jack's Comments

Can Royal Dutch Shell's Shale Extraction Technique End 'Peak Oil' Paranoia?

Wed, 11 Apr 2007 22:39:43 -0400

I don't dispute that there is science behind production slowing from existing sources. Nor do I doubt that prices will go up. I'm with Jim Rogers on commodities including oil going up for the foreseeable future. My only point is that the world is not going to come to an end, even if gas goes up to $7 a gallon. At some point, the prices will get high enough that alternative petroleum sources like shale will make economic sense. We may be in for a slide, but not an endless one.

Can Royal Dutch Shell's Shale Extraction Technique End 'Peak Oil' Paranoia?

Wed, 11 Apr 2007 12:38:38 -0400

We are in complete agreement over corn ethanol. And you are right that it will take time to ramp up production rates. That is largely attributable to the US government, which has not allowed access to the colorado shale fields until very recently.

I remain convinced that necessity is the mother of invention. That the oil is there is not in dispute. It's only a matter of how quickly and cheaply it can be extracted, and if oil prices continue to rise, we will eventually reach the point where even the nasty, expensive traditional extraction methods become commercially viable.

But again, I think our energies are better directed to finding alternatives to petroleum than to worrying about running out.

Can Royal Dutch Shell's Shale Extraction Technique End 'Peak Oil' Paranoia?

Wed, 11 Apr 2007 12:31:29 -0400

Norme, please read the last paragraph of my article. Regarding ethanol, we are in agreement, at least with corn ethanol. Its energy efficiency ratio is laughable. It's nothing more than a cash cow for ADM lobbyists. Sugar and celluloid ethanol have more potential, but frankly, I believe offshore nuclear plants powering hydrogen pipelines is the best energy solution, at least for now. Waste is an issue, but the issue of global warming is much more pressing. Nuclear would give us more time to develop more sustainable energy sources, and hydrogen pipelines would be an efficient distribution means.

I remain amused that I have alternately been called a socialist and a right-wing reactionary in response to the same article. Any time I manage to anger both Democrats and Republicans, I figure I must be doing something right.

Can Royal Dutch Shell's Shale Extraction Technique End 'Peak Oil' Paranoia?

Wed, 11 Apr 2007 12:20:42 -0400

I've gotten a number of reponses along these line. Try to understand that the version of the peak oil theory to which I am responding may not be your understanding of the theory. The more nuanced position you describe has merit. The end-of-the-world scenarios that are rapidly spreading do not. It is the latter to which I am responding in this article, not the former.

Can Royal Dutch Shell's Shale Extraction Technique End 'Peak Oil' Paranoia?

Wed, 11 Apr 2007 12:17:00 -0400

Yes, the heating process requires time and energy, but then again, so does drilling 5 miles into the earth, or hauling coal out of a mine. Generating energy always requires expending energy. According to Shell, their in-situ extraction method has a reasonably high positive energy ratio (I don't recall the exact figures). From what I've read, large natural gas pipelines are being routed to the area to power the shale extraction efforts.

Kerogen, by the way, is a higly pure and high-grade form of petroleum. It does require some processing, but Its soluble portion is known as bitumen, which is much more clean-burning than other forms of petroleum, and considered to be of an even higher grade than light sweet crude.

Can Royal Dutch Shell's Shale Extraction Technique End 'Peak Oil' Paranoia?

Tue, 10 Apr 2007 18:53:44 -0400

By the way, I am amused that I am accused both of being a "conservative" and a fan of Al Gore, in response to the same article.

Can Royal Dutch Shell's Shale Extraction Technique End 'Peak Oil' Paranoia?

Tue, 10 Apr 2007 18:52:18 -0400

Mr. Sterman, you are incorrect regarding patent publication procedures. Patent applications are routinely published 18 months after application, whether granted or not. I am a patent attorney, so I am in a position to know. You may view an excerpt from the application here: appft1.uspto.gov/netac...;Sect2=HITOFF&...

Can Royal Dutch Shell's Shale Extraction Technique End 'Peak Oil' Paranoia?

