Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 11/27/2017 in all areas

  1. 29 points
    The irony of the Mueller investigation that was demanded by Democrats because they thought it would show Trump colluded with Russia to win the Presidency is that it has blown up in their faces by exposing in greater detail how Obama and the Deep State attempted first, to throw an election in favor of one candidate, Hillary Clinton, and second, attempted a coup once Trump was elected via investigations and false claims. Once Trump won the election, the Deep State used their accomplices in the msm to convince the American public that Donald J Trump stole the election with the collaboration of the Russians. In this way they sought to remove him by impeachment. It turns out the Deep State were the ones who were acting as agents of Russia seeking to tear America apart. Consider: John Brennan, Obama’s CIA director, by his own admission, played a key role in instigating the investigation of Trump before the election. In the aftermath of the election Brennan has repeatedly called Trump a traitor on social media and old media. We now know in August 2016 Brennan gave a private briefing to Sen. Harry Reid. Subsequently, Reid sent a letter to the FBI which included info that clearly came from the now infamous dossier, manufactured by ex-British spy Christopher Steele and Fusion GPS contractor. This dossier would later be included in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant application that was used to justify investigations into Trump, his campaign, and his family. It now appears very likely Brennan later lied under oath that he did not know who commissioned the dossier. This dossier was originally funded by none other than Hillary Clinton and the Democratic Party. Since the conclusion of the Mueller report has come out Brennan, probably fearing an investigation into his actions pre/post election, now says he had “bad information”. A more accurate description might be that he was willfully spreading disinformation to bring down a President. James Comey himself described this dossier as “salacious” and “unverified” yet he did not bother to have the FBI attempt to verify the contents of the dossier. This didn't stop Comey from lying 4 times to the FISA court that ex-British spy Steele was the source of an article by “journalist” Isikoff, which was used to corroborate claims in his own dossier. So Comey, in essence, told the FISA court that the Steele dossier had been corroborated by…Steele. Some background: Steele also worked for Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska. So the only person who had any verifiable evidence of working with the Russians in any capacity is an ex-British spy, contracted to manufacture a false dossier on behalf of Hillary Clinton to smear Trump and later weaponized to impeach Trump after he won the election. Comey lied to the FISA court so he could obtain, as he did, a warrant to spy on Carter Page (Trump staffer) and the Trump family during the election. Moreover, in addition to Comey, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, former Deputy Director of the FBI Andrew McCabe, and former Attorney General Sally Yates were required to sign off on the FISA warrant application. They are either incompetent or were engaged in a conspiracy but regardless, this was a fraud on the FISA court. Bruce Ohr, a senior official at the time at the Justice Department, acted as a middleman between the FBI and Steele. He passed along information from his wife Nellie Ohr, also a Fusion GPS contractor like Steele, with, presumably, unverified and false info regarding Trump and his campaign. The FBI later terminated Steele’s relationship as a confidential informant with them after he revealed this relationship to the press. However, for up to 1.5 years after, Bruce Ohr continued to act as middleman between Steele and the FBI, even after Mueller took over the investigation. Americans should be marching in the streets at this attempted coup but we are so doped with mindless entertainment that we no longer care. We are becoming a system where as long as you don’t challenge the 2 party system you are allowed your freedom to make money and to say whatever you want so long as it doesn't have consequences. Any more details of Mueller's report due to be released by AG Barr are likely to reveal more of the rotted core of the Deep State and their machinations and not, as Democrats think, damaging info about Trump.
  2. 17 points
    We don't really have a two party system in this country. There's only the party of incumbency, then wealthy retirement as "lobbyist" or "consultant". We see Obama on billionaires' yachts and don't blink an eye. Al Gore is worth half a billion from a net worth of 2.5 million when he left office. The Clintons control a $2.5 billion fortune much of it protected by the paper thin veneer of a "foundation" from the tax man. Because when they ran on higher taxes on the rich, they meant thee, not themselves. It's going to take awhile to figure out how Paul Ryan was bought off, but bought off he was. In some ways, the biggest tragedy of 9/11 was that flight 93 couldn't find Congress. Shuffling the deck might have been the best thing for the country. Politicians aren't our friends
  3. 16 points
    This thread starts with the headline: "Iran downs US drone. No military response" Why is this so startling? The US sends a spy drone to go take a look at what the Iranians are up to (not much of a surprise there), and the Iranians go take a shot at it, get lucky, wing the bird, and down it goes. Again no big surprise - after you get past the shooting part of hitting the bird. Let's remember something: The USA has no business sending spy drones over other countries. If you do that, then don't be surprised that somebody takes umbrage and tries to knock it down. Going back some 50 years, the Russians were infuriated that the US had developed that U-2 high-level spy plane that flew up beyond their air power reach, and could travel over several thousand miles of Soviet territory with impunity. So the Russians knocked themselves out developing an ultra-high-altitude interceptor missile, knocked down Francis Gary Powers, and the rest is history. The US can do it today with the Blackbird SR-71, but nobody much bothers as satellites have made those manned flights obsolete. Today those spy drones, and their cousins the assassination drones, are cheap enough to build and operate and can drop a bomb right through some open window and into the bedroom of any foreigner the US wants to go assassinate, and do it with complete impunity. Now, that prospect is going to make adversaries rather jumpy. You have to expect that the targets are going to do their damnest to knock those birds down. Another good reason not to have a live pilot on board. Nobody is going to start a shooting war over some spy drone. They just send up another one, and the game continues.
  4. 14 points
    I feel like looking at this through an idealistic lens: When a nation adopts dangerous ideas, it's safer for the world to destroy that nation than to let the infection spread. Thus, nations aren't being destabilized to prop up the price of oil. They're being destabilized to prevent violent ideas (Iran) and economically unsound ideas (Venezuela) from infecting other nations. This works partly because it strips dangerous nations of the resources they need to spread their ideas and partly because it makes an example of them. Most of the Middle East is an obvious example of dangerous ideas. They export violence, oppression of women, etc. That's not acceptable. Venezuela is a more subtle case. Their sin was socialism: stripping resources from the producers of society to give it to unproductive people. This is dangerous because, in the long run, it destroys the economy, plunging everyone into destitution. Unfortunately, citizens of developed nations looked at Venezuela's short-term success and thought, "I want free stuff too!" The dangerous idea was spreading. Thus, the safest course of action is to accelerate Venezuela's inevitable demise. If Venezuela doesn't appear successful, then there's no reason to mimic their behavior. There's also the issue of OPEC, which intentionally manipulates markets. If the problem is that governments are manipulating markets, then the solution is to replace those governments. If The People don't like the resulting death, disease, and destruction, then they shouldn't have supported market manipulation. Better to have a few suffer today than to have everyone suffer later. Conveniently, many dangerous nations rely on oil revenues. Increasing oil prices has the short-term effect of enriching these nations, but the long-term effect of destroying them. As they become dependent on oil revenues, high prices allowed unconventional oil producers to invest in R&D, which drove down the cost of unconventional oil, which allows unconventional oil to replace conventional oil from dangerous nations, which eliminates those nations' revenue streams. These dangerous nations are now wholly dependent on oil revenue even as they're being stripped of that revenue. Problem solved. On a more abstract level, the problem is that some people can't manage resources. They consume everything they're given, fall into destitution, and then complain bitterly that it was Someone Else's fault. These people destroy everything they touch. They are dangerous and cannot be allowed to infect others. Thus, they must be made into examples.
  5. 14 points
    In my opinion, Russiagate was a fraud and a hoax. However, I do not view "the Deep State" is a monolithic entity. I believe there are various factions and interests, some more in common with others, and it's never clear in the shadowy netherworld of intelligence and intrigue. What we see on the media are the figureheads and cartoon cutouts - the Ted Lieus, the Adam Schiffs, the Muellers, the Maddows, etc. In my opinion, the Trump election reflects a slight conflict precisely within the 'Deep State' factions. The neoliberal establishment that has long since reigned does not like Trump for various reasons, including likely his geopolitical opinions. The Russiagate narrative served to vilify Russia has the number enemy. Unfortunately, most in the American ruling class were and still are asleep to the fact that the greatest geopolitical rival and threat to the U.S. actually comes from China, not Russia. Former candidates like Mitt Romney are completely oblivious to the geopolitical tectonic shifts that are currently underway that will determine the fate of the 21st century. Russiagate did a whole lot of nothing, but the lasting effect of Russiagate has been online censorship of mostly right-leaning personalities who dare questioned the official media narrative. Social media sites have largely silenced or banned those who did not necessarily tow the main line. Russiagate will soon be in the public memoryhole, but you can bet the censorship tactics of most of the social media corporations will remain intact. Although I do not agree with Trump on most items, he was correct to see China as the true geopolitical rival to the U.S. and his (at least) verbal overtures to woo Russia could be viewed as an attempt to mend ties with Russia. If the U.S. has any hope of trying to stay relevant not just as a superpower but as a country, it will need to realize the reality and court proper alliances on the grand chessboard, especially Russia.
