Hey Oil Barons.......

[Guest]

2 hours ago, MoJames said:

lol at people asking to have posts erased on a longhorn board about O&G.

Had nothing to do with O&G or any post here. 

[Guest]

3 hours ago, The Royal We said:

The way I read the article is all heating will have to be electric, no gas fired furnaces allowed for keeping buildings warm.  Where do they think the electricity is going to come from? 

As someone who lives in the sticks and has to use electricity to heat my house in the winter, let me tell you how expensive that can get.  I'd spend quite a bit of money to run nat gas to my house if it was an option.

Even if it’s only an option in her budget, she’s a total moron. 

[Guest Lobo]

3 hours ago, MoJames said:

lol at people asking to have posts erased on a longhorn board about O&G.

Look man, we all said some shit we regret when we were at -$30/bbl.  No harm, no foul.  Please give your mother my best  

[Loop 1604 227]

Nat gas futures over $6.00/mcf

Edited April 6, 2022 by Loop 1604

[billfromlaketravis 11448]

Haynesville guys how ya feeling?! 
 

 

[Tex48 840]

8 hours ago, billfromlaketravis said:

Haynesville guys how ya feeling?! 
 

 

They're probably feeling pretty good this morning with the 5% spike on gas. 

[Armybrat 40826]

I feel pretty damn good -

After nearly a decade of frustrating surveys, studies, & litigation in North Dakota over accretions on the now submerged shoreline of the Missouri River under Lake Sakakawea, I gained and additional 3+ acres of mineral rights.
So as a result, the royalties accrued from the production during that time were released by the holding bank and deposited into my account. 
Nice to get a low six figure windfall  (99%er humblebrag for sure)

[MAUFRAIS 6621]

I don’t think anybody is unimpressed by getting a one time check like that. Congrats. That’s awesome. Go buy a gun.

[Guest]

17 minutes ago, Armybrat said:

I feel pretty damn good -

After nearly a decade of frustrating surveys, studies, & litigation in North Dakota over accretions on the now submerged shoreline of the Missouri River under Lake Sakakawea, I gained and additional 3+ acres of mineral rights.
So as a result, the royalties accrued from the production during that time were released by the holding bank and deposited into my account. 
Nice to get a low six figure windfall  (99%er humblebrag for sure)

I imagine Continental operates a large portion of your stuff?  I’ve been fighting them to get in pay on 7 wells in which we have a significant NRI. Fighting for months. Fighting on my end - probably SOP for them. Well, division order analyst finally pulled his head from his ass and we just got paid. It was a not insignificant amount. 

[52-80 19147]

drop a small nuke in this room and be done with it

 

 

[MoJames 8244]

15 hours ago, Lobo said:

Look man, we all said some shit we regret when we were at -$30/bbl.  No harm, no foul.  Please give your mother my best  

Oh I just assumed you guys were big enough to own your anonymous posts on the internet. My bad.

[Armybrat 40826]

34 minutes ago, Porterhouse said:

I imagine Continental operates a large portion of your stuff?  I’ve been fighting them to get in pay on 7 wells in which we have a significant NRI. Fighting for months. Fighting on my end - probably SOP for them. Well, division order analyst finally pulled his head from his ass and we just got paid. It was a not insignificant amount. 

Yes, it’s tough to get Hamm’s people moving sometimes, and then they can be demanding when it comesthe probate courts & such. Then their accounting office must employ aggy to screw stuff up. Same with their state politicians.

I wonder if he’s gonna have to write another great big one to some ex lady friends?

[Storm the Field 5294]

13 hours ago, Loop 1604 said:

Nat gas futures over $6.00/mcf

Bring back the Barnett Shale!!!!

[Guest]

3 hours ago, MoJames said:

Oh I just assumed you guys were big enough to own your anonymous posts on the internet. My bad.

You done with your little monthly mole routine?

[Storm the Field 5294]

RBOB down to $3.05. If that level holds, regular unleaded in TX should average ~$3.60 in the near future.

