|
Post by Andrew on Feb 12, 2016 6:48:43 GMT
Andrew, Sig would have to be one of the most respectful people to enter these pages, please assigning negative attributes to people of different origin is offensive. I have spent many years in both the US and Europe and both places are blessed with the smart and the stupid. you may have noticed that your entry into this site has resulted in a collapse of interest from others. interact with respect or go. should we have a vote to determine if you are welcome? You get the forum you deserve. Defending somebody like Sigurdur is scientifically insane. How about you start being proactive for once and try and find out what Sigurdur thinks about latent heat, or barycenters, or cooling bodies? Your call. Either you act responsibly and defend physics and reason, or just sit there and do nothing and make it out it is unreasonable to point out stupidity on a web site that people like Leif svaalgaard posts on.
|
|
|
Post by nonentropic on Feb 12, 2016 7:33:58 GMT
Andrew you see us as fools and idiots why further wobble our world, just go.
There has been no sign of Leif for some time on this site the question is who is the switch of?
Enjoy your brave new world elsewhere free of us.
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Feb 12, 2016 8:08:01 GMT
Andrew you see us as fools and idiots why further wobble our world, just go. There has been no sign of Leif for some time on this site the question is who is the switch of? Enjoy your brave new world elsewhere free of us. I do not see you as being an idiot. Foolish yes. People here are making stupid claims and we barely get a sound out of you, when you are the only person here other than me who is capable of reasoning scientifically (who has so far got involved in these insane discussions) These c.unts have been insulting me for years simply for trying to explain school boy physics.
|
|
|
Post by icefisher on Feb 12, 2016 8:53:19 GMT
These c.unts have been insulting me for years simply for trying to explain school boy physics. This comment probably ought to be framed and tacked to the wall. LOL!
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Feb 12, 2016 18:26:13 GMT
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Feb 17, 2016 14:49:22 GMT
|
|
|
Post by walnut on Feb 17, 2016 16:17:03 GMT
We "won", US energy companies weathering the storm, foreign enemies blinked first. Maybe their costs of production are not as low as the media has been telling us.
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Feb 17, 2016 17:35:49 GMT
We "won", US energy companies weathering the storm, foreign enemies blinked first. Maybe their costs of production are not as low as the media has been telling us. Remember they have one salable commodity and the bottom is dropping out of the price as everyone now seems to be finding that they also have it in their backyard. So all those spending plans built on $100+ oil futures are going away potentially for decades or more, and the Rial is dropping fast. It's not cost of production so much as debts on spending that do not look repayable with oil at $20-$30.
|
|
|
Post by nonentropic on Feb 17, 2016 21:00:24 GMT
being an American shale producer and to be told you are a winner is little hollow when the sale price is in the 20's.
this all hinges on demand growth against a weaker economic growth picture and decline or not in production at current prices.
the current surplus is a million barrels per day sounds a lot but we are collectively using 95 million barrels per day. I think the US producers will struggle to maintain production under $50/bbl. what is clear is that $100/bbl was above the economic equilibrium.
fundamentally there is an economic reality that we are experiencing but in the background who really believes the key oil producers are politically stable and what price would smooth their population. I am picking $50 to 70/bbl as the Goldilocks zone.
|
|
|
Post by walnut on Feb 17, 2016 21:55:04 GMT
Real estate prices have backed off a bit here in Tulsa but still fairly stable so far. I don't think many layoffs yet. But this can't last much longer and the price had better not continue to drop or there will be big trouble in this part of the country.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Mar 25, 2016 15:00:28 GMT
|
|
|
Post by glennkoks on Mar 28, 2016 15:05:18 GMT
being an American shale producer and to be told you are a winner is little hollow when the sale price is in the 20's. this all hinges on demand growth against a weaker economic growth picture and decline or not in production at current prices. the current surplus is a million barrels per day sounds a lot but we are collectively using 95 million barrels per day. I think the US producers will struggle to maintain production under $50/bbl. what is clear is that $100/bbl was above the economic equilibrium. fundamentally there is an economic reality that we are experiencing but in the background who really believes the key oil producers are politically stable and what price would smooth their population. I am picking $50 to 70/bbl as the Goldilocks zone. Unfortunately there never seems to be a "Goldilocks" zone. The oil and gas industry is either in full expansion "get rich" mode or in "hunker down" and survive mode. With a very large fracklog I don't expect to see much of a high side in 2016. Any increase in price will be met with an quick increase in production. This most likely runs well into 2017 with a slow wide U shaped recovery. Expect more and more bankruptcies as this drags out.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Mar 28, 2016 15:18:59 GMT
A agree Glenn.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Apr 6, 2016 4:40:37 GMT
www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-aliso-canyon-blackouts-20160405-story.htmlState officials warn that Southern California could face as many as 14 days of scheduled blackouts this summer because of depleted reserves of natural gas caused by the massive leak in Aliso Canyon. The canyon in the hills above Porter Ranch is a crucial gas storage facility, supplying 17 power plants in the Los Angeles basin. But the four-month leak that began in October left the facility at one-fifth of its capacity and new injections of gas have been prohibited until all of its wells have passed comprehensive tests. Officials estimate the storage facility won’t be back on line for months, leaving local power plants without a key source of natural gas.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Apr 15, 2016 12:45:14 GMT
www.yahoo.com/finance/news/opec-report-suggests-massive-oil-203952161.htmlThe headlines reacting to OPEC’s April Oil Market Report generally read “OPEC concerned about global oil demand” and as such, oil prices traded down slightly on April 13, despite an overall positive market. Well, I’m concerned about global oil demand also, so I thought I better read their report. Clearly, the commodity never performs well in the face of stagnant or shrinking economic activity – no commodity does – in fact, nothing does. Except maybe alcohol sales. In any case, I am concerned with exactly how worried OPEC was about global oil demand and by extension, global GDP growth. Guess what? It turns out that despite the green lobby’s insistence, world economic activity is strongly reliant on hydrocarbon consumption and vice versa.
|
|