Don’t worry, just a little bump - $70 is just around the corner. Short traders just keep making those margin calls, mortgage the house if you have to. Fortunes await you! PO is for pansies and doomers. At $70 short some more ..... it is going back to $22 .... the world is awash with oil ........ reality has nothing to do with it, its all in those charts!!!!!!!!!!
Posted: Mon Jul 07, 2008 3:04 pm Post subject: Re: Cantarell Esta Muriendo (. . . is dying)
If other elephant fields come anywhere near this rate of production decline then everyone everywhere is truly buggered. There will be no chance of any kind of transition, there will just be blind panic, despair and death.
Posted: Mon Jul 07, 2008 3:10 pm Post subject: Re: Cantarell Esta Muriendo (. . . is dying)
G-d damn you Ayame. G-d damn you and I hope you burn.
I was having a decent day here.
But then you come along and vomit the truth all over my face like that and I'm back to sucking down Doomer Porn and jonesing for vices.
And Burton - use anything I write any way you want.
We are all buggered - truer words never spoken. _________________ Massive Human Dieoff must occur as a result of Peak Oil. Many more than half will die. It will occur everywhere, including where you live. If you fail to recognize this, then your odds of living move toward the "going to die" group.
Posted: Mon Jul 07, 2008 4:27 pm Post subject: Re: Cantarell Esta Muriendo (. . . is dying)
Ayame wrote:
If other elephant fields come anywhere near this rate of production decline then everyone everywhere is truly buggered. There will be no chance of any kind of transition, there will just be blind panic, despair and death.
Posted: Mon Jul 07, 2008 4:39 pm Post subject: Re: Cantarell Esta Muriendo (. . . is dying)
Cashmere wrote:
nobodypanic wrote:
Quote:
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.
from the same bloomberg article.
glossing over things like that is rather... well it gives the appearance of a certain bias.
Nobodypanic, did you seriously direct the above response to me?
I mean, seriously?
You have got to be kidding.
I glossed over nothing. I didn't even mention it - I expect any intelligent adult to read the article.
Bias?
What are you talking about? What the hell interest could I possibly have in it either way?
The number speaks for itself. I couldn't give a rat's ass about whether investment would help or not. It's not there, so it does not matter.
Finally, it's my opinion that BB is still throwing in those b-llsh-t lines like the one you quoted to keep the DSEs thinking that . . .
. . . there IS a solution.
It's a crock of crap. They can invest all they want, but it won't change much of anything.
It's game over. Cantarell is in its death throes, and bringing in an English speaking or Dutch speaking group of surgeons will do absolutely nothing other than, maybe, slow the rate of death.
So save your accusations of bias. I quoted the most interesting part of the article, and I linked to it.
34% decline rate - which is HUGE news. Huge, staggering, and frightening.
And your response - "you're glossing over the part about it's not so bad."
Whatever - I'm a doomer because I get it, and I don't look for the little glittery sequins sparkling from the steaming turd load the dog dropped in the front room carpet because he ate a kid's doll earlier that day - I leave that job to you.
you excerpted the worse sounding portion of the article without including the bit about lack of investment. not mentionining it is glossing over it. i wrote that you were giving the APPEARENCE of bias. frankly, given your rather violent, knee-jerk reaction, yeah, now i think you are biased; it might have been subconcious on your part, now i am not so sure, but that's beside the point. like i said, there's really no reason to even try and spin it; it's bad enough as it is.
you're very touchy. i am sorry if i may have bruised your ego in any way.
Joined: Oct 23, 2004 Posts: 5415 Location: New Jersey
Posted: Mon Jul 07, 2008 4:52 pm Post subject: Re: Cantarell Esta Muriendo (. . . is dying)
Investment. You can't handle the truth! (Ok, that's sarcasm)
Quote:
EIU ViewsWire Mexico
Economist Intelligence Unit
July 7, 2008
Section: EIU ViewsWire 07 Jul 2008 (T16:40)
Mexico politics: Energy reform talks continue
COUNTRY BRIEFING
FROM THE ECONOMIST INTELLIGENCE UNIT
The focus of Mexico's legislature remains on the Felipe Calderon administration's hydrocarbons reform bill, with discussions in the Senate (the upper house) scheduled to conclude on July 22nd. According to Gustavo Madero, the new Senate leader of the governing Partido Accion Nacional (PAN), there are plans to hold another special session of Congress in late July or early August to vote on the legislation, although Francisco Labastida of the opposition Partido Revolucionario Institucional (PRI), who heads the Senate's energy committee, has stated that a vote might not come until September.
