Ok..I had asked IH to delete that board...I will check it out....thanx..
hi my friend title no show at favorite's board.
Up and Coming, Royal Quantum Group (RYQG.OB) Woodford Shale Play! Royal Quantum announces update to shareholders.
Completion work is continuing on the Gleason #4-16 well located on the Nemaha Ridge in north central Oklahoma approximately 8 miles southwest of Perry...The company is in discussions with a third party to acquire a sizable land position within the region that could potentially host substantial oil and gas reserves in multiple zones...
Read full release at:
Royal Quantum Group Drilling in Woodford Shale, latest shale to join the parade.
Royal Quantum Group, RYQG.OB announces drilling has been completed in Gleason #4-16 well, located in Nemaha Ridge in north central Oklahoma.
Woodford shale, within Anadarko basin, is territory for Devonian black shale resource. Large operators in area include Devon Energy and Chesapeake Energy.
Read further at http://www.bullstockalerts.com/blog/?p=22
Twitter with us at http://www.bullstockalerts.com
Big Oil: Dark Skies Ahead?
February 06, 2009
by Prudent Speculations
In what is likely to be one of the more interesting stories in 2009, the Financial Times on Wednesday discussed the impact that the falling price of oil will likely have on some of the world’s largest multinational oil companies.
Despite having record breaking profits in 2008, 2009 looks to be a different story altogether as the decline in oil from $150 to $40 could lead to hard choices for oil companies. Particularly on whether or not to continue with their current level of capital expenditures, share buybacks and dividends or to reduce these expenditures to reflect their current cashflows and the price of oil. Below you will find a fascinating graphic from the Financial Times that breaks out the cashflows of six of the worlds largest oil companies and the impact that the fall in the price of oil will likely have on them.
The negative cashflows that will likely be achieved by BP, ConocoPhillips (COP), Shell (RDS.A) and Eni (E) at $35 dollar oil will force these companies to either reduce their capital expenditures and shareholder payments or to borrow in order to continue with their current expenditure policies. While these companies have certainly built near fortress balance sheets, no management team enjoys shelling out more cash than what is coming in on unprofitable capital expenditures and through the return of capital to shareholders.
In addition to the cashflows of the world’s largest oil companies being impacted by low oil prices, their balance sheets are as well as the firms will likely have to take dramatic writedowns on assets that were purchased at premium valuations during 2008. A prime example of this occurring can be seen in ConocoPhillips most recent quarterly report in which it took a $34 billion dollar writedown.
Unlike their smaller brethren, BP, ConocoPhillips, Exxon Mobil (XOM),, Shell, Total (TOT) and Eni have held up fairly well given the recent swoon in the financial and commodity markets. This trend will likely not continue, as investors are likely to become increasingly skittish of these firms because of the ever increasing chance that they will be forced to take on substantial amounts of debt to maintain their current capital expenditures and shareholder return policies. Over the last year these six companies have performed as follows:
XOM: Down 2.8%
TOT: Down 25.3%
RDS: Down 26.4%
E: Down 28.0%
BP: Down 30.3%
COP: Down 38.3%
Of these six, it is clear that Exxon Mobil has significantly outperformed its fellow big oil peers. Despite having $31 billion in cash, the company’s quarterly earnings reports will likely be ugly going forward as the company’s free cashflow will undoubtedly come under significant pressure. At its current price the company’s earnings multiple is 2-3 times its smaller mid and small cap peers. Despite its ability to radically reshape the oil and gas industry with its strong balance sheet, the stock should not be held at these levels given the current price of oil.
The company's most recent quarterly report, and the ones that will come after it, will weigh heavily on the stock’s momentum investors, as they will become increasingly uncomfortable holding shares in a company with a deteriorating balance sheet and income statement.
There are many other smaller oil and gas stocks that I would rather own over Exxon that have already fallen significantly and are now trading at levels much more reflective of the current environment within the energy markets. Unless oil returns to $70+ dollars per barrel, Exxon Mobil will more then likely come under significant pressure going forward as the gap between its valuation and that of its fellow big oil peers begins to converge.
The Top 10 Peak-Oil-Related Stories of 2008
Tom Whipple, Editor
Steve Andrews, Publisher
January 5, 2009
ASPO - USA
1. The Global Recession
The impact that declining world oil production will have during the coming year, and possibly longer, is now inextricably intertwined with the course of the economic recession that is sweeping the world. During 2008 the world’s stock markets lost some $30 trillion in investor equity. Nearly every major government was forced to begin massive bailouts of financial institutions and many have started to support failing businesses. The end is not in sight.
