Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
before i finished reading your post my response was 'probably not'. call it politics or 'understanding human behavior'. Exxon knows that they have an image problem with some populations and it's easier to have a bunch of subsidiaries with a different name that don't immediately draw the ire of reactionary types. XTO still maintains some amount of autonomy.
More permanent. Not on are there more and deep pocket competitors, but clients are also doing more of the work in their own labs.
nah. that's a natural gas pipeline. all that will do is put further pressure on natural gas prices which makes me grumpy.
at the moment most bakken natural gas is flared.
That seems like very bad planning but I doubt it surprises many
OT: fracking nonsense
scams not just limited to biotechs
http://www.thestreet.com/story/11671408/1/chemical-engineer-announces-details-of-chimera-energy-corp8217s-revolutionary-non-hydraulic-shale-oil-extraction.html
i'm sure all the other graduates of UC San Jose are embarrassed.
The Lincoln Towncar index was very high at Biogen last week so the rumor is consistent.
OT: Climate Change
8th,
There wouldn't be an argument, even between intelligent and knowledgeable folks, if there wasn't uncertainty. The physics underlying the climate change hypothesis are facts. How those processes interact with other processes are extremely complex which produces large uncertainties in interpretations and projections. And there are some somewhat random processes that further complicate the problem (e.g. Volcanic eruptions).
Whether there are unrecognized or under-appreciated countering effects that might ultimately balance human derived effects are legitimate topics of investigation. However, it would be extremely delusional to pretend humans do not have an affect on the environment.
So the short answer is that I don't have to be a "believer" or "non-believer". I am a scientist and I see reasonable arguments on both sides. In the end, I agree with Mann's comment that it is an economic problem. At the moment there is at least a perception that there are other problems that should take priority. I don't have a problem with that. However, in highly complex systems there tend to be large historetical effects on both the cause and effect ends. So if human activities do end up turning the Mississippi valley into a north american version of Egypt, then reversing that might be difficult and more expensive than the investment on the front end.
And that gets to your question about sea level. The short answer is "no". If the climate change proposition is true, then such effects will not be manifested in "a few years". This is the difficulty that climate change scientists face: the effects occur slowly and may be drowned out by short term noise.
Charlie
A 2-5 yr decrease in the growth rate of CO2 emissions makes a hill of beans difference to GHG induced climate change. The cause and effect relationships are not resolvable on that scale.
i was inquiring about Clovis Oncology. i didn't think to check Yahoo ;^) as a credible source of info but alas there is no message board for C60.F. Maybe guilt by association with ARRY?
thanks for trying.
charlie
CLVS
anybody have any idea why CLVS has been bludgeoned over the past 2 days?
thanks
Charlie
i suspect that undue emphasis is being given to the automobile industry's consumption of iron. Iron consumption for pipe and pressure fittings is probably more significant (that isn't just a WAG). That iron will not be supplanted by aluminum. Iron consumption is very much tied to oil and natural gas production, refining, and transportation; i suspect the linkage is getting stronger.
I agree completely with Dewophile's response. The lack of appreciation in your "alloy metals" prices may be due to over production related to their association with more profitable metals, e.g. gold. I can easily imagine this is the case for molybdenum and some other metals.
from what i've heard CLB is an assembly line shop. They run things efficiently and in standardized ways; however, they do not develop methods or handle customized analyses. My thinking was that if CLB is losing staff that were responsible for making their operation work, then they might be hurt more than service companies that are more broadly diversified.
As for the stock option aspect, as far as i've seen, everyone does that and i know that some exploration and production companies give far more generous discounted stock and 401k matching plans than some of the service companies, as well as having better salaries. I know many people who have moved to O&G companies from service companies in the past 2 yrs and very few that have gone the other direction (& i think those were in 2009).
my crystal ball says CLB is a bit over-valued and the others are about right. If i could buy oil companies, i'd rather buy them.
there's been quite a bit of poaching of service company folk by exploration and production companies over the past year or so. There's a significant salary differential which the service companies don't seem to be inclined to fight. I suspect this will hurt companies like CLB more than tool developers. SLB, BHI and the larger production companies are also acquiring, expanding, or setting up their own core and fluid analysis labs versus farming work out to CLB. Whether they will be successful in being competitive/superior to CLB is the million dollar question.
