DrumBeat: February 21, 2009
Posted by Leanan on February 21, 2009 - 10:25am
From the deep waters of Brazil to complex and expensive projects in Canada, oil companies are in a desperate – some say losing – race to raise output from new projects faster than old ones decline.“Peak oil”, a peak in world production, could still be decades away, according to the most optimistic forecasts, but a peak in non-OPEC production is already upon us, many experts say.
About two-thirds of the world’s oil comes from countries that are not part of OPEC and official energy forecasts indicate that an increase in production in this area will prove crucial to meeting growing demand in the developing world. Yet many experts say the combination of the economic crisis and natural depletion of reserves means there is little possibility that the total amount of crude produced outside of OPEC will grow at all in coming years, if ever.
Without more production in non-OPEC countries, dependable suppliers such as Saudi Arabia and the UAE will have to build up multibillion-dollar capacity expansions faster than planned, or risk a new “super spike” in oil prices after the global economy recovers.
Saudi Arabia’s move to cut oil production will affect gas sector
Saudi Arabia’s decision to reduce its oil production to its lowest level in many years will stifle its gas production this year and the problem could worsen in the long term, a key Saudi investment company said yesterday.Since a large part of its natural gas is associated with oil, reduction in the Gulf Kingdom’s crude output in line with an Opec agreement to trim supplies to prop up sagging prices will depress smother gas extraction at a time when the country’s energy demand is growing fast, Jadwa said in a study.
American drilling techniques may migrate overseas
COLUMBUS, Ohio — With one eye cast toward home, giant European energy companies are investing billions in U.S. natural gas and oil fields where huge, hard-to-get reserves have been unlocked with new drilling technology.That technology is the prize in Europe, where gas production has declined and where an international utility dispute recently left people in more than a dozen European countries shivering in unheated homes.
Shell puts cost of crude oil theft in Nigeria as high as £1.1bn a year
As many as 100,000 barrels of crude oil are being stolen or smuggled from Nigeria every day, representing 5 per cent of national production, according to estimates from Shell.
Total, the French Oil Company, Places Its Bets Globally
Since moving here 13 months ago as the local manager for Total, the French oil giant, Mr. Deffontaines has seen his main export pipeline damaged by terrorists, endured devastating flash floods and sent expatriate families back home because of security concerns.Despite these challenges, Mr. Deffontaines, a lanky, 43-year-old Parisian, doesn’t appear overly anxious. Indeed, Yemen is a showcase for Total, whose experience here shows how far an oil company will go these days to unearth new energy supplies.
Bubbles of warming, beneath the ice
As permafrost thaws in the Arctic, huge pockets of methane -- a potent greenhouse gas -- could be released into the atmosphere. Experts are only beginning to understand how disastrous that could be.
Trouble Trickles From Steep Drop in Oil Prices
The precipitous fall in the price of oil in recent months, while good for consumers, has contributed to the confusion in the global economy, wreaking havoc with the budgets and economies of oil-exporting nations and putting many expensive energy projects on hold...."The last five years saw the rebirth of the use of oil as a critical instrument of foreign policy by key resource countries, Iran, Russia and Venezuela in particular," said Ed Morse, managing director and chief economist of LCM Research. "With oil and natural gas prices having collapsed, the power of their weapons has been waning rapidly, turning creditor into debtor nations and depriving them of the revenue required to fulfill their international goals."
Oil Prices: Speak Softly and Carry an Ugly Stick
The future of oil and natural gas markets this year is coming to resemble a reverse beauty contest, a hard-fought battle to decide which is uglier—the deteriorating demand picture or the grim supply side of things.
Kuwait will forge ahead with developing its gas resources, despite the political deadlock that has stalled most of the country’s oil projects, according to a senior official of its state oil company, and it will do it with the help of international energy companies.“Kuwait is now open for gas. All our fields are open,” said Mohammed Hussein, the deputy managing director for planning and gas of Kuwait Oil Company, at a gas conference in Abu Dhabi.
Exxon Closes in on Gorgon LNG Deal with PetroChina
According to a report from Dow Jones Newswires, ExxonMobil is close to finalizing an agreement to sell 2 million tons of LNG annually from Australia's massive Greater Gorgon project to PetroChina.
National Oilwell Varco still drilling for acquisitions
So is the company slowing down given lower commodity prices and rocky economic times? Not exactly. Pete Miller, chief executive of National Oilwell Varco, told a packed room at a Houston Strategic Forum luncheon on Thursday that his company is actively scouting for targets. His reasoning: That oil and gas is going to continue to be harder and harder to find, which will force oil and gas prices back up in the near future. "We're going to have peak oil," he said. "The question is when."
Leaving aside Rio Tinto, to which I'll return in a bit, these indicate an increase in long-term oil supply deals between customers and producers both of which are state-backed enterprises, bankrolled by the government backed development bank. It thus increases the role of governments and may trigger greater concerns if not from the recipient countries then from others. It further reinforces the increased role of government and quasi-government influence in the energy and resource sectors as state-backed resource companies have an increasing role in the energy sector in terms of production and supplies. Several of these companies have some private funding but ultimately governments have a key influence on decisions, backstopping decisions. However, it does seem to be potentially a win-win for the companies involved, even if the costs to the global markets are less certain.
Shell eyes more Nigeria operational cutbacks
LONDON (MarketWatch) -- After axing 1,200 jobs in Nigeria in 2008, Royal Dutch Shell PLC may be forced this year to take further cost-cutting measures, including more layoffs, in one of the oil major's most important producing markets, a Shell official said Saturday.The official said the potential for more operational cutbacks stemmed from a combination of weak oil prices, inadequate spending by Nigeria's state oil company in its joint venture with Shell, and the likelihood Shell will have to fork over more tax money from its lucrative offshore Bonga oil field.
Pemex’s Cantarell Drops at Fastest Rate in 14 Years
(Bloomberg) -- Petroleos Mexicanos, the state-owned oil company, said crude output fell 9.2 percent in January as its largest field plunged at the second-fastest rate ever.Production dropped to 2.685 million barrels a day, from 2.957 million barrels a year earlier, Pemex, as the Mexico City- based company is known, said today in a statement. Pemex extracted 772,000 barrels a day from Cantarell, the world’s third-largest field, a decline of 38 percent from a year earlier.
“If the question is, what is Pemex going to do in the short-term to prevent the falling production?” George Baker, a Houston-based energy consultant who publishes the newsletter Mexico Energy Intelligence, said in an interview. “I’m afraid the answer is nothing.”
Mexico cuts rate to boost economy, peso slides
Mexico's central bank cut its benchmark interest rate by a quarter point Friday to boost the country's sagging economy, which has been pummeled by the U.S. recession.
Latin America gears up for economic revival
MEXICO CITY (Xinhua) -- Struggling Latin American countries amid the global financial crisis have unveiled an array of stimulus measures in a bid to dragging their economy out of a stagnation as early as possible.In Mexico, the government announced a 54 billion dollar recovery plan in January, which includes such measures such as freezing gasoline prices and boosting spending on public works.
Bob Geldof believes biofuels can eradicate poverty in Africa
Renowned singer, philanthropist, political activist and biofuels advocator Sir Bob Geldof believes that biofuels can be developed from feedstocks without impacting food production, thereby, providing a positive impact on poverty-stricken communities by giving the opportunity to develop energy independence and eradicate poverty across Africa.
Monbiot: A kneejerk rejection of nuclear power is not an option
Support of nuclear power will no doubt provoke hostile responses, but we have a duty to be as realistic as possible about how we might best prevent runaway climate change.
India: Atomic energy could have lit 40 million homes
There is a great irony lurking behind the highly secretive doors of India’s atomic energy establishment.Even without the Indo-US nuclear deal, at least 40 million more homes could have been lit up for an entire year in power-starved India if the Department of Atomic Energy (DAE) had mined and used the extensive uranium reserves lying untapped for years.
While this report is focused on the prospects for alternative energy sources to replace fossil fuels, it is useful to apply the above criteria first to oil, coal, and gas so that comparisons can be made with their potential replacements.
Peak energy: promise or peril?
Will we continue to use fossil fuels to the detriment of our planet and the human population? Or can we clean up our act in time to avoid calamitous change? That's the dilemma the world currently faces, yet in spite of efforts to transition to alterative energy sources, projections show that annual fossil fuel demand is likely to increase 45 per cent by 2030.But those projections make an important assumption — that there will be enough oil, coal and natural gas to meet the demand. That's a view that is increasingly being challenged by researchers, who are now looking at what declining fossil fuel supplies might mean for the Earth's climate. Although some say that a peak in energy production could allow us to avoid the most serious consequences of climate change, others fear that we will still suffer disastrous impacts and run out of energy to boot.
Nigerian court jails 13 Filipinos over stolen oil
LAGOS (AFP) – A Nigerian court has sentenced 13 Filipinos to five years each or a fine of one million naira (6,800 dollars) for stealing 12,500 metric tonnes of crude from the Niger delta, a report said Saturday.
Kidnapped Russians regains freedom in SE Nigeria
Two Russian kidnapped by unknown gunmen operating in the oil rich Niger Delta since December 2008 have been found by the Joint Task Force in the Niger Delta, the Punch newspaper reported.
Nigeria: Let's Leave Oil in the Soil
Surveying the myriad problems behind the Nigerian state's facilitation of unregulated oil and gas extraction, Nnimmo Bassey and Environmental Rights Action (ERA) demand that obscene oil company profits be used to clean up the environmental and social mess inflicted upon the Niger Delta population. Concerned about the government's inability to tackle the problem of gas flaring, Bassey and the ERA propose a concerted endeavour to stop gas flaring, audit all oil spills and bring about a thorough clean-up of the region in order to detoxify the land once and for all. With a view to moving Nigeria away from its dependence on crude oil exports, Bassey and the ERA argue that offering new oil blocks should be resisted and oil kept in the soil.
How Dangerous Is This Man? (review of Hugo Chávez And the War Against America)
Since Venezuela is the fourth-largest supplier of oil to the United States, the authors of this book believe that Americans ought to take Chávez more seriously. They are far from impartial observers. Both Douglas Schoen and Michael Rowan are political consultants who worked for the opposition candidate whom Chávez defeated in 2006. They believe that Chávez manipulated that vote, just as they contend that he rigged the results of a 2004 recall effort mounted by the civic opposition movement Súmate ("Join up"), for which the authors also worked. Schoen, who played a key role in former President Bill Clinton's reelection in 1996, is a prominent practitioner of the global art of political polling and consulting: He has had 19 heads of state as clients and helped run election campaigns for Silvio Berlusconi, Shimon Peres, Yitzhak Rabin and Ehud Barak. Rowan has done much the same thing, mostly for Latin American candidates.
The most inspiring movement in the world: transition towns
Transition! It advances undeterred and unstoppable. A growing movement steps up to deal with the inevitable change facing humanity in the 21st century.America and the world face unprecedented challenges in the 21st century due to peak oil and unparalleled climate change which drives food scarcity. While the “Age of Oil” that supported massive population growth declines, human population explodes. The human race gallops toward a collision with its own numbers. Strap on your seatbelts, helmets and parachutes folks!
The newest thing is the bad economy, which some survivalists are putting their money on now as the tipping point for western civilization. 9/11 and the Bush years didn't plunge us back to the Flintstones -- although for a while it was a close thing -- so they are pinning their hopes now on a worldwide monetary collapse or the new scare scenario, "Peak Oil", which is apparently so scary, that we need to capitalize it.
Solar power heats up energy possibilities
(CNN) -- In the desert of southern Spain, just west of Seville, a sea of giant mirrors is reflecting the sun's energy to provide "concentrated solar power" (CSP) while illuminating the path to a new wave of green energy projects.
Colorado enjoys the spotlight on its renewables
DENVER - Colorado's renewable energy promise was on the national stage this week when President Barack Obama chose Denver as the stage for signing the $787 billion economic stimulus package.The 250 or so renewable energy business leaders who attended the ceremony Tuesday weren't surprised.
"You're asking why Colorado? It's like it's in the water here," said Jo Elyn Newcomb, general manager of Boulder-based Independent Power Systems, which among other things puts solar panels in people's homes.
