Oil Slick Stuff

Sort by newest Sort by date
04/29/2010 - Updated 3:01 PM ET
1.gif

Crude gains 2% as dollar weakens; natural gas stumbles Natural-gas futures extend losses after monthly output figures
1.gif
By Claudia Assis, MarketWatch & Polya Lesova, MarketWatch

SAN FRANCISCO (MarketWatch) -- Crude-oil futures on Thursday settled above $85 a barrel for the first time in nearly a week, but natural-gas prices fell sharply as government reports showed an increase in weekly inventories and February output.
Crude got a lift from a brighter picture for Greece's financial rescue package as well as by signs of improvement in the U.S. labor market and a decline in the dollar.
Crude for June delivery, the most active contract, gained $1.95, or 2.3%, to $85.17 a barrel on the Comex division of the New York Mercantile Exchange.[more]
http://markets.usatoday.com/custom/...-4A94-8284-2288F274BF88}&loc=interstitialskip
 
04/30/2010 - Updated 8:36 AM ET
1.gif
Poised for April rise, crude contract extends Thursday gains
1.gif
By Kate Gibson, MarketWatch

NEW YORK (MarketWatch) -- Crude-oil prices climbed Friday, putting the commodity on a path to register a third straight monthly gain, on optimism over a global economic recovery and on heightened prospects for a rescue package for Greece.
Crude for June delivery, the most active contract, added 29 cents to $85.46 a barrel on the Comex division of the New York Mercantile http://markets.usatoday.com/custom/usatoday-com/html-story.asp?markets=COMMODITIES&guid=%7B094A7029%2D0544%2D4649%2DAFB2%2D552F11D90CA7%7D
 
Last edited:
04/30/2010 - Updated 10:19 AM ET
1.gif

Crude oil trims gains after consumer sentiment index
1.gif

By Claudia Assis, MarketWatch & Kate Gibson, MarketWatch

SAN FRANCISCO (MarketWatch) -- Crude-oil prices relinquished much of their earlier gains after a survey of consumer sentiment showed a drop in April from the prior month, while natural gas turned lower. [more]
http://markets.usatoday.com/custom/...S&guid={094A7029-0544-4649-AFB2-552F11D90CA7}
 
Well, I'll be gone until about Market close, I have to go shopping with the wife, I hope you can feel my pain. See Ya then! face1.gif :laugh:
 
KD weighed in on Drill Baby Drill. Big surprise that I agree with him.

From the Market Ticker:

Ok, I'll say it - and I live here in the potential "impact zone".
Drill Baby, Drill!
Yes, I recognize fully that this is an ecological problem - the depth of which we do not yet know, and it could lead to damage to the beaches right here where I live.
That doesn't change a thing.
I supported drilling right here, right now when I moved here, I have written extensive on this in Musings before I started The Market Ticker, I have supported drilling here on this blog, and I still do.
Why?
Because without energy sources we do not have an economy and essentially everything these days contains plastics - which are made of oil. Our food is grown using diesel fuel to cultivate, plant and harvest it. Fertilizers are made from natural gas.
We can live in a cave or we can live in a modern society. Either way we take risks - in a cave you risk freezing to death, among other things. In a modern society you risk the possibility of environmental damage.
Unlike most of the people in this debate, I accept the risks that come with energy exploration and development, because all of the alternatives come with risks that are at least as high, and may be higher.
I have long supported nuclear power, for example, despite living downwind from Fermi I as a child - the only plant in the history of nuclear power the United States that ever threatened to go supercritical (no, Three Mile Island did not.) Even though I would have almost certainly been killed had they lost control of the core in that plant, I would still vote for a nuclear plant to be built 10 miles upwind of me - right now, right here, today.
All choices comes with risks and costs, along with the benefits. In this case we have a society and economy that are absolutely dependent on energy. We can try to deny the reasons why liquid hydrocarbons fuel our planes, boats, cars and trucks, but what we can't reasonably do, today, is change that, and there is plenty of reason to believe from a simple study of thermodynamics that no such realistic option will present itself during my lifetime.
This is a matter of thermodynamics - that is, physical laws, not desires, wants, or so-called 'innovations" or the lack thereof.
So yes, folks, I still think - today, with the possibility that we will have oiled beaches this weekend right here, right now, in my back yard, that we should indeed Drill Baby Drill.
 