[BLKNSTY 289]

question to the pro-oil guys here, say you get what you want - no activist ESG initiatives, ramp up of banks investing in production, streamlined permitting, Keystone and other pipelines, hell even US DOE backed funding for retrofitting of refiners to process our domestically produced light sweet crude.

But the trade off is we reinstate the crude oil export ban that Obama did away with back in 2014 I think. And yes I know this doesn’t apply to nat gas.

We are currently exporting around 4 million bbls/day of crude oil. Up from about 0.5 in 2014.

We are currently exporting around 12 bcf/day of LNG. Up from about 0 in 2014. Nat gas via pipeline is around 8 bcf/day, up from about 6 in 2014.

And we’re also producing more crude oil and nat gas today than we were in 2014, even though our internal consumption has remained relatively flat. Yet we’re paying $5/gal and $6/mmbtu

we know for a fact that nat gas and crude oil are priced on the marginal cost to produce (i.e the cost to produce the last bbl/mmbtu needed to balance the market more or less sets the price of the first produces).

cause here’s where I’m coming from - can’t have your cake and eat it too. We can’t be out here saying American independence, lower prices when we know all of the incremental production is headed towards international markets which frankly makes a ton of sense/is big oils right since we’re all capitalists.

My belief is that even if we remove all those impediments and don’t reinstate the crude oil ban - the days of $3 gasoline/nat gas are firmly behind us without some black swan demand destruction (i.e. COVID) event. I’d argue that this is actually anti-American in a way since we’re still getting fucked by high gasoline prices since big oil makes better returns/better financing cause of a forward sold contract going international plus the additional pollution in our local environment so that a subsection of oil and gas producers and mineral right owners make off like bandits. So as long as the crude oil exports are still in the picture - I’m having a tough time believing that big oil will take pity on us Americans and our $5 gasoline/nat gas so they are better served blaming ESG and permitting (i.e. controlling the narrative/deflecting)

Would love to here from the experts on where I’m wrong.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Hozz 1017]

First of all, why not both?  Why is one (easing domestic production hurdles) tied to the other (restricting export) in your argument?

But I'll take a stab.  More of something means cheaper prices assuming demand remains the same.  And oil/gas is a global market regardless of our export, or lack of export, restrictions.  And demand worldwide is highly inelastic.  The price goes up and people just pay it and if its a business or production input the increase just gets passed on down.  So if we produce more oil and gas and everyone else stays the same, it gets cheaper eventually.  Smarter people than me have posted reasons why you can't index the price at the pump to the price of oil in this thread.

If the gloves were off for US producers in terms of no more restricting federal leases, no slow playing permits and no ESG bullshit choking financing and investment and we embraced the fact that a barrel of oil not produced here is a barrel that will be produced elsewhere, if possible, then we would see prices fall over time.  Nothing anyone can do is going to reduce the price people pay at the pump over night.

As for pipelines...they are objectively safer and more efficient than literally every other means of transport.  So, do with that what you will if you are wondering why Keystone XL got torpedoed.

[Guest]

3 hours ago, BLKNSTY said:

question to the pro-oil guys here, say you get what you want - no activist ESG initiatives, ramp up of banks investing in production, streamlined permitting, Keystone and other pipelines, hell even US DOE backed funding for retrofitting of refiners to process our domestically produced light sweet crude.

But the trade off is we reinstate the crude oil export ban that Obama did away with back in 2014 I think. And yes I know this doesn’t apply to nat gas.

We are currently exporting around 4 million bbls/day of crude oil. Up from about 0.5 in 2014.

We are currently exporting around 12 bcf/day of LNG. Up from about 0 in 2014. Nat gas via pipeline is around 8 bcf/day, up from about 6 in 2014.

And we’re also producing more crude oil and nat gas today than we were in 2014, even though our internal consumption has remained relatively flat. Yet we’re paying $5/gal and $6/mmbtu

we know for a fact that nat gas and crude oil are priced on the marginal cost to produce (i.e the cost to produce the last bbl/mmbtu needed to balance the market more or less sets the price of the first produces).

cause here’s where I’m coming from - can’t have your cake and eat it too. We can’t be out here saying American independence, lower prices when we know all of the incremental production is headed towards international markets which frankly makes a ton of sense/is big oils right since we’re all capitalists.