  6. 14 points
    That is a bogus polling company paid by Maduro's regime close to 90 % of Venezuelans want him to go. He is hanging on because of the chief military support based on their asociation with drug cartels and money laundering and widespread corruption
  7. 14 points
    1) Demand for oil plummets due to the economic effects of the threat of triple digit oil prices. 2) Oil and gas production continue to increase, far more than is needed, due to overblown concerns about oil production cutbacks in Iran, Venezuela, etc. 3) Canada gets its act together and an oil pipeline system is put in place to export more oil to U.S. Tar sands production increases due to pressure to pay down fixed costs. 4) U.S. Shale oil pipeline bottlenecks get resolved, and Shale oil production increases dramatically. 5) Iran keeps exporting oil, but on the black market, resulting in incorrect global oil production figures, and OPEC and Russia don't cut back. 6) Oil traders panic about overproduction and drive oil prices over a cliff. If some (or all) of these happen by middle / end of 2019, I could plausibly see $20 oil.
  8. 13 points
    Brushing up on my Oil Kingdom Official-Speak parlance, I think the non-official version of the announcement roughly translates to something like this: Dear world consumers, we have been pushing for $80 to $100 oil prices to prop up our Aramco IPO. But some hawks are pushing for $300 oil - that's crazy talk, as we tend to like having our heads firmly attached to our necks. So we plan to push for weekly increases in oil prices, to see just how far we can go. Next week we'll run the idea of $120 oil up the flagpole to see if anyone salutes. And the week after that, we'll push for $130 oil, because of risk of supply disruptions. And stuff. Risk stuff. We want consumers to be happy with a balance of oil prices somewhere between $80 and $300, depending on what the market will bear, with us creating fear and highlighting risk. Did we mention risk yet? Because oil prices need to increase because of risk. Trust us, we are doing what is best for us. Have a nice day, consumers.
  9. 12 points
    Well, here's the math: An "excellent" shale well, as with merely "good" or even "punk," produces the most during the first year. Then fairly rapid decline sets in. That initial production, the IP, basically bankrolls the company that drilled that well. The lifetime production of such a well is based on the trajectory of the IP parabola, and that, in turn, depends on the thickness of the shale layer, how oil-soaked it is, and matters such as porosity of the rock, how easily fractured, and whether or not it is held in place by a pinch-out (a non-porous subterranean barrier). An excellent well with a big IP is usually thought to have a lifetime yield of about 600,000 barrels, which even at $50/barrel (which can't go on forever, can it?) comes to . . . $30,000,000. It costs just as much to drill a mediocre well as an excellent well--about $6,000,000. Many of the wells drilled into Tier-1 rock pay out in the first two years of life. That's one of the reasons EOG is so successful: They have great geologists and engineers working on this and their GPS drilling is second to none. Another reason is because they buy cheaply, drill out a field quickly, and by the time other companies move in, they're on their way to the next great Great. But you're right, every driller is running out of Tier-1 rock, especially in the Permian where "child" wells (infills) are between 20-30% less productive than their "parent" well (the "wildcat" in the tract). This is because of a pressure sink and also due to porosity and the near absence of pinch-outs. Okay, move on to Tier-2 rock, which is frequently thinner shale but sometimes closer to the surface. A pretty good well is projected to produce about half that of a Tier-1. That's still $15,000,000 return for a $6M investment, and again about 50% of that comes with the IP. Something that no one ever mentions is "re-frack," which is going to eventually become--I think--a pretty big deal. Spend $2-3M for re-fracturing a good well and in many cases--especially in the Bakken, where they say 60% of wells are re-frackable--and you wind up with a brand new oil well that is as good as the old one (or better, because completion techniques improve). The thing that is killing most shale drillers is the usual: too much debt. But all this pessimism in the WSJ and elsewhere presupposes that we're never going to improve completion techniques, or discover cheaper ways to fracture rock, or handle the 2:1 water load that comes up with the oil (think reuse and pipelines instead of trucking it to disposal wells). Me? I'm no expert but I think shale oil just saved our asses; instead of escalating a conflict in the Middle East (Iraq comes to mind), we are mostly just imposing economic sanctions on Iran and showing KSA how to run their radar. This is amateur hour when I explain this, but also factual data from someone who loses a lot of sleep about the shale business. I hope this helps, because I don't have a single link to show you and I don't even know where to find one for sure. My only "link" is from putting my money where my mouth is, which probably wasn't the smartest thing I've ever done in my long life. But it has forced me to study like I was back in college, and they say that keeps Alzheimer's at bay.
  10. 12 points
    Yup. It's one of the most amazing political elections in history. He had the entire state apparatus against him. This includes, especially, the media. Even members of his own party. Even more amazing is he survived this coup attempt. If you're an atheist it's enough to make you a believer in some sort of invisible hand. Eric Schmidt is evil. I don't like to throw the word evil around because it's used too often but it applies here. Google was working on Project Dragonfly. It was essentially a censored search engine for China. They would censor whatever words or content the Chinese Communist Party wanted. To their credit some employees leaked this effort and now Google says it won't deploy it. I've no doubt, however, they continue to work on it until things quiet down. Google is also working with the Chinese on AI. This has led General Dunford, Chairman of the JCS, to meet with Google since this technology will benefit the Chinese military, hence, the CCP. Recall that Google decided not to continue working with the Pentagon on Project Maven for fear it could be used to identify targets, for example. Google is so desperate to get back into the Chinese market that they are willing to get into bed with the Chinese. What they don't understand is that China will never let Google in their market so long as it's ruled by the CCP. To stay in power the CCP need to control information. An unfettered search engine is anathema to that goal. They are going to steal everything they can from Google while dangling the prospect of letting them in. When they've got what they want they'll sever ties with Google and continue to keep them out. Just imagine the things Google would have been able to get away with, here and abroad, if Hillary had won.
  11. 12 points
    Really interesting that this is taken seriously. It is again all about the dislike of OPEC. Those Arabs have all the oil, they live in tents, they don't need oil, they should just give it to us for free. OPEC are currently producing close to maximum at the request of the U.S president. So is the current oil price due to manipulation by the U.S. president. Maybe his assets should be frozen. OPEC claim they don't manipulate the price, they try and manage supply. Does America really want an even more unstable oil market. Do they really think that will bring cheaper oil. And where does this confidence to tell OPEC what to do come from, energy independence based on oil shale -really!
  12. 12 points
    I sadly report that the situation in Venezuela continues to collapse into unreal despair and the country sinks ever farther into the abyss. Two Reports have surfaced on the BBC which should give anyone pause. One is on the unfolding effects of continuing electricity outages, with failed appliances (presumably burned out due to low-voltage conditions that typically precede a brown-out) and rotted meat being sold in the markets. One father is seen buying some pure fat, all he can afford for his children. A woman going in for cancer surgery has to find and provide everything for her operation, even the surgical gloves, as the hospitals and doctors have nothing. If she survives, she faces recovery in a house with no fan even, in the stifling heat: https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-latin-america-45868268/venezuela-crisis-hits-food-markets-and-a-morgue?intlink_from_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.bbc.com%2Fnews%2Ftopics%2Fcg41ylwvwgxt%2Fvenezuela&link_location=live-reporting-map Right with that is another BBC report on young mothers giving up their babies for lack of food. The people literally no longer have anything to eat. https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-latin-america-45879534/venezuela-crisis-mothers-giving-away-babies-children-living-on-streets?intlink_from_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.bbc.com%2Fnews%2Ftopics%2Fcg41ylwvwgxt%2Fvenezuela&link_location=live-reporting-map It is an entire country in a death rattle. How anyone looking at this chaos can have a reasonable expectation that the oil will once again flow and bring money for reconstruction is baffling.
