Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 12/18/2019 in Posts

  1. 10 points
    People will blame each and every catastrophe or change in recent weather patterns on climate change...whether there is any scientific evidence or not. If you can’t identify the cause, just blame it on climate change! It is then politically incorrect to argue with you.
  2. 9 points
    I was working on the Sedco 135D back around 1985. For those of you not familiar with this rig type, it was a three-legged semi-submersible with the control room located in the center of the rig UNDER the main deck (easier to watch the draft marks on each leg). The rig had been on floating production for a few years and we were going through her to get her ready to go back drilling as Petrobras wanted us to drill two more wells. Anyhow, I was on deck when the PA system announced that I was needed in the control room. When I got there the Barge Engineer asked me to watch the control board for awhile (I had previous Watchstander experience on the old Staflo). As this was easy duty out of the sun, I gladly accepted. After about half an hour I felt that the rig was strangely quiet - rigs are never quiet! I went up to the main deck and not a soul in sight! I looked over under the starboard crane and saw everyone leaning over the handrails looking down at the water. Being human, I walked over and did the same. Lying alongside the rig was a HUGE shark (sea life seems to like the heat and vibration). This thing was at least 25’ long and probably 4’ between the eyes! Now I knew that there were whale sharks off of Brasil, and thought this might be one. The Brasilian divers on board assured me that this type of shark ‘ate people’. I thought that they may be ‘shining me on’ so I told them that I wanted them to launch their boat and check out our production mono-buoy, to which they replied, in very colorful Portuguese, that there was no way on earth that they were getting in the water! I have no idea what type of shark this was, but I really can’t blame the guys for not wanting to get in the water! Working the offshore rigs you used to see some amazing sea life.
  3. 9 points
    What is holding up the purchase of more nat-gas in the USA is the stubborn (and silly) unwillingness of various States to allow the construction of gas pipelines across their territories. So you end up with the bizarre, anomalous situation of the City of Boston unable to get sufficient gas supplies because New York will not let a new pipeline be built across its State to bring gas from Pennsylvania to the markets in and around Boston. The result of this ridiculous situation is that Boston's gas supplier has to buy liquefied product shipped in from "Europe," which is really Russian gas. So the LNG is drawn from Russia, shipped to England, there the paperwork gets massaged, and the ship sails from there all the way across the Atlantic to Boston, and the people there have to pay the inflated prices to get their heating fuel. Instead of building a short length across NY from Pennsylvania, the NY portion being perhaps 50 miles of pipe. Meanwhile, up in Vermont, the anti-fuel activists have been able to persuade the Legislature to block the construction of any natural-gas pipelines of any sort to anywhere from anywhere, so even a short spur line to a factory or municipal installation is blocked. Instead, those plants either have to take their gas deliveries by tanker truck, or go to wood fuel. It is about as stupid as you can get. If those pipelines to the big metro areas ever got finished, and that is not a lot of work, the demand for gas inside the USA would increase quite a bit. So, the trading positions are all a function of the time horizon.
  4. 8 points
    I presume you mean the Constitution. Well, no, we won't change a word. Because in the US the Constitution is the sacred document that guides our way of life. We have a word for someone capable of interpreting the original version: Textualist. The late Judge Antonin Scalia was the best example. We basically used the Magna Carta as the framework for our Constitution . . . you weren't using it so we thought we'd borrow it for a bit. The Framers were learned men the likes of which we don't have around now. Most of them owned slaves, some sexual, some not so much. Thomas Jefferson, for example, liked the looks of pretty little Sally Hemings, a slave girl, so much that he fathered six children by her. That did not detract from his leadership; as someone pointed out, times were different. Not only was Jefferson a bit of a scamp, but Alexander Hamilton was the son of a prostitute. Nonetheless, he had some great ideas. He and James Madison, and John Jay and Benjamin Franklin (and maybe Jefferson too) wrote a bunch of idealistic propaganda called The Federalist Papers, which were primers to getting the Constitution ratified by the American people. There were 76 of these papers, and they were, to borrow a term, pure gold. Anyway, Alexander Hamilton was wily in the ways of good and not-so-good men. He wanted a very strong executive branch, but made it pretty easy for a charge of high crimes and misdemeanors to be levied against the president in the House of Representatives: to rein him in, if you will. A subsequent trial was to be held in the Senate, presided over by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. So, in the unlikely circumstance of an impeachment, the Framers made sure that all three branches of government had a role to play. Impeachment was intended to be taken seriously, not to be used as a political cudgel. Unfortunately--and I say this as a Republican--Bill Clinton didn't do much to get impeached over (everyone knows the sordid details), but he was a horny, smug bastard and he got impeached by a Republican House of Representatives that hated his guts, and then he was rightly acquitted by a Democratic Senate. It was hard on the country. Everyone in his or her right mind breathed a sigh of relief when it was over. But it wasn't: The Democrats that now rule the House think they're "getting even," though I believe it will blow up in their faces. To be honest--and saying this makes me feel almost traitorous--this is not a proud time in our democracy. In the United States we now face a dearth of competent leaders in the Democratic Party. If you are an oil and gas person (even if you hate shale), it's hard to find anyone in the Democratic Party who has a lick of sense. This is a long-winded answer to a short question. Like I said before, my verbosity stems from being made to take on the role of Cicero as a pre-pubertal school kid in Western Oklahoma; I talk and think slowly but type like a grand champion. No, we're not going to change the Constitution: It's near perfect. It's the people busily bending the Constitution who cheapen it.
  5. 7 points
    Maybe, just maybe, the Iranian people are back on track to take back control of their lives and their country. Obviously they will need outside support. I wonder ‘who’ will have the cajones to step up to the plate and give it to them?
  6. 7 points
    I don’t mind trying to get this going, my first Derrickmans job for Santa Fe Drilling onboard Rig140 this is late 1980s. Santa Fe were a great company who fully embraced the promote from within policy, very rarely they would hire above a roughneck position. Santa Fe were merged with Global Marine and soon after GSF was engorged by Transocean. The saying at the time was “all the way with Santa Fe” Great guys, great memories and a swift learning curve for a young man on how to go to work.
  7. 7 points
    That was precisely what people were feeling and why Trump got elected. The depths of destruction left by the errors (or deliberate sabotage) of the financial regulatory system in the US and its counterparts at the BIS - where the collection of idiocies called "Basel III" were passed (and adopted into internal US and EU law), has been clear to Americans and was ignored by the media, government and most of all, those same cads at the Fed who enabled the China bubble that ate everyone's lunch. The Carter era like sense of "malaise" was palpable. Trump offered a path, most of which is workable and is economically and geopolitically correct. To use the shale gas and oil revolution to the US' advantage in rearranging trade relationships, military alliances, and the extent of US involvement in being global cop. He finally picked up the Neo Con idea that China intends to be a successor to the US as global hegemon and that is an existential threat to the US over time. My main issue with him is the emphasis on opposing immigration in policy, and his misogynist and racist expressions and bully tactics in his personal behavior in public. As the intellectually lazy and single track person he is, many say hold your nose and vote for him, because the alternatives are simply more of what buried us in the hole in the first place. People support him fiercely despite the orange bully clown persona, because he is actually doing things that help economic development (except opposing immigration) as opposed to the opposition that do things to promote their own power and just claim to produce a benefit.
  8. 7 points
    The last thing Trump wants is a kinetic war with Iran. Trump waging an economic war on Iran , takes longer but no collateral damage and saves lives. SANCTIONS NOT BOMBS. Trump has let Iran know where the redline is drawn. Iran knows Trump won't let a little thing like an election get in the way of responding to Iran's crossing that line. He will act , unlike previous administration's. I believe Europe might be coming around to Trump's thinking. Watch any developments over next few months. U.S. Democratic Party's 3 year quest for "fake" impeachment emboldened European elite, Russia, China and North Korea to stall , delay and foil any of Trump's agenda. About time Democrats worked for a better America and world. U.S. doesn't need Mideast oil. (Trump has made that clear) U.S. doesn't need NATO. (Trump has made that clear) Trump will ask NATO to get involved in Mideast, thus give them the chance to show NATO is worth keeping.
