Middle East. If the trend continues, gas prices would double again within a year. 100% gasoline price inflation is nothing to brag about, but imagine Mr. Obama going into the 2012 election having to explain why gas costs $7.00 a gallon. I'm sure the White House would spin it as one of their "Green" initiatives.


Looks like Obuma has doubled the price in three years!!!! Now there is "change" we can all see!

Now bend over, grab your ass and get ready for the "hope"
http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/watercooler/2011/mar/30/gas-prices-double-under-obama/

 

One simple question for simple minds. Is the price of oil and gasoline going up or down?

 

Yep, you got that right! The crazy liberal fascination with developing expensive cars that run on electricity doesn't change the fact that:

1 Solar powered vehicles don’t commercially exist and are not practical....

2 The cars that do run on electricity, or even battery-powered hybrids still require gas!!!!

3 The high cost of the alternatively fueled vehicles makes them largely insignificant in the current auto market and cost-prohibitive to the average consumer. Who's going to buy them? GM can't sell the Volt.....

 

crappy...premium will be about $4.25 for bike week Daytona

 

The delusions of the Green Movement run even deeper.

Most of the electricity in this country is generated from coal, which the EPA is working very hard at shutting down.

A significant percentage of the juice also comes from nuclear plants, most of which are headed toward retirement, because they are so old, because the U.S. seldom builds nuclear plants anymore, because regulations and litigation make nuclear plant construction unprofitable.

The Green Movement celebrates the EPA's muscling of coal power, and the unsustainability of nuclear fission, because they think that George Jetson is going to swoop in on hovercraft and give us some newfangled 21st century "Green" technology that has been waiting in the wings for decades and that we would have started using long ago, if only the Big Evil Oil Oligarchy had not been allowed to corner the energy market for so long.

You know, it's funny. If you so much as whisper that Barack Obama's "birth certificate" looks like it's been copied from copies ten too many times, the far-left moonbats brand you as a hater, a loon, an insane conspiracy nut.

Yet they have no problems with eliminating fossil fuels and nuclear fission... in short, eradicating the two biggest forms of power consumption... because they believe that will clear the way for all kinds of super-secret, undefined technology that the oil companies have kept locked in a vault for twenty years.

Nope. No conspiracy there! No, sirreee! Why, don't you Ariana-loving suckers know about that 100 miles-per-gallon car GM developed forty years ago and dynamited at the behest of George W. Bush's great granddaddy?

Well, GM and the Green Movement sure could use that 100 miles-per-gallon engine right about now, couldn't they? Given that GM wouldn't exist, if our tax dollars were not bankrolling its operations and subsidizing the sales of its "Green" cars.

Obama's told the the world, on national TV, that we can solve the energy crisis with $160 per gallon fuel made from pond scum. I guess if you haven't gone to Columbia and Harvard by being the right color to check the right boxes, you're just not smart enough to understand why that one makes sense.

And a sizable percentage of the people on this board have even suggested, in all seriousness, that we can replace fossil fuels and nuclear with Panama Red, or Acapulco Gold, or some other wild hydroponic shit grown in the foothills of the Colorado Rockies.

And these are the same people who are telling the opponents of the Green Movement to "get serious."

After all, there are a few towns in the U.S. where gasoline went down a couple cents yesterday! Riggghhtttttttttt. And the world looks like it's warming, if you choose your timeslices very, verrryyyyy carefully, and strike out inconvenient truths like the Little Ice Age. Rigggghhhhhhhttttt.

Obama is the president of this country, for better or worse. The buck stops with him, for better or worse. It is time for him to stop all his pansy-assed whining, and lead. He has been president for four years. It is time to stop campaigning, and to start doing his job. Energy supply is critical to national security. Energy supply falls under the purview of the Executive Branch. Energy supply is not beneath Obama's pay scale.

 

Excellent post and all true! You know, this is going to upset our good friend stumbler

 

Let's try to touch reality here again.

One of them is this. With all the very real tensions in the Middle East including Syria, Iran, Israel, and the US and the very real possibility of war oil prices should already be setting new records. And that is especially true during a week of saber rattling on the Part of Israel's prime minister.

Instead both oil and gasoline prices are for now at least being held at bey.