The PRI has failed to give a clear message about whether it will support the measures and has recently indicated that it might present its own hydrocarbons reform bill. Although this is likely to form part of its strategy to extract concessions from the PAN, it highlights the extent to which the government is dependent on support from the PRI for passage of reforms.
The recent performance of the oil industry gives credence to the government's worst scenarios. Oil output has continued to decline, with total crude oil production in March falling to 2.9m barrels/day, the second-lowest level since December 1999. Although output rose by 16% at the Ku-Maloob-Zaap field, this was insufficient to counter a steep 25% fall in output at the Cantarell field, Mexico's largest producing area.
Reflecting the overall drop in production, the volume of crude oil exports fell by 12.4% in the first quarter to 1.5m b/d. Rising energy prices have helped to prevent deterioration in the country's external accounts. With the Mexican oil mix averaging US$83.1/b in January-March (74% higher than the first quarter of 2007), total export sales of crude and condensates reached US$13.1bn, an increase of 51% year on year. That said, limited refining capacity has meant that the import bill for refined products increased by 36% in the first quarter, while natural gas imports rose by 91%.
According to Pemex, the short-term outlook for production remains bleak. Although total reserves (proven, probable and possible) amount to 42bn barrels, 83% of total reserves are located in regions where it is difficult to extract the oil. In addition, only 14.7bn barrels are proven, meaning that the current ratio of proven reserves to production stands at 9.2 years.
Although new opportunities are evident, Pemex lacks the resources needed to carry out sufficient exploration activities, hence, the government's desire to loosen conditions to allow more private participation in the sector. According to Pemex, there could be 29bn barrels of crude in deep waters, but it would have to drill around 300 wells (implying exploration in 1,500 wells, assuming a 20% success rate) to find sufficient oil to maintain current production levels. Currently, Pemex has the capability to drill two wells per year in deep water and will be able to drill 10 wells per year in deep water by 2011.
[no link] _________________ It's already over, now it's just a matter of adjusting.
Last edited by DantesPeak on Mon Jul 07, 2008 4:54 pm; edited 1 time in total
Posted: Mon Jul 07, 2008 4:54 pm Post subject: Re: Cantarell Esta Muriendo (. . . is dying)
nobodypanic wrote:
Cashmere wrote:
nobodypanic wrote:
Quote:
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.
from the same bloomberg article.
glossing over things like that is rather... well it gives the appearance of a certain bias.
Nobodypanic, did you seriously direct the above response to me?. . .
Whatever - I'm a doomer because I get it, and I don't look for the little glittery sequins sparkling from the steaming turd load the dog dropped in the front room carpet because he ate a kid's doll earlier that day - I leave that job to you.
you excerpted the worse sounding portion of the article without including the bit about lack of investment. not mentionining it is glossing over it. i wrote that you were giving the APPEARENCE of bias. frankly, given your rather violent, knee-jerk reaction, yeah, now i think you are biased; it might have been subconcious on your part, now i am not so sure, but that's beside the point. like i said, there's really no reason to even try and spin it; it's bad enough as it is. you're very touchy. i am sorry if i may have bruised your ego in any way.
I "excepted" the critical portion of the article. The fact that it was the "worst-sounding" portion is only because the news was that bad.
I find it funny that you don't seem to see that difference.
Cashmere - "Nobodypanic, I found your best friend banging your wife."
Nobodypanic - "You forgot to tell me she was wearing my favorite sheer babydoll and that she didn't seem to be as loud as she is with me. You're biased and you glossed that over."
On a linguistic note, "gloss over" does not equal "ignore". You're wrong. I didn't "gloss over" the investment part; I ignored it entirely.
You wrote: "you're very touchy. i am sorry if i may have bruised your ego in any way."
Right. That's it. I have a fragile ego.
But really, what is my bias and why do I have it?
Please answer, as I am genuinely curious about what you think I'd get out of misleading people about what the article said. _________________ Massive Human Dieoff must occur as a result of Peak Oil. Many more than half will die. It will occur everywhere, including where you live. If you fail to recognize this, then your odds of living move toward the "going to die" group.
