SI
SI
discoversearch

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.
Gold/Mining/Energy : Big Dog's Boom Boom Room -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: quehubo who wrote (75619)11/28/2006 7:31:20 AM
From: aerosappy  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 206138
 
mr. quehubo,

The EIA spreadsheet you linked to is raises some questions. For example, can you tell what they mean in footnote #3 (adjusting Other States excluding Alaska:

<<3 Estimates for Other States were determined by applying the relative change in production between July and August as estimated using the 2004 calibration year data to the published July estimate calculated using the current model calibrated to 2003 data.>>



To: quehubo who wrote (75619)11/28/2006 7:32:35 AM
From: aerosappy  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 206138
 
I thought that Texas RRC data show declines???

The EIA Y-O-Y (August 2005 to August 2006) changes are as follows:

GOM......(6.3%)
LA.......+3.2%
NM.......(0.9%)
OK.......+4.1% (thanks to CHK??)
TX.......+4.6%
WY.......+7.1%
Other....+6.7%
Lower48..+2.8%

The EIA data show production as a percent of total as follows (August 2006):

GOM.......14.9%
LA........ 6.9%
NM........ 7.8%
OK........ 8.6%
TX....... 30.7%
WY....... 10.5%
Other.... 20.6%


HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News