Chevron Corp. (CVX)

All Comments on CVX

  • commenter
    Harley King
    Sep 25 05:53 AM
    My Website
    Year to Date Performance of Dow 30 Members [view article]
    General Motors are still included in the list, This only proves that people are still interested in different cars. Which is nowadays, can be easily search in the internet if you want to buy whether it is new or used car just like in www.zibe.com
     Reply
  • commenter
    widicusf
    Sep 24 02:41 PM
    Natural Gas Bargain Justifies Obama's Stance [view article]
    Currently the U.S. is not a net importer of NG. This will not be the case if we make a dramatic shift to NG powered vehicles...newly discovered shale gas will not come cheap. Reply
  • commenter
    oldoilman
    Sep 24 02:00 PM
    Why "Drill, Baby, Drill!" Does Not Translate Into Effective National Energy Policy [view article]
    The oil companies employ some of the brightest and most creative minds in the world. These minds are paid very well to find one of the most elusive commodities on Earth, namely hydrocarbons. I know that first hand because I was an exploration geologist for many years. I'll tell an interesting story to the "drill-baby-drill... crowd: the gigantic Caspian oil and Qatar gas deposits have been known for a long time. However, they were not developed until recently due to economic and logistical constraints. It can take decades before known deposits are developed once they are discovered by the drill bit. Development wells, surface facilities, pipelines, shipping, etc., are costly and may take many years to put in place. Just look at Prudhoe Bay, the largest oilfield ever discovered in North America: it took over a decade before the oil reached refineries in the Lower 48, at a cost of many billions of the 1960s and 70s. And Prudhoe Bay is declining very rapidly. The people working for the oil companies understand the business very well and are laughing at the millions of fools who believe that drilling today will result in $0.60/gallon gasoline tomorrow. Pity! I suspect we will see oil in the $250-$400 barrel in a few years. So, even an oilman like me, realizes that the only way to solve the energy crisis is to start developing alternate sources of energy. Not only that, but also start using efficiently the remainig oil. Let's forget about driving an 8,000 lb vehicle to carry a 200 lb person. Mass transportation should be part of the equation as should be limiting urban sprawl. I hope we start doing this before it is too late. Reply
  • commenter
    dbjn
    Sep 24 12:42 PM
    Natural Gas Bargain Justifies Obama's Stance [view article]
    Obama's stance? Obama's plan? Has he actually offered any concrete ideas besides his hollow message for "change"? Reply
  • commenter
    Chris B
    Sep 24 10:26 AM
    Why "Drill, Baby, Drill!" Does Not Translate Into Effective National Energy Policy [view article]
    The plentiful oil religion continues, with anecdotal evidence (Bakken, Brazil, etc.) used to argue that oil is not getting more scarce or more costly to obtain. The world's flat or declining oil production, they say, is all the fault of those dammed hippie environmentalists (you know, the ones who controlled all three branches of government for most of the last decade). At least they've mostly given up on the ethanol fad.

    I'm tempted to say "OK, fine, put your faith in drilling, build your house 40 miles from work, drive a gas-guzzler and let me know how that works out for you in the next 10-20 yrs." The problem is that the oil-is-everywhere cult stands in the way of developing an economy that can survive the $250-$500 bbl oil that we will probably see in our lifetimes. The folks who think $0.70 gasoline is right around the corner are the ones opposing light rail transit in and between our cities. They are the ones mocking wind, solar, and geothermal energy solutions. They are the ones who think anyone who prepares for the likely future by driving a small car or a hybrid is a granola-chewing fruitcake. They are the ones advocating wars in Asia and the Middle East to, in theory, obtain control over oil (despite plenty of evidence that such wars disrupt production, raise prices, and result in dictatorships). Finally, the oil-is-everywhere kool-aid-drinkers were the ones buying Ford Expeditions and GMC Tahoes to drive back and forth from their exurban homes to work. The plummeting average US fuel economy in the 90's and 00's plus the increased average commute distance during that same time is largely responsible for the quickly increasing US demand that drove up prices for ALL of us. Thanks a lot.     Reply
  • commenter
    Alan von
    Altendorf
    Sep 24 02:22 AM
    My Website
    Why "Drill, Baby, Drill!" Does Not Translate Into Effective National Energy Policy [view article]
    "you live in Houston Tx, thus you are obviously backward"

