Member Info for romaron

TBH Mansardman I've stopped trying to understand. My thoughts are as they say "fluid" at present. The slightly better performance of US/Canada oilies is because they are less hostile over there towards fossil fuels and things are more expensive. I saw something on TV that said the average wage in Albania is £1.50 per hour whilst in the UK is £13.50. That kind of differential explains some of the pressures.
Then there is the argument that every person is worried about global warming. I'm not and I haven't actually come across anybody who is. At a push we all want fresh air and less pollution but we realise there is a trade-off with cheap energy. My daughter did COP26 but her company doesn't think its worth the expense (you have to include security) and the Egyptian authorities do not respect human rights, women or journalists. These conventions are imo a waste of money and about as scientific as the General Synod of the CoE. They are great though for getting funding and grants from G7 to developing countries.
I rely on simple analysis and still believe in "Revenue is vanity, profit is sanity, but cash is king". If this government and the next one wish to commit hari-kari by outlawing O&G then there are plenty of countries willing to take the O&G industry off their hands. There is little Joe Public can do when getting re-elected is the main aim of politicians. What is needed is a good dose of realism instead of appeasing a small minority of climate activists and ESG extremists.
It should be quite cheap to set up in Albania and we would help reverse the flow of immigrants. I'm not being facetious. My suggestion is as puerile as the current political rhetoric.

This is a big month for us and for a change I think it might all go well.

*I know quite a few Albanians and they are not as depicted in the press. If you are kind to them they don't forget. Random but my father was wounded fighting the Germans in Albania in WW2.

https://www.offshore-energy.biz/pacific-gas-orders-four-large-ethane-carriers-pens-charter-deal-with-ineos/

I hope Ineos know what they're doing? I'm hearing that Greta isn't going to COP27. Something about human rights. I think it's because she doesn't want to be involved in a clusterf*ck.
Haven't read the paper yet but yesterday the Times cheered me up with two stories. "Harbour threatens to move over windfall tax" and "Unsafe Harbour" which said "Of course, Linda Cook is talking her book. But the boss of Britain's biggest oil and gas producer Harbour Energy was crystal clear. "Investors are advocating for geographic diversification" thanks to the North Sea windfall tax and talk over a levy extension.
Who can blame them? Not only does the government want them to invest more in UK energy security and fund green projects crucial to net zero, such as carbon capture, it's also whacking them with more tax. Rishi Sunak shouldn't be surprised if they opt to invest somewhere else."

*anyone else been getting unsolicited dick pics? Only clue I have is "I'm 6 foot athletic with a loving family" - probably some drunk.

At the talking shop a.k.a. COP27 there will be wheeled out the total unfairness of the West's feel good measures to get even richer and ship out manufacturing and pollution to the developing world. I'm ignoring the text and only looking at the picture, one can only take so much hypocrisy in a day:
https://www.reuters.com/world/africa/africa-deserves-fair-shake-upcoming-climate-summit-maguire-2022-11-02/

I'm no HSE expert but the picture of the young fellow in the saw mill speaks volumes.
No shoes, no mask, no protective glasses, no gloves, no protective overalls, no helmet but you'll probably all miss the most egregious omission but I hear that juststopoil are on the case.

What evidence do we have that the timber comes from a sustainable source? I mean priorities matter. The trees cannot defend themselves and we have to educate the African people. If juststopoil send out missionaries to correct this terrible attack on tree rights and are prepared to glue themselves to the trees I for one will willingly contribute. Meanwhile the young African can then go to making windmills and solar panels ready for when they have a grid to plug into.

It's for their own good.

I realise many here are sick of the groundhog days but many poiticians are as confused and as frustrated as us but for different reasons. They are forced to accept global warming which is an unproven science to a degree. Since when has weather been completely predictable? There were more lives lost to weather in the past and a lot of problems are overpopulation and lack of employment in poorer countries.
To board the climate bandwagon is easier than standing against. I keep thinking of Trump holding the bible. If you're a US politician it is politically fatal to declare as an atheist. Something similar with climate over here and the easy option is to say a few token aspirational words from time to time. They are often as empty as the beauty queen's desire for world peace. Events are unfolding and I wonder if COP27 will be a flop? The 3rd world will demand more loans from the West at cheap rates or even as aid. With the tough times at home I can't see it happening. Politicians have enough problems to deal with domestically.
Realism is beginning to bite and I can't see a rush for companies to invest in new fields with the present hostility towards them. It needs a commitment from governments. It is stick and stick. Where is the carrot? The EPL rebate has strings attached. Spend now but we'll take all your profit if you make money. If you lose - tough!
It used to be good business to make money. Now the O&G industry is just a convenient whipping boy. There won't be any new investment until this changes.

