how much $ does america spends on oil from other countries?
356523
About 40 billion a month and going up.
463011
No, profits are the American way. I doubt you were even born when the oil companies were struggling back in the mid-seventies and early eighties. Aquisitions and mergers have made them some of the strongest American companies.\nThere are now more known oil reserves world wide than ever before. There is also more demand than ever before. Hence oil is over $72 per barrel. We could get all we need from the Canadian oil sand deposits and it would be cheap. But it is being shipped around the world.\nFigure that
1005081
The average price in the U.S is $3.50 per gallon.  About the same as what you are paying in India.
1026354
Bothers me a lot that our budget deficits are being bought like candy by every major asian power.  They take those IOU's, trade 'em for cash, and then by the shoes off our feet.  The more our government spends on useless wars and "homeland security", the more the Asians can buy us legitimately...funny how our war for oil is going to really screw us in that department in the long run.
479028
ALL ESTIMATES ARE ROUGHLY\nOil\nSpent in USA\n$100-150 billion every year on crude oil\nUsed in USA\n60 billion gallons of petroleum diesel\n120 billion gallons of gasoline\n\nBiodiesel\n\nTo grow the "feedstocks"\n$80,000 per hectare for algal ponds\n3.85 million hectares of algae ponds would be need to replace all petroleum transportation fuels with biodiesel\n$308 Billion just to build the farms\n\nOperating cost\n$12,000 per hectare\n$46.2 billion per year to yield all the oil feedstock necessary for the entire country\n\nI will add more fuel later must go watch TV now\n***EDIT***\nOk I am back, it turn out that makeing ethanol and biodiesel are around the exact same cost.  But I doubt that they will ever be a realistic source of fuel.\n\n I found this and thought you might find it interesting\n""...but producing ethanol or biodiesel from plant biomass is going down the wrong road, because you use more energy to produce these fuels than you get out from the combustion of these products.""\n\nStudies done everywhere show that cost and disposal of the bi-products are going to be a problem, plus energy wise its just not worth it.  They are working on these problems trying to figure something out to make it more feasible.\n\nIn terms of energy output compared with energy input for ethanol production, the study found that: \n\ncorn requires 29 percent more fossil energy than the fuel produced; \nswitch grass requires 45 percent more fossil energy than the fuel produced; and \nwood biomass requires 57 percent more fossil energy than the fuel produced. \n\nIn terms of energy output compared with the energy input for biodiesel production, the study found that: \n\nsoybean plants requires 27 percent more fossil energy than the fuel produced, and \nsunflower plants requires 118 percent more fossil energy than the fuel produced.
333263
There just isn't enough oil in US arctic waters to make much more than a blip. If we enlarge drilling operations, we have two options: A small, negligible but steady supply, or a big, short-term operation that would also make a negligible difference.\nThe big issue is that it’s mostly low-grade crude, and any economic benefit is probably offset by the twin bugaboos of the additional refining costs, as well as the inevitable environmental cleanup.\n\nIf we assume Americans start using less gas—which is darn unlikely—then gas prices go up as oil and gas producers adjust to preserve their profits.\n\nAmerica, however, is about to become a bit player in all this. China will, within 10 or 15 years, out-consume America for oil, and there are NO efficiency measures on the horizon there, primarily because the demand is for industrial processes, not cars. If America slows the rate of increase in consumption, it will just mean that the global rate increases slightly less quickly. Bottom line: Nothing America does is going to have much of an impact on demand or supply.
301537
Scandinavia. And it's about 70 dollars per litre. And you people are complaining. Hell... The gas prices in the United States are amongst the lowest in the whole world.
