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 : Canadian Rocket Red's Picks -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Texas77 who wrote (18677)7/7/2008 6:15:56 PM
From: lexi2004  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 19697
 
Dave...Good, glad I can share something that might interest you. I'll try to remember to post my info here too. The info you just shared is helpful to me in gaining insight into what's going on in your location, so that's great.

It would appear to me that with the info in this article that BQI would be even more attractive since it looks like there won't be as much oil coming out of Mexico. (Just found this - it was written on the 4th)

Drop in Mexican Crude Threatens Energy Security

04 July 2008 10:09

A steady drop in Mexico's crude oil output is threatening the nation's energy security and means jittery world oil markets cannot look to it for reassurance, Energy Minister Georgina Kessel said Thursday.

As world oil prices shot above $145 a barrel on a mixture of Middle East tensions, speculation and supply worries, Kessel told Reuters Mexico was under more pressure than ever to push through reforms to its struggling state-run energy industry.

"We are seeing that for Mexico, energy security is currently at risk," Kessel said in an interview.

"For the rest of the world, as long as we haven't resolved our problem of energy security, there will be no way that we can contribute to the rest of the world."

Kessel said getting Congress to approve a controversial plan by President Felipe Calderon to change oil laws will be crucial to avoid a plunge in production in the coming years.

Without new exploration and production projects, Mexico's oil output could drop by nearly two-thirds by 2021, she said.

She also said a goal to double Mexico's proved oil reserves replacement rate to 100 percent by 2012 -- meaning every barrel of extracted oil is replaced with a barrel of newly proven reserves -- would be "difficult" to reach.

"Achieving that goal will depend a lot on what we do," Kessel said. "That is why it's so important that the reforms are approved, because we are going to have to be doing an enormous amount of activity in exploration and production."

The world's No. 6 oil producer, Mexico is a top three U.S. crude supplier, and Washington has grown to rely upon it as a reliable and politically stable source of oil.

But a worse-than-expected drop in production since historic peaks in 2004 means state oil monopoly Pemex's exports to the United States have slid by almost a third in just four years.

Mexico's proved oil reserves have also waned to nine years' worth, amid a lack of spending on exploration. Although seismic tests indicate huge deposits of deep-sea crude, none of the six deepwater wells Pemex has drill so far have struck oil.

"WE HAVE A PROBLEM"

The trend also means that Mexico, which relies on foreign oil sales to fund about a third of its federal budget, is losing out on potentially lucrative new markets like China and India where demand for oil is soaring, Kessel said.

"Mexico is losing income and also opportunities," she said. "We've had to cut back exports not just to the United States but also to the rest of the world. We've had to reduce our commitments due to the fall in our production."

Mexico sees its total oil exports dropping to 1.4 million barrels per day in July, down 18 percent on the year and 4.6 percent lower than in June, the finance ministry said on Thursday. In July 2004, Mexico was exporting 1.8 million bpd.

Mexico's oil sales are up in dollar terms, as Mexican crude sells at a record $128 per barrel, but the government says it is losing most of its oil profits by paying a ballooning bill for fuel imports. A shortfall in refining capacity means Mexico must import about 40 percent of its gasoline.

The grim figures come as the conservative government, which lacks a majority in Congress, is trying to persuade opposition parties to back a reform that could spur on new exploration and drilling projects by letting state-run Pemex hire foreign firms under attractive contracts based on incentive fees.

Some leftists have accused Pemex of exaggerating its woes to pressure lawmakers to support the reform proposal, which opponents say smacks of a creeping privatization.

But Kessel said the message from Pemex was the same both for recalcitrant lawmakers and world markets.

"What we are observing is a reality," she said. "We can't give different messages because the reality is a single one. We have a problem in the hydrocarbons sector."

Many analysts fear opposition to the reform plan means the bill will emerge from Congress so watered down as to be largely ineffective. But Kessel said she remained optimistic Congress will pass a bill weighty enough to make a difference.

Kessel also said she had started communications with the U.S. government to seek an agreement on cross-border oil fields that span the maritime border in the Gulf of Mexico, amid fears that U.S. oil firms could inadvertently suck up Mexican oil when a treaty banning drilling in the area runs out in 2011.

By Catherine Bremer, Reuters

offshore-technology.com



To: Texas77 who wrote (18677)7/7/2008 7:05:59 PM
From: lexi2004  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 19697
 
Found this and it was written in '06. Is that what it's like now with all the activity they talk about day and night every day of the year?
=====================
The Oil Sands Of Alberta

June 25, 2006
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(CBS) This story originally aired on Jan. 22, 2006.