While many peak oil observers long anticipated that faltering world oil production would lead to much higher oil prices and eventually to an associated economic meltdown, the setbacks of the last year have complicated the situation. While it is clear that worldwide demand for oil has stopped growing and has started to decline in the last six months, it is not yet clear just how fast demand is falling. The sudden drop in oil prices has further complicated the situation by setting off a race between falling prices and slowing economic activity.
Nearly all observers are forecasting that the economic situation will get worse for at least the next six months as foreclosures increase, real estate values continue falling, retail downsizes, and unemployment grows. From there on opinions vary. Some believe that the trillions in financial and business bailouts and massive government stimulus spending will stabilize the US and world economy, eventually leading to economic growth. Others believe that spending so much borrowed money will only exacerbate the current situation and that far worse times are ahead.
Some peak oil pragmatists look at the US airlines and auto industries as the canaries in the recession’s coal mine. Hit last spring with oil prices too high to work with their business model, plus a recession, the airlines blinked. Virtually all announced major schedule cutbacks. The recession has pushed the Detroit Big Three to near bankruptcy. This year will likely determine their future.
2. Price Volatility: Who Knew?
In a case of extreme dissonance, oil and gas prices first rocketed and then crashed in unprecedented fashion during 2008, setting records and trashing forecasts in all camps. Oil: from $90 to $147 to $34? Natural gas prices doubled, then dove. Some coal tripled, then retreated too.
Why the enormous swings? With hindsight, the drivers to the upside seemed to be a mix of the fundamentals and speculation. First and foremost, it was obvious but too often overlooked that flat oil supply and increasing demand is a recipe for a price surge. Then too, stockpiles were well below norms during the spring price run-up. A growing mismatch between marginal supply (e.g., Iran’s heavy oil) and available refining capacity to process that oil didn’t help. Shrinking exports from Russia, Mexico and 13 other leading exporters—down 2.5% from 2006—sent a price signal.
On the investment front, the sinking dollar and hammered equities drove investors towards the full suite of commodities, not just oil. Goldman Sach’s report in early May forecast $150-$200 oil within 6-24 months—one of several analyses that probably stimulated some late-cycle gambling. And any geopolitical moves in the oil patch—violence in Nigeria, nuclear chatter from Iran, explosions on the BTC pipeline in Turkey, etc.—were bullish factors pushing up prices and driving fisherman, farmers and truckers to strike and protest the financial pain.
And then came the crash, a 75% price drop over just 5 months that stunned producers. While the crash handed staggering American consumers what is now a billion-dollar-a-day unscheduled bailout, remember that the oil price run-up—a primary trigger in most of the major recessions since 1973—was a leading-edge factor in our deepening recession.
An almost tragic byproduct of 2008’s violent oil price swings is that it sends confusing signals about our long-term oil supply constraints to decision makers at all levels. For example, low gasoline prices are helping lure some car-buyers back to near-dead SUV showroom floors…
3. Falling Investment = Building the Big Boomerang
During the first half of 2008, spiraling costs in the oil sector led to the periodic announcement, especially from oil exporting countries, that a few production or refinery projects were being delayed, decisions put on hold. It didn’t help that the industry—from fully-booked drilling rigs and tankerage to an over-booked and aging engineering corps—appeared stretched thin. The International Energy Agency sounded warnings of under-investment by the oil industry.
Then came the crash. During the fourth quarter, when demand declined and oil prices dropped to four-year lows that few industry players had anticipated, a daily drumbeat of project delay and cancellation notices flowed from the industry. Among the earliest casualties were the Alberta tar sands processing projects which require massive amounts of capital for every barrel of production capacity; one company even announced a 50-percent cutback at their existing tar sands operations because $40 oil does not cover current costs to excavate and separate bitumen from sand. Additionally, some proposed deepwater projects don’t work with oil prices under $60 a barrel.
Tighter credit is also taking its toll. While major international oil companies may have financing in place or can self-finance projects, smaller companies delayed or cancelled plans due to lack of liquidity. That same liquidity issue also battered prospects for front-loaded renewable energy financing as well as funding for extremely expensive “clean-coal” and coal-to-liquids projects. While national oil companies made massive profits through September, the October-December price drop hammered those producing countries where the bulk of their oil revenues are diverted to run government programs; they will soon be in no position to invest in new production developments.
