What The **** Big Oil

[aucu 3]

whats Bakken?just curiousdont know at coutnry its in

HiIt's a shale in the USA so it even has a blog.http://bakkenshale.blogspot.com/Another shale that's in the spot light right now is Utica shale in Quebec, a major gas discovery was made there last month.INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILYPosted 4/23/2008For other companies, watch the New America Report. When people think of Quebec, natural gas isn't what springs to mind.But that's starting to change as a result of a discovery announced earlier this month.The natural gas find, locked within a rock formation called the Utica Shale, may hold as much as 4.1 trillion cubic feet of reserves. It sits along the St. Lawrence River between Montreal and Quebec City.One national publication in Canada, the Globe and Mail, declared that the Utica Shale may turn Quebec into "a major natural gas producer." The newspaper also said the province could become "North America's next hot new exploration zone."The company behind the discovery is Denver, Colo.-based Forest Oil. (FST) The oil and gas explorer and producer disclosed its Utica Shale find at an analysts conference in early April, saying the play had several strong points.Similar To Barnett ShaleThe advantages include its access to existing pipelines, its high-quality natural gas and the shallow depth of the shale, Forest officials say. They add that the Utica play's geologic properties are similar to those of Texas' Barnett Shale, the busiest onshore gas field in the U.S."We do not have some of the challenges that other shale plays have," Forest's COO, J.C. Ridens, said during the conference. "As a result, I think you're going to see some extreme upside out of this play."Another strength is the Utica Shale's nearness to the huge Northeastern U.S. gas market."We've got premium pricing to Nymex (the New York Mercantile Exchange) because of being located in proximity to the Northeastern market," Ridens told analysts. He called it a "head start on the Barnett coming out of the shoot."Forest drilled two vertical test wells in the Utica Shale last year, achieving production rates of up to 1 million cubic feet of gas per day. Based on those wells and other data, it estimates reserves of up to 4.1 trillion cubic feet.This year, Forest plans to drill three horizontal wells, which are generally more productive but more expensive. The company says it expects a full-scale drilling program at the Utica Shale by 2010. It controls about 269,000 net acres at the site.Forest officials say initial results are encouraging, but they caution that the Utica play is in its early stages. Analysts also warn against getting too enthusiastic at this point. Some cite a lack of service industry capacity in the region that may slow progress, while others just want more information."It has big potential, but we need to see a little more data before you get overly excited about it," said Ken Carroll, an analyst at Johnson Rice & Co. He says it's important for Forest to double or triple production levels with the horizontal wells that are currently in the works."Everyone will keenly watch for those results," Carroll said.Analyst Raymond Deacon cautions that some other companies involved in the Utica Shale haven't seen it as a growth driver. Deacon is an analyst at BMO Capital Markets, which has provided investment banking and other services to Forest Oil within the last year."Forest is kind of the first company I've heard say, 'This could have a lot of potential,' " Deacon said. He added that the Utica Shale could be a very meaningful find, "but it's going to be a couple of quarters before you really know."The Utica discovery has put a spotlight on what previously had been a somewhat overlooked company, says Carroll, the Johnson Rice analyst.Forest's forte generally has been its deep, low-risk inventory of "old school" assets, he said."Maybe if there's one thing that had been lacking in the Forest story, it had been some asset that brought some sex appeal and got people excited," Carroll said.

[dms26 3]

http://www.courierpostonline.com/apps/pbcs...59/0/BUSINESS01have much much much much more..but trying to explain to most, will be like trying to convince Hilary on dropping out of the race...enjoy!

US demand does not equal world demand.

[hblask 1]

Lack of startup capital isn't an excuse? LOL

It's not, because if OP is correct about the profits being obscene, it should be easy to demonstrate that fact to venture capitalists, who will be beating a path to get in on these "obscene" profits. The only way this doesn't work is if the person attempting it is incapable of explaining the situation, or, possibly, just plain wrong.If there is money to be made, a motivated person can figure out a way to make it.

