Seeking Alpha

Michael Fitzsimmons

View as an RSS Feed
View Michael Fitzsimmons' Comments BY TICKER:
Latest comments  |  Highest rated
  • Gold: Time To Short [View article]
    The FED's printing presses will keep printing to pay for the oil the US imports. The only thing that would make me short gold is if the US embarked on a strategic long-term energy policy to adopt natural gas transportation, stop importing oil, and stop all the wars. Since that doesn't seem to be happening (despite the lowest nat gas prices in the world, and despite that the EU, China, and Russia have all adopted such policies), oil and gold will keep grinding higher with "corrections" and market panics along the way. But the long-term trend is higher. Much higher, for both oil and gold.
    Jun 11 01:29 PM | 14 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • U.S. LNG Exports - No Cause For Alarm [View article]
    The alarm bell should be rung because US policymakers, despite the lowest natural gas prices in the world and a still hefty foreign oil import bill, refuse to adopt a strategic long-term comprehensive energy policy centered on natural gas transportation to solve the economic, environmental, and national security the country faces as a result of its decades long reliance on foreign oil. Exporting natural gas to the EU and China (which despite 3x the nat gas price of the US) so they can use it to implement their strategic nat gas transportation policies, while we are still importing foreign oil, is ridiculous.
    Apr 25 10:34 AM | 14 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The Politics of Natural Gas: How and Why to Invest [View article]
    you are absolutely correct in pointing out that the coal and oil power has prevented our illustrious leaders from implementing a strategic long-term comprehensive energy policy to reduce our dependence on foreign oil while at the same time being environmentally responsible. only the broken U.S. political system would have us addicted to the two dirtiest fossil fuels (oil and coal) while under utilizing our #1 economic advantage against all others countries on Earth: our extensive nat gas pipeline distribution system combined with huge domestic nat gas reserves. (btw - i believe the EIA estimate for nat gas reserves to be off by at least a factor of 2).

    i think one must question the patriotism the CEO's of american oil companies. no one knows better than the impact of the oil crisis on the American economy and national security. ironically, they also are well aware that natural gas transportation is the solution and have the natural gas production to enable it on a large enough scale to reduce foreign oil imports by 5,000,000 barrels a day. yes, they know these things. but, they are so focused on the fact that they can sell gasoline for twice that of natural gas, and so they go for the money. the sell out the country for the increased margins. but i have a question for them: what will happen in the long run to the U.S.A.? the american oil company CEO's (XOM, COP, CVX) are almost insuring china's supremacy. they are almost insuring economic ruin. but lastly, as they believe they are working for their shareholders by fighting nat gas transportation, they are not. their policies will eventually lead the U.S. government to nationalize these companies, take control of the oil production and refineries, and ration out the gasoline - mostly to the military and police to take control of a country in chaos.
    Feb 3 09:04 AM | 14 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Coal or Natural Gas? [View article]
    epeon: your comments suggest you did not even read the article. did you make assumptions based on the article's title? please, read the entire article and you will no longer be perplexed. i clearly stated "clean coal" is a myth and an oxymoron. i also clearly explained how the U.S. government has subsidized coal and oil and prevented natural gas transportation from being adopted. i also explained why coal is NOT cheap.
    Feb 16 12:41 PM | 14 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Why Natural Gas Vehicles Won't Decrease Oil Dependence, Part I [View article]
    Fuelmaker did go out of business, but the Phill intellectual property was bought by Fuel Systems Solutions. i hear FSYS is setting up a production line in Italy to make the Phill since the Italians (like the Brazilians, Iranians, and Singaporeans, among others) are smart enough to adopt natural gas transportations. The Brazilians are doing so so that they can export their oil to countries like the US.
    Feb 8 08:44 AM | 14 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Peak Oil for Dummies [View article]
    the question really isn't if peak oil has been reached or will be reached in the next few years. as 2008 showed us, the earth has reached a point where oil supply cannot keep pace with oil demand in a fully functioning oil based world economy. i have been searching for a solution to a future which dr campbell, whom you quote, so accurately described. there is only one solution: natural gas and natural gas based transportation. yet for all the logical arguments i can and have presented on seeking alpha, still the naysayers want to stay addicted to oil, despite the scary writings on the wall of 2008 and the subsequent economic fallout. the US in particular is in denial - its media, its government, and its citizens. since the US is 5% worlds population and consumes 25% of the world's oil, it doesnt take a rocket scientist to figure out the US will be the hardest hit country when the realities of oil supply and demand strike again (and it won't be long). thanks for the aricle, but i think the only way out of the mess for the US is for the 50 states to band together, call for a constitutional convention, disolve the present congress, and start over with governmental and energy reform as the top 2 priorities. otherwise, the US is going to lose its wealth, freedoms, and democracy much faster than it gained them.
    Aug 9 12:06 PM | 14 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Peak Oil: China vs. USA [View article]
    amouna: well, not to knit-pick, but i wouldn't say you are an "advocate" of peak oil..say you are a "believer" in peak oil :) i don't think natural gas will peak within 100 years, please read robert hefner's book "The Grand Energy Transition", THE GET, it will explain to you why i believe we have 60-100 years worth of nat gas (minimum).

