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.

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

To: ChanceIs who wrote (124440)	9/25/2009 11:16:23 AM
From: tom pope	1 Recommendation Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 206184

I've read some indications recently that Obama (and perhaps more important, Chu) is moving away from the position that NG is to be lumped in with oil and coal as an evil fossil fuel.

To: ChanceIs who wrote (124440)	9/25/2009 11:39:54 AM
From: jrzy	1 Recommendation Respond to of 206184

Chancels - Thanks for your many valuable posts on this thread. Like you, I was a fan of Calpine and Pete Cartwright. I agree with Peter Huber’s general theme on natural gas. But, be aware he has a history as a gun-for-hire. He’s a bit loose with claiming that natural gas was a practical vehicle fuel alternative in 1973. Although the technology for using it was then available, there was no sense, or hope, of the natty abundance that is now evident. Indeed much of DOE budget at that time was toward developing processes for producing $5/mmBtu synthetic natural gas (SNG) from coal. >>The squeeze should have started long ago. With the technology available in the days of Ford's Model T, using liquid fuels made it much easier to get lots of energy quickly and securely on board. But gas-handling technologies had improved quite enough to make natural gas a practical alternative when the Arabs embargoed their oil in 1973.<< Source Watch has an interesting bio. sourcewatch.org