[BigDMcGee 3,352]

It's not, because if OP is correct about the profits being obscene, it should be easy to demonstrate that fact to venture capitalists, who will be beating a path to get in on these "obscene" profits. The only way this doesn't work is if the person attempting it is incapable of explaining the situation, or, possibly, just plain wrong.If there is money to be made, a motivated person can figure out a way to make it.

that's so cute, it's like you stepped right out of an Ayn Rand book.According to AUCU there are tons of small oil companies. Who knew?

[brvheart 1,752]

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/busines...exxonmobil.htmlI am sure you can find this story anywhere but seriously there is something really really wrong about this and it seems that no one is taking action. My favorite excerpt is this:But even at $10.9 billion, the profit ranks as the second biggest for a U.S. company – the only bigger result in a three-month period was the $11.7 billion Exxon Mobil posted in the final three months of 2007. This means that in the last 6 months they have PROFITED 22.6 BILLION dollars. Meanwhile the average person (me) is struggling to buy food, gas, and the basic necessities of life. I wouldn't be so angry about it if they were making a modest amount of money, but this boils down to greed plain and simple by anyone in the oil industry. While the rest of us have to basically sit here and take it in the butt. Well I am going to start showing them that I don't need their stupid oil ... as much. I am riding my bike to the trolley station and taking that to work now because I can't even afford to drive to work anymore.So maybe I should thank big oil for getting me back on a bike and getting in shape....Nah i'll just be irritated that they get to live off of the money that the average joe is shelling out. **** you big oil. I will B my L all over your boardroom./rant

So sick of the ignorant. Yes, they posted a multi-billion dollar profit. No, it is not outrageous. Unless you view 7.25% profit margins as outrageous. They are huge operations with budgets in the hundreds of billions and the recent profit number was a 7.25% profit based on gross margins. Just because gas goes up at the pump does not mean mobil should surrender all its profits. And the worst part is Hillrod wants to hit them with a 50% windfall tax. This is still the U.S. right? Capitalism still reigns here?

Exactly. If you think they are making too much, invest in their stock or start your own oil company. They are not evil for making money. We are not victims. Buy a motorcycle, ride the bus. There was something in the news recently that Obama said he was going to fine them something like $15 billion a year for no reason. That is awful. We are not a communism. If you want to get rich then go get it... don't blame people that already figured out how by selling balloons.http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=new...id=aP_1wrIyt1NcAs long as we're on the subject, I love how democrats the media says "working families" as if rich people don't work. It's funny.

[BigDMcGee 3,352]

Exactly. If you think they are making too much, invest in their stock or start your own oil company. They are not evil for making money. We are not victims. Buy a motorcycle, ride the bus. There was something in the news recently that Obama said he was going to fine them something like $15 billion a year for no reason. That is awful. We are not a communism. If you want to get rich then go get it... don't blame people that already figured out how by selling balloons.

That's all fine and great, but when a single natural resource effects so much of the national economy and inflation, it's different than going out and starting a balloon company from scratch. Nothing is more important to our economy than oil. Absolutely nothing. I'm not saying that the government should go in and intervene, but.. Carrots can't take the bus. TV's shipped from San Francisco to chicago can't ride a motorcycle. What really matters about the price of oil isn't how much we, as individuals, pay for gas. What matters is the cost of shipping everything that we consume. Every single thing. When the price of oil goes up this much, this fast, the cost of EVERYTHING Goes up, and inflation goes up and the economy goes into the crapper. So if there is ever an industry that requires oversite, it's the oil industry. No other product has such far reaching impact on the economy.

[dms26 3]

That's all fine and great, but when a single natural resource effects so much of the national economy and inflation, it's different than going out and starting a balloon company from scratch. Nothing is more important to our economy than oil. Absolutely nothing. I'm not saying that the government should go in and intervene, but.. Carrots can't take the bus. TV's shipped from San Francisco to chicago can't ride a motorcycle. What really matters about the price of oil isn't how much we, as individuals, pay for gas. What matters is the cost of shipping everything that we consume. Every single thing. When the price of oil goes up this much, this fast, the cost of EVERYTHING Goes up, and inflation goes up and the economy goes into the crapper. So if there is ever an industry that requires oversite, it's the oil industry. No other product has such far reaching impact on the economy.

