Seeking Alpha

Fred Linn

Fred Linn
Send Message
View as an RSS Feed
View Fred Linn's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • 6 Oil Stocks to Buy in the Next Correction [View article]
    Some info about the DuPont plant.

    http://bit.ly/1qvlWDD
    Dec 10, 2014. 10:18 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • 6 Oil Stocks to Buy in the Next Correction [View article]

    On the surface, it seems to look like really bad news for biofuels, but I don't really think it is in the longer term. The price of oil is down(so what it always is this time of year) but it will spike again next summer. The difference is, there will be a long spring of relative inactivity in investment and drilling. Meaning that when the price goes back up it will be higher than ever.

    $4 has always been the sort of "magic number" if gas is less than $4, people grumble but keep on using it-----if it is more than $4 people are willing to make changes.

    We've just had three plants open that produce ethanol from waste corn stover(the non grain parts of the plant). And a fourth, the DuPont plant is just finishing up completion in Nevada, Iowa right now. Should open next quarter. Summed up, these plants will add nearly 100 million gal/yr to ethanol production,-----and more still, the same processes can produce ethanol from any type of cellulose at all, from tree leaves to kudzu. The DuPont business plan calls for selling entire turn key operations of their plant, cookie cutter style.

    So, look to see where the price of oil at the pump rebounds to. Too high, there may be a repercussion at the pump increasing the ethanol, not high enough to satisfy profit hungry investors----and there is the risk of decreasing production over time by not bringing in enough new investments for drilling and equipment.

    Personally, I'd like to see us using more ethanol and less oil.

    Fred Linn
    (I am concerned what all this increased drilling is doing to our environment and social structure-----but these are not popular concerns on Seeking Alpha)

    Dec 10, 2014. 10:12 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Could The Oil Discovery In South Australia Be A Game Changer? [View article]
    MPT----the cost of electricity in Denmark and Germany is taxed with VAT very heavily. Also, the generation and distribution structure varies significantly. A straight kWh price comparison is not very informative.

    A more valid comparison would be Iowa and South Dakota. In both Iowa and South Dakota last year, 25% of the electrical power consumed(actually used) was generated by wind---about the same % amount as Denmark and Germany.

    The average price of electricity in Iowa and South Dakota was a little over $.09/kWh and $.08/kWh .................about $.05/kWh less than the national overall average or about 30% less.

    And the fuel is free. We'd still need some natural gas capacity to back up the wind----but, our best deal is use as much wind as we can, and only use natural gas when we have to.

    By the way----Germany produces approximately 20% of their methane usage from agricultural and industrial waste and sewage. One town, Lunen, (pop. 90,000) produces ALL of their energy needs with biomethane produced from livestock sewage from local farms. And still has enough excess left over to pump into the national pipeline grid.
    Jan 21, 2014. 09:02 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Could The Oil Discovery In South Australia Be A Game Changer? [View article]
    Yup, power and money go hand in hand. So it has always been, so it shall always be.

    I am a proponent of renewable energy(to the point of being a grave thorn in many sides). But it is with a very good reason that can become a little esoteric. To me, renewable energy represents one of the true basic fundamentals of our basic freedoms and rights. Rule by law, democracy, freedom and the fair and equitable distribution of power and wealth. Capitalism can be good, or it can be bad. When the accumulation of wealth and power leads to corruption and tyranny by law we need to clean house. We need to clean house, for our own sake, the sake of future generations, the environment, and our own rights and freedoms. Fossil fuels are at source of many of our problems, at least as a contributing factor right now.

    By moving our society away from fossil fuels, we strengthen and enhance the distributed wealth and power that guarantee our own rights and freedoms, well being, security and future.

    I know it is a hard concept to see at first glance, but think about it for awhile, it will get clearer to you the more you think about it. Ask yourself "what ifs" and follow the money, and look at the results.

    Keep in mind that power and control is a much greater motivator than even money for some people. Just to be able to force you to do something. Just because they can.

    I want to see natural gas used widely as a motor fuel. True it is a fossil fuel. But fossil natural gas is methane, CH4. Methane is both a fossil fuel AND a biofuel(biomethane). Exactly the same stuff, CH4, the two can be mixed in any proportion with no loss of function in any application. We can make methane, easily, low tech, and low cost from any type of waste biomass at all, including landfills and sewage. It is not possible to monopolize the source of sewage(like petroleum)----it is available to anyone, anywhere. This represents economic and political freedom for us(the consumer).[by "us" I mean all people]

    Thanks for asking and listening MPT.
    Jan 21, 2014. 08:39 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Could The Oil Discovery In South Australia Be A Game Changer? [View article]
    MPT----------" That's an interesting thought--that the oil majors would favor their oil assets over their natural gas assets. Chevron is putting a fortune into nat gas in Australia."-------------

    Natural gas does not need to be refined for use. It is "scrubbed" in a water spray to remove impurities is all.

    There is no refining, no waste, and no left over by products to need to dispose of, like tar. Every single BTU of energy you pay for is usable as fuel, unlike petroleum.