There is a growing narrative against climate activists and ignorance. Two articles in The Times today.
"Sorry, oil rebels, you're not the suffragettes" - by Baron Daniel Finklelstein. He is a law maker and has a seat in the House of Lords. In reference to juststopoil he wrote ""The right way to consider a policy on oil production is through constructive debate, proper deliberation and a consideration of all the costs and benefits of a particular policy. Just sitting there with a banner is a childish tantrum, not an argument." He went on to say that these protestors are articulate and usually highly educated people too lazy to take the longer option of running for office and prefer to block the right of totally normal, non-political people to go about their business. What gives them the right to do this when there are other options?
The second was by their chief business commentator Alastair Osborne titled "Miliband's none too slick over Big Oil." He attacked the paste and stick politics of Ed Miliband who has been making rookie errors over his pronouncements (wrong quarter, wrong companies) but then detail is not necessary or important when disparaging the oil industry. AO then attacked the facile arguments put forward by the climate activists and EM. With EPL he noted that BP now pays 65% tax in the UK whilst the average in the 70 other countries that BP operates in is 37%. Kneejerk politicians need education. I would love to see Miliband torn apart by somebody from the industry because frankly he isn't up to the job and his litany of lies will come back to haunt him and his party.
It makes a change to see this resistance building. juststopoil have lost (I believe) the goodwill and tolerance of the British public and that makes them peripheral going forward imo. Oil will be one of those commodities that you don't miss 'til its gone. A van driver (any driver actually) facing ruinous fuel prices will not align with juststopoil.

This will exert pressure https://www.energyvoice.com/oilandgas/north-sea/456859/equinor-open-to-collaborating-to-deliver-mariner-extension-project/ especially if thre response is lukewarm. Also on Energy Voice OEUK requesting an urgent meeting with the Chancellor because tax uncertainty is "driving investment out of the UK".

With the Ukranian conflict bedding down for the winter there is a temporary stalemate in that senseless war and China being more concerned (currently) with its own issues Biden has a certain respite. He only has to control the price of oil for a few days before midterm elections and then he can blame any increase on outside parties and they are conveniently quiet for now.
I don't know the mechanics of how they feed the SPR into the market but I'd imagine it is akin to a Central Bank protecting the currency. They will increase the amount if pressure builds and we all know that is only a temporary measure until the fundamentals causing the problem are resolved but you'd be foolish to take on the US government at present by buying oil aggressively.
The world is not staring at the price of oil for now. It could get very interesting post midterms. I suspect that $100+ oil is practically nailed on.

Be Lucky

This is about as close as it gets to an official announcement without an RNS. Thanks KO and also don't forget people that VoR and oinkston brought us similar news on the 26 October. This though is saying that with decent numbers from the forthcoming update and the Government burning the midnight oil (this time) and a better understanding of the limitations of renewables there will be BUYBACKS and DIVIDENDS on the table; possibly as soon as H2 2023.

Build it and they will come. Where else can they go?

Driving around yesterday I noticed the gap between 4 star and diesel was 27p. That reflects the worldwide shortage of diesel but apparently another reason is that about 700 Mb/d of global middle distillate supplies going to bunker, putting a further squeeze on supply. Kraken oil must be attracting some premium at the mnoment.

*a pundit on CNN reckons that China will attack Taiwan within a year. He was very persuasive. Xi Jinping has basically created a war cabinet with the very public removal of opposition. It would crater world trade but imagine the price of oil?

Nooo ! I've fallen down a rabbit hole: https://www.prageru.com/video/why-cant-america-fill-a-pothole

*For balance - a Union representative, Tony Soprano, denied the claims in this video.

How about someone like this to debate with Ed Miliband and acolytes:

https://www.prageru.com/video/how-much-energy-will-the-world-need

No you're not Questforoil. I doubt you have any investment here. Troll away, I'm sticking you in the bin.

Morning Juan - I agree but who even knows what the landscape will be by then? I was watching the TV last night and a juststopoil demo in (I think) Westminster came on. It was the last apparently for this tranche with a promise of more to come. It was filmed from an angle that made it look like there were more there than there actually was. I'd guess around 20 max. One had a dog collar so fair enough. He believes in things that don't require evidence so maybe some were his parishioners. I accept that fossil fuels are anthropogenic but so too is alcohol and hangovers, try stopping people drinking. The question is more about being aware of the limitations and speed of transition and the extra costs of going too fast. In fact nobody has addressed how the world will be fed without ammonia and transportation of food to where it is needed.
I would like to see Ed Miliband in a debate with an oil expert and be asked to defend his outrageous claims about renewables and their costs and what Labour would actually do if in power. Very few it seems are prepared to challenge the claims of climate activists but the public deserve to know the true figures. They may not understand the science but they understand simple sums. We don't want more migrants but instead are prepared to give them the economic advantage to stay put whilst we move to a more agrarian society (in fact that won't happen - they'll just starve).

