U.S. oil industry prepares to boost production — but with a giant warning

[YoursTruly]

Bullshit!

Funny but the oil companies didn't keep production low when Trump was President.

Because it was a boom cycle. The oil companies had an oil friendly president that allowed a lot of NEW leases and permits. Trump cut the lease time from 7 years down to 2 years. They took advantage of it and employed a lot of geologist, drillers, pipeliners and other hands to cover as much ground as possible.

Biden comes in and blocks new leases. NOT existing leases that are producing oil. Plus he puts a halt on the CANADIAN xl pipeline.
This gives the oil companies the opportunity to send them into a bust cycle.
NOTE: The bust cycle means that all those hands I mentioned before are going to get laid off. But it's actually a BOOM cycle for the CEO's, the companies profit margins, their investors. Why? Because the market prices go up. And since they've cut most of their overhead, profits go way up.

Two facts the Moon Bats can't run away from:

1. When Trump with an American Energy Independence agenda gas at the pump was less than half of what it is now. The price increased when that idiot Biden stole the election and has his "no more fossil fuel to save the earth" agenda.

2. Under Trump we were a NET exporter of oil in 2019 and 2020 due to his policies. That means we produced more oil than we used. Under Potatohead we are begging the Saudis, Venezuelans and Iranians to give us oil in other to save the Democrats from a disaster in the midterms.

Not only is this Biden idiot causing tremendous inflation, high prices for energy but also we are facing a significant economic recession. It is coming.

Anybody that voted for Biden and then ignored the fact he stole the election is an idiot.

All you're doing is repeating the oil companies "excuses" for decreasing oil production. Read post 138. This is why and how oil companies and land owners (who own the mineral rights) reduce oil production.

 

[YoursTruly]

They're only beginning to do so now

Yea...profit taking

They're not going to increase production to any extent that's going to show up at the pump until after summer. There's a lot of psychological BS that has to be gone through before "we the people" are at our breaking point. And the oil companies aren't going to budge until that happens.

We still have a month of blaming Biden. Then another month of bitching and whining about the oil companies. (This will happen when even republicans don't care why it's happening. Only that it's happening).
Then theirs the month of how do we combat these higher prices. As in ride shares, carpooling. People starting to buy hybrids and EV's.
We could skip these next few months just by reducing our oil consumption right now. But we're not that smart. We LOVE to bitch and moan. Oil companies know this. They pay people big money to figure this psychological crap out.

 

[Flash]

Because it was a boom cycle. The oil companies had an oil friendly president that allowed a lot of NEW leases and permits. Trump cut the lease time from 7 years down to 2 years. They took advantage of it and employed a lot of geologist, drillers, pipeliners and other hands to cover as much ground as possible.

Biden comes in and blocks new leases. NOT existing leases that are producing oil. Plus he puts a halt on the CANADIAN xl pipeline.
This gives the oil companies the opportunity to send them into a bust cycle.
NOTE: The bust cycle means that all those hands I mentioned before are going to get laid off. But it's actually a BOOM cycle for the CEO's, the companies profit margins, their investors. Why? Because the market prices go up. And since they've cut most of their overhead, profits go way up.


All you're doing is repeating the oil companies "excuses" for decreasing oil production. Read post 138. This is why and how oil companies and land owners (who own the mineral rights) reduce oil production.

You are confused Moon Bat.

The oil companines were producing and making money when Trump was letting them. In 2019 and 2020 the US was a net exporter of oil. That means we were producing more oil than we were using in case you are confused.

What changed?

An asshole that stole the election became President with a well known stated Environmental Wacko agenda to do away with fossil fuels.

Then he did a series of things to screw up the market. Closing down efficient pipeline projects, ANWAR, halting drilling leases of Federal lands ,etc.

Now you idiot Moon Bats who know what a disaster these high fuel prices are and how it will destroy the Democrats in the midterms are blaming everybody else and their Little Brown Dog.

You Moon Bats never take responsibility for the damage you do to this country and you are always in denial and johnny on the stop to blame somebody else.

We Americans get tired of you filthy ass Moon Bats fucking up everything and then blaming your failures on other people.

 

[miketx]

Believe what you want, bro. But I was in the business during both boom and busts. We hauled either salt water or oil from production tanks. I seen the shit with my own eyes.

When an oil company contracts someone who owns the mineral rights to their land & oil, they have to allow us to pump a certain amount per month or week from the production tank. It's in the contract. When the oil prices are on the rise, we ONLY pumped what was contracted. Even if the production tank was almost full, they'd install a new production tank.

Why? Because if oil is going from $100 per barrel to $120 per barrel, the land owner and the oil companies would rather save all the oil they could because they make more profit in the end.

Here's some math to prove what I say.

The criteria: A small 500 barrel production tank. Oil is $50 per barrel. Land owner is contracted to allow 160 barrels per month. 160 barrels is a standard truck load. 160 barrels normally keeps the weight of the trucks at legal permitted road weight from the lease road, to either the disposal site (for salt water), the refinery. Or the storage tanks that feed the pipelines.
Month one:160 barrels @ $50 per barrel X 10%<<land owners profit = $800. The land owner needs more than this to live on or to continue his investments or what ever. So he pumps 160 barrels per week. The oil companies also need to pump more to continue their profit margins for the company and it's investors.
(Keep in mind, this is just from one production tank. Most land owners usually have several)

The oil bust starts. They know the price is going to $100 per barrel within a month and $150 within 2 months. So they slow production, to ONLY what's contracted.

Month 2. 160 barrels @ $100 per barrel. This equals to $1,600 per truck load, going to the land owner.
Month 3. 160 barrels @ $150 per barrel. This equates to $2400 per truck load.