    If CNG were to gain popularity as a motor fuel, the vertically integrated petroleum companies(like most major brands) that own extensive refining facilities would find hundreds of billions of dollars worth of refining capacity worthless overnight.

    Naturally, they are not to anxious for people to discover that they can drive twice as far on the same amount of $$$ using CNG than they can using petroleum. They also do not want people to know that internal combustion engines with the right set up can use both CNG or gasoline in the same engine.(bi-fuel) Or even a whole range of fuels.(multi-fuel) For instance, Fiat makes the Siena Tetrafuel in Brazil for the South American market, primarily Brazil, Argentina and Peru. The Siena can run on petroleum gasoline, gasoline and ethanol mixtures, pure hydrous ethanol(straight from the still, unblended) and/or CNG. You can drive the lifetime of the car on petroleum, some petroleum, or no petroleum at all.

    The only reason that oil companies drill for gas at all is that they are looking for "wet" wells. They want the liquids locked in the shales----the only reason they even collect the gas and sell it is that it helps to defray the cost of drilling a little if it happens to be easy and convenient to catch the CH4 and sell it. Otherwise, it will just be flared off---------exactly what you see happening in North Dakota(Bakken), Texas(Permian), and Pennsylvania(Marcellus). You can very easily trace the outlines of the drilling activities in the various drilling areas by the light from the NG flaring in pictures taken at night from satellites in space.

    Oil companies and governments have a vested interest in keeping the cartel monopoly of liquid petroleum motor fuels rolling at the expense of consumers and taxpayers. One hand washes the other.
    Jan 20, 2014. 10:36 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Could The Oil Discovery In South Australia Be A Game Changer? [View article]
    -------" 1/3rd of what Keystone will carry will be Bakkan oil from North Dakota. Most of the oil from this pipeline will be sold into the midwestern states."----------

    No, oil is a world commodity. The oil will be sold on the world markets, since that is more profitable. Republican and right wing anti renewable energy groups have been conducting campaigns for years to keep renewable energy off the market. There is no way to create monopoly market control of energy sources that use wind, sunlight, and other sources of renewable energy. They want to take fossil fuels from public lands and waters----that belong to all the citizens, and make enormous profits with no controls or regulations. Then leave the citizens with the environmental and public health destruction, and no resources.

    --------" It is so obvious an answer. Who is paying the politicians to ignore it? "---------

    The people who profit from the sale of fossil fuels. They do not want natural gas to gain a market foothold in competition with petroleum. NG is cleaner, safer, and it is both a fossil fuel and a biofuel. We can make CH4 from any type of biomass at all, including landfills and sewage---it is being done right now, and we've been able to do it for the last 160 years.

    Monopolies(fossil fuels are a cartel monopoly) are good only to a few people who profit from them. Monopolies are very bad for consumers and countries.

    Follow the money.
    Jan 19, 2014. 10:10 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • RINs And Biofuels Dominate Valero Conference Call [View article]
    --------" Upon reducing CO2 concentration in the tube, only a tiny difference could be found and he concluded that very few CO2 molecules are enough to completely absorb the IR beam. The conclusion was that a CO2 increase could not matter. This was the birth of the first skeptic of the then called "CO2 theory" and of the more recent "CO2 effect is saturated" skeptic argument. "------

    The fact that the infrared radiation is completely absorbed by CO2 down to very small amounts of CO2 in no way disproves absorption of IR and heat conversion---------it proves that it is a very efficient process.
    Jul 29, 2013. 10:44 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • RINs And Biofuels Dominate Valero Conference Call [View article]
    ----------" That isn't how chemistry and physics works. First, everyone is claiming that the oceans are warming. Can we agree on that point? If we can, there is something called Henry's law that would explain the increase in CO2 much better than burning fossil fuels."--------

    --------" William Henry, an English chemist, showed that at constant temperature, the amount of a given gas dissolved in a given type and volume of liquid is directly proportional to the partial pressure of that gas in equilibrium with that liquid. This is known as Henry's Law."-----------UC Davis(chemwiki page)

    That is the point(oceans are warming)-----the partial pressure of CO2 is increasing in response to the atmospheric increase in caused by burning fossil fuels.(partial pressure = the % composition expressed as mmHg pressure, 760 mmHg at sea level X .209(20.9% oxygen composition) = 158.84 mmHg O2 at sea level.

    CO2 is hydrophilic----it will preferentially dissolve in water to form carbonic acid, which reaches a stable plateau in response to the atmospheric CO2 available---Henderson-... equation. The fact that the oceans are becoming more acid(acidification) is a reflection of the increasing CO2 in the atmosphere being absorbed into the oceans. A very small change in the absolute amount of CO2 in the atmosphere makes a huge change in the pH of the oceans because pH is a negative logarithmic number of the H+ ions(definition of acid).

    Exactly the same process is at work in your bloodstream. pH is a basic measurement in blood gas analysis that I use to make ventilator adjustments on people who can not breathe for themselves. If pH is going down(becoming more acid due to CO2 retention) it is necessary to increase ventilation(breathe faster) to remove CO2. Normal serum pH is 7.35 to 7.45(slightly alkaline). If pH drops below 7.0 you only have a few minutes to get it back within normal range or death occurs.

