<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Global Industrialism and Oil&#8217;s Price Envelope</title>
	<atom:link href="http://gregor.us/non-opec/global-industrialism-and-oils-price-envelope/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://gregor.us/non-opec/global-industrialism-and-oils-price-envelope/</link>
	<description>Energy and Economics</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 08 Mar 2010 04:43:23 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: gregor.us</title>
		<link>http://gregor.us/non-opec/global-industrialism-and-oils-price-envelope/comment-page-1/#comment-3800</link>
		<dc:creator>gregor.us</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Dec 2008 16:43:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gregor.us/?p=448#comment-3800</guid>
		<description>Saudi Arabia and Russia would be doing the world a favor if they just moved their sale price to at least 60.00. I frankly don&#039;t know why they don&#039;t do it. The price would move in that direction almost immediately.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;G</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Saudi Arabia and Russia would be doing the world a favor if they just moved their sale price to at least 60.00. I frankly don&#39;t know why they don&#39;t do it. The price would move in that direction almost immediately.</p>
<p>G</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: gregor.us</title>
		<link>http://gregor.us/non-opec/global-industrialism-and-oils-price-envelope/comment-page-1/#comment-3801</link>
		<dc:creator>gregor.us</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Dec 2008 16:41:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gregor.us/?p=448#comment-3801</guid>
		<description>Interestingly, conventional oil projects can be harder to re-start because the flows are dependent on classical geology and pressure. An oil sands or tar sands project is more like a mining operation, so segmentation is easier as alot of work is done in the processing and upgrading. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;On the topic of Brazil, I think we have to recall that most of the drilling that Petrobras completed for their deepwater was to prove out the resource, not to pump it.  Of course, that project is toast, now, at 42 bbl. When PBR got their first drilling invoice it was in the billions, and the PBR CEO said &quot;you know, 125 dollar oil is a fair price.&quot; &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;What goes off line first are stripper wells--these are the Ma n&#039; Pa wells that dot the landscape globally and only produce 10-20 bbls a day but they are myriad and completely uneconomic as oil comes back to current levels. I think a research house in London is saying that  a ton of production in the aggregate could be lost from these--sounds oddball, I know, but I think they are right. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;The main concern is as follows: OPEC controls all the cheap conventional oil. non-OPEC controls all the expensive, unconventional, hard to get oil. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;You also have to consider the psychological factor: oil going back to 80.00 in Q1 2009 is simply not going to persuade Shell or PetroCanada to out their tar sand expansion plans back on. We already saw how cautious the industry has become this decade, even as oil rose.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;OPEC tried to do the world a favor by acting when oil got to 100.00. But dislocations in all assets globally including currencies were a very powerful force.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;G</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Interestingly, conventional oil projects can be harder to re-start because the flows are dependent on classical geology and pressure. An oil sands or tar sands project is more like a mining operation, so segmentation is easier as alot of work is done in the processing and upgrading. </p>
<p>On the topic of Brazil, I think we have to recall that most of the drilling that Petrobras completed for their deepwater was to prove out the resource, not to pump it.  Of course, that project is toast, now, at 42 bbl. When PBR got their first drilling invoice it was in the billions, and the PBR CEO said &#8220;you know, 125 dollar oil is a fair price.&#8221; </p>
<p>What goes off line first are stripper wells&#8211;these are the Ma n&#39; Pa wells that dot the landscape globally and only produce 10-20 bbls a day but they are myriad and completely uneconomic as oil comes back to current levels. I think a research house in London is saying that  a ton of production in the aggregate could be lost from these&#8211;sounds oddball, I know, but I think they are right. </p>
<p>The main concern is as follows: OPEC controls all the cheap conventional oil. non-OPEC controls all the expensive, unconventional, hard to get oil. </p>
<p>You also have to consider the psychological factor: oil going back to 80.00 in Q1 2009 is simply not going to persuade Shell or PetroCanada to out their tar sand expansion plans back on. We already saw how cautious the industry has become this decade, even as oil rose.</p>
<p>OPEC tried to do the world a favor by acting when oil got to 100.00. But dislocations in all assets globally including currencies were a very powerful force.</p>
<p>G</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: gregor.us</title>
		<link>http://gregor.us/non-opec/global-industrialism-and-oils-price-envelope/comment-page-1/#comment-193</link>
		<dc:creator>gregor.us</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Dec 2008 12:43:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gregor.us/?p=448#comment-193</guid>
		<description>Saudi Arabia and Russia would be doing the world a favor if they just moved their sale price to at least 60.00. I frankly don&#039;t know why they don&#039;t do it. The price would move in that direction almost immediately.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;G</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Saudi Arabia and Russia would be doing the world a favor if they just moved their sale price to at least 60.00. I frankly don&#39;t know why they don&#39;t do it. The price would move in that direction almost immediately.</p>
<p>G</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: gregor.us</title>
		<link>http://gregor.us/non-opec/global-industrialism-and-oils-price-envelope/comment-page-1/#comment-192</link>
		<dc:creator>gregor.us</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Dec 2008 12:41:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gregor.us/?p=448#comment-192</guid>