My belief is that even if we remove all those impediments and don’t reinstate the crude oil ban - the days of $3 gasoline/nat gas are firmly behind us without some black swan demand destruction (i.e. COVID) event. I’d argue that this is actually anti-American in a way since we’re still getting fucked by high gasoline prices since big oil makes better returns/better financing cause of a forward sold contract going international plus the additional pollution in our local environment so that a subsection of oil and gas producers and mineral right owners make off like bandits. So as long as the crude oil exports are still in the picture - I’m having a tough time believing that big oil will take pity on us Americans and our $5 gasoline/nat gas so they are better served blaming ESG and permitting (i.e. controlling the narrative/deflecting)

Would love to here from the experts on where I’m wrong.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes, why not have cake and eat it too?  I don’t care about restrictions. It will exacerbate the already-overwhelming increasing price trend. That’s fine by me. The crude oil export ban is incredibly dumb. The world doesn’t work like that. It’s a global commodity and always will be. Guys like Putin don’t run our world. We would eradicate any WWIII threat with haste.

You seem like you know some things reasonably well, but you’ve erected this odd straw man that isn’t even a part of the equation. I can’t remember why Obama did that, but it was yet another idiotic thing a Democrat President did that served some individual political goal, didn't work, didn’t last, and probably increased prices which wasn’t the expected goal. Q4’2014 was when the downturn started though. 

[Guest]

Northeast and West Coast investors are totally walking back ESG excuses for not investing in E&P (university endowments with idiot student involvement are not).  It’s widely discussed: capital is flowing. Companies just aren’t backing off exercising capital discipline. 

[BLKNSTY 289]

First of all, why not both?  Why is one (easing domestic production hurdles) tied to the other (restricting export) in your argument?
But I'll take a stab.  More of something means cheaper prices assuming demand remains the same.  And oil/gas is a global market regardless of our export, or lack of export, restrictions.  And demand worldwide is highly inelastic.  The price goes up and people just pay it and if its a business or production input the increase just gets passed on down.  So if we produce more oil and gas and everyone else stays the same, it gets cheaper eventually.  Smarter people than me have posted reasons why you can't index the price at the pump to the price of oil in this thread.
If the gloves were off for US producers in terms of no more restricting federal leases, no slow playing permits and no ESG bullshit choking financing and investment and we embraced the fact that a barrel of oil not produced here is a barrel that will be produced elsewhere, if possible, then we would see prices fall over time.  Nothing anyone can do is going to reduce the price people pay at the pump over night.
As for pipelines...they are objectively safer and more efficient than literally every other means of transport.  So, do with that what you will if you are wondering why Keystone XL got torpedoed.

the reason as to why not both is that it’s just a hypothetical negotiation between the left and the right in terms of what can we do to help bring down gasoline prices today. In this hypothetical situation in which you were the single decision maker for the entire o&g market, would you take a deal that said we’ll ease domestic production hurdles in return for reinstating the crude oil export ban?

If I represent the o&g folks, to me, it’s not even a question. I’m fighting tooth and nail to never ever ever give up that ability to export crude oil. At the same time I’d be controlling the narrative in the sense that I’d be paying my senators to say the domestic hurdles are the reason why gasoline and nat gas prices are high. It’s too easy. A+B=C

You look at the WTI/Brent spread from 2011 to now, it’s basically gone from $10-$20 to $2-$5. We have literally pushed crude oil to more of a global commodity when at least in the past we had a little delta. I don’t think that’s a good thing for Americans in general. I think that is a direct result of the revocation of the crude oil export ban. We are more exposed to KSA and OPEC now than we ever have been, and even if we opened the production spigot by easing domestic hurdles, it wouldn’t make a lick of difference cause now we no longer have to just balance US production/consumption - we have to balance the global demand.

again just a hypothetical, let’s not think through the legal headaches and the lawyers we would pay literal billions to think through force majure and shit.