  13. 12 points
    It is now, after Qatarstrophe.
  14. 11 points
    Copying this delicious comment in full. Great overview of the story so far. https://np.reddit.com/r/The_Donald/comments/d98t4d/asking_for_it/ Let me break this down from a fundamental standpoint. Joe Biden, the former Vice President of the United States has just been caught extorting Ukraine to keep his son out of trouble. His son, Hunter Biden, who was kicked out of the Navy in 2014 for cocaine violations and arrests, is not a man of integrity. This is the same man that cheated on his wife, with his dead brothers widow. Just a few weeks after his Navy discharge, and also in 2014, despite having absolutely no experience, Hunter gets a 600k per year job (that’s 50k per MONTH!) on the Board of a Ukraine energy firm. This despite having no experience in the the energy sector and not knowing how to speak a word of the languages used in Ukraine. After a short period of time, Ukraine has had enough of him. They appoint a prosecutor to go after him for alleged crimes and do what prosecutors do. This doesn’t sit well with Joe Biden. Not at all. Joe Biden, while still Vice President, calls Ukraine and tells them that if the Prosecutor is not fired immediately, the United States will not be sending them the 1 BILLION dollars in aid that we normally send them. Now think about that? This is YOUR tax dollars that he’s using as leverage to stop a criminal investigation on his son. That’s a huge problem. Of course Ukraine immediately fires the prosecutor because they desperately need the aid that the United States provides. Also, Ukraine has to rehire New prosecutor (get ready for this) that Biden himself has to approve. Is this not Crazy! Now fast forward to present time. President Trump during a recent phone call speaks to the new Ukraine President congratulating him on his win. During the conversation President Trump mentions Biden. Alleging that he has possibly committed a crime. The Ukraine President says that he is aware and has been wanting to talk with President Trump about that. How does President Trump know about this? Because Biden is very stupid and talks about doing exactly just that during a recorded video. It’s in the video that President Trump tweeted out personally on his Twitter feed yesterday. Now of course before President Trump tweeted this, Biden when questioned about it, played dumb. He also lied and said he has never spoken to his son about any of his son’s out of country business adventures. He even gets mad at the reporter and starts yelling that he should not be investigated, but that Trump should be. So a “whistleblower” (it was just released that his lawyer, who organize the whistleblower’s statement, donated to Biden’s presidential campaign) goes to the press (The New York Times) and says Trump called the Ukraine President and that he 8 separate times, in a hostile phone call, pressured the Ukraine President into investigating Hunter Biden and Joe Biden for doing the above mentioned. The Ukraine President states that he very much remembers the phone call and that it was a very pleasant phone call and President Trump absolutely did not pressure him or threaten to or deprive his country of anything. He also acknowledged that his government was threatened by Joe Biden by withholding aid if the Biden issue wasn’t dropped. But oddly enough, at least for the first few days, the press didn’t mention the sins of Joe and Hunter. And in the New York Times piece about the “whistleblower”, if you read past the headline, and towards the very end of the story, you’ll see that the The New York Times slips in the fact that the “whistleblower” DOESN’T have any direct knowledge of the phone call and didn’t hear it personally. Seems like a handy piece of information to have upfront, doesn’t it? The person saying this happened never heard it themselves! That’s not a whistleblower, that’s gossip. But what does Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi do with that gossip? She foams at the mouth and calls a press conference saying that she is launching an impeachment inquiry against President Trump. An impeachment inquiry! Over unverified gossip! Does that Sound desperate to you? She accuses President Trump, based on information from said “whistleblower” who never heard any part of the phone conversation, of threatening to withhold military support to Ukraine unless the investigation into the Biden’s is resumed. She is accusing the President of a quid pro quo. Which is EXACTLY what Joe Biden did. The only problem is that no such thing happened with President Trump. She held that press conference, yesterday, BEFORE SHE OR ANYONE ELSE, HAD POSSESSION OR EVEN READ THE DAMN CONVERSATION TRANSCRIPT! President Trump approved the White House to release an unedited, Non-redacted transcript of the entire phone conversation. That’s what a victim does, not criminal. And guess what? They did just that today. And again guess what? It’s nothing like what was reported. I read it. It’s not even close. During the conversation President Trump says Joe Biden has recently been bragging about what he did for Hunter and that a lot of people in America are concerned about it. He he wants to find out what happened. Totally within his right as an American President. The (newly elected) Ukraine President tells President Trump on the phone that he’s putting together a cabinet and will be selecting a team to investigate the claim. That’s it, nothing hostile, no mention or allegation at all of President Trump threatening to withholding military aide like the media and Pelosi said. President Trump didn’t keep bringing it up 8 times. Absolutely fake news. Now that the White House released the phone call, Nancy Pelosi and the rest of her posse should be embarrassed for jumping the gun with the announcement of an impeachment inquiry. Biden, who even as a former Vice President, can still be impeached (would lose all pension and benefits among other things) should step out of the presidential race and await his fate. This is actual political corruption. Criminal political corruption. Not just an ethics violation. And it absolutely should be dealt with at the highest level of our courts. So did President Trump have a right to ask Ukraine to help look into a possible matter of corruption involving them and Vice President Joe Biden? Absolutely. Treaty 106-16 is a document signed and passed in 1999 that allows for Ukraine to cooperate with mutual legal assistance on any matters with the United States. FUN FACT: Joe Biden was even in that Congress. Shhh. Don’t tell the democrats.
  15. 11 points
    If Trump wins re-election it will be very bad for the “deep state” whether that deep state be monolithic, systemic or isolated. Think of it thusly, remember when Obozo told Medvedev, “After my election I have more flexibility”? Trump will be in the same boat as Obozo was. Termed out, beholden to almost no one with the added bonus of spoiling for a fight. Has anyone forgotten his vindictiveness? Heads are going to roll on this. Now, it won’t reach to his imminence Obozo (calm yourself hope and change acolytes) Folks like him in “democratic societies” rarely ever get their deserved comeuppance. In third worlds he’d meet a sure and violent end. But it will reach to very high levels. In the periphery Sillary will take a hit. The Clinton Machine no longer has the power it once did and thus her and Slick Willy’s absolute protection, once a forgone conclusion, are now imperiled. Others like Brennan, Comey and perhaps Susan Rice will pay. They won’t betray Obozo as the true puppet master on the deal and thus it will be their pound of flesh that is paid. Let’s call them necessary sacrifices. Unfortunately still, so many American Voters can’t see the real picture here. What has been done by the folks who hatched this Russian Collusion malarkey can’t be undone. The damage to our Republic can’t be undone. It doesn’t matter whether you love or hate Trump, this episode represents the truth about where we are as a nation. Some in our country have become so overwhelmingly partisan that they don’t give a damn about respecting the law and the peaceful transfer of power which is the hallmark of our country. I’m fighting mad about it and everyone else should be as well. I’d be equally angry if Bush Jr. had done this to Obozo. This mess shouldn’t offend your sensibilities in terms of your politics or party ideology. It should offend your sense of Freedom, Right and Wrong, party be damned.
  16. 11 points
    These are your suppositions not supported by any sort of data and it's a narrative I've often seen used to rationalize Hillary's loss and disparage people who voted for Trump. The poorest people in the US are black and Hispanic. They also vote overwhelmingly Democratic. These are facts. Poorer people are more likely to be the 'automatons' who support politicians promising them free things as the Democratic Party does rather than using these mythical leadership skills you speak of to acquire them through effort. The reality is most people in this world, regardless of political belief, are worker bees. As it should be. This doesn't mean they are unthinking automatons. Too many Chiefs and not enough Indians makes for a bad organization.
  17. 11 points
  18. 11 points
    The rabbit hole goes deep. They never thought Hillary would lose. Here's just one of the many reasons why I use DuckDuckGo for my research searches rather than Google:
  19. 11 points
    We need a grassroots, bipartisan groundswell for term limits. Otherwise, in my opinion, we are doomed. The Swamp controls everything. Unfortunately, half the population has Trump Derangement Syndrome, and aren't willing to focus on anything else.
  20. 11 points
    Yes, in my opinion, this will have trickle-down global consequences. Clearly, since I have a minority opinion on this entire issue, many others will disagree. And I'm fine with others disagreeing. This is a difficult rabbit hole to go down, it's not pretty.
  21. 11 points
    Option 3. renewables and FF will co-exist.