While worldwide demand for oil is falling, it isn’t dropping as fast as investment in new production. Bottom line: the slowdown in new oil production projects will obviously have a major effect on future oil production rates. It may be several years before cancelled or delayed projects fully impact the world’s capacity to replace declining production, let alone grow that production again. If the economy should stabilize during the next year or two, and demand for oil snaps back, expect prices to boomerang back above $150. Investment uncertainty guarantees higher price volatility just a few years out.
4. The IEA Changes its Stance (will U.S. EIA, CERA and Exxon-Mobil follow?)
During July 2007, the International Energy Agency announced its intention to conduct a bottom-up study of worldwide oil field production in order to better inform their OECD member about prospects for future supply growth. They more than hinted at accelerating supply and price troubles to come. That warning was echoed again in July 2008 when the IEA cut its supply forecast for the next five years. Realism seemed to be settling in at the Paris-based energy office.
On November 12th, the IEA released its World Energy Outlook 2008, a forecast that broke with their past tradition of projecting demand and then assuming supply would rise up to meet it. The report was a curious mix of unreality (liquid fuel supplies can grow steadily between now and 2030) and unprecedented warning of an energy crisis to come. Breakthrough findings included:
“Current global trends in energy supply and consumption are patently unsustainable.”
Half the world’s oil comes from the 110 largest fields; many of those are post-peak and aging.
The natural decline rates [all drilling stops] for fields past their peak is 9% and rising.
Observed decline rates [drilling/maintenance continues] for fields past their peak production rate is 6.7% today, rising to 8.6% by 2030.
Much of the media coverage of the WEO 2008 focused on the stated need to discover and/or develop 64 million barrels a day—“6 new Saudi Arabias”—of new production by 2030. Digging deeper into the IEA’s detailed assumptions uncovered some trends which IEA forecasts that raise major questions:
Will the US will only lose 400,000 bpd in production over the next 22 years, compared to 800,000 bpd over the last seven years?
Will Mexico only lose 500,000 bpd from its 3.5 million bpd in 2007, despite production at their mainstay producing field (Cantarell) being in a tailspin?
By 2030, will China only lose 200,000 bpd, despite China’s admission that their production should peak by 2012; etc.?
Yet despite these and other weaknesses, the report’s “unsustainable” position statement was one of many that broke new ground.
Finally, in an important post-script to their WEO 2008, Dr. Fatih Birol, the IEA’s chief economist, was interviewed by the Guardian newspaper during mid-December. When asked what the phrase oil production “leveling off towards the end of the projection period” meant, Birol gave the interviewer the date 2020. Yes, peak oil by 2020… While that’s still way too optimistic a view for many realists and pragmatists, that statement represents a major turnaround for an agency that has previously supported the “no peak in sight” mantra.
5. The Campaign and the Elections
Until the price crash which started in July, it looked as if this year’s US federal elections were going to be about gasoline prices and little else. As prices rose to the $4 - $5 level, politicians running for office became so nervous that proposals to counter high gasoline prices were flying all over the landscape. Some wanted to cut gas taxes; many wanted to scrap environmental restrictions on drilling; and some wanted to ban speculation. That most of these suggestions were of dubious value or would take many years to implement was of little import. It was the appearance of concern that counted.
As gasoline prices fell during the summer and fall, however, and the need for immediate action diminished, the wilder proposals disappeared, but a fundamental disagreement of whether more domestic and offshore drilling would solve the problem continued to November. Yet the hard facts—that offshore drilling won’t contribute substantively to supply for a decade, that peak flow from the “new offshore” would perhaps equal 1+ percent of current consumption, etc.—were generally missing from the dialogue.
The election of Barak Obama to the presidency clearly will bring about a major change in the US government’s approach to global warming and energy policies. As yet, there has been little discussion of oil depletion by the new administration outside of ritualistic and poorly-informed pronouncements about energy independence. So far statements and appointments made by President-elect Obama show that he will clearly place a major emphasis on reducing fossil fuel emissions, promoting renewable sources and efficient use of energy, goals which are compatible with preparations for peak oil.