also, this is just applicable to crude oil. I’m a big fan of LNG personally. I think we flare too much ng and getting actual useful energy out of that in whatever form we can is a tremendous net positive.

long oil IMO cause we’re never going to reinstate the export ban. I bought a ton of Magnolia O&G mid Covid cause I loved their senior leadership and I’m holding on forever. $1 bet that 5 years from now domestic crude production will be up another 25% but crude oil will still be $100+. But we’ll still be bitching about these domestic hurdles.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BLKNSTY 289]

Yes, why not have cake and eat it too?  I don’t care about restrictions. It will exacerbate the already-overwhelming increasing price trend. That’s fine by me. The crude oil export ban is incredibly dumb. The world doesn’t work like that. It’s a global commodity and always will be. Guys like Putin don’t run our world. We would eradicate any WWIII threat with haste.
You seem like you know some things reasonably well, but you’ve erected this odd straw man that isn’t even a part of the equation. I can’t remember why Obama did that, but it was yet another idiotic thing a Democrat President did that served some individual political goal, didn't work, didn’t last, and probably increased prices which wasn’t the expected goal. Q4’2014 was when the downturn started though. 

Oil at $110+ for any extended period of time accelerates demand destruction tremendously and Russia fucking cemented that for at least 2 to 3 years. I don’t think that’s good for O&G. We can ease domestic hurdles all we want but domestic motor gasoline consumption, which is by far the biggest consumer of crude oil, has been relatively flat at 9 million barrels a day since around 2008.

the odd straw man argument isn’t really a straw man. Dems need a reason to ease domestic production or they’ll be facing an internal revolt. but if I’m a Dem, I wouldn’t do that without knowing for sure gasoline prices will come back down. The math says easing domestic hurdles alone aren’t going to do shit cause none of it will stay here. So not only will they get dragged for high gasoline prices from both the right and the left, it’ll look like they turned their back to their treehugger base. Literally a lose lose. At least with the status quo they can keep some of their base happy.

Otherwise the dems can point to Russia as a reason to switch to electric, and at these oil prices + tax breaks and EV subsidies - it’s a damn good proposition.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[MadTrapper 152]

It's an interesting thought experiment for sure and I get the assertion that the higher spread between Brent and WTI was presumably good for the American consumer with respect to gas prices. A counter point would be that the export ban put US oil on the global market and helped drive down global oil price as shale oil flooded the market and WTI and Brent basically reached parity. Would that have happened if we still had the export ban? I'm not sure. Maybe to a lesser degree? But it seems like lifting it benefited the consumer for a good seven-ish years.

In your scenario I would personally prefer no export ban compared to streamlining process restrictions. However, I'm not happy that there's still not the next 5 year offshore federal leasing program, which means there probably won't be one for another couple of years at best.

[Loop 1604 227]

10 hours ago, Storm the Field said:

Bring back the Barnett Shale!!!!

In all seriousness, would love to see how it would perform with a modern frac design- 3-4k lbs/ft slickwater. None of that cross link gel bullshit. Still probably uneconomic but would be a cool science project haha.

I’m a conventional guy so I don’t know shit about fuck though.

[billfromlaketravis 11448]

The decision to overturn the federal offshore lease sales was very unfortunate. It would have increased domestic production, and deep water GOM production is the cleanest/cheapest way to produce a barrel of oil. Consumers lost. The industry lost. And whether they’ll admit to it or not, environmentalists lost. 
 

 

[Guest]

11 hours ago, BLKNSTY said:

Oil at $110+ for any extended period of time accelerates demand destruction tremendously and Russia fucking cemented that for at least 2 to 3 years. I don’t think that’s good for O&G. We can ease domestic hurdles all we want but domestic motor gasoline consumption, which is by far the biggest consumer of crude oil, has been relatively flat at 9 million barrels a day since around 2008.

the odd straw man argument isn’t really a straw man. Dems need a reason to ease domestic production or they’ll be facing an internal revolt. but if I’m a Dem, I wouldn’t do that without knowing for sure gasoline prices will come back down. The math says easing domestic hurdles alone aren’t going to do shit cause none of it will stay here. So not only will they get dragged for high gasoline prices from both the right and the left, it’ll look like they turned their back to their treehugger base. Literally a lose lose. At least with the status quo they can keep some of their base happy.

