scfranklin94's Comments RSS Syndication from SeekingAlpha.com http://seekingalpha.comuser/181226/comments http://seekingalpha.com/article/164713-how-much-natural-gas-remains-in-the-usa?source=feed#comment-703453 703453
Before the Horn River Basin was drilled, geologists thought there was probably gas there, but it was uneconomical to produce due to low potential reserves. Then the first exploratory wells came in and, low and behold, there was an estimated 100 Tcf in unproven reserves, then more wells were drilled and by this spring, Horn River was up to 250 Tcf, now some estimates say over 500 Tcf.

Worrying about when we're going to run out of natural gas is much like worrying about when the Sun is going to go super nova..............why does it matter; we'll all have been dead for generations.]]> Mon, 05 Oct 2009 08:48:34 -0400
Before the Horn River Basin was drilled, geologists thought there was probably gas there, but it was uneconomical to produce due to low potential reserves. Then the first exploratory wells came in and, low and behold, there was an estimated 100 Tcf in unproven reserves, then more wells were drilled and by this spring, Horn River was up to 250 Tcf, now some estimates say over 500 Tcf.

Worrying about when we're going to run out of natural gas is much like worrying about when the Sun is going to go super nova..............why does it matter; we'll all have been dead for generations.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/154616-why-are-natural-gas-producers-expanding-production-so-aggressively?source=feed#comment-621987 621987
It's a bit more complex than that:

1) HappyCajun pointed out the economics of drilling is a use it or lose it proposition.

2) The producer isn't hedging at the spot price, but at something more in line with annual prices (adjusted for declining production monthly). The prompt month is at $3.674, but the average for the next twelve months is $5.307 at Henry Hub; if a producer decides to drill a shale well today, it will take at least ninety days to set up, drill the well, and get tied into the gathering system, the annual forward price of gas 3 months out is $5.68 (there's a ton of production costs and basis considerations that I don't have time to get into).

3) Once a well is drilled, the bulk of the production costs are over, but the borrowed debt is still on the balance sheet. So shutting in a well just because prices are low is usually not option for most producers, because they have monthly interest payments they have to make. When a producer decides to shut in wells due to low prices (as opposed to being shut in due to pipeline oversupply), it says a lot about the strength of the producer's balance sheet.

4) There is a wide range of breakeven costs for shale wells out there. Many estimates are based off of the high leasing costs of June 2008 and the drilling costs from that time; virtually every cost has declined substantially since that time. So what is the breakeven for a shale well in the Haynesville? Some will claim it's $6.50, while I've seen analysis that it's closer to $4.75 for new leases. If you've already paid the leasing fee a year earlier, you might as well drill if the estimated production is calculated to pay you something over the actual drilling costs.
]]> Sun, 09 Aug 2009 12:26:48 -0400
It's a bit more complex than that:

1) HappyCajun pointed out the economics of drilling is a use it or lose it proposition.

2) The producer isn't hedging at the spot price, but at something more in line with annual prices (adjusted for declining production monthly). The prompt month is at $3.674, but the average for the next twelve months is $5.307 at Henry Hub; if a producer decides to drill a shale well today, it will take at least ninety days to set up, drill the well, and get tied into the gathering system, the annual forward price of gas 3 months out is $5.68 (there's a ton of production costs and basis considerations that I don't have time to get into).

3) Once a well is drilled, the bulk of the production costs are over, but the borrowed debt is still on the balance sheet. So shutting in a well just because prices are low is usually not option for most producers, because they have monthly interest payments they have to make. When a producer decides to shut in wells due to low prices (as opposed to being shut in due to pipeline oversupply), it says a lot about the strength of the producer's balance sheet.