Another reality that many can obviously not accept is that our energy generation, consumption, and use has already changed. That is just obvious in the facts that we are now importing less than 50% of our oil and gasoline, diesel, and jet fuel are our largest exports.

One simple question drives home the realities. When's the last time those two things have happened?

Only ideologically blinded reactionaries can't recognize and admit those realities.

So its little wonder if they can't recognize the realities right before their eyes they also cannot see our energy structure continues changing on almost daily basis as new innovations and new ways of providing energy become realities.

Ones like this one:

Skyline Innovations Sees Bright Future For Solar Hot Water Heating In U.S.

http://idealab.talkingpointsmemo.co...ar-hot-water-heating-in-us.php?ref=fpnewsfeed


And to add a personal note by my observation at least the first two industries to take real advantages of the advances in solar electricity generation were the oil and gas companies. That would be another reality check for some of these brainwashed parrots go out in some oil and/or gas field and just try to count the solar panels.

 

Harsanyi: Aren't High Gas Prices What Democrats Want?

By David Harsanyi February 22, 2012 6:58 am
Text Size: A A A

Gas prices are spiking. That's great news, right? We have to wean ourselves off the stuff. At least that's what we've been hearing for years. Oil is dirty. We import it from nations that hate our guts (like Canada!). And moreover, we're running out. Oil is "finite." Finite much in the way water is finite.
So why aren't Democrats making the case that the spike in prices is a good thing? Isn't this basically our energy policy these days? How we "win the future"? If high energy prices were to damage President Barack Obama's re-election prospects, it would be ironic, considering the left has been telling us to set aside our "dependency" -- or, as our most recent Republican president put it, "addiction" -- for a long time.
If Democrats had their way, after all, we would be enjoying the economic results of cap-and-trade policy these days -- a program designed to increase the cost of energy by creating false demand in a fabricated market. As the theory goes, if you inflate the price of fossil fuels, the barbarians might finally start putting thought into how peat moss might be able to power a toaster.
In 2008, Steven Chu, Obama's (and, sadly, our own) future secretary of energy (sic) lamented, "Somehow we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe." The president, when asked whether he thought $4-a-gallon gas prices were good for the American economy, said, "I think that I would have preferred a gradual adjustment."
How gradual? Like, what, four years? Or is it eight?
Part of "figuring it out" surely had something to do with the recent decision by Obama to nix the Canadian Keystone XL pipeline project that would have pumped 700,000 barrels of oil per day into the United States. More oil just means more excessive, immoral, ugly energy use.
Well, get used to it. You can't take three steps without stepping over some potential 10-billion barrel reserve of dead organisms.
According to the Institute for Energy Research, there is enough natural gas in the U.S. to meet electricity demand for 575 years at current fuel demand, enough to fuel homes heated by natural gas for 857 years and more gas in the U.S. than there is in Russia, Iran, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and some place called Turkmenistan combined. Oil? The U.S. Energy Information Administration estimates that the United States could soon overtake Saudi Arabia and Russia to become the world's top oil producer. There are tens of billions of easily accessible barrels of offshore oil here at home -- and much more oil around the world.
Yes, gas prices have spiked an average of 14 cents a gallon in the past month and about 30 cents a gallon since last November, according to AAA. Oil prices jumped to a nine-month high -- more than $105 a barrel -- after the Iranians shut down their own energy exports to Britain and France so they could start a much-needed nuclear program, which is, no doubt, for wholly peaceful purposes.
Given the fungibility of commodities and the track record of civilization in the Middle East, we'll likely always have to deal with occasionally painful fluctuations in the price of energy, regardless of what we do at home -- drilling and new pipelines included. Still, fluctuations have a lot better track record than price controls.
Subsidizing quixotic green companies or creating carbon credits won't stop the rules of basic economics. If the gas crunch starts hitting the economy, it's doubtless that we will get an earful of populist hand-wringing and that we'll hear the administration once again blame wealthy speculators and nasty oil companies.
Yet in the end, high gas prices are part of the plan. This is what the administration wants.
---
David Harsanyi is a columnist at The Blaze. Follow him on Twitter @davidharsanyi.http://www.gopusa.com/commentary/2012/02/22/harsanyi-arent-high-gas-prices-what-democrats-want/

 

Ohio stiffens regulations after concluding that fracking caused earthquakes

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/03/...-concluding-that-fracking-caused-earthquakes/

 

Here's a really good story on why the Keystone Pipeline will actually increase US oil prices not lower them.