Otherwise the dems can point to Russia as a reason to switch to electric, and at these oil prices + tax breaks and EV subsidies - it’s a damn good proposition.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You’re placing way too much importance on Russia. You’re not looking at the fundamentals situation independent of Russia. It is glaring and supports $100 oil - now. Demand destruction at a $100-$150 price point is a myth. Whether or not it’s “good for the industry” it is where circumstances have put us.  

[Storm the Field 5294]

Natty $6.35. Highest close in 14 years.

[Cleo McDowell 20]

The decision to overturn the federal offshore lease sales was very unfortunate. It would have increased domestic production, and deep water GOM production is the cleanest/cheapest way to produce a barrel of oil. Consumers lost. The industry lost. And whether they’ll admit to it or not, environmentalists lost. 
 
 

I don't know much about this, is it the cleanest even when factoring events like the Horizon oil spill, and if so, how often could you have a similar spill and this still be the case?

[MadTrapper 152]

The decision to overturn the federal offshore lease sales was very unfortunate. It would have increased domestic production, and deep water GOM production is the cleanest/cheapest way to produce a barrel of oil. Consumers lost. The industry lost. And whether they’ll admit to it or not, environmentalists lost. 
 
 

Yes, GOM does have a relatively low emission per boe produced. Thing is, the ruling had it's precedent set in a Hilcorp ruling from from a challenge of one of their Alaska developments (Pt Thompson, maybe?). Then that impacted Conoco's Willow project that got delayed to some degree based on a similar suit brought against them.

The challenge from environmental groups was that the BOEM didn't properly take into account emissions from foreign oil production/consumption when coming up with the current 5 year plan (that ends in July, I believe). Apparently the projections BOEM used of CO2 emissions from foreign oil vs POTENTIAL oil produced from lease sales were not rigorous enough, which to my understanding is indeed the case, and the environmental groups exploited that inconsistency, just as they did with Hilcorp and Willow. The fact that emissions from GOM production is lower than most other sources is essentially irrelevant in the lawsuit. So the judge basically had his hands tied and legally made an appropriate ruling. The blame really lies with BOEM and not easily revising their CO2 calculations after they were challenged with the two AK suits and lost. Very frustrating.

[SaucyJack 3488]

Another Moron

 

https://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/politics/fl-ne-ron-desantis-offshore-drilling-congress-trump-20190912-ijgml7c65zfstg4qyklaxo7qbe-story.html

[billfromlaketravis 11448]

4 minutes ago, Cleo McDowell said:

I don't know much about this, is it the cleanest even when factoring events like the Horizon oil spill, and if so, how often could you have a similar spill and this still be the case?

I can’t speak to the risk portion. I’m an onshore guy that marvels at offshore’s price per barrel, and carbon emissions on spreadsheets/slide shows. In a free cash flow environment, offshore is making money in the $20’s. 

Horizon sucked for BP. Everything that could go wrong went wrong. But offshore is still their primary business. Shell is divesting in everything US onshore, but has held on to their GOM business. That says quite a bit. It’s a space they both feel is clean and profitable enough to play in. 
 

The offshore lease sale 180 sucks because most of the companies bidding were trying to build out existing inventory. These are responsible operators that like acreage nearby they could build up. 

[MadTrapper 152]

I don't know much about this, is it the cleanest even when factoring events like the Horizon oil spill, and if so, how often could you have a similar spill and this still be the case?

DW Horizon was terrible, complacent, and unacceptable...full stop. It's also difficult to compare the dirtiness of the spill vs. the dirtiness of the CO2 emitted while producing the oil and gas. But it's a fair point to consider and try to quantity all associated risks. I just don't know how you do that in this case.

The elephant in the room is carbon, though. And if you can produce 100 MMBOE with 10 wells instead of 100-200+ wells onshore that also require millions of gallons of water to complete, waste water disposal, trucking, more joints for methane leakage, more opportunities for HSE incidents, etc., then the decision to discourage offshore development is short-sighted IMHO.

