Peak Oil is You
Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)
Page added on March 12, 2015
Harold Hamm Dismisses IEA Shale Prediction
It might be discussed over coffee, at the gym, or when a group of friends gather on a Friday night. Analysts write about it, pundits prognosticate about it almost hourly on one cable news channel or another. And everyone probably thinks about it, consciously or unconsciously, when they pull into a gas station.
Where is the price of oil going next?
If that question could be answered with any degree of accuracy whatsoever, there would be a lot more wealthy traders in the world. The art, and science, of forecasting which direction oil prices are heading next, at the end of the day, is obviously less than precise. That’s what hedging is for – to cover the margin of error, and that doesn’t even always pan out as expected.
The International Energy Agency (IEA), Paris-based global research and analytical firm supporting 29 member countries, released an updated mid-term outlook for oil through 2020. In it, the IEA is expecting U.S. shale to basically peak at approximately 9.7 million barrels of oil in 2016, and then stay mostly flat into 2018, before resuming a mild uptrend to around 10.3 million barrels of domestic oil in 2020.
Harold Hamm, Chairman and CEO of Continental Resources, disagrees. Hamm said early-on that oil prices would turn in 2015. So confident was he in his crystal ball, that Continental pulled all its short-side hedges in October when oil was in the mid-70’s. Hamm admits he was off….by a mile. The company could have made far more than the $430 million dollars it did pocket since the summer peak.
Hamm was quoted recently in Forbes with a new term for what he says is the essence of what fostered the shale boom in the first place, and is what will carry America to the front of the stage of global oil influence. The word he coined is Cowboyistan, the independent, tough-minded, stubborn, get-‘er-done attitude that permeates the oil field.
According to Hamm, things will stay tough until supply and demand balances out, but he places a heavy weight on the affect of the decline curves. Shale wells produce large volumes of oil and gas at the beginning (called the IP, initial production, generally measured over the first 30 days of going online), but characteristically their output reduces greatly over each of the next two years, so that by year three, the flow is a trace of what it was originally. Hamm is convinced that once enough rigs go offline, supply will fall, simply based on the physics of shale production. No new investment, no growth in output, and likely a reduction in supply. When, and if that occurs, Hamm believes the price of oil will normalize in a range where producers can start drilling again, but consumers won’t be hurt by the sting of high fuel prices.
Hamm is not the lone voice saying the same thing. John Hofmeister, former head of Royal Dutch Shell’s U.S. operations echoes the same belief, as does Chris Faulkner of Breitling Energy in Dallas, both highly visible on cable business news programs.
While industry experts have their hopeful eye on the decline curve, many recently-released analyst reports, including the IEA February update, are not putting such a heavy weight on declines playing that big a factor in production, at least in the near term.
Also of note was the information released this week by Wood Mackenzie that as many as 3,000 wells have been drilled without being fracked. When prices do turn, that could become the lowest hanging fruit for new supply.
Furthermore, the IEA has come under fire periodically for not being the most accurate barometer by which to measure trends. Research scientist Schalk Cleote took a look at the last 15 years track record of the IEA and published his report on theenergycollective.com. While impressively accurate on natural gas forecasts, the agency does not fare so well for crude, according to his findings. In particular, Cleote reports, is a tendency to over-predict demand, and he notes they virtually missed the plateau of conventional production.
The bottom line is we have never been here before in over 150 years of American oil and gas production. Commercial shale extraction is just over a decade old now, but mostly in earnest for the last five years. How this plays out will certainly be scrutinized for more accurate predictions, but for now we’re in no-man’s land and only time, plus more monthly shale output numbers, will provide the answer.
Meanwhile, Cowboyistans around the world wait and watch for that ray of hope that will bring prices back to a more profitable production number while hopefully leaving consumers smiling every time they fill up.
By Thomas Miller For Oilprice.com
34 Comments on "Harold Hamm Dismisses IEA Shale Prediction"
Plantagenet on Thu, 12th Mar 2015 9:21 pm
The oil glut has a ways to go. First production has to drop—-then the tens of millions of surplus barrels in storage will have to go to market.