Dismal gas drilling forecast gets bleaker
For the first time in more than two decades, the group that represents oil and gas drillers in Canada has been forced to revise its already bleak outlook for the industry.The Canadian Association of Oilwell Drilling Contractors is now predicting 22 per cent fewer wells will be drilled in Western Canada, compared to the forecast it released in October.
U.S. Gas Production Seen Sliding for 4 Years: Chart of the Day
(Bloomberg) -- U.S. production of natural gas, the most widely used furnace fuel in the world’s largest economy, may tumble through 2012 as low prices prompt producers to shut down drilling rigs from Louisiana to the Rocky Mountains.
Low oil prices could push Russia to curb new fields
MOSCOW, Feb 20 (Reuters) - Russia will consider linking the launch of new oil deposits to global crude prices, a policy that would allow oil firms to store up reserves and cut exploration budgets in times of low prices.The proposal was made at a Feb. 12 meeting of government officials and oil executives in the refining town of Kirishi, the minutes of which were seen by Reuters on Friday.
A proposal was also made to set an allowed deviation of the annual production required by a licence agreement to oil price. The current subsoil law requires licence holders to produce a certain amount of oil or lose the right to the field.
Russia prepares for OPEC session in March
Russia's Vice-Premier Igor Sechin said his country is planning to discuss a proposed memorandum on cooperation with the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries at the group's mid-March session."We submitted our proposals and are going to discuss them," Sechin said of the draft memorandum submitted by Russia last October which contains proposals on joint monitoring, market analysis, data exchange, and energy market security.
Yemen oil min - oil majors mull investments-paper
DUBAI (Reuters) - Yemen has received investment offers from oil majors including Exxon Mobil Corp and Total, Oil Minister Amir al-Aidarous said in remarks published on Saturday.
Shipping costs set to rise for oil companies
The cost of delivering Middle East crude to Asia, down for the past four sessions, may advance next week as traders return from an industry gathering with just five day to find the vessels they need for early-March loadings.
Chinese copper entrepreneurs flee DR Congo
More than 40 Chinese-run copper smelters are standing idle in the Democratic Republic of Congo after their owners fled the country without paying taxes or compensating staff at the end of the commodity boom, according to a governor.Moïse Katumbi, governor of Katanga province, which is bisected by Congo’s copper belt, said Chinese entrepreneurs abandoned their smelters in a matter of days in a co-ordinated move at the end of last year as copper prices tumbled.
Its Muscle Car Glory Faded, Pontiac Shrivels Up
On Tuesday, when General Motors asked the federal government for more bailout money, it also announced a reorganization plan that included demoting Pontiac to a “focused niche brand,” signaling that its lineup of vehicles would shrink and that it would no longer be a separate division.To industry analysts and Pontiac’s longtime fans, the downgrade provides a case study of the product missteps that helped put G.M. in its precarious state, and a reminder of the dangers in straying from a successful formula.
It's Time for Cities to Favor People, Not Cars
Los Angeles and countless other cities - Phoenix, Houston and Atlanta come to mind - are far more friendly to cars than people, having been built according to land use policies that all but put people behind the wheel. It's an unsustainable model, and it must change.
For two decades, James Lovelock was seen by many of his scientific peers as an eccentric loner who had ruined his otherwise solid reputation as an inventor and pioneering environmental chemist by insisting that the earth was "alive", not very well, and living under the name of Gaia. But as global warming has moved up the agenda, he has increasingly appeared to be a prophet who deserves every honour the human race can bestow.
California farms lose main water source to drought
LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - The main irrigation system for California farmers, the Central Valley Project, expects to halt water deliveries to most of its growers this year due to one of the worst droughts in state history, federal managers said on Friday.The zero-water allocation for most CVP users was declared by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation as California water officials repeated their plans to cut amounts supplied from a separate state-run water project to 15 percent of normal allotments.
Return of Arctic ice no sign of climate recovery: researcher
WINNIPEG — When it comes to global warming, even the good news may not be all that great in the end.After a devastating Arctic ice melt in 2007, researchers were cautiously optimistic when the ice surface area actually grew in 2008.
But University of Manitoba scientist David Barber says the growth was mostly thin, first-year ice, which is more likely to melt during the summer.
The 2007 assessment established a base line of expectation, but it is already looking outdated. From all over the globe, in bits and pieces, data are accumulating that suggest we may have already left behind the world of possibilities portrayed in the panel’s report. Sea ice has melted more quickly than expected. And, according to a recent report from the United States Geological Survey, sea levels in 2100 could increase by more than double the 1.5 feet rise projected by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (it chose not to add in water from eroding ice sheets because they remain poorly understood). Add to that the hard reality that carbon dioxide is a long-lived gas, and the picture of global warming is both volatile and forbidding.
Contact
- Content: editors at theoildrum dot com
- Tech support: support at theoildrum dot com
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.
More humor from the Onion:
Exxon Paleontologists call for increased U.S. fossil production.
My fear is that there are more than a few people on Capitol Hill that would take this as a serious proposal and act on it.
Well, if they were to act on it by burrowing deep in the Earth, we would probably be better off..
I remember reading Ghawar oil was made from the excrement of some long dead worm, or some such. I'm guessing there is WAY more waste coming out of all holes of a congressman than a lowly worm. Should be the beginnings of a lot of oil on Capitol Hill.
Ceiii2K:
Your colorful comment
deserves a little clarification, from a geologist's perspective: What you probably read was that the actual ROCK from which the oil in Ghawar field is produced, i.e., the stratum that holds the crude oil in its pore spaces, is in part a peloidal limestone, and that these peloids are the fossilized excrement of ancient worms, or crustaceans, or some other marine organism that lived during the Jurassic Period. And from what I have seen in recent months from studying many thin sections of core samples through the Arab-A, Arab-B, Arab C, and especially the Arab-D horizons (from two other KSA fields, but not Ghawar), I agree with that statement.
The actual OIL in Ghawar and other oil fields in its vicinity is probably derived from the fats and oils (lipids) that were present in countless marine microorganisms such as zooplankton, which thrived in the Jurassic seas, and the remains of which accumulated over time on the Jurassic seafloor. This marine sediment is now a shale (named the Tuwaiq Mountain Formation) that is older than the Arab A to D formations, and stratigraphically beneath it. Over time, this layer of marine mud and microorganisms was buried and heated at depth in Earth's crust, and in the process the oils in those microorganisms was physically separated, maybe in sort of the same way that heat applied to uncooked bacon (or most other meats) will soon result in the appearance of two phases, a solid (cooked meat) phase and a liquid (oily) phase. The solid remains of the fossils are still in the Tuwaiq Mountain Formation, but the liquid that was driven off by heating has migrated upward in Earth's crust over time, into the porous Arab formations (and other horizons as well), where it was trapped in the pore spaces because further upward migration was not possible owing the presence of thick layers of impermeable anhydrite, an evaporite deposit that formed also during Jurassic time when an enclosed or semi-enclosed sea dried up several times.
The geology of the Persian Gulf oil fields is fascinating, and of varying complexity from field to field, as discussed in laymen's terms in "Twilight in the Desert" by M. Simmons, and, in numerous AAPG publications, in more technical terms.
I figured I had oversimplified it. Thanks for this explanation though. It does clarify what I thought I understood.
How would future paleontoligist intrepret finding fossilized politicians and fossilized lobbyists? Hopefully they will be buried along with fossilized ideologies!
They (and many others) already do! Isn't this the rationale behind biofuels? we can just use the carbon fixed every year to maintain our current standard of living indefinitely. Nevermind that it has only taken us 1 hundred years to burn 1 billion years of fixed carbon, technology will provide us with the necessary correction of 7 orders of magnitude.
From the US gas production article (linked uptop):
Rule of 72: At a -30%/year decline rate, new production would drop by half about every 2.5 years, and in the Barnett Shale reportedly the average well is about 80% depleted at the end of two years. Even with a continued full scale drilling effort, I think that there was a serious question as to whether the US could keep the overall gas production rate growing, given the underlying decline rates in these shale plays.
WT,
I did a crude model (more qualitative then quantitative). As you and many others know the ramp up in NG production from 1/1/07 was due primarily from unconventional NG drilling and, to a lesser extent, Deep Water GOM. Before 1/1/07 we had a fairly well established (and relatively low) decline rate from the very many but very small conventional reservoirs. Thus my model hinged on the UNG. The decline of convention NG is almost insignificant to the increase in UNG over the last few years. Even if the industry cuts back UNG drilling as much as we have (80% drop in rig count) we won't see as rapid a decline rate as I once thought. Even with only three rigs running the production from those 9 new wells (compared to 50+ last year) a year will be coming on at significant rates. Sort of good news/bad: wells drilled 2 years ago, as you pointed out, have already declined significantly and are now declining at a much lower rate. Faster then the old conventional fields but still much slower then when they came on.
High decline wells drilled during the last two years will be replaced to a degree by the near future wells. But even from a qualitative standpoint, we are obviously into a general net decline curve. But not the cliff I had one envisioned. The high initial rates of the new but fewer wells will mitigate the cliff. The only bright side is that the UNG wells drilled in the last few years will have long lives but at a greatly reduced rates. But collectively that represents a somewhat stable production base comparable to the old conventional fields. Though they will be producing at near stripper rates these wells will last 20+ years.
I also feel that his potential of X% in rig activity over so many years misses the mark. IMO I think the rig rate will bottom wherever it bottoms and stay near that level for an extended period. Even as NG prices increase I see a number of factors holding operators back: capital, equipment, personnel, memory of the current blood bath, etc. The only motivation for increasing the effort will be the expiration of those expensive leases taken the last couple of years. But dropping many of those leases allows tax write offs. And in the end public company policies tend to be driven not so much by the engineers and geologists but by the accountants. When we see NG prices shoot up again and the inability to supple demand begins to hurt our recovering economy only then will activity increase by any significant amount. But IMHO, not as quickly as we saw over the last few years. All the players who have survived will factor in the potential for another price crash. We might actually see a transformation in the oil patch where profitability is valued more then increases in reserve base at any price.
It would be nice if the boom/bust cycle could be evened out. In the past the assumption that future prices will be the same the as past has driven the instability. Scarcity drives prices high, and everybody and his brother starts drilling, with no thought to what future supply/demand might look like. Then scarcity turns to glut and prices collapse, everyone pulls back. Is it possible for the acountants to look ahead, and plan acticity based upon projected future supply/demand? Or is that asking them to take too much responsibility (i.e. who gets the blame if the forecast is wrong)?
enemy -
You get your accountants to tell you how much to cut back, and I am sure others will do the same. One of the big players has SUCH a good reputatiton, I am just sure they will follow suit.
I honestly think it portends well for big users, since they can hedge in the valleys and just ride out the peaks. Generally, you do not have to be perfect on the timing with hedges, just someplace in the (big) ballpark. With economic perils getting worse daily, just figure out how to stay in business to take advantage of the hedges and you will be OK. If the shale gas plays are as quick to develop as it seems, it ought to be easy to ramp up as you see what is coming. Acreage issues and keeping leases / drilling prospects tied up is what looks to be more of a problem, and that is on the supply side. If a whole regional gathering system was needed, that would be different, but where the general framework is in place, it is not so hard.
It is easy enough to do. Just allow the Texas Rail Road commission the ability to set flow and drill rates in the US. It was needed for oil and natural gas would benefit now. It works like a tax, but the money goes to the industry. Overall consumers would see higher prices than without, but there would be no sudden spikes. And more gas would stay in the ground, as a resource for the future.
Several years ago Barnett was a new hot play, there were wells with 1 mmcf flow per day. Wildcat wells in the Rocky Mtns. were returning half as much or less.
Now some Haynesville wells have yielded upwards of 20 mmcf per day. One drill rig might do the work of 20 in a lesser field. The Marcellus has shown a few abnormally high flow wells and is positioned for growth as over a million acres have been leased and water rights for drilling operations have been secured.