4) There is a wide range of breakeven costs for shale wells out there. Many estimates are based off of the high leasing costs of June 2008 and the drilling costs from that time; virtually every cost has declined substantially since that time. So what is the breakeven for a shale well in the Haynesville? Some will claim it's $6.50, while I've seen analysis that it's closer to $4.75 for new leases. If you've already paid the leasing fee a year earlier, you might as well drill if the estimated production is calculated to pay you something over the actual drilling costs.
]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/146213-natural-gas-worth-another-look?source=feed#comment-569687 569687

On Jun 30 10:27 AM GordonScott wrote:

> Those new fracturing technologies have also been found to lead to
> a tainting of the water supplies around the world. Once this fact
> comes to fruition and New York water supply is tainted, these technologies
> will no longer be allowed to be used and the surplus will quickly
> be used.

You don't have a clue of what the fracturing process involves, do you? The federal oversight mandates might increase well costs by $20k apiece, but it's not going to stop fracturing. Most wells are drilled at depths of 10k+ feet, I don't think that's going to bother a hundred foot water well.

The only reason that the industry is complaining about this is 1) the states already have fracturing laws on the books. 2) the only instances of 'fracturing contamination' have happened when an operator is violating the state laws, so why is federal oversight needed?]]> Wed, 01 Jul 2009 09:00:42 -0400

On Jun 30 10:27 AM GordonScott wrote:

> Those new fracturing technologies have also been found to lead to
> a tainting of the water supplies around the world. Once this fact
> comes to fruition and New York water supply is tainted, these technologies
> will no longer be allowed to be used and the surplus will quickly
> be used.

You don't have a clue of what the fracturing process involves, do you? The federal oversight mandates might increase well costs by $20k apiece, but it's not going to stop fracturing. Most wells are drilled at depths of 10k+ feet, I don't think that's going to bother a hundred foot water well.

The only reason that the industry is complaining about this is 1) the states already have fracturing laws on the books. 2) the only instances of 'fracturing contamination' have happened when an operator is violating the state laws, so why is federal oversight needed?]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/144222-natural-gas-long-term-bull-short-term-bear-part-2?source=feed#comment-555711 555711
Meanwhile, calendar strip after calendar strip has been sold lately for 2010, leading me to believe that the producers have decided that $6+ average for 2010 is good enough to hedge a drilling program around. Without a robust rebound in industrial demand, it might be possible that this moderate level of shale production will actually keep the US in an oversupplied nat gas market for all of 2010. Therefore it is very possible that the near term bear market in NG might continue deep into 2010.

I know that's not the concensus view, but then a year ago, July09 futures were priced at $10+.]]> Sat, 20 Jun 2009 23:09:31 -0400
Meanwhile, calendar strip after calendar strip has been sold lately for 2010, leading me to believe that the producers have decided that $6+ average for 2010 is good enough to hedge a drilling program around. Without a robust rebound in industrial demand, it might be possible that this moderate level of shale production will actually keep the US in an oversupplied nat gas market for all of 2010. Therefore it is very possible that the near term bear market in NG might continue deep into 2010.

I know that's not the concensus view, but then a year ago, July09 futures were priced at $10+.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/144286-six-reasons-natural-gas-is-better-than-oil?source=feed#comment-555700 555700 2) Oil/NG ratio - please get off of this; if you can put NG in your car instead of gasoline, then we would have interchangeability, but until then, forget the friggin' ratio.
3) $4 dollar gas is uneconomical to develop - check out the whole curve, 2010 is at $6+. If you drill now, the well won't be completed until the fall and probably won't flow until November. Gee, maybe that explains why strip after calendar strip has been sold the last two weeks and the rig count went slightly up.
4) LNG is uneconomical - Trinidad & Tobago's cost of nat gas is 1.50/mcf or less and then it costs a dollar to get it here, they'll do fine. Qatar just sold 250 bcf to Sempra for 2010 to bring in at Cameron. LNG producers don't like to sell at such low prices, but LNG liquification facilities are a sunk cost and the cost of operation is relatively low, so it will eventually come here.
5) Politically more favorable than coal - you would think so, but then how come in the Waxman cap & trade bill coal generators get their emission credits for free and gas generators and industrial users of gas have to buy their credits at auction? In effect we are subsidizing coal at the expense of NG. Could it be that the Dems need coal-state votes to get their brain-damaged bill passed?
6) Supposedly this will happen in 2025, when the coal generators have to buy their emission credits at auction, like everyone else. Be prepared for Senators and Congressmen getting on the tube, howling how we're raising the cost of electricity for poor consumers and how we're legislating US jobs out of existence.