Only after that can the market come into balance again.
Jimmy on Thu, 12th Mar 2015 10:42 pm
Thanks Plant for continually pointing out what is painfully obvious. You should work for CIA or something. Lol loser
dave T on Fri, 13th Mar 2015 12:37 am
Yes I agree plant the 7-8 day over supply/glut (4oo-500 million bbls) on the world market will have to be sold first. A drop of 1-2 million per day extraction should do the trick in about 2 months. Ever notice how the price of gas goes up over night when the price of crude goes up. But it takes a long time for the price of gas to drop when the price of crude goes up?
rockman on Fri, 13th Mar 2015 6:05 am
Davy – Good point but I’ll take the opportunity to remind folks that it’s physically impossible to draw down 100% of the oil inventory. There is a Minimum Operating Level in the oil supply dynamic that’s required. Granted that’s just splitting hairs as you point out with your time span of a draw down.
BobInget on Fri, 13th Mar 2015 9:55 am
Speaking of IEA:
Demand
· 2015 global oil demand estimates were revised higher by 0.14 mb/d to 93.51 mb/d, higher y/y by nearly 1 mb/d, in line with our estimates, although we believe there is upside risk to our figures should the current trend in demand persist for a few more months.
· The bulk of the upward revision was concentrated in Q4 15 (+0.22 mb/d), despite the IEA’s communique focussing on temporary weather effects in Q1 15 (estimates for which were raised by 0.13 mb/d) as the reason for the upward revision. Unlike the IEA, we believe the demand strength has not been driven mainly by one-off factors and restocking but rather by lower prices. We think weather has added around 0.6 mb/d of demand to Q1 15 global oil demand.
· The OECD has seen demand growth pick up since December, with preliminary January European demand higher y/y for the second month running at 0.9%.
o European demand estimates for 2015 were raised by 60 thousand b/d (with y/y declines now at 50 thousand b/d), the US by 20 thousand b/d (y/y growth at 0.19 mb/d), while Japanese demand was revised lower by 10 thousand b/d (y/y declines at 0.15 mb/d).
· Overall, the IEA expect 2015 OECD demand to grow y/y by 10 thousand b/d, following a 60 thousand b/d upward revision this month.
· In the non-OECD, Chinese oil demand estimates were revised higher by 40 thousand b/d, with y/y growth at 0.28 mb/d, broadly in line with our estimates.
o Indian demand growth was left unchanged at 0.14 mb/d, while Russian demand declines, the biggest drag on 2015 demand, remain at 0.18 mb/d.
· In all, the 1 mb/d of demand growth in 2015 is largely concentrated in non-OECD countries.
Non-OPEC supplies
· 2015 estimates were unchanged at 57.41 mb/d, with y/y growth at 0.74 mb/d, as downward revisions in Latin America and Europe offset higher North American numbers.
o 2015 growth is expected to continue to come from the US where growth forecasts are pegged at 0.75 mb/d, following a 0.15 mb/d upward revision to supplies. This is broadly in line with our estimates, as we expect strong growth from the Gulf of Mexico and rising US output despite falling rigs in the near term, due to high-grading.
o Canadian growth estimates are pegged at 0.12 mb/d, although this is offset by a 0.16 mb/d decline from Mexico.
o Brazil is expected to grow by 0.11 mb/d this year following a downward revision by 0.12 mb/d. 2015 sees fewer projects start-up in Brazil as well as a high H2 14 base, and the corruption scandal surrounding Petrobras is expected to slow future project developments.
o Elsewhere, a 40 thousand b/d upward revision to Russian production led to declines easing to 0.1 mb/d this year compared to the 0.13 mb/d forecast last month. Other FSU supplies were revised higher by 30 thousand b/d meaning output will be broadly flat from Kazakhstan and Azerbaijan, something we disagree with.