HES Seeking Alpha article
i wouldn't give the cited article much significance. The author seems more interested in presenting tables of numbers in random order rather than making any sense out of the numbers.
Just in case it's useful:
stages refers to the number of discrete sections of a well which are separately fractured. How many stages are fractured will depend on the length of the well and what the logs have revealed about the intersected rock.
IP refers to initial production rate [production in fracked tight reservoirs is frequently high initially and tails off - sometimes very rapidly]
choke is an orifice used to control flow rate and the pressure drop between the reservoir and the well. There are many reasons for adjusting choke settings so without additional (and probably highly confidential) information, these numbers are not very meaningful.
i don't know if any conclusions can be drawn from the relative quantities of proppant and water used in these wells
i suspect that the last number on the well identifications, e.g. En-Weyrauch 154-93-1918H-1, En-Weyrauch 154-93-1918H-2, En-Weyrauch 154-93-1918H-3 refer to 3 different laterals off of a common vertical hole. Why he separates them as he does and in random order is a function of the writer's madness or ignorance.
WSJ SLB valuation article
That article is a bit shallow. SLB's presence in the shale gas market has been trivial so any decline there hasn't hurt them. That doesn't mean that $2/MBTU doesn't hurt. In addition, SLB has been trying to gain more market share in NA so to portray that as a negative is a bit off. If SLB has been successful in that market share gain, then HAL and BHI have lost share and that will matter more down the line.
OT hint
if you cant write a coherent sentence in English, then you might try writing in your 1st or 2nd language and have Google translate. It couldn't be any worse. Alternatively, you could be silent.
Tullow
Not sure if the 70% is meaningful since hitting oil doesn't mean that a well or even a given target stratum is capable of producing commercial quantities. I've probably found gold 70% of the time that i've gone panning but it's always cost me more to find it than what I could get for what I found. Conversely, tullow does appear to be very successful for their size and I've heard very flattering comments about them that are entirely consistent with the article.
in the process he will guarantee a loss in Ohio and he's working on PA - all of which i'll be very happy about.
for humor value on this theme
the 2nd 2 links add a bit of flavor to the 1st
http://www.worldoil.com/Polands_red_tape_main_headache_for_shale_gas_industry.html
http://www.worldoil.com/Poland_will_present_proposed_hydrocarbon_tax_bill_on_June_13.html
http://www.worldoil.com/ExxonMobil_drops_shale_plans_in_Poland.html
these are particularly timely
http://www.rbnenergy.com/the-bakken-buck-starts-here-crude-pricing-part-1
http://www.rbnenergy.com/the-bakken-buck-starts-here-crude-pricing-part-II
this might also be useful and they they think Bakken crude should trade at $0.50 to $1.00 premium to WTI.
http://www.turnermason.com/Publications/petroleum-publications_assets/Bakken-Crude.pdf
based on the higher gasoline yield, lower residue, Canadian pipeline construction, etc my WAG would be that $1 could be way low. I'd guess it could go for a 3 to 5% premium to WTI.
As of 1 week ago Bakken was trading at $11.65 discount to WTI
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/05/markets-usa-cash-crude-idUSL1E8H5DK320120605
but then you have the wacko crowd that just doesn't understand numbers
http://www.desmogblog.com/new-bakken-shale-pipeline-cushing-ok-works
As long as pipelines are blocked - yup. The one good thing for now is that I suspect rail contracts are probably relatively cheap. If obama loses, then the restrictions on coal will also vaporize which will drive up the cost of rail transport. So pipelines are very important to the Bakken. With a good pipeline network, then Bakken producers can get the proper bang from their relatively high quality crude.
As long as pipelines are blocked - yup. The one good thing for now is that I suspect rail contracts are probably relatively cheap. If obama loses, then the restrictions on coal will also vaporize which will drive up the cost of rail transport. So pipelines are very important to the Bakken. With a good pipeline network, then Bakken producers can get the proper bang from their relatively high quality crude.