    You are spreading disinformation on a subject of which you have no knowledge or understanding.
    Jul 29, 2013. 10:27 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • RINs And Biofuels Dominate Valero Conference Call [View article]
    from the link you provided---------" According to a study published last year in the journal Conservation Biology, more than 50 percent of the Cerrado has already been transformed into pastureland, causing soil erosion, biodiversity loss, fragmentation, and the spread of nonnative grasses."-------

    Sugarcane is not grown in pastures. You can't run cattle in sugarcane fields. Sugarcane is the equivalent of tall grass prairie in the Northern Hemisphere. Sugarcane plants would be around a meter over the cattle's heads and so densely packed as to be impenetrable to a herd of cattle.

    http://bit.ly/13gI1Ix

    As you can see by the map of the sugarcane growing regions linked above, sugarcane is grown primarily in the southern region of the Cerrado, mostly 1200 to 1800 kilometers from the closest rainforest in the Amazon basin----and almost none in the Atlantic rainforest region. Soils in the Atlantic rainforest regions(and Amazon basin as well) are sandy and very pourous----not a good base for the monsoon(wet to dry conditions) needed for sugar culture. They do not hold the moisture and nutrients needed for growth during the dry season.

    Brazil grows enough sugarcane to supply 50% of their transportation fuel needs on about 2-3% of their available arable land. There is far more land available to grow sugarcane than is currently being used. There is no need to clear any rainforest to increase production.

    Sugarcane grows well in the US in Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, Florida, South Carolina, North Carolina, Arizona, California, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and Virgin Islands.

    Cattle are not a native species to South America.

    It doesn't appear to me that neither you or your "experts" commenting on the National Geographic story know much about agriculture or wildlife biology.

    It is true that "we are limited in how much land we have available" to grow any one crop on for biofuel.............be it sugarcane, corn, sorghum or any other. But exactly the same statement can be made of any other crop man grows for any reason, including food.

    Fortunately for us, ethanol is a highly fungible commodity----we can make ethanol from almost anything. Instead of grain or root crops(starch) we can also make it from sugars. If sugarcane is not suitable for an area---it is possible to use other crops. Sugar beets offer similar yields and can be grown in any area of the US offering suitable soils and moisture, including Alaska. We can also make ethanol from agave cactus(actually a succulent but commonly called a cactus). We've been doing it for centuries, it is called tequila. We can even make ethanol from wood, we've been able to do it for over 120 years.
    Jul 29, 2013. 09:41 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • RINs And Biofuels Dominate Valero Conference Call [View article]
    ---------" That is a reason to dump ethanol. We are cutting down the rain forest to grow sugarcane. "-------

    Sugarcane is grown in the Mata Grosso region, analogous to the Great Plains here, savannah country. A thousand miles from the nearest rainforest.
    Jul 28, 2013. 12:34 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • RINs And Biofuels Dominate Valero Conference Call [View article]
    Once again, the question that you failed to address.

    ---------" From my own perspective---atmospheric warming is not the main problem----environmental destruction due to mining and pollution are the priority reasons we need to dump fossil fuels.

    If RINS are not working to meet this goal----what would be a better way to accomplish this? "-------------
    Jul 27, 2013. 12:11 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • RINs And Biofuels Dominate Valero Conference Call [View article]
    http://bit.ly/17KWsEz
    Jul 27, 2013. 12:03 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • RINs And Biofuels Dominate Valero Conference Call [View article]
    from the NOAA link you cite--------" “The ocean is the biggest reservoir for heat in the climate system,” said Josh Willis, an oceanographer at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory and one of the scientists who contributed to the study. “So as the planet warms, we’re finding that 80 to 90 percent of the increased heat ends up in the ocean.” -----------------

    #2)-------I think you need to review the properties of the various wavelengths of EM spectrum.

    There are three modes of thermodynamic movement----radiation, convection and conduction. Just because heat originates in the atmosphere does not mean it stays there.

    The deep ocean looks blue because the blue spectrum is reflected back. That is why you can see it----shorter wavelengths(blues) are not absorbed, that is why they can get to your retina----so that you can "see" the ocean.
    Jul 27, 2013. 11:55 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • RINs And Biofuels Dominate Valero Conference Call [View article]
    Man is not putting significant amounts of water vapor into the atmosphere----------the increase in atmospheric CO2 however is entirely man made.

    It is impossible to raise atmospheric CO2 using biofuels.

    From my own perspective---atmospheric warming is not the main problem----environmental destruction due to mining and pollution are the priority reasons we need to dump fossil fuels.

    If RINS are not working to meet this goal----what would be a better way to accomplish this?
    Jul 26, 2013. 12:41 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • RINs And Biofuels Dominate Valero Conference Call [View article]
    -------" I don't just make those comments off the cuff, I have an extensive scientific background and have actually analyzed the "science.""----------

    So, do you have extensive scientific proof that CO2 does not absorb infrared radiation and converts it to heat ?

    If you do, why have you not published it?
    Jul 25, 2013. 01:41 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
COMMENTS STATS
580 Comments
435 Likes