  9. 7 points
    Two points to my rebuttal. 1) Climate Change models seem to conveniently exclude this temperature data below. Syndey Morning Herald from 1939 stated that the record high temperature for New South Wales was 125 degrees in 1909. Conveniently, most climate models for Australia seem to start at 1910. Climate cherry picking data. Piss poor "science". 2) Much of the current fires in Australia are attributed to arson by humans, but much of mainstream media refuses to report this fact. Nearly 200 People Arrested Across Australia For Deliberately Starting Bushfires Authorities in Australia have arrested close to 200 people for deliberately starting the bushfires that have devastated the country, yet the media and celebrities continue to blame “climate change” for the disaster. The fires have caused at least 18 deaths, destroyed thousands of homes, millions of hectares of land and killed hundreds of millions of animals. A total of 183 people have been arrested by police in Queensland, NSW, Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania for lighting bushfires over the last few months, figures obtained by news agency AAP show. In New South Wales, 24 people were arrested for arson, risking prison sentences of up to 25 years. In Queensland, police concluded that 103 of the fires had been deliberately lit, with 98 people, 67 of them juveniles, having been identified as the culprits. Around 85 per cent of bushfires are caused by humans either deliberately or accidentally starting them, according to Dr Paul Read, co-director of the National Centre for Research in Bushfire and Arson. Read also highlighted the link between school holidays and kids starting fires, commenting, “School holidays are a prime time for fire bugs, but especially over summer.” The kids have got time to get out there and light, and the most dangerous adults choose hot days.” ... ================================== Perhaps Climate Terrorism by environmentalist extremists are actually to blame. =================================== Similar deliberate misdirection as Southern Africa blaming food shortages on "Climate Change" when in actual fact the white farmers were chased away / killed and the remaining people did not farm the land. Footbullet.
  10. 7 points
    Khashoggi “journalist” Lol I would put my money on Muslim brotherhood, mossad or deepstate operative (see Josef misfud; along the same vein). Perhaps all 3. and Pretty sure journalist “disappear” in China all the time. Our communist media doesn’t bat an eye. Doesn’t fit their narrative.
  11. 7 points
    Not really. What you are overlooking is that it is not a "war" at all. The USA is simply going to disengage with China and the two can go heir own way, and I can flat-out guarantee you that the people in the USA are not even going to think further of or about China. The attitude already is: "So, who cares?" And the answer to that is: basically, nobody. The whole "go to China and get your stuff made cheap" is an idea that has come and gone. The big shift comes with Donald Trump, and while he pontificates (a lot!) about "trade war," in fact it is not a trade war at all, although the Chinese are trying to make it into one. It is a de-coupling, with the Americans (and Canadians) simply sourcing in other places. Or doing their sourcing "at home," which is what is happening already in the USA. And all that is the result of the energies of one man, Mr. Trump. Like him or loathe him, you have to acknowledge that he is making a huge, tectonic shift in the China trade pattern. Now the Chinese reaction is to try to strike back by such acts as stopping imports of US and Canadian products, and (of course) by seizing and imprisoning two Canadians, businessmen who were stupid enough to be inside China on purchasing expeditions when China decided to go grab someone for leverage against the arrest of Mrs. Meng, she of Hauwei fame. But that just backfires. I put no success on any of that. To demonstrate just how involved China trade patterns have become, at least in Canada, I invite you to ponder the case of Goodfellow Lumber, a large (probably the largest) Quebec wood processor. Those guys buy raw logs from Quebec and even next-door Vermont, then mill the logs into planks and sections, for sale into the furniture and construction trades. One item they got into was hardwood flooring. So oak and maple logs are milled into final shape as tongue-and-groove flooring, then put into containers and shipped from Montreal all the way to some finishing plant in China, there taken out of the containers, and finished by the addition of stain to color, then the polyurethane coatings to make them resistant to wear. There might be as many as 12 coatings of poly on each plank. The poly coating is dried between coats, and then the entire finished product is bundled into large boxes of about 78 sq. ft. of product each, then the boxes are put back into sea containers and shipped back to Montreal, then trucked to the plant south of the city. From there, the finished product is shipped by truck out to the retail outlets, such as "Lumber Liquidators," and "Home Depot," and then sold to consumers. Now, this is poor management, of course; lazy management, done to avoid having to do the work on-site in Quebec or have some local entrepreneur do it. The Chinese were able to snag that work by offering it at lower prices. So "price" becomes the determinant of retaining that business. But if the USA now duties that flooring at 25% or more because it is effectively a product of China, do you seriously think the price advantage will remain? Of course not. So then all that sea-trade shuffling of product in and out of China to get some re-finishing work done is going to disappear. It will not go to Vietnam; it will come back to Canada. And if there is a duty on it to get into the US market, then the finishing and packaging will go to Vermont or the USA. That much is inevitable. Now, what does that Chinese finishing plant do to make up for the lost work? Well, there is not much they can do, except perhaps push for the same work for European customers. But Europe has little hardwood trees, and what they have, those logs are sold for gold. Europe imports its woods, softwood from Finland (and probably Sweden), and hardwoods are not to be found, some stand left in places such as France and the Carpathian Mountains. Not enough to satisfy the demand for hardwood flooring, unless you start bringing in mahogany from the Congo. But African hardwood is difficult to source, those countries unreliable suppliers. So the logical supplier becomes - the USA and Canada. And this is how markets shift. You will see this disengagement from China as a source, both for products built "from scratch," such as bicycle gears, and in intermediate finishing, as you see in the flooring business. As those Chinese plants lose that work, you will have loss of employment in that segment of society, which will be a destabilizing factor internally, and is the big reason you see these Bots (such as "remake it") showing up on Western internet forums, and even their primary human handlers (such as marcin) who had this carefully constructed cover story of being an economist in Poland. But no economist in Poland is going to be endorsing the prattle of some robot in China so consistently, that is out of the question, so Marcin has blown his cover. One more human handler of Chinese propaganda, paid for by their military. Why are the Chinese so upset by this de-coupling? Because so much of their commercial structure is premised on manufacture for the Western markets. They can talk big about "emerging markets," places such as Africa and Kazakhstan and Iran, but those places do not have the rich consumers of the USA, Canada, and Western Europe. So the volumes are not there. And China is, above all, a place of volume. So, what Can China do for an encore? the business model is based on selling their surpluses, including items such as steel sheet, plate, and product, and aluminum in ingot, plate and product, and lots of finished goods to the WalMarts of the world, to absorb their surplus capacity - of which they have lots. Now the China supporters all have this idea that there is or will be this rich Chinese internal market. that is not so. First, lots of Chines are poor. Second, the place is in a population implosion. Now the govt has to divert resources, and lots of them, to support old people, and unless you do a Stalin and starve them to death to dispose of that surplus population, you have to have both the bodies of trained workers and the women to reproduce them or the whole thing collapses. And you need free access to foreign markets to provide the outlet for that production. And that is going away, except for the European marketplace (which is large, but all of Europe taken together still does not equal the US market alone, which is some 25% of the world marketplace). So the US can simply ignore China. And they will. China wants to go spend their coin on building artificial islands in the South China Sea? To what end? To capture offshore oil drilling? To what end? There will be no market for that oil, because without the mercantilist market for goods you don't need a source of oil. OK, a little oil, but you can buy that a lot cheaper from Venezuela. Or the USA, for that matter. China simply cannot hold it together. The idea that the US is going to go back to its old ways if the Chinese stop buying canola and soybeans and lobsters is laughable. This is the USA, home to nimble entrepreneurs; new uses for those products will be found, or the land and sea will shift to other production of other grains. Don't kid yourself; in the USA, nothing is static. The place is far too dynamic for that. So, once again, the US simply disengaging from China will lead to the collapse of China. And that is why the Bots are so fierce. Cheers.
