This administration's Green policies and how they affect Oil/Nat-Gas/Coal...

[okietool]

The last time we let the free market develope energy resourses unchecked, we got JD Rockefeller and Standard Oil. That didnt work so good.

There is a very interesting book on Rockefeller and Standard Oil, titled The Prize. It covers a lot more than just Standard Oil and is pretty intersting stuff. The Prize.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Prize:_The_Epic_Quest_for_Oil,_Money,_and_Power

It was also a mini-series Part 1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qspu35JG59Q

I seen on cnn's news ticker that the US is about to become the largest exporter of oil soon.

Exporter or producer? The date I've heard bandied about is 2014 the US will surpass Saudi Arabia as the world's largest producer.

There is a strategy in the oil industry that revolves around is it worth more in the pipeline or in the ground. Right now natural gas in Oklahoma is below break even for my company. I'm sure it's close for other producers as well.
There are new regulations coming that may have a profound effect on oil and gas completions and production. They are greenhouse gas emission regualtions that (with technology at it's current level) will really hinder the completion process as we know it.
Right now I am in New Mexico, you see a lot of flares because there are producing oil wells that make natural gas that it is not economically feasible to produce (H2S or no transmission lines near by).
I do believe that the US is a net exporter of CNG.
The big gains Oil & Gas production companies have made are definitely due to technological advances (horizontal drilling being probably the #1 reason). Also Frac technology advances have led to better stimulation of hydrcarbon bearing zones (yup the notorious fracking), Fracing is not a new process, but the scale of frac jobs has grown signifgantly in the last 10 years. Part of the scaling up of the fracs is because we are now fracing 4000' zones instead of 100' (pulled that last number out of my a$$, it's just for clarification). Oil & Gas producer profits are largely because the Oil & Gas industry is a "for profit" business, if you can't make a profit you do not survive. I think the US could help itself a lot if CNG were a more largely accepted and used fuel for motor vehicles. That being said it will never completely replace gasoline or diesel (IMO).
Wind energy is definitely on the up swing, but the last time I knew anything about it, it cost you more per kwh.
I think it's no secret the EPA and environmental groups are definitely anti-nuclear, I sure wouldn't want a nuclear plant next to my house.
I wonder if Exxon is still the world's largest coal owner/producer?

EZ Bake, I don't think I gave you anything you wanted, but in my defense, I think the thread was kind of wandering anyway.

Hmm the links aren't blue for me any more.

 

[ez bake]

Oh my god this is like an e-version of arguments I have with my pothead friends late at night.

EZ Bake, I don't think I gave you anything you wanted, but in my defense, I think the thread was kind of wandering anyway.

Nah - I'd say any intelligent discussion on the matter (and/or Ridge or Ignern't comments of any kind) are welcome.

In that sense, you've outdone several others so far man.

 

[okietool]

Here is a pretty balanced piece on it with this being the key bit.



http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-10-17/is-obama-really-waging-a-war-on-coal-.html

I wonder why they think energy demand will fall?

 

[Shadowrider]

Okay y'all done went and made me do it.

EXECUTIVE ORDER

ACCELERATING INVESTMENT IN INDUSTRIAL ENERGY EFFICIENCY

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, and in order to promote American manufacturing by helping to facilitate investments in energy efficiency at industrial facilities, it is hereby ordered as follows:

Section 1. Policy. The industrial sector accounts for over 30 percent of all energy consumed in the United States, and, for many manufacturers, energy costs affect overall competitiveness. While our manufacturing facilities have made progress in becoming more energy efficient over the past several decades, there is an opportunity to accelerate and expand these efforts with investments to reduce energy use through more efficient manufacturing processes and facilities and the expanded use of combined heat and power (CHP). Instead of burning fuel in an on site boiler to produce thermal energy and also purchasing electricity from the grid, a manufacturing facility can use a CHP system to provide both types of energy in one energy efficient step. Accelerating these investments in our Nation's factories can improve the competitiveness of United States manufacturing, lower energy costs, free up future capital for businesses to invest, reduce air pollution, and create jobs.

Despite these benefits, independent studies have pointed to under-investment in industrial energy efficiency and CHP as a result of numerous barriers. The Federal Government has limited but important authorities to overcome these barriers, and our efforts to support investment in industrial energy efficiency and CHP should involve coordinated engagement with a broad set of stakeholders, including States, manufacturers, utilities, and others. By working with all stakeholders to address these barriers, we have an opportunity to save industrial users tens of billions of dollars in energy costs over the next decade.

There is no one size fits all solution for our manufacturers, so it is imperative that we support these investments through a variety of approaches, including encouraging private sector investment by setting goals and highlighting the benefits of investment, improving coordination at the Federal level, partnering with and supporting States, and identifying investment models beneficial to the multiple stakeholders involved.

To formalize and support the close interagency coordination that is required to accelerate greater investment in industrial energy efficiency and CHP, this order directs certain executive departments and agencies to convene national and regional stakeholders to identify, develop, and encourage the adoption of investment models and State best practice policies for industrial energy efficiency and CHP; provide technical assistance to States and manufacturers to encourage investment in industrial energy efficiency and CHP; provide public information on the benefits of investment in industrial energy efficiency and CHP; and use existing Federal authorities, programs, and policies to support investment in industrial energy efficiency and CHP.

