Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by North LA on September 7, 2008 at 15:48

"The difference between then and March of 2008 is that we have found and identified enough gas to last seventy five years and can be predictably produced my methods we have today."

Great point. There were no proven shale resource plays back in the 80s and early 90s. All we had were the higher risk lower cost conventional reserves. NG didn't make sense then but does now. This will be a stable source in a stable market. The DeSoto parish Sheriff's office won't take over a pipeline just because they want it like Russia took over the Georgia BP line :)

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by DrWAVeSport Cd1 on September 9, 2008 at 8:37

The bigger diff. today is: Newer Technology. That is what is going to revolutionize the U.S. energy marketplace. No matter what the source, i.e., new-found oil fields, ng, coal, etc., the development of the newest technology will be the key to how we use transportation, utilities, etc. We need to put $$$ into R&D, which has been greatly underfunded over the past 30+ years.
Maybe newly found shale $ will help with this too.

DrWAVeSport 9/9/08

Permalink Reply by KT on September 6, 2008 at 10:18

EPA certification is done on a per vehicle basis. A conversion for a 2005 F-150 with a 5.4 ltr engine that is EPA approved does not meet EPA approval on a 2006 F-150 functionally identical. Absolute B---S---! Even though the engine is 75% cleaner than a gasoline engine right from the start. For CNG to work this kind of pure roadblock crap must be repealed.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by North LA on September 6, 2008 at 11:43

Any idea why?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by KT on September 7, 2008 at 13:42

To make it unnecessarily complicated. To discourage the switch to CNG. To retard the process. As to the why - I don't have any idea. Maintaining the current state of affairs benefits the oil industry and investors. Conspiracy theory or market conditions. I can't buy what is not available. Automakers sell a lot of CNGV overseas. New models are in european dealerships before they are sold in the US. Strange thing for GM, Ford to do, but it is true. The reason is probably as simple as the overseas markets are more savvy than ours. They demand better products.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by North LA on September 6, 2008 at 11:47

"Of course these behemoth, bureaucratic entities had nothing to do with developing these shale plays, with the exception of Shell."

Competition is good for the landowner. If you have 1 company trying to lease your land you get $100/acre offer, 2 companies $2,000/acre offer, 3 or more maybe a $20k/acre offer. If you have 10 companies trying to lease your land and 4 of them include Exxon/BP/Shell/Chevron then you are going to get a lot more for your lease.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by North LA on September 6, 2008 at 14:44

That's true.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by North LA on September 6, 2008 at 11:38

"Maybe Mr. Chesapeake can become the loudspeaker for convincing the American consumer to invest in their own desire to become energy strong, instead of remaining energy poor."

I believe he is along with Pickens.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by North LA on September 25, 2008 at 18:13

http://www.greencarcongress.com/2008/09/toyota-to-displ.html

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• Next ›
• Page