Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Clown-Free Zone... sorry, no clowns allowed -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lucretius who wrote (2908)	7/10/2000 2:31:17 PM
From: pater tenebrarum	Respond to of 436258

true.

To: Lucretius who wrote (2908)	7/10/2000 2:38:51 PM
From: pater tenebrarum	Respond to of 436258

energy: Michael J. Economides and Ronald E. Oligney the authors of Color of > Oil wrote this piece to the Houston Business Journal > > In the dark over oil and gas > > Modern politicians are missing the boat when it comes to energy > > The latest 700,000-barrels-per-day production increase announced by > the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries has had exactly the > expected effect on the price of oil -- none. > > The price continues to pivot around $32 per barrel, as it did before > the OPEC meeting. Gasoline prices in the United States have surged, > yet OPEC has been blamed only cursorily for that. > > On July 4th Saudi Arabia made a unilateral announcement that stunned > everybody, including every other OPEC member. They will increase > production by an additional 500,000 barrels per day. The results of > this increase on the price of oil are likely to be small and perhaps > counter-productive. It is difficult to predict how more militant OPEC > members will react. > > Market forces do not seem to be invoked in the national discourse. > Instead, the political left suggests price gouging by the oil > companies; environmental regulations and taxes are blamed by the > right. > > Once again, things in the realm of energy that should be obvious to > politicians, pundits and even common consumers seem to cause > surprise. If their surprise is genuine, it is confounding to us. > > OPEC's ability to manipulate the market has been eroding for many > years, and after a last gasp in 1999, their excess production > capacity is now practically nil, having fallen from a high of al-most > 20 million barrels per day 15 years ago. > > A substantial increase in production will now require an > unprecedented infusion of capital in the petroleum industry. Yet, > this investment is hindered dramatically by recent history -- the oil > price collapse of just a year ago and the myopic cost-cutting by "old > economy" managers. It should not be surprising that the price is > where it is. It is simply market reaction. > > Two highly opposing poles of the political and economic spectrum have > painted a common but highly misleading picture of petroleum supply. > Using OPEC as the prop and with the multinational companies thrown in > for good measure, dime-a-dozen energy analysts with very little > knowledge about the physics of production talk about "opening the > taps" and "pumping more," constantly implying the proverbial > underground tank full of oil. This is supposed to assure the public > that somehow oil is readily and ef-fortlessly forthcoming if only the > producers get their act together. > > At the other pole, anti-everything ideologues imply a deliberate > shortage... OPEC and companies are hoarding supplies. Even more > perverse, some are not so private in their gloating. Higher oil > prices may mean the onset of the era of renewables -- solar, wind and > biomass. Nasty oil companies, the mentality goes, which bring a > myriad of social ills, international exploitation and suppression > (and cause global warming to boot) may soon get their comeuppance. > > None of this explains the other recent great run-up in energy prices - > - that of natural gas. Natural gas prices have trebled over the past > year and are now at record levels. They may eventually have the > impact of $60 oil. > > In fact, the situation in both forms of petroleum, oil and natural > gas, is now so tentative -- the supply and demand is so near > equilibrium and the cushions have grown so thin -- that any one of > 100 minor events may cause prices to soar to previously unthinkable > levels. This could be a coup or a presidential death in an OPEC > country, a hurricane in the Caribbean, an accident, or more likely, a > couple of days of cold weather next winter. > > We have become very naked indeed in the energy scene. > > And yet the national politicians have come up short in both > articulating the issues and, more seriously, providing a leadership > for their resolution: > > > The importance of energy in the national welfare has never really > been the central theme that it deserves. A United States and world > with energy shortages is a scary and highly dangerous notion. The > wealth of modern nations is inextricably connected to affordable > energy abundance. > > > No prominent politician has unambiguously informed the public that > hydrocarbons (oil, gas and coal) account for about 90 percent of the > world energy mix, and that renewables account for just 0.5 percent. > > > Nor has any politician stated the obvious: There are no real > alternatives to hydrocarbons in the foreseeable future. The market > share of oil and gas over the next 20 years is likely to increase by > at least 5 percent, this while the total energy consumption continues > to forge ahead unabated to perhaps 50 percent higher than today. > > > Calls for repeal of gasoline taxes from one end of the political > spectrum, and demands for investigation of "price fixing" from the > other, amounts to nothing more than pandering to consumers. This will > have little or no impact on energy supply. It may cause quite a lot > of harm. > > > Far more important is the fact that we still have massive resources > of hydrocarbons within the U.S. jurisdiction that are likely to be > prodigiously prolific. They happen to be under thousands of feet of > water. > > The ongoing and highly beneficial transition to from oil to natural > gas as the primary fuel of the U.S. economy will certainly go through > some growing pains. Is the nation prepared for them? Will the > political leadership have the resolve to stay the course? > > What's the plan, man? > Michael J. Economides is a professor at University of Houston School > of Engineering, where Ronald E. Oligney is director of engineering > research development. Together they published "The Color of Oil" > earlier this year.

To: Lucretius who wrote (2908)	7/10/2000 2:46:31 PM
From: pater tenebrarum	Respond to of 436258

Iraqui oil output declining : 07/10 Iraqi Crude Oil Exports Likely to Fall in July, MEES Reports London, July 10 ( Bloomberg ) -- Iraqi crude oil exports under a United Nations-sponsored oil-for-aid program fell by 500,000 barrels a day to 1.94 million in June and are likely to post a similar decline for at least the first two weeks of July, the Middle East Economic Survey reported, citing oil traders. Reasons for the decline, which comes against a background of rising Iraqi oil production capacity, include Iraq's delay in signing the agreement to roll over the previous phase of the oil-for-aid program and low demand for so-called sour crude oil of the type Iraq produces, MEES said. Pressure on sour crude prices could increase if Saudi Arabia proceeds with its plan to raise output by 500,000 barrels a day because most of that will be sour crude, the Nicosia-based weekly said. Iraq, the fourth-largest crude oil producer in the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, doesn't participate in the group's agreements on output levels.

To: Lucretius who wrote (2908)	7/10/2000 2:48:59 PM
From: pater tenebrarum	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 436258

global gold output declining: LONDON, July 10 ( Reuters ) - World gold production fell by around two percent to 12.12 million ounces in the first quarter of 2000, while total cash costs were also down two percent at $196.00 an ounce, World Gold Analyst magazine said on Monday. The 50 core gold mining companies monitored by the publication accounted for around 65 percent of world production. With the exception of Australia, major producing countries lowered output with the United States decreasing production by six percent to 2.34 million ounces, Canadian production down one percent at 2.78 million ounces and South Africa two percent lower at 3.60 million ounces. Australian production remained unchanged compared with the same period a year earlier, coming in at 2.18 million ounces. Canadian companies remained the lowest cost producers with average total cash costs of $160.00/oz. South African total cash costs increased by around one percent to $228.00/oz, while Australian miners' total cash costs dropped by five percent to $203.00/oz. U.S. total cash costs were also down five percent, at $183.00/oz.