Sec. 2. Encouraging Investment in Industrial Efficiency. The Departments of Energy, Commerce, and Agriculture, and the Environmental Protection Agency, in coordination with the National Economic Council, the Domestic Policy Council, the Council on Environmental Quality, and the Office of Science and Technology Policy, shall coordinate policies to encourage investment in industrial efficiency in order to reduce costs for industrial users, improve U.S. competitiveness, create jobs, and reduce harmful air pollution. In doing so, they shall engage States, industrial companies, utility companies, and other stakeholders to accelerate this investment. Specifically, these agencies shall, as appropriate and consistent with applicable law:

(a) coordinate and strongly encourage efforts to achieve a national goal of deploying 40 gigawatts of new, cost effective industrial CHP in the United States by the end of 2020;

(b) convene stakeholders, through a series of public workshops, to develop and encourage the use of best practice State policies and investment models that address the multiple barriers to investment in industrial energy efficiency and CHP;

(c) utilize their respective relevant authorities and resources to encourage investment in industrial energy efficiency and CHP, such as by:

(i) providing assistance to States on accounting for the potential emission reduction benefits of CHP and other energy efficiency policies when developing State Implementation Plans (SIPs) to achieve national ambient air quality standards;

(ii) providing incentives for the deployment of CHP and other types of clean energy, such as set asides under emissions allowance trading program state implementation plans, grants, and loans;

(iii) employing output based approaches as compliance options in power and industrial sector regulations, as appropriate, to recognize the emissions benefits of highly efficient energy generation technologies like CHP; and

(iv) seeking to expand participation in and create additional tools to support the Better Buildings, Better Plants program at the Department of Energy, which is working with companies to help them achieve a goal of reducing energy intensity by 25 percent over 10 years, as well as utilizing existing partnership programs to support energy efficiency and CHP;

(d) support and encourage efforts to accelerate investment in industrial energy efficiency and CHP by:

(i) providing general guidance, technical analysis and information, and financial analysis on the value of investment in industrial energy efficiency and CHP to States, utilities, and owners and operators of industrial facilities;

(ii) improving the usefulness of Federal data collection and analysis; and

(iii) assisting States in developing and implementing State specific best practice policies that can accelerate investment in industrial energy efficiency and CHP.

In implementing this section, these agencies should consult with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, as appropriate.

Sec. 3. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(i) the authority granted by law to an executive department, agency, or the head thereof; or

(ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

BARACK OBAMA

THE WHITE HOUSE,
August 30, 2012.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press...ating-investment-industrial-energy-efficiency

When you see the term "encourage" used this is codespeak for "you will do it or else". Been there, done it and got the t-shirt. The EPA and their air quality permits are a nightmare. I can only imagine what it will be like with the The Departments of Energy, Commerce, and a gaggle of others tag teaming you. I picked this one to post because it fits perfectly with a place I used to work. I ran the chemical finishing part of the plant and I had to keep two very large boilers running to heat all of my cleaning, etching and anodize tanks. These boilers also heated about four tanker trucks worth of glycol for the heating system for the entire 135,000 square foot plant. These boilers were about 25 feet long and big enough to walk through. In the machine shop side one of our machines had six 30HP ACV drive motors and that was just for the cutting spindles, add in 12 more SCR servos for the drive axis' (dual gantry 5 axis CNC mill with 3 spindles per gantry) and the fact that they were all 480V 3phase and you get an idea of the electrical load. Now this was just one single machine. We had about 70 machines total and most all of them were multi axis CNC mills and lathes and all on 480V 3 phase feeds. Putting in a co-generation system for even a fraction of this load would cost about the same as all of the rest of the capital equipment we had. Just another pie in the sky idea from dear leader who hasn't a clue.

 

[RickN]

I wonder why they think energy demand will fall?

Because people can not afford it anymore. All part of the plan to make "green energy" competitive.

 

[Parks 788]

The last time we let the free market develope energy resourses unchecked, we got JD Rockefeller and Standard Oil. That didnt work so good.

Not sure what point you're getting at butRockefeller and Standard Oil provided a lot more viable jobs than anything in the solar industry has been able to do reliably.

 

[okietool]

Follow the money. It's an interesting exercise if you want to do it. It would clarify or muddify (my own word) things. The contributors might kind of surprise you. It might also explain some things.

When I was reading about Rockefeller and Standard Oil, I was kind of amused by the parallels you could draw between them and Bill Gates and Microsoft.
I guess Gates and Microsoft had better lawyers, or more favorable legislators.

 

[okietool]

Nah - I'd say any intelligent discussion on the matter (and/or Ridge or Ignern't comments of any kind) are welcome.

In that sense, you've outdone several others so far man.

Now you've hurt my feelings. I'll have to report in to Rush tomorrow.

 

[ez bake]

Not sure what point you're getting at butRockefeller and Standard Oil provided a lot more viable jobs than anything in the solar industry has been able to do reliably.

Alternative energy is still very young, and it's not as if money wasn't wasted in the early days of Oil (with little to no jobs in the stages prior to big Oil industry).

Still under the impression that nothing posted in this thread proves that regulations are actively affecting the Coal industry while somehow not affecting the Oil industry.

 

[JD8]

Still under the impression that nothing posted in this thread proves that regulations are actively affecting the Coal industry while somehow not affecting the Oil industry.

http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/energy-environment/coal/index.html?8a


http://www.mrc.org/node/27538

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/30/b...l-industry-is-under-siege.html?_r=2&ref=coal&

Some interesting links.....

Personally, anecdotally going by watching the market and owning Russian coal stocks, I'd say there's been a perfect storm worldwide of a drop in demand and a push for NG so names like Mechel have been hit hard. Here, I'd imagine it kind of makes the switch a no brainer with the EPA and .gov breathing down your neck.