|It was wishful thinking The Argus ;-) Back to waiting for some action here.|
|looking at the timing of the start of the rise, it seems to coincide with the start of the trading day in America maybe?
|What I was thinking too EE. Perhaps something is up (not just the share price!) or is it just wishful thinking?|
|...Late move today, against both the sector and the market.....|
i thought the brexit debate on both sides came from GREEN energy
the grass grows and the bull eats the grass and after a while the bull converts the grass to ...., hence conversion|
|So the rule of thumb is that if you want to identify the big energy-consuming devices, look for the ones that produce a lot of heat.Excellent. Now we can blame the Brexit debate for global warming too............ ;-)|
|There's a very simple rule of thumb one can use to judge which devices are the important ones from the point of view of energy consumption.
As background, the law of conservation of energy essentially says that all the energy that goes into a device comes out of it again in some form or other, and it all ends up as heat. The final conversion to heat sometimes happens outside the device, and possibly even outside the building you're in - for instance, some of the energy that goes into a light bulb comes out again as light, most of which will be absorbed by surfaces within the room, heating those surfaces up very slightly, but a small amount of it is liable to escape through the windows and end up heating the outside world instead. Mobile devices are similar, with radio waves replacing light and different building characteristics - for light, buildings are mostly opaque walls but have highly transparent windows; for radio waves, both walls and windows tend to be rather more translucent.
But quite a high proportion of the energy going into a device - probably over half for even the most energy-efficient devices - becomes heat within the device. That's why light bulbs, mobile phones, etc, get warm in use. And some devices - heaters, cookers, etc - are designed to convert essentially 100% of the energy that goes into them into heat.
The point of which is that one can make a very rough-and-ready estimate of how significant devices are relative to each other just by considering how much heat they put out in use. For instance, an old-fashioned incandescent light bulb would get quite hot in use - nothing like as much as an electric heater, but enough to scorch things placed close above them. Modern LED light bulbs need a bit of care taken about heat very close to the light-emitting part, basically because all the heat they are emitting appears in a very small volume, but lights using them generally only get rather warm to the touch. Mobile phones also get warm to the touch in use, but rather less so. From that, you might guess that in order of increasing energy consumption, those four devices are mobile phone, LED light bulb, incandescent light bulb, electric heater, and you'd be right: as an order-of-magnitude-only approximation, one electric heater = 10 incandescent light bulbs = 100 LED light bulbs = 1000 mobile phones.
So the rule of thumb is that if you want to identify the big energy-consuming devices, look for the ones that produce a lot of heat. Heaters (including central heating systems), cookers and car engines are the chief culprits in domestic life; elsewhere, heating non-domestic buildings, other transportation and various heat-producing industrial processes (such as smelting iron) are the big consumers.
That does incidentally mean that the various media campaigns about things such as not leaving one's mobile charger powered when one isn't using it are only nibbling at the edges of the energy consumption problem. Not saying they're wrong to encourage switching off or unplugging chargers that aren't in use, but I do get the impression that they've given a lot of people the idea that it is the way to do your bit about reducing energy consumption, distracting them from far more effective measures...
|The big electricity users are heating/cooling and cooking.
As "we" become more affluent we heat out homes rather than putting on a pullover (I accept that this is more typically gas usage nowadays), or turn to a/c rather than opening a window. We have ever more powerful showers, cooking in all manner of "ovens". Washing machines get used more frequently (although cooler washes do largely offset this); dishwashers get used daily, and tumble driers rather than an outside washing line. Fridges have become the size of small larders, and we are choosing to rival supermarkets with our freezers.
I agree, many thing have become more efficient; lighting (but we now use many more of them), CRT-LCD (ditto lighting...?)
And the rest of the world is desperately trying to attain the same as the privileged 5-10% living in the west.
Domestic electricity is only part of our consumption. Industry uses huge amounts, but as the UK deindustrializes, it's offset by rising domestic demand.
My own electricity usage (in kWhrs) has crept higher over the 35 years that I've been responsible for paying my own bill.
And once we move to e-cars demand will increase dramatically. They might not consume oil, but the electricity they require for recharging will (unless its from renewable sources - and even these require energy during their manufacture).
As to oil demand for plastics (and how I wish that had never been invented), with "unlimited" electricity, some of it can be synthesized without the need for oil.
But all this is still 20+ years away. Soco's production will still be in demand...|
|Tom, I was referring specifically to electricity, since you mentioned your Nokia mobile compared to a modern day smart phone.
It's clearly true given the link that electricity use is not on the increase, despite a growing population and has in fact fallen over the years despite a dramatic increase in the number of domestic appliances we have.
Nearly all modern appliances use less energy than older versions, lighting, tvs and fridges/freezers are the most obvious , but others too.
You are right that a lot of oil is used in other things like transporting goods. However the one thing we see clearly is that if supply / demand balance changes by a few % it can have dramatic effects on price.
so changes in use of oil/ gas for generating electricity or in transportation can have dramatic repercussions on the price going forward, even if the demand only changes marginally. So it's worth considering when and how quickly transportation will switch from fossil fuels to electricity, and what that means for oil prices.
|interesting, do you really use more energy than you did Tom ?
I recall when a lightbulb used 60W, now I can run a laptop off a similar amount. you may charge your phone more, but how much electric does a 50" lcd use ? 75w ? compared to maybe 5 times that for a crt ?
lights can now run off a few watts, your iphone may use more, but often avoids you having to boot up your laptop.
a quick google reveals ....
