Hey Oil Barons.......

[tx 3 putt 76880]

1 hour ago, Aqua Buddha said:

Oil patch about to be lit.  F-150 Raptor sales about to take off along with guys buying their wives tits before they divorce them.

the guys sweeping the shop will be driving raptors. You’re not thinking big enough !!!

[tx 3 putt 76880]

every basic midessa housewife will be driving G wagons, toting their birkins around 

[Guest]

3 hours ago, BevoSwag said:

As an old old retired oil man I have yet to hear a discussion on how EV's are the absolute answer to saving the planet.  If 300 million are charging their cars every night in the garage where is the energy coming from that makes that possible?  And don't get me started on the used retired batteries.

Nat gas. People who bring that up are young, stupid or both. 

[52-80 19147]

7 hours ago, BevoSwag said:

As an old old retired oil man I have yet to hear a discussion on how EV's are the absolute answer to saving the planet.  If 300 million are charging their cars every night in the garage where is the energy coming from that makes that possible?  And don't get me started on the used retired batteries.

"Saving the planet" is a loaded question.  Whether your energy is coming from crude refined into liquid fuel, gas-generator to electricity, or cow farts, a joule is a joule.  In energy terms, EVs are 3x more efficient than normal cars.  The globe's entire supply of energy - it can propel cars 1x the distance, or 3x the distance.

Retired car batteries get recycled, like batteries have been recyclable for decades.  The higher content of valuable metals in them makes them more desirable to recycle/recover.

[52-80 19147]

On 3/2/2022 at 7:42 PM, 52-80 said:

I'm seeing the service companies and suppliers lag the producers lagging the crude pride.  This whole Russia thing is going to put more weight on the energy-independence narrative (again), which might induce the e/p to open up the pursebooks.  I would take profit from the XOM/CVX/XLE/XOP of the world and put it in RIG/OIH.

 

just a hunch

intraday

RIG up 25%

OIH up 9%

Edited March 7, 2022 by 52-80

[Storm the Field 5294]

Whiting and Oasis are merging and will be HQ'd in Houston under a new name. 

[MAUFRAIS 6620]

Whoasis

[Guest]

9 hours ago, 52-80 said:

"Saving the planet" is a loaded question.  Whether your energy is coming from crude refined into liquid fuel, gas-generator to electricity, or cow farts, a joule is a joule.  In energy terms, EVs are 3x more efficient than normal cars.  The globe's entire supply of energy - it can propel cars 1x the distance, or 3x the distance.

Retired car batteries get recycled, like batteries have been recyclable for decades.  The higher content of valuable metals in them makes them more desirable to recycle/recover.

a) it won’t save the planet. There will be tremendous growth in gasoline engines for cars probably until we die, globally. 

b) the answer to his question is natural gas. 

[billfromlaketravis 11448]

3 hours ago, Storm the Field said:

Whiting and Oasis are merging and will be HQ'd in Houston under a new name. 

How are the Bakken companies doing? I haven’t heard a peep about North Dakota in quite some time. 

[Armybrat 40826]

21 minutes ago, billfromlaketravis said:

How are the Bakken companies doing? I haven’t heard a peep about North Dakota in quite some time. 

Harold Hamm of Continental Resources is expanding into West Texas.

He is the one who has drilled in two of our mineral lease spacings (Montrail & McKenzie Counties). In the latter, he had planned on 12 wells, but could only get two completed before the current administration’s BLM denied permits for the remaining 10. That’s because the feds own 30 acres within that 1,280 acre spacing. The rest of the acreage is privately owned.

And the mofo (/cr) denying the permits is supposedly planning to travel to Saudi to persuade them to increase their production. WTF?

fml

 

 

Edited March 7, 2022 by Armybrat

[52-80 19147]

1 hour ago, Porterhouse said:

a) it won’t save the planet. There will be tremendous growth in gasoline engines for cars probably until we die, globally. 

b) the answer to his question is natural gas. 

