[TDoS]

But calling me a liar from a position of absolute ignornace is rude.

You complaining about somebody being rude is laughable. 

Sort of like someone who wasn't there for a conversation proclaiming that those who were lied about its content? Laughable indeed.

It is quite touching though, a one legged man standing up   to defend he who was rude.

[RE]

Since you can't produce the evidence of the quote you reference, it's not laughable.  Based on your misrepresentations of many "Peak Oilers" you disagree with, it wouldn't be out of character for you to misrepresent what Ugo wrote.

I have one leg, but good balance, and besides I am sitting most of the time anyhow.

RE

[TDoS]

.... it wouldn't be out of character for you to misrepresent what Ugo wrote.
RE

It would be. Because I don't misrepresent.

Just because people know stuff that you don't, and you can't confirm because you don't hang in the right circles but prefer echo-chambers, and others obviously have far better memories of minor details of your own posting history (and mine pretty well too!), and it is all unscientific to do anything other than represent as best as possible (for courts, conferences, schooling the XOM folks in New Jersey or teaching PhD level students), but you pretend that I misrepresent is all you got?

All you've got is the Forum Power to ban/erase/censor/"pretend you know what Ugo said". Enjoy.

And you have my sympathy that it is the best you can do in terms of accomplishment.

[Toxic Plants Blog]

A two year old discussion that will be of interest to the hard-core doomer.  The fossil gurus are mentioned.

Peter's website: Toxic Plants Blog

Thanks for mentioning my blog, but I think that podcast I did with KMO was my least successful guest appearance ever (not that I've done very many of them).  For a start, we had problems with the audio, resulting in me not being able to use the headset I was intending to use, and having to switch to alternative equipment which resulted in me not being able to hear the sound of my own voice when I was talking, which was really off putting and interfered with my concentration.  Then there was the conflicting philosophy between myself and KMO.  As long time peak oil followers may remember, KMO went "all in" for peak oil, left his job and his family, went to live on an organic farm while he waited for the imminent collapse which never arrived, and probably ended up feeling rather foolish, which gave him a jaundiced view of peak oil forever after.  On the other hand, I kept a foot in both worlds, and continued with my daytime job while researching and preparing for peak oil, which turned out to be far more sensible (and I'm still doing it).  Then towards the end of the interview, KMO ran out of things to ask me and just started rabbiting on about anything to fill in the 60 minutes.  You can hear it all and judge for yourself if you listen to the podcast, but quite frankly I wouldn't recommend it!  Far better to visit my blog and read my latest post on the upcoming UK General Election.   

[K-Dog]

TO,

Welcome,

A more realistic approach would be to redesign our living arrangements so there is less need to transport people and materials.

We seem to have convergent evolution going on.  That is my position too.  But we dream.  Dream with green?  Attempts to mitigate with green, green, green is a trip on the river of De-Nile.  Only a fundamental change in living arrangements can make a dent, could matter at all.  I wish it could be more than a dream.  Fundamental change is unpopular.

I support carbon Fee and Divided which is not a tax as you know.  Government gets the proceeds of tax.  Fee and dividend is a redistribution that would encourage natural human self-interest to make needed behavioral change.

On the other hand, I kept a foot in both worlds, and continued with my daytime job while researching and preparing for peak oil, which turned out to be far more sensible (and I'm still doing it).

Me too.

As you say: "If you stand on a bridge over a major highway, or stand on a hill overlooking a city at night, you get a visceral sense of the enormity of the problem. How can we possibly convert all those thousands of vehicles passing under the bridge every hour, to net zero? How can we possibly convert all of that city's electric light to net zero?"

It is not in the math.  Often there is talk, and even hard core doomers will make the mistake of portraying overshoot as something that 'will happen' if people don't do something.  Truth is, overshoot is here, and has been for a while.  Now we wait for system delays to kick-in inevitable consequences.  Green thinking is denials' success at not reading the room.  Of not understanding the delay.

The earth does not do things on a timescale humans can relate to.  KMO and others who went off the 'deep end' did not appreciate this.  Net zero is an extreme that errs in the other way.  Net zero is 'throw me in the shallow water before I get too deep'. Net zero wants to put lipstick on a pig.  Extreme fear of the water.  Fear of change.

I make no distinction between residents or immigrants on the basis of nationality, religion or ethnic origin. I have every sympathy for economic migrants and refugees, and I fully understand why they want to seek a better life elsewhere.

I thought only RE and I thought this way.  What to do about the situation is complicated.

Welcome to the Diner.

* You are only a 'Useless Eater' for a few posts.

[RE]

In the Great Peak Oil Poker Game, BP saw the IEAs 2029 Peak Demand by 2029 and raised to 2025.  Bloomberg apparently also is betting with the shorts on this.  I will maintain my opinion this has less to do with conversion to EVs, Net Zero and Carbon Credits and more to do with the likelihood of a major recession getting underway.

Far as the trading goes, it's been hanging range bound between $80-85 for about the last month, after the initial panic in June when it dropped to the $70s after the IEA announcement.  Based on recent stories, I'm expecting a recession announcement in 2-3 months.  That will be a good test if it comes to pass.

https://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/BP-Predicts-Global-Oil-Demand-Will-Peak-In-2025.html

RE

[TDoS]

In the Great Peak Oil Poker Game, BP saw the IEAs 2029 Peak Demand by 2029 and raised to 2025.  Bloomberg apparently also is betting with the shorts on this.  I will maintain my opinion this has less to do with conversion to EVs, Net Zero and Carbon Credits and more to do with the likelihood of a major recession getting underway.

I'll buy that for a dollar!! The more blood in the streets the better, any investor worth their salt isn't going to mind exctly what is needed for an improved return on investment environment. 2008 was an excellent example.

[RE]

I'll buy that for a dollar!!

So you're going short on oil?  Make some money betting the demand dropping?

RE

[RE]

Clearly the Argentinians have not read the IEA or BP predictions.  lol.  Arriving a little late to the party.  Now the question is, who will pony up and finance the drilling?  Since the IEA projects a supply GLUT for the next decade, it doesn't seem to be a very attractive investment opportunity.  The Brit banks aren't financing new FF drilling in the North Sea, but maybe they would hand over money to Argentina for drilling?

https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/article/2024/jul/11/argentinas-future-lies-in-the-balance-as-vast-oilfields-poised-for-extraction

Argentina's future lies in the balance as vast oilfields poised for extraction


RE

[K-Dog]

https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/article/2024/jul/11/argentinas-future-lies-in-the-balance-as-vast-oilfields-poised-for-extraction

Argentina's future lies in the balance as vast oilfields poised for extraction

RE

Privatize the commons, full speed ahead.  Let no crying infant or starving widow stop you.  As the preforming Argentinian clown just said:

Starting the delivery of his go-to manifesto about the evils of socialism, and virtues of the free market, Milei gave a hearty hug to Brazil's hard-right former President Javier Bolsonaro, who just days earlier was indicted by federal police in a scheme to embezzle Saudi diamonds.

My friend Jair Bolsonaro is suffering judicial persecution,

Milei said onstage from the conference in Brazil's southern city of Balneario Camboriu.

Che would not be happy.

* Bozo is getting Trumped and Trump is not.

[TDoS]

I'll buy that for a dollar!!

So you're going short on oil?  Make some money betting the demand dropping?

RE

I tend to bet overall market performance, not specific stocks, industries or commodities.

So for example when a decent recession is coming, I move from market tracking funds to fixed returns, and back again when things begin to turn. Made an absolute killing timing the end of the world with peak oil 2008 (according to the experts at TOD) and bet the wrong way a few years ago coming out of the market during Covid rather than before it. Stayed in that position to long, but got back in in time to get substantial benefit from the post Covid government spending spree and weird housing market reaction that came along with it. Went short on the market about 3 months ago, but not a bunch. Just a little.

Oil is irrelevant in the overall scheme of things from my investing perspective. Too myopic of a perspective.

[TDoS]

Clearly the Argentinians have not read the IEA or BP predictions.  lol.  Arriving a little late to the party.  Now the question is, who will pony up and finance the drilling?  Since the IEA projects a supply GLUT for the next decade, it doesn't seem to be a very attractive investment opportunity.  The Brit banks aren't financing new FF drilling in the North Sea, but maybe they would hand over money to Argentina for drilling?

https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/article/2024/jul/11/argentinas-future-lies-in-the-balance-as-vast-oilfields-poised-for-extraction

Argentina's future lies in the balance as vast oilfields poised for extraction


RE

Recently, during evaluations of offshoe resources in Guyanna, this problem reared its ugly head. In the States with continuous resource development (LTO and shale gas for those unfamiliar with the terms) it comes down to IRR across a sequence of CapX investment in a cycle. They get the discount from the service companies for the work, pound it all out and stand back and check to see that the mean of the IRR for all is reasonable, and begin playing hedging games and whatnot. Reevaluate and do it again.

The international actors are completely different. Walk into the room with some energy minister or another and begin laying out costs, timing and particulars, and when you discuss the 15% iRR that can be achieved, you get told to go back to the drawing board and find 25-30% iRR projects to fund. Think of them as being loan sharks compared to how the domestic E&Ps do it.

[RE]

The international actors are completely different. Walk into the room with some energy minister or another and begin laying out costs, timing and particulars, and when you discuss the 15% iRR that can be achieved, you get told to go back to the drawing board and find 25-30% iRR projects to fund. Think of them as being loan sharks compared to how the domestic E&Ps do it.

The problem of course is that you project your IRR  at what you THINK the oil will sell at when the well starts producing.  If you say you think it will sell for $80 but when the well comes online it's at $60, your revenue is 25% less than projected.   Obviously you have to convince the energy minister you are right and the IEA is wrong.  This makes it a risky investment.  The banks that ponied up money before the price dropped down to $30-50 between 2015-2021 took a serious bath since it had been selling at $90-100 in 2014.

So what price would you have penciled in right now (hypothetically) when you make your pitch to the Argentinians?

RE

[TDoS]

The international actors are completely different. Walk into the room with some energy minister or another and begin laying out costs, timing and particulars, and when you discuss the 15% iRR that can be achieved, you get told to go back to the drawing board and find 25-30% iRR projects to fund. Think of them as being loan sharks compared to how the domestic E&Ps do it.

The problem of course is that you project your IRR  at what you THINK the oil will sell at when the well starts producing.

What an interesting understanding of stochastic modeling you have. Would you care to volunteer your suggestion of the best futures hedging profile you would use across the life of the resource development project at the national level?

In my stochastic modeling, the tornado plot clearly demonstrates that price isn't even in the top 5 variables in terms of effect on the IRR profile through time. How else can you decide the best TIME to stop the project to maximize the overall result?

The IRR outcome is a probability density function at the annual level, based on all the other underlying probabilities as they play off against each other. More hedging, less hedging, future tax expectations, import/export considerations and refinery locations and costs in the GOM, long term contracts or short, geopolitical risk of a particular or general nature, initial investment all up front or development of multiple projects involved in stages, etc etc. Financing if it is included, etc etc. Some customers will take lower IRRs along with less hedging costs, different expections of ranges in exchange rates among currencies, etc etc.

Just run of the mill stochastic modeling, state of the art and no different than companies do for similar projects.

Like I said...oil price isn't even in the top 5 in terms of the uncertainty involved.

If you say you think it will sell for $80 but when the well comes online it's at $60, your revenue is 25% less than projected.

Depends on your hedging profile. Yours in this example appears to be none. How...quaint.

Obviously you have to convince the energy minister you are right and the IEA is wrong.

You are kidding, right? Name the geologic expertise and its caliber available to the IEA.

This makes it a risky investment.

Is that the conclusion energy ministers reach after seing your deterministic calculations? How do you answer if they say "and what might the IRR range and discounted return on initial investment be if we hedge at a price 10% higher than last run for the first 3 years from the starting point of the first capital expenditure tranche"?

The banks that ponied up money before the price dropped down to $30-50 between 2015-2021 took a serious bath since it had been selling at $90-100 in 2014.
So what price would you have penciled in right now (hypothetically) when you make your pitch to the Argentinians?
RE

Oh goodness. How would any of us internet yahoos ever be able to answer such a difficult question? A deterministic price path instead of a probabilistic one with correlations for rates of change through time to back out a range of IRRs? The complexity if just mind blowing for us internet yahoos.

[RE]

Blah blah blah, you didn't answer my question.

Just pretend I am a dumb ass bankster who has authority to loan you $100M to get some wells producing Oil.  You are in my office in Buenos Aires and I say, OK I'll write you a check if you tell me how many wells you will dig with this and how many barrels of oil they will produce starting next year when you have to make your first monthly coupon payment.  I want to know what you expect to sell each barrel of oil for starting Aug 1st 2025 and how many barrels you will produce.  If you give me a satisfactory answer, I will ask a few more before I write the check, but answer this first.  Otherwise, there's the door, don't let it hit you on the way out.

Now, even though I'm an idiot, if you are condescending and give me lots of bullshit answers, you will not get a penny from me.  Nor am I interested in whores or kickbacks, so forget trying to bribe me.  I realize most banksters would and you can go down the street to one of them, but I am incorruptible.  So answer or I'll have my body guards show you the exit.

RE