Other than #1, I don't think you have much of an argument.]]> Sat, 20 Jun 2009 22:38:57 -0400 2) Oil/NG ratio - please get off of this; if you can put NG in your car instead of gasoline, then we would have interchangeability, but until then, forget the friggin' ratio.
3) $4 dollar gas is uneconomical to develop - check out the whole curve, 2010 is at $6+. If you drill now, the well won't be completed until the fall and probably won't flow until November. Gee, maybe that explains why strip after calendar strip has been sold the last two weeks and the rig count went slightly up.
4) LNG is uneconomical - Trinidad & Tobago's cost of nat gas is 1.50/mcf or less and then it costs a dollar to get it here, they'll do fine. Qatar just sold 250 bcf to Sempra for 2010 to bring in at Cameron. LNG producers don't like to sell at such low prices, but LNG liquification facilities are a sunk cost and the cost of operation is relatively low, so it will eventually come here.
5) Politically more favorable than coal - you would think so, but then how come in the Waxman cap & trade bill coal generators get their emission credits for free and gas generators and industrial users of gas have to buy their credits at auction? In effect we are subsidizing coal at the expense of NG. Could it be that the Dems need coal-state votes to get their brain-damaged bill passed?
6) Supposedly this will happen in 2025, when the coal generators have to buy their emission credits at auction, like everyone else. Be prepared for Senators and Congressmen getting on the tube, howling how we're raising the cost of electricity for poor consumers and how we're legislating US jobs out of existence.

Other than #1, I don't think you have much of an argument.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/144110-ethanol-s-persecution-complex-to-rehabilitate-its-image-it-must-understand-the-issues?source=feed#comment-553577 553577 Fri, 19 Jun 2009 09:15:17 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/143999-natural-gas-etf-anomaly-is-it-time-to-exploit?source=feed#comment-553548 553548 Fri, 19 Jun 2009 09:02:57 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/143167-natural-gas-the-next-big-thing?source=feed#comment-546994 546994
I wish people would stop bringing up the oil to natural gas ratio; there's only a very small part of the country that can swap oil-fired generation for nat gas generation, and over 99% of cars can't use natural gas for fuel, so the fuels aren't interchangable.

If natural gas is so valuable, how come it trades in the $2.50 to $3.00 range out west? Could it be that we have too much supply; no it must be evil speculators forcing the price down!]]> Mon, 15 Jun 2009 09:36:23 -0400
I wish people would stop bringing up the oil to natural gas ratio; there's only a very small part of the country that can swap oil-fired generation for nat gas generation, and over 99% of cars can't use natural gas for fuel, so the fuels aren't interchangable.

If natural gas is so valuable, how come it trades in the $2.50 to $3.00 range out west? Could it be that we have too much supply; no it must be evil speculators forcing the price down!]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/143001-destroy-cities-to-save-them?source=feed#comment-546091 546091
The answer is to give business a reason to move to Flint via low taxes and low operating costs, but Michigan is wedded to the UAW and union labor costs, and it will stay that way as long as we keep bailing them out.]]> Sun, 14 Jun 2009 12:05:55 -0400
The answer is to give business a reason to move to Flint via low taxes and low operating costs, but Michigan is wedded to the UAW and union labor costs, and it will stay that way as long as we keep bailing them out.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/143036-are-oil-etfs-showing-us-how-natural-gas-etfs-will-trade?source=feed#comment-546077 546077 Pros
1) TSX is in CDN, which is good if you think USD is going to weaken.
2) High crude prices will get the tar sands into high gear and Alberta nat gas prices will have a floor due to NG use in the extraction.
3) AECO gas can go either east or west, unlike many other production areas.