· Overall, the growth this year is expected to come from the US (0.75 mb/d), Brazil (0.11 mb/d) and Canada (0.12 mb/d). These are partially offset by declines in Mexico (-0.16 mb/d), Russia (-0.1 mb/d) and Colombia (-60 thousand b/d).
Inventories
· Preliminary February data suggest that inventories drew by 8.8 mb as a steep 41.7 mb draw in refined products which fell due to cold weather offset building crude stocks in the US. Still, we do not think we will run out of storage space in the US as once refineries return from maintenance, they will run hard given the strong margins environment. However, the IEA’s view may put downward pressure on WTI prices.
· January OECD stocks built by a weaker than seasonal 23.1 mb, taking stocks to 2,733 mb. As a result, the surplus to the five year average narrowed to 60.3 mb from 75.1 mb at the end of 2014.
o The increase was centred in crude stocks, which rose by 16.7 mb, with a large 31.6 mb build in US crude stocks offset by 9.1 mb and 3.9 mb draws in Europe and Asia.
o Product stocks, however, remain in a deficit to the five year average, by 30 mb, with middle distillate stocks 37 mb below seasonal norms.
o US product stocks fell by 5.2 mb owing to a decline in propane stocks as exports remained high whilst temperatures fell steeply which increased demand
· US crude stocks, however, continued to rise at a phenomenal pace of 1 mb/d, with the OECD crude overhang solely concentrated in North America (74 mb above the five-year average, with the rest of the world 14 mb below).
· Further, the IEA also highlight that the hype surrounding floating storage has not materialised into increased volumes stored on the water, contrary to their suggestions earlier in the year that OECD storage capacity could be tested.
BobInget on Fri, 13th Mar 2015 10:07 am
excerpts:
US crude stocks, however, continued to rise at a phenomenal pace of 1 mb/d, with the OECD crude overhang solely concentrated in North America (74 mb above the five-year average, with the rest of the world 14 mb BELOW).
· Further, the IEA also highlight that the hype surrounding floating storage has not materialized into increased volumes stored on the water, contrary to their suggestions earlier in the year that OECD storage capacity could be tested.
? Why do we continue to import more then we currently need ?
? Where is President Putin ?
? Why did oil prices plummet 2% overnight ?
(when evidence, including above revised estimate, show diminished production, increasing demand ?)
shortonoil on Fri, 13th Mar 2015 10:10 am
The oil going into storage is considered demand, and it accounts for the increases in demand that we are seeing. Without it demand would be going down!
rockman on Fri, 13th Mar 2015 11:22 am
Bob – “Why do we continue to import more then we currently need”. The best answer may be to view it as working inventory. If you making refined products and the price of oil goes down you build your inventory while you can get the low prices. You’ll eventually crack all the oil you buy. The stuff you buy cheaper now will provide a better margin later.
As far as “importing more than we need” if the “we” is US consumers we aren’t getting more than we need: about 3 million bbls of that imported oil is refined with the products exported overseas.
rockman on Fri, 13th Mar 2015 12:33 pm
Speaking of storing oil here’s the latest reality:
Reuters – Only a few of the supertankers still chartered by traders for storage are filled with crude because a play to hold cheap oil and sell it later has lost momentum after prices recovered from six-year lows more quickly than expected.
Traders had been looking for profit from storing oil and selling it later at higher prices in the so-called contango play. But the recovery in crude prices has rendered storing oil onboard tankers unprofitable, senior traders from Glencore and Statoil have said.
More than 30 tankers had been put on long-term charter at the start of this year to play the contango, but vessels still earmarked for storage have dropped to 12. Of these, only one Ultra Large Crude Carrier (ULCC) and four Very Large Crude Carriers (VLCCs) are filled with oil, according to Thomson Reuters shipping data, shipbrokers and traders.
“What is not so easy to grasp is how many ships will actually store (oil). We will see in Q2,” said Robert Hvide Macleod, chief executive of Norway’s Frontline Management, one of the world’s largest tanker operators.
