Oil Slick Stuff

Sort by newest Sort by date
Market Update

10:35 am : The US Dollar Index is pushing higher in current trade, which is causing most commodities to sell off again.

February natural gas began to rally early this morning, from the unchanged line, and recently hit session highs of $5.653 per MMBtu. Ahead of today's inventory data, where consensus is expecting a draw of 230 bcf, the energy component was trading 1.8% higher at $5.591 per MMBtu. Following the data, which showed a draw of 245 bcf, natural gas saw an initial spike before pulling back toward the flat line; it is now higher by 6.2 cents to $5.558.
http://finance.yahoo.com/marketupdate/overview?u
 
Last edited:
Oil slips 2%

By Hibah Yousuf, staff reporterJanuary 21, 2010: 3:00 PM ET

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Oil prices fell near $76 a barrel Thursday, tracking a broad selloff on Wall Street, and following a greater-than-expected rise in gasoline supplies.
What prices are doing: Crude oil for March delivery declined $1.66, or 2.1% to $76.08 a barrel.

Click chart to view other commodity prices.

http://money.cnn.com/2010/01/21/markets/oil/index.htm
 
Last edited:
01/22/2010 - Updated 7:41 AM ET
1.gif

Oil futures extend losses on weak demand worries
1.gif
By Polya Lesova, MarketWatch

FRANKFURT (MarketWatch) -- Oil futures fell below $76 a barrel on Friday, extending their recent losses, as concerns over weak energy demand continued to weigh on sentiment.
Crude oil for March delivery dropped 21 cents to $75.87 a barrel in electronic trading on Globex. Earlier, the contract hit an intraday low of $75.62 a barrel.
http://markets.usatoday.com/custom/usatoday-com/html-story.asp?markets=COMMODITIES&guid=%7BBACD9C0A%2D2169%2D445F%2DA0BE%2DB93DBA92BA9E%7D
 
Last edited:
Damn! what a shame...Feces Occurs..as long as there is men and machines, there will be accidents..but at least the spill is cleanable and contained..a few years ago without more modern cleaning and containment techniques, this could have been a real ecological mess like the Exxon Valdez thing in AK was...just the down time at the port is what hurts now...:notrust:
 
The nature of the beast, I wish there was a way so stop this needless pollution of the environment.:mad:
 
Update= now 18 miles of coastal waterway is closed to all shipping:



http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/6833095.html


Port Arthur waterway closed as oil cleanup continues


The Coast Guard has extended the safety zone surrounding Saturday's massive oil spill in the Sabine Neches Waterway, calling for an 18-mile stretch down to the Gulf to be closed as cleanup crews work to skim 420,000 gallons of crude oil from the water.

No boats, vehicles or people will be allowed to enter the area, which could be contaminated with dangerous chemicals from the crude oil, officials said.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The collision occurred in the canal near Port Arthur. It's now flowing downstream to the three wildlife areas on the Gulf.

Everything is shut down- but I think there will be a lot of animal life killed by the time this one is over.

 
This article is dated, but gives relatively honest projections of output and usage, in my opinion.

http://www.getreallist.com/the-ieas-come-to-jesus-moment.html

Non-OPEC production is expected to increase from 50 mbpd today to 52.5 mbpd by 2012, but the additional production will be mainly from unconventional sources such as natural gas liquids, tar sands production, extra heavy oil, coal-to-liquids, even biofuels.
 
Show-me said:
So are you saying Ethanol is completely safe to the environment or never gets spilled?
Click to expand...
IMO, Ethanol is ludacist - GO NUCLEAR - Not the old '50s technology. - Just Look at Norway and Swednen today - they are recycling 98% of the Nuclear waste - have Volvos and cars the run on electric (pennys on what we are paying).
ITS A HUGE THREAT - IN TYING OUR FOOD SUPPLY TO OUR ENERGY NEEDS.
I SCREAM FOUL, AND B.S!!!!, :mad:
VR
 
I agree on the nuclear technology point as a way to create energy, but ethanol is another useful fuel. Is it harmful to the environment.....not really. At least not in the reaction. The point is to reduce our intake of fossil fuels, which is feasible.
 
It depends on the price of petroleum, and whether or not a large enough ethanol factory is produced.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price_of_petroleum

It may or may not have been feasible in August of 2005, when oil prices were lower, but when they reached new levels in 2008, it probably was economically expedient.

There's an economic cutoff point that has to be reached. For example, the Germans used gasification of coal in WWII because they needed the synthetic fuel to drive jets at the time. At the same time, their production of war material was higher than ever, since the 2 inputs were coal and steel. Eventually, the Ruhr choked on its own supply, since they couldn't drive the tanks off the lot to where they were needed.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Show-me said:
So are you saying Ethanol is completely safe to the environment or never gets spilled?
Click to expand...

No, I am saying:

1. Ethanol is made here, so it doesn't have to be brought in in tankers.

2. When ethanol does spill, it dilutes into the water rather quickly, and becomes less lethal more quickly. In a day or two, it's all diluted and evaporating, rather than kiling wildlife for years.

3. And if we used more ethanol, we'd have to import less oil, thereby reducing the chance of collision accidents in the water.
 
SkyPilot said:
Ethanol May Not Be Worth It.

http://feinstein.senate.gov/05speeches/ethanol-oped.htm
Click to expand...


With all due respect, the person who wrote that op-ed doesn't know what he/she is talking about. They cite Pimental in that article, a notoriously rabid anti-ethanol guy on the payroll of big oil, who has been widely discredited for years for using very obsolete data.

No, ethanol is far more efficient that what is written about there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top