6. OPEC Cuts Production
Last spring, OPEC, and most particularly the Saudis, came under heavy pressure to increase production as oil prices were increasing so rapidly it seemed as if industrial civilization was about to be pushed over the edge. President Bush visited the Saudis and Riyadh even put on a special producer/consumer gathering in June to announce that the Kingdom was increasing production from newly completed wells to help with the crisis.
Within weeks, however, the landscape shifted and oil prices began the unprecedented plunge that brought the average prices that OPEC received for its oil from an all time high of $147 a barrel in early July to $35 last week. As prices fell through $100 in mid-September and then $60 in mid-October, OPEC became increasingly nervous. Not only was oil falling below the cost of exploring and drilling, for new production, the producers’ national budgets which are heavily dependent on oil revenue were being devastated.
In a series of meetings beginning in September, OPEC announced production cuts that now total on the order of 4 million b/d. As ignoring such cuts is a long tradition within OPEC, the oil markets were rightly skeptical that the cuts would actually be made. Much to OPEC’s chagrin, oil prices continued to fall as each production cut was hinted at or announced. In the last week, however, as more details of the cuts have been announced and OPEC’s customers have started reporting that they expect to receive less oil in coming weeks, the market’s skepticism has been slackening.
7. The Large Exporters: from Boom to Busted
As oil prices rose steeply in recent years, OPEC and the other major oil exporters benefited greatly. In 2001 the average value of OPEC oil exports for the year was $23 a barrel and in 2008 it was on the order of $95. This four-fold increase in oil revenues had varying effects. Some countries such as Norway and the smaller Gulf States quietly stashed the money away in sovereign wealth funds for the benefit of their grandchildren. A few, such as Russia, Iran, and Venezuela, became belligerent, using the new-found wealth to promote their leaders’ ideological goals and great power aspirations. Resource nationalism abounded as governments felt they could now do without foreign investment and technical expertise.
In the last six months however, many of these aspirations have been brought up short by the collapse in oil prices. Hardest hit have been those exporters with large populations to support such as Iran (65 million), Venezuela (26 million), Russia (140 million), Mexico (110 million) and Nigeria (146 million). Adding insult to injury, production in all five of these countries is either declining or flat while domestic consumption increases; that means declining net exports—another hit to the bottom line for the exporters, plus a looming pothole for the world’s oil importers.
Although 2008 was a banner year for exporters, as prices were above $100 a barrel until September, after the price crash their cash flow is becoming a huge problem. Development projects are being cancelled, stock markets are crashing, budgets are being reworked and political unrest may be in the wind as countries like Iran consider eliminating large gasoline price subsidies. Even some of the more belligerent geopolitical posturing seems to be moderating as governments turn to more pressing domestic issues.
Unless prices rebound soon, major exporters with little other revenue will be hurting.
8. Shale Gas: Game Changer or Rope-a-Dope? [or “a mixed blessing”]
After essentially no net increase from 1994-2006, U.S. natural gas production rose 4% during 2007 and will have increased between 6% and 7% in 2008, despite shut-ins for Gustav and Ike. The biggest single reason for this is increased flows from shale gas. In a world without deep recessions, this success might have continued the current run for several more years. Indeed, shale gas will still play a key role in US natural gas production for decades, but that isn’t unqualified good news.
The industry knew about shale gas for many decades. In fact, the nation’s second-largest producing field today—Texas’ Barnett Shale—was discovered in 1981. But back then, the industry didn’t know how to exploit the resource on a large scale. Application of horizontal drilling in the Barnett Shale changed that. Compared to drilling vertical wells for conventional gas, this unconventional resource requires more drilling, more hydraulic fracturing work—more cost and more energy inputs. The breakeven costs (plus 10%) for most of the shale-gas plays falls between $5 and $6.50 per Mcf of natural gas. During the last five months of 2008, natural gas prices dropped 50% from their July peak; the combination of that price crash plus recession-induced destruction of demand for natural gas forced the gas industry to start idling rigs. Of the 1600 rigs drilling for gas as recently as September, as many as 400 will likely be stacked soon.
There’s a related nasty catch with shale gas: during the first year after a shale-gas well is drilled, upwards of 2/3 of the ultimately recoverable gas flows from the well; that’s a lot faster decline rate than conventional wells experience. So the more reliant we become on shale gas wells, the more susceptible we will become to wider swings in supply. Relying on shale gas is likely to cause much more volatility in prices.
