• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

$60 / Barrel by year end

Status
Not open for further replies.
I can't think of anything that is off the table just now - except perhaps the construction of Canadian pipelines.

And in the absence of those Alberta and Saskatchewan cannot contribute to damping volatility.

One of the best things that Canada could do for the global economy is to build its own pipelines and start shipping oil directly from tidewater.

And Christie Clark - she is missing the boat.  She could be generating more BC shipyard jobs simply by demanding that Ottawa beef up the Coast Guard's environmental response capabilities on the West Coast to get her her "world class spill response" capability - whatever that may mean.

God I do hate modern rules and regulations - best practices, world class, good manufacturing practices, reasonable - and nary a suggestion as to how to define that.  At the same time, as noted previously, we have engineers demanding ever more clarity, to the point of absurdity, as noted previously, and producing less utilitarian products but masses an masses of paper that will never get read.

Sorry Old Sweat - bad morning.  I am frustrated by the lack of imagination shown on all fronts.  By the "can't do" attitude that seems to currently infest the universe.
 
Well it is nice to pay $30 for a tank of 17 US gallons @ $177.9 in Phoenix = $43 CDN.

Beats the feeling of paying $65 in West Kelowna. Gas in WK is the lowest since moving there in Aug 08. Gas is always expensive, usually at least $1.25 to $1.45 + per liter. Gas Buddy today is $99.9 per liter.
 
Technoviking said:
I get paid in USD, so IDGAF how much is it in pesos CAD.  [:p

I see you're in VA.  I am down the road, in MD.  I'll buy you a drink anytime!

I get paid in USD as well.  But it's my salary converted into USD :(
 
Rifleman62 said:
Well it is nice to pay $30 for a tank of 17 US gallons @ $177.9 in Phoenix = $43 CDN.

Beats the feeling of paying $65 in West Kelowna. Gas in WK is the lowest since moving there in Aug 08. Gas is always expensive, usually at least $1.25 to $1.45 + per liter. Gas Buddy today is $99.9 per liter.

Yeah, same here. When I was home in NS at Christmas it was $50 to fill up the car (18 USG full). Don't think I've paid more than $35 to fill up in the US since we bought it in October.
 
More on the oil front:

And yet, amid current low oil prices, the notion of collectively taking barrels off the market is a seductive one. After all, there’s not a single company in Calgary’s corporate towers that isn’t starving for a bit of extra cash flow these days. But such a price shock would only prolong and worsen the underlying supply imbalance. Canada’s advantage in the global oil industry its technological savvy, not its geology or geography. Its best shot at emerging a winner is to cut costs and improve technologies faster than its competitors. The ongoing international competition to price out costly producers will certainly hurt marginal oil sands players, but a temporary price spike would only mask the oil sands’ greatest challenges: reducing its per-barrel production costs, building pipeline export capacity and achieving a “social license” to operate. Despite the pain they are causing, low oil prices are forcing Canadian heavy oil producers to face that reality. The last thing anyone needs is more volatility.

http://www.albertaoilmagazine.com/2015/12/why-opec-wont-and-shouldnt-cut-production/

About that infrastructure - pipelines is infrastructure.
 
One analyst is predicting much lower prices, and gives the reasons we might expect that outcome:

http://www.marketwatch.com/(S(rnrsydaynixa5x55oiibxm45))/story/fund-manager-whos-been-right-on-oil-has-a-depressing-new-prediction-2016-01-15?pagenumber=2

Fund manager who’s been right on oil has a depressing new prediction
T. Rowe Price New Era’s Shawn Driscoll says the price for a barrel of oil could drop into the teens
By Howard Gold, MarketWatch

In November 2014, Shawn Driscoll, manager of the natural-resource-focused T. Rowe Price New Era Fund, told me he expected crude oil prices, then in the $80s-per-barrel range, to fall into the $50s within 10 years.

Ten weeks later, with crude in the $50s, I interviewed him again and he predicted crude would drop into the $30s.

This week, when oil was trading in the low $30s, I caught up with him once more. And if you’re looking for a so-called tradeable bottom in energy markets soon, you’re going to be disappointed.

Although Driscoll thinks crude oil will slip into the low- to mid-$20s within six months — at around $29.50 in late-Friday-afternoon NYMEX trading, we’re not far from that now — it ultimately could go lower as we spend the next decade digging out of a secular bear market in commodities and oil.

Why? Oil’s oversupply is profound and will last for at least two years, he said, and too many industry people still are in denial.

Another take: Why oil could plunge to $20 a barrel, but probably not $10

The oversupply, of course, stems from Saudi Arabia’s efforts to keep pumping to preserve market share from U.S. shale producers and other countries like Russia and Iran, which is chomping at the bit to free itself from international sanctions so it can pump oil again — at any price.

