Why Is Congress Agnostic About Natural Gas? 105 comments
-
Font Size:
-
Print
- TweetThis
Nothing is a better testament to Congressional dysfunction than this recent article in the New York Times about the "progress" of the natural gas bill working its way through Congress. In the article, Aubrey McClendon, CEO of Chesapeake Energy (CHK), aptly sums up the situation. "Never in my life have I been confronted with something so obviously easy and good to do and have such Congressional apathy."
Does anyone really believe that it is both physically and economically possible to drill a hole in the ground and pump millions of tons of CO2 into the hole? Even if this were true (it is not), why not start with a fuel (natural gas) that emits 50% less CO2 than coal in the first place? Meanwhile, solely focusing on CO2 emissions ignores the even bigger problem of toxic metal particulate remnants from burning coal. But I guess when you build a big enough store of those pollutants, you just allow most of it to run into the Tennessee River and then dig a big hole in Cumberland County, TN to bury the rest.
The big picture here is that the oil and coal lobbies are flush with cash (and politicians) after decades of subsidization by the US government. The newly created natural gas lobby is not doing a good job of dealing with the entrenched powers that be. While the nat gas lobby has begun a necessary campaign in Washington, DC, they cannot be successful with this strategy alone. The oil and coal powers are too entrenched and too powerful. The only way the natural gas lobby can be successful is going straight to the American 
people. In this respect, they are failing miserably. They must start advertising the advantage of having a Fuel Systems Solutions (FSYS) "Phill" to fill up your vehicle in your own garage. They have to make the other states feel incompetent by playing up states like Utah and Oklahoma where folks are filling up with US produced natural gas at half the cost of foreign oil derived gasoline.
The natural gas lobby needs to work with Toyota (TM) to help make their natural gas/electric hybrid concept car a reality by bundling it with an FSYS "Phill" as a home based solution to reduce foreign oil imports. Most Americans are not even aware of such a solution and the natural gas lobby has done a poor job of educating them. The nat gas lobby must become more proficient in showing the economic consequences of the US being addicted to foreign oil (a negative S&P500 for the last 12 years, a falling US dollar, going bankrupt fighting oil wars, etc. etc). They simply must play hard ball. It's obvious that the coal and oil interests have been, are, and will be doing so. The natural gas lobby needs to take off the gloves. If the natural gas bill fails to enact robust natural gas transportation and electricity generation policies, it will be the natural gas lobby's fault for failing to make the case to the American people as it is the people who must threaten to kick the bums out of office if they don't support it.
Meanwhile, market activity today is reminiscent of the pre-collapse days. The US dollar is sharply lower while oil and gold are higher. The big difference now is that foreign countries, first Russia, then China and Brazil, finally even Germany and France and the United Nations itself are clamoring for an alternative to the US dollar as a world reserve currency. This will be the nail in the coffin of economic independence for the US and guarantees the "new world order" that Bush #1 first spoke of and that Bush #2 (and now Obama...) worked so hard to enable. Who can doubt that the combination of US government debt and foreign oil addiction based wealth outflow will eventually mean the end of the US dollar? I mean, is there a bigger Ponzi scheme than the US Treasury and Federal Reserve? If Madoff goes to jail, where do Paulson, Bernanke, and Geithner go? I'd love to ask Ron Paul that question.
The only cure for eventual US insolvency (and loss of sovereignty) is a strategic long-term comprehensive energy policy that reduces foreign oil exports, invests in natural gas transportation infrastructure with an eye toward a future hydrogen based economy, and a reduction in US deficit spending. Still, Congress is asleep and content to support failed 20th century liquid and solid fuels like oil and coal while ignoring the one domestic fuel that is cleaner, cheaper, abundant, and can significantly reduce foreign oil imports: US produced natural gas.
So what is the American investor to do? Buy gold and buy oil and get out of broad US equity investments like the S&P500. Owning ExxonMobil (XOM), BP, Chevron (CVX) and ConocoPhilips (COP) will protect your purchasing power (at least until Wall Street itself implodes) from the next big spike in oil prices which I expect within the next 2-3 years. Petrobras (PBR) and StatOil (STO) are oil plays that will also benefit from a falling US dollar. Investing in gold bullion and other precious metals buried in the backyard (or GLD for those that think paper gold is gold), a big garden, a fish pond, and some hunting property are also good strategies. Meanwhile, expect a rebound in natural gas prices as depletion rates kick in supplies begin to fall.
The US is missing a great opportunity to build our natural gas infrastructure and rejuvenate the US auto industry with NGV conversions and nat gas/electric hybrids. The natural gas lobby must share the blame with Congress for this unfortunate state of affairs.
Disclosure: Long COP and gold.
Related Articles
|
-
The Seeking Alpha 100
See allThe top 100 stock
market authors
selected for publication
Seeking Alpha 100 » -
Fastest Climbers
Authors with the largestSee all
increase in followers
in the last 7 days
Fastest Climbers » -
Top Commenters
Top commenters,See all
as ranked by their peers
Top Commenters » -
Top Instabloggers
The 100 most active
Instabloggers.-
1
David Fry
-
2
TraderMark
-
3
Don Dion
-
4
Cliff Wachtel
-
5
Mike Havrilla
Top Instabloggers » -
1
-
Top StockTalkers
TopSee all
StockTalkers.
Top StockTalkers »
This article has 105 comments:
i'm more than happy about how much i've saved on gas .
here we are using a lot of this cars
anyway the 3 tanks in the back of the car (each at 3000psi pressure, same a scubadiving tank) are quite heavy and i hope i will not have any car accident ,in that case if the tanks will get really damaged i guess i will be in BIG trouble...more than if i have jus regular gas
so now i drive more carefully
ALL ABOARD!! The train has begun leaving the station.....and this is your one chance to ride it up the mountain. Suggest going long natural gas through Horizons BetaPro NYMEX Natural Gas Bull Plus (HZBBF) which seeks to correspond to two times (200%) the daily performance of the New York Mercantile Exchange (NYMEX) natural gas futures contract for the next delivery month.
TICKETS PLEASE
I am long NG and the pipeline/service providers.
And why would anyone oppose it ? Not "Big Oil", since they own the gas, at decade low prices, and in quantities too big to store, as well. Not labor - just building the infrastructure alone would surely create tens of thousands of jobs. And not true environmentalists or anyone concerned about our economy either, for all of the fine reasons listed in the above article.
Really have to wonder - if Obama REALLY wants this country to succeed, why the silence, why isn't HE making it a TOP priority?
Every “mcf” of United States natural gas that is produced and consumed will not only benefit every citizen of our nation, it will also make this world a better place and pay real and tangible dividends to future generations.
Total world demand for oil will be reduced and the world price for oil will be lower. Energy for developing nations will be less expensive.
The world’s ecological / environmental situation will be improved due to lower “greenhouse gas” emissions.
Development of this nation’s natural gas provides real and absolute stimulus to our economy and credit system. This type of tangible absolute stimulus with its multiplier effect will produce significant and ongoing dividends for our nation.
Not only will the United States’ economy be stimulated, the dollar will be strengthened. Our nation’s deficits will be reduced more quickly.
The United States will be less vulnerable to “financial coercion” by foreign powers; the wealth now being transferred to oil producers will remain in the United States and can be used to benefit this nation’s future generations.
As the tangible benefits to the world and the United States are significant and compelling, there must be a single historic legislative act that articulates, memorializes, and provides gravitas to this monumental undertaking to ensure the future of the American dream and our national security.
To wit;
The United States of America Proclamation for Increased Energy Security (US PIES); Natural Gas Act of 2009
To move as expeditiously and conclusively as possible to avoid any further energy crises and in light of the now abundant supplies of natural gas with which our nation is blessed, the Congress of the United States of America hereby sets forth the Natural Gas Act of 2009 to bridge this nation’s destiny to increased energy independence.
In that our national security and economy are threatened and may be perilously further threatened and compromised by our nation’s current over dependence on imported oil and the concomitant transfer of our national wealth, it is imperative and essential our nation move with purpose and urgency to employ our God given natural gas resources and in so doing ensure the future strength and prosperity of our nation by increasing our energy security by reducing our dependence on foreign oil.
Elucidation: May God Almighty help forge these words with the flame of His Truth and Wisdom.
Illumination: Let the guiding light for this nation’s energy future be the glowing embers of the spirit of the Americans’ that have sacrificed and continue to sacrifice for our freedom, security and liberty to prosper. May these flames be light onto us.
The United States currently imports the majority of its oil from overseas National Oil Companies (NOC’s). This debilitating situation can be remedied.
Recent American technological breakthroughs, horizontal drilling and multi-stage fracture stimulation of reservoirs, have made the drilling and completing of natural gas wells much more efficient and productive and vast new reserves new of natural gas accessible here within our borders.
According to a recent study by Navigant Consulting Inc., the United States now has an estimated 2,247 trillion cubic feet of natural gas reserves, enough to last approximately 118 years at 2007 demand levels.
In that the world’s ecological future and world peace may be threatened by “global warming” and or having reached or in time soon reaching “world peak oil production”, it is imperative and essential our nation move with purpose and urgency to employ our God given natural gas resources and in so doing ensure to the maximum extent of our ability the energy security of the Untied Stats, the future world’s peace, prosperity and environmental harmony.
Note; this would be an expanded version of the New Alternative Transportation to Give Americans Solutions Act, that includes incentives for gas fired power generation and natural gas producers.
I realize all the above is easy to write and will require great effort and will not be unanimously embraced; however, there is much to be gained if we act.
There is all too much to be lost, if we do not act.
It is our American spirit and energy that make this nation great.
This natural resource is no longer supply constrained. It is demand constrained. U.S. gas supply increased by an unprecedented 8% in 2008 compared to 2007. The aforementioned new technologies make further substantial increases in our natural gas supply and consumption viable.
The development, distribution, and consumption of these abundant natural gas reserves provide the currently sought economic stimulus and creates powerful lasting long term dividends to this nation not seen since the construction of the interstate high system in the fifties or the WPA.
Natural gas is the fuel to power this nation’s economic resurgence as the world’s largest and most dynamic economy.
Natural gas is the “fast lane bridge” to this nation’s reducing dependence on imported oil.
Natural gas is the cleanest burning hydrocarbon fuel. Natural gas emits 45% less carbon dioxide than coal and 30% less carbon dioxide than oil. This transition fuel will provide the “time bridge” until solar, hydro, wind-power, and cleaner coal technologies become more available and cost effective.
New clean burning “natural gas” powered electric plants need to be constructed to reduce “greenhouse gases.”
Natural gas is the fuel for this nation’s future prosperity and growth. Increasing demand for natural gas will create tangible and lasting economic benefits for this nation; tangible and real and long lasting economic dividends and expeditious environmental benefits.
In line with the previously cited Navigant Consulting Inc. study, if we immediately doubled our current annual consumption we would have approximately sixty years to implement current “renewable” energy technologies and other heretofore undiscovered new technologies.
Boone Pickens Plan has stated every thousand cubic of domestically produced natural gas used for transportation could reduce the need for eight gallons of imported gasoline.
20,000,000,000,000 twenty trillion cubic feet per year =
20,000,000,000 20 billion MCF per year =
160,000,000,000 gallons of gasoline per year @ eight gallons per MCF =
3,809,523,810 barrels of gasoline per year =
10,437,052 barrels of gasoline per day
NYMEX April natural gas futures are now under four dollars per million cubic feet. In gross BTU parity terms before pipeline transportation charges and taxes; eight gallons of gasoline can be purchased for fewer than four dollars.
Assuming $55 per barrel of imported oil, then for every additional trillion cubic feet of natural gas produced and utilized annually, we can reduce payments for imported oil to produce gasoline by approximately ten billion dollars per year.
Our nation currently consumes roughly 20 trillion cubic feet of gas a year. So doubling are current consumption of natural gas would reduce annual payments for imported oil by approximately $200 billion per year. The U.S. dollar would be stronger. To continue as the world’s leading nation, we need a strong dollar in this global economy.
In addition to this national savings, there would be tens of thousands of good high paying careers created in this country.