  22. 11 points
    @Mike Shellman While you're right in agreeing with Tom about independent U.S. producers having a bankruptcy-prone business model, you are overly pessimistic and cynical about the extent of our reserves and the role America is playing in the industry. These independent producers took large risks to actually develop shale reserves when all the majors spent time developing deep-sea offshore reserves. Crude oil prices above $100 per barrel allowed these independents to be creative and gave them plenty of room to experiment with new techniques. On the other hand, the crash in crude oil prices forced them to maximize efficiency, spurring more innovation. While many of these companies remained unprofitable through both the boom and the bust, you can't say that they all operated irresponsive to price. Even if you disapprove of every fiscal decision made by every independent, you have to applaud their engineering prowess and technological contributions to the industry. With oil prices significantly up from February 2016 lows, Chevron and Exxon are increasingly focused on developing upstream shale oil, especially in the Permian Basin. The Permian was the only shale oil basin that continued to thrive throughout the oil price crash, as the previously favored Bakken and Eagle Ford shales became too expensive to operate. Today, the Bakken and Eagle Ford are making a comeback, as well as other the other many basins in Texas and Oklahoma. I'm personally optimistic about East Texas and Louisiana, as the Haynesville and Austin Chalk are relatively untapped. Acreage in the Permian is now at a premium, and we are starting to see independents cash out on their Permian assets in favor of other plays with much cheaper acreage. Chevron and Exxon have the benefit of being capable of operating at a much larger scale than any independent, which further cuts down on costs per barrel. If our shale resources are truly going to run out in 5 to 8 years, would the acreage in the Permian remain to be so expensive? Would we really be building pipelines from the Permian to Texas's gulf coast if our shale resources were going to run dry in 5 to 8 years? Of course not! Those pipelines will be in use for decades once they're built. Everyone needs to realize just how heavily stacked are the Delaware and Midland sub-basins (The Wolfcamp A is just one layer), not to mention the thickness of each layer. If anything, the insolvency of many U.S. independents will allow for consolidation through M&A, if not only land swaps. The town of Pecos, Texas was luckily considered an opportunity zone under the new tax bill, and it's located in the heart of the Permian Basin. You'll be damn sure money will continue pouring in to reduce and defer the capital gains earnings of many. With today's investor sentiment, people are fearful of the prospect of another oil glut, getting fatigued by the money-losing independents, and, in some cases, divesting their shares in oil for the sake of being green. With money so tight and investors demanding returns, oil companies are under a lot of pressure to reduce capital expenditures. To further cut costs by scaling upwards, what if Chevron and Exxon did what Barrick Gold and Newmont Mining are doing in Nevada? A Permian Joint Venture would allow for both longer laterals and shared infrastructure across the entire region. Other companies could be allowed to pool in their assets for a stake. Maybe base the headquarters of this joint venture in Pecos and trade it publicly? As for Donald Trump, his cutting of taxes & regulations, opening up of federal lands & waters for lease-sale, and sanctions on Venezuela & Iran has helped America's oil industry greatly. There are many factors contributing to why WTI is nearly $10 less than Brent, and one of those reasons is pipeline bottlenecks. If we had all the necessary infrastructure to send all of our Permian and Eagle Ford shale oil to the Texas coast for refining and/or exporting, we wouldn't have to discount it as much to make up for trucking and rail transportation costs. Global supply plays an important role as well, and OPEC is using leverage where they can. OPEC knows that they can't compete with us on drilling for light oil but can compete with us on drilling for heavy oil. Much of the production OPEC cut was heavy oil, giving them higher margins on heavy oil while suppressing our margins on light oil. We should be getting our heavy oil from Canada, but the Keystone XL, TransMountain, and Line 3 pipelines are all being held up by communist lawyers on both sides of the 49th parallel. (Maybe Alberta can build a pipeline through Saskatchewan and Manitoba to the Hudson Bay, potentially the town of Churchill?) As someone who follows news on WorldOil and Hart Energy, I have faith that technology in geophysics, data science, and sub-sea/onshore engineering will continue to make oil exploration and production more cost effective and efficient.
  23. 11 points
    I share your opinion, Tom, and I have 50 years of experience writing checks to be IN the oil and natural gas business. I understand well economics. Does THIS... https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-03-12/in-private-talks-opec-is-said-to-warn-wall-street-on-nopec sound like America is a swing oil producer in the world, that shale oil can "dominate" the rest of the world with cheap oil exports? This is proof positive that if it were not for OPEC + production cuts the US shale oil industry would be facing $80B of debt maturities in the next 20 months with $40 oil prices. It would not survive that. OPEC knows it is helping the United States shale oil industry by propping up oil prices. Why, do you suppose, it is willing to do that? Because it is afraid of Trump, or US repercussions? Phfttttttttt. It can out produce America in a heartbeat, and make 300 times the money the shale oil industry can. IT IS GIVING AMERICA JUST ENOUGH ROPE TO DEPLETE ITSELF INTO OBLIVION, AS FAST AS IT CAN, so that in another 5=8 years it will be back in the driver seat selling oil to America for whatever it wants. Does the Bloomberg article above sound the US has control over world oil markets? That we are about to become energy independent? If American shale oil is so tough, why isn't Trump asking IT to raise production and lower oil prices? America's energy policies are leading us all down a bad road. We are being led by the stupid.
  24. 11 points
    A good opportunity for Europe to get rid of the US bases. World War II is over, the Cold war is over. I's time to end this military presence from an other age.
  25. 11 points
    Readers may wish to ponder one irreducible truth: the price of oil is not a function of any of the factors described in your Seeking Alpha article, or any "fundamentals" or "technical analysis." The price of oil is a number that clears traders seeking to sell futures contracts and those seeking to buy futures contracts. And those guys are driven by only two factors: their personal greed, and their jittery fears. Greed and Fear run the commodities markets. We delude ourselves by thinking that some fancy technical or fundamental analysis is going to give a day trader, or a contracts trader, some special leg up in a market run on emotions. It is a special fantasy. The next delusion is that participants can somehow out-guess the market. Unless you are strong on psychology - and even not then - you cannot guess the reactions of men exposed to fear. The "market" is the collective of thousands of these guys, all about to make a buck in their zero-sum trading game, out to gore the next fellow, and scared to death that the trade is made in the wrong direction and they are on the cusp of losing their shirt and putting their family into the bankruptcy court. Now, I grant you that, if enough of these guys are holding onto some fantasies of "oil reserves levels" and "production numbers," then their collective can push the market. So, what are those current factors? Iran production will report, officially, significant drops. In reality, Iran will be selling to their favored customers the usual amounts, all sneaked past some US blockade, which will be predictably very porous. The real issue will be, how much cash does Iran have to put on the table to sell their blackballed oil? There is a Number out there that will entice even the most stalwart US supporter into buying loads of Iranian crude - there always is. Will it be twenty bucks? Thirty bucks? Forty bucks? Will the Ayatollah knuckle under to his arch-enemy The Donald to save his country forty bucks? Who knows. I don't. These are imponderables. But the issue for this little debate is that the Ayatollah will be out there doing cargo deliveries along with the rest of them. The official number show dramatic declines, and if you couple that with the "promises" of KSA to up the pumping to meet the shortfall, then the markets are going to be flooded. Meanwhile, the refineries will be shutting down for their usual maintenance times, and will be not taking cargoes. So where is all that oil going to end up? Floating storage, anyone? Trader arbitrages, anyone? The Canada trade mess is ending, the Canadians have pretty much capitulated to reality, The Donald gets to crow (although the depressed Canadian Dollar keeps real US trade gains to basically nothing), and life on the Border continues, albeit a bit rockier with the aggressive acts of the green-shirted Border Patrol (which is a different department from the Customs Officers stations and the Federal Entry Inspection Stations, I point out). The cross-border trade will continue, although cross-Border tourism is taking a hefty hit. The Mexicans have capitulated on internal wages, requiring some substantial portion of their auto workers to make a minimum wage more approaching US factory wages (albeit not US or Canadian union auto wages). So the huge gains of Mexico in auto supply to the USA are likely to be trimmed a tad. Will the US continue to import Canadian rail crude? Probably. Will Mexico export crude and import gas? Probably. Are markets being fundamentally disrupted? Does not look like it. What will the traders do? They will continue to try to screw each other over, and some will succeed, most will fail. The market will continue to be a sinkhole for speculator cash. I see the world ending up, paradoxically, awash in oil, the Trump embargo on Iran actually increasing world supplies, lots of bootlegging, India buying discounted Iranian crude, and the futures prices collapsing. How far? Total guess. Could be fifty bucks, could go lower. There is going to be a lot of oil out there. Fear will hit.