  12. 7 points
    A great article "What Happens After Impeachment" https://www.history.com/news/what-happens-after-impeachment The last paragraph confirms Jabbar's dismissal argument. The Impeachment of President Donald Trump started during the Presidential campaign and it won't end after the President is acquitted. Dismissal is a great option if you want to get this done quickly. I don't. I want a pound of flesh. The Republican Senate should employ similarly unfair rules for the Trial as the Democrats used on the Republicans in the Impeachment. Witnesses should be called who can bring the whole charade into the light. The process that lead to Special Prosecutor Mueller needs to be investigated. Hillary and Obama campaigns paid law firm Perkins Coie millions to funnel cash to Fusion GPS who hired Steele to produce the infamous and totally fabricated Steele Dossier. The Washington Post reported last week that Perkins Coie, an international law firm, was directed by both the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and Hillary Clinton’s campaign to retain Fusion GPS in April of 2016 to dig up dirt on then-candidate Donald Trump. Fusion GPS then hired Christopher Steele, a former British spy, to compile a dossier of allegations that Trump and his campaign actively colluded with the Russian government during the 2016 election. Though many of the claims in the dossier have been directly refuted, none of the dossier’s allegations of collusion have been independently verified. Lawyers for Steele admitted in court filings that his work was not verified and was never meant to be made public. https://thefederalist.com/2017/10/29/obamas-campaign-gave-972000-law-firm-funneled-money-fusion-gps/ FISA Warrants FBI/CIA Hunter Biden Schiff / Whistleblower Ciaramella Let's take a flamethrower to DC. That ought to amuse the rest of the world. I want Schiff, Hunter Biden, Mueller, Comey, Clapper, Ohr, Rosenstein, Whistleblower Eric Ciaramella on the stand.
  13. 7 points
    Plant , remake might have a chance of being correct. Trump sent Nancy a letter yesterday, comparing Impeachment to the Salem Witch Trials. Remakes Impeachment argument is a dream. During the Salem Witch trial the Chief Justice allowed Spectral evidence: " Spectral evidence is a form of evidence based upon dreams and visions. It was admitted into court during during the Salem Witch Trials by the appointed chief justice , William Stoughton." So there is judicial precedence to base remakes dream Impeachment. Supreme Court Chief Justice Roberts may allow Spectral evidence into Trump Senate trial based on this precedence. Outside of that I'm done with remake. I already countered his claim several times. Discussion is going in circles, an endless loop. I'm getting writers cramp. What's his China comment about ? Is he a Chinese bot ?
  14. 6 points
    Ya think ! ? ! ? Once again, ordinary people are not going along with the narrative being forcibly shoved down their throats by the globalists. The Climate Armageddon folks are gonna need a scarier plan for Doomsday, to get them to accept coughing up loads more tax money and ceding more control to Big Brother Government. 'Costly Blow in the Air': Swedes Think Climate Policy Worst Waste of Taxpayers' Money in 2019 - Poll The authors of the poll explained the Swedes' vote as being due to the fact that while the Swedish government has invested loads of money into climate action policies, the actual amount of carbon dioxide emissions has slightly increased. Swedish citizens have voted for climate policy as the worst waste of taxpayers' money, a poll conducted by the Swedish Taxpayers' Association revealed earlier this week. Out of 18,000 citizens who took part in the poll, about 30 percent voted against national climate policies. The poll says that in Sweden's budget for 2020, 12.6 billion krona ($1.3 billion) has been allocated to climate action, compared with 5.2 billion krona ($547 million) in 2014. Back in 2017, the National Institute of Economic Research even said that the government's budget risked becoming "a costly blow in the air". Given the amount of money and lack of actual positive results for the environment, Gustafsson suggested that it would be more beneficial if the government's funds would be diverted into something valuable. Sweden is one of the leading nations in advocating for environment-friendly initiatives, including trends like electric bicycles and solar cells.
  15. 6 points
    After a discussion with @Douglas Buckland we thought it may be interesting to try something which relates to our industry at grassroots, the forum could use some diversion from constant ego based discussion, let’s see if we can add some nostalgia to a thread. It would be interesting to hear stories from all our OP crew mates past and present. Please add your favorite oilfield story or experience, photos and memories. Lets have a bit of fun for once. See you in the smoke shack.... James
  16. 6 points
    Never been offshore, which is a shame because with the new rules I don't think I can even visit without doing the helicopter training in the dunk tank etc. I even invented some tech that's being deployed offshore and I don't get to watch, just hope the guys I trained do everything right. Lots of roughneck stories. We were drilling in Montana and there'd been a lot of push back because people were worried we were going to harm the wildlife. The first day we saw a couple of cute antelope standing there watching us from about 200 feet away. The next day there were about 10. The next day there were at least 40. By the 4th day there were so many we couldn't even count them. Of course the reason they were hanging with us was predators. No coyotes, bears or wolves or whatever else wanted to eat them wanted any part of our drilling rig or us I suppose. The people crying about the wildlife weren't on our friends list so they never knew. I was living at an outfitter's log cabin because it beat the 60 or so miles to the nearest hotel. He didn't believe me so I took him out there. I don't know if his jaw ever recovered from being agape so long. He didn't bring a camera either since he didn't believe me. When we took the rig down they all moseyed away, like the show was over.
  17. 6 points
    Heh heh, the Climate Armageddon crowd's desperation is palpable. ZOMG THE WORLD IS GONNA END BECAUSE ORANGE MAN BAD !!!!! Oh, and what the heck was the job of Climate Negotiator in Obama's State Department? How bad can the climate crisis get if Trump wins again? Climate pollution in the US is up under Donald Trump and threatens to undermine international efforts to stall the crisis, especially if he wins re-election this year and secures a second term in the White House. ... ... Andrew Light, a climate negotiator for President Barack Obama’s state department, said the world is taking note of those efforts, but if Trump is re-elected “you are going to see a lot of people who are worried anew about what the US can do.” Americans choosing Trump would send the signal that they don’t care about the climate, Light said. ... ... Under Trump, the oil and gas industry contributing heavily to the climate crisis is thriving. Oil and gas-related industries in the US are planning to build 157 new or expanded plants and expand drilling over the next five years – releasing as much greenhouse gas pollution as 50 new coal-fired power plants, according to a report from the Environmental Integrity Project. ...
  18. 6 points
    Papillon, you have it bass ackwards. For 3 years Trump has been endlessly vilified by Mainstream Media and Hollywood, and Obama held up as a paragon of saintliness. Many Americans are totally fed up with neverending attacks against Trump and against Conservatives in general, while Obama, Clinton and their buddies get a free pass. This is an oil & gas site. Most likely, since many liberals and leftists generally dislike the oil & gas industry, there may be more conservatives on this site than liberals. While I would indeed likely poke fun of the mistake if Pelosi made it, that is an outlier as far as the media in general is concerned. Media says Obama / Clinton / Democrats are wonderful and faultless and Trump / Conservatives evil, ignorant, racist, subhuman garbage. I push back. You are free to poke fun of Trump here. You are free to voice your opinions here. Others are free to poke fun of Pelosi or Obama or whover they want. Remake it is free to continue voicing his / its pro-China (and more recently, pro-Iran) comments. Nobody is actually stopping anyone else from voicing their opinions here. And calling something hypocrisy can be correct, or it can be partially correct, or it can be a deliberate distraction, a Straw Man head fake. I've been a Freedom of Speech activist for many years, long before coming to this site. I encourage dissent. And I also tend to call out BS when I see it. If one's viewpoints and beliefs are incapable of a bit of poking and prodding and questioning by others who have differing viewpoints, then perhaps it might be a good idea to step back and look at the bigger picture and see if some re-evaluation is needed. Memes work, just like a good joke gets others to laugh. A good meme is mostly visual, with minimal text, and a jarring and amusing idea. I'm not very good at making memes, but getting better. And I steal and spread good memes by others. This one was made yesterday by someone else. Pointed.
  19. 6 points
    One picture taken during the inauguration, the other taken hours before. Compared to This picture the audience in attendance is vastly larger. But that didn't fit the narrative. Again your propaganda needs work. Sure Taiwan going with the Nationalist Party was your plan?
  20. 6 points
    Yes we are just as stupid in the UK people actually try and have as many kids as they can with no means of providing for any of them, then the government steps in and gives them a load of cash and a mansion to live in!! meanwhile honest hard working idiots like you and me struggle to get by and are taxed to keep these layabouts in a lifestyle they don’t deserve! Douglas you are 100% correct on this one!
  21. 6 points
    I am not advocating cutting welfare programs, what I am advocating is policing these programs to make sure that they are actually providing a safety net for those it was intended to. When you see well dressed women paying for sirloin steaks and Oreo cookies at the Safeway check out with one of these welfare cards, it is obvious that the system is being abused. To provide a safety net for those in need is one thing, when I see these people living off the taxes of others and eating better than my parents can on social security, I get annoyed. We need to prevent people from gaming the system. I have heard similar comments from British citizens and the ‘dole’. It is not a uniquely American phenomena.
