|
Post by sigurdur on Dec 7, 2015 20:34:53 GMT
Yes, imagine that.
|
|
|
Post by dontgetoutmuch on Dec 7, 2015 23:15:01 GMT
Can't have anything threatening their livelihood now can we?
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Dec 16, 2015 6:21:35 GMT
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Jan 15, 2016 18:28:14 GMT
www.reuters.com/article/us-iran-oil-exports-idUSKCN0UT098With Iran ready to resume business as usual with the world under a historic nuclear deal, Tehran will target India, Asia's fastest-growing major oil market, and old partners in Europe with hundreds of thousands of barrels of its crude. Iran expects the United Nations nuclear watchdog to confirm on Friday it has curtailed its nuclear program, paving the way for the unfreezing of billions of dollars of assets and an end to bans that have crippled its oil exports.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Jan 16, 2016 16:31:15 GMT
I have to agree with this fellow. Lead time of 3-5 years indicates that oil production will continue at current levels.
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Jan 16, 2016 17:26:46 GMT
There is a distinct possibility that Lockheed Martin compact fusion or Low Energy Nuclear Reaction (LENR) could actually be approaching a move from research to actual implementation see the Huff Post and what we are seeing with oil prices is a fire sale before the energy market is completely disrupted by reliable base load and dispatchable 'free energy'. I can see no reason for OPEC to be pushing oil ever lower in price other than concern to get as much from it as possible before it becomes as worthless as whale oil. The world would then be full of suicidal Malthusians.
|
|
|
Post by nonentropic on Jan 16, 2016 18:00:25 GMT
What we are also viewing is the folly of government drive energy planning and winner picking. Namely wind and solar.
LED lights were predicted be economic about now by the Economist 15 years ago and what we see is the adoption of the technology in a rational process driven by need. their method is very basic you track cost against time and note the projected cross over to economic.
Naut you may be right but even a full blooded conversion to such new technology's will take 50 years.
what is more critical to the oil price is how much long run decline in production will occur at each price level. I still hold the view that oil was never worth $120 and current production will slide as high as $60.
my pick is the shale play is not very interesting at $70 and deep offshore oil is higher than that.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Jan 16, 2016 19:34:56 GMT
|
|
|
Post by glennkoks on Jan 17, 2016 5:36:08 GMT
A couple of numbers about the oil glut I find interesting. The rig count in the U.S. is down approximately 1300 rigs from it's high about 18 months ago (roughly 66%). However, internationally the rig count is only down about 1%. Drilling costs are certainly higher here but I think it highlights just how dependent some of the petroleum producing economies are on hydrocarbons. They are in desperate need of cash and selling oil and gas is their only real source of income. To make up for the lost revenue they are simply pumping more oil.
With the current sell off in the worldwide equity markets and the overall general slowing of the economy expect the poorer petroleum producing countries to simply pump more and more. Any reductions in production here due to attrition will probably be filled by foreign producers.
So how low will it go and how long will it last? I think it depends on the developing worldwide economy. If the saying "as January goes so goes the year" is true we can expect a very, very tough year in the oil patch and for commodities in general. If you make a living producing commodities, hang on. It's going to be a wild ride.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Jan 17, 2016 9:42:57 GMT
Not sure how cold the world is, but it is cold here this early morning. -22F as I type. The good thing is, I have fossil fuel in my fuel tank so the house is not frozen solid!
I think you have hit is Glenn. The USA oil production will decline, as the cost of production is higher than other plays in the world. Saudi Arabia's intent was to break Russia, with fall out in Iran because of low prices. They also intended to break the USA production of shale, and it looks like that goal will be achieved.
I think it will be longer than a year of tough times in the US oil patch, and it will be tough times for farmers as well. The AGW gloom and doom in ag is not fitting the reality at all. Production of food basics continues to rise unabated. It will be economics that causes it to decline now, not warming.
|
|
|
Post by flearider on Jan 17, 2016 10:50:25 GMT
There is a distinct possibility that Lockheed Martin compact fusion or Low Energy Nuclear Reaction (LENR) could actually be approaching a move from research to actual implementation see the Huff Post and what we are seeing with oil prices is a fire sale before the energy market is completely disrupted by reliable base load and dispatchable 'free energy'. I can see no reason for OPEC to be pushing oil ever lower in price other than concern to get as much from it as possible before it becomes as worthless as whale oil. The world would then be full of suicidal Malthusians. now i see why the saudi's are going to sell off there oil company aramco .. hmmmm
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Jan 17, 2016 20:02:39 GMT
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Jan 17, 2016 20:15:44 GMT
Which do you suppose will happen first? The dismantling of the fossil fuel to energy infrastructure? Or the next cold phase? How many btu's are there in a politician?
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Jan 17, 2016 20:48:35 GMT
Which do you suppose will happen first? The dismantling of the fossil fuel to energy infrastructure? Or the next cold phase? How many btu's are there in a politician? A LOT, but not nearly ENOUGH!
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Jan 18, 2016 15:24:04 GMT
Which do you suppose will happen first? The dismantling of the fossil fuel to energy infrastructure? Or the next cold phase? How many btu's are there in a politician? Bloviation meet reality There has been a politically led attack on power generation worldwide or at least in the 'first world' (sic) Where we see the base load power capabilities of major countries being reduced to the bare minimum and very little extra dispatchable power generation added, unless you think that windmills are dispatchable power. This is all a nice political game and thickens the wallets of many politicians and bankers. However, the reality of a coming cold phase will force the electorate to face the reality that (1) it is cold and getting colder and (2) they have been lied to about power generation by the politicians and about climate by climate 'scientists'. This could all become very nasty faster than the politicians can act, definitely faster than new baseload power can be added. UK looks like it could soon lose 10% of its baseload power as Drax goes offline - the EU suddenly decided that woodchips were not sustainable or some such - but it looks like the subsidies the company thought they would get for woodchips will not be available. If Drax goes the UK will get blackouts as with Drax it only has around 3% spare capacity. From what I have seen the USA is moving into a similar state as large numbers of coal fired baseload power stations are going off line due to EPA regulations unsupported by science but supported by greens and fake law suits. Imagine New York City or London (UK not Kentucky) losing power on a regular basis during the winter. This might affect the politicians' popularity. If a significant problem occurs in the grids (which is very likely as they are destabilized by wind power) and a blackout lasts more than a few hours. I would expect the kind of lawlessness that occurred in New Orleans after Katrina but affecting ten times as many people. I would not want to be a politician in that scenario. Yet they are sleepwalking into it.
|
|