On Wed, Dec 24, 2014 'Chris de Morsella' via Everything List < [email protected]> wrote:
> the very same EIA that got it so wrong with the Monterey shale deposit > reserve projections it made in 2011 > Yes they got it wrong with Monterey, estimating reserves isn't easy and is more a art than a science, but given that as far as anybody knows they got it right with the Bakken and Eagle Ford formation and they alone account for 70% of reserves so it's not a major consideration. Could they be wrong again? Sure. Could you also be wrong about reserves? No way! > The EIA, IMO, is complicit in this fraud. And as evidence I produced the > grossly overstated reserve numbers it produced for the Monterey shale > deposits in 2011 > If you don't like the way they do it please describe the far superior method that you have developed for estimating how much oil and gas in the ground can be economically extracted. I'm all ears. > I am describing a huge financial bubble, > The first financial bubble in the history of the planet that went down not up. > tied to tight oil sector energy derivatives that is bursting as we speak, > yes. > Since the value of a energy derivative is a function of the value of the oil (or gas) in the ground, and since the value of a barrel of oil is less than half what it was just a few years ago then of course the value of those energy derivatives are going to go down too. But you need to put your money where your mouth is, you think the drop in the cost of oil is a very temporary thing, therefore you should be buying those energy derivatives as fast as you can. And you should be buying them on margin to give yourself leverage, of course if you're wrong then the leverage works against you but I'm sure there is no possibility you're wrong. > > I am describing this investment and perception mania that was > manufactured on promises of endless supplies of new shale deposits. > Bullshit, nobody promised endless supplies of anything. > You do not seem to grasp the concept of low cost producers being able to > put the squeeze on the high cost producers > It's only right and just that low cost producers put high cost producers of oil or of anything else out of business, so if OPEC wishes to keep the shale people out of the oil business they're going to have to keep their production high enough that oil costs less than what the shale people cam make it for. Currently it costs between $95 and $30 to produce a barrel of oil from shale depending on the particulars of the geology, and as technology improves the cost will go down. That explains why $147 for a barrel of oil as it was at its peak in 2008 is not sustainable however much OPEC may wish it were, and Saudi Arabia will run out of oil before the USA runs out of shale. John K Clark > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [image: image] > <http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/11/27/us-opec-meeting-idUSKCN0JA0O320141127> > > > > > > > > > > > > VIENNA (Reuters) - Saudi Arabia blocked calls on Thursday from poorer > members of the OPEC oil exporter group for production cuts to arrest a > slide in global prices,... > > View on *www.reuters.com* > <http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/11/27/us-opec-meeting-idUSKCN0JA0O320141127> > > Preview by Yahoo > > > > > > > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