[MadTrapper 152]

Another Moron
 
https://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/politics/fl-ne-ron-desantis-offshore-drilling-congress-trump-20190912-ijgml7c65zfstg4qyklaxo7qbe-story.html

Well besides the fact that the article is from 2019, FL also has a massive area offshore that is off limits due to military training operations. Florida has been off limits forever and that's not changing soon. Is there prospectivity there? Yes. But no one expects that area to open up any time soon. Click bait article and politicians doing politician things.

[hornmpa96 2618]

The crude oil export ban was silly when you allow for the export of refined products. The true beneficiaries of that policy were US refiners who could buy US produced crude at an artificial discount and then export gasoline/diesel to Asian/European markets. As someone mentioned above, allowing the export of US crude actually reduced worldwide pricing and brought Brent/WTI closer.

For offshore leases, any new leasing activity wouldn’t result in production for many years. It takes years to explore and develop a greenfield development. Also it’s extremely expensive unless you can utilize existing infrastructure.

Capital is available for drilling but capital discipline is here to stay. If the companies tried to grow significantly, their investors would revolt because they want to get paid (probably for the first time since the shale boom started). Also, there would be significant services cost inflation if growth started which would shrink margins significantly. 

[Neonmoon 38129]

15 hours ago, MadTrapper said:

FL also has a massive area offshore that is off limits due to military training operations

We all know why Florida is off limits and it sure as shit isn’t militarily training operations. It has beautiful beaches and waters. That’s it. There is nothing wrong with that reason. 

[Guest Lobo]

Yeah, I've said this before on other threads...Florida is a shithole of gargantuan proportions.  Mainly because of the people.  But they do a pretty good job, all things considered (particularly because their state leadership has been grossly incompetent and corrupt for a century save for Jeb Bush), of taking care of their environment.  Sure it's overbuilt in many areas.  But they are better stewards than most any other state in the lower 48 at caring for beaches, wetlands, wildlife, the Everglades, inland natural areas, etc.  Sure a lot of it is a marshy sauna, but it's a well-preserved marshy sauna in the condition that nature intended.  That extends offshore as well. 

When I lived there, people who couldn't complete a sentence or critical thought in their head M-F, would suddenly transform into really thoughtful and forward-thinking folks when we went fishing or boating or camping on the weekends.  Put a lot of planning into taking care of wherever we visited in nature, didn't leave a mess, paid attention to maritime laws and traditions, nobody fucked with fishing limits, etc.  Then back to drunken shithead by Sunday night.  But it's always cool to see.  I doubt you'll see any drilling off their coasts in our lifetime.  /rant

[Guest]

34 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

We all know why Florida is off limits and it sure as shit isn’t militarily training operations. It has beautiful beaches and waters. That’s it. There is nothing wrong with that reason. 

It’s a dumbass reason for sure. Look at California offshore, and compare Cali politics to Florida politics. 

There are some dumbass people that think the shitty beaches (if there is in fact any beach the further NE up the coast you go) Texas and Louisiana and Mississippi are in some way adversely impacted by the past prolific state waters drilling that occurs there. No, this is a myth. 

[Guest]

10 minutes ago, Lobo said:

Yeah, I've said this before on other threads...Florida is a shithole of gargantuan proportions.  Mainly because of the people.  But they do a pretty good job, all things considered (particularly because their state leadership has been grossly incompetent and corrupt for a century save for Jeb Bush), of taking care of their environment.  Sure it's overbuilt in many areas.  But they are better stewards than most any other state in the lower 48 at caring for beaches, wetlands, wildlife, the Everglades, inland natural areas, etc.  Sure a lot of it is a marshy sauna, but it's a well-preserved marshy sauna in the condition that nature intended.  That extends offshore as well. 