To top it off the Fayetteville lateral of the Boardwalk pipeline system is due to be completed this quarter as part of an ongoing pipeline extension program to connect new shale gas fields in the TX, LA, AR areas to main interstate pipelines. As more large diameter pipeline capacity becomes available, existing wells that were stranded will be connected to the greater national natural gas storage and delivery system.
Places like the Piceance field (pronounced Pissants) will have to pack up and move on along the road.
i would take all that conference call happy talk with a grain of salt. the fact is, most of these hz wells have not been on production long enough to establish a long term decline trend. all i have seen so far is a high ip and rapid decline(up to 85% per yr, recently quouted in a happy talk conference call). so your 20 mmcfd outlyer could be down to 3 mmcfd in 1 yr, 0.45mmcfd in two.
some of these companies want you to believe that they can forecast reserves for decades out based on a 1 day, 1 week or 1 month rate.
i believe it is pronunced pee-ahn-ce. piceance is a basin, not an individual field.
You get a rapid drop off then a long term shallow production, that has been known for years, XTO went around trying to buy up wells after the first stage production drop knowing they could get them for pennies on the dollar and then got paid back as the production drop leveled off into a long term production plateau, at a much lower than initial flow rate, but yet flowing in economical quantities. Natural gas people would like to get all their money back from drilling a well in the first year. I think the price of natural gas is as low as much new production might not be sustainable. Even in the Haynesville Shale prices are so low very little new ground is being leased and companies with large debt overhang are in trouble. Nations with growing debt levels might face similar consequences when the bubble will burst. The country is on a treadmill. If it raises interest rates businesses fail. If they keep them lower than the inflation rate, capital might flee the country. Capital does not have legs per se, but some people might find that business conditions in China are better for manufacturing as they have a laissez-faire attitude toward cheap energy industry like aluminum and airplane manufacturing, sheet metal steel fabrication for cars, steel for ship building the works. Carbon taxes do not end CO2 emissions, they merely outsource them to Asia.
"You get a rapid drop off then a long term shallow production, that has been known for years,..."
i dont know for sure what play you are talking about, but the technology of long laterals and multi stage frac jobs is relatively new, on the order of a year or two. that technology has not been fully evaluated. as far as i can tell that assumed long production tail is based on the fact that vertical wells in the devonian shale in penn, w. va. and ohio have produced for a long long time. that may not apply to the current haynesville hz play which you have mentioned. multi stage frac jobs undoubtedly result in higher production rates, but that does not necessarily equate to significantly greater reserves. it may be that the reserves are just recovered faster. yes, that would results in more favorable pw economics for a constant price case.
the increase in dry ng production from about 52 bcfd to near term peak of 57 bcfd between early '06 and mid '08 was accomplished with a rig count that increased from about 1300 to 1600. the current rig count is just over 1000. the last time we were at 1000 rigs, dry ng production was about 51 bcfd and declining.
we may not have yet seen the peak resulting from that 1600 rigs drilling because of the normal delays in completing, equiping and connecting wells.
Back from Indonesia I'll post some comments later on.
However one thing your not considering is the decision to put in compressors as the well head pressure drops I'd suspect under the current conditions with the current drilling rate that many wells will be capped and not finished off with expensive compression of the low rate longer term gas.
One things for sure is we can watch the curve unfold with interest and then discuss the major effects.
The problem is the relative importance of any one part of the problem is hard to guage. Obviously depletion rate and the rate of drilling are important but what else ???
The situation is scary as hell.
I finally had time to take a look at Chesapeake's financials for Q4-08 this morning.
It's PV-10 on Dec. 31, 2008 was $15.6 billion, calculated at a gas price of $5.71 per MCF. At yesterday's closing price of $4.04 that $15.6 would drop by almost half based solely on price, seeing as their direct production expense (less DD&A) is almost $2.00 per MCF ($5.71 - $2.00 = $3.71 margin, $4.04 - $2.00 = $2.04 margin). Other negatives:
1) At $4 per MCF, a lot of the proved undeveloped reserves will not be economical to develop.
2) If drilling drops off, the per-well production rate will drop, but fixed operating costs will go on, making the operating cost per MCF greater.
3) At $4 per MCF, the economic life of the wells will also be shortened, which will also negatively impact ultimate recovery (reserves) and PV-10.
There will not only be less profit per MCF, but there will also be fewer MCF produced at $4.04 per MCF.
Chesapeake is sitting there with $14.2 billion in debt. It's got $1.6 billion in derivitave positions that will help for a while. But when you've got $14.2 billion in debt and less than $8 billion in future cash flow (regardless of whether you spent $33 billion to acquire that cash flow), you've got a big problem.
I suspect most of these companies heavy into the resource plays are in the same condition. If the price of natural gas doesn't recover to a price of $6.00 or above quickly (within the next 12 months), I think a lot of these companies will be in the same predicament as the banks--insolvent.
Quick math note: it's even a bit worse than what you describe, as the "rule of 72" begins to break down as you get to high decline (or growth) rates. At a 30% annual decline rate, each successive year would have 70% of the production of the previous year. After two years, the production would be 49% of the original (0.7^2), or slightly less than half.
How do rigs get counted with the new horizontal techniques? If a horizontal drill rig can 'cover' a larger area than a vertical rig does this lead to an apples to oranges comparison with previous years?
"....does this lead to an apples to oranges comparison with previous years?"
yes it does, and add to that the fact that production from these hz wells declines much faster, at least initially, the best we can do is a wag. we will find the answer in the rearview mirror.
that chart of the day is a little misleading, as the production part is represented by gross withdrawls. dry gas production, the part that is available for heating, electric generation and industrial consumption is gross withdrawals - lease and plant fuel-extraction losses.
dry gas production was on a slight decline from about '02-01 until about -'06-02. the turn around came with a rig count of about 1300 compared to the current 1024 rigs as of 02-19-09. so my wag is that we will see a decline starting about anytime now and we will need to get well above 1300 to turn that around.
fasten your seat belts, we are in for a wild ride !!!
I realize that shales are tight and unpredictable. Still, I cannot help but think that as the horiz laterals get closer together, we will see field declines. Thus, counting them chickens from eggs a dozen or more years out seems quite risky. Just because we are seeing phenomenal results in these efficient phases, it will not last. Gas under pressure has more ability to move, even in tight formations. I feel sure that the Barnett, at least in the old vertical parts, is showing this now. Other areas will as well. If what I am postulating is correct, the reserves, based on acreage for the most part, will prove to be far overstated.
With all due apologies to most Petroleum Engineers, this may well be the first time anything was overstated; well, I am sure that is not the case, but as a general rule, calculate oil in place, reduce by thirty percent, apply the normal recovery rate, reduce by 10%, divide by 2, deduct exhorbitant expenses inflated excessively and then discount back to a net present value, and you get reserves which are understated by a large margin. (Pardon me if I got the %'s wrong, but if you are a PE, you know how to apply them, so please correct me.)
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story_id=4717&page=0
Yemen: The Well Runs Dry
Yemen Net Oil Exports:
http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/country/img/charts/YM_net_imports_large.png
not to worry, wt, the calvary........er i mean exxon is on the way.
http://www.reuters.com/article/marketsNews/idAFLL50541520090221?rpc=44
Cavalry, instead? Then again, crucifixion may be the best way to describe it.
A carbon cap trading plan might cause the U.S. steel, metal fabrication, auto, and heavy equipment manufacturing plants to go out of business while in China where increased smelting capacity and a cheap coal driven power grid caused manufacturing jobs to become more abundant might take over. Initially a million jobs, including union jobs might be lost. No net decrease in global carbon emmisions may be expected as China is likely to ramp up production growth coming out of the recession. Kyota treaty signature countries may see stunted growth in energy and metal fabrication intensive industries.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601072&sid=aHscSU9C.1F8&refer=e...
Global warming caused by solar factors or changes in the earth's orbit around the sun began about 20,000 years ago. The sea level has risen about 360 feet in that amount of time. No amount of carbon taxes could stop the ongoing global warming that has melted continental ice sheets more than a mile thick and millions of square miles wide. If all carbon emissions were stopped the sea level would yet rise, as has occurred over the past 20,000 years.
Environmental paranoia contributes to economic hardships for millions. Highly inefficient aternative energy programs contribute to the woes of a nation closer to risk of bankruptcy.
The planet has been in a cooling trend for the last 1000 years and the last 10000 years.
(note that the time axis is in different directions on these two charts)
Bifurcation has happened.
Whether we go into ice age or hot desert,
civilization as we know it, doesn't survive.*
In other words, We have left the Holocene.
*Barring complete collapse now.
Nationalize the Federal Reserve and take Bernanke/
Greenspan's $$$ and distribute to food kitchens/shelters in America. A start on the Long Emergency.
" Bank stocks are now penny stocks while the bankers pretend, they are a viable business. Today, we get to see videos of Ron Paul and Kucinich calling on Congress to nationalize the FEDERAL RESERVE itself. Of course, the House is empty. And as riddled with corruption from bank lobby ‘donations’ as a house is riddled by termites."-elaine supkis
Another point of view.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Global_Economy/KB18Dj05.html
Thank you.
Per the article:
We never have seen anything like this before in all of history. Pension and health costs projected forward will crush these economies a generation from now. Taxes will suffocate the dwindling population of young workers. A straight-line projection of present trends takes us to the cusp of national failure. We do not know whether present trends will continue in a straight line, to be sure. The race is not to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, as Damon Runyon said, but that's the way to bet."
"The US has become the Japanese carry trade due to our ZIRP banking system. The rich ‘investors’ will NOT be using CAPITAL to buy the 8% basis of these government-sponsored loans. No, they will BORROW this money from the Federal Reserve and then CARRY it to the Treasury and TRADE it for higher-interest bonds backing US housing loans! See how easy this is to figure out!!!!
This is our version of the Japanese carry trade only it is a vampire trade that has our own rulers sucking our blood."-ES
By April the EU has to come up with $44 trillion,
the amount that has disappeared from it's banking system.
The reason the Swiss Franc is collapsing.
And as for America becoming the last refuge,
get ready for all o our colonizing tactics
tried for decades, being used here in America.
See the Harvard Boys, Larry Summers and Yeltsin
for details. And what we've done to the Warsaw Pact
nations.
The world has 2 modes: (1) warm and wet; (2) cold and dry. If it's warm it will be wet. However the models predict that some places will be drier, notably south of a line from Sydney to Perth, and we've certainly seen that. They also predict more rain up north in Australia, and a lot of it is under water right now. This could be luck. It's not hard to find places where expectations are not playing out yet. All this is incredibly moot. Australia expects to be, and already imagines itself to be, the most affected by climate change. We've just lost hundred of lives to bushfires which have added to general alarm. And yet it will be a tough fight to get our modest ETS through parliament in the current economic climate. Now imagine places like Russia which have worse economic problems and expect to benefit from climate change. Are they going to suffer to make the world a better place?
Or consider CCS. Even if possible, this would reduce output from coal power plants by 20%-40%. Lets guess 1/3. That means we need 50% more coal power plants and we run though our remaining coal 50% faster. Forget it.
Once upon a time, say a year ago, we imagined that prices of fossil fuels would keep rising and we'd extract every bit. Now we can see that economic conditions will continue to worsen keeping prices low and making difficult to access fossil fuels inaccessible. So we aren't going to go close to the feared levels of CO2 emissions.
Peak fossil fuels is going to reduce the world population by billions unless we're really clever. And then suddenly I remember: Death rode a green horse. That's scary.
You do realize that 1. those graphics do not come from climate scientists or any peer-reviewed paper and do not indicate the provenance of their data in any way, shape or form (regardless of whether they support your stance or not) and 2. that "anomaly" does not equal "temperature?"
I'd like to see you back this up.
You should learn to follow the links. Prevents kludge from filling up the threads. But I will do it anyway since you asked. I note that you do not ask Rainsong to provide evidence for her claims.
1000 year trend:
The reconstructions used, in order from oldest to most recent publication are:
1. (dark blue 1000-1991): P.D. Jones, K.R. Briffa, T.P. Barnett, and S.F.B. Tett (1998). , The Holocene, 8: 455-471.