How much would Keystone pipeline help US consumers?

Canadian firms behind it say it will supply Gulf Coast export markets

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/46689167/ns/us_news-christian_science_monitor/#.T1t-CfXwCVg

 

Now let's take a look at the conservative/Republican/Tea Bagger lies that are getting told here. Right above this we have the proof that the Keystone pipeline is going to increase oil prices in the Midwest and increase exports not domestic supply.

And below we've got a lying governor trying to bullshit the general public.

Obama strikes back at GOP critics on gas prices

http://news.yahoo.com/obama-strikes-back-gop-critics-gas-prices-110434100.html

 

Gas is now $4 a gallon here.... Thanks to Obama

 

Energy Will Be Obama's Waterloo

By William Tucker on 3.2.12 @ 6:09AM
And it will all be his doing -- blaming Bush won't cut it anymore.


When President Obama suggested last week that we might eventually be replacing oil with algae, Mark Whittington of Yahoo suggested that the President had reached his "lunar base moment." It was an apt analogy. Just as Newt Gingrich's musings about a moon colony finally made the public cock its head a little when listening to him, so the moment may have arrived when the environmentalism fantasies that inhabit the President's brain will finally be exposed to the light of day.
As things stand now, $5 gas may shift the entire focus of the election onto energy and what the Administration's faculty-lounge policies have been doing to America's industrial base. To the public, "clean, green energy" will no longer be a dreamy vision of windmills and solar collectors but the hard reality of spending $100 to fill your tank. There's one more thing as well. This will be the first issue in four years where President Obama won't be able to cast reflexive blame on George Bush.
The President began his term with an Inaugural Address promise that "We will harness the sun and the winds and the soil to fuel our cars and run our factories." He has kept that promise. Using the crowbar of the $1 trillion "stimulus," the Administration has shoehorned much of the country's energy investment into a Rube-Goldberg sector of the economy made up of the half-baked projects of armchair entrepreneurs plus the off-the-charts dreams of those wanting see the entire planet transformed into an environmental utopia.
Prompted by various federal and state government tax incentives plus market-obliterating "renewable mandates," hundreds of square miles of mountain and prairie have been covered with 45-story windmills that look like the archaeological remnants of a previous race of 80-foot giants. These "wind farms" generally produce electricity that is essentially useless. When the wind blows, windmills can force other forms of generation out of the market because they are free of fuel costs. But those other forms of generation have to be kept running just in case the wind dies down. Last year when temperatures rose to 110 degrees in Texas, that state's 7 percent "wind capacity" proved absolutely useless in the heat-induced doldrums.
And wind "farms," it should be noted, always talk in terms of "capacity" rather than output. That's because they only operate about 30 percent of the time. Nobody has yet invented a way to store commercial quantities of electricity and it may be impossible without building facilities of equally gargantuan dimensions -- say an entire city block of rechargeable batteries. Without any means of storage, wind power is essentially a nuisance.
Then there is solar electricity, which, in order to access, California is now planning to cover dozens of square miles of pristine desert (yes, there is already environmental opposition) in order to prove the world can run on sunshine. Solar energy is a bit more concentrated than wind so that it only takes about five square miles of highly polished collectors to produce 100 megawatts -- when the sun shines. In the desert environment, these solar panels will require constant cleaning and polishing to keep them from getting covered with dust and therefore becoming dysfunctional. It's a labor-intensive task that will require lots of water coming from who-knows-where.
And how about the electric car? Caught in the headlock of a government bailout, GM was forced to push its Volt out the door -- where it has sat on dealer lots ever since. Sales are miserable, except for the occasional government agency that drops by to place an order. Government patronage of the electric car industry has also produced the $104,000 Fisker Karma, made in Denmark but shipped to our shores so that Leonardo DiCaprio and a few others could buy first editions. Then there was the Bright, which went bankrupt last month, and the Asperta, which failed before that.
