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: Hannoverian who wrote (182840)	3/2/2014 1:25:25 PM
From: Bearcatbob	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 206334

I wonder if it is possible to concoct a classic control volume diagram where there is the simple In - Out = Accumulation model portrayed. If I could do this I would define In as existing production - depletion + new production. The number I do not have any concept of is depletion. From what is written the big wave of shale gas wells should now be well past their peaks. If so - it would seem a huge increase in new production would be needed to grow the in stream to the control volume. Of course the numbers would be time dependent. Perhaps a projection of mid July if done accurately would show just what is needed to generate the refill volumes. My life time experience with projections of extreme results is that they never happen. There are always mitigation factors that emerge that are not apparent at the time when things look bleak. Bob

To: Hannoverian who wrote (182840)	3/2/2014 1:32:13 PM
From: JimisJim	1 Recommendation Recommended By Ben Smith Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 206334

I find roby's numbers quite useful wrt what you are talking about. He gives higher level "big picture" stuff as well as very detailed ng numbers in a series of a dozen or so posts every week. And I've found his numbers quite accurate over time. Do you ever look at his work? He posts on the iV BRY board and all you have to do is set the filter to display the top recs for the last 24 hrs. or 7 days, then just click on his alias and all you'll see are his very informative posts, chalk full of just about every ng stat you can think of with summaries, too, all updated weekly. Try this link (with filters pre-set): investorvillage.com (sometimes iV is really slow, so give it a minute to load)

To: Hannoverian who wrote (182840)	3/3/2014 8:51:19 AM
From: Ed Ajootian	1 Recommendation Recommended By Dennis Roth Respond to of 206334

Hannoverian, thanks for your thoughts. I take everything the analysts say regarding their conclusions with a grain of salt, but I tend to lean on them for factual data since I'm basically lazy and I assume that they couldn't get away with putting out stuff that was factually inaccurate. The Citi report dated 2/21 (thanks Dennis) cites an increase in '13 natty production of 1.8 bcfd, admittedly still not as much as the last 2-3 years but when you drill down into the data you will see that a significant amount of new pipelines came online in the Marcellus in November, so in more current terms we are running production at quite a bit higher rate than that vs. the same month in the prior year. For example, in the December EIA 914 report that just came out on Friday, 12/13 Lower 48 production, even in spite of all the well freeze-offs, was 3.21 bcfd higher than 12/12 production, see eia.gov . Citi is calling for production to increase by 2.4 bcfd this year vs. last year, which seems reasonable given the low natty-directed rig count and seems to be more or less in line with consensus. When I first saw both Citi and Morgan Stanley settling for only 3.6 TCF as a target for ending fall storage levels my first reaction was similar to yours, i.e. that that would not be enough, but the more I thought about it I believe they are figuring that with the 2 bcfd of additional supply, 3.6 TCF next Halloween would be roughly equivalent to the 3.8 TCF we had last Halloween.