(a) ‘saving the planet’ is such an emotionally-charged, trap-filled, and loaded statement its not worth diving into. but (1) electricity is a more resource-efficient means of automotive transportation (2) sales growth in EV cars have already and will continue to outpace combustion cars [easy because it starts from lower base]
 

(b) he asked how can 300m ev cars can charge simultaneously and what from. current electricity is primarily from has but (1) the world has wayyyy more gas than it does oil (in energy/boe/equiv terms) and (2) its a silly question because theres not 300m ev cars now or next year.  
 

that would be like asking in 1900 “how can automobiles ever replace horse carriages when theres barely any oil extraction or gasoline stations”.   the answer is that they complement eachother. 
 

 

[MoJames 8244]

Couple questions for my edification.

How far off is the US on being able to produce as much as we use with and without Canada's imports?

What missteps have been made in the past 2 years that have led most to blame Biden?

Why is everyone in O&G so opposed to diversification of energy sources? I don't see any scenario where O&G isn't produced and used.

[Armybrat 40826]

Well, if Tesla would sell their Model 3 for $25,000, I’d buy one.

[Guest]

8 minutes ago, 52-80 said:

(a) ‘saving the planet’ is such an emotionally-charged, trap-filled, and loaded statement its not worth diving into. but (1) electricity is a more resource-efficient means of automotive transportation (2) sales growth in EV cars have already and will continue to outpace combustion cars [easy because it starts from lower base]
 

(b) he asked how can 300m ev cars can charge simultaneously and what from. current electricity is primarily from has but (1) the world has wayyyy more gas than it does oil (in energy/boe/equiv terms) and (2) its a silly question because theres not 300m ev cars now or next year.  
 

that would be like asking in 1900 “how can automobiles ever replace horse carriages when theres barely any oil extraction or gasoline stations”.   the answer is that they complement eachother. 
 

 

You’re reading a lot into his comments that I didn’t read, because I don’t look at these comments as any sort of political commentary because I’m not looking to quibble.  We get bombarded with EVs and “energy transition”. This is an oil board and he’s a retired oilman.

The answer is nat gas and I’ll leave it at that. 

[Guest]

1 minute ago, MoJames said:

Couple questions for my edification.

How far off is the US on being able to produce as much as we use with and without Canada's imports?

What missteps have been made in the past 2 years that have led most to blame Biden?

Why is everyone in O&G so opposed to diversification of energy sources? I don't see any scenario where O&G isn't produced and used.

It will never produce as much as we use with Canadian imports. Like, not even close. 

He hasn’t done anything; he’s just a moron. Like really stupid for releasing SPR barrels when that was just going to worsen the problem. Biden couldn’t have done anything differently to cause long term prices to have done anything other than exactly what they are doing. His administration was SO unnecessarily hostile to the industry, much moreso than Obama, and now they’re in the midst of a multi-month walk-back with the industry. 

I’m not opposed to diversification. I’m opposed to idiot governments / IEA- type organizations saying oil can’t be used / won’t be needed for light duty transport by 2050. That is so laughably stupid and is a goal to make the Greta Thunbergs of the world happy. 

[Guest]

9 minutes ago, Armybrat said:

Well, if Tesla would sell their Model 3 for $25,000, I’d buy one.

I won’t ever buy an EV out of principle. 

[MoJames 8244]

9 minutes ago, Porterhouse said:

It will never produce as much as we use with Canadian imports. Like, not even close. 

He hasn’t done anything; he’s just a moron. Like really stupid for releasing SPR barrels when that was just going to worsen the problem. Biden couldn’t have done anything differently to cause long term prices to have done anything other than exactly what they are doing. His administration was SO unnecessarily hostile to the industry, much moreso than Obama, and now they’re in the midst of a multi-month walk-back with the industry. 

I’m not opposed to diversification. I’m opposed to idiot governments / IEA- type organizations saying oil can’t be used / won’t be needed for light duty transport by 2050. That is so laughably stupid and is a goal to make the Greta Thunbergs of the world happy. 

Is there a point in the near future where we are only dependent on our production and Canada imports?

Appreciate the response on Biden. I by no means approving his presidency up to this point, but I have a hard time pinning the cost of Gasoline on him.

The way I look at change is you need both sides of that ridiculous spectrum involved to land somewhere in the middle. That's what I hope happens with the current trends. Petroleum is so intertwined in so many facets of our life, that I don't see it going away, but a decreased dependence would be lovely.

[Armybrat 40826]

15 minutes ago, Porterhouse said:

I won’t ever buy an EV out of principle. 

.