Joined: Oct 18, 2004 Posts: 1717 Location: kiwibush
Posted: Mon Jul 07, 2008 5:04 pm Post subject: Re: Cantarell Esta Muriendo (. . . is dying)
Nobodypanic
There are those on here who are convinced that we are at a crisis in human civilisation and I am one of them and consequently, I happen to agree with Cashmere's prognosis.
Now, no amount of civilised debating will convince me that we are capable of squeezing 6.5 billion (as in human numbers) capacity oil energy reserves out of the harder to extract deposits on this planet. We can barely get by on the current crop of happy campers.
I suspect thats where Cash (and most definitely I) feel exasperated by the likes of you. We have a serious problem here that requires hysteria my friend. We need to be, in word, crap-scared, to deal with it. Finely nuanced debates will not resolve the crisis, delay it yes as we sink our heads deeper in the sand, but resolve it, no. _________________ Bugger me, I hear oil's runnin out mate!
Posted: Mon Jul 07, 2008 5:16 pm Post subject: Re: Cantarell Esta Muriendo (. . . is dying)
Cashmere wrote:
nobodypanic wrote:
Cashmere wrote:
nobodypanic wrote:
Quote:
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.
from the same bloomberg article.
glossing over things like that is rather... well it gives the appearance of a certain bias.
Nobodypanic, did you seriously direct the above response to me?. . .
Whatever - I'm a doomer because I get it, and I don't look for the little glittery sequins sparkling from the steaming turd load the dog dropped in the front room carpet because he ate a kid's doll earlier that day - I leave that job to you.
you excerpted the worse sounding portion of the article without including the bit about lack of investment. not mentionining it is glossing over it. i wrote that you were giving the APPEARENCE of bias. frankly, given your rather violent, knee-jerk reaction, yeah, now i think you are biased; it might have been subconcious on your part, now i am not so sure, but that's beside the point. like i said, there's really no reason to even try and spin it; it's bad enough as it is. you're very touchy. i am sorry if i may have bruised your ego in any way.
I "excepted" the critical portion of the article. The fact that it was the "worst-sounding" portion is only because the news was that bad.
I find it funny that you don't seem to see that difference.
Cashmere - "Nobodypanic, I found your best friend banging your wife."
Nobodypanic - "You forgot to tell me she was wearing my favorite sheer babydoll and that she didn't seem to be as loud as she is with me. You're biased and you glossed that over."
On a linguistic note, "gloss over" does not equal "ignore". You're wrong. I didn't "gloss over" the investment part; I ignored it entirely.
You wrote: "you're very touchy. i am sorry if i may have bruised your ego in any way."
Right. That's it. I have a fragile ego.
But really, what is my bias and why do I have it?
Please answer, as I am genuinely curious about what you think I'd get out of misleading people about what the article said.
i am not exactly sure what your motivations might have been, but i am fairly certain that they led you to completely discount the opening of the article, dealing w/investment, as being 'uninteresting' in comparison to the portion you highlighted. perhaps it was unconscious on your part.
misleading? i said it was giving the appearance of bias. if you had included the first paragraph (i think that's the one) along w/the portion you quoted, well then you wouldn't have been open to any sort of criticism at all. as it is, i think someone could come along and reasonably conclude that there was an attempt at spin here. once again, the news was bad enough; there's no reason to give anyone any straws to grasp at, which it's my opinion you did, even if not consciously.
Posted: Mon Jul 07, 2008 5:33 pm Post subject: Re: Cantarell Esta Muriendo (. . . is dying)
Don'tPanic wrote:
i am not exactly sure what your motivations might have been, but i am fairly certain that they led you to completely discount the opening of the article, dealing w/investment, as being 'uninteresting' in comparison to the portion you highlighted. perhaps it was unconscious on your part.
Not only do I find the "investment" portion of the article "uninteresting", I also find it immaterial and of questionable intent.
In other words, the story was, to me, the 34% decline rate. The rest of the article was noise.
Quote:
i think someone could come along and reasonably conclude that there was an attempt at spin here. once again, the news was bad enough; there's no reason to give anyone any straws to grasp at, which it's my opinion you did, even if not consciously.
I'm not following you. Which straws?
Again I ask -
What do you think my bias might be, and why might I have it? _________________ Massive Human Dieoff must occur as a result of Peak Oil. Many more than half will die. It will occur everywhere, including where you live. If you fail to recognize this, then your odds of living move toward the "going to die" group.