What is taxing/fining them going to do to help consumers?Should the oil companies be responisble for subsidizing gas to American customers? IMO this is something we got ourselves into by not preparing until it was too late, now everyone is screaming to go green, hybrids, ect. Europe has been paying these type of prices for years. America's stance about pretty much everything seems to be ignore until it's shitting on us then complain about how unfair it is and that we should be bailed out.

[brvheart 1,752]

That's all fine and great, but when a single natural resource effects so much of the national economy and inflation, it's different than going out and starting a balloon company from scratch. Nothing is more important to our economy than oil. Absolutely nothing. I'm not saying that the government should go in and intervene, but.. Carrots can't take the bus. TV's shipped from San Francisco to chicago can't ride a motorcycle. What really matters about the price of oil isn't how much we, as individuals, pay for gas. What matters is the cost of shipping everything that we consume. Every single thing. When the price of oil goes up this much, this fast, the cost of EVERYTHING Goes up, and inflation goes up and the economy goes into the crapper. So if there is ever an industry that requires oversite, it's the oil industry. No other product has such far reaching impact on the economy.

We need to tear up some bike paths and lay more railroad track. If we only hadn't torn it up in the first place we would be sitting pretty right now.

[Mercury69 3]

You want to know who controls oil and gas? Go ask your Federal Government. Stuff like the recent price gouging is only filling up the pokets of those who already control government. Your politicians, just like ours in Canada (most likely), are taking everything they can get from the big money groups like oil, pharmaceuticals, tobacco, etc.You think an honest politician will get anywhere these days? Ahahahahahaaaaa...Big money controls government. It's been like that for centuries. If you don't believe me, too bad. God, it makes me sick. It wouldn't be any different if we had complete anarchy, really. Except the people in control would have the biggest guns.

[El Guapo 8]

How does futures trading come in to play?

In what aspect? Oil trades as a regulated commodity, with OPEC setting the futures prices (for the most part) Gas stations will reset their prices on gas the day oil futures rise, but we don't necissarily seem them respond that fast when they drop. It taked them a little longer (most likely some short term market manipulation going on here).

[BigDMcGee 3,352]

What is taxing/fining them going to do to help consumers?Should the oil companies be responisble for subsidizing gas to American customers? IMO this is something we got ourselves into by not preparing until it was too late, now everyone is screaming to go green, hybrids, ect. Europe has been paying these type of prices for years. America's stance about pretty much everything seems to be ignore until it's shitting on us then complain about how unfair it is and that we should be bailed out.

The big difference between europe and the US is that Europe little to no native oil supplies, while North America has a multitude. And no I don't think taxing them and fining them is the answer, they'll only pass that savings onto the consumer.

[El Guapo 8]

Look if we opened up our oil reserves we could tell OPEC to jump off a cliff and kill there way of life. We consume 25% of the oil on this planet (approx) we have ~ 4 years of reserves plus we drill 40% of our own oil, which would extend that 4 years out some, add in drilling in Alaska and Canada we could easily be non-dependent on OPEC oil for decades and then we could negotiate the price, instead of having it dictated.

[AmScray 355]

We need to rally our scientists and industrial base to make magical new technologies that power our ****ing shit for cheap.It's how we used to solve problems- we rolled up our sleeves, used our ingenuity and concocted some device or technology that did what we needed done. I ask myself how the Normandy Storming generation would've dealt with being economically held hostage by a bunch of options trading Jews and raghead oil monkeys- there is no question in my mind that if this situation arose in 1943, by 1944 we would all be getting to work in flying cars powered by camel meat and tear soaked yarmulkes.