Most of the tankers booked on annual charters are now delivering crude as usual, traders and shipbrokers said.
Some traders who had earlier made the contango play have already taken profit on some of their stored oil and are looking for the next opportunity to store more.
Traders and analysts expect a supply overhang to cause prices to drop sharply again in the second quarter before recovering in the second half this year.
“Everybody agrees we’re going to recover in the second half but it’s just a matter of what happens in the second quarter,” said Tony Nunan, a risk manager at Mitsubishi Corp.
Brent crude fell 60 percent from above $115 a barrel in June last year to a nearly six-year low in January at just over $45 a barrel. It has since recovered to around $60 as U.S. oil output growth slows and Middle East and North Africa supply disruptions threaten
Northwest Resident on Fri, 13th Mar 2015 12:58 pm
“Everybody agrees we’re going to recover in the second half…”
Not everybody. Me, for one. Just like that fabled economic recovery — it is always going to happen, but never happening, just swirling further and faster down the tube. I suspect the same will happen with oil, despite optimistic predictions of future recovery.
shortonoil on Fri, 13th Mar 2015 1:54 pm
“Everybody agrees we’re going to recover in the second half…”
It is theoretically possible that we could see oil back in the $60’s by the end of the year:
http://www.thehillsgroup.org/depletion2_022.htm
If that does happen, it will however, not be a sufficient enough increase to save the high cost producers: shale, bitumen, ultra deep water, and high sulfur extra heavy. As depletion continues to reduce the consumer affordability of petroleum the highest production cost oils will be phased out first. The impact of falling petroleum prices has hardly just begun.
http://www.thehillsgroup.org/
rockman on Fri, 13th Mar 2015 5:48 pm
And back to the same problem: to have any chance to predict future oil prices one has to predict future economic activity and thus oil demand. And then there are all the sidebars such as geopolitical, geological, etc factors.
GregT on Fri, 13th Mar 2015 6:04 pm
To have any chance at predicting future economic activity and thus oil demand, one has to predict future oil prices. If oil prices stay as high as they are right now, or go higher, future economic activity will continue to drop off.
The only way to solve this problem is to abandon our current financial and monetary systems, for different systems that are not debt based, and do not require infinite exponential growth. We need a steady state economy, and as we move forward, we will need to learn how to live with less and less of everything.
GregT on Fri, 13th Mar 2015 6:15 pm
Of course, those that are running these systems, are the ones that benefit the most from maintaining the status quo. They have already killed millions of people to keep their control over their debt slaves, and they will in all likelihood continue to kill millions more. If they don’t stop screwing around in Eastern Europe, those numbers could easily be in the billions.
Albert Bartlett was correct:
“The greatest shortcoming of the human race is our inability to understand the exponential function.”
The people that are still telling us that growth is the answer, are at the root of the biggest problem facing humanity.
shortonoil on Fri, 13th Mar 2015 6:34 pm
And back to the same problem: to have any chance to predict future oil prices one has to predict future economic activity and thus oil demand.
The economy does not drive oil; oil drives the economy. The economy consumes energy, oil supplies it. Without energy there is no economy!
Davy on Fri, 13th Mar 2015 6:35 pm
Greg, you realize a steady state economy is fine in the theoretical but until a significant reduction in population occurs it is likely not possible. A steady state economy is something locals should goal seek. There is likely no conversion for the global BAU into a steady state economy. What is beautiful about locals is the many opportunities that are possible if they survive the initial crash.
Locals will be the successional pioneer species of the transition from the destroyed climax ecosystem of BAU. That is if the local has the conditions for regrowth. This is why I preach location and relocation. There may be no future but no one knows now what is ahead so plan as if there is some kind of future. Acting out your frustrations by saying “why do anything there is no future” is emotions not logic. None of us know what is ahead. There is no earth killing asteroid on a path to destroy us in 5 years I know of. This is a systematic collapse of BAU that will be complex and act out on many levels. Keep your focus simple and basic and you will feel good about your efforts.