Now all this wouldn't be so bad if the Administration hadn't spent the other half of its time trying to put the fossil fuel industry out of business in order to clear the path for the Green Age. After spending a year failing to pass cap-and-trade, the Administration has doubled down with the Environmental Protection Agency, turning it loose on the nation's coal plants. The Sierra Club just celebrated the closing of the 100th coal boiler, with more to come. Just what this will mean for the reliability of the electric grid will be revealed this summer when electrical demand peaks. Last August, with temperatures at 110 degrees, Texas consumed a record 68,000 megawatts of electricity with only 76,000 MW of generating capacity on hand. Since then, the EPA has demanded the closure of 10,000 MW of Texas coal. The state has dodged the bullet only by going to court. Industrial states from Pennsylvania to Wisconsin are facing the same dilemma. If the region starts suffering power shortages this summer, will George Bush be there to take the blame?
Not that the President hasn't been playing both sides of the fence. With extraordinary chutzpah, Obama has claimed credit for the increase in oil and gas production through fracking technology. As Newt Gingrich pointed out last week (chronicled on this site by Peter Ferrara), the only reason fracking has succeeded is that all the new deposits are east of the Rockies and therefore beneath private land. In the Far West, where the federal government still owns up to 80 percent of the territory, the pace of exploration is slower than ever. The Institute for Energy Research has shown that drilling on land owned by the Bureau of Land Management is at an all-time low, only half what it was during the Clinton Administration.
How about offshore development? For a few brief months, the Administration actually talked about opening up new areas for exploration. Then came the BP oil spill and since then the Gulf of Mexico is becoming a backwater. Of 51 rig platforms stationed in the Gulf, only 21 are under contract and 15 actually drilling, a utilization of only 41 percent. The rate in rest of the world is 83 percent and in Europe and the Mediterranean 96 percent so there's plenty of demand out there. Fourteen rigs have left the Gulf over the last two years and the pace is accelerating. Since the Gulf provides 30 percent of our domestic production, this is bound to have an impact.
This bureaucratic foot-dragging is recognized all over the oil industry. "These have been the most difficult three years from a policy standpoint that I've ever seen in my career," Bruce Vincent, president of Swift Energy, told the annual meeting of the National Association of Petroleum Engineers last week. "They've done nothing but restrict access and delay permitting." And that doesn't even include the Keystone Pipeline, where the Administration kicked away 700,000 barrels a day, 4 percent of our total consumption. And all this isn't supposed to have an effect on gas prices?
In truth, though, all these considerations are long-range. What is having a more immediate impact is probably the easy money policies of the Fed. Oil isn't climbing so much as the dollar is depreciating. As the Wall Street Journal notes, if President Obama is ready to reap the reward of rising housing and stock prices, it's only fair that he accept rising commodity prices as well. This is treacherous territory. Every major downturn since the Arab Oil Boycott of 1973 has been preceded by a run-up in oil prices. It seems to signal an inflationary bubble in the economy that is about to pop.
So what can the Administration do between now and November? To be frank, they haven't a clue. President Obama is a lawyer, not an economist or a scientist. His knowledge of energy is drawn from the chitchat in the faculty lounge.
In any case, wherever supply and demand are concerned, Democrats are rarely willing to concede to reality anyway. Bernie Sanders is already yammering about "speculators" and the apologists in the press are lamenting that "the President isn't to blame for gas prices." There are even off-the-wall stories claiming that drilling and pipelines will only make things worse. "The Canadian plan [for building Keystone] was to use their market power to raise prices in the United States and get more money from consumers," proclaimed Bloomberg breathlessly -- just as every entrepreneur plans to acquire "market power" to "get more money from customers." Only to end up have the market end up claiming power over them. When defending something like the Obama Administration's energy policies, it's always important to make simple things sound complicated.
At bottom, the real problem is what Charles Murray describes in his new book, Coming Apart --the growing gap between college-educated people schooled in the wish fulfillment of "green energy" and the hard-won, hard-nosed wisdom of blue-collar America. To the elite in New York, Washington and San Francisco, energy generation is something we're trying to put behind us. It's déclassé. Only in blue-collar regions like Pennsylvania, Ohio and North Dakota do the realities of energy become visible, tangible, and audible -- and taxable.
The good news for Republicans is that the battle lines are drawn. After a summer of $5 gas plus power shortages in industrial regions, the results of four years of Obama energy policies will be hard to avoid. And there won't be any George Bushes around to take the blame.

http://spectator.org/archives/2012/03/02/will-energy-be-obamas-waterloo