		<description>Interestingly, conventional oil projects can be harder to re-start because the flows are dependent on classical geology and pressure. An oil sands or tar sands project is more like a mining operation, so segmentation is easier as alot of work is done in the processing and upgrading. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;On the topic of Brazil, I think we have to recall that most of the drilling that Petrobras completed for their deepwater was to prove out the resource, not to pump it.  Of course, that project is toast, now, at 42 bbl. When PBR got their first drilling invoice it was in the billions, and the PBR CEO said &quot;you know, 125 dollar oil is a fair price.&quot; &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;What goes off line first are stripper wells--these are the Ma n&#039; Pa wells that dot the landscape globally and only produce 10-20 bbls a day but they are myriad and completely uneconomic as oil comes back to current levels. I think a research house in London is saying that  a ton of production in the aggregate could be lost from these--sounds oddball, I know, but I think they are right. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;The main concern is as follows: OPEC controls all the cheap conventional oil. non-OPEC controls all the expensive, unconventional, hard to get oil. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;You also have to consider the psychological factor: oil going back to 80.00 in Q1 2009 is simply not going to persuade Shell or PetroCanada to out their tar sand expansion plans back on. We already saw how cautious the industry has become this decade, even as oil rose.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;OPEC tried to do the world a favor by acting when oil got to 100.00. But dislocations in all assets globally including currencies were a very powerful force.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;G</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Interestingly, conventional oil projects can be harder to re-start because the flows are dependent on classical geology and pressure. An oil sands or tar sands project is more like a mining operation, so segmentation is easier as alot of work is done in the processing and upgrading. </p>
<p>On the topic of Brazil, I think we have to recall that most of the drilling that Petrobras completed for their deepwater was to prove out the resource, not to pump it.  Of course, that project is toast, now, at 42 bbl. When PBR got their first drilling invoice it was in the billions, and the PBR CEO said &#8220;you know, 125 dollar oil is a fair price.&#8221; </p>
<p>What goes off line first are stripper wells&#8211;these are the Ma n&#39; Pa wells that dot the landscape globally and only produce 10-20 bbls a day but they are myriad and completely uneconomic as oil comes back to current levels. I think a research house in London is saying that  a ton of production in the aggregate could be lost from these&#8211;sounds oddball, I know, but I think they are right. </p>
<p>The main concern is as follows: OPEC controls all the cheap conventional oil. non-OPEC controls all the expensive, unconventional, hard to get oil. </p>
<p>You also have to consider the psychological factor: oil going back to 80.00 in Q1 2009 is simply not going to persuade Shell or PetroCanada to out their tar sand expansion plans back on. We already saw how cautious the industry has become this decade, even as oil rose.</p>
<p>OPEC tried to do the world a favor by acting when oil got to 100.00. But dislocations in all assets globally including currencies were a very powerful force.</p>
<p>G</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ShortBusTrader</title>
		<link>http://gregor.us/non-opec/global-industrialism-and-oils-price-envelope/comment-page-1/#comment-187</link>
		<dc:creator>ShortBusTrader</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Dec 2008 09:35:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gregor.us/?p=448#comment-187</guid>
		<description>Do you have  an idea of how long it takes for the different types of oil suppliers to start up again after they have been shutdown and bankrupted. For example, I suppose it would take less time for a Venezuelan oil project to start up again than a Canadian oil sands project , and a Brazilian project a lot longer again. Obviously Brazilian supply is the costliest and difficult to find, what about the other major suppliers. Next post maybe.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Do you have  an idea of how long it takes for the different types of oil suppliers to start up again after they have been shutdown and bankrupted. For example, I suppose it would take less time for a Venezuelan oil project to start up again than a Canadian oil sands project , and a Brazilian project a lot longer again. Obviously Brazilian supply is the costliest and difficult to find, what about the other major suppliers. Next post maybe.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: GloomBoom</title>
		<link>http://gregor.us/non-opec/global-industrialism-and-oils-price-envelope/comment-page-1/#comment-186</link>
		<dc:creator>GloomBoom</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Dec 2008 03:49:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gregor.us/?p=448#comment-186</guid>
		<description>Peak oil is here and the government should do something to keep oil above $70 per barrel, e.g., via taxation. Without that support, exploration will cease. Check out &lt;a href=&quot;http://GloomBoom.com&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;GloomBoom.com&lt;/a&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Peak oil is here and the government should do something to keep oil above $70 per barrel, e.g., via taxation. Without that support, exploration will cease. Check out <a href="http://GloomBoom.com" rel="nofollow">GloomBoom.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stuart MacDonald</title>
		<link>http://gregor.us/non-opec/global-industrialism-and-oils-price-envelope/comment-page-1/#comment-184</link>
		<dc:creator>Stuart MacDonald</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Dec 2008 21:25:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gregor.us/?p=448#comment-184</guid>
		<description>Gregor, fascinating stuff. I&#039;m very glad that I connected to you via Paul on twitter. I&#039;ve become a regular reader.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Cheers,&lt;br&gt;Stuart&lt;br&gt;(@stuartma)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Gregor, fascinating stuff. I&#39;m very glad that I connected to you via Paul on twitter. I&#39;ve become a regular reader.</p>
<p>Cheers,<br />Stuart<br />(@stuartma)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: bobbrill</title>
		<link>http://gregor.us/non-opec/global-industrialism-and-oils-price-envelope/comment-page-1/#comment-183</link>
		<dc:creator>bobbrill</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Dec 2008 17:13:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gregor.us/?p=448#comment-183</guid>
		<description>As always, appreciate you sharing your expertise.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As always, appreciate you sharing your expertise.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