Every “drilling rig” directly employees about 40 people; indirect job creation can be expected to be 5 times the 40 direct jobs; or 240 direct and indirect jobs per drilling rig.
Current drilling rigs can be expected to have a useful life of at least 20 years.
Every one thousand additional drilling rigs would create 240,000 potential careers and the concomitant opportunities for advancement; careers, not temporary employment. These careers, these jobs cannot be transferred to other lesser developed countries.
Each new state of the art drilling rig required will cost about $ US 16 million
So, 1000 new rigs will provide an economic boost to machinery manufacturers, steel fabricators and others equal to $US 16 billion.
Additional tens of thousands of new jobs and opportunities will be created by expanding and revamping the nation’s natural gas pipe line and local distribution infrastructure.
The American automotive industry can be revitalized by being incentivized to manufacture compressed natural gas vehicles. In concert with the auto manufacturers, the car dealerships and automotive aftermarket industries should gear toward retrofitting existing vehicles with natural gas fuel capability.
A natural gas refueling” infrastructure will need to be added to the current refueling infrastructure; this will create further economic activity.
Legislation should require all government vehicles to be powered by natural gas.
United States industries such as steel, other metals, chemicals, and fertilizer will become more competitive in U.S. markets and possibly internationally. With lower fuel/power other U.S. industries will have the opportunity to return as competitive forces in the global market.
The misguided and wasteful “ethanol debacle” needs to be terminated immediately. Productive agricultural land needs to be used to feed the world’s hungry children. Natural gas should be used to fuel our automobiles. The United States can feed the world’s hungry children.
The United States needs to move will all haste to capitalize the new found abundance of this environmentally friendlier and plentiful resource.
The future of North American natural gas requires the development of unconventional resource basins, which require better economics for E&P companies.
• The basins require large scale drilling programs, advanced drilling techniques and technologies, and large amounts reservoir stimulation.
• These basins include shale gas, tight sands, and coalbed methane (CBM)
In the early 1980’s there were over 4,500 drilling rigs operating drilling for oil and gas on land in the U.S.A. 4,500 rigs active rigs is the all time high for this nation. Advanced technology produced 2008’s unprecedented supply increase with the natural gas rig count reaching a peak of 1,606 in late August
Right now, natural gas exploration and production companies are cutting their capital budgets and suspending drilling operations at unprecedented rate because the price of natural gas is too low.
The United States active drilling rig count has fallen precipitously to under 900 rigs at this time; tens of thousands of jobs and careers have been put on hold or lost.
An excerpt from the March 2009, Land Rig Newsletter Monthly Report follows:
Small oil and gas operators are worried about changes to federal tax law affecting the amortization of intangible drilling and completion costs. Operators say they can withstand efforts to change the item from an expense to amortization over three years, or even five. Get beyond half a decade and the impact on drilling would be devastating for the small, privately held companies who account for more than 40 percent of rig activity.
There is an oversupply of natural gas in storage as we continue to import foreign oil and dilute the U.S. dollar.
Increased natural gas consumption is the most logical, expedient and beneficial means for keeping the USA moving forward as the world's economic and international leader.
The greater the focus and effort put on powering our transportation and electricity generation needs with this now abundant resource, the sooner we, the USA, will move forward with tangible and lasting economic dividends for our nation.
• Reduced imported oil for gasoline
• Reduced greenhouse gases from cleaner burning natural gas
• Real and lasting tangible economic growth in the United States
• Strengthening of the U.S. dollar
It is sinful in light of the blessed abundance of this natural resource and national treasure, that we, the American people, currently send our hard earned dollars overseas to those who, in too many instances, oppose our best interest and even our existence.
Our nation’s currency is no longer backed by gold…
This all the more reason our energy security, economic prosperity and freedom, and our environmental future should be backed by “U.S. natural gas”.
Immediate and increasingly urgent economic, environmental, and national security issues will be powered forward by increase usage of natural gas.
The stifling national debt will be reduced and future generations' "American dream" and way of life will be illuminated and preserved by this value adding investment in America.
What is required to achieve this is the American peoples' supporting this vision (why would we not) and leadership with the courage to passionately ensure moving proactively forward with the vision.
I am very proud to work for
• an American company,
• a company registered in the United States,
• a company that pays its full United States taxes,
• a company that has recently invested billions of dollars in U.S, manufactured drilling equipment and machinery,
• a company that created thousands of safe high paying American jobs,
• a company that has been in business for nearly 90 years creating value and wealth for its shareholders and employees; a company I pray that will be in business for many more generations,
• an industry that has invested hundreds of billions of dollar to better the American peoples’ standard of living
• an industry that has provided millions of careers and hard earned well deserved retirements for its employees
• that has and will protect and preserve this nation’s interest by providing cost effective energy,
• an industry to which this nation can and must turn in this nations great time of need; I pray this nation’s government will not turn its back to this great industry in this great nation’s time of need.
My father, a World War 2 veteran, had only a sixth grade education, but because of his work ethic and the opportunities in the great American oil and gas industry he was able to retire with a good pension and medical benefits from a major oil company. I am sure there are hundreds of thousands of similar American “big oil” stories.
American “big oil” has led the effort throughout our history to bring energy and a higher standard of living to the people of the world while investing hundreds of billions of dollars and creating hundred thousands of careers. Yes, “big oil” has profited, but not any more so than other capital intensive and innovative enterprises. There have been mistakes, but the benefits to this nation and the world outweigh by order of magnitude the negatives.
Today, America’s much maligned “big oil” companies are faced with severe and unfair restrictions, terms, and conditions leveled at them by “national oil companies” that now control the vast majority of the world’s oil and gas reserves. These national oil companies in the large majority of the cases subsidize the cost of fuel and energy for their internal economic industries.
The “national oil companies” are controlled by governments that choose to artificially control prices, limit free enterprise, confiscate American investments, and maintain the American addiction to foreign oil and liquefied natural gas. There is great danger that U.S. natural gas industry will be inundated by a deluge of imported LNG, if this nation’s government does not act swiftly and decisively to counter our nation’s increasing dependence on foreign sources of energy.
Today our nation’s economy is melting from the destructive heat of criminal avarice.
Greed that seeks to gain at the imperilment of the innocent people of this nation; premeditated greed and avarice that have stolen innocent peoples’ dreams while decimating the value of years of hard work and destroying hopes for higher education or golden years.
Meanwhile, the great American oil and gas industry that has once again discovered and created new value through visionary investment, innovation, technology, and plain old hard work finds itself being slowly and painfully paralyzed while our government flounders about attempting to bail the masters of greed out of their self-created toxic morass.
By supporting natural gas development in the United States we can begin to end the misguided and senseless dissolution of the "health and wealth of this great nation’s and this planet's future".
The American dream is not a pipe dream! Wake up!
Our government needs to step boldly forward out of this toxic quagmire and put forth the necessary legislation and tax incentives to stimulate natural gas usage in this country! This is real economic stimulus. This is absolutely imperative for the security and the well being of future generations of this great nation.
We have to move forward purposefully with the development of the God given resources we have to create value and wealth for this nation’s people. Let’s get on with it!
We owe it to future generations! Exploiting and developing this nation’s abundant natural gas supply is simply the common sense use of this nation’s God given resources. To paraphrase the heroic passengers of 11 September 2001, “Let’s roll with natural gas!”
May God speed and continue to bless this nation.
Alan Orr
Executive Vice President
Engineering & Development
Helmerich & Payne I.D.C.
Mr. Orr has worked over 33years at H&P and prior to his current position was Vice President and Chief Engineer from 1991 to 2005. He holds a B.S. in General Engineering from the United States Military Academy at West Point.
He has worked in H&P’s U.S. and international divisions in both operations and engineering assignments.
In field operations he has worked as roughneck, driller, toolpusher, and superintendent and division operations manager. In engineering assignments, he has worked as drilling engineer, project engineer, and Chief Engineer.
As Executive Vice President Engineering & Development he is responsible for development of all H&P engineering functions, technology, new rig construction, and upgrade projects – both onshore and offshore. Mr. Orr has pioneered numerous innovations and advances in the drilling industry and holds several patents.
Recognizing his role as the principal architect of H&P’s industry changing FlexRig and other significant industry contributions, Mr. Orr was the 2005 recipient of the International Association of Drilling Contractors’ Contractor of the Year award. The prestigious Contractor of the Year award, sponsored by Reed-Hycalog, was established in 1988 to recognize an individual drilling contractor representative’s outstanding lifetime achievements in technical innovation, safety, and economic efficiency in the drilling industry. It is the only award that exclusively honors drilling contractors.
By "curious" I asume you mean "very interesting." This morning's Wall Street Journal has a story about OEM Japanese industry saying to its new "greener" government that it has done as much as it can without harming the economy to cut back on "grrenhouse" gas emissions. I suspect that Honda, which is quoted in the story, and Toyota, which is mentioned but not quoted, may quickly look at CNG even for just that 10% reduction. Of course oncer again this will leave America's zombie car companies, GM and the other one, in the dust. I don't know what Ford is doing, but I cannot remember a time when Ford did not offer a liquid propane fue option on its pickup trucks; this was for farmers who had LPG and didn't want to store gasoline and/or diesel also for their light duty vehicles. I also remember that the fuel option was (is$) available on some Ford cars.
"What's past is prologue" is the way the Bard of Avon put it.
On Sep 09 08:48 AM John Petersen wrote:
> The biggest problem NG faces is that nobody understands that it's
> different from its traditionally more important sister oil. My back
> of the napkin performance figures for a CNG HEV are stunning. The
> darned thing would be within 10% of an EV in terms of CO2 emissions
> and at least 25% cheaper to buy. When you factor in the reality that
> all of the fuel revenue would stay in North America instead of going
> elsewhere the logic is undeniable. I find it particularly curious
> that Toyota and Honda seem to be stepping away from the plug-in circus
> and taking a hard look at natural gas.
Seriously, I just don't think he gets it...plus he's still in the pocket of Coal!
Experienced, Logical and coherent. There's no counter to your argument.
Jack Lifton
On Sep 09 09:28 AM AO wrote:
> Natural gas manifesto; May the flame be light unto us!
> Every “mcf” of United States natural gas that is produced and consumed
> will not only benefit every citizen of our nation, it will also make
> this world a better place and pay real and tangible dividends to
> future generations.
>
> Total world demand for oil will be reduced and the world price for
> oil will be lower. Energy for developing nations will be less expensive.
>
>
> The world’s ecological / environmental situation will be improved
> due to lower “greenhouse gas” emissions.
>
> Development of this nation’s natural gas provides real and absolute
> stimulus to our economy and credit system. This type of tangible
> absolute stimulus with its multiplier effect will produce significant
> and ongoing dividends for our nation.
> Not only will the United States’ economy be stimulated, the dollar
> will be strengthened. Our nation’s deficits will be reduced more
> quickly.
>
> The United States will be less vulnerable to “financial coercion”
> by foreign powers; the wealth now being transferred to oil producers
> will remain in the United States and can be used to benefit this
> nation’s future generations.
>
> As the tangible benefits to the world and the United States are significant
> and compelling, there must be a single historic legislative act that
> articulates, memorializes, and provides gravitas to this monumental
> undertaking to ensure the future of the American dream and our national
> security.
> To wit;
>
> The United States of America Proclamation for Increased Energy Security
> (US PIES); Natural Gas Act of 2009
>
> To move as expeditiously and conclusively as possible to avoid any
> further energy crises and in light of the now abundant supplies of
> natural gas with which our nation is blessed, the Congress of the
> United States of America hereby sets forth the Natural Gas Act of
> 2009 to bridge this nation’s destiny to increased energy independence.
>
>
> In that our national security and economy are threatened and may
> be perilously further threatened and compromised by our nation’s
> current over dependence on imported oil and the concomitant transfer
> of our national wealth, it is imperative and essential our nation
> move with purpose and urgency to employ our God given natural gas
> resources and in so doing ensure the future strength and prosperity
> of our nation by increasing our energy security by reducing our dependence
> on foreign oil.
