Bobco23

Peak Oil: China vs. USA

Realold,

Like you I have been around a few years. You point out a critical issue that no one else (author and commentors included) seem to grasp. A great deal of our inaction on an energy plan can be traced to the environmentalists. They are the responsible parties for the lack of exploration and drilling on "big oil's" existing leases. They are the ones preventing a nuclear power solution to electricity production (Harry Reid, anyone?). They are the ones filing lawsuits to prevent grid construction, pipeline infrastructure, LNG, and on and on. Any energy policy to have any chance of success is going to have to limit the envoronmentalists. And that, given the track record of the last two decades; is just not going to happen.

Buy oil companies. Buy US oil and gas royalty trusts.
On Apr 10 03:00 PM realold wrote:

> A great article/rant and lively feedback. I agree with much, but
> think everyone misses the point. Obama represents the most liberal
> and extreme green elements of society. Their shared goals include
> as little use of energy as possible, reduced standard of living and
> mobility to "save the earth".
>
> Natural gas is too easy and too cheap. It might actually help improve
> the standard of living and then people might not need Obama anymore.
>
>
> Greenies want you at home in front of the TV (a smaller one -see
> California legislature bill to ban large screen tv's as energy wasteful)
> and away from the wilderness areas that belong to the animals and
> Sierra Club.
>
> I know, wild rants from an old guy. But, I do hope some of you wake
> up to what is really happening as the VP said "no crisis will go
> unused".

Why Is Oil Trading at $53 When Supply and Demand Is So Bearish?

Artfuldodger, count me in on your co2 position. The only people who believe that manmade co2 is causing global warming are fools and those in on the scam.


On Mar 24 01:31 PM ArtfulDodger wrote:

> Fitz:
>
> Good article overall. Thanks. I'm a little early on some of the NG
> plays, such as DOM & SBR, but I agree that NG should play a bigger
> part in powering the nation before long.
>
> Have you ever been to the TN Valley? I travel the area every summer
> and I've not seen all the pollution you mentioned. If it's there
> and you've been there, point me to it. I'd like to see it myself.
>
>
> I'm not a hater of CO2 as you and so many are. We need more of it
> in my opinion. It is after all part of the all-important to all life
> photosynthesis.
>
> Thus, I go along with the view that because we've created more of
> it burning natural fuels, trees are more plentiful, more healthy,
> and humans and animals are as healthy as they are because of it.
>
>
> Keep up the good work. I like your writing in respect to investing,
> but I'd like to see you leave your ideology out of it. Besides, you're
> preaching to the choir on this site in respect to shutting down the
> use of natural fuels for power.

Book Review: Robert Hefner's 'The Grand Energy Transition'

Nice StarTrek view into the future.

Most of us will be dead before hydrogen becomes a viable, cost effective, and practical fuel. A lot of us older guys will be dead before solar has any significant impact for our energy sources. Solar works a bit locally, but the transmission loss to pump it from sunshine states to the rest of the country makes it impractical to be more than a minor component of a varied energy source. The same is true of wind, hydro, and tidal electric generators.

The environmentalist are incharge at the white house and congress, so we will dream the dream of "clean energy", subsidize unprofitable producers, and squander opportunities for practical solutions.

Those who see nat gas as the most viable transportation fuel are correct. Nuclear is the best for electric production, buy Harry Reid is killing this alternative by preventing a solution to the waste storage area problem. Electric cars are ok if they are hybrids using waste energy from the vehicle's motion, but if you consider the transmission loss on energy for true battery powered vehicles, you find that the total "cradle to grave" cost is prohibitive.

Foreign oil is among other things, a national security threat. We must get off of it as fast as we can.

Man-made global warming and CO2? Anyone who believes in this is either a fool or in on the scam.

Want to Profit from Sky-High Oil? Avoid the Majors

All valid and interesting comments. APC, APA, etc. all look to be brides sometime in the near future. Oil service and exploration stocks look equally attractive. There is one paradigm changer that was not discussed - what happens if congress changes the drilling rules and opens up vast areas of the US for E&P? The majors seem the likely candidates to win these leases. Given the broohaha over Boeing/Airbus tanker contract, I can't see any leases going to foreign majors. So the question is, could the US majors see new life from voter pressure on congress to DO SOMETHING.

The Triple Play: Oil Addicts, The Credit Crunch and Deflation

Where did you get this guy, the weather underground? 1) There is no oil conspiracy just a pardigm shift in the economic evolution of the world. Get over it and profit. 2) The end of the financial world is not coming, just punishment for those unfortunate enough to get caught in the bubble bust. Like tech, housing and credit will recover in time. 3) Deflation? You mean inflation. Printing money causes inflation not deflation (see Samuelson, Econ 101).