..

[CanadianCrude1 + 6]

23 hours ago, Wastral said:

Breitbart, unlike CNN, tells you WHO they are quoting and where the numbers come from. 

I suppose the sattire is the abject lazyness/ignorance of certain posters flaming themselves ...

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/how-biased-is-your-news-source-you-probably-wont-agree-with-this-chart-2018-02-28

Pretty common knowledge that Breitbart has never been an unbiased news source. We'll let the laziness speak for itself. 

[BenFranklin'sSpectacles + 762]

20 hours ago, MaxNix said:

Hello WS -

You've made me think harder.  When I took economics, a drop in oil prices was good since so much of the money spent on oil went overseas to pay for imports.  Now that the U.S. is somewhere between breakeven and an exporter, your argument is much stronger.  I need to get used to the "new" scenario.  I agree that moving money among domestic companies is about a wash for the US economy, although maybe not for employment - oil is above average in revenues per employee.

An interesting topic would be to discuss if anyone is willing to bet on strong oil demand for enough years to justify major E&P expense in new "frontiers".

 

19 hours ago, Boogieman said:

Simple I think to understand. If the money goes overseas, it shrinks the amount being spent domestically. If instead that money is diverted locally, it increases gpd. What's so hard to understand?

If we wanted, we could refine this analysis: there are two Americas, one leftist and one conservative.  Oil money is now being recycled within the country, but it doesn't recycle to those factions equally.  Conservatives benefit more from domestic oil consumption than leftists do.  Depending on which faction you claim, that's good or bad. 

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,190]

On 6/14/2019 at 6:37 AM, CanadianCrude1 said:

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/how-biased-is-your-news-source-you-probably-wont-agree-with-this-chart-2018-02-28

Pretty common knowledge that Breitbart has never been an unbiased news source. We'll let the laziness speak for itself. 

Unlike you I can read and differentiate, facts(quoted from references) from OPINIONS(BS blather on Breitbart)...  Maybe you will join the rational world and learn to differentiate between the two as well. 

[Tom s + 5]

On 6/11/2019 at 9:58 AM, Falcon said:

Some good may come out of lower oil prices.  Good for consumer spending thus good for economies 

The reduction in GDP it will bring outweighs saving $3 on a tank of gas and the economic benefit of that.  

[Tom s + 5]

On 6/11/2019 at 10:54 AM, Falcon said:

The old "create job" argument. How come every discussion turns into a defense of high oil prices blog. 

Self interest. Denial. 

It will get a lot worse for those that over leveraged . The next 2 years will be hell.  

But Shale oil production and exports will thrive.  Just the reality.

Those posters that are collecting royalties, small independent producers or small drilling or fracing companies or invested in small independents aren't happy.

That doesn't mean the US SHOULD LEGISLATE:

 "OIL PRODUCER WELFARE SYSTEM"

Cowboy up.  You made some good money.  Party is over.

I don't think u can call a reasonable $60/barrel wti "high". At $60 everyone wins, consumers, producers, shareholders, etc. 

[James + 30]

Sorry but I’m not trusting an industry with over $100 billion in debt, worsening well conditions, and ignoring long-term repercussions to carry us forward, shales best days are in its last days, and the next few years will see continuous production growth declines as well as more financially sound operations spending within cash flow. And I believe the continuous  upwards reserves estimates are a fraud and being used as a part of the great shale scheme to lure in more capital. I’m not an oil expert compared to some commenters, I’m just giving my 2¢. 

[Falcon + 222]

On 6/15/2019 at 8:54 PM, Tom s said:

 

Edited July 30, 2019 by Falcon

[Vinoth Joseph 0]

The global is economy is under Recession.The US-CHINA Trade war exists.The European economy is Weak.The Issues among OPEC is under pressure. These factors will suppress the American oil boom. 

[Mike Shellman + 548]

On 6/15/2019 at 11:51 PM, James said:

Sorry but I’m not trusting an industry with over $100 billion in debt

Upstream public and private debt, including infrastructure, is closer to $300 billion. Midstream gathering to service the shale oil industry, who knows? Nobody knows how much public and private debt as been incurred to provide services to the shale oil industry, like HPP, sand, rigs, that sort of stuff. Its a lot. More money is being borrowed every day to put pipe in the ground in hopes that a.) the upstream sector can itself keep borrowing money to drill wells to fill that pipe or b.) a miracle will occur and the price of oil will go to $85. 