There’s an oil boom going on right now. Not in Saudi Arabia or Kuwait or any of those places, but 600 miles north of Montana.

In Alberta, Canada, in a town called Fort McMurray where, in the dead of winter, the temperature sometimes zooms up to zero.

The oilmen up there aren’t digging holes in the sand and hoping for a spout. They’re digging up dirt — dirt that is saturated with oil. They’re called oil sands, and if you’ve never heard of them then you’re in for a big surprise because the reserves are so vast in the province of Alberta that they will help solve America’s energy needs for the next century.

Within a few years, the oil sands are likely to become more important to the United States than all the oil that comes to us from Saudi Arabia.

Correspondent Bob Simon reports.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Twenty-four hours a day, 365 days a year, vehicles that look like prehistoric beasts move across an arctic wasteland, extracting the oil sands. There is so much to scoop, so much money to be made.

There are 175 billion barrels of proven oil reserves here. That’s second to Saudi Arabia’s 260 billion but it’s only what companies can get with today’s technology. The estimate of how many more barrels of oil are buried deeper underground is staggering.

"We know there’s much, much more there. The total estimates could be two trillion or even higher," says Clive Mather, Shell's Canada chief. "This is a very, very big resource."

Very big? That’s eight times the amount of reserves in Saudi Arabia. The oil sands are buried under forests in Alberta that are the size of Florida. The oil here doesn’t come gushing out of the sand the way it does in the Middle East. The oil is in the sand. It has to be dug up and processed.

Rick George, the Colorado-born CEO of Suncor Energy, took 60 Minutes into his strip mine for a tour. He says the mine will be in operation for about 25 years.

The oil sands look like a very rich, pliable kind of topsoil. Why doesn’t oil come out when squeezed?

"Well, because it’s not warm enough. If you add this to hot water you’ll start the separation process and you’ll see the oil come to the top of the water and you’ll see sand drop to the bottom," George says.

It may look like topsoil but all it grows is money.

It didn’t always. The oil sands have been in the ground for millions of years, but for decades, prospectors lost millions of dollars trying to squeeze the oil out of the sand. It simply cost too much.

T. Boone Pickens, a legendary Texas oil tycoon, was working Alberta’s traditional oil rigs back in the '60s and remembers how he and his colleagues thought mining for oil sands was a joke.

"Here we are sitting there having a drink after work and somebody said this isn’t going to, it isn’t possible. It’ll all have to be subsidized to a level, said, before they’d make money you’d have to have $5 oil," Pickens says laughing. "We never thought it would happen."

But then $40 a barrel happened and the oil sands not only made sense, they made billions for the people digging them. But it wasn’t just the price of oil that changed the landscape, it was the toys. That’s what they call the giant trucks and shovels that roam the mines.

Everything about the oil industry has always been big. It’s characterized by bigness, from the pumps to the personalities. But up here in Alberta, it’s frankly ridiculous. The mine operates the world's biggest truck. It’s three stories high and costs $5 million. It carries a load of 400 tons of oil sands, which means, at today’s oil prices, each load is worth $10,000 dollars.

What it’s like to drive one of these monsters? At the foot of a tire, we asked the driver, Jim Locke.

"You have 14 steps going up, and at my house you have 14 steps to the bedroom. So it’s like going upstairs in my house, sitting on my bed and driving the house downtown," says Locke.

But getting downtown is just the beginning. The oil sands then go into a plant. They’re heated in a cell, which separates the oil from the sand. The result looks like something out of Willy Wonka’s chocolate factory. This oil froth is then sent to an upgrader and eventually to a refinery.

Asked if the processed oil is as good as that pumped in Saudi Arabia, Mather says, "Absolutely as good as. In fact, it even trades as a, at a premium because it’s high quality crude oil."

The capital of the oil sands frenzy is a frontier town called Fort McMurray, which isn’t in the middle of nowhere. It’s north of nowhere and colder than the Klondike, but a boomtown just the same. The local hockey team is called the "Oil Barons." They’re on a winning streak.

Is this comparable to a gold rush?

"I think it’s bigger than a gold rush. We’re expecting $100 billion over the next 10 years to be invested in this area — $100 billion in a population that, currently, is 70,000 people," says Brian Jean, who represents the region in Canada’s parliament.

Pickens, who once scoffed at the oil sands, is one of those investors. He runs a hedge fund in Dallas and is now a true believer.