    longoil: the chinese are simply kicking our butts. we fight oil wars and go broke, the chinese use their US dollar reserves to lock in energy deliveries for years in the future. now we find out our idiot Energy Secretary Chu is "agnostic" about natural gas. i swear to god congress and the administration seem to be working as hard as they can to completely obliterate the middle class in this country.

    respirate: well, thanks for the compliments, but i occaisionally "lose it" on here and today, i must admit, i am in a real foul mood after reading the quote from the energy secretary. wrt clean coal, first of all, there is no such thing! second of all, even is there was, how does that solve our foreign oil addiction? answer - it wouldn't! so, clean coal fails on both objectives, yet Obama and Chu support it, while they are "agnostic" on natural gas?! my god, what is happening to this country? wrt the chinese, i believe the big difference is that the chinese gov. is run mainly by engineers, and the US is run by professional politicans and lawyers. we get what we deserve by electing idiots that wouldn't know a BTU from a SUV. and yeah, i am OCD on this stuff...we just have such idiotic policies and idiotic leaders i am beginning to think it is all intentional to simple crash the country so they can rape, pillage, and plunder the middle class. meanwhile, the middle class doesn't understand war has been declared on them and continue to watch sports and glorify athletes and movie stars, drive their SUV's, and relish the current low gasoline prices. did i mention i was in a foul mood? you're right in that peak oil can bring on argumentative discussions, but, you're also right, and i usually point out, the real issue isn't whether we have "peaked" or not, the real issue is can worldwide supply keep up with worldwide demand. as we saw in 2008, that answer is, yes, but barely, so prices will soar. at some point in the next 5-10 years, the answer will be "no", and the US will have no natural gas transportation policy, and then all americans will be supremely controlable because they will have lost all their freedom of movement, and all their other freedoms will follow...and our democracy will evaporate. did i mention i was in a foul mood? wrt Mulva taking a position on nat gas transportation, i cannot believe he doesn't. i really used to like the guy, now i am not so sure about him after overpaying for origin and whatknot. i wrote COP a letter asking why no support for nat gas trans, and i got an email back saying they do support it. i replied, ok, show me a press release, and i never heard back from them. i haven't heard mulva say one thing about it. astonishing considering COP's reliance on nat gas revenues and price.

    long_on_oil: well, i dont know about the saudis owning obama (although they definitely owned both bush's...), regardless, obama and his idiot energy secretary apparently prefer sending American energy dollars to saudi for oil over sending it to american farmers, landowners, and investors for american produced nat gas. btw, i don't remember bush asking for oil in return for iraqi war expenditures..and it was his idea in the first place. afghanistan will be obama's disaster.
    Apr 9 06:06 PM | 14 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Natural Gas: Short Term Bear, Long Term Bull [View article]
    agressive actions by Obama? unfortunately, this is definitely not true with respect to natural gas transportation. the president, congress, and the american people have yet to figure out that natural gas transportation is key to our foreign oil addiction, environmental woes, high energy bills. it is abundant, cheap, and clean. we could reinvigorate and reindustrialize america with a robust natural gas transportation problem. instead, we stay addicted to foreign oil, fund both sides of the "war on terror", keep spewing CO2 and particulates into the air, and stay on the peak oil economic yo-yo. meanwhile, the low prices of natural gas are causing another washout in the oil patch similar to the 1980's. it's a damn shame. big oil and coal interests have stacked the deck against natural gas transportation, and the nation is and will continue to pay the price.
    Apr 2 08:13 AM | 14 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The Case for Natural Gas [View article]
    Unfortunately, Obama did not even mention the words "natural gas" in his first major energy policy speech. It would appear hoping for three logical words in a sentence "natural gas transportation" will be a pipe dream in Obama's time as it was in Bush's. Perhaps you did not read my SA post on the subject? Here it is:
    seekingalpha.com/artic...
    Nat gas will likely track oil in the next few years since nat gas supplies are abundant in the US, especially since the new shale technology has come online. It's a great time to build out the natural gas infrastructure for transportation to pick up some of the demand now that all our factories that use natural gas appear to be idle, or, at least significantly reduced in capacity. However, still the washington crowd (and the media) ignore the huge benefits of natural gas transportation:
    1) reduce foreign oil imports
    2) create good paying jobs
    3) reduce green house emissions
    4) create an infrastructure that will pay dividends for decades
    5) perhaps, with an electric/nat gas hybrid, bring our automotive manufacturers back to life (see: seekingalpha.com/artic...)