  26. 11 points
    Bill, I cannot speak to your individual investments and nothing I say should be taken as investment advice. You raise some interesting points. Let's look at Trump's background. He grows up in Queens, but is a problem child and his parents send him off to military school to try to instill some discipline. That failed. He has these problems with American women so settles on imports from East Central Europe for his series of wives. He seems to have this history of sleeping with prostitutes and apparently the KGB did a secret pee-pee tape of him in Prague with Russian or Czech prostitutes, that part is unclear. In his business career he has to deal with two groups: local politicians (and their bureaucrats) and bankers. Politicians tend to be not very bright and are easily enough persuaded b y some grandiose building scheme that looks good on paper. Bankers, especially New York bankers, are definitely not bright, they are historically drawn from the "C"-student ranks. You can convince New York bankers to float some scheme if your pro-forma income statements show this big income stream from rents. Trump has built an entire career on using "other peoples' money" and leaving them with the debts to go clean up. He is quite skilled in the street smarts of outdoing bankers. And that is it. Trump has no sense of the noble; he does not go to art exhibits, nor to the symphony hall, nor outside to enjoy nature, his idea of a grand time is to build yet another gaudy building. So when you go elect him as President then don't be surprised that he talks about building The Wall and wants to go intern Muslims. Hey, why not Muslims, he is already interning Mexicans. Trump thus has this Darth Vader personality with the same tiger instincts, so when you elect him he talks about having the power of the Dark Side of the Force, when confronting anyone and everyone from Kim Son Un to Angela Merkel to Justin Trudeau. Now, who wants to go sit in that Cabinet? Other captains of the Evil Empire, people like Steve Mnuchin, the pig who stole over $400 million for himself by foreclosing on ordinary working people using fabricated papers, in the most massive orchestrated theft on the face of the planet, using Far West Federal bank as his vehicle. Mnuchin, true to the Boss' form, marries a blondie actress twenty years his junior in a million-dollar wedding, with The Donald in attendance of course, I think that one was down at Mar-a-Largo, I lose track. So you have this Builder who cons bankers surrounding himself with crooks and scam artists, all of whom have these immature relationships with women. And you put these people in charge in Washington and expect mature, reasoned governmental decisions? You might as well go recruit meth addicts from West Virginia and crackheads from Baltimore and get the same result. No, there is no Grand Plan. No, there are no geniuses on board. It is a motley collection of Ship of Fools, along with some very dangerous ideologues and vicious, amoral thieves, and they want to steal for themselves and above all destroy the Clintonites. Everybody else is just so much peripheral cannon fodder.
  27. 11 points
    Oil prices, as I have maintained, have started to fall. How low can they go? Well that is not easy to answer. Nor should we ignore the fact that we might see oil prices rising once again. But the question is how sustainable will it be? Please read my latest to find answers to some of these questions. https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Dont-Take-Higher-Oil-Prices-For-Granted.html
  28. 11 points
    It was reported yesterday by CNN that Khalid al Falih, Oil minister of Saudi Arabia, said "Two years ago we pulled supply. I think in the near future there will be time to release supply," Al-Falih said. "It's likely that it will happen in the second half of this year. We've had intensive discussions [with Russian energy Minister Alexander Novak], and I think we're aligned on that," . Apparently most observers accept this statement with an attitude of "Of course - no problem". But is a bit more thought and critical questioning needed to understand the consequences of such an action? Let us examine these consequences. It may turn out that the Saudi's and Russia's increasing production is more complicated than they imagine. In fact, since oil can only be produced if you have an empty receiving vessel awaiting delivery of oil, neither country can produce more oil without enticing potential customers to provide a means for receiving such additional oil. Currently we know of no empty tankers at anchor outside either the Saudi or Russian loading ports that are awaiting acceptance of their nomination for a cargo of oil. So how do they accomplish this promised increase in production? The only control lever that Russia and the Saudis possess is the pricing lever. There is no lever, no on/off switch, to force the customer to accept an increase in production. So, in order to entice additional vessels to enter the loading port, ready to receive cargo, the producers must offer a price advantage. This leads to the inevitable conclusion that for the Saudis and Russia to fulfill their promise to increase production they must become more price aggressive. Since demand is currently being readily supplied, and the Saudi/Russian wish to increase production will not increase that demand, the only way that the Saudis and Russia can increase production is to cut the price below that of another producer so that that producer's oil is displaced from the market. In other words, the actions of 2014 are about to be repeated. A similar price decline is possible. One would have thought that the Saudis would have learned from the 2014 experience. But that was Al Naimi. This is Al Falih. Neither minister can put ten gallons of oil in a five gallon bucket. Al Naimi thought that he could regain market share by undercutting the shale oil price. He did not gain market share from doing this, he only lost revenue, as did the entire industry. What suggests that Al Falih will fare any differently? He will not. If OPEC tries, this year, to regain the 1.8 million barrels a day of market share that they conceded to others two years ago, prices will likely return to the $30's. If you lived through the 2014/15 time period, you will recall that, initially, when the price dropped from $110/B to $90/B the industry was sure that this "low" price would soon be reversed. When the price dropped to the $80's, the idea of a quick recovery persisted. When the price keep falling and reached $70, even al Naimi assured the industry that the price would go no lower. He was wrong. The fall continued into the $20's. In spite of the falling prices, the talk of "recovery" did not subside. First it was believed that a "V" shaped price recovery would occur. Then, as time marched on and prices did not recover, the industry shifted to the expectation of a "U-shaped" recovery. When it became obvious that it was more likely an "L-shaped" profile, OPEC gave up. They quit trying to maintain market share through price cutting and conceded 1.8 million barrels a day of the market to non-OPEC. By removing the downward price pressure of trying to maintain market share, the speculative trading community was able to restore the higher prices through persistent demand for and accumulation of the "long" side of the futures market. This same trading community had the usual knee-jerk reaction to the Saudi/Russian announcement of planning to regain markets. The futures price dropped. But will the drop persist? If the marginal producers, the Saudis and the Russians, follow through with their expressed intention of pushing back into the already-satisfied market, the drop in price will continue through the pressure of liquidation of the long side of the futures contracts, while the buyers of real oil take advantage of the producers' price war. A repeat of 2014/15 seems quite likely. For those of you who've become convinced that inventory levels dictate the price, I might point out that the figures for US total stocks, the only numbers reflecting the current time period, show inventories now at essentially the same level as they were at this time in 2015. The price then was comparable to the current level. By early 2016, nine months later, the price had halved and US oil stocks had increased by 100 million barrels. If you believe that surplus inventories at that time contributed to the price drop, then do you similarly believe that inventory levels will again place downward pressure on prices? Will the price drop by 50% again? This is an important time for the oil industry. The developing events remind us again that without an understanding of how prices are actually formed - the pricing mechanism - the industry is left with a random, hit or miss system of oil prices. Good luck!
  29. 11 points
    "Saudi Arabia “will work with major producers and consumers within and outside OPEC to limit the impact of any supply shortages,” a Saudi energy ministry official said on Wednesday, according to state news agency SPA." It does my ole heart good to see how the Saudis care about the world's needs. So selfless. So generous. Excuse me while I wipe a tear.
  30. 10 points
    Unbelievable.That'll show 'em. Some sugar cane derivative on a global landmark of art. ''Let's free The Louvre'' by making it dirty for a few hours. Brilliant. https://uk.reuters.com/article/us-climate-change-activists-paris/activists-daub-louvres-pyramid-with-molasses-in-anti-total-protest-idUKKBN1WC1SF PARIS (Reuters) - Environmental activists daubed the Louvre’s glass pyramid with thick molasses on Friday in protest at what they said were the environmentally-damaging activities of museum sponsor Total, a multinational oil and gas company. Clad in black, the activists belonging to “Liberons le Louvre” (Let’s Free the Louvre) plastered dirty hand-prints over the museum’s famed 70-foot-high glass-and-steel pyramid, a much-loved Paris landmark, as tourists gazed on. Total has been a Louvre sponsor in past years, the museum said on its website, including support for renovations to the Apollo Gallery and the creation of an Islamic arts department. They dipped their hands into bags of molasses - a black treacle that results from refining sugar cane - before smearing it over the structure to denounce what they called “the dirty hands” of Total. “The handprints on the Pyramid can be cleaned away easily, whereas the environmental footprint left by Total is not as easy to clean”, said Victoire, a member of the collective. Another member, Kester Lovelse, told Reuters: “A cultural institution should not be receiving money from a multinational company that continues to endanger the climate, pollute the climate and leave such a dirty environmental footprint on the earth.” “Even if we are not the main patron of the Louvre, we are proud to support the initiatives of this emblematic institution,” Total said in a statement to Reuters. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - EDIT - Then all these people drove home to their houses full of oil based products. Brilliant. They are true heroes.