I'm guessing the better performance of EnQuest this morning has something to do with BP results?

* correction - flaws not laws

Thanks mrc. It is quite easy to produce counter arguments full of laws and omissions. Having said that it is terrible that there are no longer any Pandas in the wild in Norway.

We won't see much change until reality bites and that is getting closer.

I can't find it but isn't it semantics anyway? It isn't their money in the first place. Like a mugger saying "I won't rob you today". It shows their dupicity to me. It is what happens down the road in 2/3 years that is important. Raising capital is another consideration for companies. Is it there?

Hi Bastan - We are the low hanging fruit and easiest to attack. The whole cyclical business of oil means that the good times make up for the bad times. Except for this time. Our government is so desperate for revenue and tacitly supported by the majority of the media in that fossil fuel is BAD. You are not completely in the clear because Greta has achieved sainthood and I'm awaiting her canonisation by the Pope. (BTW Mother Teresa caused enormous harm to women worldwide). Cults and religion don't need to be based on facts.

I hope the UK O&G industry sit on their hands until we are treated with respect and fairly. That's what I'd do. We are however a deeply pragmmatic nation and once the truth comes out people will begin to see the lies that they have been fed.

Even in these early days of potential radical increases in demand, lithium prices are already up nearly 1,000% over the past two years, along with copper trading in a range that’s double the long-run history, nickel trading at a five-year high after coming down from recent peaks, and aluminum prices at a 10-year high. Again, this is the case with Solar, Wind, Battery (SWB) meeting only a few percentage points of total global energy needs.

Time to windfall tax the miners methinks. It'll end the immigration problems. Very soon the only acceptable job will be fruit-picking.
Interesting fact. Hospitals use 250% more energy per square foot than commercial buildings but we'll all be healthier working in the fields (except for rheumatism, arthritis, bent backs and a long, shuffling retirement).

"Policymakers ignore at their political peril the importance of energy costs. Gallup’s long-running tracking poll about what people volunteer as the “most important problem” finds that the economy and inflation top the list by a huge margin. The number two issue was “government/poor leadership.” The Russia “situation” was halfway down the top 10. Climate change didn’t make the top 10.[18] (That doesn’t mean citizens “deny” the idea of climate change. Indeed, most citizens say “yes” if prompted with a specific question about whether they believe anthropogenic climate change is happening."

source: https://www.manhattan-institute.org/the-energy-transition-delusion

BTW like the beauty queens of the past I wish for "world peace".

https://www.mauldineconomics.com/frontlinethoughts/turning-bullish-on-energy

Summary:
#1. Energy demand is going to increase, not only from new population, but from those who are already here and desire to improve their lives.
#2. Energy supply is increasingly under pressure. When demand increases and supply is under pressure that is typically resolved by either more production or higher prices. We will likely have both.
#3. There are many, especially in government and institutions, who think we can easily transition to a zero-carbon, renewable energy future. They seem to think we can do this by 2030 or by the latest by 2035. Given the current plans to transition to solar and wind, this is simply not possible. If we make a commitment to 4th-generation nuclear, we can be there within 15 to 20 years. Maybe sooner depending on how committed we are.
#4. Oil and gas companies are reluctant to ramp up production and are being starved of capital. As noted above, 60% of current wells being drilled are by private groups, not traditional public energy companies.
#5. Sometime in November, the 1,000,000 barrels a day from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve will no longer be put into the system.
#6. China will eventually get its act together and demand for oil and gas and commodities of all type will increase once again. Demand will also rise after we get through this coming recession.
Finally, and what really pushed me personally over the edge, is the entire ESG movement which is pushing to significantly decrease funding for oil and gas production, limiting what they will lend or invest in oil and gas. In what can only be characterized as ironic, “defunding” oil and gas will only make the prices of oil and gas go higher, penalizing the consumer.
Of course, they think that by making the price of oil and gas higher it will make the comparisons with renewables like solar and wind better. That is true, and all things being equal, we would substitute renewable energy for oil and gas based on price.
But that’s not how the real world will work. There is only so much energy that solar and wind can produce in the near term (5?10 years). The rest will have to be made up by traditional power sources, some of which are renewable like geothermal and hydro, some of which are carbon free like nuclear, but given the natural limits on production it still means oil and gas will remain a significant contributing factor to our energy usage.
Until there is a significant sea change in the political climate not just in the US but at least in Europe, until there is less of a hostile business climate and the ESG movement becomes less effective at blocking capital flowing to oil and gas companies, the pressure on the price of oil and gas is going to be up. To be sure, if we have a recession, the price of oil will go down but history demonstrates it will rebound as demand rebounds after the recession is over.

Is anyone still building it? Russia may become the next Venezu