"Over the longer term, domestic electricity consumption increased to a peak of 10,809ktoe
in 2005 then began decreasing, despite the continuing increase in the number of electrical
appliances owned by households. Table 3.01 blow shows the average number of
appliances per household;" gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/573269/ECUK_November_2016.pdf
doesn't seem to suggest big increases in energy use, rather a decline in energy use as more lights and appliances are updated with low power alternatives. We have more tablets/phones etc, but most of domestic energy use is lighting and appliances. These are more and more going over to lower energy alternatives.
|There will be an ever increasing need for oil in the years to come. American refineries produce 19 gallons of petrol and 12 gallons of diesel/heating oil from each 42 gallon barrel of crude. The other 11 gallons go into plastics, animal foodstuffs and various chemicals. You can't get that from a windmill. Also in the US the proportion of eclectrically powered vehicles to conventionally combusted vehicles is still less than 1%.|
|Coming back to oil
I am surprised to read of the economic performance of solar and wind energy generation which is becoming very competitive with oil. The trend that I suspect will keep oil afloat is its key use as feedstock for the plastics industry and the worlds nearly insatiable demand for energy. Also forgotten is that the supply chain on wind and solar is also dependent on oil.
I don't know what the stats are but when I have some work to do I buy or hire a power tool to do it. My so-called smart phone needs recharging twice daily. My old Nokia was happy with a charge every week. I use more energy now than I did 10 years ago.
The global growth of the middle classes in the emerging world will buy all the power hungry devices that only the developed nations currently enjoy. The world will have to run very fast to keep up with the demand.
|You've been watching too much RT "news" kenobi.......IMO this is quite an important phase in the geopolitical "Great Game" - and I wouldn't believe a word any of the parties claim!|
|Not read the whole article but it seems deluded,
The US, have bombed an airfield, but said they're not prepared to get involved,
but they tell us asad is on the way out and russia risks becoming irrelevant if they continue to support him ? yet they intervened militarily, and turned the war in his favour.
It is possible that the gas attack was carried out by assad, but why would he ? the tide of war is clearly in his favour and until this, the US showed no appetite for getting involved. More likely it's a rebel group, trying to get the US involved or a false flag if you ask me. It seems that it's the US risking becoming irrelevant,
and no chance of that pipeline from Qatar to turkey going through Syria, now that the Russians have saved Asad.
but perhaps I'm missing something. This might be a president in trouble proving he's not the stooge of the russians. (or trying to),
I agree there may be more instability, perhaps the bromance with putin is over now he realises that Putin might flatter you but won't play nice.
|"Russia was either incompetent or inattentive.......it doesn't matter which......"https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/11/world/europe/russia-syria-rex-tillerson.html......watch this space for Putin's comments?|
|Brent now back at the levels before the March fall - and up $6 from the March low. Perhaps more importantly, it is again on the cusp of making a two-year high and perhaps getting back above $60, which hasn't been seen since H1 2015. The recent rise may have more to do with geopolitics rather than fundamentals - but if the Western hand-wringing inaction over Syria is coming to an end, then the near future looks more unpredictable politically-speaking.......nobody knows the nexus between geopolitics and oil better than Rex Tillerson.|
|....ps....the other area that is plainly on the radar in North Africa (per recent interview of ES)|
|Undeniable that the Cairn people know India well. Also I think there are a number of possible deals to be done there. However, I'd just see Asia as more likely than elsewhere....certainly more likely than Greenland!|
Would that be India, perchance because of Ed Storey's historic NED role in CNE, in your view ?
|Greenland was a Cairn venture. As was India. I know which is more likely here.......|
|Thanks for the feedback greyingsurfer.
I note this opinion from Malcy after the results in February. I missed it until now!
A rather uninspiring update from SOCO this morning as they miss their production guidance producing 9,883 b/d against a prediction of 10-11/- b/d although warning of slippage had been heeded. With over $100m of cash and a very strong model that delivers high prices and low opex giving a break even of the low $20's one cant grumble but it is clear that they are gearing up for something hence the new ex-Cairn arrivals.
This from Malcy also of interest. Another I missed!
Board changes dont often figure that much unless there is a particular reason so today's news that Dr Watts is leaving the board of SIA has some interest. This is because in a few weeks time he is reappearing at the company with Jann Brown, also formerly of Cairn to set up their new Business Development Group. The actual wording from the company goes like this ‘ This change signals a renewed emphasis on growth to complement our high quality producing assets'. So, Watts and Brown are to be tasked with finding the next growth area for SIA, any sign of Greenland in the betting?
|It's a production well, so I wouldn't expect any RNS. I'd expect a round up later in the year, along with other operations news.
|From the 13th March RNS:
Preparations to commence drilling the TGT-H1-30P well into the crestal part of the H1.1 Fault block were completed and the well was spudded on 8 March 2017. The well will target the Miocene and Oligocene reservoir horizons. It is expected to take 30 days to drill and complete the well. The PVD VI rig will then move to the H5-WHP to continue the remaining, two well, 2017 TGT development/appraisal drilling programme.
How soon after spudding do results come when a timeline of 30 days is given and no hitches develop? 30 days will be up on Friday, so ......?
Perhaps an RNS next week? Friday would be too soon!|