Energy
But when you call our reasoning regarding oil decontrol “silly”, we think you overlook a key point. True, 2 million barrels per day of increased production (which we project for 1985) under decontrol is a “drop in the bucket” in terms of total comsumption. But it’s about four times the amount of the Iranian shutoff, which triggered the great Gas Crisis of 1979. In an inelastic market—especially one complicated by allocation schemes and price controls—the smallest increase or decrease in supply will have effects beyond its deserved impact.
As you say, an increase in gasoline price might not cut into your business. But gasoline lines and shortages—which 2 million b/d would help eliminate—are another story. A “silly” consideration? Far from it!
Nelson C. Smith
Independent Petroleum Association of America
Reader Smith may have misread our comments. We did support decontrol and we would welcome any increase in domestic production. We were merely attempting to put decontrol in it’s proper perspective.
Back From the Dead
In the Summer ’79 issue of SAM, an article on the Camden Ski Bowl referred to “the late Thomas J. Watson, Jr.” In accepting our apologies for this error, the U.S. Ambassador-designate to the U.S.S.R. wrote as follows:
Dear Mr. Rowan:
Thank you for bringing me back to life. I will certainly need to be as lively as possible in the Soviet Union.
Sincerely,
Thomas J. Watson, Jr.
Armonk, N.Y.