Tue, 10 Apr 2007 18:47:00 -0400

To eedmund: the only thing that's new is that I've been seeing a big increase in the volume of articles claiming the end times are nigh because of the peak oil issue. The patent application was published a few months ago. I decided to write on the topic because several of my readers forwarded me articles from newsletters advising drastic action to deal with the peak oil "crisis." One article went so far as to advise stockpiling food and arms to prepare for a complete societal breakdown, all due to peak oil. This was reminiscent of 80s fear-mongering over World War III (which was far more justified, by the way.)

As for Mr. Whittaker, I sympathize with your position, but it's plain you didn't read my article in its entirety. I invite you to re-read the last paragraph of my article in particular.

I also sympathize with those who have noted that the "legitimate" peak oil theory is not so much that we will run out completely, but that production will stagnate while demand will continue to rise. I dispute that this scenario is inevitable, but it certainly is plausible. The trouble is that there has been a huge volume of writing recently characterizing peak oil in extreme terms, as described above.

In short, will there be economic woes, reminiscent of the 70s? Perhaps. But a complete global economic breakdown, resulting in war, famine, locusts, and seas of blood over $100-a-barrel oil? Give me a break.

Why Netflix Can't Match Blockbuster's Competitive Advantage

Tue, 27 Mar 2007 15:53:01 -0400

One last thing: in the long run, BBI is far more likely to be "doomed" than Netflix. Its brick-and-mortar stores provide a temporary advantage now, but when downloads take over, they will be nothing but a liability.

Why Netflix Can't Match Blockbuster's Competitive Advantage

Tue, 27 Mar 2007 15:43:12 -0400

Thanks for the comments. I have a couple of responses to offer. First, if you read my article again, you will see that I don't suggest that either company will be "doomed" by the rise in competition. In fact, in the case of Netflix, I specifically say I believe it will survive as a business. It is an excellent company with excellent management and an excellent brand. I simply believe that it is too expensive at its current earnings multiple.

Regarding Blockbuster, the fact that its service may not be particularly profitable is beside the point. The fact is that it is bound to eat into Netflix's market share. As I said, I don't recommend BBI as an investment. But it doesn't have to do well itself to damage Netflix's long-term prospects.

Lastly, I agree that I should have gone into more detail about Netflix's download service. I hinted at my issue with this: I am confident the service will be reasonably successful due to Netflix's fine brand -- my issue is that there are hardly any barriers to entry into this business. Prior to download services, Netflix had an impassable competive moat in the form of massive DVD warehouses and a streamlined distribution system.

This huge advantage evaporates entirely with download service. Netflix (an others) will have to compete based on other factors like brand, selection, etc. Again, I have no doubt it will be a modest success at doing so. But not enough of a success to pay 33-times earnings.

Gold To Break Away From Equities

Wed, 21 Mar 2007 15:38:21 -0400

Gold is like any other commodity. It has a certain intrinsic value based on supply and demand, which is independent of currency values. Thus it is a good hedge against inflation. But then, so are all commodities.

The thing to remember is that commodities also rise in value as interest rates increase, due to the interest rate component of futures contracts. Because a common method of combating inflation is to raise rates, commodities of all varieties can have periods of outperformance, as prices are pushed up both by the inflation itself, and by the interest rate hikes used to combat it. Gold is no exception, as leveraged positions and options are also rate dependent.

Good businesses, like commodities, have intrinsic value and thus serve as reasonable inflation hedges themselves. However, stock prices tend to go down with rate increases, rather than up. In light of the Fed's decision to hold rates steady recently, it's no great surprise that gold and stocks have moved in parallel. If the fed chooses to raise rates (as I agree it should), the combination of the herd waking up and saying "uh oh, inflation" with the rates themselves should cause gold to pass stocks by briefly
I like gold as a short term play right now, but that's it. Timber is a smarter long-term move. It has the same inflation-flighting benefits of gold, with the added benefit of income production. Gold doesn't grow on trees. Timber does.

Drop by Quite Contrarian some time. I'll be writing a number of articles about inflation over the next few weeks.