Free market nuts conveniently overlook unprofitability and debt. If you are IN the oil business you want stable, higher prices; that is particularly true if you are a royalty owner. Why sell minerals that your dad left you for $50 when you could sell then for $70? Things have now become so desperate for the shale oil industry it is resorting to stuff like "the greater good for society" crap, i.e., what would the price of gasoline be without shale oil? Don't buy that hooey. Nobody in the oil business remotely feels that way; we want higher, stable prices. The greater good baloney is to convince people that shale oil is now too big to fail and its benefits to society are so great it needs government support. That's not true. It needs to be able to stand on its own financial feet. PROFIT IS WHAT MAKES AMERCIA GREAT ! 

Some people thing goats grow on trees and so does shale oil.  Like conventional oil around the world shale oil is a finite resource, its extraction heavily dependent on price...at least in a capitalized society. Lack of profitability in the shale oil business model will catch up to it.

 

[wrs + 893]

18 minutes ago, Mike Shellman said:

Upstream public and private debt, including infrastructure, is closer to $300 billion. Midstream gathering to service the shale oil industry, who knows? Nobody knows how much public and private debt as been incurred to provide services to the shale oil industry, like HPP, sand, rigs, that sort of stuff. Its a lot. More money is being borrowed every day to put pipe in the ground in hopes that a.) the upstream sector can itself keep borrowing money to drill wells to fill that pipe or b.) a miracle will occur and the price of oil will go to $85. 

Free market nuts conveniently overlook unprofitability and debt. If you are IN the oil business you want stable, higher prices; that is particularly true if you are a royalty owner. Why sell minerals that your dad left you for $50 when you could sell then for $70? Things have now become so desperate for the shale oil industry it is resorting to stuff like "the greater good for society" crap, i.e., what would the price of gasoline be without shale oil? Don't buy that hooey. Nobody in the oil business remotely feels that way; we want higher, stable prices. The greater good baloney is to convince people that shale oil is now too big to fail and its benefits to society are so great it needs government support. That's not true. It needs to be able to stand on its own financial feet. PROFIT IS WHAT MAKES AMERCIA GREAT ! 

Some people thing goats grow on trees and so does shale oil.  Like conventional oil around the world shale oil is a finite resource, its extraction heavily dependent on price...at least in a capitalized society. Lack of profitability in the shale oil business model will catch up to it.

 

Can't stop calling names and trying to categorize people can you?  As to the greater good for society crap, why would you run around foaming at the mouth about wasting natural gas then?  Clearly it's just another opportunity to bash shale.

Edited June 17, 2019 by wrs

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

CNN's credibility rating is now in the toilet. You can check it out on various sites, but the gist is:

https://www.dailywire.com/news/18088/death-spiral-along-its-credibility-cnn-ratings-john-nolte

[BillKidd + 139]

On 6/12/2019 at 9:11 PM, butasha said:

Thought of you Tom when I read this article a few minutes ago.

Nolte: Death spiral continues as CNN loses one-third of primetime audience

https://www.breitbart.com/the-media/2019/06/12/death-spiral-continues-cnn-loses-one-third-primetime-audience/

And your source? Breitbart. Hahahahahahahaha!

[Rodent + 1,424]

On 6/11/2019 at 1:14 PM, Ward Smith said:

People on this forum should ask themselves if they're driving like they used to? If not, where has that "demand" gone? 

The IEA and the global warming enthusiasts have been assuming this linear progression of increasing oil consumption. It ain't happening, if anything it's gone down instead of up. And that, as they say, is that. Silly supply demand…

Anecdotal, but I don't change my driving habits based on the price of gasoline. It is what it is. I have to go from point A to point B no matter what the price is. I suspect that when a consumer decides to reduce gasoline consumption, it is a change for good (selling auto and taking public transportation, buying EV, buying @Jan van Eck's electric bike, etc). 

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

14 hours ago, Rodent said:

Anecdotal, but I don't change my driving habits based on the price of gasoline. It is what it is.