  22. 6 points
    Nope. Exactly the opposite. Large scale welfare encourages people to not work, to not be productive, and to expect a "free" handout from government (all that "free" stuff is taxpayer money). Chicago is a great example. The number of people in Chicago on welfare keeps increasing, decade after decade. If welfare actually worked, the number of people on welfare should steadily decrease, and not increase.
  23. 6 points
    It’s always baffled me how people value someone’s intellect based on their occupation or accent. It is common in the US, and internationally (likely due to their portrayal in Hollywood), to assume an American with a Southern or Appalachian accent is dimwitted. In business, engineering, finance and last but not least, the oilfield, you believe this at your peril. Many of the smartest people that I have met in my career did not have a university degree.
  24. 6 points
    We can add to the list the Germans and the Holocaust and the Belgians in the Congo, and the French in Viet Nam and throughout Africa, Japan in China and Korea. The English in S. Africa and Somalia and India. All of which the US did not do in its history as an imperial power. The communist dictatorships and the Nazis were by far the most murderous, and on a wholly enormous scale. Anyone who smears the US with these kind of accusations had better not be supporting any of the countries on the rogue's list as having the capacity to take a moral stance, particularly the unreformed ones that have yet to take historical responsibility and detach from the social concepts that brought them to the point of mass murder over class allegiance and genocide. There is no moral equivalence between what the US does and what motivates it and your claim. The US intervenes when the cost to itself is not high and when a benefit, geopolitical or economic is available. You can't expect the US to intervene where it has no interests.. And the fact of interests does not negate a moral driver when there is one. The US, with N. American oil sufficiency can leave the ME to blow each other up and butcher the large minorities in each of the countries. But that is not what would happen alone, Europe China and SE Asia all depend on that energy for their survival. They would definitely come in and take over everything they can and leave the locals to fight among themselves without access to oil funds.
  25. 6 points
    For what its worth, I was in the navy. If we had intelligence on some bad actors whereabouts who had recently engaged or killed U.S. personnel.....we put warheads on foreheads. That's how the military works. Never did we seek a proportional response. Our reply was almost always disproportionate by a large margin to send a clear message. Granted, they were clear military targets during wartime, but that was my interpretation of my command and their strategy.
  26. 6 points
    Jabbar, US has many internal problems but it is still OK. US still has money and power to engage in adventures 6,000 miles from its shores. The world is not US toy. People in foreign countries can live and want to live without US invading and killing them. It is that simple. You and 330 million of your compatriots watch these Middle East events as if it is some movie, yes we killed this evil actor yesterday, we can kill them all. But this is real life of 200 million people who are not 6,000 miles from there , but 10 or 20 miles, who live there. Hundred thousand of their relatives were killed by US Army. I KNOW THESE WERE GOOD KILLINGS IN YOUR, AMERICAN EYES. Jabbar, try to think how it would be if you change places with Iraqi. Substitute Americans with Iraqi and vice versa. In 2003 Iraqi army invaded United States on some made cause. They killed President Bush Jr, hanged him at the TV show broadcasted live around the world. They killed about 1% of your nation, that is 3 million Americans,, and another 3% of Americans that is 12 million, mainly kids died out of hunger, diseases and other indirect effects of war. Every week 1,000 Americans die in bomb attacks or other terror. Please think about your extended family, and choose 2 males and 2 kids, maybe your niece or your son, think what it would be like if the males would be killed by Iraqi soldiers still occuppying United States and kids died cause of lack of medicines and hunger. Furthermore in 2015 when US was still under occupation of Iraq, some jihadist mercenaries invaded your country. And US Army was gone cause destroyed by Iraqi Army, but Iraqi Army is still in your country, just sitting in their bases and do not care about jihadists. So jihadists took over some major cities like Philadelphia where part of your family lived, they raped women, some men were beheaded, a lot of people died, the rest fled to Washington and New York. And Jihadi ISIS army was on outskirts of New York where you lived. And then appeared many US heroes who with great courage organized militias and protected Washington and New York from the fate of Philadelphia. Many died as martyrs while protecting their capital. The most popular of them was General GRANT. And you know 2 days ago Iraqi killed your General GRANT (=American Suleimani) because the day before some unarmed Americans were protesting at fortress in Washington that hosts Iraqi Embassy. Try to imagine these alternative reality, you would understand how Iraqi are feeling about United States. I would say: God help Iraqi survive American help.
  27. 6 points
    Like all those feel-good renewable stories you have to dig a little deeper. Denmark has long been claiming high penetration rates from wind. I was looking at this stuff in 09 and nothing much seems to have changed but basically Denmark is a small economy with a lot of wind power capacity. When a lot of wind power comes on its grid it can export the excess across the Baltic for storage in the numerous dams of the much larger economies of Sweden and Norway (just a shipping channel between Denmark and Sweden). When the wind dies they pay to re-import the power. Its an expensive way to run a grid but it does get them to nearly half renewable energy. Norway, incidentally is at 100 per cent renewable because it has masses of hydro power. It is as I've always said. If a grid already has lot of hydro (or access to hydro in Denmark's case), then its much easier to get high penetration rates of wind. Without hydro there's lots of problems. None of this is cheap, as I noted. Denmark's power costs are high even in European terms - a point the article carefully avoids mentioning.
  28. 6 points
    Nope. Totally inaccurate. From memory, while still in office Obama even joked that Trump would need some kind of magic wand to improve the U.S. economy. The rest of the comment appears to be full blown TDS.
  29. 6 points
    The Republicans always get out played. The story is : Spying on the Trump campaign, It's about a fake Steele Dossier, Fusion GPS , Perkins Cole Law Firm , DNC , Hillary 2016 , Doctored FISA Applications , FBI James Comey , CIA Brennan , National Intelligence Clapper , FBI Andrew McCabe , Justice Dept Rod Rosenstein , Fusion GPS Nellie Ohr , Justice Dept Bruce Ohr , Joseph Mifsud , FBI Peter Strzok , FBI Lisa Page , Crossfire Hurricane , Mueller and his Democratic Attack Dog Atty Andrew Weissmann, etc, etc, etc . . . . . . . . AND THE DEMOCRATS HAVE ALL FOCUSED ON A STUPID TELEPHONE CALL BETWEEN TRUMP AND THE PRESIDENT OF A THIRD WORLD COUNTRY CALLED UKRAINE. The Democrats in Congress have complete control of the narrative well organized and executed. They allowed the House Democrats to Impeach a President with no crimes. The Democrats crafted a Whistleblower cover for Ciaramella to cover him. Even though Schiff and staffers Abigail Grace and Sean Misko manufactured a fake crime. They let Schiff illegally obtain private phone records and published many of them. Republican Mines talked about suing CNN on other matters and their parent company AT&T turned over the records. Obama U.N. ambassador unmasked over 200 people associated with Trump 2016 campaign. They have shamed the President from doing a proper investigation into Hunter Biden. The list goes on and on. I could list 10 pages of this crap. It won't change. HOROWITZ INSPECTOR GENERAL REPORT- FISA ABUSE Ever wonder why the Horowitz IG report that was completed last April/May finally came out as the Trump Impeachment hearings started. The IG is supposed to be a finder of facts NOT give opinions. Yet IG Horowitz gave the Democrats and their media minions a perfect talking point to again deflect any fallout from the criminal FBI FISA Report. ITS ALL ABOUT DISTRACTION . . . MISDIRECTION . . . . PREOCCUPIED Pelosi is doing it again. Deflecting attention from IG Horowitz report and the even BIGGER Barr/Durham criminal investigation by extending the Impeachment farce indefinitely. Some say PELOSI loses by extending Impeachment. That she's making it up as she goes. She doesn't know what she's doing. PELOSI KNOWS EXACTLY WHAT SHE IS DOING AND. . . . . PELOSI IS WINING. In the meantime McConnell says he's fine with delay . He'll just approve more Judges. Good for you Mitch "mr excitement" McConnell. Meantime you lose the country. There is talk of major indictments coming from Barr/Durham that go up quite high in the Obama administration. This info comes from good sources . . . I will only believe it when see it. REPUBLICAN SENATE MUST TAKE OFFENSIVE The Democrats will most likely outsmart and outwit the GOP again. Republicans have no strategic vision or guts to take on the DEMs. They don't realize things have changed. It's a different game now. Democrats play hardball and the Republicans stand on the sidelines and watch. CAN'T WAIT TILL BARR/ DURHAM INVESTIGATION TO FINISH. Republicans must hold hearing on all the Democratic misdeeds, crimes, infractions. REPUBLICANS MUST OCCUPY THE NEWS CYCLE. They have to also move the Trump agenda forward. It will take work. SO GOING TO HAVE TO WORK MORE THAN 3 DAYS A WEEK. If Mitch doesn't have the energy. Get others to lead. Republicans think Nancy overplayed her hand and Trump will easily win reelection I'm not sure. I wouldn't bet on it. Note; I have heard the Democrats have caught a whiff of a couple of early indictments from Federal Prosecutor Durham coming soon. Hope so. Get the spotlight back on the criminals.