    (laughs hard) Y'all don't use linen table napkins at lunch I reckon?     Reply
  • commenter
    happycajun
    Sep 23 11:53 PM
    Why "Drill, Baby, Drill!" Does Not Translate Into Effective National Energy Policy [view article]
    I must admit, I enjoy watching the world's chicken littles running around shouting about the sky falling and all, without a clue what to do about said problem. I love hearing people who don't know $h!t about that which they advocate (borrowing a form of encryption from the !D!0T above who is fearful to continue with life) ranting about what NOT to do. "Fearing for my country" sounds distraut over realities that I saw back in the '70s. Hell, I'll bet that the clown doesn't even realize how stupid his/her solution sounds, asserting that "the only solution is to actually change the way we live." Well duhhhh, that happens with the passing of every minute of every day. HOW are we going to change? WHAT does that mean? Hell, as his/her name demonstrates, he/she is only scared, not uncommon through history.

    Carbonate - don't get too worked up. We'll make money off of the 1d1ots (I would just say idiots, but I get some satisfaction from mimicking ol' fearful) along the way! Now, I take exception to your assertion about some foreign countries having lower environmental standards - some have the same high standards, they just don't enforce them! You and I both know that a dozer and gradeall can do wonders with 5 million barrels of oil and a bunch of sand - hell, that is what you call stabilized drift sand.

    Alan - there is those of us who understand, and there is them that don't. This whole thread of commentary addresses the rather sophisticated statistical analysis of the author, noting in particular that he knows nothing of the underlying subject matter as evidenced by the complete absense of discussion of natural gas. In that analysis, the author concludes that drilling won't "solve the probleml." Without defining what "the problem" is, I believe that a majority of the commentators have pointed out that drilling is PART of any solution of an ENERGY problem. But hey, what do I know, I'm only a lowly engineer. Who happens to be an attorney. Who has spent a decade or so in the Middle East. I'm sure I'm not as smart as ol' scared ass "Fearing" is. Alan, you live in Houston Tx, thus you are obviously backward. Carbonate, based on your name, you have G&G knowledge, thus probably live in some backward place like Louisiana, Texas, Oklahoma, Colorado, or some other such hell hole. We are all inferior - so let's not argue, we need to just go make $$$$$$$. The other folks? They will be the source of that $$$$$$$!

    Laissez Les Bon Temps Roulez!     Reply
  • commenter
    TAS
    Sep 23 11:04 PM
    My Website
    Why "Drill, Baby, Drill!" Does Not Translate Into Effective National Energy Policy [view article]
    Misleading. Acceptance of this lenghty piece means that you can indeed baffle folks with B.S. Reply
  • commenter
    Alan von
    Altendorf
    Sep 23 08:17 PM
    My Website
    Why "Drill, Baby, Drill!" Does Not Translate Into Effective National Energy Policy [view article]
    "Illogical government policies derived by brain-dead, socialism breathing, college professors with grudges against the industrial world which refused to hire them due to their lack of competence and common sense"... like Ben Bernanke?