2. (blue 1000-1980): M.E. Mann, R.S. Bradley, and M.K. Hughes (1999). , Geophysical Research Letters, 26(6): 759-762.
3. (light blue 1000-1965): Crowley and Lowery (2000). , Ambio, 29: 51-54. Modified as published in Crowley (2000). , Science, 289: 270-277.
4. (lightest blue 1402-1960): K.R. Briffa, T.J. Osborn, F.H. Schweingruber, I.C. Harris, P.D. Jones, S.G. Shiyatov, S.G. and E.A. Vaganov (2001). , J. Geophys. Res., 106: 2929-2941.
5. (light green 831-1992): J. Esper, E.R. Cook, and F.H. Schweingruber (2002). , Science, 295(5563): 2250-2253.
6. (yellow 200-1980): M.E. Mann and P.D. Jones (2003). , Geophysical Research Letters, 30(15): 1820. DOI:10.1029/2003GL017814.
7. (orange 200-1995): P.D. Jones and M.E. Mann (2004). , Reviews of Geophysics, 42: RG2002. DOI:10.1029/2003RG000143
8. (red-orange 1500-1980): S. Huang (2004). , Geophys. Res Lett., 31: L13205. DOI:10.1029/2004GL019781
9. (red 1-1979): A. Moberg, D.M. Sonechkin, K. Holmgren, N.M. Datsenko and W. Karlén (2005). , Nature, 443: 613-617. DOI:10.1038/nature03265
10. (dark red 1600-1990): J.H. Oerlemans (2005). , Science, 308: 675-677. DOI:10.1126/science.1107046
(black 1856-2004): Instrumental data was jointly compiled by the w:Climatic Research Unit and the UK Meteorological Office Hadley Centre. Global Annual Average data set TaveGL2v [2] was used.
Documentation for the most recent update of the CRU/Hadley instrumental data set appears in: P.D. Jones and A. Moberg (2003). , Journal of Climate, 16: 206-223.
10000 year trend:
The following data sources were used in constructing the main plot:
1. (dark blue) Sediment core ODP 658, interpreted sea surface temperature, Eastern Tropical Atlantic: M. Zhao, N.A.S. Beveridge, N.J. Shackleton, M. Sarnthein, and G. Eglinton (1995). , Paleoceanography, 10(3): 661-675. DOI:10.1029/94PA03354
2. (blue) Vostok ice core, interpreted paleotemperature, Central Antarctica: Petit J.R., Jouzel J., Raynaud D., Barkov N.I., Barnola J.M., Basile I., Bender M., Chappellaz J., Davis J., Delaygue G., Delmotte M., Kotlyakov V.M., Legrand M., Lipenkov V., Lorius C., Pépin L., Ritz C., Saltzman E., Stievenard M. (1999). , Nature, 399: 429-436. DOI:10.1038/20859
3. (light blue) GISP2 ice core, interpreted paleotemperature, Greenland: Alley, R.B. (2000). , Quaternary Science Reviews, 19: 213-226. DOI:10.1016/S0277-3791(99)00062-1
4. (green) Kilimanjaro ice core, δ18O, Eastern Central Africa: Thompson, L.G., E. Mosley-Thompson, M.E. Davis, K.A. Henderson, H.H. Brecher, V.S. Zagorodnov, T.A. Mashiotta, P.-N. Lin, V.N. Mikhalenko, D.R. Hardy, and J. Beer (2002). , Science, 298(5593): 589-593. DOI:10.1126/science.1073198
5. (yellow) Sediment core PL07-39PC, interpreted sea surface temperature, North Atlantic: Lea, D.W., D.K. Pak, L.C. Peterson, and K.A. Hughen (2003). , Science, 301(5638): 1361-1364. DOI:10.1126/science.1088470
6. (orange) Pollen distributions, interpreted temperature, Europe: B.A.S. Davis, S. Brewer, A.C. Stevenson, J. Guiot (2003). , Quaternary Science Reviews, 22: 1701-1716. DOI:10.1016/S0277-3791(03)00173-2
7. (red) EPICA ice core, δDeuterium, Central Antarctica: EPICA community members (2004). , Nature, 429(6992): 623-628. DOI:10.1038/nature02599
8. (dark red) Composite sediment cores, interpreted sea surface temperature, Western Tropical Pacific: L.D. Stott, K.G. Cannariato, R. Thunell, G.H. Haug, A. Koutavas, and S. Lund (2004). , Nature, 431: 56-59. DOI:10.1038/nature02903
Additional data used in inset plot and for matching temperature scale to modern values. Colors match those used in Image:2000 Year Temperature Comparison.png.
1. (orange 200-1995): P.D. Jones and M.E. Mann (2004). , Reviews of Geophysics, 42: RG2002. DOI:10.1029/2003RG000143
2. (red-orange 1500-1980): S. Huang (2004). , Geophys. Res Lett., 31: L13205. DOI:10.1029/2004GL019781
3. (red 1-1979): A. Moberg, D.M. Sonechkin, K. Holmgren, N.M. Datsenko and W. Karlén (2005). , Nature, 443: 613-617. DOI:10.1038/nature03265
4. (thin black line 1856-2004): Instrumental global annual data set TaveGL2v [2]: P.D. Jones and A. Moberg (2003). , Journal of Climate, 16: 206-223.
Caveats
1. A typical modern temperature construction involves tens or hundreds of records to ensure reasonable global coverage. Because the average shown here involves only 8 records, it is entirely plausible that significant contributions to temperature variation are being overlooked because certain large regions (e.g. Asia) are not being sampled.
2. Different regions have different sensitivity to global temperature variations, so one can reasonably argue that a true global average reconstruction requires scaling the different records to match local sensitivity. Since no scientific consensus exists for how to do this, no attempt was made to do this.
3. Given the limited spatial sampling, it is unclear whether the slightly warmer period during the Holocene climatic optimum corresponds to a statistically significant difference.
4. Because the Davis et al. pollen reconstruction is based on measurements across many sites in Europe, it is more reasonably described as a regional rather than a local temperature measurement. Similarly, it shows considerably less short-term variability than most other sites.
5. A small number of records, not used in this study, have been interpreted as indicating much larger temperature variation during the Holocene (5+ °C) than the records represented here. In many cases, critics have interpreted these changes to reflect seasonal, rather than annual variations in temperature, or very unusual local changes. However, the possibility exists that the current reconstruction underestimates long-term variability.
6. During the earliest parts of this record, the timing uncertainty on some records may become substantial, potentially exceeding a couple hundred years. This could have the result of causing correlated features to fall out of alignment.
7. And the most important caveat: Though all of this data is published, and the methodology is similar to previously published methodology, and resulting average is similar to previously published interpretations of the Holocene, even so, no peer reviewed scientific publication has ever combined precisely these data in precisely this way. Hence, any interpretation of that average must be regarded with skepticism.
The continental ice sheet must have melted due to higher temperatures since the peak of the ice age, not a lowering of temperatures as presumed. The drying up of the Sahara over the past ten thousand years could not have been from cooler temperatures. The switch from northern vegetation in Turkey to more southern vegetation since 11,000 years ago could not be attributed to global cooling. The increasing heat/aridity in the Negev that drove settlers to cooler areas could not be due to global cooling. In a lake delta there was a change in coloration of sediments due to peak carbon deposition during the growing season and light colored sediment layers deposited in the winter. These are called varves. They are like tree rings and contained pollen samples. Along with carbon 14 dating data that has been published not consistent with geochemical markers in ocean water or disolved CO2 in ocean water as a geothermometer as there were more factors than a Gorite could comprehend. It is incomprehensible to suggest the ice age ended due to carbon dioxide emissions. Charts showing ocean level rise of 320 feet over 20,000 years all show long term gradual rise. None showed that the ice age land bridge from Siberia to Alaska remained to this day due to prolonged global cooling.
California snowpack has been replenished by recent storms and is at 74% of normal with another storm forecast to arrive:
http://www3.signonsandiego.com/stories/2009/feb/20/1m20drought234433-did...
You're going off in so many directions its becoming hard to tell what you are talking about. Aridity is not the same as temperature. Changing plant zones is a multi-variable problem. Reaching back to 11,000 is putting you right at the end of the last ice age. Of course zones were moving northward then. Reaching back 20,000 year time frames is during the last glaciation. The earth was warming from 20K to 11K as the ice melted. There is a sharp spike upward at ~14.5K and then again at 12K. There is a bit of a plateau from 10K to 8K, then the earth (relatively modest compared to glaciation, relatively large for the Holocene) dips and warms again around 8K, and then slowly cools. That story holds for the aggregate. It holds for Greenland core. If you look at just European pollen the warming is slower, peaking at 6K and basically flat since then (Pollen distributions, interpreted temperature, Europe: B.A.S. Davis, S. Brewer, A.C. Stevenson, J. Guiot (2003). , Quaternary Science Reviews, 22: 1701-1716. DOI:10.1016/S0277-3791(03)00173-2)
Don't like proxy aggregates? Neither do I, really. Here is the tale of the tape from central Greenland for the last 10000 years.
ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/paleo/icecore/greenland/summit/gisp2/is...
(more recent years on the left)
Where did this come from?
1) I don't think any has made this claim in this thread.
2) It is not incomprehensible to suggest it.
The northern and southern ice sheets are not in perfect phase. Based on ice proxies, temperatures rise earlier in the Southern Hemisphere than they rise in the Northern Hemisphere. They rise in the Southern Ocean before they rise in Greenland. CO2 levels rise earlier than the temperatures in Greenland. So it could very well be that there is an astronomical component that triggers Southern Hemisphere warming, which increases available CO2 in the atmosphere, which begins a feedback cycle that eventually melts Northern Hemisphere ice. Earth slowly cools and ices over. Wash, rinse, repeat. This Holocene plateau actually looks a little unusual for the longevity of its peak when you look over the last several ice ages.
Timing of Atmospheric CO2 and Antarctic Temperature Changes Across Termination III
Nicolas Caillon, Jeffrey P. Severinghaus, Jean Jouzel, Jean-Marc Barnola, Jiancheng Kang, Volodya Y. Lipenkov, 2003
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/299/5613/1728
The analysis of air bubbles from ice cores has yielded a precise record of atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations, but the timing of changes in these gases with respect to temperature is not accurately known because of uncertainty in the gas age-ice age difference. We have measured the isotopic composition of argon in air bubbles in the Vostok core during Termination III (~240,000 years before the present). This record most likely reflects the temperature and accumulation change, although the mechanism remains unclear. The sequence of events during Termination III suggests that the CO2 increase lagged Antarctic deglacial warming by 800 ± 200 years and preceded the Northern Hemisphere deglaciation.
Charts for the last 20000+ years show a fast rise in sea level until about 8K where it begins to slow. Sea level has been very flat for the last several thousand years.
http://www.theoildrum.com/story/2006/2/3/0394/97545
Actually, I did look for the provenance and there was none except this: the charts are made by the people who run that site. Perhaps you should read the article at RealClimate titled something like, "Three Ways to Cook a Graph."
Ah, here it is: http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2008/05/how-to-cook-a-grap...
I'm glad there were links to the data and thank you for providing them. Now show me the peer review of those graphs to ascertain their legitimacy. Also, are those links themselves legit? (I'm not going to check, so insert whatever response you wish here.)
Beyond that, I didn't bother mentioning talking about ten thousand year trends in terms of climate change is pretty useless. I'll leave you to figure out for yourself why. A thousand year trend has more validity as it is less likely to overpower the beginning of a shift in a trend, so I'd give a little leeway there. However, the real problem with these bullshit graphs is this:
That the Earth has been cooling for ten thousand years is just bull. It's been debunked, so anyone starting with that as their premise is spouting crap and cooking graphs to make it seem legitimate. So, when n do you count from? How about from the Younger Dryas? That was more than ten thousand years ago. So we've been warming up ever since, right? Or how about 20k years ago?
...I can pull dates out of my arse all day long...
It's no different than trying to claim we are in a recent cooling trend because of 1998. It's a Red Herring.
Jeers
When? Where? By Whom? Citations are appropriate here.
Somehow I doubt you have one.