Davy on Fri, 13th Mar 2015 6:45 pm
Oil and the economy is a symbiotic relationship. No economy no oil infrastructure. No oil no economy. This is why I laugh when the anti-Americans crow about Russia and how they will do just fine in a crash. The reality is the oil complex is complex and requires a functioning economy that is at the level of capital intensive. If not there will not be an economy or an oil complex. There will only be ISIL style makeshift mobile refineries supplying the mad-maxathon. But I agree on the flip side Short. Oil does drive the economy and that is why the Econ majors are buffoons to discount energy in their econ 101 calculations. I am referring to people like Marm that will throw out a Freddy fluff chart to discount the importance of oil to the economy.
GregT on Fri, 13th Mar 2015 6:53 pm
Davy,
Russia is a net exporter of oil and natural gas. She has a surplus of the stuff that fuels our economies, and grows our food.
Davy on Fri, 13th Mar 2015 7:10 pm
Sure Greg, I have no problem with that but if Russia has no markets for that oil and no place to buy spare parts what good is that oil? IOW no economy no oil. Except of course salvage oil production but that is another animal. Salvage oil will be a local or regional affair not a global oil complex economic environment. The flip side is true of the US and her AG exports. No economy no food exports and the world goes into food crisis especially Asia. We are interconnected as you are well aware Greg.
GregT on Fri, 13th Mar 2015 7:49 pm
Yes Davy, I am very aware.
What I would do if I was the leader of Russia, would be to look inwards. To focus on resources and food production within my own country, and to focus more on building relationships with my immediate neighbours. I would do pretty much exactly what Putin has been doing. He does have degrees in both resource management and economics, so I wouldn’t expect anything less.
If I were the leader of the US, I would bring the troops home, close down all of the hundreds of military bases around the world, and focus entirely on alternate energy production, and food production and distribution.
Because I know that our leaders are more concerned with maintaining their own power and wealth, and have no immediate plans to stop wasting our money on wars in far away places, I have decided to look inwards myself. Just like you are doing Davy.
Davy on Fri, 13th Mar 2015 8:26 pm
Sounds good Greg on the local level of you and me but at the levels of nations it is a big if. This is true of both the U.S. and Russia. BAU has left no stone unturned and all nations are vulnerable to this descent. Putin’s regionalization gamble may payoff it may not. Russia has significant comparative advantage but it takes more.
At this point with so many unknowns advantages alone are not enough. In today’s uncertainty it takes above all luck. Luck that when this shit storm plays out you will have been under the right tree and spared the lightning.
ghung on Fri, 13th Mar 2015 11:15 pm
Get Ready for Oil Deals: Shale Is Going on Sale
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-03-11/get-ready-for-oil-deals-shale-is-going-on-sale
“(Bloomberg) — A decision by Whiting Petroleum Corp., the largest producer in North Dakota’s Bakken shale basin, to put itself up for sale looks to be the first tremor in a potential wave of consolidation as $50-a-barrel prices undercut companies with heavy debt and high costs.
For the first time since wildcatters such as Harold Hamm of Continental Resources Inc. began extracting significant amounts of oil from shale formations, acquisition prospects from Texas to the Great Plains are looking less expensive.
Buyers are ultimately after reserves, the amount of oil a company has in the ground based on its drilling acreage. The value of about 75 shale-focused U.S. producers based on their reserves fell by a median of 25 percent by the end of 2014 compared to 2013, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. That’s opening up new opportunities for bigger companies with a better handle on their debt, said William Arnold, a former executive at Royal Dutch Shell Plc…..
….. Sellers will be companies like Whiting, handicapped by heavy debt and lacking the cash reserves or hedging contracts that would have provided some insulation from the market crash. Among the three biggest producers in North Dakota — Whiting, Continental and Oasis Petroleum Inc. — the value per-barrel of reserves has fallen by about half since June, the data show, meaning those reserves would cost a buyer half what they were worth eight months ago.
