Amerisur Resources Share Discussion Threads

[fadilz] 11/3/2019 19:07

Quidnunc, thank you for your answer. I would ask more questions, but probably wrong place for a lengthy off topic - and I found the following wikipedia page quite helpful in setting out sources for climate change scepticicism. I may research this to get a better perspective.


Meanwhile I heard Peter Wadhams talk at the Orkney science festival (recommended!) 2 years ago and then read his book 'A farewell to ice'. I find him very convincing - and I recommend his book to anyone who wants an insight to the science behind the warming argument.

Of course there is bad science on both sides, and I do remember the ice age scare in the 70s - but to use that to dismiss the argument is wrong. I also found Ivar Giever somewhat glib. The fact that the argument has become so politicised is troubling, because it shows that there are vested interests on both sides. Enough from me on this topic.

[xxnjr] 11/3/2019 17:28

Hopefully for Colombia, Shell will come up with the goods. Both blocks are in the Caribbean Sea. The COL 3 block is close to some fairly recent Anadarko finds. APC were hoping to find 'moving the needle' oil, but I think they found gas and liquids. Since then they've gone a bit quiet. Shell's other block is near the border with Venezuela. JW prefers low cost onshore stuff, although lots of machete's required for seismic ;-)

[thegreatgeraldo] 11/3/2019 17:14

Does that chain still do a filly o fish?

[fsawatcher] 11/3/2019 17:10

colombia the place to be if you wanna dance like a frog in a tree

i smell oil flowin

23p on ask is a comin like the gerkin to a filly o fish innit

[tsmith2] 11/3/2019 17:10

Malcy's been raving about AMER on vox today

[knackers] 11/3/2019 16:58

Good spot, Soggy. Adds nicely to the tapestry - to say it’s good having this pro E&P Govt support is an understatement. El Pres tweeting CPO5 Indico results should’ve had everyone paying full attention.

[knackers] 11/3/2019 16:24

Intent clear: hxxps://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Oil-Prices-Rise-As-Saudis-Curb-Exports.html

[sogoesit] 11/3/2019 16:24

When the Bid gets over 17 then something might happen... not seen it yet.

[tsmith2] 11/3/2019 16:19

Inverse H&S

[tyler durden1] 11/3/2019 16:08

TGG with greatest of respect you were posting about exports, I was posting discussing this export figures.

So there is no obfuscation.

[tsmith2] 11/3/2019 16:02

Expecting a pop. Look at chart..

[thegreatgeraldo] 11/3/2019 15:52

Go back & read my posts, obfuscation won't work. Ciao.

[tyler durden1] 11/3/2019 15:45

Geraldo. that is not what we were discussing it was about exports figures which includes NGL's


"However, these numbers doesn't account for exports. During that particular week, the U.S. imported 7.2 million BPD of crude oil, and exported 3.2 million BPD. Thus, net crude oil imports were 4 million BPD.

But product exports are a different story. During that week the U.S. imported 1.6 million BPD of finished products, while exporting 5.8 million BPD (which includes some ethanol and NGLs). Net U.S. exports of finished products were 4.2 million BPD. (The U.S. became a net exporter of just finished products in 2011)."

[thegreatgeraldo] 11/3/2019 15:41

tyler durden1
11 Mar '19 - 15:35 - 17895 of 17895
0 0 0
Ethane may be a component of NGL but I cannot see any U.S. export figures showing NGL's separately

...Follow the link below....

hxxp://ir.eia.gov/wpsr/overview.pdf

Refer to "Table 1", where you'll see "Crude Oil Supply" & just below that "Other Supply"

There's no "may" about it, ethane is an NGL..... & an important one at that, which is why I used it as an exanple.

[sogoesit] 11/3/2019 15:36

No ethane is not NGL. It's a gas. A part of NGL when liquid.
FFS!
Sorry, but the tedium of these shale oil/gas supply/demand arguments has lead me to apply a certain button.
Good luck!

[thegreatgeraldo] 11/3/2019 15:32

What? Ethane isn't crude, as I posted

[tyler durden1] 11/3/2019 15:31

Ethane is not NGL?
hxxps://blogs.platts.com/2015/06/30/bragging-rights-worlds-top-oil-producer/

[thegreatgeraldo] 11/3/2019 15:28

tyler durden1
11 Mar '19 - 15:19 - 17889 of 17890
0 0 0
The U.S. include NGLs as crude as predominantly shale is responsible for the increased NGL output.

..The IEA, in their weekly report, treat crude & NGLs seperately. Ethane, for example, isn't crude, obviously

[tyler durden1] 11/3/2019 15:26

"Crude oil production is defined as the quantities of oil extracted from the ground after the removal of inert matter or impurities. It includes crude oil, natural gas liquids (NGLs) and additives."

OECD

[knackers] 11/3/2019 15:25

Seller has finished!



...for the moment at least

[tyler durden1] 11/3/2019 15:19

The U.S. include NGLs as crude as predominantly shale is responsible for the increased NGL output. The price of NGL's was favourably linked to crude rather than gas but has dropped considerably with shale production.

[thegreatgeraldo] 11/3/2019 15:07

tyler - I understand you dismiss figures which don't fit your narrative.. & as I pointed out, the current export figure includes NGLs, which aren't strictly "refined product", which may mean that comparing current IEA figures & seeking alpha's projections may be comparing apples with parsnips.

[tyler durden1] 11/3/2019 15:02

ace

Laughed at that

Worrying though as it demonstrates how little conventional oil is being discovered. If the world gets so reliant shale oil that has lost so much money at even $80 barrel, prices will have to soar to keep shale going or the U.S. will have the biggest defaults and bankruptcies in oil companies that has ever been seen. Perhaps that's what the Saudi's and the Russians anticipate too especially with the latest U.S. figures on debt.

thereat
yes quite a neat trick the U.S. have done in combining all figures but even then the export figure put out by the IEA is whatever they suggest it is, they copied the Saudi's in not auditing figures.

The strange thing about the article is as Geraldo points out, currently they are supposedly 8.3mmblsday and this FIVE YEAR outlook has the U.S. producing .7mmblsday more than it already alleges it does.

When companies like Chevron comment about being only cashflow positive by 2020, having presumably been cashflow negative for so many years.....? Draw your own conclusions.