Commodities secular bear markets go on for years, fund manager Shawn Driscoll said — the last one took about 18 — and we’re only in the early stages of this one.

Given current demand — and without new Iranian production — “our model is saying we’re still oversupplied a million barrels a day in ’16,” said the manager of the $2.7 billion New Era mutual fund PRNEX -2.31%  . “Our model for ’17 still shows oversupply with above-trend-line demand and without Iran.”

And the oversupply may be even worse than traders and investors acknowledge, because hundreds of thousands of barrels a day of new production are coming online in places like Brazil and Kazakhstan over the next couple of years.

“The piece that’s most overlooked by market participants … is the long-tailed projects, deepwater projects that take three to five years to come online. Those projects are still coming,” he told me. “There were decisions made in 2013 and 2014, the echo of those projects is still coming online this year and next year. 2018 is the first year you don’t see a lot of those projects coming.”

But despite massive production cutbacks, tens of billions of dollars in reduced investment and 250,000 layoffs and counting in the global energy industry, Driscoll sees, if not complacency, then a lack of fear among energy investors and decision makers.

“Over the last few weeks, we’ve had several meetings [with producers] and there’s just no panic,” he told me. “I would have said at $30 we ought to start seeing that.”

“I can’t get over how many people, CNBC, for example, ushers before the camera to say oil’s bottoming. This is not the psychology I would expect at $30 oil. There’s an endless amount of people who want to call the bottom,” he continued. “There’s not enough fatigue — investor fatigue, management fatigue.”

Read: Shale billionaire says oil to rebound to $60 a barrel by year-end

Is it denial? “With some people, it may be denial,” he replied. “No one wants to look like a fool where they do something drastic at the bottom. I think that’s part of the psychology.”

In fact, he said, “we’ve been thinking for a while that there’s a perverse incentive to keep drilling even while prices are falling … particularly when you’re sitting on a lot of debt.”

What could cause producers to throw in the towel? A major bankruptcy or series of bankruptcies of deeply indebted energy companies, which becomes more and more likely as prices drop.

“We [think] you need to see a credit calamity and/or we need to see very low oil prices to rationalize supply. We’ve certainly seen some credit pain, but we don’t think it’s over,” he said. “I think the next three to six months are going to feel like our ’08-’09 again. I think the calamity in credit is going to be bad.”

That’s bad news for oil prices, too. While Driscoll thinks crude may fall into the $20s over the next six months — not a big drop from here — he doesn’t think that’s the ultimate bottom.

Commodities secular bear markets go on for years, he said — the last one took about 18 — and we’re only in the early stages of this one. Oil prices could drop into the teens over the next decade, he said.

What could get us there sooner? “If the high-yield market goes off the rails, we may hit our sub-$20 number then,” he told me.

But more likely than a dramatic bottom and then a big rebound, we’re facing years of churning and pain.

“It’s not fun being bearish,” Driscoll said.

No, it isn’t. But given his track record and the precarious state of the oil market, bearishness on oil may well be the reality we just can’t ignore.

Howard R. Gold is a MarketWatch columnist and founder and editor of GoldenEgg Investing, which offers exclusive market commentary and simple, low-cost, low-risk retirement investing plans. Follow him on Twitter @howardrgold.
 
Saw that article.

General tenor is "Why aren't they panicking?  They should be panicking?"

What does he expect them to do?  Their inventory is in the ground.  They turn off the taps.  Shut off the exploration.  Send everybody home.  Are they supposed to start demolishing plant?

All they can do now is to sit tight and hold on.  I am aware of people with cash that are expanding their holdings.

The only people that benefit from a panic are in the stock market - and a few governments betting on irrational acts.
 
SupersonicMax said:
I see you're in VA.  I am down the road, in MD.  I'll buy you a drink anytime!

I get paid in USD as well.  But it's my salary converted into USD :(

Shhhh!  Don't mess with the dream!  :P

 
Further to the "Why aren't they panicking?" meme.

Hedge funds and private equity groups armed with $60bn of ready cash are poised to snap up the assets of bankrupt US shale drillers, almost guaranteeing that America’s tight oil production will rebound as soon as prices start to recover.

Daniel Yergin, founder of IHS Cambridge Energy Research Associates, said it is impossible for OPEC to knock out the US shale industry though a war of attrition even if large numbers of frackers fall by the wayside over coming months.

Mr Yergin said groups with deep pockets such as Blackstone and Carlyle will take over the infrastructure when the distressed assets are cheap enough, and bide their time until the oil cycle turns.