9. Food vs. Fuel Hit Pocketbooks Worldwide
2008 started with a rash of reports by respected organizations about a worrisome if highly predictable phenomenon: increased use of biofuels was helping push up food prices worldwide. Two Purdue University agricultural economists published in late 2007 that two-thirds of food cost increases from 2005-2007 were related to biofuels. During the previous six years, land planted for biofuels increased from 12 to 80 million hectares as subsidies and national policies mandating their use were driving the rush to biofuels. The UN’s food price index, based on export prices for internationally traded foodstuffs, climbed 14 percent in 2006, 37 percent in 2007, and continued apace into 2008.
Rapidly rising food prices obviously result in hunger and political instability as more people become desperate in their search for affordable food. During 2008 food riots erupted in Mexico, Italy, Morocco, Pakistan, Yemen, Senegal, Mauritania and elsewhere. Press reports popped up about “how the rich are starving the world by making biofuels—dubbed by some as “a crime against humanity.”
In the US, the ethanol industry and its reported $25 billion in federal handouts started in 1978, picked up enormous momentum after the August 2005 Energy Security Policy Act, and accelerated even faster after Congress passed the Renewable Fuels Standard in December 2007. Now, thanks to one of the most divisive agricultural policies in the US, there are 178 ethanol distilleries in the US that will likely consume over 30% of the US corn crop and produce just under 600,000 b/d of corn ethanol. (Adjusted for energy equivalency, that offsets roughly 400,000 b/d of US oil consumption—around 2% of our daily oil diet—excluding the large net-energy problem that plagues corn ethanol.) Yet after 30 years of R&D, a $0.51/gal tax credit and tariffs on imported biofuels, the industry still can’t compete; large ethanol player VeraSun filed for bankruptcy in late October, and now the industry is asking Congress for bailout dollars.
The year ended with an op-ed from the Investor’s Business Daily in which they made this point: “The heavily subsidized ethanol industry is the latest to seek a federal bailout. If there is any industry that deserves to go bankrupt, it's this one. Time has come to stop putting food in our gas tanks.” In the interests of the food vs. fuel battle, we tend to agree.
10. Global Production Peaks, on the Production Plateau
The EIA reports that since 2005 production of conventional oil has been on a plateau, cycling up and down between 72 and 74 million b/d. In July 2008 production reached a new all-time high of 74.86 million b/d and has been dropping since. As OPEC is currently implementing production cuts totaling 4 million b/d, several major producers such as Mexico and Russia are in decline or do not have much growth potential; and investment in new production is drying up due to economic conditions, the likelihood that the July bump to a new high will stand as the all-time peak of world conventional oil production is increasing.
The IEA reports that “all-liquids” production which includes conventional oil, biofuels, natural gas liquids, and tar sands production, reached 86.5 million b/d in November, but this is subject to revision.
It is ironic that the all-time peak of world oil production seems to be happening in the midst of a global recession of unknown duration. While it is possible that the global economy could rebound in the next few years and markedly increase the demand for oil, it is clear that the industry is no longer able to respond with large increases in production as it did earlier this decade. All things considered, it is inevitable that declining world oil production, which is currently linked to declining demand and OPEC policy, will eventually be governed by production constraints. These constraints, due to a combination of geological factors, lack of adequate investment, geopolitical conflicts, and resource nationalism, make it likely that oil production will never again reach the highs seen in 2008.
PPTL Premium Petroleum Corp.: Continues to Seek up to $5,000,000 in Financing to Tie-in Existing Wells and to Fund Additional Drillin
CALGARY, ALBERTA -- (Marketwire) -- 10/30/08 -- Premium Petroleum Corp. (PINK SHEETS: PPTL) continues to pursue financing alternatives. Debt, equity, and joint venture options are being reviewed.
The financing proceeds will be used to: equip and tie-in our Viking gas well (9-22); (approximately 1100 yards to the tie-in point), to test, complete, equip, and tie-in our Upper Grand Rapids Flowing Oil Sands well (14-15); to expand our drilling program; and for general working capital purposes
It is anticipated that the gross cash flow from these two wells could exceed $70,000 per month at current commodity prices.
Bruce A. Thomson, B.A.Sc.; President & CEO states: "In spite of oil price decline, our discovery remains economic due to the fact that the specific gravity of our oil is such that it will "cold flow", which permits conventional recovery methods to be utilized. We are fortunate as a junior company to not only to have approximately 15,000 acres in Oil Sands lands but also to have made a new pool Flowing Oil Sands Discovery."