> Elucidation: May God Almighty help forge these words with the flame
> of His Truth and Wisdom.
>
> Illumination: Let the guiding light for this nation’s energy future
> be the glowing embers of the spirit of the Americans’ that have sacrificed
> and continue to sacrifice for our freedom, security and liberty to
> prosper. May these flames be light onto us.
>
> The United States currently imports the majority of its oil from
> overseas National Oil Companies (NOC’s). This debilitating situation
> can be remedied.
>
> Recent American technological breakthroughs, horizontal drilling
> and multi-stage fracture stimulation of reservoirs, have made the
> drilling and completing of natural gas wells much more efficient
> and productive and vast new reserves new of natural gas accessible
> here within our borders.
>
> According to a recent study by Navigant Consulting Inc., the United
> States now has an estimated 2,247 trillion cubic feet of natural
> gas reserves, enough to last approximately 118 years at 2007 demand
> levels.
>
> In that the world’s ecological future and world peace may be threatened
> by “global warming” and or having reached or in time soon reaching
> “world peak oil production”, it is imperative and essential our nation
> move with purpose and urgency to employ our God given natural gas
> resources and in so doing ensure to the maximum extent of our ability
> the energy security of the Untied Stats, the future world’s peace,
> prosperity and environmental harmony.
>
> Note; this would be an expanded version of the New Alternative Transportation
> to Give Americans Solutions Act, that includes incentives for gas
> fired power generation and natural gas producers.
>
> I realize all the above is easy to write and will require great effort
> and will not be unanimously embraced; however, there is much to be
> gained if we act.
>
> There is all too much to be lost, if we do not act.
>
> It is our American spirit and energy that make this nation great.
>
>
> This natural resource is no longer supply constrained. It is demand
> constrained. U.S. gas supply increased by an unprecedented 8% in
> 2008 compared to 2007. The aforementioned new technologies make further
> substantial increases in our natural gas supply and consumption viable.
>
>
> The development, distribution, and consumption of these abundant
> natural gas reserves provide the currently sought economic stimulus
> and creates powerful lasting long term dividends to this nation not
> seen since the construction of the interstate high system in the
> fifties or the WPA.
>
> Natural gas is the fuel to power this nation’s economic resurgence
> as the world’s largest and most dynamic economy.
>
> Natural gas is the “fast lane bridge” to this nation’s reducing dependence
> on imported oil.
>
> Natural gas is the cleanest burning hydrocarbon fuel. Natural gas
> emits 45% less carbon dioxide than coal and 30% less carbon dioxide
> than oil. This transition fuel will provide the “time bridge” until
> solar, hydro, wind-power, and cleaner coal technologies become more
> available and cost effective.
>
> New clean burning “natural gas” powered electric plants need to be
> constructed to reduce “greenhouse gases.”
>
> Natural gas is the fuel for this nation’s future prosperity and growth.
> Increasing demand for natural gas will create tangible and lasting
> economic benefits for this nation; tangible and real and long lasting
> economic dividends and expeditious environmental benefits.
>
>
> In line with the previously cited Navigant Consulting Inc. study,
> if we immediately doubled our current annual consumption we would
> have approximately sixty years to implement current “renewable” energy
> technologies and other heretofore undiscovered new technologies.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Boone Pickens Plan has stated every thousand cubic of domestically
> produced natural gas used for transportation could reduce the need
> for eight gallons of imported gasoline.
> 20,000,000,000,000 twenty trillion cubic feet per year =
> 20,000,000,000 20 billion MCF per year =
> 160,000,000,000 gallons of gasoline per year @ eight gallons per
> MCF =
> 3,809,523,810 barrels of gasoline per year =
> 10,437,052 barrels of gasoline per day
>
> NYMEX April natural gas futures are now under four dollars per million
> cubic feet. In gross BTU parity terms before pipeline transportation
> charges and taxes; eight gallons of gasoline can be purchased for
> fewer than four dollars.
>
> Assuming $55 per barrel of imported oil, then for every additional
> trillion cubic feet of natural gas produced and utilized annually,
> we can reduce payments for imported oil to produce gasoline by approximately
> ten billion dollars per year.
>
> Our nation currently consumes roughly 20 trillion cubic feet of gas
> a year. So doubling are current consumption of natural gas would
> reduce annual payments for imported oil by approximately $200 billion
> per year. The U.S. dollar would be stronger. To continue as the world’s
> leading nation, we need a strong dollar in this global economy.<br/>
>
> In addition to this national savings, there would be tens of thousands
> of good high paying careers created in this country.
>
> Every “drilling rig” directly employees about 40 people; indirect
> job creation can be expected to be 5 times the 40 direct jobs; or
> 240 direct and indirect jobs per drilling rig.
>
> Current drilling rigs can be expected to have a useful life of at
> least 20 years.
> Every one thousand additional drilling rigs would create 240,000
> potential careers and the concomitant opportunities for advancement;
> careers, not temporary employment. These careers, these jobs cannot
> be transferred to other lesser developed countries.
>
> Each new state of the art drilling rig required will cost about $
> US 16 million
> So, 1000 new rigs will provide an economic boost to machinery manufacturers,
> steel fabricators and others equal to $US 16 billion.
> Additional tens of thousands of new jobs and opportunities will be
> created by expanding and revamping the nation’s natural gas pipe
> line and local distribution infrastructure.
>
> The American automotive industry can be revitalized by being incentivized
> to manufacture compressed natural gas vehicles. In concert with the
> auto manufacturers, the car dealerships and automotive aftermarket
> industries should gear toward retrofitting existing vehicles with
> natural gas fuel capability.
>
> A natural gas refueling” infrastructure will need to be added to
> the current refueling infrastructure; this will create further economic
> activity.
>
> Legislation should require all government vehicles to be powered
> by natural gas.
>
> United States industries such as steel, other metals, chemicals,
> and fertilizer will become more competitive in U.S. markets and possibly
> internationally. With lower fuel/power other U.S. industries will
> have the opportunity to return as competitive forces in the global
> market.
>
> The misguided and wasteful “ethanol debacle” needs to be terminated
> immediately. Productive agricultural land needs to be used to feed
> the world’s hungry children. Natural gas should be used to fuel our
> automobiles. The United States can feed the world’s hungry children.
>
>
> The United States needs to move will all haste to capitalize the
> new found abundance of this environmentally friendlier and plentiful
> resource.
>
> The future of North American natural gas requires the development
> of unconventional resource basins, which require better economics
> for E&P companies.
>
> • The basins require large scale drilling programs, advanced drilling
> techniques and technologies, and large amounts reservoir stimulation.
>
>
> • These basins include shale gas, tight sands, and coalbed methane
> (seekingalpha.com/symbo...)
>
> In the early 1980’s there were over 4,500 drilling rigs operating
> drilling for oil and gas on land in the U.S.A. 4,500 rigs active
> rigs is the all time high for this nation. Advanced technology produced
> 2008’s unprecedented supply increase with the natural gas rig count
> reaching a peak of 1,606 in late August
>
> Right now, natural gas exploration and production companies are cutting
> their capital budgets and suspending drilling operations at unprecedented
> rate because the price of natural gas is too low.
>
> The United States active drilling rig count has fallen precipitously
> to under 900 rigs at this time; tens of thousands of jobs and careers
> have been put on hold or lost.
>
> An excerpt from the March 2009, Land Rig Newsletter Monthly Report
> follows:
>
> Small oil and gas operators are worried about changes to federal
> tax law affecting the amortization of intangible drilling and completion
> costs. Operators say they can withstand efforts to change the item
> from an expense to amortization over three years, or even five. Get
> beyond half a decade and the impact on drilling would be devastating
> for the small, privately held companies who account for more than
> 40 percent of rig activity.
>
> There is an oversupply of natural gas in storage as we continue to
> import foreign oil and dilute the U.S. dollar.
>
> Increased natural gas consumption is the most logical, expedient
> and beneficial means for keeping the USA moving forward as the world's
> economic and international leader.
>
> The greater the focus and effort put on powering our transportation
> and electricity generation needs with this now abundant resource,
> the sooner we, the USA, will move forward with tangible and lasting
> economic dividends for our nation.
>
> • Reduced imported oil for gasoline
>
> • Reduced greenhouse gases from cleaner burning natural gas
>
> • Real and lasting tangible economic growth in the United States
>
>
> • Strengthening of the U.S. dollar
>
> It is sinful in light of the blessed abundance of this natural resource
> and national treasure, that we, the American people, currently send
> our hard earned dollars overseas to those who, in too many instances,
> oppose our best interest and even our existence.
>
> Our nation’s currency is no longer backed by gold…
>
> This all the more reason our energy security, economic prosperity
> and freedom, and our environmental future should be backed by “U.S.
> natural gas”.
>
> Immediate and increasingly urgent economic, environmental, and national
> security issues will be powered forward by increase usage of natural
> gas.
>
> The stifling national debt will be reduced and future generations'
> "American dream" and way of life will be illuminated and preserved
> by this value adding investment in America.
>
> What is required to achieve this is the American peoples' supporting
> this vision (why would we not) and leadership with the courage to
> passionately ensure moving proactively forward with the vision.
>
>
> I am very proud to work for
> • an American company,
>
> • a company registered in the United States,
>
> • a company that pays its full United States taxes,
>
> • a company that has recently invested billions of dollars in U.S,
> manufactured drilling equipment and machinery,
>
> • a company that created thousands of safe high paying American jobs,
>
>
> • a company that has been in business for nearly 90 years creating
> value and wealth for its shareholders and employees; a company I
> pray that will be in business for many more generations,
>
> • an industry that has invested hundreds of billions of dollar to
> better the American peoples’ standard of living
>
> • an industry that has provided millions of careers and hard earned
> well deserved retirements for its employees
>
> • that has and will protect and preserve this nation’s interest by
> providing cost effective energy,
>
> • an industry to which this nation can and must turn in this nations
> great time of need; I pray this nation’s government will not turn
> its back to this great industry in this great nation’s time of need.
>
>
>
> My father, a World War 2 veteran, had only a sixth grade education,
> but because of his work ethic and the opportunities in the great
> American oil and gas industry he was able to retire with a good pension
> and medical benefits from a major oil company. I am sure there are
> hundreds of thousands of similar American “big oil” stories.
>
> American “big oil” has led the effort throughout our history to bring
> energy and a higher standard of living to the people of the world
> while investing hundreds of billions of dollars and creating hundred
> thousands of careers. Yes, “big oil” has profited, but not any more
> so than other capital intensive and innovative enterprises. There
> have been mistakes, but the benefits to this nation and the world
> outweigh by order of magnitude the negatives.
>
> Today, America’s much maligned “big oil” companies are faced with
> severe and unfair restrictions, terms, and conditions leveled at
> them by “national oil companies” that now control the vast majority
> of the world’s oil and gas reserves. These national oil companies
> in the large majority of the cases subsidize the cost of fuel and
> energy for their internal economic industries.
>
> The “national oil companies” are controlled by governments that choose
> to artificially control prices, limit free enterprise, confiscate
> American investments, and maintain the American addiction to foreign
> oil and liquefied natural gas. There is great danger that U.S. natural
> gas industry will be inundated by a deluge of imported LNG, if this
> nation’s government does not act swiftly and decisively to counter
> our nation’s increasing dependence on foreign sources of energy.
>
>
> Today our nation’s economy is melting from the destructive heat of
> criminal avarice.
>
> Greed that seeks to gain at the imperilment of the innocent people
> of this nation; premeditated greed and avarice that have stolen innocent
> peoples’ dreams while decimating the value of years of hard work
> and destroying hopes for higher education or golden years.
>
> Meanwhile, the great American oil and gas industry that has once
> again discovered and created new value through visionary investment,
> innovation, technology, and plain old hard work finds itself being
> slowly and painfully paralyzed while our government flounders about
> attempting to bail the masters of greed out of their self-created
> toxic morass.
>
> By supporting natural gas development in the United States we can
> begin to end the misguided and senseless dissolution of the "health
> and wealth of this great nation’s and this planet's future".