Joined: Oct 23, 2004 Posts: 5415 Location: New Jersey
Posted: Mon Jul 07, 2008 6:33 pm Post subject: Re: Cantarell Esta Muriendo (. . . is dying)
americandream wrote:
Nobodypanic
There are those on here who are convinced that we are at a crisis in human civilisation and I am one of them and consequently, I happen to agree with Cashmere's prognosis.
Now, no amount of civilised debating will convince me that we are capable of squeezing 6.5 billion (as in human numbers) capacity oil energy reserves out of the harder to extract deposits on this planet. We can barely get by on the current crop of happy campers.
I suspect thats where Cash (and most definitely I) feel exasperated by the likes of you. We have a serious problem here that requires hysteria my friend. We need to be, in word, crap-scared, to deal with it. Finely nuanced debates will not resolve the crisis, delay it yes as we sink our heads deeper in the sand, but resolve it, no.
Well put.
It looks like events are already set in motion in Mexico where the solutions to immeadiate problems will take whatever investment money is needed for future oil investment. Even then, it looks like Mexico faces a bankruptcy worse than the defaults of the early 1980s and early 1990s. I suspect Mexico will become an example of what we mean by 'catabolic collapse'. _________________ It's already over, now it's just a matter of adjusting.
Posted: Mon Jul 07, 2008 6:50 pm Post subject: Re: Cantarell Esta Muriendo (. . . is dying)
DP's predictions will be vindicated again.
Mexico's fate seems sealed. It also seems wretched.
They may be the first country to "pop" post peak, as their short term oil production outlook, their reliance on oil revenue, and there socioeconomic demographics all seem to point very strongly toward social mayhem.
At 34% it won't take 12 more months to watch Mexico go into free fall, with the only caveat being that 200 dollar oil will give them a brief respite.
There was a brilliant line in the cited article.
Think about this.
The guy said that 144$ + oil will be a savior for them right up until the moment they go from net exporter to net importer. Thereafter, it's going to be their executioner. Brilliant, really. _________________ Massive Human Dieoff must occur as a result of Peak Oil. Many more than half will die. It will occur everywhere, including where you live. If you fail to recognize this, then your odds of living move toward the "going to die" group.
Joined: May 28, 2008 Posts: 64 Location: Leon, Gto. Mexico
Posted: Mon Jul 07, 2008 6:51 pm Post subject: Re: Cantarell Esta Muriendo (. . . is dying)
Holy crap!! I live in Mexico and I can tell you that most - if not all - people are completely clueless about PO; even more so, they don't want to know.
To them is most an issue of "privatization vs. state ownership"; not about oil depletion.
I've tried talking to some people about it but I only get blank stares or the usual "someone, somehow, will come up with a solution someday".
Joined: Oct 23, 2004 Posts: 5415 Location: New Jersey
Posted: Mon Jul 07, 2008 6:57 pm Post subject: Re: Cantarell Esta Muriendo (. . . is dying)
cualcrees wrote:
Holy crap!! I live in Mexico and I can tell you that most - if not all - people are completely clueless about PO; even more so, they don't want to know.
To them is most an issue of "privatization vs. state ownership"; not about oil depletion.
I've tried talking to some people about it but I only get blank stares or the usual "someone, somehow, will come up with a solution someday".
This is really scary stuff.
Welcome cualcrees and BTW our discussions by no means implies we are against Mexico. If anything, I envision more bailouts in a few years run by the US government to help Mexico. That will cost us here. _________________ It's already over, now it's just a matter of adjusting.
Posted: Mon Jul 07, 2008 7:43 pm Post subject: Re: Cantarell Esta Muriendo (. . . is dying)
cualcrees,
I'll second Dante's statement. I've spent in Mexico...did field work there as a young geologist a lifetime ago. I've always felt the Mexican people could really develop their society if they could take control from the elite power structure. But knowledge is power and the state did a great job of keeping them in the dark for generations. It will very sickening to watch their realization that they have been truly abandoned by those who pretended to be their protectors.
And Dante... you probably know this but others may not: there are two categories of "proved " reserves in the oil patch. Proved producing and proved non-producing. Watch the numbers that various folks throw out and see if they make the distinction.
All times are GMT - 6 Hours Goto page Previous1, 2, 3Next
Page 2 of 3
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
News
Discussions
Resources
Members
Forum FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Then stop driving to work, duh..... 