FRGY:Frontier Energy Signs Letter of Intent With Weekley Energy Group 1 L.P.
NORTH LAS VEGAS, NV--(MARKET WIRE)--Jan 9, 2009 -- Frontier Energy Corporation ("Frontier" or "the Company") (Other OTC:FRGY.PK - News) is pleased to announce the signing of a Letter of Intent to form a joint venture with Weekley Energy Group 1 L.P. The joint venture concerns the acquisition of four separate leases containing a total of 27 well bores, of which three wells are producing. The remaining wells will be re-entered in four stages over a 120 day period from the date of closing and will use Weekly Energy's proprietary technologies and processes to re-complete along with the technical expertise of Frontier's consultants.
The joint venture entitles Frontier to receive for its initial funding 75% net revenue interest (BPO) and 50% net revenue interest (APO). The joint venture will continue to pursue additional re-entry and re-completion partners within the area of mutual interest in a 50/50 partnership.
Richard Shykora, CEO of Frontier Energy, stated, "We are looking forward to a successful relationship with the Weekley Energy Group and through Mr. Anderson's expertise to evaluate this opportunity, we feel this is a stepping stone to a potentially larger scale joint venture with the Weekley Energy Group.
"Weekley Energy Group 1 L.P. is pleased to enter into the joint venture with Frontier Energy. The addition of Mr. Anderson to our team will definitely strengthen our geophysical and technical expertise as we move to increase our inventory of well bores and acreage in the area of mutual interest containing tens of millions of recoverable barrels through our unique applications and technological processes."
About Frontier Energy Corp.
Frontier is an exploratory oil and gas business headquartered in North Las Vegas, Nevada. Our goal is to build a solid portfolio of assets through the acquisition of leases and explore and develop the opportunities on the individual leases.
World's Worst Ecological Disaster Ignored By Mainstream Media
The World’s worst ecological disaster, ever, ignored by mainstream media! Remember Chernobyl, Three Mile Island, Hiroshima and Nagasaki? They sure got mainstream media coverage. However a disaster which makes these events pale in comparison is being quietly ignored. Why? 600 milligrams of uranium were used in Little Boy which blew up Hiroshima. Seventy thousand people were killed by the blast, another seventy thousand people died excruciating deaths as a result of the radioactive uranium released in the explosion.
We all know how dangerous it is when uranium from nuclear power plants is exposed to the atmosphere and what extraordinary lengths and exceptional expensive procedures are employed to keep the spent uranium from contaminating the environment. The clean up costs when uranium gets out are astronomical. In 1979, depleted uranium (DU) particles escaped from the National Lead Industries factory near Albany, N.Y. It was estimated that less than 0.39 kilograms per month of DU escaped the factory. The cost of cleanup? In excess of one hundred million dollars.
Now this will blow your mind. Instead of storing the depleted uranium in ultra heavy duty storage facilities our dear government decided to make bullets out of it. Yea, bullets, like in weapons, things you shoot at people and tanks and the like. No, this is no different from the depleted uranium that is used in atomic bombs. Most atomic power plants require an enriched version in their reactors about 10% of the reactors can use DU.
It turns out that if you machine nuclear waste into a bullet and fire it at a tank the uranium bursts into flame on impact, melting through the armor plate and blowing up the tank. A bit like a mini atomic bomb hitting the side of a tank. The military call these ‘kinetic projectiles’. Yes the same alpha radiation and radio active waste is blasted into the atmosphere from these DU rounds as Little Boy in Hiroshima.
Ok, you are thinking, this must be in some remote crazy scientist test lab located in the middle of the Nevada desert. Well no. Ever seen a Warthog, the A-10 anti tank aircraft blasting away at a tank? Well guess what causes the fireworks? Yep, Depleted Uranium rounds, 65 thirty millimeter rounds of them per second or three thousand nine hundred per minuet.
Now you are starting to get it. No wonder everywhere the U.S. troops invade takes care of things so quickly, they are using mini atomic bombs.
Except, the quantity of radio active nuclear waste being blown into the atmosphere is no where near the 600 milligrams used in Hiroshima, they measure the amounts of DU atomic weapons in tons. That’s right tons. The U.S. military has so far blasted close to two thousand or more tons of radio active uranium into the nations we have been sequentially invading around the world.