    The comment by 'carbonates' above is absolutely true, at least among the oil people who know what they're doing. Rugged individualism still exists. We don't give a damn what happens to the world as such. And if you get in the way, we go elsewhere.     Reply
  • commenter
    carbonates
    Sep 23 07:00 PM
    Why "Drill, Baby, Drill!" Does Not Translate Into Effective National Energy Policy [view article]
    Okay, Fearing, I'll take the bait. By your logic I should stop drilling in the US, as the US production is going into decline anyway. That's fine with me. I can take my skill set to Saudi Arabia and get paid more anyway. My quality of life will decline slightly, but my personal finances will be greatly improved by reductions in taxes and higher income. My work will be slightly easier, because I will not have to deal with any sort of environmental standards, and even fewer regulatory hurdles. You will still be paying my higher salary (but you will be receiving far less of my income in the form of taxation), so it makes little difference to me. I could have provided my services inside the US, creating high paying jobs and huge amounts of tax revenue in the US, but it seems you feel you would be better off to buy imported oil. By the way, the MMS is the second largest source of revenue to the Federal government behind income taxes. As US oil production declines, your tax rates will increase.

    Likewise, I can shift my investment portfolio from US oil producers to foreign producers that will benefit from having a larger market share in the US. As US production goes into even higher declines, oil will no doubt go higher and I will continue to benefit in my portfolio. I can even start collecting my paycheck in Euros or Swiss francs!

    Also inherent in your position is the shift away from environmentally responsible oil and gas production within a strongly regulated framework, to production in areas where there is no environmental regulation. Russia still considers plowing on-shore oil spills under with a tractor to be "spill remediation." Other countries I have worked in tolerate lakes covered with 12 inches of oil as the cost of doing business. Your attitude only supports this lack of responsibility and will hasten the decline of the worldwide environment.

    Meanwhile, you seem to suggest the US stop using oil, or alternatively import more oil, as for some reason drilling seems to upset you. You would prefer to take the point of view that since we can't produce all of what we need, we should not even try.

    I can easily change the way I live. It will not be beneficial to you however, but will be very beneficial to me. Can you change the way you live? Call me an idiot, but at least I have a positive suggestion on how to make the transition to renewable energy and alternative raw materials that will be needed to replace oil and gas. As is often repeated quietly in the oil industry "you can all go freeze in the dark" if you don't want my help. I'm not the cause of your digestive problems.     Reply
  • commenter
    briechelx
    Sep 23 06:01 PM
    Why "Drill, Baby, Drill!" Does Not Translate Into Effective National Energy Policy [view article]
    BIOLOGICAL EXPERIMENT #1: Take a Petri dish (a sterile glass bowl), fill it with nutrient, then add a culture of bacteria.
    ACTIVITY #1: The bacteria will multiply without restraint while they consume all nutrient.
    OUTCOME #1: The bacteria die in their own waste.

    BIOLOGICAL EXPERIMENT #2: Take a Planet Earth, fill it with renewable resources as well as with fossil fuel. Then add a few humans.
    ACTIVITY #2: The human population increases to 2 billion while it lives sustainably on renewable resources for a long time. But when they discover fossil fuel, they are able to increase food production 3X. (Made possible by artificial fertilizer, pesticide, herbicide, medicine, transportation. All are made from fossil fuel). The additional food allows the human population to increase 3X (to 6 billion and up).
    OUTCOME #2: As fossil fuel is depleted, the human population shrinks by 2/3, back to 2 billion. There is worldwide starvation as well as wars over resources.
    No telling what effect global warming will have. It could decrease, or increase, food production.     Reply
  • commenter
    Fearing for
    my country
    Sep 23 05:18 PM
    Why "Drill, Baby, Drill!" Does Not Translate Into Effective National Energy Policy [view article]
    Good God, I read these comments and want to throw up. 95% of them don't even mention the raw reality that WE IMPORT 12 MILLION BARRELS OF OIL A DAY. A trickle from North Dakota (5 Million barrels in a month, WHOO HOO) is used to illustrate that business as usual is just around the corner. DRILL A FEW MORE HOLES AND WE'RE SAVED!

    Look at reality. Exports from Mexico, who used to be our #2 supplier, are down 16% in the last year, and they will cease to be an exporter by 2011. As recently as last year we got 1.5 Million barrels per day from Mexico. Now we get just over 1 Million. Within two years, we will have to replace that 1.5 Million barrels from the world market that is also in decline. Can you say $200 a barrel?