[ShakeZuma 585]

We need to rally our scientists and industrial base to make magical new technologies that power our ****ing shit for cheap.It's how we used to solve problems- we rolled up our sleeves, used our ingenuity and concocted some device or technology that did what we needed done. I ask myself how the Normandy Storming generation would've dealt with being economically held hostage by a bunch of options trading Jews and raghead oil monkeys- there is no question in my mind that if this situation arose in 1943, by 1944 we would all be getting to work in flying cars powered by camel meat and tear soaked yarmulkes.

and the e-man-crush on scram continues

[LongLiveYorke 38]

We need to rally our scientists and industrial base to make magical new technologies that power our ****ing shit for cheap.It's how we used to solve problems- we rolled up our sleeves, used our ingenuity and concocted some device or technology that did what we needed done.

Honestly, this is really the best and the only permanent solution to the oil problem. It's really not that hard either, people just need some incentive. There will be a lot more incentive in the upcoming years as oil prices skyrocket, but for a long time prices were manageable and so nobody tried really hard to get the ball rolling. I don't see why making an electric car that runs well should be all that difficult. And I don't see why we don't start relying more and more on nuclear power and why we don't put more money into creating better and safer forms of nuclear power.I think we need a sort of X-prize for research into electric cars, or cars that get 70 miles per gallon, or something like that. Why doesn't our government simply put aside 20 billion dollars and give out $500 million for the first 40 people who come up with viable electric or high mpg cars. Or they could give out the money in step increments so that people will have funding through the course of the research. Also, we should multiply the funding going into energy research by 10 or something rediculous like that, which really would cost very little on the scale of government. I know it seems simple to just throw money at the problem and hope for a solution, but there's really nothing that leads me to believe that these problems can't be solved given proper incentive.

[El Guapo 8]

Honestly, this is really the best and the only permanent solution to the oil problem. It's really not that hard either, people just need some incentive. There will be a lot more incentive in the upcoming years as oil prices skyrocket, but for a long time prices were manageable and so nobody tried really hard to get the ball rolling. I don't see why making an electric car that runs well should be all that difficult. And I don't see why we don't start relying more and more on nuclear power and why we don't put more money into creating better and safer forms of nuclear power.I think we need a sort of X-prize for research into electric cars, or cars that get 70 miles per gallon, or something like that. Why doesn't our government simply put aside 20 billion dollars and give out $500 million for the first 40 people who come up with viable electric or high mpg cars. Or they could give out the money in step increments so that people will have funding through the course of the research. Also, we should multiply the funding going into energy research by 10 or something rediculous like that, which really would cost very little on the scale of government. I know it seems simple to just throw money at the problem and hope for a solution, but there's really nothing that leads me to believe that these problems can't be solved given proper incentive.

I agree with you here in principle. I am not really OK with the government funding a project like this. That is was private individuals do. Also, electric is not exactly the answer as right now we use oil and coal still to produce electricity.What I wholeheartedly agree with is the use of Nuclear Energy. The fact that each city or metropolitan area is not powered by a nuclear power plant at this point is ridiculous. Since nuclear energy, (in reference to a submarine, not sure about power plant) is steam power, a friend of mine and I talked about the possibility of having a small nuclear power source in every home. Of course since the uranium or whatever radioactive source we use is still dangerous if it were stolen to be used in weaponry, this won't happen. But its not to say that it would not be possible in the future, to basically use steam to run your homes electricity.

[LongLiveYorke 38]

I agree with you here in principle. I am not really OK with the government funding a project like this. That is was private individuals do.

The government doesn't have to run it, they just need to give away the prize money and let capitalism and industriousness do the rest.

That is was private individuals do. Also, electric is not exactly the answer as right now we use oil and coal still to produce electricity.

Clearly. The electric car part makes sense only if we change our energy focus on cleaner sources of energy, such as nuclear (yes, even though it leaves behind horrible waste it's cleaner), wind, geothermal, solar, etc etc.

[LongLiveYorke 38]

Since nuclear energy is steam power...

I still find it funny that we go through so much trouble to produce steam. Really, the vast majority of power is quote unquote steam power in that we come up with creative ways to create steam. The stem then turns turbines which turn magnets around wires and create magnetic fluxes and therefore create currents. But really all we need is steam to rise. The obvious exception is solar power which create currents directly through the photoelectric effect. But coal, nuclear, geothermal, gas, wood, and all sources of power to like this are used only to create heat to heat water to make hot steam. In regard to putting a nuclear plant in your home, it's a pretty bad idea since it's still highly radioactive, leaves behind radioactive material, and requires a lot of water and creates a lot of heat. It would be extraordinarily dangerous, and the only reason nuclear power is feasible is that we have smart people who run it and go through a lot of precautions to make it safe and practical.