Minnow said:
KD weighed in on Drill Baby Drill. Big surprise that I agree with him.

From the Market Ticker:

Ok, I'll say it - and I live here in the potential "impact zone".
Drill Baby, Drill!
Yes, I recognize fully that this is an ecological problem - the depth of which we do not yet know, and it could lead to damage to the beaches right here where I live.
That doesn't change a thing.
I supported drilling right here, right now when I moved here, I have written extensive on this in Musings before I started The Market Ticker, I have supported drilling here on this blog, and I still do.
Why?
Because without energy sources we do not have an economy and essentially everything these days contains plastics - which are made of oil. Our food is grown using diesel fuel to cultivate, plant and harvest it. Fertilizers are made from natural gas.
We can live in a cave or we can live in a modern society. Either way we take risks - in a cave you risk freezing to death, among other things. In a modern society you risk the possibility of environmental damage.
Unlike most of the people in this debate, I accept the risks that come with energy exploration and development, because all of the alternatives come with risks that are at least as high, and may be higher.
I have long supported nuclear power, for example, despite living downwind from Fermi I as a child - the only plant in the history of nuclear power the United States that ever threatened to go supercritical (no, Three Mile Island did not.) Even though I would have almost certainly been killed had they lost control of the core in that plant, I would still vote for a nuclear plant to be built 10 miles upwind of me - right now, right here, today.
All choices comes with risks and costs, along with the benefits. In this case we have a society and economy that are absolutely dependent on energy. We can try to deny the reasons why liquid hydrocarbons fuel our planes, boats, cars and trucks, but what we can't reasonably do, today, is change that, and there is plenty of reason to believe from a simple study of thermodynamics that no such realistic option will present itself during my lifetime.
This is a matter of thermodynamics - that is, physical laws, not desires, wants, or so-called 'innovations" or the lack thereof.
So yes, folks, I still think - today, with the possibility that we will have oiled beaches this weekend right here, right now, in my back yard, that we should indeed Drill Baby Drill.
Click to expand...
I also have advocated this and agree 100%...The future will develop alternatives for sure...Hopefully in our life time, but realistically, probably not...so in the mean time as science progresses to find and create alternatives that are renewable safe and clean…Oil, NG and Coal is here for a while to bridge the gap until science finds that alternative, So get use to it and accept it...Drill baby Drill
 
Drill Baby Drill (smarter)
I agree and all technologies at their disposal need to be utilized to do it as safe and ecologically friendly as possible.
This is an enormous disaster but chit happens and if there is negligence involved monetary penalties are on the way.

Minnow,
(no, Three Mile Island did not.)
When you're not on the inside and are only hearing reports over the radio and TV everything is always going to feel Supercritical. I grew up within sight of the Cooling towers and for a few days thought that the place where I was born would be evacuated and in my life time would never be able to visit again. At 15 years old it was a supercritical event in my life.
 
WorkFE said:
Minnow,
(no, Three Mile Island did not.)
When you're not on the inside and are only hearing reports over the radio and TV everything is always going to feel Supercritical. I grew up within sight of the Cooling towers and for a few days thought that the place where I was born would be evacuated and in my life time would never be able to visit again. At 15 years old it was a supercritical event in my life.
Click to expand...

Those were Denninger (the blogger) words. I think he corrected later on because a nuclear engineer gave him the correct term: prompt critical.

Denninger basically said that he lived close to the only reactor to go prompt critical... which was not Three Mile Island.

I believe that unnamed engineer stated that reactors go supercritical all the time -- it just means the fission rate is increasing. I doubt the media back then or nowadays would bother to use the correct terms.

I'm with you, though, if I had lived there, that would be supercritical to me.
 
FireWeatherMet said:
Lets have a little Energy "reality check".

The Future...Is Now.