I think largely dependent on election outcome. If Romney wins, then pipelines get built as well as other things that I think will be favorable - favorable in my world meaning higher oil prices due to growing economy. Pipelines give Bakken producers more leverage than they currently have.
I think the current situation is temporary. How temporary... I leave to individual imagination ;^)
But at the moment, Bakken production as a share of total production, is more of a problem than an asset because that oil is sold at a large discount to a dropping price for WTI.
There's a story in the Saturday WSJ "The Natural Gas Skeptic" that makes it clear that the demise of coal is greatly exaggerated. Since I can't invest in oil and gas, i've decided to take up coal mining.
If production in the Paris basin requires fracturing, then leased acreage is effectively worthless and from what I've seen, the targets there were tight. the other problem I have with that news release is that it seems to portray all of the Eagle Ford as oil rich. that is definitely not the case. Location, location, location.
the 1st on the list was featured in Chemical & Engineering News a few weeks ago. At least one of the principals was previously convicted of some financial malfeasance in Italy and his current "cold fusion" contraption is no less shady.
one way it may be a problem is through the foreign corrupt practices act which is just a bag of tricks for enterprising lawyers and politicians in the US to further handicap US-based companies and multi-nationals who operate in the US.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303296604577450442633804840.html?mod=WSJ_Energy_leftHeadlines
in the oil industry, being able to move stuff across borders in a timely fashion is extremely important and i can tell you from personal experience that the FCPA and other 'Trade Compliance" regulations are stifling. Even shipping benign stuff between the US and Canada can turn what should be an overnight shipment into a futile exercise that can eat weeks.
reuters CHK story
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/07/us-chesapeake-mcclendon-profile-idUSBRE8560IB20120607
story is remarkable for its complete lack of introspection on the part of the writers. You'd think that given the attention in the story to McClendon's various personal as well as business activities the writers might wonder when the guy sleeps (~4 hrs/ngt from what i've been told). Another despicable bunch of folks with envy problems.
OT: oh you poor deluded man. remember where the major US markets are located. I'm sure the market makers will be so disconsolate that there will be a sympathetic drop of 5% in the major indices. ;^)
PS: i love how some of the media outlets used phrases like "narrowly survives" and "nail-biting finish". I call it whupped.
a hint to the credibility of the folks at your 2nd link should be that under their "Latest News in Fracking" link they talk mostly about coal. The "grassroots activism" picture shows an oil well even though the story is supposed to be about shale gas. And this:
with NG<$3/MBTU the anti-fracking crowd is getting their wish. Drilling is drying up very rapidly.
i have my doubts that fracturing with petroleum liquids or liquified natural gas will gain widespread acceptance. There are hazards that do not exist with water. The concern is not so much of local residents; rather the crews working on the well site and in transportation are the concern. I wouldn't be surprised if one accident could bankrupt GFS.
There are many advantages to using water aside from safety and material cost. Compression is an obvious example. The ability of the fluid to carry proppant is another (GFS and SeekingAlpha portray this as less proppant used).
There is much that is not understood about hydraulic fracturing but things like fracture lengths are probably not as important as surface area. In addition, it's not clear how much hydrocarbon is sorbed on mineral surfaces and solid hydrocarbons versus being discrete liquid or gas and the chemistry of the fracturing fluid may play an important role in the liberation of the hydrocarbon. Just because hydrocarbons are more soluble in other hydrocarbons than in water ignores some significant "components" of the reservoir.
The entire spin that use of liquified natural gas is more environmentally friendly and a lower threat to ground water contamination is hogwash and I'm certain that if this technology does gain more widespread use then GFS will find no shortage of 'environmentalists' attacking them.
indeed. However, one of the differences betw/ CLB and SLB is that I think CLB may run the analyses and provide interpretations to the client without a comprehensive suite of other types of data from a field. I'm not sure if that is completely true; however, in the cases where SLB is managing a field, they can produce the data and they do have a full array of different data types available. In SLB's case they are trying to increase production and share the revenue from that increase in production. CLB's revenue stream stops at the lab analyses.
word i heard today is that 1st operations may start in 2014 w/ full operation in 2015. however, i wouldn't afford this any higher credibility than rumor mongering.