If I wanted to 'cook the graph' I would have started at just a little less than 8K years.
I wonder how I came up with the esoteric number of 10000? hmmm.....
One side provides full citations for sources and claims.
The other just keeps making uncited assertions.
I'm pretty sure I know which side is speaking out of their ass.
Jeers right back atchya.
I do hope you mean the ACC side is imparting knowledge and the anti-ACC side isn't because you are a damned liar otherwise.
Every point you could possibly raise has been debunked on these forums over and over and over.
It's boring and a waste of time to deal with you lying, bought and paid for fools.
I already made my point, and clearly: you chose 10,000 years. I asked you: What about from the Younger Dryas?
You have no answer because you are a cherry-picking fool.
I chose 10K because it is a power of 10.
100
1000
10000
If I wanted to cherry pick numbers I would have chosen to examine the Holocene starting at just a little shy of 8K - then I could exaggerate the cooling trend.
If I wanted to examine the Pleistocene, 100K wouldn't do it I would need to bump up to 500K or more.
What is it that you want to know about Younger Dryas? A period preceding the Holocene? A period of warming immediately following the Big Thaw? How does that affect a 10K trend? How does that inform us of the Holocene?
I have found in my history of posting on science, that when the argument turns to personal insults there is usually no more to be learned and nothing worth discussing left.
Good day.
If we are on the same side, then great. If there was a misunderstanding it was due to your incorrect statement:
That verb usage does not mean was, or has stopped, it means was and IS. If I got the wrong impression from that, I'll gladly back off while encouraging better use of verb phrases.
The planet has been in a 10000 year cooling trend.
The planet is in a 100 year warming trend.
The 100 year trend is likely to continue because that trend isn't natural.
The Holocene gives way to the Anthropocene.
(assuming energy intensive civilization survives the next couple of centuries)
Rainsong was trying to make the point that the current warming was part of a natural 20K warming trend.
RS is full of _it. 20K crosses an interglacial boundary. It's a nonsensical time frame. It would be a stronger position to just argue that current temps and trends fall within the bounds of the noise in the 10K trend. (Note, I haven't actually calculated the s.d. for the 10K trend yet, so I don't know if that claim is true or not. Seems likely though. Maybe a project for later today).
I don't mind you challenging my sources and data. Especially if we are on the "same side of the debate." It's perfectly reasonable to challenge such a broad claim supported by only 8 data streams. But because of your misreading of what my intent was, you let it go beyond reasonable challenge to an attempt to discredit me personally.
It's Sunday morning. Maybe a good time for some reflection.
If I may be so bold as to step into this discussion--As I understand it, ccpo simply wants you to change one letter--the s in has--to a d. The accurate verb form for a process that has stopped in the past is the pluperfect (or as the Roman's liked to say, plus quam perfectum).
So, Ron, would you be opposed to re-wording the your paraphrastic verb tense from "The planet has been in a 10000 year cooling trend" to "had been" and ccpo would you consider modifying your tone when the confusion may be something as trivial as a slip of one letter?
On the other hand, we seem to be in agreement that rainsong is not accurately reflecting current scientific understanding (though I could think of more colorful ways of saying that).
Back to the articles--I thought it was an interesting point that, although the big drop in total sea ice coverage was in 2007, the more important big drop in the amount of thick, multi-year ice happened in 2008. I would still like to see estimates of total ice mass, but perhaps those aren't available?
I drafted a long reply but decided to trash it.
Hopefully the following is clear:
I think the long term cooling trend which has prevailed over the last 10000 years and 1000 years is going to be abruptly (in geologic scale) terminated by a sharp spike in global warming caused by human-sourced CO2 which will dominate the coming millennium. We are at the boundary between the Holocene and the Anthropocene. You don't track linear trends over phase changes. The past does not predict the future.
The two of you needn't have bothered with the last three posts. Once I realized I had mistaken Ron's point, it was ended. Within the context he's using the sentence, it's OK as you can, and it seems pretty usual to, note trends from the same data by using different time frames and starting/ending points. That's the way he meant it.
I get tired of reading the idiotic rants of immoral, unethical and/or willfully ignorant people and didn't read Ron's post carefully.
My bad.
I still don't trust those graphs, though. I'll stick to graphs produced by the scientists and have met with peer review.
I also think the 10k trend is irrelevant. The current spike in temps and GHG's is absolutely enormous. It obliterates long term trends.
Also, we don't understand ACC only from temperature records. There are so many other forms of evidence it is absurd for people to even consider any other explanation. Exxon-bred anti-bots like attacking temps - have you noticed their comments are almost exclusively related to temps and that they won't deal with any of the other evidence? - because it is the one area that offers them ambiguity. There's nothing ambiguous about ice melting, animal territories changing, climate zones shifting, etc.
Cheers
Dear Rainsong
Dr. Jim Buckee, Formerly head of Talisman on global cooling:
- A lecture to be given at Aberdeen University.
-
http://media-newswire.com/release_1086423.html
The first lecture on global warming was scheduled to take place a couple of weeks ago, but had to be cancelled because of severe snow fall.
‘The first lecture in the Energy Controversies series by Professor of Soils & Global Change at the University, Pete Smith, entitled Global Warming: the View of the IPCC, was scheduled to take place last Thursday ( 5 February ), but was cancelled due to adverse weather conditions.’’
rgds
dropstone
Climate Progress » Blog Archive » Very warm 2008 makes this the ...
Very warm 2008 makes this the hottest decade in recorded history by far*. The climate story of the decade is that the 2000s are on track to be nearly 0.2°C ...
climateprogress.org/2008/12/07/very-warm-2008-makes-this-hottest-decade-in-recorded-history-by-far
worst drought in CA history now.
I think the water types, hydrologists are looking at lagging indicators. The current month of Febuary looks like it is going to be a "fabulous Febuary" water supply wise. Lokk at the latest fiveday forecast:
5day precipitation forecast
Not that that will be enough to bring the snowpack back up to normal seasonal levels. And we started the rainy season with seriously depleted reservoirs, so even a normal year won't end shortages. But, the current hyperbole is unrealistic. Around here people are very-very tired of rain.
The California drought might be compared to the Oklahoma drought of the Great Depression. Rapid population growth and increased water consumption has not helped the situation any.
As for global cooling over the past 10,000 years. It is a myth. There were pollen studies of lake sediments in Anatolia, pollen studies at archaeology sites in the fertile crescent (Levant) indicating global warming over the past 10,000 years. In the Negev and Sinai the climate used to be different. There was more water due to cooler climate during the Early Bronze Age c. 4,000-5,000 years ago. With the onset of aridity the communites were abandoned and the people moved north and to higher elevations in Israel and Jordan or to the Nile communities of Egypt. In the 1970's it was known that the Sahara was expanding and Lake Chad was drying up. Close to 10,000 years ago parts of the Sahara in Egypt were inhabited by cattle keepers and seasonal barley farmers. During modern times even the prayers of the devout cannot bring rain. The communities are gone, their cooking fire charcoal, stone grain grinders, and other stone tools remain. In the arid Algerian desert there are rock paintings of giraffes, elephants etc. None of those animals exist there today. The Sahara has not stopped expanding.
During the last ice age there were boreal forests in Europe where there are hardwood forests today. The vegatative zones have shifted north.
Rainsong,
You are again conflating several factors and confusing time scales. The sea-level curve posted above shows that sea-level did rise some 140 meters after the Last Glacial Maximum, but reached roughly the present level by 8,000 BP. Your comments about the mid-eastern deserts ignore the fact that those areas were heavily populated thousands of years ago and the inhabitants used lots of wood. There's clear evidence that the trees were cut down and did not return. One reason is that trees transpire water, which falls as rain downwind. There was a thriving community at Ephesis (sp) during Biblical times, but the harbor is now filled with silt due to soil erosion after the surrounding trees were cut. When the trees near the Mediterranean Sea were cut, the areas downwind were deprived of that moisture. Desertification is another man made process, which has caused the Sahara Desert to move to the south as grazing animals removed the plants which held the soil.
It's not as simple as you make it sound.
E. Swanson
Will we permit global destruction because we could not tell the difference between weather and climate?
It's not a matter of not telling the difference: Exxon paid for those lies and BuCheney helped cover them up.
Dear CCPO,
Dont you think its time to stop flogging that dead horse about Exxon money and that all who happen to disagree with you are lying deniers, propagandists and oil company shills? It is beginning to sound a bit lame. Especially in the light of the phenomenal money now spent on pro AGW 'research', compared with that spent by Exxon and Evil Incorporated. The pro-money dwarfs the anti-money by an order of magnitude at least.
rgds
Dropstone
Exxon is a company whose survival depends on technical expertise. You want to drop 100 million on an offshore well? You depend on facts and you make sure that the facts you use have validity. Like all oil companies, Exxon is forced to take the long view of each prospect and its development.
Given that factual, science based understanding, is critical to the economic well being of the organization, that it chose to spend its dollars on "junk science" and public obfuscation is inexcusable. Exxon's actions have had substantial impact on undermining public acceptance of current scientific understanding of AGW and therefore have delayed any attempt at mitigation.
Ccpo is being far too charitable. Revoke their corporate charter!! May their executives burn in hell!! That is exactly the future their, and your, children face.
As always drop, old liar old pal, where are your facts? Your proof? We have it about Exxon and BuCheney. Where is yours? And, no, we are not talking legit science funding, we are talking intentional propaganda to prevent action on ACC. Where is your proof of intentional funding of scientists to LIE about ACC in order for corporations to make money?
You idiots spout this stuff about ACC funding while blithely ignoring the WH was occupied by BuCheney and it was a Republican congress during the time we are addressing.
They committed crimes against humanity. You are, too, or do you not understand the concept of Accessory After the Fact?
Disgusting.
Yes, but that's not the only reason why.
Yes, but it's because of that principle Nate talked about, the one where the crisis lies beyond the foresight horizon of any current decision maker. A disaster is likely at some future time, maybe decades away, but to avert it requires significant expense right now.
Like the sort of space program we'd need to have if we want to deflect that 2029 asteroid pass...
Dear Wisco,
Some of us can tell the difference between weather and climate. We learnt it at length in our climatology and meteorology classes as undergraduates. I just found it funny that STV interviewed the poor guy in a blizzard explaing that his global warming lecture was cancelled due to snow. He went on to say that none of this will happen in 2080...poor guy, the gentle cooling which may well progress over decades has shot his fox :-)
rgds
Dropstone
But ironically the global cooling talk on the 18th took place on a day where the temperature in Aberdeen reached 13C (56F) - positively tropical for Aberdeen in February.
Dear Undertow,
Dont mix up weather with climate :-)
rgds
Dropstone
It's like a recent headline in a Canadian paper "thousands brave freezing cold to protest about global warming"
"Natural gas prices have fallen to about half of what most producers need to make to be profitable, and a freeze in credit markets have hurt drillers, said Herring. ... "You can kind of dress it up any way you want and describe it as some kind of a tax credit, or an incentive. But essentially for activity to increase, the royalty take has to go down," Herring said before meeting Alberta Energy Minister Mel Knight on Friday."
Royalties are an excuse, not the reason why natural gas drilling is down. Drilling is down for the simple reason that the industry cannot collectively restrain itself from suicidal economics by selling too much gas for whatever they can get. It is a feature of capital-intensive industries such as petroleum that once the costs are paid for, they will sell at any price just to keep cash flow going. This beggars everyone and wastes valuable resources that should be metered out more slowly.
This, to me, is the reason for the Hubbert peak. When lots of resources are readily available, it makes economic sense to squander them as fast as possible in order to maximize cash flow. The trigger for the upslope side of the peak is not necessarily cheap and easy-to-get resources but rather a high cash flow regardless of the capital costs. The Alberta oilsands are not being scaled back because of high capital costs per se but because the projected cash flow from $35 oil will not suffice.
I don't believe natural gas will hit its peak for many years yet.
But don't operators have an incentive to maximize production in a rising price environment? The initial Texas & North sea oil production declines corresponded to rising oil prices.