[52-80 19147]

15 minutes ago, Porterhouse said:

You’re reading a lot into his comments that I didn’t read, because I don’t look at these comments as any sort of political commentary because I’m not looking to quibble.  We get bombarded with EVs and “energy transition”. This is an oil board and he’s a retired oilman.

The answer is nat gas and I’ll leave it at that. 

I misread his question. I thought he asked how can 300m cars charge simultaneously, when he asked what does 300m cars charge from. 
 

Yes, currently in the US, it is primarily from gas. But the bigger answer is it doesnt *have* to be. 

[billfromlaketravis 11448]

Has the government ever offered incentives for refiners to convert their facilities from heavy to light crude? 

[Fudge Nuggets 19189]

On 3/5/2022 at 6:44 PM, Johnny Chimpo said:

I got in at 33 and that’s an 11% yield so I plan on just holding it for divvies. 

I'm at ~10% dividend yield and plan to hold it until I need the cash for something.

[tbone_ 14113]

Subscribed

[Storm the Field 5294]

18 hours ago, billfromlaketravis said:

How are the Bakken companies doing? I haven’t heard a peep about North Dakota in quite some time. 

Bakken rig count dropped all the way down to single digits in late 2020, and has only crept back up to 35, which isn't even back to the pre-Covid average of around 55 at any given time from Summer 2017 to March 2020. Very far cry from the ~200 that used to be drilling back during the 2011-14 boom times. 

[Storm the Field 5294]

WH supposedly announcing a ban on imports of Russian crude, LNG, and coal later this morning. 

UK to announce plans to "phase out" Russian oil imports entirely over the next few months.

Hold onto your butts.

[Guest]

I think the ban is less of an issue price-wise, in that it’s already largely priced in. It’s probably more important to hammer Putin. I don’t have an issue with this. 

[52-80 19147]

3 minutes ago, Storm the Field said:

WH supposedly announcing a ban on imports of Russian crude, LNG, and coal later this morning. 

UK to announce plans to "phase out" Russian oil imports entirely over the next few months.

Hold onto your butts.

epic global pain, for everyone.

good thing we're not longer in the middle of winter. 

[The Ace of Aces 5175]

So, question - my family was all in the oil business but I am not and no longer in Texas so don't have any real info on the state of affairs anymore (sidenote: to me gas is still cheaper than it probably should be and has remained remarkably cheap for the existence of the US). 

These charts appear the US is basically energy independent (exporting more than we import) already minus crude. Is there an opportunity without drilling in nature/wildlife reserves to get crude to also become independent? 

[pearlandhorn 3269]

On 2/15/2022 at 1:22 PM, 52-80 said:

Biden considering suspension of ~18c/galon of federal tax on gasoline.  So thats how you fight inflation...

 

 

On 2/15/2022 at 2:50 PM, Porterhouse said:

Biden is a fucking moron. 

 

On 1/26/2022 at 12:32 PM, pearlandhorn said:

[Rip76 4925]

47 minutes ago, Storm the Field said:

WH supposedly announcing a ban on imports of Russian crude, LNG, and coal later this morning. 

UK to announce plans to "phase out" Russian oil imports entirely over the next few months.

Hold onto your butts.

Yup

Just say we will ramp up production, even if we don’t.

[Guest]

10 minutes ago, pearlandhorn said:

 

 

Not that he ever had much control but Biden can’t do anything to hurt or help oil prices. 

[52-80 19147]

WH now officially ban import of RU oil and gas.  (they exclude Uranium).

Painful side effects for everyone, but I can admit its the consistent and principled thing to do.

Edited March 8, 2022 by 52-80

[Lagunamadre 1975]

18 hours ago, billfromlaketravis said:

Has the government ever offered incentives for refiners to convert their facilities from heavy to light crude? 

That's a great question and what the average American misses in the "energy independent" talk. America could pretty much be self sufficient if all of our refineries were retrofitted for light sweet (shale) oil. The problem is that's a multibillion dollar and time consuming process which could only be done if the majors believed the light sweet was here forever, I think most of them feel like the shale production will always be the swing oil but will never have the economics to be our base, so for now our base will continue to be the heavier ME/Canadian/Mexican oil that we are currently set up to refine. With decisions like that with decades long implications, it would be hard to trust any gov subsidies that could be taken away 4 years later. So short of us nationalizing the refineries or major technological developments in shale development, probably not going to change any time soon. 