Exxon is the only major oil company with a AAA credit rating, which gives it unparalleled borrowing power for financing deals. More importantly, the company has $226 billion of its own shares stashed away from buybacks that it could use to buy other companies. That was how Exxon paid for Mobil in 1999 and XTO Energy Inc. in 2010.
Chevron holds $43 billion of its own shares in its treasury alongside $13 billion in cash…
An analysis by Wolfe Research LLC’s Paul Sankey found the likeliest takeover candidates among major U.S. and Canadian producers included Continental, Apache Corp., Devon Energy Corp. and Anadarko Petroleum Corp….
Northwest Resident on Fri, 13th Mar 2015 11:28 pm
GregT — I’m pretty sure that if the US closed down their military bases around the world and brought the troops home, global economic collapse would be rapid and total. A lot of countries around the world would just fall apart, and it wouldn’t be pretty. Those military forces are protecting and guaranteeing ocean trade routes, and keeping the oil flowing in key ME countries. Of course, we know that it is all going to fall apart sooner or later anyway, but one way to bring it on hard and fast would be to walk away from playing the role of world policeman. I am sure that the USA will eventually bring all or most troops home though, where they’re going to be needed to maintain order and fight insurgents here — the military is planning for those future scenarios, urgently I believe. I think when the troops do start coming home from around the world, they won’t be returning to flag waving crowds and parades.
GregT on Sat, 14th Mar 2015 2:08 am
NWR,
“playing the role of world policeman.”
So do you believe that policemen should act above and beyond the law? Do you think that just because someone accuses you of something that the police have the right to bust down your door, kill your family, yourself, or your dog? To bomb your entire town, city, or country back into the stone age? Seriously?
“Those military forces are protecting and guaranteeing ocean trade routes, and keeping the oil flowing in key ME countries.”
Those military forces are protecting our oligarchs NWR. The people that all of us are debt slaves to. The people that are willing to put our sons and daughters in harms way to protect their abilities to amass stupid amounts of wealth, and nothing more. The biggest threats to mankind on this planet, other than the DC oligarchs igniting a nuclear war, is the continuation of adding even more CO2 into the environment, and the people that continue to profit from doing so.
The “insurgents” that the troops will be fighting at home will be the same insurgents that they are fighting overseas. The people that only want to be left alone, to have the rights to their own self determination, and to not be indebted to a corrupt oligarchy. People like you and me NWR.
Davy on Sat, 14th Mar 2015 6:10 am
Greg, you can argue the pros and cons all you like but a vacuum is what it is. NR, has a solid point. The troops will be coming home with a collapse in some fashion. You are right that civil unrest and possible civil war is a real and probably outcome at some point. This will be global not just a US phenomenon. The US will be best placed for security in a collapse situation at least initially. We already have paramilitary police and large military at the authority’s disposal. I am also with NR that security even fascist security is better than anarchy at least in the worst of the transition.
I doubt all troops will return initially and I doubt all at once but home they are coming. I imagine the US military will continue to be for hire by those countries willing to pay for their services if collapse is gradual. That is just a fact of life. Mercenaries and security forces are very difficult to build up in an effective fashion. There will continue to be US soldier around the world until BAU’s descent makes international trade null and void. The US military has one of top militaries as far as equipment, training, and experience. They have a market for services. They do now and will have likely in the future.
If collapse is of long duration and strong effects. I doubt much global trade will go on. Too much disruption and few alternatives. How many navies or merchant fleets have sail power? All that will need to be built back up. Fossil fuels and manufacturing needed for BAU transport will suffer entropic decay relatively quick. When the need for a security services dries up and resources are too difficult to distribute globally that is when the troops will be back for good. Of course a quick and total collapse will be a quick and swift return I imagine.
marmico on Sat, 14th Mar 2015 6:20 am
Marm that will throw out a Freddy fluff chart to discount the importance of oil to the economy
Isn’t the oil age and technology great? 🙂
For the same quantity of oil consumed, Americans can travel twice as far in 2015 in their personal transport machines as they could in 1980.