  31. 10 points
    I read the article ‘Millennials Really Do Ruin Everything, And Big Oil Is Next’, by Julianne Geiger, this morning. Apparently, once again, the message is that we must placate this generation in an effort to survive. I refuse to buy this nonsense and I think that it is unhealthy to do so. I found a list of Millennial characteristics on the internet, and present them here: · Narcissistic · Lazy · Coddled · Delusional · Civically and politically disengaged · Focused on materialistic values Apparently, among Millennials, the trend is “more of an emphasis on extrinsic values such as money, fame, image and less emphasis on intrinsic values such as self-acceptance, group affiliation and community. From what I have read, it seems that we, the ‘older generation’ must bow down to these entitled little snits and ‘work with them’ on such issues as flexible work hours, working from home, ‘onboarding’ (a favorite HR buzzword) them once we have actually given them a job, and so forth. Keep in mind that this generation has amassed a mountain of student loan debt. I will not get into the argument that education is too expensive, but these Millennials knew the rules of the student loan game when they decided to play it, they got their degrees, now they do not want to take responsibility for that decision and want the loans forgiven – that is, the American taxpayer to pay for their bad decision making process. These children did not have to attend universities, they had other options such as the military or a trade…but dammit they were entitled to go to university! Now let’s carry that thought further. We, as corporate entities, are now expected to hire these people, who have already shown poor decision making capabilities, who need to be coddled and apparently have no loyalty to anyone except themselves, and now allow them to create their own schedules and possibly work from home to achieve the right ‘work/life balance’. Does anyone else see the opportunity for abuse and the subsequent lack of production? Furthermore, we are supposed to provide ‘premium on-the-job’ training, an ‘easily climbable career ladder’, and ensure that these people are convinced that ‘their job means something’. Let’s just be honest with ourselves, these Millennials have little or nothing to recommend themselves to the work force. They have no work ethic, no loyalty, poor decision making capabilities. They feel entitled to succeed, yet are not willing to put the effort in to make that happen – we are supposed to ensure that they are successful in their job, not them! Would you actually want one of these people running your companies, making executive decisions and spending your money? Apparently, if we do not coddle these kids and make them feel wanted in the corporate workspace, they will simply leave (remember, no loyalty) and provide their wealth of knowledge and experience to a competitor. Do you remember in the ‘old days’ that you were warned that if you kept jumping jobs that it would show up on your resume and that eventually people would refrain from hiring you? I believe that is still in effect today. Granted, these Millennials are now the pond that we must fish in for talent. But there are still many out there, born in that specific period, who maintain a strong work ethic, are loyal, are willing to work to progress and at the end of the day are appreciative of having a job. These are the ‘Millennials’ which we should be looking to nurture and hire. We should not get into the mindset that we are forced to hire and mollycoddle Millennials simply to fill a slot in the organizational chart. Doing so will degrade any company in the long run.
  32. 10 points
    I think that it has to do more with the desired national policy than anything else. Can the President mandate that companies do not do business with North Korea or Iran? Of course he can. If it is felt that China is detrimental to US economic security he could also invoke that priviledge. This is not socialism, it is more of a national security issue. Furthermore, if your adversary does not 'play by the rules' (the Politburo could easily decree that Chinese companies are banned from doing business in the US) or skirts the intent of WTO rules, why should you handcuff yourself to 'fair play'? This is the crux of the problem. China expects everyone else to play by the rules while they simply ignore them...giving them an unfair advantage. Other examples would be the Nine Line Map/freedom of navigation/ownership of the South China Sea and adherence to environmental norms.
  33. 10 points
    Just for the Record: 1. You are assuredly not an asshole. If I want to find assholes, I head over to Wall Street. Lots around over there. 2. You are most definitely not a communist. I would be hard pressed to come up with a more Capitalist guy. 3. You are assuredly not "ignorant." You know whereof you speak. ------I read your posts with great care. Personally, I find I learn quite a bit from them. Cheers.
  34. 10 points
    Recently there have been those responding to comments in the posts 'Total Nonsense in Climate Debate' (Renewables) and 'Visualizing How Much Oil is in an Electric Vehicle (Oil: General) who apparently feel that it is acceptable to insinuate that someone is less than knowledgeable about the issue, mentally challenged concerning the facts, or simply stupid. Others seem to feel that it does not violate literary decorum or simply good manners to say someone is lying. We are better than this! This type of behavior has 'crashed' similar forums as they simply become 'yelling matches' with neither side willing to accept that another viewpoint exists. Many viewpoints are strongly held and are vigorously defended, this is debate and is encouraged on OilPrice.com, but it should be done in a courteous manner. If you feel someone has an error in their logic, point it out. But be prepared to support your argument in a non-aggressive, logical manner. Some of those who post feel it is okay to post reams of supporting documentation, which is their right on the forum but makes it very difficult for others who may be on the sidelines to follow the debate. We need to accept the fact that on a social media forum such as OilPrice that you generally do not know anything about those who are replying to any issue. It could be an expert in the field or it could be some old roughneck having his Miller time at the keyboard. Regardless of who is posting, we should always give them the benefit of the doubt that they have something worthwhile to contribute. If you feel that they may not be at your intellectual level - you are not required to get into a debate with them. There is no excuse for bad manners. Okay, I need to go to the refrigerator and get another Millers Lite....I'm trying to watch my weight.
  35. 10 points
    NBC is generally always out in "left field," granted. This, however, is a good piece and worth watching: https://www.nbcnews.com/leftfield/video/why-is-texas-burning-millions-of-dollars-of-natural-gas-a-day-1436078147715 For almost a century the Great State of Texas and the Texas Railroad Commission has led the way, set the example for the rest of the world to follow with regards to hydrocarbon conservation, the preservation of bottom hole gas pressure to increase reservoir recovery rates and the prevention of oil and natural gas waste. There are statutory laws in Texas written for the sake of conserving our States natural resources. Those laws have been abandoned and the regulatory agency entrusted with imposing those laws, the TRRC, is now out to lunch. For the TRRC it is all now about good paying jobs and the votes they represent. The three Texas Railroad Commissioners are elected officials. Lots of associated gas from shale oil wells meets severance tax exemption standards so lots of this flaring does not even hurt the State financially. Make no mistake about it, this about jobs and the "politics" of using American shale oil as a foreign policy tool. (I am an active oil and gas operator in Texas, with many employees, and am taking a big risk by saying this about the TRRC. What Sitton says in this video is a joke.) The shale oil industry has been touting "drillable locations" in big shale basins for a decade now. Its part of its sales pitch. It is even allowed to book a portion or reserves from undeveloped, imaginary shale oil wells nearby existing wells. Its borrowed money against those proven, undeveloped reserves. All it has to do to make it all legal, and legit, with the Securities and Exchange Commission and with its lenders is turn those proven undeveloped reserves (locations) into proven reserves by actually drilling the wells within 5 years. Those are SEC rules. Even with all that time the shale oil industry, particularly in the Delaware Basin, and the Bakken of North Dakota, still did get not get its act together to gather this associated gas. But it went ahead and drilled the wells anyway and has got nothing left to do with the gas other than burn if off into the air. So it can export its oil to Asia, all on credit/debt. For all the hubbub about "technology" that is going to save the day, and make shale oil profitable (for the first time ever!), only if we give enough time...phfttttt. We can't even keep from wasting its associated gas up a damn flare stack. The American shale oil industry needs to be on a leash. It needs to be slowed down, its debt paid back, a return made to stakeholders and worldwide oil and natural gas prices stabilized. OPEC and Russia are trying to stabilize prices, why should American not join in? With stable oil prices comes stable, long term employment. With stable oil prices comes long term energy security. Gas gathering infrastructure needs to catch up to oil production, even if that means America's oil needs to STAY in America. Producing this expensive crap as fast as possible is not a good plan. Its a bad plan. After 150 years of oil and natural gas production in the United States there is NO excuse for waste. We're better than that. We live in America, not Siberia.