Cons
1) If crude prices tumble, the CDN will probably weaken.
2) Canadian gas storage is already high, so the daily volume has to be burned/exported or shut-in.
3) Western US gas storage facilities are nearing 90% full, limiting AECO's deliverability to Ontario and Chicago, neither of which need much gas for the summer.

One thing to consider in playing ETFs in nat gas, is that the winter is already at $6, and the breakeven price for shale gas is below that, so it's possible that we could get to the winter, with increasing rig counts and no appreciable gain on the ETFs, since they continually roll into the next month at a higher price.]]> Sun, 14 Jun 2009 11:45:17 -0400 Pros
1) TSX is in CDN, which is good if you think USD is going to weaken.
2) High crude prices will get the tar sands into high gear and Alberta nat gas prices will have a floor due to NG use in the extraction.
3) AECO gas can go either east or west, unlike many other production areas.

Cons
1) If crude prices tumble, the CDN will probably weaken.
2) Canadian gas storage is already high, so the daily volume has to be burned/exported or shut-in.
3) Western US gas storage facilities are nearing 90% full, limiting AECO's deliverability to Ontario and Chicago, neither of which need much gas for the summer.

One thing to consider in playing ETFs in nat gas, is that the winter is already at $6, and the breakeven price for shale gas is below that, so it's possible that we could get to the winter, with increasing rig counts and no appreciable gain on the ETFs, since they continually roll into the next month at a higher price.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/142300-natural-gas-should-get-a-boost-from-china-s-new-demand?source=feed#comment-540262 540262
Everyone is waiting and hoping for the 'big ramp up' in US nat gas prices, because it seems so obvious that prices 'have to go up soon'; meanwhile incremental LNG production for 2010 is having trouble finding a market (Note how Russia had to sell 128k mcf/day to Sempra for Baja import, because neither Japan or South Korea would take the gas).

We know we're going to completely fill storage this fall and it would take a very severe winter (like 1976) to deplete the inventory levels. It's more likely that we'll have a winter similar or more mild than last year, so there's a real possibility that we exit the winter with near record storage inventory in April. If nat gas demand hasn't returned to early 2008 levels (which is most likely) then the drop off in nat gas production for 2010 will be offset somewhat by all the LNG coming here. So it's very possible that nat gas prices for next summer that are currently in the $6+ range will fall to $5 or $4.

The only scenario that makes NG prices extremely bullish for 2010 is that the US economy comes screaming back to life in the next six months. If you think the US economy will grow gradually, if at all, in the next six months (like I do), then UNG is a poor investment for the near term.]]> Wed, 10 Jun 2009 09:21:03 -0400
Everyone is waiting and hoping for the 'big ramp up' in US nat gas prices, because it seems so obvious that prices 'have to go up soon'; meanwhile incremental LNG production for 2010 is having trouble finding a market (Note how Russia had to sell 128k mcf/day to Sempra for Baja import, because neither Japan or South Korea would take the gas).

We know we're going to completely fill storage this fall and it would take a very severe winter (like 1976) to deplete the inventory levels. It's more likely that we'll have a winter similar or more mild than last year, so there's a real possibility that we exit the winter with near record storage inventory in April. If nat gas demand hasn't returned to early 2008 levels (which is most likely) then the drop off in nat gas production for 2010 will be offset somewhat by all the LNG coming here. So it's very possible that nat gas prices for next summer that are currently in the $6+ range will fall to $5 or $4.