Natural gas production from the 10 largest natural gas producers in the U.S. was already in a slow decline for the first three quarters of 2008, despite increased price and a steadily growing rig count:
Natural gas production from 10 largest U.S. producers (BCFPD)
Q1-2008 17.64
Q2-2008 17.60
Q3-2008 17.46
I would think that, with plummeting natural gas prices and rig count, this trend would only accelerate.
Could it be the imploding natural gas prices are attributable to factors other than increasing supply?
"Could it be the imploding natural gas prices are attributable to factors other than increasing supply?"
it probably is, however the latest consumption figure, nov. '08 was up slightly from nov '07, as was ytd.
At the end of yesterdays DB Totonelia created a post on urea as regards Russia and some others. Dealing with gas supplies.
I took a look at current quotes to farmers on 46-0-0(urea) and saw prices per ton ranging from a low of $450 to a high of around 650 and maybe 700...this was in the upper midwest as I recall.
There is urea and there is amm nitrate at 34% vs urea at 46%...
This countries crops are totally depending for reasonable yields on lots of nitrogen inputs. Some may go the nh3 route and that is also very pricy. I thought maybe $1000/ton.
My figures might be a bit off since I haven't been speaking about it to local farmers. I might do that today.
Myself I use very little I-N,P,K...and this year perhaps almost none.
I instead intend to use COF as per S. Solomon. Also some compost I started last year.
One further note: Most farmers on blogsites are really really pissed about the machinations of our government as regards the bailouts.
They applauded Santelli's rant 100%..overwhelmingly.
I did too. Time things need to be said,,actually YELLED.
Airdale-Obama is a huge disappointment to me. I said I would withhold judgement. That time is now over. He failed.
WOW ! We are already a month (well not quite) into the Obama Administration, and he has already failed. Rush Limburger's "I hope he fails !" must have been the nail in the coffin. And then there is the whole bunch of us who were wowed when he actually did get something done early in his administration. What fools we were. I'll check back in another month and see how much worse everything is. At least Bush got out of town before things got bad. Can't have anything to do with his failures of historic proportion. Maybe we can elect another Bush and get things straightened out again.
Obama is not a disappointment to me, because I wasn't expecting much.
But I do think he's heading for failure, if he isn't there already. He's put the people who created this mess in charge of fixing it. Either he's really stupid, or he thinks we are.
I supported his candidacy, because I knew severe challenges were ahead. He looked like our best hope for getting through them. He still does. That doesn't mean he hasn't made mistakes. Or that he can pull off a miracle. His timing is terrible, he should have asked for a 12month extension of GWBs contract before starting work!
The key will be can we get through the crisis without turning to a demagogue? Times of anger and frustration are opputune times for the worst elements. Time will tell if we can obtain sufficient mitigation of the depression to avoid them.
Yes, timing is everything, and it wasn't something he could control. I said before the election that whoever won was going to be Hoover, not FDR. In my more paranoid moments, I wonder if the GOP planned it this way all along.
But I really think Obama has his head where the sun don't shine, putting the likes of Geithner and Summers in charge. And Rahm Emanuel. Obama will have the voters longing for Dubya again if he doesn't change course.
People are very angry, and it's going to get a lot worse before it gets better. Trying to re-inflate the housing bubble is stupid and futile, and it's making people even angrier.
Let us not pretend that he has any real leeway in his actions. He had to prostrate himself before his party and the corporations to get in. They paid for him fair and square (just like they purchased congress), and in return he padded his administration with insiders and political hacks.
His only hope, is that things get so bad that it is politically expedient to toss his patrons under the train, and start fresh. My guess is that by late fall he will get a clue and start doing some really radical things.
At this point, things are not actually all that bad, so his action have been relatively restrained. Foreigners are still buying up our debt, no states have gone bankrupt, over 80% of the population still have a job, inflation is under control, rioting and civil unrest is minimal, famine is not widespread. If you were the president surveying this landscape, you would have to conclude the best course of action is patch the system.
His choices seem to be Keynesian spending, or let the market work it out. Even Bush was bright enough to realize that doing nothing would mean a mob with torches and pitchforks in the rose garden.
Will anything he does now work?
Hell no!!
It is all just window dressing, till things get much more serious latter this year.
I realize that you have to pay as you go, even if you're president.
But this business of picking people who can't pay their taxes...it's making him look incompetent. Surely there are people who are approved by his party and the bankers who aren't tax cheats...somewhere.
Having just done my taxes last week, I have to wonder how anyone knew these guys had tax problems. The regulations are so indecipherable I would guess that anyone who doesn't qualify for a 1040EZ made a mistake.
Does a nomination win you a 5 year tax audit from the IRS? I doubt it.
Did the nominee just remember at the last minute he forgot something? I doubt that also.
Even if the nominee released the last 5 years of his tax returns who could tell they did it wrong?
The more I think about it the more I suspect these were hatched jobs. As I think back, I never remember reading any story attributing a source for the tax problems. They just seemed to spring full blown into the MSM.
I have on occasion rubbed shoulders with the rich and powerful. The tend to be universally corrupt. I doubt a single member of congress could survive a rigorous audit. So I have to wonder what the back story is on these nominations tax problems.
First thing that comes to mind, is that bush appointees were still in charge over at the IRS while this was going on.
I don't think Bush can be blamed for the supposed "hatchet jobs." Geithner was chosen to appease the Republicans and big business (and was in fact greeted enthusiastically by the right). They really couldn't hope for anyone better (from their POV).
BitteroldCoot speaks about taxes.
Difficult? Yes. Impossible? No.
I have always done my own taxes. And did my kids as well while they were going thru college. Even as my son was taking his Masters of Accontancy I was doing his. What does he use now? Turbo Tax.
Yet I still do my the old fashioned way. And it was ok until I got farms,and then had to also do my Sch Fs...after retirement and taking over my fathers business , I still did mine and this now included Sch C...so both farming...a Sch F, a Sch C and then I started consulting on mainframes and that meant many 1099s...and working in a different state than I resided in...and also all my state taxes.
One year I sold a major residence, brought a farm in a different state, and owed capital gains and had to do two states as well.
The only time I didn't was one time when I had H R Block do them and I regretted it deeply..I would never send anyone to HR Block...
I worked on a woman who did local farmers taxes. She had this gimmick..if they stopped using her she right off turned them in to the IRS. And even so I was filing on my Sch F depreciation and using the ...called 196 line to take it off the top...I asked her about this and she drew a blank..means all farmers had to do yearly depreciation on a scale...
Now its easy. I just draw SS and a Pension. Its a snap.
Its a bit complicated but if you model off the last years return you rarely make a mistake. My son is now a CPA..do I ask his advice?NO.
He knows less than I do. Believe me its true.
In fact I believe that most IRS agents are not too sharp on the code. They get a file open and drag it out forever. This is where people get caught.
One year after I quit consulting I learned that I could deduct all my expenses so I filed two ammended returns for the previous two years.
No problem there and I bounced it also to my state.Got a call from someone..explained it and he said. Fine business. No problemo.
Farmers can work so many angles that the IRS agents can't untangle the webs.Plus they are given a lot of leeway. A lot.
Airdale
"I have on occasion rubbed shoulders with the rich and powerful. The tend to be universally corrupt."
I think this sums it up pretty well. I am always suspicious of sudden revelations of corruption. With corruption ubiquitous in the upper echelons of power, such revelations to me mean that someone has offended the real powers behind the throne.
Being disappointed in Obama after what Bush did to the country is like being disappointed, after some a-hole pushes a car off a cliff, that the poor driver left inside can't figure out how to get the darn thing to fly--it is almost certain that nothing he can do is going to help, but it is completely certain that the main culprit has now left the scene of the crime.
And here's who we should replace them with:
Safe Haven (bank) page down to the safe haven entry:
I'm afraid hiring him would be closing the barn door while the hourse are running wild.
He woulda been the guy to keep us from getting into trouble in the first place. But, now we need a clever laywer to get us out of jail. (I doubt both caabilities exist in the same man).
The US has had nothing but puppets in the White House for three decades now. Carter was the last non-puppet. I believe that he was intentionally set up to fail, as that made it considerably easier to place puppets in the White House. The Republicans (or rather, those that bankroll the Republicans) started this game, then the Democrats (or rather, those that bankroll the Democrats) realized the advantages of playing the same game. There are a considerable number of equal-opportunity bankrollers who see the advantage of rotating puppets between party labels, as this preserves the charade of "democracy". They are the reason why nothing ever really changes regardless of who gets elected.
I suspect that Obama is being set up to fail, so that the bankrollers can step things up to the next level; this is a repeat of what happened with Carter. The US is going to become a much more authoritarian country. TPTB know they have no choice, the problems facing the country are too great, they need a more authoritarian regime to run things if they are going to have any chance of preserving their wealth and power. The appearance and trappings of democracy will be carefully preserved, but it will all be a sham - even more so than now.
Being very intelligent isn't always the best thing. From Ivory Tower thinking to over-thinking, there are perils.
I'm edging toward the opinion that the best president would be someone who is a very good judge of character, self-assured, but not arrogant, and an excellent Big Picture analyst - none of which require an IQ over, say, 110.
Cheers
Hank Paulson, Robert Rubin, Bernie Madoff, this Stanford guy, pretty well every successful grifter in the USA is very intelligent. With the current setup it is pretty well impossible to elect a President who will work for the nation, so eloquence and charm is useful but won't change the basics.
I think William F. Buckly said something about preferring to be governed by people selected at random from the Boston White Pages rather than the "best and brightest" from Harvard.
I think that Obama put in the advisors and subordinates that he did because that is what he was told to do. You don't believe that all that money he raised came with no strings attached, did you?
It is not like he has been on the scene for decades and has all that thick a contact list, anyway. He accepted the "suggestions" and "recommendations" of his chief donors gladly.
I think it is much more subtle then that. As someone who knows he needs a top notch economist, but isn't one himself, he has to rely on others to recommend who would be best. So you end up with a fairly narrow circle on experts making recommendations from within their own circle. A president is a generalist, and is dependent on experts in many fields. To some degree he is vulnerable to those very experts, as he may be incapable of independent evaluation of their advise.
The NY Times had an analysis on the Santelli performance this morning, citing comments from several blogs:
The bailout for billionaires is very much part of the anger Santelli is tapping into. People wouldn't be so angry if this were the first bailout, rather than merely the latest.
You are mistaken Leanan, the bailout for billionaire bankers, (TARP), and the tax cut for billionaires, happened on Bush's watch. Santelli just loved both of those, especially the tax cut for billionaires. He is pissed because people who bought more house than they can afford to pay for are getting bailed out. They are not billionaires by any stretch of the indignation. They may not deserve getting bailed out but that is another story. That was the point of his rant.
As you say, he may be tapping into some of the anger about Bush's bailouts. However, for the most part, they are different sets of people. The rich are for Bush's bailouts and upset at Obama's and the poor are for Obama's bailouts and upset at Bush's. And that is Santelli's position, upset at Obama but pleased with what Bush did.
Ron
How am I mistaken?
I did not say anything about whether Santelli himself approved of the bailout for billionaires, or whether it happened on Bush's watch or not.
Okay, people like me for instance, were upset over what Bush did but think Santelli is an idiot for his rant. You can't have it both ways unless you are a Libertarian, (against all government fiscal intervention), and they are a small minority. I have never heard a staunch Republican criticize Bush for his bias toward the rich or a staunch Democrat criticize Obama for his bias toward the poor and middle class.
Santelli was tapping into the anger of the rich and those Wal-Mart Republicans who think that making the rich richer will eventually trickles down them. The people who are ranting against the mortgage bailout are, by and large, Republicans. (I realize a few Democrats are among them just as a few Republicans voted for the Obama package.)
Ron
I think what you're missing is that most of America is not really comfortable in either party. In some states, there are more independents than Democrats or Republicans. (This may be one of the most striking changes in American politics over the last fifty years or so.)
The anger Santelli tapped into is not the anger of the rich. It's the anger of Main St. So much so that there's now talk about CNBC expanding their viewership beyond the wealthy business crowd.
The average Joe doesn't care whether Santelli supported the bailout last fall. That was last fall. This goes far beyond Democrat vs. Republican.