>
> The American dream is not a pipe dream! Wake up!
>
> Our government needs to step boldly forward out of this toxic quagmire
> and put forth the necessary legislation and tax incentives to stimulate
> natural gas usage in this country! This is real economic stimulus.
> This is absolutely imperative for the security and the well being
> of future generations of this great nation.
>
> We have to move forward purposefully with the development of the
> God given resources we have to create value and wealth for this nation’s
> people. Let’s get on with it!
>
> We owe it to future generations! Exploiting and developing this nation’s
> abundant natural gas supply is simply the common sense use of this
> nation’s God given resources. To paraphrase the heroic passengers
> of 11 September 2001, “Let’s roll with natural gas!”
>
> May God speed and continue to bless this nation.
>
> Alan Orr
> Executive Vice President
> Engineering & Development
> Helmerich & Payne I.D.C.
>
>
> Mr. Orr has worked over 33years at H&P and prior to his current
> position was Vice President and Chief Engineer from 1991 to 2005.
> He holds a B.S. in General Engineering from the United States Military
> Academy at West Point.
> He has worked in H&P’s U.S. and international divisions in both
> operations and engineering assignments.
> In field operations he has worked as roughneck, driller, toolpusher,
> and superintendent and division operations manager. In engineering
> assignments, he has worked as drilling engineer, project engineer,
> and Chief Engineer.
> As Executive Vice President Engineering & Development he is responsible
> for development of all H&P engineering functions, technology,
> new rig construction, and upgrade projects – both onshore and offshore.
> Mr. Orr has pioneered numerous innovations and advances in the drilling
> industry and holds several patents.
> Recognizing his role as the principal architect of H&P’s industry
> changing FlexRig and other significant industry contributions, Mr.
> Orr was the 2005 recipient of the International Association of Drilling
> Contractors’ Contractor of the Year award. The prestigious Contractor
> of the Year award, sponsored by Reed-Hycalog, was established in
> 1988 to recognize an individual drilling contractor representative’s
> outstanding lifetime achievements in technical innovation, safety,
> and economic efficiency in the drilling industry. It is the only
> award that exclusively honors drilling contractors.
Pickens and McClendon propose the most feasible plan to get NG into our transportation system: Trains and trucks and a string of stations to serve along a central corridor of travel.
Somehow I can't belive that certain people don't know as much about gas as Mr Fitz and Mr Orr, but you can never tell about these things.
What I really can't understand is why the USDOE can't try to straighten us out on this matter.
Who benefits the most from us not switching to natural gas? It is not BP, COP or Exon because they have a huge natural gas business.
Just a little common sense points to the middle east and Chavez ...daaa it is not rocket science.
west.wwu.edu/ucomm_new...
We can use our coal; we can use our gas. In the end, both are irreplaceably GONE! Both gone, in what 100-300 years at current consumption??
For the past 30 years we have been practicing the policy of using someone else's oil; that worked. But we didn't solve our real problems; or develop the alternative solutions to when the wells went dry. Or did we?
We could still electrify the rails and the interstate hiways using current technology. And we could produce biofuels for the airplanes and many road machines. And we have many ways to produce more electricity, sans additional coal and nat gas capacity.
What we need are some clearheaded, CLEAN, policy makers; some not concerned about the bribers and punishers (what bread butterer's become when they stop buttering your bread!). Sounds like we need some INDEPENDENTS - if there are any such things in existence.
The best independents I've even known are the entrepreneurs that had a good idea and the backing to strike forth with a concept and product that made sense and money - that worked when all the policy makers did not exist or get in the way of PROGRESS. Sort of like a Ford, Westinghouse, or Bell, or.........where's the current free and clear thinker, unencumbered.......??
redbaron: yes, i agree with you that i am certainly not the most patient human being. on the other hand, $145/barrel oil and its impact on a country that imports 60-65% of its oil supply is not something that, i believe, we can afford to lolly-gag around with. it's simply essential that we address this huge economic drain if we want to remain economically competitive going forward. however, i am not following your logic about depletion rates. depletion rates and rig counts mean natural gas prices will rise shortly. the CEO of XTO said on mad money last night that he believes long term nat gas prices will settle in the $7 area. i am not privy to all the economics behind shale drilling costs, but the $7 number seems plausible to me. i guess my point is, if Congress won't move with sub-$3 natural gas, what makes you think they'll move when natural gas prices double or so from here? it's kind of ironic that the lack of natural gas demand at the moment, due in part on its miniscule use in the transportation sector, is one reason NG storage is at record highs, and therefore production and new drilling cut-backs will cause the NG prices to rise rather dramatically at some point in the next 6 months or so (i believe).
receipt: i dunno...i have been exchanging some emails with AEP execs, and they seem content to drill holes in the ground to pump in coal generated CO2. makes no sense to me. the only CO2 sequestion project i know that worked was Exxon in colorado pumping in coal CO2 emissions into the ground to help push out natural gas. that is, it makes sense to me to pump something in to get something out, but to merely pump something in? how does that work? seems like pushing 10 lbs of sh*$ into a 2lb bag. and of course you still have the cocktail of toxic heavy metal wastes to deal with.... anyway, i hope you are right that nat gas power generation increases dramatically. it should, but for some reason some of the biggest utilities seems wedded to coal. after the TVA disaster at kingston, tn there is still very little talk in the knoxville area about converting the kingston plant to natural gas. you'd think that would simply be a no-brainer, especially after looking at the air over knoxville on a humid summer day during TVA coal generation...
tripleback: well, it *should* create alot of debate *now*. i blame the US media and coal/oil lobby money for silencing the debate. however, that nat gas lobby has, in my opinion, done a poor job. they have a superior product for a number of reasons: it's abundant, clean, and its *domestic*. for whatever reason, they seem to be unable to reach the american people with the message. the fact that the "clean coal" lobby has been successful in convincing politicians and americans that coal is cleaner than natural gas is a testament to this failure. they should take obama and chu to task for this. they should take out full page adds demanding energy secretary chu resign for his admission that he is "agnostic" on natural gas transportation. they had, and have, a great opportunity to prove he is bought off by the coal lobby, and they didn't make hay while the sun was shining. it is not too late, they simply need to grow some ganubles and do it.
johnP: yes, i agree completely, and that is why i keep publishing articles about the toyota nat gas/electric concept vehicle. it is amazing to me that most americans don't even know of this solution. couple a nat gas/electric hybrid with a phill in your garage and you have a brilliant transportation solution. i'd buy that combination in a new york second!! but they are simply not available. isn't that amazing and very very sad? the nat gas lobby should have full page adds with this solution in the WSJ and USA today every week for a year. if americans knew they could be filling up in their garage for half the price at the gasoline stations, don't you'd think they'd demand access to these products? demand their politicians take action? it could literally save the US economy and usher in an area of progress reminiscent of past US glory days when we were much more energy dependent.
kitchensink: exactly, obama and chu's position on natural gas transportation prove they are bought out by the coal lobby. illinois after all is a big coal state. more interesting is that obama's supporters are not holding his feet to the fire on the issue (making the same mistakes republicans did with bush - not holding their candidate accountable for obvious wrong headed policies). wrt big oil, yes they have natural gas, but oil is their big profit stream, so, no, they are not supporting natural gas transportation, which doesn't say much for their patriotism does it? look at exxon for instance, despite their huge investments in qatari LNG infrastructure, they would rather produce commercials on their algae research (are you serious??) than on natural gas transportation which needs no research whatsoever, just NGVs and refueling stations. it's ridiculous. i wonder what XOM execs will do with all their stock when the NYSE eventually melts down due to US insolvency due mostly to its addiction to foreign oil?
Alan: nice to see you back again and thanks for the comment! perhaps you should run the natural gas lobby :)
jack lifton: honda and toyota have shown they are ready to move ahead as soon as the US government is ready to support them. that was toyotas message with the nat gas/electric hybrid concept vehicle. it was a message to the US government: "hey, whenever you guys will support the refueling infrastructure, we have the vehicle NOW". jack - please refrain from copying and pasting previous comments - it makes the comment section longer and harder to scroll through. thanks!
Mmmarkk: i agree, obama and chu are definitely setting up shop in the suit pockets of coal and utility executives that are addicted to a dirty and expensive 20th century fuel as opposed to a clean and cheap 21st century fuel (natural gas).
mpherson: actually, it IS as easy as that. it would also be very easy to meter the natural gas refueling system and tax it appropriately. however, you are correct by pointing out that the government is obviously concerned about the tax issue as gasoline taxes are a huge revenue stream. at the same time, many times that amount is leaving the country every day to pay for foreign oil. these days, it is very easy to put wireless transmiters on metering devices which can be read and taxed very easily. as far as fleets go, they are an obvious first step and pickens and company are very successful in this area. however, fleets alone simply won't significantly reduce foreign oil imports to the extent needed - and this is where i differ with pickens. the US could reduce foreign oil imports by 6-7 million barrels a DAY by simply converting half of all US cars and trucks to run on natural gas. fleets alone, while helping, can't come close to such a huge reduction in foreign oil imports. after all, 70% of all US oil imports go to transportation..
Ferdinand: if you look at the DOE predictions and actions, they simply have not been proactive about what they should be doing: weaning the US off of foreign oil. like all federal government bureaucracies...they are vulnerable to "influence" from lobbyists....
joeH: hope you are right...i have my doubts. we'll see if the nat gas act passes, and if it is robust or simply lip service.
long_on_oil: i disagree a bit with you. COP is highly leveraged to natural gas, but still, the major oil companies get most of their profits from selling oil. the reason, i believe, they don't want to see the transition to natural gas transportation is because most of the natural gas produced in the US is done via small independent producers. the top 4 US nat gas producers are less then 10% of total production. this scares the hell out of the oil majors!! that is, they wont be able to control prices which means profit. wrt obama being owned by saudi...who knows..but it is obvious every time he utters the oxymoronic "clean coal" mantra (and myth) that he (and Chu) are bought off by coal. obama also never said a word about the kingston, tn disaster...arguably the worst environmental catastrophe in US history. completely silent!! imagine that.
ripskii: yes, and i have been very vocal about mulva's complete silence on the natural gas transportation issue. as a COP shareholder, it really pi$$es me off that he won't get behind natural gas transportation. it just shows you how powerful the oil business is. i am sure mulva doesn't want to jeopardize overseas oil acreage accumulation and deals by being confronted in negotiations were he to support nat gas transportation in the US. that said, can't these US oil execs see what is happening to this country due to its foreign oil addcition? it just doesn't make sense to me. why would they want to contribute in a major way to the demise of the country their children and grandchildren will live. or, do they have a grand exit strategy? if so, where will they go???
nakedjaybird: i am certainly not saying that we should not develop alternatives like wind and solar, in fact my energy policy strongly supports both. but we must be pragmatic here. it will take TIME to develop these sources and the infrastructure to deliver them. the environmental "purists" who keep waiting for the 100% EV solution continue to drive their gasoline fueled vehicles(!). how in the world does that help? why not, while we wait for a future of solar, wind, and eventurally hydrogen get the 50% reduction in CO2 compared to coal, the 30% reduction in CO2 compared to gasoline, and the 100% reduction in toxic particulates compared to both, by using US produced natural gas instead of foreign oil imports?? environmental purists are not only hurting the environmental with their unrealistic policies, but they are also underwriting foreign oil producers and the war machine that the US has developed to obtain oil supplies. meanwhile they drive the gasoline fueled cars and complain how dirty things are. it's moronic.
And I am so very Glad you have stopped calling yourself a True Environmentalist. That Toyata hybrid you have been pushing only reduces CO2 emissions by 20%. (you said so yourself in a different Comment so don't bother denying it.)
This is another Fab on your part:
"Meanwhile, market activity today is reminiscent of the pre-collapse days. The US dollar is sharply lower while oil and gold are higher."
The USD is around where it was last September, OIL is Sharply Lower and Gold Is higher. Oil Was on the Way down, The USD was on the Way Up.
I see you continue to try to Alter History. Why?
Why does every 8Th comment of your involve the use of Fascism?