The only scenario that makes NG prices extremely bullish for 2010 is that the US economy comes screaming back to life in the next six months. If you think the US economy will grow gradually, if at all, in the next six months (like I do), then UNG is a poor investment for the near term.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/140345-will-surging-oil-derail-a-us-recovery?source=feed#comment-524036 524036
If crude is going to take off like a rocket every time there's the least hint of demand recovery, then I don't see how we avoid getting stuck in a perpetual stagflation scenario.]]> Sat, 30 May 2009 10:00:25 -0400
If crude is going to take off like a rocket every time there's the least hint of demand recovery, then I don't see how we avoid getting stuck in a perpetual stagflation scenario.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/139779-hugoton-royalty-trust-a-stock-for-the-natural-gas-contrarian?source=feed#comment-524026 524026 Sat, 30 May 2009 09:48:37 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/140183-is-oil-going-the-wrong-way-or-do-we-need-to-adjust-our-perceptions?source=feed#comment-522881 522881 Stimulus package creates demand, which increases crude prices to the point that the increased energy costs offset the value of the stimulus package....

The energy markets are all over the idea that CL is going to $75/bbl; seems no one has factored in that the return to higher prices will force the US into a stagflation scenario, meaning very low growth in GNP and a flattening of demand. ]]> Fri, 29 May 2009 11:08:33 -0400 Stimulus package creates demand, which increases crude prices to the point that the increased energy costs offset the value of the stimulus package....

The energy markets are all over the idea that CL is going to $75/bbl; seems no one has factored in that the return to higher prices will force the US into a stagflation scenario, meaning very low growth in GNP and a flattening of demand. ]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/139842-sorry-arnold-tarp-can-t-be-used-to-bail-out-the-golden-state?source=feed#comment-519776 519776

On May 27 12:15 PM Duude wrote:

> The fact is as a large state wealthy Californians have been subsidizing
> smaller states for decades. Large states have always, always put
> more into the pot and got little back while little states put in
> little and get all of it back and then some. The call for bail out
> might not be as unfair as many believe.

This only became true when the military started closing bases in the 1990s, before then California got more from the Feds than they paid in taxes.]]> Wed, 27 May 2009 12:49:54 -0400

On May 27 12:15 PM Duude wrote:

> The fact is as a large state wealthy Californians have been subsidizing
> smaller states for decades. Large states have always, always put
> more into the pot and got little back while little states put in
> little and get all of it back and then some. The call for bail out
> might not be as unfair as many believe.

This only became true when the military started closing bases in the 1990s, before then California got more from the Feds than they paid in taxes.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/139842-sorry-arnold-tarp-can-t-be-used-to-bail-out-the-golden-state?source=feed#comment-519762 519762 Wed, 27 May 2009 12:43:44 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/139056-bloodbath-for-natural-gas-and-solar?source=feed#comment-514275 514275 Fri, 22 May 2009 09:59:16 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/139056-bloodbath-for-natural-gas-and-solar?source=feed#comment-514268 514268

On May 22 09:41 AM Fred W wrote:

> one weather event and the NG price spike will come...a couple of
> "events" and we will be back to 2005 #s]]> Fri, 22 May 2009 09:55:07 -0400

On May 22 09:41 AM Fred W wrote:

> one weather event and the NG price spike will come...a couple of
> "events" and we will be back to 2005 #s]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/139056-bloodbath-for-natural-gas-and-solar?source=feed#comment-514267 514267

On May 21 11:04 PM Zeon wrote:

> Time to start buying.]]> Fri, 22 May 2009 09:54:17 -0400

On May 21 11:04 PM Zeon wrote:

> Time to start buying.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/138552-obama-s-sweeping-changes-for-america-s-cars?source=feed#comment-511137 511137 Wed, 20 May 2009 09:52:23 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/138323-natural-gas-not-many-reasons-to-own-it?source=feed#comment-509528 509528
I remember petroleum engineers from Conoco coming to my high school in the 1970's and telling us that the US would run out of natural gas in twenty five years. I remember looking a well logs for the Barnett Shale in the 1980's and being told by the older guys in the company how the gas in the shale was trapped and would never be recovered economically. Then I attended a conference in the 1990's saying how the US was running out of natural gas and LNG was the only way that we could meet US demand. Now they're saying that the new shale plays will 'only' last 50 to 100 years.... All I know is that on my death bed, there will be more gas production in the US than in anytime else during my lifetime.]]> Tue, 19 May 2009 09:59:59 -0400
I remember petroleum engineers from Conoco coming to my high school in the 1970's and telling us that the US would run out of natural gas in twenty five years. I remember looking a well logs for the Barnett Shale in the 1980's and being told by the older guys in the company how the gas in the shale was trapped and would never be recovered economically. Then I attended a conference in the 1990's saying how the US was running out of natural gas and LNG was the only way that we could meet US demand. Now they're saying that the new shale plays will 'only' last 50 to 100 years.... All I know is that on my death bed, there will be more gas production in the US than in anytime else during my lifetime.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/138323-natural-gas-not-many-reasons-to-own-it?source=feed#comment-509462 509462
There's no way that the lack of new production will keep this from happening this fall; but by next summer the situation should swing from oversupplied to undersupplied, and there should be a multi-dollar increase in price.]]> Tue, 19 May 2009 09:29:46 -0400
There's no way that the lack of new production will keep this from happening this fall; but by next summer the situation should swing from oversupplied to undersupplied, and there should be a multi-dollar increase in price.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/137682-terra-nitrogen-super-stock-or-high-yield-villain-in-disguise?source=feed#comment-505082 505082
If the gov't returns to it's senses (admittedly that's a big IF) and reduces or cancels the ethanol subsidies (the program produces no net reductions in hydrocarbon or CO2 emissions - it's just welfare for farmers), and in the meantime NG returns to higher prices in 2010 as demand returns, Terra Nitrogen will be in a bind like it was earlier in the decade and it won't be making any distributions to its partners.

Anyone selling Terra Nitrogen partnerships as stable income should be indicted for fraud; the company's cash flows are extremely volatile.]]> Fri, 15 May 2009 09:49:33 -0400
If the gov't returns to it's senses (admittedly that's a big IF) and reduces or cancels the ethanol subsidies (the program produces no net reductions in hydrocarbon or CO2 emissions - it's just welfare for farmers), and in the meantime NG returns to higher prices in 2010 as demand returns, Terra Nitrogen will be in a bind like it was earlier in the decade and it won't be making any distributions to its partners.

Anyone selling Terra Nitrogen partnerships as stable income should be indicted for fraud; the company's cash flows are extremely volatile.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/136897-minyanville-subprime-lending-is-back-with-a-vengeance?source=feed#comment-502362 502362
Articles like this remind me of the quote from Darryl Hannah in Blade Runner, "Then we're stupid and we'll die".]]> Wed, 13 May 2009 13:48:20 -0400
Articles like this remind me of the quote from Darryl Hannah in Blade Runner, "Then we're stupid and we'll die".]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/134574-natural-gas-is-cheap-volatility-is-here-to-stay?source=feed#comment-485659 485659
As for $4 drilling costs - that's not true everywhere. The flow rates in the Haynesville have actually driven the breakeven cost below $2, so they'll drill if they want to (getting credit to drill is a bigger problem than the breakeven cost).

From the Halliburton earnings call, they don't see drilling picking back up till 2010, because of the huge backlog in drilled wells that haven't been tied into gathering systems yet. So the falling rig count now may not lead to as steep a drop off in production as should happen otherwise.

The only way that NG goes up and stays there before the winter is if the recession is over and the US economy is coming back strong. It might happen, but I doubt it.]]> Fri, 01 May 2009 11:47:26 -0400
As for $4 drilling costs - that's not true everywhere. The flow rates in the Haynesville have actually driven the breakeven cost below $2, so they'll drill if they want to (getting credit to drill is a bigger problem than the breakeven cost).

From the Halliburton earnings call, they don't see drilling picking back up till 2010, because of the huge backlog in drilled wells that haven't been tied into gathering systems yet. So the falling rig count now may not lead to as steep a drop off in production as should happen otherwise.