  30. 6 points
    Violation? I see no violation. Boston buys its gas from some out of State corporation (presumably). NY is not stopping that corporation from shipping it across NY soil - they can go hire a fleet of tanker trucks, or they can put it in railcars, or they can load it into barges or ships. Nobody is stopping them at all. What NY will not allow some corporation to do is go dig a pipeline pathway and lay new pipe in it to transport that gas. The gas would have to transit NY State Parks, including the Adirondacks, that are preserved for use in their natural state, in perpetuity. So a pipeline company would have to select a route that does not impact any Parkland, and also meets the test of a "certificate of need" to get past the permitting process. And that certificate is never going to get issued. What set all this off was some fracking in the early stages that caused gas to get into the water supply somewhere. NY City takes all its water from a series of lakes up in the Adirondacks, and that is brought to the City by a series of huge aqueducts, some 27 feet in diameter. None of that water is filtered or treated; it is pure lake water. So they are terrified of the idea that any of that water source gets contaminated. There is a zero building edict on all the lands around that very large district of lakes. That is reserved, conserved land area. Will some pipeline intended to transport gas to Boston meet a "certificate of need" for New Yorkers? No chance. So the Certificate does not get issued. If Boston wants that gas, fine let them build LNG tankers and take it from the Port of Philadelphia, by sea to Boston, nobody is stopping them. In short: there is no violation of interstate commerce, as the gas can be taken over the borders, just not by some new pipeline not yet built. And you are not getting a Permit to transit the State Parks, which are reserved natural areas. Cheers.
  31. 6 points
    Well, you guys are something... You totally discount @Jan van Ecks discussion points and you also, apparently, discount the loss of consumer goods purchases from China by U.S. consumers and what effect that may have on Chinese factories. Er, ok!
  32. 6 points
    @Jan van Eck Jan, what about the affect of the average American not buying Chinese products if at all possible? I mean, if I buy something on Amazon I almost always go into the questions and comments to see what others have to say, and one of the most common questions i see is: where is this made? If the answer is China, people will offer up advice as to what or where you can buy American, or at least not in China. I'm serious in asking this question as I don't know the answer. It seems that if there is a massive trade deficit between China and the US, then if Americans stop buying Chinese made goods wherever possible, that means China no longer sells into the largest consumer market in the world and hence loses $100s of billions a year? Won't this close more than a few factories in China? Maybe thousands of companies? Does that make sense? I think it does.
  33. 6 points
    Nope. What is escaping you is that nobody in the USA or Canada or Europe even gives a second thought to the aspirations of the Chinese nation, Likely the only person on the European Continent that is thinking about these issues is you. Certainly not in America. Nobody here cares; nobody here even thinks about it. Nor should they. What you do not grasp is that China is already in a population deflation, a "death spiral" of numbers collapse. You think of China as being the great, expanding, dynamic society. Nothing could be farther from the truth. China's immediate future is to turn into a society of old people, probably a lot of very old people, who will contribute nothing to the economy but be very expensive. China is already short at least 60 million women. There are now at least 60 million men with no wives, and no prospect of ever having a wife, and thus condemned to a life of sexual celibacy, or alternatively to convert to homosexuality. That is a very destabilizing prospect for the regime. What are you going to do? Try to import wives from Taiwan? No chance; those 60 million men are peasant boys, they have nothing to off er in a society that is rapidly urbanizing. Cambodia? Again, who wants to go, to live away from family with some Chinese peasant man? Not much luck there. And there is your problem. You cannot put them in the Army, then the disaffected have guns, and that becomes very dangerous to the regime. China's population collapse is the direct result of two paths: the idea in the past of a one-child policy, and rapid urbanization. The women can be very picky in choosing husbands, so they pick urban, wealthy or wealthier men. Those women have access to education and new values that do not include families with children. So China now has a fecundity rate of only 1.5, and you need 2.1 just to stay even. In two generations China is a collapsed society. It is headed for poverty, to be a lot poorer than it is today. You see the same thing in Russia, and in Ukraine. Both have these low fecundity rates, running around 1.5-1.6. Ukraine particularly has both low fecundity, urbanization, and emigration. that is deadly. The population will drop by half in one generation. In Russia, you have a drop in life expectancy, a fecundity rate of about 1.6, and population collapse. Absent migration in from the Muslim outlier States, Russia will shrivel up and wither away; its destiny is to vanish. The USA has a fecundity rate of about 1.95. Not so great, but it has lots and lots of immigrants that keep the population expanding. The USA will remain a dynamic society. So will Canada, which despite a fecundity rate of 1.6 continues to expand due to the vast immigration into the country. I predict Canada is heading towards 100 million, and will be a much bigger player on the world stage. In one generation or less, Canada will have the equal population of Germany. The USA will continue to march past 325 million, and I believe the number today is closer to 350 million, as there are likely some 25 million Canadians living here that are undocumented. When a Canadian college girl marries an American visiting student and she moves over the Border to Buffalo, she effectively had a fatal car crash as far as Canadian fecundity rates are concerned. She vanishes from the Canadian registry. You have the same thing with impoverished Ukrainian secretaries making $400 a month, moving to Western Europe to advance themselves - and marry a European man. Ukraine suffers a population collapse, and will not have either the money or the numbers to ever challenge the Russians in the Donbass - and those Russians are also vanishing, the ones remaining being surplus violent men, and criminals, that Moscow sends there to keep them from doing robberies in the Russian cities. Single men without women are dangerous. Involuntary celibacy leads to disaffection, and anger with the Government. That reaction is universal. SO China is facing its demographic crossroads. You see China as this burgeoning powerful society; that is a mistake. Some 25% at least of Chinese GDP is building infrastructure that is not even needed, like entire cities that remain empty because nobody can buy in. What are you going to do - move the peasants in and urbanize them, with no jobs and no future, and no wives? You can't do that. Far too risky. So China will have to resort to repression, a new surveillance State, and that will result in poverty. China may stay in one piece, but only as a poor, agricultural society. The big industrial push is going to fail, because their population is collapsing. China has tried to combat all this by their mercantilist trade policies. Both the West in the USA, and in Europe, have been mild in their reactions, until Trump came along. He put a stop to it, and the slide into negative fecundity becomes irreversible. Say good-bye to China. And also to Russia. And tht is why nobody much cares in the USA; it is headed for oblivion anyway.
  34. 6 points
  35. 6 points
    playing to the green new dummies over climate or not, this idiot said he is fine having Americans be out of work....but I would like to know if he whined and moaned and had pity for those "poor government employees" briefly out of work during the temporary shutdown...