HardToLove
On Sep 09 11:22 AM Ferdinand E. Banks wrote:
> I'm really curious as to how this thing with gas is going to turn
> out.
> Somehow I can't belive that certain people don't know as much about
> gas as Mr Fitz and Mr Orr, but you can never tell about these things.
>
> What I really can't understand is why the USDOE can't try to straighten
> us out on this matter.
So let's start again....................
MF made that comment early this year, so why waste the Money?
Now let's talk about REAL PROGESS WITH REAL POLIICY to get us there.
First policy: leave ALL the fossil energy where it is; stored forever, if need be, to the best of our ability.
Second policy: implement existing and develop and execute as many as possible (AMAP) alternatives as soon as possible (ASAP) in both POWER GENERATION and TRANSPORTATION the Electricfy America and Alternatives themes.
If you want to know how to do that, go into the achives and read my earlier published comments in SA about the less than 10 point plan.
Or, watch China.
These outfits do not wait for the Federal Clowns. They have a good business case, a good achievable compatible ecological goal and a plan that supports the objectives.
It is *those* sorts of *private* activities that will bring this to fruition if only the Feds get out of the way and provide *minimal incentives - such as supporting nationwide goals for good integration and infrastructure development.
HardToLove
P.S. If ford brings that Ford seven passenger HEV minivan conversion here with that CPST turbine in it, I'm a buyer!
On Sep 09 02:20 PM one eye wrote:
> CNG fleets are a good idea, CNG electric Plants are a Good Idea,
> CNG private paasenger cars are not viable without a Yet to be Built
> Pioe line for Alaskan NG which won't be Completed until 2018 at the
> earliest.
>
> MF made that comment early this year, so why waste the Money? <br/>
simple economics every college freshman should know: if NG must compete with oil for transportation energy what will happen to the price? the prices will equalize (per energy unit). if you can't grasp this, find out how much karosene was worth before it became marketed as a whale oil substitute. then, what will happen to the price of electricity when the majority is produced by NG? do you have any idea how much energy it will take to make enough solar and wind generation to keep the price stable if the price of NG goes up 5 or 10X? if you are going to complete this scam, i mean scheme, without people in the streets burning you in effigy, you better build 10 or 20 nuclear power plants first. you guys think you understand economics, but all you actually know is some stats; Congress, as corrupt and idiotic as they are, understands this and is not listening to you because you are wrong.
now a mean-spirited trip to the woodshed for the idiots who keep bringing this up: basic economics, what is the difference between trading paper dollars to foreigners for barrels of oil versus french cheese or japanese cars or taiwanese semiconductors? absolutely none, the ARM processor in your iphone and the rubber in the tire on your prius are as 'bad' for the economy as the oil and gas in your car. it is the exact same thing; either all foreign trade is bad or none of it is, this so basic it is not even debatable, you embarrass yourself and everyone on this website every time you say it; as far as foreign policy goes, is saudi arabia or china more dangerous in the long run?
full disclosure: i own oil and gas mineral rights and stock in drillers, pipelines and service companies. just like mr orr and pickens, in the short run, i will definitely be much richer if t boone's scheme is implemented; however, i think they are selling out our freedom and wealth in the long run if we create these economic inefficiencies instead of letting the market transition naturally.
The path to the energy Utopia the Greens dream of requires time and less green sources of energy to maintain productivity so the accomplishments leading to the utopia can be realized.
Spend it here even if the price gets on par with oil it is money spent at home. Electric cars will off set some demand and this wont happen overnight. Yes nuke would be a great addition but this administration has their head in a dark moist hole between their butt cheeks and they have no intention of fixing the problem
On Sep 09 02:44 PM Wisdom vs. Information wrote:
> economic dislocation from this scheme will create how much consumption
> and pollution? if you do not know, you do not know if this is a good
> plan.
>
> simple economics every college freshman should know: if NG must compete
> with oil for transportation energy what will happen to the price?
> the prices will equalize (per energy unit). if you can't grasp this,
> find out how much karosene was worth before it became marketed as
> a whale oil substitute. then, what will happen to the price of electricity
> when the majority is produced by NG? do you have any idea how much
> energy it will take to make enough solar and wind generation to keep
> the price stable if the price of NG goes up 5 or 10X? if you are
> going to complete this scam, i mean scheme, without people in the
> streets burning you in effigy, you better build 10 or 20 nuclear
> power plants first. you guys think you understand economics, but
> all you actually know is some stats; Congress, as corrupt and idiotic
> as they are, understands this and is not listening to you because
> you are wrong.
>
> now a mean-spirited trip to the woodshed for the idiots who keep
> bringing this up: basic economics, what is the difference between
> trading paper dollars to foreigners for barrels of oil versus french
> cheese or japanese cars or taiwanese semiconductors? absolutely none,
> the ARM processor in your iphone and the rubber in the tire on your
> prius are as 'bad' for the economy as the oil and gas in your car.
> it is the exact same thing; either all foreign trade is bad or none
> of it is, this so basic it is not even debatable, you embarrass yourself
> and everyone on this website every time you say it; as far as foreign
> policy goes, is saudi arabia or china more dangerous in the long
> run?
>
> full disclosure: i own oil and gas mineral rights and stock in drillers,
> pipelines and service companies. just like mr orr and pickens, in
> the short run, i will definitely be much richer if t boone's scheme
> is implemented; however, i think they are selling out our freedom
> and wealth in the long run if we create these economic inefficiencies
> instead of letting the market transition naturally.
Ozarker has been MIA as well for the same amount of time, can I expect to see him here "helping" to disuade criticism as well.
MF has a line he uses, the Gist of which is: Let me jump right in here to give all and sundry my Expert opinions on everything.
Gee but you have used it as well, in MF's Articles, in reponse to questions directed to MF specifically. Why?
MF has one "all encompassing" answer, Show me your Policy.
Debates are not required on my Articles.
On Sep 09 09:03 AM ktchnsnk wrote:
> Both amazing & depressing to reflect on how much more good we
> would be doing ourselves if even SOME portion of the funding spent
> on "cash for clunkers", electric vehicles, TARP & the health
> care boondoggle were put into nat gas for transport infrastructure
> instead.
>
> And why would anyone oppose it ? Not "Big Oil", since they own the
> gas, at decade low prices, and in quantities too big to store, as
> well. Not labor - just building the infrastructure alone would surely
> create tens of thousands of jobs. And not true environmentalists
> or anyone concerned about our economy either, for all of the fine
> reasons listed in the above article.
>
> Really have to wonder - if Obama REALLY wants this country to succeed,
> why the silence, why isn't HE making it a TOP priority?
This is MF on American Nat Gas Infrastructure from an Article of his own and a Link provided by himself:
"the US has all the reserves it needs, but if we can get it cheaper from canada or LNG fine" seems quite hypocritical without explanation, i.e. it sounds as though i am supporting a switch from foreign oil addiction to foreign natural gas addiction. for the record, i am not. however, we need to be realistic here. i don't think a US natural gas transportation policy works without Alaskan nat gas. BP and COP have decided on a pipeline versus LNG, and i suppose they know best. the pipeline is projected to be completed in 2018."
2018 is not going to help us "now" and He did not think a US Nat Gas Transportation Ploicy would work without this Pipeline.
"i don't think a US natural gas transportation policy works without Alaskan nat gas."
when Obama is no longer President.
On Sep 09 11:45 AM Joe H. wrote:
> I belive that nat-gas will be in much greater use after next year
> election!
The Hamburg-based renewable energy group Lichtblick and its automaker partner Volkswagen say the plants would produce not only heating and hot water but also electricity, with any excess power fed into the local grid.
The two firms said the concept of "SchwarmStrom" (literally, "swarm power") would allow Germany to abandon nuclear and coal power stations sooner and help compensate for the volatility of renewables like wind and solar power...."
Not only do the US have huge nat. gas reserves they are also ahead of the competition for most efficiently converting it to power. Just check Capstone Turbine Corp. In other words the US could easily beat in efficiency the "SchwarmStrom" system, not writing about the most efficient hybrid vehicles (see GreenCar.com
August 31, 2009 Title: Ford S-Max Hybrid Uses Advanced Capstone MicroTurbine Power).
Unfortunately "Dereliction of duty" also abounds.
Long CPST of course
I think the Alaskan line is to help offset the declining LNG exports I expect will occur (and has been noted already in the EIA reports) as the foriegn producers come aboard. As big oil was helped by the Alaskan oil pipeline, so it will be helped by this boondoggle.
HardToLove
On Sep 10 03:01 AM one eye wrote:
> Evanbobh: MF needs the Big Oil guys for his plans,
>
> This is MF on American Nat Gas Infrastructure from an Article of
> his own and a Link provided by himself:
>
> "the US has all the reserves it needs, but if we can get it cheaper
> from canada or LNG fine" seems quite hypocritical without explanation,
> i.e. it sounds as though i am supporting a switch from foreign oil
> addiction to foreign natural gas addiction. for the record, i am
> not. however, we need to be realistic here. i don't think a US natural
> gas transportation policy works without Alaskan nat gas. BP and COP
> have decided on a pipeline versus LNG, and i suppose they know best.
> the pipeline is projected to be completed in 2018."
>
> 2018 is not going to help us "now" and He did not think a US Nat
> Gas Transportation Ploicy would work without this Pipeline.
>
> "i don't think a US natural gas transportation policy works without
> Alaskan nat gas."
The recent DOE approval of the 30% rebate to customers, CARB certification (completed), ISO900x certification (completed), UL certification (in progress), expanded distributor network, lease program (successful), ... make it a winner I think.
But opportunity cost drives me to not stay in it for now. I'm using recent price moves to recoup losses on it from last year and use the gains to lead to an eventual long-term position again.
Started out with a few hundred shares this year, took profits, applied to it again, rinse and repeat. With this strategy, I've gone from playing a few handred shares to 2,500 each cycle now. I'm looking to get up to around 10K shares or more if the price moves keep working for me. At that point I should be long-term invested if my timing is any good.
The management has been managing to cash flow very well the last couple of years, compensation is reasonable and I think they have a great future.
HardToLove
On Sep 10 04:32 AM mbr wrote:
> Just read this: "by Aurelia End Aurelia End – Wed Sep 9, 11:06 am
> ET BERLIN (seekingalpha.com/symbo...) – An ambitious project
> was unveiled in Germany on Wednesday to install mini gas-fired power
> plants in people's basements and produce as much electricity as two
> nuclear reactors within a year.
>
> The Hamburg-based renewable energy group Lichtblick and its automaker
> partner Volkswagen say the plants would produce not only heating
> and hot water but also electricity, with any excess power fed into
> the local grid.
>
> The two firms said the concept of "SchwarmStrom" (literally, "swarm
> power") would allow Germany to abandon nuclear and coal power stations
> sooner and help compensate for the volatility of renewables like
> wind and solar power...."
>
> Not only do the US have huge nat. gas reserves they are also ahead
> of the competition for most efficiently converting it to power. Just
> check Capstone Turbine Corp. In other words the US could easily beat
> in efficiency the "SchwarmStrom" system, not writing about the most
> efficient hybrid vehicles (see GreenCar.com
> August 31, 2009 Title: Ford S-Max Hybrid Uses Advanced Capstone MicroTurbine
> Power).
>
> Unfortunately "Dereliction of duty" also abounds.
>
>
> Long CPST of course
If he's just not addressed CPST directly, I suspect it may be because of their terrible history as a business for so many years. The continued improvement in that aspect is what I'm keying on. As I mentioned, they still have issues to work out, but progress has been good and is getting more consistent over time. That's why I trade them for now with an eye for an ending position that, hopefully, matches with their emergence as a stable well-run company with a suddenly strong growth profile. If it doesn't work out, then I'll have made some $$ and end with a profit - using stops if necessary.
Risk is a constant companion in small-cap companies. And I'm careful with all of those sorts.
Another possible reason for not addressing CPST would be it's "under the radar" in automotive applications.
Their longest application is in the generation and CCHP business and I don't know when their units started getting used in buses. But it's been a couple years I believe.