Just heard on CNN:
89 percent of Democrats support the Obama stimulus plan.
52 percent of Independents support the Obama stimulus plan.
22 percent of Republicans support the Obama stimulus plan.
Nuff said!
Ron
Huh?
That doesn't mean anything without numbers for how many are in each category.
Double Huh?
36 percent of Americans identify themselves as Democrats.
37 percent of Americans identify themselves as Independents.
27 percent of Americans identify themselves as Republicans.
Of those Independents, 15 percent lean Democratic while only 10 percent lean Republican.
Fewer Voters Identify as Republicans
My point was, the Santelli ranters are mostly all Republicans! They do not reflect any anger over the Bush bailouts for billionaires. They only hate the Obama bailouts, they love the Bush bailouts and tax cuts for billionaires.
Ron
Wow. So now "Independent" is the most popular party. That is a big change from how it used to be.
I don't see how that follows.
Rasmussen's latest on bank bailouts:
72% of Republicans oppose more government help for banks
63% of Independents
50% of Democrats
I think what this shows is that Republicans are more opposed to bailouts, period. Which is not exactly a surprise.
I am definitely glad to hear that. They think that the original TARP was enough. So do I. However this has nothing to do with the subject of your original post. The Santelli rant was opposed to bailouts for the poor and middle class, it had nothing to do with banks. In fact it will hurt banks because many will have to write down a high percentage of all of the mortgages that are under water.
Ron
I know Santelli was talking about the mortgage bailout.
What I said, and what I maintain, is that the popular anger he's tapped into started with the bank bailout. Whether he was opposed to it originally or is now has nothing to do with it.
I don't think I can remember seeing people as angry as they are now. I don't know many Wall St. billionaires. The people I know are blue and white collar workers who don't generally worry much about the Dow Jones or follow Wall St. They are Democrats, Republicans, and independents - and all furious. They were ready to spit over the bank bailout last fall, and this mortgage bailout just strikes them as the final straw on the camel's back.
Understand your point Leanan. But you must understand, based on the CNN poll cited above, the ranters are far short of a majority. The overwhelming majority of the majority party, and over half of the indipendents are perfectly happy with the Obama stimulus plan. Hope it works but like you I doubt that it will.
Ron
Okay, that I agree with. Probably the vast majority of Americans don't even know who Santelli is. It's a big mistake to assume "big on the Internet" translates into real life.
However, according to Rasmussen, most Americans do not support Obama's mortgage plan. 45 percent of Americans oppose, 38 percent approve, 18 percent are undecided. And you don't need a majority to be a political force.
Me, I think the plan is just dumb. The way it's designed...I don't think it will help very many people. And it's wrongheaded to begin with, trying to prop up prices when in fact, prices need to go down to match wages.
What I want is a new CCC. With an emphasis on building renewable energy infrastructure. It probably won't fix the economy, but it will give people jobs. We'll get some green energy out of it. And it's much less likely to tick people off.
We have to distinquish among the various plans. Stimulus is the easiest to understand, although I think the instincts of most people are to not trust Keynesian economics (borrowing to stimulate the economy during a severe down turn). The mortgage thing, sounds to a lot of people like giveaways to the least deserving (homeowners, and banks alike). I think very few understand what the Fed and TARP are doing for mainstreet, and the reaction is mostly what you see here, conspiracy theories about raiding the treasury for the benefit of a handful of fatcats. I personally don't believe that is what is happening, but I am in the minority. And even I will admit that even sincere government workers have to rely on the advice of experts. If those experts are compromised, then even the most public spirited official could be compromised.
Who would of thunk it?
What this poll and the one Darwinian cites show is that most Americans take the same position that I do--they support handouts for the regular guy (the stimulus package) but oppose more bailouts for the fat cats (bank bailouts).
So the American people can, and do, make the subtle distinction between bailouts for the rich and bailouts for the rank and file.
I think that most polls are useless. The scripts are prewritten to obtain the desired results
I have never been called and I know of no one else who has.
I once did a man on the street interview on TV regarding Carter before the elections. I watched others give their views.
When it aired that night not a single one ,including me , was shown.They just showed those interviewies whose views sided with the station.
Its all a big fakeout. Keeps the sheeple in line. Lies and more lies.
What is this country good at? Lies. Bullshit. Payoffs.
Airdale
You should do a poll to validate your position thaat most polls are useless..
I think you're wrong here, Leanan. Main street was furious over the earlier bailouts. They were divided over the auto bailouts. (Predictably, those connected to auto jobs were for it.) But this last one is different. I say this based on living among mostly lower middle class and blue collar workers and hours of listening to talk radio...
lilith
Happened across this article this morning:
You can't accuse Santelli of trying to have it both ways.
DISCLAIMER: I am not a GWB fan. However, in the spirit of fairness, it should be noted that the ENRON prosecution happened during King George's reign. Kenny Lay was a personal friend and he still got hassled. The Untouchables list has obviously grown tremendously since the days of the ENRON prosecution and so far there are no indications that Barack Obama will cause any trouble for the boys.
Absurd! Do you think there will be no such investigatons under Obama? Will there be no prosecutions of Ponzi Schemes under Obama? Bernie Madoff will be prosecuted. Allen Stanford’s scheme was discovered during Obama’s watch and he will be prosecuted and so will any other such fraud like the one listed below.
SEC Uncovers Ponzi Scheme Targeting Deaf Investors
My God, the man has been president for one month and you are already saying that he will let all the corporate criminals go free! Where do you get your evidence? With two major Ponzi Schems uncovered in only one month it looks like Obama is cracking down twice as hard as Bush ever did.
Ron
You make a good point, Ron. It may be very difficult under current law to prosecute many of the guys responsible for the financial crisis.
But Brian has a point too. It's possible that under today's laws what Ken Lay did would be perfectly legal. Hiding bad assets and liabilities in off-book vehicles like Enron did sounds an awful lot what the banks are doing now with their Level 3 assets. And it's all perfectly legal:
Phillips pubished his book in 2002 so specified the year 2000, but if anything the impunity has only grown worse over the past 8 years.
DS, how can you make the leap that Brian has a point that Obama will be negligent in prosecuting corporate thieves based on laws that were passed long before he was elected?
My very point is that you can ascertain little about what kind of president he will make based on one month in office. But so far he has been very diligent in tracking down corporate criminals.
Ron
I very much hope that you are right and I am wrong.
And undoubtedly a large majority of Americans believe as you do.
But all the telltale signs I see make my stomach turn inside out, such as many of his cabinet picks to date.
And didn't he already come out and make a statement to the effect that he wants to "look forward" and doesn't want to prosecute any of the wrongdoing that transpired under the previous administration?
It all sounds very magnanimous, but I don't think it's going to satisfy the public's demand for justice, especially if this thing keeps spiraling downwards.
Sadly I have to agree.
Obama is beginning to look more and more like a ringer every day, put in there to run interference for the banksters.
I hope I'm proven wrong, but it's beginning to look like pure political theater. There are crumbs ($75 billion + maybe another $200 billion more in the stimulus package) for the poor folks, which come with much fanfare by the Obama administration and withering criticism from the Republicans (like Santelli), while they (both Democrats and Republicans), with the wink of an eye and the sleight of a hand, funnel $10,000+ billion to the finance industry.
I live in Mexico, man. I've seen how this stuff works.
Please do read Basevich _The Limits to Power_. Anyone who becomes president of the empire known as the USA is going to be serving the interests of the powerful. It cannot be any other way. A general uprising, or the threat thereof, may influence some more more than others, but the central job of a US president is to protect the major powers behind the empire.
Doubly absurd!!! You obviously did not live in California at the time and obviously did not follow this at all. Gray Davis got tossed out of office ONLY because of the effects of the Enron price manipulations. He was blamed for the effects because he had to act and there were no good choices. Why?
Because he BEGGED the BuCheney two-headed devil to intervene and they absolutely refused. It was only long after the damage was done - people bankrupted, credit ratings ruined, thousands upon thousands of dollars down the drain - and the facts were irrefutable that BuCheney acted. And then only because they had no choice.
Cheers
I forgot-when you're right you're right and this time you're right. However, to fill out your narrative you should mention the all-important involvement of Barack's mentor Robert Rubin and cronies at Citi.
Ahem: Most farmers do cart-wheels when Uncle Sam lavishes subsidies and price supports on them. Take a look at corn-based ethanol.
If you have the answer to the World's and US's woes, please post it here (or a link, since it bound to be very detailed) and mail it to Congress and the president and all the major newspapers and networks please.
I love how after 8 years of the Bush Crime Family all the sanctimonious Republicans are screaming bloody murder just now. Who exactly could we elect who could extinguish the two-hundred flaming bags of dookie on our country's porch? John McCain and Sarah Palin? Are you kidding me? Wasn't it convenient how the government didn't even officially declare that the US had been in a recessions since December of 2007 until AFTER the November elections?
I also note the 'Red-Sate Socialism' where many heavily Republican states receive more than one dollar back from the Federal Government for every federal tax dollar they contribute.
The whole darn system is broken. Obama is no where near perfect at all. But I am darned impressed that the man has the convictions to get on five television networks and admit he made a mistake and to apologize for it. The man flat-out said that if the economy doesn't recover then the U.S. will have a new President. The man has at least some good grasp of some of the issues and can speak in multi-syllabic, multi-paragraph terms with a fine command of English.
If we elected McCain, who forfeited his wartime honor by doing a 180-out on most of his positions he took when he ran again Shrub in order to kiss Bush's (ring), he would still be telling us that we are in a mental recession and calling us 'My friends' every two minutes, with his lap dog Palin saying 'You Betcha'.
Stop the damn wars, and implement Range Voting so we don't have to be restricted to only two parties, the Deimicans and Republicrats.
+1
he failed according to the cacophony of stuck pig squeeling (the likes of boener and mccain) because their ox is being gored, their golden goose cooked and their gravey train derailed. and i would use a few more farm animal metaphors if i could think of 'em.
the only reason they are so damned concerned about the amount of debt now, as opposed to the last 8 yrs, is because the tide is shifting away from their beloved military industrial complex and toward such projects as making federal and state buildings more energy efficient.
i don't know why these so called conservatives are so damned opposed to conservation.
it has taken about 28 yrs to get into this mess, now can't you give obama a few years to try to slow this freight train down, so it can be turned around ?
Obama isn't stopping or even slowing down the military industrial complex. We've got the same Secretary of Defense, and about the biggest move he is making is transferring the troops from Iraq to Afghanistan.
DoOn't get me wrong, Bush and the republicans had to go, but I'm seeing a complete lack of moral integrity on his part.
Tax Cheats? and Lobbyists? The only thing that's changed is the party name.
The reality is there are two very small groups of people (RNC and DNC) that have the knowledge and political capital to get someone elected president. These groups are very stable, and only change very very slowly over time. The figure head changes because of term limits, but the political machine remains the same. That's why so much of Barack Obama's cabinet is from the Clinton presidency. And Bush's had a bunch of retreads from his father's presidency, who was connected all the way back to Reagan.
It's really remarkably like a two family monarchy - they just don't kill everyone from the opposing family when they take power.
Garth
As much as I admire Obama, and as much as I can imagine the political dangers that might arise from an attempt to cut our bloated military (and our imperialistic foreign entanglements) down to size, I am dissapointed by this. He too easily gave in to including extra defense spending in the stimulus. I hope he is simply waiting for the time, and the politics to be right. But this isn't an auspicious beginning.
that military industrial complex has been growing more or less continuously since about 1940, long before ike uttered the phrase. do you expect obama to change that in a month ?
no, i am not very pleased with obama's plans for afganistan, but that proposal has been on the presidents desk since at least july. bush wouldnt act upon it one way or another.
Friday night failures: just one this week, and no, it's not Bank of America or Citibank.
Regulators close Oregon's Silver Falls Bank
Yeah, I was really surprised to read where a local bank is posting some local leases for foreclosure. I was really familiar with one - already drilled and producing, flowing conventional gas, albeit at low prices. It does not cost anything to operate leases like that. Well, you have to go out and look at the well from time to time, make sure that it is still there, and then drive all the way back home. I imagine it will still bring a pretty good price at the courthouse steps.