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/graph/?g=147F
Expect that trend to continue for the next 35 years.
Go Hamm, go. As the head honcho of a leading independent shale oil producer, keep excising the lard out of the domestic oil patch to bring the marginal cost curve down to $60 WTI.
Davy on Sat, 14th Mar 2015 7:14 am
Marm, Why is traveling twice as far better? Why does modern man insist more, bigger, and further is better? Look where that has got us Marmie. OH, I know there is a Freddy Fluff chart for how wonderful life is today. Marm, I know your large and exceptional brain is above this but others here may find this interesting. This is from Big Soldier an Osage from Missouri in the 1813:
“I see and admire your manner of living, your good warm houses, your extensive fields of corn, your gardens, your cows, own workhouses, wagons and a thousand machines that I know not the use of. I see that you are able to clothe yourselves even from weeds and grass. In short, you even do almost what you choose. You whites possess the power of subduing almost every animal to your use. You are surrounded by slaves. Everything about you is in chains, and you are slaves yourselves. I fear if I should exchange my pursuits for yours, I too should become a slave. Talk to my sons, perhaps they may be persuaded to adopt your fashions … but as for myself I was born free, was raised free and wish to die free”
marmico on Sat, 14th Mar 2015 7:39 am
Davy-boy, you are as phony as a 2$ bill.
Three personal transport ICE machines, let alone the recreational machines, two licenced drivers and not a penny of agriculture receipts in your nuclear family of four on the doomstead.
Oh, I forgot about the fourth personal transport machine. Your annual trip to St. Louis for a years supply of goods after you harnessed the oxen and attached the wagon for the journey. 🙂
Another Freddy Fluffer chart for you. Recreational goods and vehicle expenditures exceeded gasoline expenditures in Q42004 by a smidgen.
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/graph/fredgraph.png?g=147M
Davy on Sat, 14th Mar 2015 7:53 am
Marm, took the bait! I love a catch!
Marm you know you give a Neo-Malthusianism legitimacy by responding to the Grand Master of Doom especially with Freddy fluff.
Marm, I like you, really, how boring would our morning be without some bantering amongst friends!
buddavis on Sat, 14th Mar 2015 10:21 am
Hey Rock
Art Berman had this posted today.
http://www.artberman.com/world-oil-demand-surges-a-data-point-for-price-recovery/
What are your thoughts on him?
Northwest Resident on Sat, 14th Mar 2015 1:12 pm
GregT — I pretty much agree with everything you point out, and Davy added some excellent points also. Hey, I didn’t say that the US Military acting as world policeman was fair, or right. It’s just the way it is, hardcore Machiavellian reality, and as unfair and brutal and savage as the actions of that world police force are, it isn’t anything compared to how bad it would (WILL!) be once they leave the rest of the world to their own fates. Which we both agree is going to happen anyway. But I hope under controlled circumstances — a longer, slower collapse as Davy describes — because like Davy says, “even fascist security is better than anarchy”.
We’ll probably get exposed to heavy doses of both as time goes on and BAU continues its historic unraveling. Let’s not be in too big of a hurry, please!!
synapsid on Sat, 14th Mar 2015 10:41 pm
marmico,
Shame. $2 dollar bills are legal tender and I love to spend them, usually when the person on the till looks like they’re about 19, because they don’t know what they are.
Half dollars work, too.
Apneaman on Sat, 14th Mar 2015 11:06 pm
NW, I totally agree about our Machiavellian reality. I accepted that many years ago. What I can’t stand is listening to people spin it as righteous. I have more respect for my raping and pillaging barbarian Viking ancestors who simply said we are doing it because we want to, like it and can.
Davy on Sun, 15th Mar 2015 7:20 am
Ape Man, I like you, like honesty in all its forms good or bad. Nothing worse than denial and lies. “Be real or go home” is my slogan for the BAUbastards or the angles with iron wings who are the AltE’ers, AGW’ers, greenies, and transitionalists.
Pain and suffering is ahead accept it and quit being pussies.