[billfromlaketravis 11448]

6 minutes ago, Lagunamadre said:

That's a great question and what the average American misses in the "energy independent" talk. America could pretty much be self sufficient if all of our refineries were retrofitted for light sweet (shale) oil. The problem is that's a multibillion dollar and time consuming process which could only be done if the majors believed the light sweet was here forever, I think most of them feel like the shale production will always be the swing oil but will never have the economics to be our base, so for now our base will continue to be the heavier ME/Canadian/Mexican oil that we are currently set up to refine. With decisions like that with decades long implications, it would be hard to trust any gov subsidies that could be taken away 4 years later. So short of us nationalizing the refineries or major technological developments in shale development, probably not going to change any time soon. 

Follow up question. If Keystone XL had been approved,  could the Canadian heavy crude easily replace the Russian heavy crude that will be banned today? 

Edited March 8, 2022 by billfromlaketravis

[Neonmoon 38129]

9 minutes ago, billfromlaketravis said:

Follow up question. If Keystone XL had been approved,  could the Canadian heavy crude easily replace the Russian heavy crude that will be banned today? 

Russian Ural is medium at (30.6), a mix between It’s a little heavier than Brent (37.9). Canadian is heavy sour. (24.7)

But generally, yes. We could replace the Russian heavy blend with Canada. However the Keystone XL wasn’t going to be complete until 2023. We can still replace it but transport costs will be a bitch 

[FORTY NINE TO ZERO 2652]

59 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

Russian Ural is medium at (30.6), a mix between It’s a little heavier than Brent (37.9). Canadian is heavy sour. (24.7)

But generally, yes. We could replace the Russian heavy blend with Canada. However the Keystone XL wasn’t going to be complete until 2023. We can still replace it but transport costs will be a bitch 

thanks i was curious about the xl as well 

[MoJames 8244]

3 hours ago, Storm the Field said:

WH supposedly announcing a ban on imports of Russian crude, LNG, and coal later this morning. 

UK to announce plans to "phase out" Russian oil imports entirely over the next few months.

Hold onto your butts.

Appears we import per wsj around 8% of our crude from Russia?

https://www.wsj.com/articles/why-does-the-u-s-still-buy-russian-oil-11646151935

[52-80 19147]

8% of US import doesn't seem like a high number at first glance and in that narrow context. 

the true meaningful context is that it's a full reduction of russia's supply from the markets in which it used to trade.  further, the removal of supply doesn't yield a linear increase in price.  add on top of that levered speculative positioning used by the trader, which when the price is volatile, causes all manners of squeezes and blowups and fuckery. 

this results in insane actual spot prices, and weird shit like earlier when oil was "negative"

[babysdaddy 2721]

2 hours ago, Neonmoon said:

Russian Ural is medium at (30.6), a mix between It’s a little heavier than Brent (37.9). Canadian is heavy sour. (24.7)

But generally, yes. We could replace the Russian heavy blend with Canada. However the Keystone XL wasn’t going to be complete until 2023. We can still replace it but transport costs will be a bitch 

what are those numbers indicating?  In my mind I think of refining equivalent to distillment, is that incorrect?  

[Lagunamadre 1975]

8 minutes ago, babysdaddy said:

what are those numbers indicating?  In my mind I think of refining equivalent to distillment, is that incorrect?  

I think Neonmoon knows a lot more about the subject than I do, so he can expand, but the numbers refer to the density of the crude. The lower the number the more dense/heavy. 

[MoJames 8244]

1 hour ago, 52-80 said:

8% of US import doesn't seem like a high number at first glance and in that narrow context. 

the true meaningful context is that it's a full reduction of russia's supply from the markets in which it used to trade.  further, the removal of supply doesn't yield a linear increase in price.  add on top of that levered speculative positioning used by the trader, which when the price is volatile, causes all manners of squeezes and blowups and fuckery. 

this results in insane actual spot prices, and weird shit like earlier when oil was "negative"

And I'm assuming even in a world where the US and Canada were no longer dependent on any other country for O&G, prices would still fluctuate with the global economy?