So get out your calculator. There are one thousand kilograms in a ton, so that’s 2,000,000 kilograms of uranium. Now there are 1,000 grams in a kilogram, add another three zeros. And 1,000 milligrams in a gram, another three 000’s.
The U.S. is now responsible for blasting 2,000,000 kg of radio active waste into, Afghanistan, Iraq and who knows where else. Keep your calculator on. Now divide that by 64 kg to get an equivalent for Little Boy used to blow up Hiroshima. That’s it 28,438 twenty eight thousand Hiroshima’s.
Ok, so admittedly DU rounds when they blow up tanks don’t completely vaporize like Little Boy, about 50% of the uranium is vaporized, maybe more. So even if we half the number of Hiroshima’s our government has caused in their oil war, that’s still an awful amount of uranium atoms that are now free to float wherever the wind takes them.
Turns out Saddam Hussein was right after all, this Iraqi war has been the mother of all wars. The uranium will carry on killing for another four and a half billion years. 22 thousand U.S. and UK Gulf War Veterans are already dead from the DU, another two hundred thousand are registered with the "Gulf War Syndrome" from the DU, and that's ignoring the million or so Iraqi's we murdered and many millions who will now die excruciating deaths from radiation poisoning. If dust from the Sahara can end up in New York, hey it's headed here from Iraq too.
Well now the oil producing nations are unlivable, and maybe the rest of the world if global warming winds of change decide to spread the U.S. atomic goodwill.
Oh but we need the oil, our neighbors oil. So what if we destroy the earth getting it.
P.S. Why don't you send a friendly note commending Bush and his boys and all our Senators and Congress persons who allowed this to happen. Oh, and while you are about it cancel your newspaper and TV subscriptions.
TOLL FREE TO ANY MEMBER OF CONGRESS:
Anybody with any good oil and gas traders? Or anything for that matter? GLTA
I play oil and oil stocks both ways and it is hard to pick a bottom now that "The DEAL" was not passed...but chance on it after election as I see it is very slim once the water boils down here... I really see no need for it when these cocksukers paid themselves so much $$$$$$$$ for this f'ing mess... You know what I mean... Get real... let them fall on their swords and bleed... the good company's out there will pick up the pieces/mistakes and already are... don't ask US to bail YOU out you MF's... If I have anything to say about it...YOU, and you know the scum Fer's that got paid the millions++++ you need to go to jail and rot and pay the shit back.... JMHO as always... Oil goes down to $75 until winter comes in...most oil stocks with it as always...CLR my FAV pick here and stair-step into a position in this market to get a good average... Trade this puppy also... it is a good bet both ways... GLTA
FPP - hope others picked it up on the dip into the 2's. Some of these oil and gas micros are back where they were when oil was in the $30's. High of the year was in the 8's.
FieldPoint Petroleum Reports Second Quarter ResultsLast update: 8/14/2008 8:30:02 AM
Revenues Double while Net Income Triples Compared to Same Period Last Year
AUSTIN, Texas, Aug 14, 2008 (BUSINESS WIRE) -- FieldPoint Petroleum Corporation (FPP) today announced financial results for its Second Quarter ended June 30, 2008. Financial Highlights for the Three Months Ended June 30, 2008 Compared to the Three Months Ended June 30, 2007:
-- Total Revenues increased 101% to $2,000,192 from $995,061. -- Net Income increased 232% to $588,553 from $177,181. -- Earnings per share, fully diluted, increased to $0.07 from $0.02.
Ray D. Reaves, President and CEO of FieldPoint, stated, "Whereas this increase in revenue and earnings is primarily attributable to higher oil and natural gas prices, I am pleased to announce that our overall barrels of oil equivalent production was also up 9% for the quarter ended June 30, 2008 as compared to the same period in 2007. This increase in production was due primarily to an increase in oil production of 24%, or 14,009 barrels vs 11,277 barrels for the same period last year, and we anticipate continued increases in oil production in Q3 2008.
Oil prices increased 82%, averaging approximately $120.01 per barrel, while natural gas prices increased 64%, averaging approximately $8.88 per MCF in the second quarter of 2008. These prices compare to $65.89 per barrel for oil and $5.42 per MCF of natural gas for the same period in 2007. We also experienced increases in production and depletion expense for this period, primarily attributable to new oil and gas properties acquired."