    Exports are declining from Russia, North Sea, Nigeria, Saudi Arabia.

    Drilling every possible source on and offshore will not even get us back to the 10 Million barrels a day that we produced in 1970. Which means we will NEVER get even half our current demand from the US.

    Do you 1d10ts understand this?

    The only solution is to actually change the way we live. I know that (the) Dick said that the American Way Of Life(tm) is non-negotiable, but when you negotiate with REALITY, you lose. And the REALITY is that the EXPORT declines from all of the world's major exporters except Canada, will far outweigh anything we will get from within our boundaries.

    We don't have to do anything to reduce our consumption. The price will do it for us. With the consequence that our economy will completely implode. Oh wait, it already has.


     Reply
  • commenter
    mrsgreenjean
    s
    Sep 23 02:52 PM
    Why "Drill, Baby, Drill!" Does Not Translate Into Effective National Energy Policy [view article]
    paultaut,
    your comment about children's books caught my eye, so i went looking. all i found was a book about how kailing taught his kids to read before they were three. not exactly child's play. i think he's right about the long term, and so what if he's invested in alternative energy. i also noticed a bonified oil company on the list, too, he's probably just trying to invest for his kids' college educations (though they sound like they could get scholarships anywhere...)     Reply
  • commenter
    MiMi
    Sep 23 02:42 PM
    Why "Drill, Baby, Drill!" Does Not Translate Into Effective National Energy Policy [view article]
    Drill Baby Drill, may not be very poetic but it sure seems necessary. Until you can stick some french fry grease or a hunk of coal into your gas tank we are gong to need petroleum. The transition period from petro to alternatrive sources of "car power" will be long and costly. Let the transition go forward with all due haste, but during the interim we should not be paying $x per gallon for gas when there is oil to be had by drilling, thus making the cost to consumer somewhat less than $x, probably considerably less. Reply
  • commenter
    Alamo
    Sep 23 02:37 PM
    Why "Drill, Baby, Drill!" Does Not Translate Into Effective National Energy Policy [view article]
    I own mineral rights in the Haynesville Shale play in East Texas.

    So if there is a national reliance on natural gas by Americans for some, much, or virtually all of the nation's transportation needs, that increased demand will of course benefit me directly.

    That said, I believe that any energy source that is American based will have a tremendously beneficial effect on our economy. Especially so if that primary energy source can be provided at a reduced cost to that of an increasingly less available source, ie, gasoline and diesel. Adding the significant benefits that natural gas brings to the environment should make it our number 1 transportation fuel of choice.

    No matter how much additional oil is discovered, it is not going to be done cheaply so the massive capital costs involved will require that those costs be passed directly to the consumer. It's not a reach to look forward and see future pump prices at $5.00, $6.00 or more. Under the rosiest of scenarios, the OCS and ANWR exploraton might supply us with another 4 or 5 years' crude supplies at the present rates of consumption---that's 1500 to1800 days. What then? Can we have additional nuclear plants permitted and operational in this time frame? Hardly in this environmentally conscious atmosphere. 1000 MW power generating plants---under the best cases require 5 to 10 years' construction time without considering the permitting headaches involved. We can though, build up the re-fueling facilities that will support a compressed natural gas (CNG) transportation system in less that 5 years time if we embrace it on a national basis.

    Boone Pickens said yesterday before the National Press Club that 10 strategically located re-fueling stations could enable a heavy truck to go coast to coast---3500 miles.

    Its abundant, clean and 40 percent less expensive that gasoline but the thing that recommends it above all is the simple fact that it is 100 percent American. Keeping a significant portion of that annual $700 billion dollar cash flow out of OPEC's greedy hands and into American hands is the best aspect of it by far.     Reply
Loading...
Symbols:
Authors:
Quick Links: