[catmando]

Originally Posted by Codger

Brian
I have the distinct feeling that an 'Apollo mission' style approach would be a mistake. Looking at the Aptera that Catmando posted my first thought was that I wouldn't be trying to get from Sheridan to Colorado Springs in it during the winter. That's not a comment meant to denigrate the Aptera. It just might be a great solution for a specific part of the market and as long as the firm keeps focused on that market and the product evolves to better serve that market it should be a success.
What's needed in terms of government "broad brush strokes" is a reality check on some of the existing stupidities. CARB is a a perfect example of a structure that needs to be given a good review since it actually favours increased consumption rather than efficiency.

If you don't trust the electric Aptera to perform in cold weather get the hybrid gas/electric model. That's the model I expect most people will choose.

[catmando]

Codger here is a short discussion on this subject;

http://www.apteraforum.com/showthread.php?t=63

[Codger]

Originally Posted by catmando

Codger here is a short discussion on this subject;

http://www.apteraforum.com/showthread.php?t=63

Thanks. Traction was only one consideration. Battery performance in cold weather was more the concern. Having driven, or more accurately, not been able to move at the speed of traffic in a couple of different hybrids due to low temps, not having enough heat inside the vehicle to ensure that I didn't have to wear my Nanook of the North gear I have my reservations. It's a balmy -10 this morning, up from last week's -39. Heated seats are one of my favourite options.

[brian eiland]

Oil investor T. Boon Pickens said on Thursday crude prices will continue their climb and will top $125 a barrel in the near future.

Pickens predicts that despite the increase in oil production in some parts of
the world, overall production remains stable at 85 million barrels per day while
demand has surpassed 87 million barrels.

From... http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id...tionid=3510213

[brian eiland]

Originally Posted by brian eiland

Just saw this program ("Crude": 8-10 AM EST Feb 22) and it was simply the most well-done, informative and attention-grabbing program I've seen related to peak oil concerns. This program should be endorsed and viewed by every single member of this site.

On this 'Earth Day' the History Channel is replaying this interesting presentation. "Crude"

[brian eiland]

Originally Posted by Meanz Beanz

Saudis oil reserves have been remarkably stable considering all the pumping over the years.... never go up, never go down????????????? Trust that?

Listen to the industry directly ... http://www.worldenergysource.com/

This gentleman has contributed quite a few insightful postings on another forum.

Old chart, but look at the rig count? Are they behaving like a country swimming in oil, or one desperately searching for more?

[Codger]

Using rig counts as an indicator can be misleading.
I'm a bit more concerned about the pressure on the Saudis to increase production. There's a limit to the rate at which you can pump before you do damage to the structures.
If what you are implying is that the existing fields have had their proven reserves overstated, I don't think that that is any longer subject to dispute.
There are some newly defined structures that have the rigs out doing exploratory work that makes sense.

[brian eiland]

Now another video, " A Crude Awakening"


http://www.oilcrashmovie.com/film.html


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NlVNyJFBCxc

(...can't find the whole movie on video at the moment)

[brian eiland]

Originally Posted by Meanz Beanz

...Oh but it often does, a futures contract will often have more open interest at points than product can be supplied but that is only a bad thing under certain circumstances. Commodities law recognises those circumstances and seeks to prevent them because they can be manipulative if market concentration is high enough, this is something that is very very difficult to achieve in a large market like oil. The "Enron loop hole" circumvents these laws and this is what the discussion is in the US and where this topic came from. They are talking about why, how and if those trading in this fashion should be legislated out of the market. One of the ironies here is the group being called speculators are in fact index funds, they are long term buy and hold funds that in any other market are called investors. It seems if we benefit from it your an investor, if we perceive we don't (we do, but that is another discussion) your a demon speculator. Anyway as I have pointed out before if they close this loop hole in an agressive fashion it will have a short term effect and a long term effect. Better prices in the short term and higher in the long term for one of two reasons... being; lower/delayed investment in the sector OR captial flight to other markets... both of these are bad for the US, hence the legislators need to consider their moves carefully. Being an election year I suspect that a short sighted and damaging populist move will be made, but I live in hope that they will not shoot the goose that lays the golden egg as they have done in the past (windfall profits tax!)....

..The only way you can drive oil up speculatively is by hoarding physical oil, not only is that hard to do in price setting quantities, its also not a futures market issue...

...It stuns me that China is now almost more free market than the US, its a massive irony...

Okay Meanz, you've convinced me with some very thoughtful postings to this thread. I think you are right that our Congress not make some knee-jerk decision in this election year. Maybe that is the only good thing that might result from a Bush veto of a quick Congressional action against big oil....let cooler heads prevail.

Today I was listening to the C-SPAN hearings of the Committee, chaired by Congressman Rep. Edward Markey (D-MA) who chairs a Select Cmte. on Energy Independence. Here is a short video from him about 6 months ago when oil was approaching $100:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kKuNQBPmY58

This is how we need to attack the problem...new technology and conservation.

I'm waiting for a YouTube presentation of todays hearings....a must listen

[brian eiland]

Originally Posted by Meanz Beanz

....Peak production occurred in 2005 and stands until surpassed which is very unlikely. To get why that is an issue you need to get your head into the "dynamics of resource depletion". Long story short, peak production occurs at somewhere around 50% reserve depletion and that occurs around the 90% point in the time line to total depletion due to the exponential nature of demand growth (just look at India and Chinas growth rates!). We have distorted that with modern and more efficient extraction methods but that just makes the drop off faster when it comes. We also don't get to use the last drop of oil, prices will sky rocket toward the end of this cycle i.e. alternates are needed now. We have almost reached the end of cheap oil, your world as you know it, runs on cheap energy. We need to replace it with other cheap sources and quickly. High oil prices are the path to getting the investment interest in the rights areas to solve this issue, that is a critical part of the solution. Logistically we are almost certainly to late now to avoid a major energy crisis, it takes more time than we have to put in place cheap alternates even if we had them and started tomorrow. So it seems we are in for a period on high energy cost until we rearrange ourselves to use other sources.... managment by crisis seems to be a part of the human condition.

To repeat we are 1.5mb per day short at the moment, when that is resolved pressure will ease on the price. That will occur but given all the other factors at play here it will very likely be short lived. This is not a time to scape goat the energy industry or anyone willing to invest in the sector by whatever means, this is a time to put capital in their hands to solve this issue...

Rep. Edward Markey (D-MA) chairs a Select Cmte. on Energy Independence hearing to discuss the future role of the auto industry and the federal gov't in fighting gas prices and to examine the fuel economy standards proposed in response to the enactment of the Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) of 2007.

Here is a CSPAN link. I'm sure an abreviated version will appear on YouTube and I will edit this posting accordingly when it comes online.
http://www.c-span.org/
...then click on "House Select Cmte. on Energy Independence Hearing on Gas Prices & Fuel Economy", June 26, 2008

[brian eiland]

Originally Posted by brian eiland

Rep. Edward Markey (D-MA) chairs a Select Cmte. on Energy Independence hearing to discuss the future role of the auto industry and the federal gov't in fighting gas prices and to examine the fuel economy standards proposed in response to the enactment of the Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) of 2007.

Here is a CSPAN link. I'm sure an abbreviated version will appear on YouTube and I will edit this posting accordingly when it comes online.
http://www.c-span.org/
...then click on "House Select Cmte. on Energy Independence Hearing on Gas Prices & Fuel Economy", June 26, 2008

That 'YouTube' link has not yet appeared. And I know that this CSPAN version is too long for most folks to wade thru. So I marked down a few 'time frame windows' that characterize some of the hi-lites of this hearing.

I'll start at the summary statement by Ed Markey that challenges us in the USA to look back at the history of one of our nation's GREATEST technological accomplishments, putting a man on the moon. In 8 years we accomplished this feat....AMAZING !!!! (Particularly when you consider how long we've been working on other problems far less complicated)
Listen to the video segment from time 52:00 minutes to 1:07:00. Ed Markey is suggesting our way out of the fuel oil dilemma is to challenge OPEC with new technologies that we are fully capable of developing.

Listen to the video segment from time of 1:13 to 1:17. John Kennedy challenged our nation to put a man on the moon. Ed Markey invokes this spirit of Kennedy's, to challenge America once again to rise to the occasion of a race for new energy technologies. The prospect of this new future alone could lower futures prices for oil.

If these two segments above get you interested in what was said at the hearing, here are two more surprises ....can you really believe that some young fellow (Bush appointee) would come to this meeting and suggest that they are modeling their energy policy based on a forecast of $2.42 per gallon of gas in 2015 !! What kind of kool-aid are these guys passing around down there in Washington DC ?? No wonder we are in trouble.
Watch these two segments:
13:00 to 15:30
33:30 to 35:50

[brian eiland]

A few more 'clips' from that video of the energy meeting:

At time frame 1:25..now a YouTube presentation of this segment
Shai Agassi speaks about the electric car project he has convinced the country of Israel to adopt. And interestingly the separation of the battery from the electric vehicle itself, thus the battery becomes a consumable like gas was for current vehicles. Also modeling the project on some basis like the mobile phone market. His website Project Better Place


At time frame 1:30
A representative from Denmark talks about there past bout with oil energy and how they began attacking the situation quite some time ago. Also Windmill energy generation.

At time frame 1:47
Shai Agassi's estimate for electric cars in USA under a dedicated power systems approach & energy transmission question.

At time frame 1:57 to 2:01
Inevitable trend lines

[brian eiland]

July 7 (Bloomberg) -- Crude output from Mexico's Cantarell, the world's third-largest oil field, is falling at the fastest pace in 12 years as investment limits keep state-owned Petroleos Mexicanos from fully exploiting deposits and finding new ones.

Production at the Gulf of Mexico development dropped 34 percent in May from a year earlier, the biggest decline since October 1995, according to data compiled by the government and Bloomberg. That was when Hurricane Roxanne's 131 miles-per-hour (114-knot) winds shut down offshore wells for a week.

Seven decades after Mexico banned foreign oil investment, President Felipe Calderon is pressing lawmakers to allow Pemex, as the state energy company is known, to hire outside producers to help find and pump petroleum. Cantarell's decline is costing Pemex $20 billion a year in sales at a time when oil prices have never been higher, and the company lacks the funding to find enough new deposits to keep reserves from dwindling.

"We are at the worst time right now of the decline," David Shields, an energy analyst and publisher of Mexican oil magazine Energia, said in a July 1 interview. "They should have been developing the fields to be sustainable."

Falling production is curbing exports to the U.S., which buys about 80 percent of the oil Mexico sells abroad. Sales to the U.S. declined to 1.07 million barrels a day in May, the lowest since November 1995.

Exports at Risk

Pemex, Latin America's biggest company by revenue, may need to cut exports this year to meet domestic demand as production falls, Energy Minister Georgina Kessel said last month in an interview.

Mexico nationalized its oil industry in 1938 and enacted a constitutional ban on foreign energy investment to protect the country's resources. Increasing royalties from Pemex, which Mexico relies on for 40 percent of government revenue, have left the company short of exploration and production funding.

Mexico's Congress is in the final month of debate on Calderon's proposal to give Pemex more freedom to hire companies to explore, produce, refine and transport oil. Foreign producers still wouldn't own the oil. Hiring them under service contracts would free Pemex to invest more in other projects.

Pemex is seeking $20 billion in exploration and production funding for next year, up from its 2008 budget of $15 billion. Output at the three-decades-old Cantarell fell 25 percent in 2007, exceeding company projections for a 15 percent drop.

Spending Needs

"Spending on exploration is a relatively low number, compared to other areas of the world," Jed Bailey, managing director of Latin American research at Cambridge Energy Research Associates, said in a July 1 interview from Boston.

Irving, Texas-based Exxon Mobil Corp., the world's largest oil company, plans more than $25 billion in capital spending this year. Chevron Corp., the No. 2 U.S. oil company, budgeted almost $23 billion.

Pemex's funding request is too low to meet a goal of boosting oil production back above 3 million barrels a day, Kessel said in the interview. The company needs about $30 billion a year to hit that target, she said. Total crude output in May was 2.8 million barrels a day, down 10 percent from a year earlier, led by Cantarell's plunge.

Pemex spokesman Carlos Ramirez didn't return calls seeking comment.

Reserves Fall

The company replaced 50 percent of the oil it extracted in 2007. At current production rates, Pemex's oil reserves would run out in 9.2 years if it added no new deposits.

Pemex has been unable to take full advantage of record oil prices. Crude-oil futures traded in New York climbed to a record above $145 a barrel this month, the highest since trading began in 1983.

Cantarell's output dropped by more than 540,000 barrels a day in May from a year earlier as the deposit lost pressure, making it more difficult and expensive to extract crude. Pemex has been injecting nitrogen for more than 10 years to stimulate production.

The development peaked at 65 percent of the company's 3.3 million barrels of daily crude output in 2003. In May, it fell to 37 percent of total production.

The world's largest oil field is Ghawar in Saudi Arabia, followed by Burgan in Kuwait and Cantarell.

[brian eiland]

Seems that we blew up a big short in the oil market...

This goes a long way to explaining the backwardation in the oil contracts for such along time.

Originally Posted by Ted Butler

Big news recently is the world record loss in crude oil trading, taken by SemGroup, of Tulsa, Oklahoma, a large but mostly unknown oil pipeline, storage and trading company founded in 2000. To my knowledge, the reported $3.2 billion loss is the second largest commodity debacle ever, only behind the $6 billion loss recorded by Amaranth Advisers two years ago in natural gas.

What is remarkable is how little has been written about SemGroup’s loss. I realize that we have become numb to reports of multi-billion dollar losses, thanks to the mortgage and credit disaster. But it is still amazing to me that more attention has not been placed upon this oil trading loss, because it explains so much about the recent volatility in the price of oil. If there’s one concern ahead of the mortgage and credit crisis, it has to be the price of crude.

Given the recent fervor by elected officials to pin the blame for the unprecedented price moves in crude on speculators, I’m surprised that more observers are not making the connection between SemGroup’s actions and the big price move in crude oil. I thought the CFTC would be all over this major market event, but they instead announced, with great fanfare, charges concerning truly insignificant oil market violations. These events occurred more than a year ago and the dollar amount was a million dollars. The SemGroup’s loss was 3200 times more significant, yet neither the CFTC nor the NYMEX, where $2.4 billion of the loss reportedly occurred (the rest was OTC) have said a word about the 2nd largest commodity loss in history.

So, how do you lose $3.2 billion dollars in crude oil trading and how did that affect the price? The answer is with an obscene number of contracts on the wrong side of a rising market on the short side. That’s smack-dab where SemGroup was positioned, with more (and perhaps much more) than 100,000 short futures and options contracts.

The exact number of contracts that SemGroup actually held short has not been revealed. However, by dividing the total loss listed in bankruptcy filings and published reports, by a reasonable loss per barrel, it’s not hard to deduce the total number of short contracts held. To appreciate what a 100,000 contract position represents, it is the equivalent to 100 million barrels of oil, or more than every barrel produced and consumed in the entire world for a day.

In terms of dollar amounts, it appears that SemGroup held short positions on more than $15 billion worth of crude oil and perhaps much more. In practical terms, it would take a position of that size going against you in order to generate a loss of $3 billion. You should be asking yourself, how did the NYMEX and the CFTC allow SemGroup, or anyone, to amass such a large position that it, obviously, couldn’t stand behind? What do these regulators do all day?

I’m certain that when the details emerge, we will read of a story that has recurred in previous market debacles, namely, an initial market miscalculation compounded by repeated attempts to get whole by doubling up. As those increased bets don’t pan out, and margin calls can’t be met, the game is over in an instant and the loss is recorded.

In this case, it’s easy to see, based upon the timeline, how SemGroup’s trading debacle influenced oil prices, first up, then down. As the end came near for SemGroup’s large, increasing short position, that position was forcibly bought back (probably by SemGroup’s lead broker, said to be Barclays). This accounted, by my calculations, for the last $15 to $20 increase in the price of oil, up to the $147 price high. When the forced buyback of the short position was concluded, a buying void was suddenly created and prices then fell $20+ to date. So, not only did SemGroup manage to lose over $3 billion and go bankrupt in the process, it also dramatically influenced the price of oil and fuel for the rest of the world.

SemGroup was the 12th-largest private US company according to many reports.

[brian eiland]

Just the other day I was talking with an 'economics type' and I brought of Greenspans name as a failure to really strongly warn us of this coming morgage situation. He ask if I knew the Federal Reserve Banking system was not a part of our Fed government , but rather a private concern. I told him I was only vagely aware of this, at which point he told me to go read a book by the name of "The Creature from Jekyll Island"

....http://www.brianrwright.com/Coffee_C...yll_Island.htm
In this tome, author Edward Griffin delivers a devastating expose on the background, execution, and remedies to the Federal Reserve Banking system (FRBS).

The system, which amounts to a national bank under control of (surprise) the money interests who dominate the government of the United States, was rather sneakily enacted into law by Congress just before Christmas recess in 1913. Creature shows how this surreptitious meeting on Jekyll Island, a private resort off the coast of Georgia owned by J.P. Morgan and associates, led to the FRBS and its seemingly unlimited license to steal continuously from the productive class.
__________________________________________________ ___
...in MP3 format
http://www.spielbauer.com/JekyllDownload.htm


__________________________________________________ ___
The Creature from Jekyll Island
A Second Look at the Federal Reserve
http://www.financialsense.com/transc...18griffin.html

The Federal Reserve - An Inflation-Creating Institution

The Truth About Banks and Their Partnership with The Fed

A Legalized Cartel?

What About Secrecy?

Is The Fed a Stabilizer?

World Bank and the IMF

Why Do Central Bankers Hate Gold?

Bankers and War

Is it Inflation or Deflation Ahead?

Can the US Change Course?

Doomsday Mechanisms



________________________________________________
...another section
What is the Mandrake Mechanism?
It's the most important financial lesson of your life!
http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/jekyll.htm