Financial Highlights for the Six Months Ended June 30, 2008 Compared to the Six Months Ended June 30, 2007: -- Total Revenues increased to $3,509,314 from $1,896,573. -- Net Income increased to $938,402 from $311,407. -- Earnings per share, fully diluted, increased to $0.11 from $0.04. For the six month period ended June 30, 2008, overall production was up 8% on a BOE basis as compared to the six months ended June 30, 2007. This was due primarily to an increase in oil production of 20%, or 27,382 barrels vs 22,797 barrels for the comparable 2007 period. This increase, combined with higher oil and natural gas prices, led to an increase in revenues and earnings per share for the six month period. For the period, oil prices increased 74%, averaging $106.65 per barrel, and natural gas prices increased 43%, averaging $7.90 per MCF. These prices compare to $61.19 per barrel for oil and $5.51 per MCF of natural gas for the same period last year. The Company also experienced an increase in production expenses for the six month period compared with last year, and an increase in depletion expenses, primarily due to the acquisition of additional oil and gas properties.
Mr. Reaves concluded by adding, "Once again we can see the dramatic effect that market fluctuations have on our financial performance. While upward price movement has been highly beneficial to us so far this year, it also serves to remind us of the importance of continuing to build our production base.
We have committed to become more aggressive in our efforts to develop new programs which can materially expand our production levels, and to this end we have started drilling our South Texas developmental gas well in the middle and lower Wilcox sands. If this effort is successful, this could lead to the drilling of additional wells. The Company also continues to diligently search for acquisition opportunities. The Company has a strong cash position which continues to grow and so far has only utilized $3.5 million in long term debt from its $50 million Citibank credit facility. We are very optimistic that the remainder of 2008 will be an important growth stage for FieldPoint."
About FieldPoint Petroleum Corp. FieldPoint Petroleum Corporation is engaged in oil and natural gas exploration, production and acquisition, primarily in Louisiana, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Texas and Wyoming. This press release may contain projection and other forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Act of 1934, as amended. Any such projections or statement reflect the company's current views with respect to future events and financial performance. No assurances can be given, however, that these events will occur or that such projections will be achieved and that actual results could differ materially from those projected. A discussion of important factors that could cause actual results to differ from those projected, such as decreases in oil and gas prices and unexpected decreases in oil and gas production is included in the company's periodic reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (at ).
I don't really know except what I read here and there... maybe that is why they say "About 46%"? I see figures that vary on the grade of gas refined and could vary from refinery to refinery and other variables...
anyhoo, I got that info from Source: EIA March 2004 Data... I will try and find other sources also...GLTY
maybe a stupid question but why when I add up the refined products mix in a barrel of crude do i get a total of 46.93 and not 42 gallons?
What Does One Barrel Of Crude Oil Make?
- One barrel of crude oil contains 42 gallons
- About 46% of each barrel of crude oil is refined into automobile gasoline
- In the US and Canada an average of 3 gallons of crude oil are consumed per person each day
- The US imports about 50% of its required crude oil and about 50% of that amount comes from OPEC countries
Product - Refined Gallons/Barrel
Gasoline - 19.3
Distillate Fuel Oil (Inc. Home Heating and Diesel Fuel) - 9.83
Kerosene Type Jet Fuel - 4.24
Residual Fuel Oil - 2.10
Petroleum Coke - 2.10
Liquified Refinery Gases - 1.89
Still Gas - 1.81
Asphalt and Road Oil - 1.13
Petrochemical Feed Supplies - 0.97
Lubricants - 0.46
Kerosene - 0.21
Waxes - 0.04
Aviation Fuel - 0.04
Other Products - 0.34
Processing Gain - 2.47
CLR insiders keep on buying...
BQI..Hope the dip today was it. I'm ready for it to move up.:)
Nice...great info. I love BQI as do the insiders 44.45%...I have been buying a few more here last couple days but would like to see it form some support here... Going down in sympathy with oil as long as CLR and others...Had to bail but stepping back into new positions...these dips were pretty scarry...have to protect profits...JMHO and GLTY
Found this yesterday and thought it was worthy of a post...BQI
There is significant interest in BQI by institutional investors. The 44.45% of the shares outstanding that they control represents a greater percentage of ownership than at almost any other company in the Oil & Gas Production
Gotten from Yahoo BB.