    but alas, all that makes way too much sense, would be too beneficial to the middle class, and would strengthen the US. when was the last time Congress did all those things with a major policy initiative? ......
    Feb 1 11:21 PM | 14 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • What If Total U.S. Oil Production Peaks In 2016? [View article]
    Yes, and I would also ask how the invasion of Iraq that took millions of barrels of crude off the market at the same time the Chinese were ramping up consumption helped the US. Seems to me all it did was take oil up to $150/barrel and helped to exacerbate inflation and the financial crisis. Not to mention Iraq is still a war zone after the US dumped trillions into it - what a complete waste of lives and treasure. And now Chinese companies are producing more oil (and receiving it...) than are US companies. Also, I would remind nvg that the ethanol mandates were instituted during the Bush administration. I am no Obama supporter, but we have to look at things objectively regardless of the party in power. In my opinion, both parties have proved themselves totally incompetent.
    Jan 10 10:46 AM | 13 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Iran mentions U.S. companies for help in developing oil fields [View news story]
    I am curious - what is the realistic alternative here? A war with Iran would likely make the war in Iraq look like child's play and of course oil prices would sky-rocket and there goes the world economy (again). The US took on a huge debt load with the war in Iraq and what was the outcome? Lots of wounded vets who can't find jobs while China is now producing and receiving most of the Iraqi oil. I wish someone could explain to me why they believe these wars in the Middle East are such a great idea for the US. All I see is massive downside. What am I missing here?
    Dec 4 11:43 AM | 13 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Phillips 66 Currently Overvalued Compared To Its Peers [View article]
    Actually, Phillips66 really has no peers: PSX is the only independent energy company with leading segments in midstream, chemicals, refining and marketing and specialties. Despite the title, I found no peer that you measured PSX against - cause there isn't one.
    Nov 20 03:08 PM | 13 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Nat Gas Transportation: China Is Trouncing The U.S. At Its Own Game [View article]
    Well, Congress could easily go around Obama and grease the path for nat gas transportation. Both the EU and China have passed strategic long-term energy policies putting a priority on nat gas transportation. It is amazing to me that China can be paying 4x for its natural gas, is importing much of the technology and know-how from the US, and has to truck the LNG from coastal import terminals to interior customers (using GTLS's Orca delivery vehicles) due to lack of pipeline infrastructure, and is *still* adopting NGVs at a much greater pace than is the US. I think there is no greater proof of dysfunction in Congress than this. At the same time, it looks like Congress is very supportive of exporting our bounty of natural gas...
    Sep 3 01:07 PM | 13 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Exxon Mobil CEO: We're Going In, Can't Pull Up, Brace For Impact [View article]
    What this country needs is a long-term strategic comprehensive energy policy centered around natural gas transportation to displace gasoline and diesel consumption and the total displacement of coal with natural gas in the power generation sector.

    That will move the needle on CO2 emissions. That is achievable in 5 years.

    Pinning your hopes on EVs is just a pipedream. We've done that for what, 5 years now? Where are they? Despite billions of subsidies for battery and EV manufacturing and research, what do we have to show for it? A few thousand Tesla vehicles? Give me a break. That is like a rain drop in the ocean.

    What we need in US energy policy is a dose of reality and a big dose of pragmatism. Lumping natural gas into the same dirty/expensive bucket as coal and oil is neither reality nor pragmatic. Such misguided energy policy is exactly why we find ourselves in the mess we are in today!
    Jun 2 01:09 PM | 13 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The Fall Of The Electric Car... And The Rise Of The NGV [View article]
    ben - perhaps you missed gaucho's sarcasm?
    Nov 5 04:43 AM | 13 Likes Like |Link to Comment
COMMENTS STATS
7,417 Comments
9,455 Likes