  36. 6 points
    The Framers of the US Constitution deliberately designed the Amendment Process to be as tedious and difficult as possible - so that future generations would not be inflamed by the passions of the day and start to mess with it. Also the Document is cast in sweeping principles, so that it can be a "living instrument" and evolve as times change. For example, the Document provides that "All powers not expressly described herein for the State are reserved for the People." Well, that is a very broad-brush Statement. And it is meant that way, so as to preclude the State from just barging in and taking over (Which is what it has now done with lots of individual liberties). And you need these broad-brush reservations so that the country stay true to the original concepts of personal liberty. You will see throughout all these Statements such as "Congress shall make no law [restriction religion, or freedom of assembly, etc]" The Constitution is thus a Document of Limitation: "make no Law." It is a Constitution that says, "Hey, Big Government, you are not in charge here in America. The People are." And that is a remarkable platform. Personally, it is very much to my taste. The idea was to prevent stifling bureaucracies. Unfortunately, Big Govt has come along anyway, a form of "creeping bureaucracy govt." And that is not how Americans see themselves. Big bureaucracies is what you have in the Communist model, where the State controls your life. So, now you know why it is what it is. Over the centuries, it has only been amended 27 times. And one of those amendments was to undo another amendment! Incidentally even the original "10 Amendments" known as the "Bill of Rights" started out life as 12 Amendments: two of the twelve did not make it past the Constitutional Conventions stage! Talk about hard to amend.......
  37. 6 points
    No not really. This is all uncharted territory. Formal or informal. There is no precedence for this . Several attorneys have spoken to this issue today stating different opinions. Now, a congressional bill must be sent to the Senate before they can act on it. This is not a bill, it is Articles of Impeachment. Trump has been "indicted". Does the President have the right to exonerate himself ? Does the President have the right to a speedy trial ? After all he is a candidate for President. Can Nancy sit on it thru the election ? Is she interfering with a national election ? Trump could argue the Democratic Party produced this farce to Interfering with an election. (which actually is true)
  38. 6 points
    I suppose I would have to be considered in the "pro-shale" camp . . . and I have too much skin in the game. However, this fellow Douglas Buckland (who is dead set in the other camp) has afforded me every courtesy. He made me think, which is (I am told) good for my aging brain. He made me nervous, because he has been around the horn a few times, and you have to listen to a fellow like that. Same thing with Mr. Coffee. I think he's very bright and much more articulate than he would lead us to believe. But I also learn a lot from your brief comments. I would feel better about my investments if all the people on this site were nodding their heads in the same direction. But I feel better informed from reading these determinedly anti-shale missiles. i like the entire concept of shale. With refracks--maybe a couple or three--I sincerely believe we'll get up to 30% recovery. But that's just me. I've argued the case for it until I sounded like a broken record. Time will tell. One thing I am sure of, and cannot be convinced of the converse, is that the United States is much, much stronger because of shale. We've run on low-cost NG. LTO prices have been on the floor. The economy has risen in no small part due to this.
  39. 6 points
    American public does not care, and will predictably repudiate the Democrats in November 2020. This whole exercise is doomed to abject failure.
  40. 6 points
    No, it's not, Mr. Buckland. What is new . . . every day . . . is the refinement of the computer software that takes that data and beats the truth out of it, and the machine learning that recognizes patterns--hundreds of thousands of them. I don't think that anyone who has spent any time analyzing this industry thinks it can talk the rock out of much more oil than is currently coming forth, but to a guy who grew up hearing you can't get blood out of a turnip, it's pretty impressive when some rock is giving up 20% of the oil in place. Again, we're here, in shale country, as a default move. I realize you've worked in many different parts of the world, on derricks that were sophisticated, and that you saw huge amounts of oil come out of some of those finds. But for some reason--it wasn't just Deepwater Horizon--many of those became less productive, and with the bust, new replacements weren't looked for. That's all coming back. In the interim, I stubbornly maintain, the shale basins have saved this country--the proud United States of America--from being dependent on, as T. Boone used to say, countries that don't like us much. I suspect that your work in various countries created in you a certain bond, maybe even a knowledge, that a full purse can always buy oil. I don't share that bond, that knowledge. I believe that oil is, today, right now, helping to keep our country safe, and that without the shale oil, we would be less safe. That's the main reason I like to see these improvements. I can't argue on your terms: I don't have that hands-on experience. I don't even want to argue. But I do read, and even though most of the bright kids have shunned the computer end of oil and gas, thinking it's not a job security field and maybe even tainted, this computer-driven data collection and pattern recognition has resulted in some staggering short-term gains. You're right, though, this will be run through in a frenzy and the whole shebang will move on, and on, until all the shale basins are pretty well depleted. Refracking is a bigger deal than has been fully disclosed on this site, and that's basin dependent. The Bakken is particularly amenable to that: some say 60% of all wells. So is the Eagle Ford. So that'll be the next boom. Then there'll be another refracking of the very best wells. And that'll be that. At least that's my take on it. This frenzy may move on to the Vaca Meurto but I sincerely doubt it. This e-fracking takes quite a fleet. I just don't see that happening on a giant scale down in Argentina.
  41. 5 points
    Not quite. What you are overlooking is that Chinese ships are not designed to withstand combat damage. Are they compartmentalized? No. Do they use heavy plate? No. Redundant internal systems including steering? No. Can the ship remain operational with a strike to the bridge? No. Do the Chinese have reactive armor? No. Gatling guns? No. One heavy hit, from a smart bomb or missile, and that Chinese ship is bye-bye. What those Chinese littoral combat ships are useful for is intimidating their neighbors, specifically the Philippines and Vietnam. And that's it. Those ships are laughable in combat against the US Navy; no chance, get blown out of the water. It is precisely this reason that the Philippines specifically is attempting to cozy up to the Americans, and inviting the US Navy to re-occupy Subic Bay, and the Air Force to re-occupy Clark Field. They see these Chinese vessels coming and even though those are lightweight they are still surface combatants that can and would project Chinese military might, and certainly do a forcible take-over of every single atoll in the South China Sea, and protect Chinese drillers in taking every single drop of oil, to the exclusion of everyone else. And they can likely get away with it with the Vietnamese, whose navy (if you can call it that) consists of some light motorboats, but not against the USA. The USA is in the current position of being "the policeman of the world," and whenever there is trouble anywhere on the planet, the rest of the world dials 9-1-1 [1-1-2 to you Europeans] and expects the USA to come running with its Navy, and also its Army. And the victims dialing 9-1-1 also do not want to pay for that police service. In the past the US Government and the American people have been mild about that and let the planet get a free ride on its policing services. But being policeman has its costs, and those costs have escalated as a result of the US doing its police work in the countries of the Middle East (including Afghanistan in that descriptive). Now the Americans are getting tired of being world policeman, and that starts to grate when you see old rivals such as Russia yet once again provoking trouble (in Serbia, Bosnia, Herzegovina, Croatia, Kosovo, Georgia, Turkey, Syria, and Ukraine). Of these, the one that likely most irritates the USA is the situation in Ukraine, where the naked land-grabs of Russia are so starkly on display. And what irritates Trump specifically is that his predecessors did nothing, specifically Clinton (with Yugoslavia) and Obama (with Crimea and the Donbas). So Mr. Trump now states, quite clearly, hey if you folks want policeman protection then you have to chip in and help fund it, and you better be nice to American interests. If you don't, then not only do we no longer supply policeman services, but we will sanction your people and companies that actively work with our rivals, both States and terrorists, and if you are going to build pipelines to fund the Russians selling gas (and thereby developing the funds for more mischief) then we will sanction everyone involved, including the pipe-laying companies and ships, and we shall see how you like that. In large part, the policies of Trump's predecessors has been one of "containment," where you try to draw a line on some map and say: "Hey, don't cross that." Unfortunately the containment policies of George Kennan went out the window with the appointment of sycophants during the Bill Clinton administration, made even worse with the appointment of Paul Bremer, the silver-spoon kid from Connecticut. With those abysmal failures, it has become apparent that the US is not very good at nation-building, and Mr. Trump wants the USA out of that business. If the Europeans do not want to do it, and provide security, then the US will (eventually) bow out and enforce its interests by cruise missiles launched from drone aircraft. Don't like it? Too bad, so sad. Meanwhile the USA will take precisely the same attitude towards both China and Russia. The days of some Russian ship doing a sea "bump" mini-collision against a US Navy ship are over. I predict the next time some Russian (or Chinese) commander tries that stunt, he will get his bridge obliterated in a fierce salvo, the command of that ship all dead. Then that ship gets sunk. In the past, the Chinese have aggressively had these mid-air collisions with Navy patrol aircraft, forcing them down on Chinese soil (Hainan Island), then forcing the US to come in and dismantle their plane, and take it out in pieces. Those days are now gone. Some US aircraft gets bumped in the skies and disabled, the entire air fleet from the base that aggressor plane flew out from will get obliterated by guided bombs, every aircraft, building, and runway destroyed. Don't underestimate just how tough Mr. Trump can be. He is not some feather like Clinton.