  36. 10 points
    @GeoSciGuy I have a dissenting opinion of the long term sustainability of shale oil in America that is based on a long oily career, lots of research, lots of communication and study with really smart economists, reservoir engineers and brilliant data hounds. Oil well economics is not difficult to understand, you must simply want to understand. It helps, tremendously, to be in the oil business with a check book. I've been labeled a communist before because I don't buy into the shale oil bullshit; a pessimist and a cynic doesn't phase me. One cannot drill the dry holes I've drilled in my career and not be an eternal optimist. CVX and XOM are not knights on shiny white horses; they will struggle with marginally (un) profitable shale oil wells, same as the rest, just make it up on the downstream side. Those two corporations have 3MM acres of very high NRI acreage to drill; the idea that they will want to merge or acquire other troubled corporations in the Permian, with looming debt maturities, low NRI's, drilling commitments and SEC 5 year rules that will most certainly lead to massive reserve impairments... is just more hope. Like higher oil prices, or more "technological breakthroughs." I am a realist and care deeply about my country and its hydrocarbon future. Reserve growth, much like economic growth, based on debt is fake. Its artificial, and therefore unsustainable. My industry needs to start telling the truth about shale economics and about the definition of "technically recoverable, as yet undiscovered, economic at some unknown price" oil reserves and what it will actually cost Americans to recover those reserves. So we can be ready. Our kids deserve that.
  37. 10 points
    I hardly think @Tom Kirkman is rooting for its demise. He is merely stating what he believes to be true. I am constantly telling my teenagers that if they don't study they will get lousy grades. Sometimes I tell them that their study habits are insufficient to get the grade that they want...that they are making bad choices. I do not tell them this because I'm wishing for their demise. I am telling them this because it is a fact and because I want them to change their behavior.
  38. 10 points
    I don't know what it cost but I am guessing $60m to develop my section. XTO inherited a very old lease signed by my grandmother and her siblings back in 1950. That lease gave us 1/8th but allowed the operator to hold the entire 640 acre section with only one producing well when these wells could only drain about 40 acres. It was a short-sighted and bad lease and now we are stuck with it. The deep rights were separated and the top lease was sold back in the 70s. Humble was the original developer and XTO was the eventual holder of the deep rights. XTO drilled a well back in 2016 before the strippers finally failed to produce enough to hold the lease. We kept pushing the stripper operator to prove paying quantities and they did it by cheating into 2016 but XTO got the new well in during a one month period because it was so easy to get crews back then. They started telling us in 2014 that they wanted to drill 25 wells on our section and I just couldn't fathom that because the operators for the other two sections we owned didn't have anything like that in mind. So they permitted a bunch of wells and sat on them until last spring and then they went in whole hog. XTO drilled and completed 7 wells during March through December of 2018 and brought them on line at the beginning of this year. The January production was 93,000 bbl oil and 383,000 mcf gas. Even at 1/8 our monthly check is mid six figures which exceeds the checks we have gotten from our section with a modern lease where we get 25% and cost free royalty with payment for any flared gas. We currently have two wells on that section. The two other sections were developed by BHP and a small independent. We have done well with the independent but sold the BHP section altogether because it was Minerals Classified which isn't worth owning and it was encumbered by one of the old leases held by strippers for years. BHP ended up selling out and nothing has been developed there since we sold it at the end of 2016. Color me impressed by what XTO has done. They have the infrastructure built to support about 120,000 bbl/mo and have permitted more wells that can be drilled to keep the production rate up for several years. After that, who knows but for now, they will be making $5-7m/mo gross with 12.5% removed for royalty and about 7.5% tax on gas and 4.5% on oil. So figure it out for yourselves, a lot of the acreage in the Permian was held by old stripper leases and isn't encumbered by 25% royalties. To the extent those sites are in the good pay zones, the operators will make good returns.
  39. 10 points
    Guaido is not a USA puppet... He was chosen by the duly elected Venezuelan Parliament... He was subsequently "officially" recognized as the TRUE Venezuelan President by over 70 nations so far........ ps: it is PENTAGON not "pentagone" pps: if the USA actually wanted to end the Maduro regime by force, it would take about 3 minutes work by a Seal Team. ppps: if the USA actually wanted to destroy the Venezuelan Military, it would take about 2 minutes via a "shock and awe" attack via missiles far more sophisticated than S300's could counter. pppps: but the USA isn't interested in interfering in Venezuela other than boycotting it...
  40. 9 points
    Well there are differences in production capacity and processing capacity and it was the latter that was impacted. There are two important levels of processing that were being discussed. The first level is called a GOSP, gas oil separation plant. That component is the first stage in processing the oil by removing the water and then separating the oil and gas which flow to different processing facilities or if oil, to storage tanks. The GOSPs for some fields are distributed around the fields which is the case for Khurais. So no loss of production occurred at Khurais other than what had to be shut in temporarily. What was lost at Khurais was 600kbbl/day of stabilization capacity. That is the part of the processing that removes H2S from the oil and also reduces the vapor pressure so that the oil can be put on ships for export or stored in tanks long term. There is enough oil used domestically in KSA that not all of it needs to be stabilized because it can be sent directly to a refinery instead of on a ship for export. So what has been lost at Khurais is 600kbbl/day may not even be needed but very likely it was being used because that stabilization plant has been expanded by 300kbbl/day in the last 5 years. Why expand if you don't use the capacity? OK so now to Abqaiq where 7mmbbl/day can be processed directly from the oil fields if I understand correctly. The facility at Abqaiq can process 7mmbbl/day from the GOSP phase to the export phase. The oil from the fields first must pass through the spherical oil separators or spheroids as they have been referred to. There are 11 of those at Abqaiq and 8 were damaged which is 72%. The oil must first be passed through those in order to reach the stabilizers. Thus, 5.1mmbbl/day of both production and processing capacity were lost and will not be restored in short order unless some of the 8 were not seriously damaged. However, we can see that at least 5 of the 11 were seriously damaged and will be out of commission for quite some time, that is 45% or 3.18mmbbl/day of production AND processing that is impacted. The media reported on the 5.1mmbbl/day plus 600kbbl/day of lost processing capacity which was correct. Now maybe they don't need all of that processing capacity and weren't using it but they weren't exporting up to their normal levels when this happened. They were at around 6.7mmbbl/day or so for August I believe. In any case, they have certainly lost 3.2mmbbl/day of production processing. So supposing that Abqaiq has 18 stabilizers and five of them were severely damaged. This amounts to 27% of the export processing capacity or about 2mmbbl/day of lost export processing at Abqaiq. However, the remaining stabilizer towers may not all be operable due to proximity to towers that have to be repaired. It may be unsafe to operate the rest of the towers in close proximity that were not damaged. I believe that is part of the obfuscations that are taking place in the media and by KSA itself. What we really want to know is exactly how much export capacity they have available, is it 6.8mmbbl/day? We can't know for certain because some oil is exported from the east coast and some from the west. I believe it was running about 5mmbbl/day on the east and 2mmbbl/day on the west. I think the Khurais field supplies the west while Ghawar and several others supply the east through Abqaiq. I believe that ALL of the export capacity of the east is at Abqaiq. So if Abqaiq was previously processing 5mmbbl/day, the question is how much is it doing now? The claim is that it's processing 4mmbbl/day. Hence, a loss of 1mmbbl/day at Abqaiq. I think the 600kbbl/day lost at Khurais will show up as a loss on the west coast. So it's my view that the most that the Saudis will be able to export going forward, until more units are repaired, is 5.2mmbbl/day. That is a far cry from the 8mmbbl/day they were exporting when they flooded the market and even the 7mmbbl/day that they have been exporting the last year or so. Hence, the market is going to be in deficit 2mmbbl/day for the next two months I think. I assume that the Saudis have some idea of what they can bring back by the end of November but my guess is that it won't be 2mmbbl/day, half that if they are lucky.