When I lived there, people who couldn't complete a sentence or critical thought in their head M-F, would suddenly transform into really thoughtful and forward-thinking folks when we went fishing or boating or camping on the weekends.  Put a lot of planning into taking care of wherever we visited in nature, didn't leave a mess, paid attention to maritime laws and traditions, nobody fucked with fishing limits, etc.  Then back to drunken shithead by Sunday night.  But it's always cool to see.  I doubt you'll see any drilling off their coasts in our lifetime.  /rant

I love Florida and don’t really give a fuck what anyone says about it. But not drilling offshore there has nothing to do with environmental stewardship and everything to do with Florida having not a lot of promising reserves offshore (they have nothing onshore) and dumbfucks thinking a platform is going to somehow hard their great beaches. 

Edited April 8, 2022 by Porterhouse

[Guest Lobo]

Yeah, the unproven reserves is a huge part of it.  As wit most things in E&P (or lack of), it's a mix of geology, environmental stewardship, cost, and public sentiment.  I'm guessing even if some shelf was "rediscovered", it still probably couldn't get done.

There's a chance the central planning zone could eventually spread to just off the coast of Perdido Bay/Key (nearest platform is only like 20-30 nautical miles---still far in those terms but spreading East every few years).  Something like that could be up for debate within 10-20 years.  Economics just west of there have made sense in myriad commodity pricing eras. 

Anyway, was just trying to pay them a compliment for being good stewards.  As I said above, I like the state...it's really pretty and great for outdoorsman...it's just the fucking people.  And the fucking meal times.  I thought they were fucking with me my freshman year when they told me the dorms cafeteria served dinner from 4:30-6:00p.  

[MoJames 8244]

1 hour ago, Porterhouse said:

I love Florida

[nineliveslost 2753]

1 hour ago, Lobo said:

Florida is a shithole of gargantuan proportions.  Mainly because of the people. 

1 hour ago, Lobo said:

  As I said above, I like the state...

 

Whaaaaat???

Your post about Florida (which is wrong) is your perception (which is dumb) but be more consistent homie

[nineliveslost 2753]

46 minutes ago, MoJames said:

 

😀

[Guest Lobo]

17 hours ago, nineliveslost said:

Whaaaaat???

Your post about Florida (which is wrong) is your perception (which is dumb) but be more consistent homie

It's not inconsistent.  I like the state of Florida (meaning the physical, environmental, and natural state of the Sunshine State).  The people are fucking horrible.  How is that inconsistent?  You like everybody in every pretty state?  That's highly unlikely.  Like Hawaii, beautiful state, wonderful people.  Arkansas is very pretty but filled with shitheads.  I like the people of Massachusetts, but the state is pretty ugly.  Ohio is both ugly and filled with assholes.  Iowa, ugly as sin but wonderful folks.  West Virginia surprises me each time I go-very pretty and very welcoming folks.  Oklahoma?  You know the answer.  

Call it wrong, dumb, or inconsistent.  I don't give a shit.  I've spent enough time in these places, I know of which I speak.  

Anyway, looked at some X994 imaging of Central Planning Zone right where Alabama and Florida hit.  Obviously people have looked at it much more informed eyes.  But I could see in ~10 years, a situation where somebody wants to go offshore technically in Floridian waters.  I'd be curious to see how it plays out.  But off-shore is another thread for another time.  I didn't realize the extent of the sale plans in the Eagle Ford for Conoco.  

[Guest]

3 hours ago, Lobo said:

It's not inconsistent.  I like the state of Florida (meaning the physical, environmental, and natural state of the Sunshine State).  The people are fucking horrible.  How is that inconsistent?  You like everybody in every pretty state?  That's highly unlikely.  Like Hawaii, beautiful state, wonderful people.  Arkansas is very pretty but filled with shitheads.  I like the people of Massachusetts, but the state is pretty ugly.  Ohio is both ugly and filled with assholes.  Iowa, ugly as sin but wonderful folks.  West Virginia surprises me each time I go-very pretty and very welcoming folks.  Oklahoma?  You know the answer.  

Call it wrong, dumb, or inconsistent.  I don't give a shit.  I've spent enough time in these places, I know of which I speak.  