Since he is so into the HEV/PHEV scene, maybe I'll see if I can get him to render an opinion.
In my mind, he's the most authorative author in the area I've seen on SA.
Thanks for the suggestion to check him out again. I hadn't visited his instablog since his last post on carbon-lead battery applications in HEVs. I've still got a *ton* to go through - as time permits.
HardToLove
On Sep 10 09:24 AM one eye wrote:
> HTL: I suggest taking a look at what Mr. Peterson has to say about
> CPST. If you don't find too much, it will be because it doesn't meet
> his rigorous standards.
What do you Really stand for? We will Never get out of our Dependance on Oil. Not unless you build a Machine that transmutes NG into a Pot Hole filing ingredient and everything else dependant on Oil. Ever hear of Lipstick?
Nor we be able to export to the rest of the World where NG is not readily available. Which is Most of the World. China Does Not have a Large undevloped NG Resource. What China Has Is Coal Methane and 7,000 dead in Coal mines.
So basically, you want to build CNG only cars which will increase my Taxes significantly but will not benefit me at all (Cities and Apartments) but will maintain our dependence on Oil and Pollute the Water to boot.
Great Plan. Why Haven't the Russians embraced it, Forced it down the throats of their own People. They do not have a Congress to try to sneak past.
On Sep 10 04:32 AM mbr wrote:
> Just read this: "by Aurelia End Aurelia End – Wed Sep 9, 11:06 am
> ET BERLIN (seekingalpha.com/symbo...) – An ambitious project
> was unveiled in Germany on Wednesday to install mini gas-fired power
> plants in people's basements and produce as much electricity as two
> nuclear reactors within a year.
>
> The Hamburg-based renewable energy group Lichtblick and its automaker
> partner Volkswagen say the plants would produce not only heating
> and hot water but also electricity, with any excess power fed into
> the local grid.
>
> The two firms said the concept of "SchwarmStrom" (literally, "swarm
> power") would allow Germany to abandon nuclear and coal power stations
> sooner and help compensate for the volatility of renewables like
> wind and solar power...."
>
> Not only do the US have huge nat. gas reserves they are also ahead
> of the competition for most efficiently converting it to power. Just
> check Capstone Turbine Corp. In other words the US could easily beat
> in efficiency the "SchwarmStrom" system, not writing about the most
> efficient hybrid vehicles (see GreenCar.com
> August 31, 2009 Title: Ford S-Max Hybrid Uses Advanced Capstone MicroTurbine
> Power).
>
> Unfortunately "Dereliction of duty" also abounds.
>
>
> Long CPST of course
On Sep 09 09:32 AM Mmarrkk wrote:
> Seriously, I just don't think he [Obama] gets it...
Their current solutions include remote monitoring, automatic fault detection and notification, etc. They have been *very* popular on un-manned oil platforms.
I'm sure for every specific application, on or the other technology may be preferable. But CPST seems to have found a good niche (and if finding others as we speak) and their poor business operations of the past seem to be well on their way to being corrected.
Their units are also being marketed by the divison of UTX that does CHP applications.
Combining all I've seen over the last couple of years, seems that they will be a good investment down the road as the business "matures" under the (relatively) new leadership.
HardToLove
On Sep 10 12:25 PM George Marchetti wrote:
> Capstone does have some competition in the Combined Heat and Power
> (seekingalpha.com/symbo...) market. The competition comes
> from a New Zealand company called Whisper Gen. See, www.whispertech.co.nz/.
> Whisper Gen's technology is based on a Stirling engine electrical
> generator rather than a microturbine genset. Stirling engines can
> operate on natural gas or virtually any other liquid or gaseous fuel
> and can be more electrically efficient than Brayton cycle microturbines.
> Stirling engine generators can be combined with a relatively inexpensive
> ground source heat pump to provide all the heating, cooling, hot
> water and electricity for the building, which could then be either
> off-grid (self-sufficient) or grid-connected (as in the German example).
> Another potential competitor is the StarRotor, which, like the microturbine
> is a Brayton cycle engine.
Atta Boy Michael.
But He added that it was impossible, so End of Discussion.
With Zenn's application for a DOE grant and Senatorial Support for same, I can't wait to see what he says the Next time.
Let's use Lead, as a substitute for? Lead. Why not use Paint with less lead. It''ll still kill you, but it will take longer. Or lets use CNG vehicles, they will still poison you but not as Fast.
Sorry for the mis-information,
HardToLove
On Sep 10 02:17 PM H. T. Love wrote:
> Yes. I think CPST's strength really lies in it patented "frictionless"
> bearing and many other patents. Because of that bearing, no lubricants
> of any kind are needed and service intervals are at 100K hours. Factory
> service contracts are also available to provide a TCO solution.<br/>
>
> Their current solutions include remote monitoring, automatic fault
> detection and notification, etc. They have been *very* popular on
> un-manned oil platforms.
>
> I'm sure for every specific application, on or the other technology
> may be preferable. But CPST seems to have found a good niche (and
> if finding others as we speak) and their poor business operations
> of the past seem to be well on their way to being corrected.
>
> Their units are also being marketed by the divison of UTX that does
> CHP applications.
>
> Combining all I've seen over the last couple of years, seems that
> they will be a good investment down the road as the business "matures"
> under the (relatively) new leadership.
>
> HardToLove
Then Clinton and Gore butchered CAFE legislation with the light truck exemption clause to buy UAW votes in Detroit and it stayed plateaued at 27 mpg from 1992 to the present.
If the Obama rhetoric holds out, it will be increased again to above 30 mpg in 2011.
.
On Sep 09 04:25 PM doubleguns wrote:
> If we use our own gas instead of imported oil I would be happy. TOO
> MUCH MONEY LEAVES THIS COUNTY EVERY DAY ON OIL.
>
> Spend it here even if the price gets on par with oil it is money
> spent at home. Electric cars will off set some demand and this wont
> happen overnight. Yes nuke would be a great addition but this administration
> has their head in a dark moist hole between their butt cheeks and
> they have no intention of fixing the problem
This is the link to that Article,
seekingalpha.com/artic...
"SkipinCA: after a cup of coffee, i realized my previous response to you:
"the US has all the reserves it needs, but if we can get it cheaper from canada or LNG fine" seems quite hypocritical without explanation, i.e. it sounds as though i am supporting a switch from foreign oil addiction to foreign natural gas addiction. for the record, i am not. however, we need to be realistic here. i don't think a US natural gas transportation policy works without Alaskan nat gas. BP and COP have decided on a pipeline versus LNG, and i suppose they know best. the pipeline is projected to be completed in 2018. now, a switch of a significantly number of vehicles to CNG would obviously add a huge demand component that today doesn't exists at all (only 0.12% as the chart shows). while the shales are a great source of supply and should keep us with supply in the shorterm. however, i support LNG terminals in my energy policy because it is an insurance policy and enables diversification of supply. in the long run, the energy challenge posed to the US will require all sources of energy supply. however, let there be no doubt, the objective here is to utilitize US produced natural gas as much and as economically as possible. the alaskan factor makes it work, which is why i support low cost gov loans to get that pipeline built earlier if possible. this should get us through the next couple decades until the electric vehicle and green electric power generation infrastructure is more mature and built out. hope that helps explain my earlier somewhat hypocritical response."
This Link is to the Article by John Peterson:
seekingalpha.com/artic...
This article contains the Following two comments by Michael Fitzsimmons: found toward the Bottom of the Article.
") Carter's policies reduced US oil imports by 50%, made the country aware of energy's ability to cripple our economy (as the Arabs did), and raised fuel economy standards for automobiles (just think where we would be today without that).....etc"
2008 Dec 27 04:09 PM |Report abuse| Link | Reply +1-1
This comment was followed Immediately by this correction, also from MF:
"sorry, the above comment should have been Carter reduced US foreign oil imports by "5 million barrels per day", not "50%". typing too fast.... "2008 Dec 27 04:10 PM |Report abuse| Link | Reply +1-1
Suffice it to say, Mr. Fitzsimmons own comments rebuke his denials.
You can either Believe him Now or you can believe what he Said Before.
On Sep 09 09:32 AM Mmarrkk wrote:
> Obamma has bigger priorities...free healthcare to his major constituency
> groups..."cash for clunkers" so that we turn perfectly good, functioning
> vehicles into scrap...Cap'n'Tax so that we penalize refineries and
> make greenies happy...raising income and death taxes. He just can't
> get around to making natural gas a big piece of his grand plan. Plus,
> no one in his administration has positioned themselves just yet to
> reap big profits from N.G. Give them some time to load up the boat
> then he'll push it! Probably waiting on Charlie Rangel and Mr. Geitner
> to get fully invested and to figure out a way to cheat on their taxes
> when they make profit!
>
> Seriously, I just don't think he gets it...plus he's still in the
> pocket of Coal!
"One eye, I have a hard time understanding your point. Currently, it is estimated that we can continue to provide natural gas for its present uses and still convert 25 to 50% of our vehicles to natural gas-powered , more if they are prius-type hybrids and still have enough natural gas for 60 years. That is using current reserves. I stand for what I believe is right for our country."
You believe in this: "That is using current reserves". The Current Reserves being Shale Gas, because without them, and a Pipeline to get Alaskan Nat gas which won't come on Line For another 9 years at the earliest, A CNG Transportation System will not be viable. (source: Michael Fitzsimmons)
Getting to those Shale Gas reserves requires the use of an Environmentally unfriendly Technology which "True" environmentalis believe will contaminate the Water.
My point? Get rid of those Coal Plants because they are Toxic and Pollute the Land and Water. Burn Natural Gas instead, augmented by Wind and Solar. How do you get those Shale Gas Reserves?
Pollute The Water. Find a better Technology to extract the Shale Gas, I'll support CNG usage. Otherwise, all that this would do is subsitute one Pollutant for another. and would Not be Viable in any case without a Yet to be built Pipe Line which is years away.
I Support a Nat Gas Fleet for the Transport of Products, we have sufficient NG to handle that Now. The Private Sector can Fund it.
By having the Misfortune of Living in an Apartment in a City, I'm expected to Pay for someone else's cost savings? I don't think so.
Figure out a way for City Dwellers to Refill these CNG powered cars. You do have a plan?
Did you see Special edition in Wall Street Journal this week, must have been Tuesday, 8 Sept 09,
All promoting Nuclear energy in USA, It was a "small", maybe 5 pages, special edition, covered the whole message of promotion;
concept is perfect for NG, transform article to NG, your agruments for NG are far more compelling than the nuclear arguments,
when I return from traveling, currently in NY, I am going to contact the author of the nuclear article and challenge to write one on NG.
Best to you Fritz, keep up your excellent work and attitude.
"You start with buses, ups, fedex and the post office,taxi fleets federal and state fleet vehicles and other centrally garaged fleets."
My little section of life, has used all electric Postal Vehicles for over a year. Do you get rid of them, waste some more money? or can they exist side by side with those you propose?
A private Wind Farm company is in the process of building them offshore across from major cities because its easier to hook to the Grid from that side rather than trying to build outside the City's suburbs.
How many times does it take to repeat the same thing over and over. I'll provide you links to the numerous times I've said that everything has to be used. How many times do I have to pound the Need for the Usage of every type of fuel available? But it all Starts with Fleets not with private passenger cars.
The Infrastructure starts with Fleets. And, if the Environment is Secondary to becoming Oil Independant, Cleaner Coal is the answer. The Technology to produce Diesel and Commercial Jet Fuel from Coal is available Now. The Infra is in place.
Don't give me that song and dance that MF does regarding the Environment, His Energy Policy called for the Usage of coal.
I can Quote him Saying that Oil Independance is his Energy Policy's primary Goal, everything else is secondary.
Why go through an unnecessary, Infra Build at the taxpayers expense, If fleets want to go CNG, let them, but let them finance it themselves.
Force Carmakers to produce only Multi-fuel engines, they will be able to sell them everywhere in the World and we will be able to use the Coal Diesel now available without additional Infrastructure and we will achieve Oil Independance for Transport.
