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 (83727)4/28/2007 2:06:16 PM
From: GaAs52  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 206338
 
Other than seasonal/weather effects, and ng replacing almost all of the petroleum liquids in power generation, I do not see any bullish case for ng.

Last two years, ng replaced almost all of the petroleum liquids and can not replace any further. 2005 and 2006 summer was quite hot which explains seasonal peaks. Calling this past winter same as 2005/2006 winter is quite a stretch. We had a record cold Feb. and April this year. It was warmer then normal but not sth close to 2005/2006.

All the current ng bullishness is coming from "fear" of hurricane and hot summer. This year ng story is again all weather and this will disappear in a couple years.

When the "fear" of cool summer and mild hurricane season will overcome the "fear" of hurricane and hot summer, things will turn upside down quite quickly.



To: quehubo who wrote (83727)4/28/2007 2:17:58 PM
From: GaAs52  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 206338
 
Que, even we agree on 500-700 bcf of incremental supply required each year for power generation, the lng import capacity is several tcf/year easily overtaking such increment.

However, I do not expect 500-700 bcf of incremental supply necessary for power generation. Here is the recent EEI weekly:

68400 for 04/21/07 vs 69104 last year. And this is despite a cold week for 4/21/07.