"We’re managing $5 billion here. And, about 10 percent of it is in the oil sands. So, it’s the largest single investment we have," Pickens says.

And if oil sands are the answer for investors, does Pickens think the oil sands are the answer for the United States?

"Oh, I think so," he says.

Most of those lumbering trucks are on their way to the gas tanks of America. A million barrels a day are now coming out of the oil sands and oil production is expected to triple within a decade. It won’t replace Middle Eastern oil but at that point it will be the single largest source of foreign oil for the United States, even bigger than Saudi Arabia, which sends a million and a half barrels a day to America.

Greg Stringham, who works for the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers, says surprisingly, that Washington has only been paying attention for the "last couple of years."

Stringham often lobbies for the oil sands in Washington. He says that in Alberta you don’t have to look for the oil sands — the earth moves.

"When it comes to exploration in the oil sands, you can’t drill a dry hole. It’s there," he says. "We know where it is. They’ve outlined it. You don’t have any risk. But other conventional sectors around the world, there’s a huge exploration risk."

The exploration risks are the least of it. Much of the world’s crude is in the Middle East where the instability is deeper than the oil. When Alberta’s blue-eyed sheiks took to Wall Street last summer in their Stetsons to drum up support for the oil sands, their message seemed to be, "If you can’t trust Alberta, who can you trust?"

"Alberta is a very good place to do business. It’s a very stable environment," says Mather.

The bonus for Canadians, aside from the treasure, is the notion that Americans might have to start treating them with a little less condescension.

"With their oil, I think we’re going to need them a lot more than they need us," says Pickens.

"We may appear in Canada to be a mouse compared to the elephant down south in terms of diplomacy or politics. But in terms of resources, we are mighty equals," says Mather.

There have been grumblings out of Ottawa that Canada should consider using the oil sands as leverage in its serious trade disputes with the United States.

Does Brian Jean think America is taking Canada for granted on the oil sands?

"Absolutely. And I think most people, most Canadians believe that," he says.

And the Canadians have alternatives. The Chinese, for example, are just dying to get a piece of the sandbox.

"I’ve been contacted personally by Chinese delegates that want to get into the plant sites here and want to see and want to invest," says Jean.

Asked what he thinks about the Chinese interest in the oil sands up in Alberta, Pickens says, "At first I thought they were tire kickers. But I think they’re serious buyers."

And the millions of Chinese who have moved from their bicycles to traffic jams are driving up the demand for oil. It’s virtually insatiable and the Canadians want to step up production quickly. What’s holding them back is labor — the shortage of it.

Brian Jean says another 100,000 people are needed in Fort McMurray.

That’s why one oil company has built a runway to fly workers daily from civilization to Fort McMurray. But why would anyone want to come work in a place where temperatures plummet to 40 below and the sun sets shortly after it rises in the long winter? Well, perhaps because the oil companies pay some of the highest salaries in North America.

Take Josh Lichti, who says he could be making $120,000 by the time he is 22.

"It’s amazing," he says.

But even if workers come flocking, the oil companies still have other problems. Creating energy from oil sands requires so much energy that the oil companies wind up spiking greenhouse gas emissions.

"And they do it in volumes that exceed any other production of oil crude anywhere on the planet," says Elizabeth May, the director of the Sierra Club of Canada.

She takes issue not only with what the oil sands are doing to the atmosphere, but to the land. The oil companies, environmentalists say, are digging up an entire province. Take a helicopter ride over the mines and you’ll think you’re flying over the moon after a moonquake.

"One of the reasons they can be mined the way they’ve been mined is the out of sight, out of mind aspect of it. And your film crew is one of the few that’s gone in there to look at how devastating this is," May says.

Even money men, like Pickens, have noticed. "Can’t argue with it. I mean, there’s no question that, that they’ve got a mess up there. But I do think they’ll take care of it over time," he says.

The oil companies say they will reduce greenhouse gasses and they point out they are required by Canadian law to refill old mines and plant new trees, and that is happening — slowly. One company, Syncrude, has even introduced bison to land that once was a barren pit.

Rick George of Suncor Energy insists in the future people won’t recognize the mines. "So what you see today is a mine. What you’ll see 10 years from now is a replanted forest," he says.

"You’re telling me that if I come here, it’s gonna be pretty?" Simon asks.

"Absolutely," George says. "These sites will all be going back. Now we’ll be minin’ at a different location at that point.

"This will look forested when we get done with it in 20 years time."