Rodi, you can also drive a little slower, go easy on the acceleration, that sort of thing.  I have this 50-mile run I occasionally do, on the Interstate.  The last 12 miles I can either get off and go "on the flat" on a secondary road at 50 mph, or go on the Interstate but have to climb up a longer grade for a mile or more, then run along the back ridge, then back down.  I probably can save more than a quart by going on the flat. I can save a full gallon overall by throttling back from 70 to 55.  A driver can stretch fuel.  Figure from 23 mpg to 28 mpg. just by dropping speed.

On one test, I ran from Maine to Connecticut late at night, in a car that usually gets around 24 mpg.  By driving gently (and letting the speed deteriorate on grades, to keep from adding fuel feed)  I was able to nurse it up to 39 mpg for the run.  Now that is quite a difference.  You would not want to drive like that in the daytime with lots of traffic around you, but it can be done very late at night.  

Now, if your car were set up with a hydraulic accumulator in the drive train, then you could maintain speed on the grade by tapping into the accumulator.  You would recharge the accumulator on that downgrade.  The manufacturers don't do that because it drives up the price of the car.  But it "could" be done. Alternatively, society could drill tunnels through the mountain ranges, which would save a ton of fuel.  They don't do that, either. 

Edited June 20, 2019 by Jan van Eck

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

On 6/17/2019 at 8:14 AM, Mike Shellman said:

PROFIT IS WHAT MAKES AMERCIA GREAT ! 

Americans is what makes America great. 

[D Coyne + 305]

6 hours ago, Jan van Eck said:

Americans is what makes America great. 

I thought it was Canadians that make America great.    Definitely improves the hockey.

Edited June 19, 2019 by D Coyne

[Matthew w + 27]

9 minutes ago, D Coyne said:

I thought it was Canadians that make America great.    Definitely improves the hockey.

If only Canadians loved their oil industry as much as hockey. Where would the economy be then? :).

[Ward Smith + 6,615]

12 hours ago, Rodent said:

Anecdotal, but I don't change my driving habits based on the price of gasoline. It is what it is. I have to go from point A to point B no matter what the price is. I suspect that when a consumer decides to reduce gasoline consumption, it is a change for good (selling auto and taking public transportation, buying EV, buying @Jan van Eck's electric bike, etc). 

To be clear, I wasn't talking about elasticity of demand based on price. It's more consumer habits, the greater ability to telecommute, choosing to live closer to work to reduce commute times, car pooling, and your examples. America is producing more oil than ever before and simultaneously using less per capita. At one time we were easily consuming 25% of world oil production. Now, I'd guess less than 15%. Yes the rest of the world is using more, and so are we, but not at the same rate. 

I'd also say, many countries with high demand haves low ability to pay. If their exchange rate is so bad, whether or not oil is high, from their perspective it is potentially Much higher. 

[Wombat + 1,028]

On ‎6‎/‎16‎/‎2019 at 10:59 AM, Tom s said:

I don't think u can call a reasonable $60/barrel wti "high". At $60 everyone wins, consumers, producers, shareholders, etc. 

Maybe even the tax-man will win one day? Here in Australia, we have had income tax cuts nearly every year for the last 15 years thanks to our commodity exports. If America exports enough oil & LNG, maybe your govt can balance it's books in 5 years time? The S&P 500 represent half the world's largest companies but don't seem to provide much revenue to govt?

[Tom s + 5]

On 6/16/2019 at 8:23 AM, Falcon said:

Gas is a cost to do business or live .  Oil prices will become a free mkt soon.  Pipelines and export terminals coming soon. 

The Oil industry will employ same amount of people at $50 oil as $60 oil.  Believe in Free Markets.  If you want price fixing move to Venezuela. 

I don't believe in price fixing per se however oil is the life blood of the world, probably 4th to only food, water, and oxygen for in terms of necessity for our civilization.  Its production should be controlled to a certain degree to ensure reliable and adequate supply.  This continuous yoyo effect with balance has lead to lack of discovery because all capital is being spent on extraction.  When way or another we will inevitably shoot ourselves in the foot in terms of supply or cost of that supply if we continue with the status quo.  Just my opinion.