More and more electric/hybrid cars are on the streets...3-4% of all cars now, projected to be over 10% in 5 years.
http://greenliving.lovetoknow.com/How_Many_Hybrid_Cars_Are_on_the_Road


BioJetFuel already works well on test airline flights.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=jet-biofuel-ready-for-takeoff

Actually, there are several alternative fuels available (since one on its own won't be enough to satisfy our energy needs. But a synergistic (Buster, that means when combined greater than the sum of their parts) easily would. Here are some well known ones.

http://www.bionomicfuel.com/top-5-fossil-fuel-alternatives/

All we need is...brace yourself...Government. Government to force a mandated transition with incremental target years. We could be rid of 90% of our oil use in the next 10 years...if we put in place the proper infrastructure (Electric Refueling stations, mass boi fuel farming and large tax subsidies).

Well hell let's just shut down the darn Oil Companies right now!!:laugh: View attachment 9204
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
FireWeatherMet said:
OK. Especially since I'm in the G fund now.:D

No...seriously...the oil co's have to see the writing on the wall. When surveyed, a large percentage of the country wants to shift out of oil and into alternative fuels (including nukes). They are likely planning for the transition. 10-20 years from now I could see Exxon/Mobil and BP owning millions of acres of bio-farmland...employing tens of thousands of farmers and agricultural scientists. But...before they do that...Big Oil wants to cash in its biggest chips...that is the profits to be made when the real crisis of demand outstripping supply occurs. When oil goes from current levels to $100...$150...$200...$300 per barrel. That scenario ove a 5 year period would be more profitable than the last 20 years for them has been. They want that golden goose first,no matter what it does to our economy in the short term.

I say don't let the Oil industry do this. Give them an opportunity to lead the energy transition, but let US the people (ie gov't) tell them when this happens. Don't let Big Oil dictate our energy policy. And instead of "shutting them all down...lets do this incrementally to cause minimal pain to those industries. There's a smart way of doing this.
Click to expand...
I would suggest just using logic, that we do devote as much time an energy as we can to replace fossil fuels as quickly as possible, until we get to the point where we use it only to make plastics and every other product you can think of as long as it doesn't pollute the atmosphere. In the mean time we have to pursue Oil like a banshee to the keep elevating prices from breaking our country's back, YES I'm for wind, solar, bio fuel (as long as we are not burning food for humans and the animals we consume) all of that stuff. This should be a slow transition by necessity, but it can't happen overnight, any other strategy will fail with dire consequences. That's as liberal as I get!:laugh:
 
FireWeatherMet said:
NNuut...you crazy liberal you!!!!:cheesy: Glad to see we agree on some things.

In terms of energy transition and keeping our prices stable there are 2 ways to do that thru the basic law of supply vs demand.

- We can do what you had suggested...a slow transition thru neccessity. In this case "supply" (or a decrease of it) leads to the "necessity". Problem is that "necessity" means demand starts outstripping supply....which will immediately start runaway upward prices. If we wait till then, then we'l all be paying 5-8 bucks a gallon for gas...along with similar increases in transported foods and goods supplies like we briefly had 2 years ago. Can we spell runaway inflation?

- The other way is to reduce demand, thru an immediate, slow but steady transition. It has already begun with all the Toyota Prius's driving around my house. Keep it going. This would be a much smoother transition, with oil companies trying to keep prices as low for as long as they can, for fear of spooking a mass avalanche into hybrids and alternative fuel cars in short order.

In the laws of the market...it makes more sense to me to do the latter.

Thats as much of a "Free Marketeer" modern conservative as I get. :confused:
Click to expand...
I think you may be getting the idea and the necessity? I call this Common Sense.:D
 
summary_header_deepwater.jpg


SUMMARY
At approximately 10 p.m. (CST) on Tuesday, April 20, an explosion rocked Transocean's Deepwater Horizon drilling rig in what has escalated into one of the nation's deadliest offshore drilling incidents of the past half-century.
After the initial blowout occurred, the leaking wellhead continued to feed the fire onboard the semisub until the rig ultimately collapsed beneath the deep waters of the U.S. Gulf of Mexico. [more]
http://www.rigzone.com/news/topics/deepwater_horizon.asp
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top