“The management may change and the companies may change but the resources will still be there,” he told the Daily Telegraph.
“It takes $10bn and five to ten years to launch a deep-water project. It takes $10m and just 20 days to drill for shale,” he said, speaking at the World Economic Forum in Davos.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/oilandgas/12118594/Saudis-will-not-destroy-the-US-shale-industry.html

And there goes the Paris Carbon plan.

As for the Oilsands

Canada’s biggest oil sands producers, which have stubbornly resisted halting output even as the price of their crude hits record lows, are planning a higher-than-normal maintenance schedule this year. The move is seen temporarily curbing supply in the second and third quarters, which should lift crude prices in the region and give producers a respite from selling their barrels below cash costs.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/industry-news/energy-and-resources/hefty-maintenance-schedule-looms-for-canada-oil-sands-producers/article28347541/
 
I see Trudeau wants to give us a Billion of our money back to build infrastructure.

Generous.

In 2013 private investors pumped 32.7 Billion into our economy to develop the Oil Sands.
http://www.energy.alberta.ca/oilsands/791.asp

They are/were also willing to spend 7.9 Billion on building Northern Gateway, 5.4 Billion on Transmountain, 10 Billion on the XL expansion and 15.7 Billion on Energy East.  There is 39 Billion Dollars of investment.  39 Billion Dollars of Jobs.

http://business.financialpost.com/news/energy/transcanada-corp-ups-cost-of-energy-east-pipeline-by-almost-4-billion-and-makes-700-changes-to-route?__lsa=4604-3205
http://business.financialpost.com/news/energy/keystone-xl-pipeline-transcanada-costs?__lsa=4604-3205
http://www.news1130.com/2016/01/22/state-of-play-a-look-at-the-status-of-pipeline-projects-in-canada/

No public money and at the end of the projects a revenue stream that benefits everybody currently receiving equalization payments and that worked in, or supplied the oil patch or supplied groceries to the families of the workers.
 
The granola crunching, tree hugging, left wing flappers are blind to that sort of logic, I'm afraid.
 
It is an ongoing problem.  Parties campaign on "we'll create jobs".  You show them a bunch of job creation opportunities.  "Those are not the jobs we're looking for."
 
Brad Sallows said:
It is an ongoing problem.  Parties campaign on "we'll create jobs".  You show them a bunch of job creation opportunities.  "Those are not the jobs we're looking for."

The other side of the coin as so aptly said by Mike Rowe "...you're talking about shovel ready jobs for people who won't pick up a shovel..."
 
So how does Trudeau get the pipeline past aboriginal title in BC, and various protests and legal challenges by various groups across the country..oh, and the US government.  I mean, Harper didn't get it done, so....
 
Money fixes nearly all domestic objections.  Once the deals over turf are cut, the environmentalists - the only real purists in the mix - will be invited to shut up and mind their own business by the muscle belonging to the same people who currently are part of the "popular front", but just angling for their slices of the pie.

After Obama departs, his successor may not be particularly seized with obstructing a border-crossing pipeline.
 
Brad Sallows said:
Money fixes nearly all domestic objections. 

I don't think you understand the change that has happened in the aboriginal community of late, especially with the decision in BC in 2014, pertaining to aboriginal title in non treaty areas.  You need aboriginal consent.  Trans Mountain can probably and will probably happen simply because a parallel line already exists (though I can see it failing as well).  Northern gateway was always dead as a result of aboriginal title.  Energy East is a wild card.  It may or may not happen.  KXL is probably dead, but who knows?
 
jmt18325 said:
I don't think you understand the change that has happened in the aboriginal community of late, especially with the decision in BC in 2014, pertaining to aboriginal title in non treaty areas.  You need aboriginal consent.

Here's the problem with our courts. They're creating laws, not clarifying on legal basis. If its non-treaty land, First Nations should get 0 say as to what happens. They don't want us telling them how to spend their money, they don't get to run the country unless they get together and get MPs elected.
 
PuckChaser said:
Here's the problem with our courts. They're creating laws, not clarifying on legal basis.

The Supreme Court is charged with interpreting the Constitution.  Their interpretation is far more meaningful than yours, and far more binding.

If its non-treaty land, First Nations should get 0 say as to what happens.

Non treaty land is land that was never surrendered by Indigenous people.  Technically, non aboriginal people are not even supposed to be there.  Of course, the courts are more realistic than that, recognizing the long inhabitance by non indigenous people.  Canadian and provincial law applies to non treaty land, but aboriginal consent, as of 2014, must be obtained for most projects through the region.

They don't want us telling them how to spend their money, they don't get to run the country unless they get together and get MPs elected.

Like I said, I don't think you understand the actual duty of the Crown, agreed to in 1763.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top