"But Coal is Dirty", Its a lot cleaner than it has ever been before and there isn't the Residual Toxic waste previously associated with it.
A link was provided which gave Details on how Clean Coal is being achieved. IS Being Achieved, MF is an Electrical Engineer, He is not qualified to given an opinion, So he Did Not Bother to Read it, He said so himself.
What part of what I have written do you disagree with?
On Sep 10 04:32 AM mbr wrote:
> Just read this: "by Aurelia End Aurelia End – Wed Sep 9, 11:06 am
> ET BERLIN (seekingalpha.com/symbo...) – An ambitious project
> was unveiled in Germany on Wednesday to install mini gas-fired power
> plants in people's basements and produce as much electricity as two
> nuclear reactors within a year.
>
> The Hamburg-based renewable energy group Lichtblick and its automaker
> partner Volkswagen say the plants would produce not only heating
> and hot water but also electricity, with any excess power fed into
> the local grid.
>
> The two firms said the concept of "SchwarmStrom" (literally, "swarm
> power") would allow Germany to abandon nuclear and coal power stations
> sooner and help compensate for the volatility of renewables like
> wind and solar power...."
>
> Not only do the US have huge nat. gas reserves they are also ahead
> of the competition for most efficiently converting it to power. Just
> check Capstone Turbine Corp. In other words the US could easily beat
> in efficiency the "SchwarmStrom" system, not writing about the most
> efficient hybrid vehicles (see GreenCar.com
> August 31, 2009 Title: Ford S-Max Hybrid Uses Advanced Capstone MicroTurbine
> Power).
>
> Unfortunately "Dereliction of duty" also abounds.
>
>
> Long CPST of course
This is the "Fuel" of the Future. With Hydrogen being Created at the Gas Station, You would not Need Any of the Wasteful Infrastructure Build for the useage of CNG.
HYGS produces these Converters, But both Fitzsimmons and his followers have chosen to Ignore this Fuel, Why?
"one_eye: jimmy carter DID reduce foreign oil imports by 50%. it's fully documented in data. of course, you have no time for real data. another falsehood: i *never* said a transcanadian nat gas pipeline was necessary before embracing natural gas transportation. thanks alot for contributing more misinformation. you must have worked in the bush administration."
In the above comment, you accused me of Lying. I let you proof of everything on your Insta Days ago. you haven't said a word about it since.
Please apologize for your "Ad hominem" attack.
seekingalpha.com/insta...
Mary Hunt: Mr. Fitzsimmons launched the following "Ad Hominem" attack against me:
"one_eye: jimmy carter DID reduce foreign oil imports by 50%. it's fully documented in data. of course, you have no time for real data. another falsehood: i *never* said a transcanadian nat gas pipeline was necessary before embracing natural gas transportation. thanks alot for contributing more misinformation. you must have worked in the bush administration."
I provided proof that I was telling the Truth, follow the above link.
He has not issued an apology. I request any reference to the above two Falsehoods be stricken from MF's comment stream.
tonto.eia.doe.gov/dnav...
and you will see that from 1977 until 1983 US oil imports went from 6.6 million bpd to 3,3 million barrels per day, a ***50% reduction*** due directly to carter's energy policies. meantime, total US oil consumption decreased by 5 million bpd during this same timeframe.
"in which you twist and misinterpret damn near everything i have ever written"
I haven't twisted or misinterpreted anything. I posted your comments for all to see.
longoil posted this comment:
"Carter did lay the ground work for reducing oil imports by 50% with his spreadheading of the CAFE standard. It took 15 years though to get to the 50% reduction. CAFE was 15 mpg in 1976 and was gradually increased to 27 mpg by 1991"
Is he Wrong?
My Mission is to eliminate Pollution.
MF--Do you not think that this 50% import reduction (3.3 mil bpd) , which you claim was due directly to carters energy policies, could possibly have been aided or directly caused by the huge recession that occurred during this period. Consumption was down 5 mil bpd that is more than the reduction in imports.
Does this mean that since Carter caused the recession, Carter gets credit for the reduced consumption that directly leads to less imports?
Oil consumption is down tremendously today as a result of our present recession. I can't see that today's reductions could be attributed to any of Bush's Presidential policy's but using the previous Carter logic we would have to consider that some of Bush's policy's somehow added to the reduced consumption of oil in our country today and forget mentioning recessions as having any possible cause.
I realize I am late to this discussion so I apologize if I missed a previous explanation of this glaring discrepancy.
He's known all along about his mistatement, I've pointed it out to him numerous times. But he continues to push it as if it were the truth.
If you look at my replies to him Above and in His own Instablog, you will find the Article, his comment and his correction. Its quite obvious that what is there is what he Said. It's in his Name and In Print.
He also said another "I never said anything about a TransAlaska Pipeline" He not only Said it but its included in his Article. HTL notes that in His comment.
But now he is trying to alter everything he says, is saying that "I Take things out of context.", that "I misinterpret" what he posts and then, "I" Lie about it.
Try as I might, I can't "Misinterpret" this remark:
"you never contribute anything positive. just a black hole of cancerous criticism in which you twist and misinterpret damn near everything i have ever written".
Look at my reply to Old Wizard above.
Its not hard to screw up. I 've done it many times, just ask my wife she can tell you about each and everyone.
It's the admitting that's hard. Especially to a wife. To bloggers it is much easier. They can never see your red face.
They wiped her before she could prove it.
I did but with witnesses this time. Hopefully, SA hasn't lost total Credibility.
"one_eye: you cancerous black hole of a human being"
Tell me how you would take this sort of abuse?
And this morning he decided I was a good target here
seekingalpha.com/insta...
So he just got the last he'll hear from me here
seekingalpha.com/insta...
and one after were I corrected a mis-statement.
I posted a stocktalk for you this morning and letting you know +1 = 601! Yep, he used that word again, but not at me.
Summary: Persona non-grata - is that how it's spelled?
Don't let him distract you too much from making $$.
By the way, you might want to take a look at the comment I made on that stock (where I misunderstoof "HTL TECH"); it's moving the wrong way right now.
HardToLove
On Sep 15 01:16 PM one eye wrote:
> DG/HTL/OG: I missed this little dig from MF:
>
> "one_eye: you cancerous black hole of a human being"
>
> Tell me how you would take this sort of abuse?
Heavy to Light crude technology and there is Gas to Liquid tech out there too. Gas Liquids are part of the every day Oil production figures, I believe they are something like 4 million brls daily. They were last year when production was chugging along at 87 million/day, Don't have a clue as to how much today.
Ich spreche und verstehen Deutsch, but I never got too good writing it though. A few years in a DP camp does wonders for one's language skills. PVX has a TransCanada Pipeline but it runs West/East, carries Gas liquids.
I'm still waiting for you to knock down those arguments.
MF argues that Building the way for a CNG Infrastructure paves the Way for His Ultimate Goal of Hydrogen use. That was disproved by one of his own followers.
So why don't you answer my post first, step by step, so I can respond. OR shall I just refer to you as another "I don't care what you say, Its my way or the Highway".
Alternative Energy: RTK, Diesel and Commercial Jet Fuel from Coal. HYGS Standalone Hydrogen Generators, EEE Cleans and compacts Coal prior to Burn, Clean Coal 99% Burn Technology with 100% Carbon Capture Filters Engineering Articles Galore on the subject.
China is now the World Leader in employing this Technology, Replacing Their old Coal Utitilities at a Rate of 1 per month, They build the new shut down the Old.
I really don't expect an answer from you, just like You did not respond before either here or in the Previous Articles written by Fitzsimmons. I date your appearance back to May of 2008, ditto ART005 and ozarker.
I can take your post and superimpose it onto dozens of previous comments made by yourself with little discrepancy.
Just like this and the previous one made above.
I don't believe people should act like milk toasts and accept pointed personal criticism.
Part of the attraction of SA is its civility. I know there are times when I have been hard pressed to control my own temper and times that I have failed. Passionate, intelligent people are bound to disagree, sometimes heatedly.
However, bullying can never be tolerated. One must stand up to a bully, to let that person know we aren't intimidated and are entitled to our opinions, especially when they differ from the author's own. I abhor the name calling. On a forum such as SA, all we have are our words.
Since I have been asked, I am volunteering my opinion.
Peace and prosperity,
OG
Just read this: "by Aurelia End Aurelia End – Wed Sep 9, 11:06 am ET BERLIN (AFP) – An ambitious project was unveiled in Germany on Wednesday to install mini gas-fired power plants in people's basements and produce as much electricity as two nuclear reactors within a year.
The Hamburg-based renewable energy group Lichtblick and its automaker partner Volkswagen say the plants would produce not only heating and hot water but also electricity, with any excess power fed into the local grid.
The two firms said the concept of "SchwarmStrom" (literally, "swarm power") would allow Germany to abandon nuclear and coal power stations sooner and help compensate for the volatility of renewables like wind and solar power...."
Thats great for People's homes. We need it here
RWE, The Major German Utility is Building Electrical Recharging Posts for Future use by electric cars throughtout Germany. The following link Provides a Look into the Future.
www.rwe-mobility.com/
Perhaps Kongress and Chu are "agnostic" about natural gas because the American sheeple are agnostic about natural gas. The sheeple like liquid transportation fuels, period. Take a poll- no one gives a %^&* about natural gas for their cars; those who heat their homes with it still have tremors at the absurd, manipulated price spikes a few years back. Only the FREE MARKETS will eventually push people to install Phills in their garages and convert their Civics to CNG. Kongress and the messiah's Administration do not and never will have a plan to create energy solutions for America; their plan is to turn us into Aborigines (while they and their bankster pals tool around in Gulfstreams.)
On Sep 10 03:50 PM Michael Fitzsimmons wrote:
> one_eye: jimmy carter DID reduce foreign oil imports by 50%. it's
> fully documented in data. of course, you have no time for real data.
> another falsehood: i *never* said a transcanadian nat gas pipeline
> was necessary before embracing natural gas transportation. thanks
> alot for contributing more misinformation. you must have worked in
> the bush administration.
>
> pramattist: i believe the coal lobby is working effectively against
> the natural gas transportation legislation. if the coal boys have
> a choice, they'd rather see electric vehicles win out over natural
> gas because they know that means more coal consumption and of course
> more pollution. so, both coal and big oil lobbyists are against the
> natural gas transportation policies, and this is why it is languishing
> in congress (small "c"). note boone pickens' email today:
>
> "In August alone we imported 355 million barrels of oil and sent
> $25.2 billion overseas – the most spent on foreign oil out of any
> month this year."
>
> How President Obama, Energy Secretary Chu, congress, Bernanke, and
> even Geitner can be "agnostic" about natural gas transportation in
> the face of a monthly bill such as that (note it would have been
> double that amount if oil were still $145/barrel...) is just amazing,
> sad, unpatriotic, and unconscionable.
Remember, its not a matter of what is said, its who reviews and decides whether its abusive.
eg: "one_eye: jimmy carter DID reduce foreign oil imports by 50%. it's fully documented in data. of course, you have no time for real data. another falsehood: i *never* said a transcanadian nat gas pipeline was necessary before embracing natural gas transportation. thanks alot for contributing more misinformation. you must have worked in the bush administration."
Here I'm providing "falsehoods", which I proved where True.
And here, is another Personal Attack.
"you never contribute anything positive. just a black hole of cancerous criticism in which you twist and misinterpret damn near everything i have ever written. i am however flattered that you have nothing better to do with your pathetic life than to poor over every article i've ever written in your search for some "smoking gun" to debunk natural gas transportation. YOU CAN"T DO IT!! but you simply can't come to grips with the fact that natural gas transportation IS the best solution to reducing foreign oil imports, curing the ills the US economy and equity markets are suffering, and restoring industrial might to america. too bad one_eye, the facts simply are not on your side. what you don't realize is that most people that read my articles understand this, and completely ignore your idiotic mission."
Like I said, it doesn't matter. SA is the Final authority. They think its A-Okay.