[El Guapo 8]

In regard to putting a nuclear plant in your home, it's a pretty bad idea since it's still highly radioactive, leaves behind radioactive material, and requires a lot of water and creates a lot of heat. It would be extraordinarily dangerous, and the only reason nuclear power is feasible is that we have smart people who run it and go through a lot of precautions to make it safe and practical.

I totally understand that. Thats why I did not get into it all that much. But if it were not for the obvious weaponry use for the material involved, just think if everyone had say 100 sqft reactor that was housed and serviced by a company trained to properly dispose of the waste. I am by no means a scientist, but I would imagine that down the road as we get better with that this is something that could be feasible, even if not plausible.

[ShakeZuma 585]

I totally understand that. Thats why I did not get into it all that much. But if it were not for the obvious weaponry use for the material involved, just think if everyone had say 100 sqft reactor that was housed and serviced by a company trained to properly dispose of the waste. I am by no means a scientist, but I would imagine that down the road as we get better with that this is something that could be feasible, even if not plausible.

well the thing about nuclear power is that it is dangerous because of what can happen if somebody isn't there, so to speak. what it does, more or less, is use fuel pellets to super heat water to create steam which of course runs the turbines or whatnot, but it also requires lots of other water needed for cooling. if anything happens at all to that cooling water, the fuel pellets get out of control hot, and your back yard becomes chernobyl. I'm not saying that maybe one day it wouldn't be possible to have small reactors, but with anywhere near our technology now it wouldn't be practical at all because of the water/equipment it requires to run just a small amount of fuel. but it is a very, very viable source of energy on a large scale, and there isn't really any loss from doing it from a plant and pumping it to houses like the old fashioned way. only problem is the NIMBY thing where everybody's so scared of it. faggots.edit: I am also drunk so this could all make no sense/be completely wrong.

[BigDMcGee 3,352]

Honestly, this is really the best and the only permanent solution to the oil problem. It's really not that hard either, people just need some incentive. There will be a lot more incentive in the upcoming years as oil prices skyrocket, but for a long time prices were manageable and so nobody tried really hard to get the ball rolling. I don't see why making an electric car that runs well should be all that difficult. And I don't see why we don't start relying more and more on nuclear power and why we don't put more money into creating better and safer forms of nuclear power.I think we need a sort of X-prize for research into electric cars, or cars that get 70 miles per gallon, or something like that. Why doesn't our government simply put aside 20 billion dollars and give out $500 million for the first 40 people who come up with viable electric or high mpg cars. Or they could give out the money in step increments so that people will have funding through the course of the research. Also, we should multiply the funding going into energy research by 10 or something rediculous like that, which really would cost very little on the scale of government. I know it seems simple to just throw money at the problem and hope for a solution, but there's really nothing that leads me to believe that these problems can't be solved given proper incentive.

I wish Bill Gates would stop throwing his money away on inner city scholarships and aids vaccines and instead use his foundation to make serious, feasible clean energy sources. That would leave a more lasting legacy that feel good charity work.

[Actuary 3]

Free Market capitalism.I completely disagree that Socialism (or communism) is ideal in "a perfect world"People achive more when there is incentive. People rotate to what they do best. and I've been in Scram's camp from the begining

[BigDMcGee 3,352]

Free Market capitalism.I completely disagree that Socialism (or communism) is ideal in "a perfect world"People achive more when there is incentive. People rotate to what they do best. and I've been in Scram's camp from the begining

what, you mean this camp?

[chrozzo 19]

what, you mean this camp?

a bit extreme no?

[Balloon guy 158]

Hey...if we're making all this steam...And the world's complaining about it being too warm...Maybe we should.....Dang it, lost my train of thought