And, I understand there are other foreclosures in the mill at that bank. I had thought you could not get any safer, and I still hope that is the case. Just not big enough for operating functions. (Promising to get online banking any time now.)
How much would such a thing go for???
Cheers
It is hard to tell. Some good compressor guy could dramatically boost production into the fairly low pressure gas line and make a lot of gas more quickly, but with more investment and a lot more trouble. Last I knew, about 18 months ago, there were two wells producing an aggregate of 70 MCF of 1100 BTU gas. Most stuff is selling at about 48 months net revenue - these carry a 3/16 royalty burden, and severance taxes and fees in Oklahoma are at about 7.12%. The gas contract is set at about 55% on the line that goes across that area, and the buyer in that area wants the liquids. If you know what price to plug in, you probably have a calculator and can do as well as I can, but I don't know what price to use. And, it is not enough gas volume to hedge, so the buyer will be at the mercy of the market unless they have other production to add to the mix. The two wells which were there should be good to flow for another 2 or 3 years, at a reducing level, and then will have to be pumped to dewater them, so plan on either hauling water or drilling a disposal well. There may be another well which has been drilled on the lease, but there are not any others in that immediate area. But, there should be other productive locations in that area, so drilling another well might yield more production and still leave the buyer with a dilemma about what to do with the salt water. Hauling salt water is expensive, and drilling costs have not come down measurably - day rates have, but not casing, cementing and treating.
I will try to buy the lease, and will let you know if I do, and what price it took. Since nobody else has an adjoining lease, nobody will go nuts and HAVE to buy it, so it may go cheap, unless someone really ambitious wants to set a compressor. BTW, I will guess that w/ compression to reduce the head pressure at the well, which I assume is flowing wide open, or on a 2" choke, the two wells should do 150-200 mcfg/d, but that is a seat of the pants guess. Lowering the head pressure would bring the water on quicker, and that would come into play as well.
Even gas wells have to be checked, and although I sort of ridiculed the lack of effort required, either you do it yourself or hire someone to do so. Not doing so is inviting trouble.
I have a natural gas furnace at my home and it gets a lot use in February here in Wisconsin. Can someone help explain the pattern in prices that my utility charges? They don't seem to track wholesale prices very well. These are the rates charged for the month of February in:
2005: $.74/therm
2006: $.93/therm
2007: $.78/therm
2008: $.80/therm
2009: $.77/therm
i assume you are quoting the gas supply (energy) charge. a therm is 100,000 btu, and the wholesale price is based on $/mmbtu(10therms). utilities contract for gas to meet their anticipated needs ahead of time and buy gas on the spot market as needed. some operate storage facilities and some do not.
midamerican energy charges a gas supply (energy) charge, a pipeline transport charge, a delivery charge(for maintaining the underground piping for local delivery) all on a /therm basis and a basic service charge $/mo. (for reading and maintaining the meter)
Understood; there are service and delivery charges on my bill as well, but I am wondering why the volumetric price for the gas itself fluctuates minimally while the wholesale price fluctuates widely.
OPEC may cut 3% of its oil exports by mid-March -- Khaleej Times
There is a substantial premium being paid for the price of Oman crude contracts compared to Nymex crude contracts.
Credit crunch may only have just begun, S&P warns
Reuters: Soros sees no bottom for world financial "collapse"
http://uk.reuters.com/article/businessNews/idUKTRE51K0AV20090221
“Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, and one by one” -- Charles MacKay
Seemingly they only prepare for what's coming one by one too and away from the eyes of the crowd :)
Does he think we're going to break up like the Soviet Union did?
Jim Willie has predicted the disintegration of the USA for a while now-he feels the run up in Gold is unrelated to inflation expectations, rather he feels that the level of distrust of paper currency is fuelling it. He feels that their is coordinated action underway to wrest political and economic control from the USA-we shall see http://www.freebuck.com/articles/jwillie/090219jwillie.htm
Wow. Interesting stuff.
It's looking like the financial crisis will destroy demand so much that peak oil won't be noticed.
And if it is, the problem will be seen as a financial failure, not an issue of resource limits. The effort will then go toward trying to fix the economy, not necessarily toward alternative energy, rail, conservation, etc.
I think all of the above are considered as just another (among very many) constituencies. A few bones will be throw their way. But the sort of commitment needed to really prepare seems to be highly unlikely to ocurr.
Interesting analysis but some of it is clearly wrong or intentionally misleading.
The author claims that Britain boycotted Davos but completely fails to mention that both Gordon Brown and Peter Mandelson attended. Brown's phone actually ringing in the middle of a press conference.
The author states that China talked to European leaders but significantly ignored the British when in fact Wen Jiabao spent three days in the UK after Davos - more time than spent anywhere else.
Best movie quote that sums this all up:
"No lieutenant, your men are already dead." - The Matrix, 1999
We're beyond life support, this 'system' under which we are living is like some kind of Frankenstein monster. Not alive in the sense of living, breathing tissue, but just a walking corpse.
LOL
What do you think Sarah Shakemup Palin meant when she said, "I can see Russia from here"?
Exactly.
Viva the independent Nation of Alaska!
Hello Burgundy,
Reuters: Soros sees no bottom for world financial "collapse"
Which would logically explain why he is now 'hugging so many bags of I-NPK' by his earlier purchase of lots of POT stock. I haven't googled Soros, but I bet he has a Eco-Tech farm/bunker like Richard Rainwater, Matt Simmons, and T. Boone Pickens.
Fiat Money, Precious Metals [PMs], and big screen tvs won't trade for much WTSHTF. 'Topsoil fuel' will be incredibly precious when its ERoEI of approx. 20 at a Leibscher's Optima is far greater than the ever decreasing ERoEI of depleting FFs. Recall Nate's FF net energy cliff graphic.
Full credit to the O-NPK aware TODer who posted: "Have you hugged your butt today?"--IMO, Post of the Year.
A little perspective on bank failures might help here.
# Year with the Fewest Failures: 2005 and 2006 - no banks failed.
# Year with the Most Failures: 1989 - 534 banks failed that year.
S&L Crisis
# During the Savings & Loan crisis, 747 savings & loans failed between 1986 to 1995.
# You thought that was bad? Overall, 2,377 banks failed.
# At the peak in 1988-1989, a bank failed every 1.38 days!
# The largest bank failure ever was Continental Illinois Bank in 1984. Continental Illinois Bank had $39,956,956,000 in assets (”too big to fail!“).
# The largest thrift failure ever, and third largest bank failure, was IndyMac Bank’s shuttering this year. (actually last year.)
# IndyMac Bank was founded as Countrywide Mortgage Investment in 1985 (yep, that same Countrywide) and used to collateralize Countrywide Financial loans that were too big to be sold to Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae.
Feb. 21 (Bloomberg) -- Oregon regulators seized Silver Falls Bank, the 14th U.S. bank shuttered this year,...with $131.4 million in assets and $116.3 million in deposits...
By the way a bank with $116 million is a small bank.
As a comparison, Citi has approx 52X the level of "assets" as that largest "failure" ever. Citi has approx 16000X the level of assets of this latest bank seized.
Yergin was on CNN today. Unfortunately, he offered no specific price guidance, but he blamed Peak Oilers for contributing the runup in oil prices, and he said that the decline in oil prices is evidence that the Peak Oil crowd is wrong once again, and once again it is clear that we are not "running out of oil."
BTW, how did crude oil production worldwide in the 2005 to 2008 time frame compare to CERA's predictions?
http://www.energybulletin.net/node/47541
A simple explanation for oil prices
http://www.theoildrum.com/node/2767
Net Oil Exports and the "Iron Triangle" (7/07)
Comments by an energy analyst and a major oil company:
CERA:
Mr. Robert Esser
Senior Consultant and Director, Global Oil and Gas Resources
Cambridge Energy Research Associates
Understanding the Peak Oil Theory
Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality
December 7, 2005
ExxonMobil:
ExxonMobil Advertisement in New York Times
June 2, 2006
As of course is evident from the history of drops in whale bone prices ... LOL
Hat tip to Noutram for posting this graph a few days ago
NY Times reporting that Latvia just went under:
Latvia’s Government Falls on Economic Toll
Huge protest over Irish economy
That 100,000 is about 2.5% of their entire population. An equivalent demonstration in DC would be 7.5 million.
Notice that many of the male demonstrators are wearing coat and tie. This isn't just the radical fringe rabble rousers.
Hello Leanan,
Thxs for the link & 'flood of humanity' photo: hopefully this protest will spur the people and their leaders into full-on Peak Outreach:
"If only every single raindrop could fully understand its individual contribution to the flood."
http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b386/markskye/4-rain-drop.jpg
I often wonder as I gaze into the cute young faces inside a SUV: Am I looking at my future executioner?
Dear Leanan,
Note the age demographic in this photo. A lot more grey hair than youthfull. These are the people who have lost savings and pensions.
rgds
Dropstone
Yeah, a lot of 'normal' people can protest in countries like Ireland because they are not afraid of being labeled 'domestic terrorists' and send to Guantanamo. I think the utter and shameful lack of any kind of organized protests in the US is a clear result of average people being totally frigging scared of incarceration. I know personally I have thought many times of taking some kind of non-violent protest action given the current fiasco, but I think twice knowing what our government is and will be doing to average people who 'step out of line'. All the laws are already in place. Want to throw a rock through the window of your local Citibank or BofA out of anger and frustration? (I do) Better think twice. (I did).
The main result of this fear and resulting passivity is that Wall Street and Washington DC are NOT afraid of us. They are laughing at us. They are laughing that 100,000 or so people signed on to CNBCs poll saying they were outraged about this bailout or that bailout. We need to take steps to make them FEAR us again. We are the voters, the consumers, their CUSTOMERS, yet they do not fear the power we have because WE are too scared to exercise that power. I am ashamed.
I kinda laughed at the article about the lacking of toilet paper on the stockpile list.
But there is a point of having spices like nutmeg on the list. Nutmeg has some nice uses besides eggnog. I use it in baking cookies, bread, and cakes. I buy whole nutmeg and grate it myself. Like a lot of other spices it comes from areas that will not be traded with if the world stops working like it does now. Almost every kitchen should have more spices in it besides onion, garlic and pepper.
Heck I just bought a whole pound of Vanilla beans. (80 beans to a pound) I have 5 bottles of clear rum soaking 8 vanilla beans each, in 6 months the rum will be dark and vanilla flavored. Around Christmas I'll leave 3 beans in the bottle and give the bottle of beans and rum to people on my gift giving list. I got my whole beans at beanilla.com.
I would offer the advice of not only having toilet paper, but herbs and spices on your list.
Charles.
This is kind of creepy:
Bill proposes ISPs, Wi-Fi keep logs for police
Even password protected home networks would have to do this? I wouldn't even know how.
If it goes through it would mean a big buying spree on data storage devices.
You can now get 1 tera-byte harddrives for under 200 bucks.
How in the world would you be able to process all of that information, along with the point of this being just another way of making the internet another arm of the Government-Police state.
Charles
Hello CEOJr1963,
99% of people with wide open home Wi-Fi networks won't be able to keep track of who uses their bandwidth port. Thus, the police will simply confiscate the home networks, computers, blackberrys, cellphones, modems & ports, etc. A very simple way to remove bloggers plus all the other net-users. Easy and convenient freedom of speech and communication thus dies.
IMO, flag-position semaphore will make a comeback:
http://www.scouts.ie/cub-scouts/semaphore/
I suggest we all start memorizing...
It is something they can't inforce without it coming to a police state.
Charles.
all they want you to keep track of is the access log.
Hello TODers,
This seems like a fairly good I-NPK read for any recent TOD newbies trying to get up to speed.
http://www.truthabouttrade.org/content/view/13391/54/lang,en/
---------------------
Recent Volatility in U.S. Fertilizer Prices
Farms that grow fertilizer-intensive crops and have a limited ability to switch to other crops or inputs may be especially vulnerable to fluctuating fertilizer and commodity prices..
----------------------
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/china-prepares-to-clamp-dow...