Meanwhile, after my little post to you:
DG/HTL/OG: I missed this little dig from MF:
"one_eye: you cancerous black hole of a human being"
Tell me how you would take this sort of abuse? Sep 15 01:16 PM |Report abuse| Link | Reply +10
He eliminated that quote from His Comment in His Instablog.
Thats what this Country is supposed to be about.
I've found that *if* issues are not supported at the top, it's no skin off their ass to fix the problem.
Click here
seekingalpha.com/page/...
Select one or more prefered recipients and garner their e-mail address, if posted and fill them in. If they do not list their e-mail addy there, once you have their names, a google might yield one.
You may also mention other SA users who may have noted many of the items of complaint to bolster your case.
Hopefully the people you post to will have the good sense to contact "witnesses" privately - you might want to suggest that.
If nothing else, this will confirm/deny whether the problem is at the top.
From personal experience, I know they have backups, as I inadvertently deleted an instablog in which Freya and I had discussed stuff. They were able to restore certain parts for me. I don't know how far back the backup files go though - I contacted them quickly.
HardToLove
On Sep 16 05:11 PM one eye wrote: here
seekingalpha.com/artic...
<snip>
You are not only removing traces of your comments from your own Insta but also of others who respond:
On Sep 16 10:47 PM optionsgirl wrote:
> One Eye: My comment was removed. I want you to know that I did respond
> when he called you a black cancerous hole. Sep 16 11:00 PM |Report abuse| Link | Reply 00
Besides, You did not bother to read his Reply to you "again":
One Eye comment above reply to you, no response from you:
"Old Wizard: I can agree with everything you have said. Which is also why I disagree with the immediate move to CNG private passenger cars."
Your Comments Are virtually identical, you have not added anything pertinant to the Discusson which isn't about the use of NG to Generate Elecricity or to Operate Fleets using it. In fact, you have Not Responded to Anything other than to Push for one Pollutant to replace another.
The Environment would be Best Served by Replacing Coal generation with Natural Gas Electrical Generation. Why, Because MF says so: A 50% decrease in CO2 with none of the Toxic Residue. Spend the Money and Create Jobs building Up the Electrical Grid.
Why spend the money on CNG Infrastructure and conversion to CNG vehicles if: A. the Technology is available to produce Diesel From Coal, B. There is only a 20% reduction in CO2 emissions from the most efficient CNG vehicles (also a MF quote) and C. The Infrastructure built for CNG will not support, The Fuel of the Future.....Hydrogen.
So lets use our Current Infrastructure and Diesel to build our way into the Future of Hydrogen by converting engines to Multi-fuel use.
We will be as Oil Independant as we "Can" be through the use of Coal for Diesel and Nat Gas for Power generation and we can start to build the Infrastructure for Hydrogen.
Respond, Please.
Please Indent your paragraphs so I can tell where one begins and another ends.
att.my.yahoo.com/_ylt=...;_ylu=X3oDMTIyN3VmMGlv...
Diesel. Alive, well and kicking
Innovation at work.
The turbine can run on any liquid fuel (I'm checking to see if it can run on LNG, which overcome some of the weight/safety issues associated with CNG) and any gaseous fuel (only you must pick liquid/gaseous at order time because it is the injectors that are different).
The computer handles adjusting injection timing, duration, etc. for the specific fuel based on a closed-loop feedback system. So on tank might be diesel, the next bio-diesel, etc and ditto for gas - NG, biomerthane, landfill gas, etc.
Further, it produces less polution, no lubricating oils (no oil changes) and only yearly filter changes yearly (in current applications) and service at some very long interval (I forget how long now).
I thought you might enjoy it.
www.capstoneturbine.co...
The question is: will Ford, or somebody, pick up on it and finish the engineering to make it production-ready or not.
Among the turbine's many uses, it already is used in many shuttles and buses.
HardToLove
It's the middle video on this page.
On Sep 18 01:53 PM one eye wrote:
> Checked the link, it did not connect to the Article but the picture
> will suffice, 240 miles per gallon, production scheduled for 2013.
>
>
> Innovation at work.
It would be fun to have the Ford version with aero, carbon fiber, ... and have a heads- up contest. That sort of competition always brings out the bost in both parties
On Sep 18 02:46 PM H. T. Love wrote:
<snip>
HardToLove
Ethanol was behind their expansion. I don't believe Brazil has/has had any Large Nat. Gas Fields, Ever.
But, I'm probably wrong, as usual.
AS of this Post, You should have 2 thumbs up for the last 3 of your comments.
Meanwhile, The Following Comment is an outright lie and should have been deleted days ago, Why is it still Polluting This comment Stream?:
Michael Fitzsimmons
" one_eye: jimmy carter DID reduce foreign oil imports by 50%. it's fully documented in data. of course, you have no time for real data. another falsehood: i *never* said a transcanadian nat gas pipeline was necessary before embracing natural gas transportation. thanks alot for contributing more misinformation. you must have worked in the bush administration."
One Eye Reply on Pipeline:
Following is a Comment from an Article by Michael Fitzsimmons: on American Nat Gas Transportation.
This is the link to that Article,
seekingalpha.com/artic...
"SkipinCA: after a cup of coffee, i realized my previous response to you:
"the US has all the reserves it needs, but if we can get it cheaper from canada or LNG fine" seems quite hypocritical without explanation, i.e. it sounds as though i am supporting a switch from foreign oil addiction to foreign natural gas addiction. for the record, i am not. however, we need to be realistic here. i don't think a US natural gas transportation policy works without Alaskan nat gas. BP and COP have decided on a pipeline versus LNG, and i suppose they know best. the pipeline is projected to be completed in 2018. now, a switch of a significantly number of vehicles to CNG would obviously add a huge demand component that today doesn't exists at all (only 0.12% as the chart shows). while the shales are a great source of supply and should keep us with supply in the shorterm. however, i support LNG terminals in my energy policy because it is an insurance policy and enables diversification of supply. in the long run, the energy challenge posed to the US will require all sources of energy supply. however, let there be no doubt, the objective here is to utilitize US produced natural gas as much and as economically as possible. the alaskan factor makes it work, which is why i support low cost gov loans to get that pipeline built earlier if possible. this should get us through the next couple decades until the electric vehicle and green electric power generation infrastructure is more mature and built out. hope that helps explain my earlier somewhat hypocritical response."
and on Carter:
This Link is to the Article by John Peterson:
seekingalpha.com/artic...
This article contains the Following two comments by Michael Fitzsimmons: found toward the Bottom of the Article.
") Carter's policies reduced US oil imports by 50%, made the country aware of energy's ability to cripple our economy (as the Arabs did), and raised fuel economy standards for automobiles (just think where we would be today without that).....etc"
2008 Dec 27 04:09 PM |Report abuse| Link | Reply +1-1
This comment was followed Immediately by this correction, also from MF:
"sorry, the above comment should have been Carter reduced US foreign oil imports by "5 million barrels per day", not "50%". typing too fast.... "2008 Dec 27 04:10 PM |Report abuse| Link | Reply +1-1
Beyond a Reasonable doubt, Mr. Fitzsimmons is Lying about what He said about One Eye.
Why Haven't MF's comments Been Deleted or Better Yet why Hasn't Mr. Fitzsimmons been erased for propagating the Lie.
One Eye Did Not select a Picture of a One Eyed African Leopard as a joke.
I am indenting so that you realize I am changing the discussion. You are aware that the port of long beach, which is a transfer point for about 60%+ of our shipments to and fro the far east has legislated that trucks coming to the port will be natural gas-driven due to the air pollution at the port. You also must be aware that IRAN is converting their automobiles and vehicles to natural gas because stategically they have to rely on overseas refineries. AT&T has announced a 600m investment for converting their trucks to natural gas. I also believe that getting natural gas from the oil sands in the US and Canada will continue for the foreeable future and the recent drop in natural gas prices has been due to a glut of this commodity here. The price approached the lowest in memory and only started to rise as producers cut back drastically. On the other side of the issue of clean coal generated diesel the time to convert or translate half of our vehicles to this fuel is not estimated by anyone and the country is not putting its investment into this fuel but rather into phevs, batteries etc. Hawaii just announced a 100m program to create electrical charging stations. In conjunction with this annoucement, a joint venture of Nissan/ Renault committed to provide automobiles consistent with these facilities. This leads me to the final point I have harped on: our investment as a country, should not be driven only by a desire to be the ideal environmentalists, but to insure that we don't perish economically by making investments in strategies that benefit other countries more than our own. When the administration talks about clean coal, can you garner from their actions or investment strategy, what timetable they are on for reducing our dependency on oil and that they see a future in hydrogen fuel. While we cancelled the fuel cell work at GM this year as impractical, Toyota launched an ad campaign that brags about its work in this area.I see no felt urency on the part of our Gov. to solve our underlying economic problem and no focus on the near term that matches that urgency except the scare tactic that global warming will bring imminent doom to the world and we the USA are the bad guys. I believe that if we don't solve our fundamental economic problems we as a country might be able to use the famous self-pitying words of Richard Nixon,'' you won't have the USA to kick around any more".
the AT&T investment is That supposed to be 600 Million or 600,000?
Otherwise, you are right on point.
If our Oil companies are allowed to go ballistic, without Environmental Interference, the time between discovery to production can be less than 3 years, Nuclear plants could be constructed within 5 years if the Red Tape and Environmental lawsuits were eliminated. New Refine anything refineries could be built whithin 2 years, Ditto Nat. Gas Power Plants.
Our Coal Utilities are sending out Cleaner Coal Tech. to the Chinese for Heavens sake. Coal to Gas. Then burn it. Hmmm, sounds just Like burning Nat Gas but without having to construct a new Plant.
This Garbage that "Clean Coal Tech is a Myth" is just gagging. There is nothing "Clean" about Nat. Gas, its just "cleaner".
Construct More NG electrical Plants to complement the Conversion to Cleaner Coal Plants.
How do you get Private Companies which are experiencing difficult times to spend money on projects with no Immediate benefit.
Let's say ATT gears up its fleet for CNG, other than being Currently cheaper what's the Future Benefit?
Will they be able to get Credits under the Cap and Trade proposal?
Ditto, current Dirty Coal plants, now that Tech is available to make them as Clean as Burning Nat. Gas without the Toxic residue.
Its simple, if an engine can be built which uses Multiple Fuels, Mandate their building. Give the people a choice of what to use at Their Discretion.
I am not against CNG use, I'm against Forcing the American Public to Use CNG whether they want it or not.
To Force The American People to Comply, That's Equivalent to a Police State.
I know all about the Cape Cod Biz, You would have had to use a very powerful set of Binocs to see them offshore.
I also believe that it is the State of New Mexico (not positive) that is trying to build a Nuclear Plant, the ongoing process has taken years, first Local, then State, then Federal Permitting...Everyone wants it done. Except the Environmental Lobby which is going up and down the Line in various Legal Courts stopping it from proceding. "We The People" don't have a say.
I would like to adopt the Old "Innocent until Proven Guilty" legal procedure on all of these Environmental Lawsuits. They have to prove Beyond a Shadow of a doubt that there is Environmental Harm Before a Case is Accepted. They have to Provide the Proof.
If a Case goes against them, they have to Pay all Legal Expenses including Punitive Damages for delay of Project.
I am a True Conservative. I Believe in the Rights of the People of the United States of America and I am totally against those who wish to Take the Rights granted me under the Constitution away.
> HTL: SA's people are still in the Business of Deleteing Thumbs Up
> from commentators who go against MF.
>
> AS of this Post, You should have 2 thumbs up for the last 3 of your
> comments.
> <snip>
Although I appreciate why you are tracking this, I know it imposes extra work on you. It's enough of a load to keep track of your own.
Other than the "honesty" of SA, I'm unconcerned, so don't take the extra time to count mine - every little bit of time you take for that adds up and subtracts from the more important things you have to do.
I do appreciate the thought though.
HTL
FTB, For The Benefit of, The more people I find across the USA who have been Personally Abused by SA, the more likely I'll be able to find a number of them within a State(s) which allows for a Suit for Monetary Compensation.
I'm posting this, my comments haven't been restored. My Name Is Freya. The Abuse continues.