The only way that NG goes up and stays there before the winter is if the recession is over and the US economy is coming back strong. It might happen, but I doubt it.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/132372-natural-gas-prices-are-down-but-still-relatively-high?source=feed#comment-474561 474561 Thu, 23 Apr 2009 14:08:50 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/132498-natural-gas-prices-at-a-6-5-year-low?source=feed#comment-474555 474555 Thu, 23 Apr 2009 14:04:16 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/132066-the-growth-of-japan-s-working-poor?source=feed#comment-472522 472522
As for the decision for Japanese companies to move the bulk of their electronics manufacturing to China, either they did that or watch Korean and Taiwanese companies come to dominate China based industries. So either way, the Japanese manufacturing jobs were going to be lost.

As to free market policies increasing wealth disparity in Japan, it's impossible for an export-dependent economy to maintain labor wage rates via protectionist policies, so the only answer is constant labor productivity gains. Productivity gains in a rapidly aging workforce is difficult at best, that is why you see Japan spending so much money on robotics research - whether it will work or not remains to be seen.

The gist of your post is that this is the future for the US; perhaps, but the US population is still increasing via immigration. In 2040 the US is projected to have a population of 400 million, while Japan will be 65% of todays population. 80 million more people in the US will mean more demand for everything (whether that's necessarily a good thing is a matter of opinion).

Lastly you point out all the problems in Japan, with the implied premise that capitalism has 'failed' the Japanese people. What other system would allow them to have the highest standard of living in Asia? If you have to be poor, would you rather be poor in Japan or China?
]]> Wed, 22 Apr 2009 10:24:50 -0400
As for the decision for Japanese companies to move the bulk of their electronics manufacturing to China, either they did that or watch Korean and Taiwanese companies come to dominate China based industries. So either way, the Japanese manufacturing jobs were going to be lost.

As to free market policies increasing wealth disparity in Japan, it's impossible for an export-dependent economy to maintain labor wage rates via protectionist policies, so the only answer is constant labor productivity gains. Productivity gains in a rapidly aging workforce is difficult at best, that is why you see Japan spending so much money on robotics research - whether it will work or not remains to be seen.

The gist of your post is that this is the future for the US; perhaps, but the US population is still increasing via immigration. In 2040 the US is projected to have a population of 400 million, while Japan will be 65% of todays population. 80 million more people in the US will mean more demand for everything (whether that's necessarily a good thing is a matter of opinion).

Lastly you point out all the problems in Japan, with the implied premise that capitalism has 'failed' the Japanese people. What other system would allow them to have the highest standard of living in Asia? If you have to be poor, would you rather be poor in Japan or China?
]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/132178-three-reasons-to-be-more-bullish-on-natural-gas-than-on-oil?source=feed#comment-472445 472445
So will NG prices go up in the long-term? Of course, but it might be a year to 18 months.]]> Wed, 22 Apr 2009 09:47:02 -0400
So will NG prices go up in the long-term? Of course, but it might be a year to 18 months.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/121997-natural-gas-price-outlook?source=feed#comment-403005 403005
Ending inventory in October is still predicted to be 4.2 to 4.4 Tcf. Note to self: there isn't that much gas storage in the US, so it doesn't matter if we have the winter from hell coming up, we aren't going to run out of NG in Nov09-Mar10. The recovery in NG stocks won't materialize until spring 2010 at the earliest.

Learn some real fundamentals and not some btu ratio to cl bs.]]> Wed, 25 Feb 2009 10:58:33 -0500
Ending inventory in October is still predicted to be 4.2 to 4.4 Tcf. Note to self: there isn't that much gas storage in the US, so it doesn't matter if we have the winter from hell coming up, we aren't going to run out of NG in Nov09-Mar10. The recovery in NG stocks won't materialize until spring 2010 at the earliest.

Learn some real fundamentals and not some btu ratio to cl bs.]]>