But there is a larger question that not only environmentalists are asking: will the availability of an enormous supply of secure oil right next door mean America will have little incentive to reduce its dependence on oil?

"What Canada’s doing," says May, "is continuing to feed the U.S. addiction to fossil fuels, instead of being the kinda friend who says, 'Let’s make a helpful intervention here.' We're acting as the supplier of a drug fix to the U.S., while all the time saying, 'Just say no.' But we keep selling it."

But unless the Chinese go back to bicycles and Americans trash their SUVs, there will be buyers — for oil anywhere, no matter how it’s found or mined. Right now, Canada has become the land of opportunity for oilmen. They will tell you there is little else on the horizon.

"Bob, if you take a tablet and put on it where is supply gonna come from that we don’t know about today. And you put down all the optimistic points, that tablet will basically be blank," says Pickens.

As blank as the landscape around Fort McMurray, where the world of oil exploration ends.

Does Pickens think the days of cheap oil are gone?

"They’re gone," he says. "From what we knew as cheap oil, when I pumped gasoline in Ray Smith’s Sinclair station on Hinkley Street in Holdenvale, Oklahoma, 11 cents a gallon, that’s gone."

Will we ever again see $1.50 a gallon? "We won’t ever see $1.50 a gallon. No, that’s gone," says Pickens.

Right around the corner from Fort McMurray you can still see oil being produced the traditional way. It’s picturesque now. The wells are still pumping but they belong to the past, like the iron horse that once rode across these prairies.

The future? Up here in Alberta they’re convinced it’s in the dirt.

By Draggan Mihailovich ©MMVI, CBS Broadcasting Inc. All Rights Reserved.

cbsnews.com



To: Texas77 who wrote (18677)7/7/2008 7:48:29 PM
From: lexi2004  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 19697
 
Would love to hear a response from you on this article....

===========================
T. Boone Pickens Speaks the Ugly Truth
Press Action
Sunday, June 08, 2008
pressaction.com

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I assume most Canadians already understand what’s at stake in the oil sands (or tar sands) region of Alberta and how the U.S. government and Corporate America believe that they are entitled to the oil that’s being produced there. In case there are some Canadians who don’t understand who will ultimately control the oil produced in this region, T. Boone Pickens, the billionaire oil and gas man from Oklahoma, set the Canadians straight in a recent interview, explaining that Corporate America views this resource as its own.

Speaking on CleanSkies.tv, an online television network bankrolled by natural gas producer Chesapeake Energy Corp., Pickens said:

“There are two things that should be working very well for us. One, are the Canadian oil sands. That oil comes to the United States. We need to be sure that it’s not exported to some other country because there’s 250 billion barrels in the Canadian oil sands.”
Given the enormous amount of oil that is necessary to sustain economic growth in the United States (or at least to keep the U.S. economy from collapsing entirely), the U.S. government will need to ensure that it has access to oil reserves around the world, including in Canada. If a more nationalist government were to take power in Ottawa and then exert tighter control over which companies are allowed to operate in the oil sands region, the U.S. government would do whatever it could to ensure U.S. companies retain a major presense in the region.

But let’s say the Canadians decide to award China or other countries a larger piece of the oil sands action, there’s no doubt the U.S. government would take a harsh stance toward such a move. What if the Canadians decided to engage in trade for oil sands production almost exclusively with countries aside from the United States? The cordial relationship between the two countries would come to an immediate end and the U.S. government would likely take steps, through economic sanctions and possibly even military force, to seize control of the oil sands region.

In the same interview, Pickens, through his comments, provided insight into how U.S. governing elites and Corporate America view oil produced in another important outpost of the U.S. empire: Iraq.

“We should have a call on the Iraqi oil. We’ve paid a price over there in people and money and we should have a call. Call at what price? Call it market price. You’re not trying to buy it cheap. But we should have a call on that oil. And that would be very important to this country to have that.”
Once again, Pickens, unlike most observers in the United States, offers a candid assessment of Iraqi oil. When Pickens talks about a “call,” he is technically referring to the trading term that would give the U.S. government, and its corporate masters in the oil and gas industry, the right to purchase oil at a specified price for a specified delivery date.

But what Pickens is really saying is that the U.S. government and Corporate America control the oil reserves in Iraq and that they will do whatever it takes to make sure oil produced in Iraq gets delivered to U.S. corporations and U.S. interests because, as the billionaire tycoon and corporate raider says, it is “very important to this country to have that.” Doing whatever it takes, of course, includes keeping the U.S. military in Iraq for what presidential candidate John McCain says will be the next 100 years.