  42. 5 points
    Regarding upstream oil projects, I am under the impression that you want to shoot for a project that will payout in 36-60 months. At least that is what the people in our little century old conventional waterflood field try to do. Sometimes it works out and sometimes it does not, there is a lot of risk and many unforeseen things that can occur, both good and bad. Of course, the money is made after the project pays out. So, that is after the time that you have had your "flush" production. At that point, of course, LOE is crucial. LOE can vary quite a bit, and a lot of that depends on downhole failure rates. I do not have personal experience with deep horizontal wells, but I have read a lot of LOS for shale well interests that are for sale on the internet auctions. It seems that LOE varies greatly well to well and month to month. I have seen wells with no downhole failures for an entire year. I have seen wells with 3-5 downhole failures in a year. It appears to me after 60 months most shale wells are nearing "stripper" classification. 15 BOPD. I suppose in the Bakken the production rates after 60 months are higher, maybe so in the Permian. Again, have to remember these are wells with a total depth of 10,000' - 20,000'. I assume one tubing job runs at least $25K? I also assume there are downhole issues that appear over time with laterals? Again, I do not know, I only deal with straight holes (really like the old cable tool holes, much straighter than the newer rotary holes - therefore fewer failures). I assume in the rush to drill these wells as fast as possible these 100,000+ shale wells all have vertical sections that are straight as an arrow? I sure hope so for the operators' sakes. (Shellman says EOG has a time near him with failures due to what I call crooked verticals). Also, I see that many are produced with submersibles. We have a little experience with submersibles, and it is not good. Seems you have to pull those more than you do those pumped with a pumping unit. And the repair cost for those submersibles is not cheap, nor are they cheap to buy begin with. This is the problem with shale wells. They become stripper wells fairly quickly, despite costing $5-12 million, depending on where you are at and what problems you do or do not encounter. In the end, all of these companies are going to be operating stripper wells just like everyone else in US lower 48. Stripper wells work very well at $80+ WTI. Business is not so good at sub $50 WTI, it is mediocre at the prices we have had for 2018 and 2019, with 2018 being a lot better. In 2015-2016, when the price crashed, I did a lot of shale well calculations because the shale companies were saying that they could make a good return at $50 WTI, then $40 WTI, then $30 WTI. With these pronouncements, the traders just kept pushing oil down, until it got so low Saudi and Russia acted. I did these calculations because I was worried if the shale guys were correct, and could make big time money at $30 WTI, our little stripper wells would all need to be plugged and we were finished. I did enough calculations to become convinced that shale generally does not work at sub $50 WTI. It works somewhat in the range of $50-65 WTI. It does much better above $65 WTI. Some companies need much higher prices than $65 WTI to also service the debt. In my calculations I also figured in natural gas, but assumed a price of $3. Seems it has mostly been worse than $3. That is too bad. The Hugoton Field is one I am familiar with, and it has been practically destroyed by shale. In my calculations I did the checkbook approach, because after all, if you are an etal in one of these, they send you a bill for every cost they incur, during the month they incurred it. Sunk costs are still costs in my checkbook. I will admit that on most of the calculations I did, I did not include land. Land can be a big expense, or no expense. It is a tough one for sure. Also, I did not include "off-lease" product or water gathering systems. I know there is a lot of infrastructure being built to handle all of that water. Not sure how to allocate it, so I didn't. I guess maybe someone can explain why XOM is spending so much CAPEX on shale and still is not showing much in the way of GAAP earnings for its upstream US operations, if shale works so well at $30 or $40 WTI? Doesn't XOM have more rigs running in the lower 48 right now than anyone else? I think CVX is doing better because they own a lot of royalty. Much better deal when NRI is 95-100% as opposed to the typical 75-80%. I am jealous of the folks who own the royalty. They are definitely the real winners regarding shale. At least as long as they did not go non-consent. I know someone from my neck of the woods who inherited a lot of ND mineral acreage, and went non-consent. Was a bad deal in the end for sure. I rarely see NRI better than 80% for non-operated WI in shale wells on the internet auctions. There are not as many operated shale well interests for sale, but again, the ones I see are usually 75-80% NRI (or should I type .75000000 to .80000000?). My view is that shale is generally high cost oil, and my view was not developed out of emotion so much as out of trying to figure out if we should unload everything ASAP for next to nothing so we would not have to plug out our wells. Now days I am more worried about EV's and politicians who view all oil as BIG OIL than I am about shale. I really do not want to rent or buy an $85,000 infrared camera to monitor methane emissions from wells that haven't been capable of burning a flare for 30+ years. I think traders have figured out that sub $50 WTI absolutely will not work, and we can get by on WTI $50, although I would much rather have WTI $60. So for now, I have moved on to things such as fracking bans (we do tiny fracks on our shallow conventional wells - would those be included by the POLS?) loss of percentage depletion (Obama said it is a BIG OIL tax break after all - LOL) and EV revolution by government mandate. We had a decent amount of drilling from about 2006-2014 in our field. Since then it has fallen to about nothing. Drilling here is all done out of cash flow, no borrowed money that I am aware of. Maybe some non-operated interests or ORI's are used to fund drilling here some. We were on a good little annual drilling program that was keeping up with fighting our decline. We haven't seen an oil price since 2014 that justifies it, so we have not drilled a well since Q3 2014. Every acre we have is HBP, so no need to rush. But our annual production is slowly on the downhill slide, as is the rest of lower 48 conventional. Sorry for the ramble, just the view of another stripper oil well operator (really investor - relatives make the day to day decisions) that knows about 1/10 of what Mike Shellman does.
  43. 5 points
    In my humble opinion, the US should leave southern Iraq to it’s own devices and move their entire mission, military and diplomatic to Kurdistan. The Kurds generally like Americans and appreciate what they can do to assist the Kurds militarily and economically. This is my opinion after roughly two years spent based in either Erbil or Taq Taq. The Southern Iraqis have shown neither the will or the effort to rebuild after Saddam, and as usual blame the situation on the US. Leave it to them. If they want to jump into bed with the Iranians, Russians or Chinese, let them and we’ll all sit back and watch how that turns out.
  44. 5 points
    The entire effort to depose Trump started from time he became a serious threat to win the Republican nomination. At the time I supported Senator Ted Cruz but I eventually saw that Trump was a much better candidate and more likely to win against Hillary Clinton so I switched. All of the attacks on Trump started to destroy his chance of beating Hillary Clinton who was assumed to be unbeatable by the Deep State including the CIA and FBI. This was all known to President Obama IMO. As the truth of this perfidy became known the efforts to create a smokescreen, to hide their illegal acts, increased and became Trump derangement syndrome. This eventually became the impeachment effort. Many in the deep state are under investigation by a now partially cleansed Justice Department and FBI. At the optimum time indictments will be handed out to several of the perpetrators involved and with enough evidence to convict them, hopefully. Convictions may be very difficult in the Washington D.C. area however. The most important goal is to thoroughly show the public what happened in the past administration and what steps the Deep State of the Obama Administration took. Putting them all in prison may not be acceptable since half the country is Democrat but it would be my preference. We must thoroughly expose the truth and pray that President Trump is reelected. He needs four more years to cleanse the Deep State and the various agencies involved. IMHO the Obama Administration was just plain evil. References Critical Information on the Trump, Obama, and Hillary Investigations https://docs.google.com/document/d/1choW_wq0D5DfjRPjqLlAkfxCnnVJhRzrHeXppE6D4E8/edit Part Two of the Obama Administration Scandals https://docs.google.com/document/d/11axnqv_b3L2k9CD6HWNMwrdIECJZSxowxjO4RIc-rbE/edit
  45. 5 points
    I don't know. Probably not. Of course it is. This is what is known as "virtue signaling." Or: "Hey, look at me, I am as pure as the driven snow, I stand against fossil fuels!"