473958
you're probably refering to the middle east.  I am not a subscriber to most theories on why american troops are there.  I don't think bush did it for the money; he did it as an economic attack on china.  China's growing economy and mass of people makes it  a huge threat to the american way of life, both economically and physically.  Their mass growth is highly dependant on oil, more so than our economy is.  Doubling, or tripling the cost of oil is a very effective assault on a massive country's growth while only lightly affecting america's economy.  That is, how many people do you know who have stopped driving?  An extremely low number of people have even reduced the amount they drive...  Prices of construction, shipping, and other things we take for granted have risen only very slightly.  Using oil is very basic in the technological chain, but to a county still essentially developing it's value is 10 times what it is to a fully developed country.  It has so much to do with politics and so little to do with oil...\n\nWhy we don't switch.  While it is a good point that the oild companies profit from not switching, it's so much more complicated than being a conspiracy of big oil companies against the country.  The cost of converting to an alternative fuel source would be large, incredibly large.  Keeping away from everything else that uses oil, big parts of idustry, and sticking only to transportation.  Every single car, truck, bus, bulldozer, some planes, in america would have to be replaced.  Ok, not too bad, could be done in 15-25 years.  But every person would have to accept the change and people in general don't like change.  Also, every single fueling station would have to change over, which is in the range of trillions of dollars in cost.  The technology must be established, accepted, and actually implemented.  On top of that, the entire country would have to agree as to which particular energy source we switch to; that's very difficult in it's own right.  This is a subject which can barely have the surface scratched on yahoo'o format.  It deserves, and has received, thousands of articles much longer than I care to write and much more technical than I can even pretend to understand without studying them in detail.  It's not a simple thing for a country which is entirely dependant on oil to just up and switch to something else.
159165
According to the CIA factbook, the United States produces 7.61      million barrels per day of oil, while it consumes 20.03 million barrels per day.  According to the USGS and Department of Energy, the United States accounts for 40% of the world's oil consumption, while producing only about 10% of the world's oil.
76220
billions and billions of us dollars
475568
I think that most Americans have stopped buying "unnecessary" fuel, but they are making more than enough money back off of just the necessary fuel (fuel that is needed for daily life, not all of us can walk to work/carpool)... if you have to have it, you have to have it... cuting consumption further isn't an option for most...\n\nSo what happens when capitiolism fails... seems like we are reaching that point with oil... increasing costs could have a crippling effect on our economy through inflation (especially if costs continue to go up)... is it worth it?\n\nThe reserves should have been released a while back... that's just silly, but that's also a Bush...
414191
What are you talking about?  The world did not exist before the end of 2001, and all good Americans love paying more for oil.  If you don't like paying extra to line Bush's friends' pockets you should go to Iraq.\n\nbaby_balla_gaby: I thought the sarcasm in my comment was obvious.  Sorry if that wasn't clear.
36290
In 2004 US imported 2400 barrels of oil a day from the Persian Gulf.  Approximately 25% of the year's total.
572222
We use alot more here on Earth.  In fact Americans use way more water then any other nationality.
471050
Are you people serious? our oil and gasoline is Subsidized by the US government.  While your crying about $3 a gallon for gasoline, Europe is paying upwards of $7 a liter for their petrol.  The government is the only thing keeping you driving the 4X4 and giant SUV, wake up.\n\nEdit: and while your on Yahoo Answers moaning to all of your "friends" about how evil a democracy the US gov't is, they are loosening the restrictions on your car's waste output, and opening the countries fuel supply for personal use so YOU don't have to ride your bike to the mall tomorrow.\n\nEdit2: YES they CAN use the excuse they cannot convert oil->gasoline.  We are currently refining at MAX capacity (when weather systems allow) We havn't made a new refinery since the 70s, and since it take almost 20 YEARS to complete a new refinery, don't hold your breath. (10 years to complete an oil rig)  Also, why the hell would Exon make a new refinery? From a business standpoint, they have NO motivation to do so, they are getting prime price for their product.
992239
oil + money = big fuss!
687290
Never, they donate too much money to the campaigns of politicians and in outright bribes... they send them on (quite literally) million dollar vacations that no politician would ever give up, and pay millions to campaign "donations" and millions more to lobbyists.\n\nPeople are soo funny, buying into the propoganda of the oil companies... exxon makes 8 cents on the dollar at the point of shipping, gas companies have more than doubled their profits in the past 3 years... they make billions on refining, shipping, and selling the gas... that 8 cents is rhetoric and doesn't include a majority of the companies profits, only what they make from transporting crude from the mid east and south america to north america...\n\nAlso, the oil companies DIRECTLY control the price of refined gasoline... Do you know what the price of gas is in Venezuela right now?  Two weeks ago it was TWENTY AMERICAN CENTS per gallon... The cost of crude is ABSOLUTELY NOT UP THREE TIMES its cost in 2001, when gas was just over $1 a gallon... it's [crude] up less than double (a lot less than double) and yet the cost of gasoline is up about triple... how can anyone suggest that the oil giants aren't controlling the prices?  Federal taxes aren't up, nor are most state's taxes on oil/gas...