[Armybrat 40826]

3 hours ago, Neonmoon said:

Russian Ural is medium at (30.6), a mix between It’s a little heavier than Brent (37.9). Canadian is heavy sour. (24.7)

But generally, yes. We could replace the Russian heavy blend with Canada. However the Keystone XL wasn’t going to be complete until 2023. We can still replace it but transport costs will be a bitch 

I thought the heavy Canadian sour crude in the Keystone pipeline was coming through N Dakota to be mixed withe the Bakken light sweet crude?

[52-80 19147]

29 minutes ago, MoJames said:

And I'm assuming even in a world where the US and Canada were no longer dependent on any other country for O&G, prices would still fluctuate with the global economy?

Yeah if we banned exports completely, the global pricing dynamics wouldnt affect it.  

Norways electricity market was like this before they started transmitting all their excess to the rest of Europe. Now theyre getting borked on prices. 

[Neonmoon 38129]

33 minutes ago, Armybrat said:

I thought the heavy Canadian sour crude in the Keystone pipeline was coming through N Dakota to be mixed withe the Bakken light sweet crude?

The Keystone XL was two extensions. One extending the current Keystone from Cushing to Gulf Coast, and another extending from Alberta through the Bakken down to Kansas. So yes, it would help the transportation issues in the Bakken. 

I think Canadian heavy sour could replace the Russian crude but the Canadian companies would have to make a deal with the US companies , and then whatever CR deals that would need to make it happen. It's doable though. 

 

[Neonmoon 38129]

1 hour ago, Lagunamadre said:

I think Neonmoon knows a lot more about the subject than I do, so he can expand, but the numbers refer to the density of the crude. The lower the number the more dense/heavy. 

That is correct. Heavy oils are cheaper to buy, but more expensive to refine, because they contain dense hydrocarbons and require more energy to break apart ( or "crack") 

 

[Armybrat 40826]

41 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

The Keystone XL was two extensions. One extending the current Keystone from Cushing to Gulf Coast, and another extending from Alberta through the Bakken down to Kansas. So yes, it would help the transportation issues in the Bakken. 

I think Canadian heavy sour could replace the Russian crude but the Canadian companies would have to make a deal with the US companies , and then whatever CR deals that would need to make it happen. It's doable though. 

 

Yes, it sure would help with the Bakken crude transportation. ND light sweet has been selling for a lot less than WTI because of the added rail & trucking costs, from what I’ve been told. The spread has usually ranged $5-$10 per barrel between the two.

Edited March 8, 2022 by Armybrat

[Guest]

52 minutes ago, Armybrat said:

Yes, it sure would help with the Bakken crude transportation. ND light sweet has been selling for a lot less than WTI because of the added rail & trucking costs, from what I’ve been told. The spread has usually ranged $5-$10 per barrel between the two.

No doubt. I love how the admin is now saying it is irrelevant. No, it’s not at all irrelevant. 

[52-80 19147]

Lol, the saudis and emiratis rebuffed bidens attempt to connect to them (to ask for increased supply)

the admin tried working with venezuel, but their infrastructure and production is shit

[MoJames 8244]

20 minutes ago, Porterhouse said:

I love watching them talk shit about the industry for 2 years and then bumble around in desperation flailing mode. Fuck Biden, Granholm and Psaki. 

Do you actually think that the Saudi's and Emiratis would've worked with anyone in this situation?

[used2b 249]

35 minutes ago, Porterhouse said:

I love watching them talk shit about the industry for 2 years and then bumble around in desperation flailing mode. Fuck Biden, Granholm and Psaki. 

Please stop name-dropping and Cloak Rooming in this thread. Thank you.

[Guest]

22 minutes ago, MoJames said:

Do you actually think that the Saudi's and Emiratis would've worked with anyone in this situation?

No idea. Hadn’t thought about it. It changes zero with my post. Saudi’s what?

7 minutes ago, used2b said:

Please stop name-dropping and Cloak Rooming in this thread. Thank you.

No. It is relevant after he and those two Secretaries have shit on the industry for two solid years. I’m largely apolitical and was extremely critical of Trump here when he was tweeting at OPEC to produce more, in attempt to lower prices. Recent events will make me a lot of money, as is generally the case with Democratic presidencies. But that triumvirate of morons have done major damage to us all.