  41. 9 points
    This is accurate. Good people leave engineering because companies treat engineers like crap. Specifically: 1) The company expects competent engineers to work for the same, low salaries an incompetent immigrant will accept. 2) Training and continuing education have become nonexistent. 3) Non-engineering departments who have no clue how the company makes money are allowed to tell engineers what they'll accomplish (even if management's vision is impossible) and how they'll accomplish it. 4) The public universities have leaned so heavily on foreign students and professors that they've become incompetent. As a result, young engineers are forced to self-teach. This leads to frustration, burnout, and abandonment of the career. The list goes on, but you get the point: engineers get treated like crap. Eventually, there won't be enough competent engineers left to keep the idiots afloat, and these companies will go belly-up.
  42. 9 points
    I think the easiest arguement to use is this. When we look at sea levels, global temperatures and CO2 levels through the geological timeline there are events where an explosion of life coincides with high temperatures and much higher CO2 levels. The most obvious one was around the time when the dinosaurs were walking the earth. It implies that a warmer environment with more CO2 means bigger trees, more food which leads to much larger animals (See chart below). I've outlined two such events. It would be a reasonable arguement to say cold is far more dangerous to life on earth, for example what killed off the dinosaurs was a meteorite impact which threw up millions or billions of tonnes of dust into the atmosphere blocking out the sunlight and causing extreme cooling and a mass extinction (yes a real one not a greta one). This chart also shows the much tamer mini cycles of warming and cooling due to ice ages in the last million years. The problem I have with the global warming people is they look at data sets which are extremely short for a planet that has existed for 4.6 billion years, it's like looking at a painting with your nose almost touching it. They need to step back and look at the earths cycles over 10s of thousands, hundreds of thousands and millions of years not 120 years or 250. Also I have a big problem about how they select the starting point, I could pick a different one and show the oposite trend.
  43. 9 points
    There is one constant in all of these situations: when the liberty of the public is threatened, the people go out into the streets and carry the American Flag. Not just one American Flag. Hundreds of American Flags. And the reason is perfectly straight-forward: there is nobody else - literally nobody else - who is prepared to step up to the plate and help those people secure their liberty. And that, folks, is the quintessential truth about the Americans. They really are the Land of Freedom. Even when the internal fascists and losers try to take it away. Even when the people wrongly elect someone like Lyndon Johnson. Ultimately, those with the authoritarian tendencies get dumped, and the standard-bearers of American Freedom get elected, and then yet once again America and the Americans are the ones to guarantee Freedom on the land. Where do these brave men come from, the ones who are prepared to put their own lives on the line to secure Liberty for others on the other side of the planet? They come from America. I invite you to ponder that.
  44. 9 points
    Could you please grow up and act/post like an adult?
  45. 9 points
    your criticism is misplaced. Mr. Trump recognizes that "war" is diplomacy that is being carried on by other means, yet still to achieve the same objective. Trump is not out to slaughter the Iranian population. He is not out even to wreck the Iranian military. He seeks to convince the current Iranian leadership to step down, or in the alternative to have the young Iranians overthrow the old - the ancien regime. Trump understands the concept of proportional response: right now, the Iranians knocked out one unmanned drone, basically a piece of military hardware. Is a proportional response to blast a launch bivouac into obliteration? It would be if there was no personnel there. But his intelligence reports that there are some 150 Iranian soldiers at that site, who would get killed. Trump, quite correctly, finds that a disproportionate response, so does not authorize a strike. He simply bides his time. That is a lot more convincing response than say Bill Clinton who attempts to go bomb the Hindu Kush mountains in some vague attempt to nail Osama bin Laden - an effort that was pathetic and doomed to failure. SO far, whether you like the guy or not, whether you think he is a moron and a buffoon or not, he is proving to be the superior leader. He knows how to keep his cool. Not bombing a populated spot is NOT "failure to follow through." It is careful weighing of the potential gains against the potential losses. Do I personally like Trump? No. But I shall give him full marks were they are deserved. Don't let your emotions color your judgment.
  46. 9 points
    No, collusion isn’t a crime but it was the nonsense used by the creators of this BS to bring about an investigation which they hoped would would uncover treason. It did not, not even close. If what you assert as true concerning Don Jr and meetings and Trumps stupid words are collusion then why did the investigation return a negative finding on that order. Saying it’s so doesn’t make it true. As you mentioned saying stupid stuff and inexperience aren’t criminal nor is it collusion. Impeachment.....good luck with that. It doesn’t matter what you call it, if you truly think there is no deep state here in the US you aren’t paying enough attention. If you genuinely feel that your lower dollar makes you more competitive I can see why the Trudeau government seems to be an acceptable Canadian failure to many Canadians despite the economic realities there. As to Trump’s diplomacy you are missing the point of Trump and what his voters sent him to the Oval Office to do.
  47. 9 points
    ^ I wholeheartedly, strongly agree. For those who understand my cryptic note about a different forum, I've received a few (you) green texts in the last year or so on this topic. Also, as a moderator here, I was going to mention that this thread was off-topic for this forum, but then I saw it was posted in the "Geopolitics" sub-forum, so it appears to be fine: "The Geopolitics Forum focuses on all global politics. If it's related to oil please create a thread within the Oil General forum."
  48. 9 points
    The world has not recognized the fact yet, Tom, but the OPEC meltdown has already begun. So far the Saudi Oil minister has duped the trading world into believing that he unilaterally cut production to boost prices. The fact is that not enough customers showed up to buy his crude for him to meet his already reduced expectations. So he actually reduced production more than he planned, not because he wanted to, but because he had too. When the dummies in the trading world click into this fact (albeit slowly), they will head for the exits. The fact is that US production is pushing its way into the market like a bulldozer. And it will not be denied because the IMO dictated that 2-5 million barrels a day of sour crude WILL be replaced within a year. So read the tea leaves and plan accordingly. Exxon apparently has read the signals accurately and are prepared to prosper accordingly. And if they can actually perform at $15/B you can forget, forever, crude prices above $40/B.
  49. 9 points
    Thanks @Rodent for your astute observations. @cbrasher1 fair enough question if you are new here. Note that over the years I have written literally over 10,000 comments about international O&G, and getting close to 15k comments these days. I have over 15 years in international Oil & Gas, and have dealt with O&G companies and EPCs in 30 countries. I am strongly pro - oil & gas and darn proud of it. My beef with the U.S. Shale Oil industry as a whole is it strikes me as debt trap. Up through last year, the U.S. Shale Oil industry as a whole has LOST MONEY. It has SPENT more than it EARNED. It was financed by easy credit. Google it. While OPEC is trying to pull back production to push prices to around $70-ish range, the coffee-guzzling frantic herd of untamed cats known as U.S. Independent Shale Oil producers are maxing out their credit to go ever deeper into debt, while flooding the world with oil. It causes havoc to global oil & gas. It's not the havoc created that I mind so much (heck, I adore Trump's 'bull in a china shop' upending of the Status Quo) but the endless cycle of debt that U.S. Shale industry as a whole keeps digging itself deeper into. It's not sustainable. Why the heck is U.S. Shale Oil industry continuing to overproduce and sell oil & gas (LNG) overseas at cut rate prices, the oil & gas that would be far better suited for DOMESTIC use. When U.S. Shale Oil production starts declining in a few years (less than 5 years from now) .... then what? Short-sightedness, fueled by easy credit and my old analogy of U.S. Shale Oil industry using new credit cards to make payments on maxxed-out old credit cards is a slow-moving train wreck. From a GLOBAL OIL & GAS perspective, my view is $70 oil [Brent] is currently around the optimum sustainable balance between global oil producers and global oil consumers. U.S. Shale Oil industry has shot itself in the foot by overproducing, and actively driving the price difference between WTI and Brent. Don't blame OPEC if you consider WTI prices to be too low. OPEC had been trying to fix this, and the herd of cats in the U.S. are merrily overproducing with joyful abandon, oblivious to their own self-inflicted foot bullets of OVERPRODUCING USING CREDIT. Clearly, I have a minority opinion, many others do not share my opinion. But hopefully I just gave you some views that you can poke around and perhaps reconsider your own opinion. Time to trot out my oil trusty tag line before I piss off too many gung-ho truuuu believers of the U.S. Energy Independence pipe dream pitched by MSM.... Just my opinion; as always, you are free to disagree.
  50. 9 points
    Climate change is to blame? Not population growth? World population 2016 = 7.442 billion. 815 million malnourished = 10.9% World population 2017 = 7.550 billion 821 million malnourished = 10.8%