  46. 5 points
    Alleged HUNTER BIDEN INVOLVED IN SETTING UP ACCOUNTS FOR BURISMA FOR MONEY LAUNDERING ? New Hunter Biden revelations Seems Hunter and his business partners set up accounts for Ukraine gas company Burisma at Morgan Stanely. Reportedly the accounts opened had deposited over $150 Million. There is some concern that there may have been money laundering involved ? Related topic : Guess who frequently accompanied Joe Biden on visits to Ukraine. That would be (fake) Whistleblower Eric Ciaramella. Remember Joe Biden's story of how in March 2016 he went to Ukraine and threatened the Ukraine government he would withhold the U.S. $1 Billion in aid if they did not fire Prosecutor Shokin. He was going home in 6 hours. Well the Vice President of the United States always travels on Air force 2. There are NO RECORDS of Biden flying to Ukraine in March 2016 . There is probably a reasonable explanation. Maybe ? Would make sense for someone to investigate all this. Especially , the one about Hunter opening accounts at Morgan Stanley for Barisma . . . . Money laundering ? All just rumors for now . . . . . From paternity suit filed by D.C. stripper against Hunter Biden "Most notably, after leaving the vicepresidency, Joe Biden attended a conference at which he discussed a previouslyunreported meeting in Ukraine for the first time. "I said, 'I’m telling you, you’re not getting the billion dollars,'" Biden boasted at theconference. "I said, 'You’re not getting the billion. I’m going to be leaving here in --,' I think it was about six hours. I looked at them and said, 'I’m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you’re not getting the money.' Well, son of a b--ch. He got fired. And they put in place someone who was solid at the time." The prosecutor, Viktor Shokin, was fired in March 2016 . . . . . However, publicly available records show that Joe Biden did not officially travel to Ukraine in 2016. . . . . believes Biden did not take Air Force Two for the trip. . . . investigations asserts that Hunter Biden and his business associates "established bank and financial accounts with Morgan Stanley et al," for the Ukrainian natural gas company Burisma Holdings Limited for a "money laundering scheme," among other ventures. One alleged scheme "accumulated $156,073,944.24," according to the document . . . "
  47. 5 points
    Actual text of the Joint Resolution of 1789: [note: Articles 1 and 2 never made it past the Convention. Article 2, after two centuries, finally became the 27th Amendment. The very first Article never made it and has never been passed, but there is an Apportionment Scheme in place]: ----------------------------------------- Congress of the United States begun and held at the City of New-York, on Wednesday the fourth of March, one thousand seven hundred and eighty nine. THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution. RESOLVED by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, two thirds of both Houses concurring, that the following Articles be proposed to the Legislatures of the several States, as amendments to the Constitution of the United States, all, or any of which Articles, when ratified by three fourths of the said Legislatures, to be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of the said Constitution; viz. ARTICLES in addition to, and Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America, proposed by Congress, and ratified by the Legislatures of the several States, pursuant to the fifth Article of the original Constitution. Article the first... After the first enumeration required by the first article of the Constitution, there shall be one Representative for every thirty thousand, until the number shall amount to one hundred, after which the proportion shall be so regulated by Congress, that there shall be not less than one hundred Representatives, nor less than one Representative for every forty thousand persons, until the number of Representatives shall amount to two hundred; after which the proportion shall be so regulated by Congress, that there shall not be less than two hundred Representatives, nor more than one Representative for every fifty thousand persons. Article the second... No law, varying the compensation for the services of the Senators and Representatives, shall take effect, until an election of Representatives shall have intervened. Article the third... Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. Article the fourth... A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. Article the fifth... No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law. Article the sixth... The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. Article the seventh... No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. Article the eighth... In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence. Article the ninth... In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law. Article the tenth... Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted. Article the eleventh... The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. Article the twelfth... The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. ATTEST, Frederick Augustus Muhlenberg, Speaker of the House of Representatives John Adams, Vice-President of the United States, and President of the Senate John Beckley, Clerk of the House of Representatives. Sam. A Otis Secretary of the Senate
  48. 5 points
    Foreign readers should understand that the USA does NOT have a "common law legal system" when it comes to the Criminal Code [for that matter, neither does Canada]. All criminal acts are codified by Statute, and the offenses are Statutory. Before anyone yells "hair-splitting!" at me, the distinction is not insignificant. Under the so-called "common law" system, the crime can be inferred or found by the simple act of observation. This was used by feudal Lords to dispose of pesky people such as poachers hunting game such as deer on the Lord's lands: you were found on the lands, thus you are guilty of trespassing (and if you had a gun, then guilty of poaching). As those crimes (in England, for example) could get you sentenced to "transportation," where you were taken off to some boat in the harbor and sold to the captain, for re-sale in America as an indentured servant, basically a white slave, these common-law charges were serious and had "irreparable harms," which is why they were abolished in the North Americas. In the US system, the criminal offense is set forth in Statute, both State Statutes and in Federal Statutes. The Federal ones tend to be clogged up with what are essentially political acts, including that all-time favorite, "treason." The politicians love that one. Moving on, I observe that all US criminal statutes excepting drunken driving require the government ["the Crown" in monarchical systems such as England} to first establish the element of "intent." If you had no intent to commit the crime, then the act itself is not a violation of Statute. For example, the passing of counterfeit money is a Federal Statutory offense, punishable by long imprisonment. However, if you have unknowingly and unwittingly received the counterfeit bills and were unwittingly handing them to someone else (say, a store clerk), then there is no intent, thus no crime. So, prosecutors have to always establish intent, and lots of those prosecutions falter on the inability of government to establish intent. An interesting anomaly is the issue of drunken driving. Currently US Law has evolved to have "inferred intent," where going out drinking and then getting behind the wheel of some car and driving off is sufficient to infer the intent of committing the offense. But if busted, the State (here, the police) still have to establish that you are drunk. So you get these legal wrangles of "blow into the breathalyzer machine" to try to get a blood-alcohol reading, and get out of the car and do the "walk the line," and recite the alphabet backwards, that sort of thing, all of which are mechanisms to provide evidence. And when the motorist refuses, yes he gets his license to drive administratively suspended, but can the State prove a crime beyond reasonable doubt? Typically "no." In Britain a smart attorney once advised a motorist: if you have been drinking and are stopped, wait until the policeman gets to your window, then with great gusto take a large swig of whisky or gin out of a bottle wrapped in a brown wrapper, and swallow it, so now what? You took a drink in a stopped car under the control of the police, and what evidence can they take that is not contaminated by that act? Hah! [I do not recommend that approach in the USA, you might end up shot, but in England, it is an interesting gambit!] And all this implies that the old Constitutional prohibition against "misdemeanors" likely has a different interpretation than what you have today. Watch out for these little traps.
  49. 5 points
    I would have to disagree with your assessment. First up, Trump is not even "indicted" [your term], as the ministerial act of Presentment has not been undertaken. Right now, as things stand, all you have is a "vote." Here is an interesting (and scholarly) take on the current situation: [bold print added by me] "But since we’ll be playing trivial pursuit for a more few hours (days?), we might as well ask: As long as the House withholds the impeachment articles from the Senate, has Trump been impeached? In the law, there are many situations in which an outcome is known, but it is not a formal outcome until some ministerial act is taken. A grand jury can vote an indictment, for example, but the defendant is not considered indicted until the charges are filed with the clerk of the court. A defendant can be found guilty by a jury, but there is technically no conviction until the judgment is “entered” by the trial court, usually months later when sentence is imposed. An appellate court can issue a ruling that orders a lower court to take some action, but the lower court has no jurisdiction to act in the case until issuance of the appellate court’s “mandate” — the document that formally transfers jurisdiction. Plainly, Congress has similar ministerial acts of transference that must occur in order for legislation to pass. Were that not the case, Speaker Pelosi would not be talking about delaying the transfer of impeachment articles. So it’s all well and good for the Speaker to hold up the works that Democrats, five minutes ago, were breathlessly telling us had to be carried out with all due haste. But many scholars take the position that the Constitution requires a trial if there has been an impeachment. If such a trial cannot properly occur unless and until articles of impeachment have been transferred from the House to the Senate, and Speaker Pelosi won’t transfer them, has President Trump actually been impeached? Sure, it’s a stupid question . . . but we’re living in stupid times."
  50. 5 points
    ^ more than most Americans, very likely. Probably not a good idea to underestimate Jan's knowledge of the U.S. Constitution and U.S. government in general. Just my opinion.