Anyway, looked at some X994 imaging of Central Planning Zone right where Alabama and Florida hit.  Obviously people have looked at it much more informed eyes.  But I could see in ~10 years, a situation where somebody wants to go offshore technically in Floridian waters.  I'd be curious to see how it plays out.  But off-shore is another thread for another time.  I didn't realize the extent of the sale plans in the Eagle Ford for Conoco.  

The people of Florida has MUCH better people than Mass or Hawaii. Hawaii is odd. It’s like saying “California people are wonderful” but with the added element that their natives hate any white person. Cali and Hawaii are considerably more beautiful than Florida. Considerably. There is a reason the term “Masshole” is prevalent throughout New England. Bostonians are considerably worse than any New Yorker I’ve ever met. Mass people being wonderful is a real head scratcher. 

Florida is great because it is Texas with better beaches. It’s closer than any other spot mentioned besides Oklahoma. Substitute Tex Mex with Cuban, and a larger Jewish population in SE Florida, and there’s not a great deal difference between the states, political or otherwise. For every Florida Man story I can assure you we can equal them in red neck weirdness. 

Florida being discussed offshore E&P is dumb. It has little to do with environmental lobby successfully warding off companies. I mean they can claim that all they want but the fact is Florida has no hydrocarbons and as such E&P has little economic incentive to initiate massive capex deployment there. If they did have reserves, it’d be monetized. 

Edited April 9, 2022 by Porterhouse

[Guest Lobo]

Yeah, racially Hawaii folks really don't like white people.  Can't say I blame 'em.  You're right, we can toe-to-toe with Florida Man with our own bullshit.  Again, I get the E&P discussion is far more relevant than their anti-drilling stewardship.  My final post was merely they take good care of their inlands and beaches.  And while there's no production to be had inland, the creep of off-shore rigs has historically gotten closer and closer to the far Western coastline of Florida.  Looking at the API shift, it's certainly moving farther east.  Not necessarily close to the coast.  But I'd bet you'll still be in the industry when a rig proposal gets close enough to Perdido Key/Bay to cause some stir.  Obviously for macro production, it's anecdotal...but somebody started the Florida derail...not me.  

Anyway, at UT energy week last month, asked some students if they could wager a guess...over/under 1,000 frack permits just for off-shore under the Obama administration.  These were students that have some academic connection to the industry (KBH Center, McCombs Energy Institute, Petroleum Engineering, Jackson School, et. al.).  All smarter than me, but just like to begin roundtables with some factoid to get chatter going.  8 of the 9 guessed under, only one got it right (it was a minutia question which was intended to portray that just because it was a D or an R, doesn't always match energy facts).  My only point was the political noise rarely matches the data.  

I'm also starting to really dislike the topography and people of Connecticut. 

[Loop 1604 227]

Offshore reservoirs don’t typically require additional stimulation (frac). Turbidite reservoirs are typically very well sorted clean sandstones with high permeability. Unless I’m missing something? 

[Guest Lobo]

No, you're right.  They don't need to stimulate, for the foreseeable future anyway.  My only point was that those Mobile Bays out on that shallow shelf might move just a hint eastward towards AL/FL stateline, "Perdido Bay/Key." someday, not physically but I mean the play.  Not sure where they'd fall inside the 9 nautical mile stateline if they did, but that's about the only way you ever technically get "E&P in Florida."  Right now, E&P in Florida means ecstasy and phenylephrine.  Fascinatingly lame thread derail that I didn't start, but here we are.  

Anyway, hope the nat gas slide winds down tomorrow.  

[Loop 1604 227]

Nat gas futures about to hit lucky 7.

[Guest Lobo]

If only the pricing fluctuation matched Bert's eyebrow.  We could get a solid pro-forma.  Goddamn Romanians.  

[Fudge Nuggets 19189]

On 4/10/2022 at 1:32 AM, Loop 1604 said:

Offshore reservoirs don’t typically require additional stimulation (frac). Turbidite reservoirs are typically very well sorted clean sandstones with high permeability. Unless I’m missing something? 

Quite a few deepwater wells in GOM have cased hole frac pack completions these days.

[Guest]

Biden is dumber than shit.  No context, no link, but y’all know what I’m talking about.