So if why in the world would the land owner and the oil companies pump a lot of oil @ $100 per barrel, if they know he oil prices are going to go up? They don't. They only pump what's contracted, saving as much oil as possible for when the oil prices are going to peak.
Because they like us? Because they don't want to see us having to pay more? BS, we're just their customers. We're not their friends. This is business, bub. Oil companies and land owners are in it for the money.

You're a liar.

 

[YoursTruly]

You're a liar.

How am I lying? Refute my comments.

You can't because you're not smart enough. The only thing you know about the oil business is the BS you read on political forums and right wing websites.

FFS you probably are so stupid that you think Biden has the power to shut down wells that are producing oil. But, I'll give you the opportunity to prove me wrong.

Here's your chance. Give it your best shot.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Front Page Featured | MRCTV

www.cnsnews.com

 

[kyzr]

If they were shutdown it will take a lot of time and money to get them up and running again. Are you really this fucking stupid?
MAGA

Duh, if they don't re-start there is no reliable electricity.
They closed Nord Stream 2, and NS-1 goes thru Ukraine, so it is very tenuous.
Even if the nukes don't re-start it's a good idea to have them ready if needed.
Don't say I didn't warn you not to trust Putin.

Properly designed nuke plants are safe and reliable.
The Germans should know that.

 

[miketx]

How am I lying? Refute my comments.

You can't because you're not smart enough. The only thing you know about the oil business is the BS you read on political forums and right wing websites.

FFS you probably are so stupid that you think Biden has the power to shut down wells that are producing oil. But, I'll give you the opportunity to prove me wrong.

Here's your chance. Give it your best shot.

Leftists don't accept proof.

 

[YoursTruly]

Leftists don't accept proof.

I'm still waiting. Let me guess, that post was just the preamble the bombshell of facts and proof of how I'm completely wrong. Right?

 

[miketx]

I'm still waiting. Let me guess, that post was just the preamble the bombshell of facts and proof of how I'm completely wrong. Right?

Leftists don't accept proof. I don't ever try to explain anything to them.

 

[YoursTruly]

Leftists don't accept proof. I don't ever try to explain anything to them.

BS. If you had facts that would prove me wrong, you'd post them in a heartbeat. And you know you would.

Man up bro. I ain't telling you to support Biden. Only the facts. Hell, I don't support Biden. I can't remember the last time I voted for a democrat. It may have been Bill Clinton. But I do remember liking Perot a lot back then. But honestly, I could've voted for Bill after Perot kept dropping in and out of the race.
None the less, you're calling me a lefty because you think of anything else to say. You have no facts to prove me wrong, so you get childish and start throwing insults.
That's the same thing the retarded lefties do. Which puts you on the same level.


You party loyalist are pathetic, bro. And you give actual conservatives like myself a bad name.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Do the AGW proponents want more or less fossil fuel production, yes or no?

Are democrats beholden to the AGW proponents, yes or no?

Did Russia fund green groups to get Europe hooked on its fossil fuel, yes or no?

When you tell an industry you are going to snuff it out in 10-20 years why would they invest in future production that has Returns of Investments of 10-20 years?

And yet that is exactly what they are doing.

 

[OKTexas]

Banks have been 'encouraged' to stop loaning money to oil companies. One big reason oil companies are wary to develop and produce more oil is they would have to self-finance.

Some banks have already pulled back before any EO or legislation gets enacted.

House Democrats want curbs on big-bank lending to fossil-fuel industry

Progressive House Democrats on Wednesday introduced a measure that would require the Federal Reserve to make sure that the largest banks start to reduce...

www.marketwatch.com

EXCLUSIVE Shareholder group pressures U.S. banks to drop fossil fuels faster

Climate-focused investors are calling on the major U.S. banks to quickly scale back their financing of new fossil fuel development, saying current commitments by the banks to curb global emissions are not enough.

www.reuters.com

That shit is unconstitutional. The banks will be putting themselves and their shareholders at great risk from legal action.

.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

That shit is unconstitutional. The banks will be putting themselves and their shareholders at great risk from legal action.

.

It's not unconstitutional, and they would lose every one of those lawsuits spectacularly.

 

[Aldo Raine]

Duh, if they don't re-start there is no reliable electricity.
They closed Nord Stream 2, and NS-1 goes thru Ukraine, so it is very tenuous.
Even if the nukes don't re-start it's a good idea to have them ready if needed.
Don't say I didn't warn you not to trust Putin.

Properly designed nuke plants are safe and reliable.
The Germans should know that.

I never disagreed with the fact that there is a place for nuclear power. I 100% agree. Simply pointing out once a reactor has been mothballed it is not that simple to fire back up as simply throwing a switch. A lot of time and loot will have to go back into making it run again. That simple.
MAGA

 

[OKTexas]

It's not unconstitutional, and they would lose every one of those lawsuits spectacularly.

The feds have zero constitutional authority to interfere with private contracts. And if the banks act as pseudo-governmental agencies doing the bidding of the government they are open to liability.

.

 

[YoursTruly]

I never disagreed with the fact that there is a place for nuclear power. I 100% agree. Simply pointing out once a reactor has been mothballed it is not that simple to fire back up as simply throwing a switch. A lot of time and loot will have to go back into making it run again. That simple.
MAGA

It's probably cheaper than starting from scratch.

 

[kyzr]

It's not unconstitutional, and they would lose every one of those lawsuits spectacularly.

Bullshit. The government can't force banks to deny capital for non-business or risk assessments.

OCC proposal prohibits banks from denying lending to oil, gun companies

The 45-day comment period is uncommonly short, but may allow the agency a brief window to issue the rule before the Biden administration is expected to take office Jan. 20.

www.bankingdive.com

• A rule proposed Friday by the Office of The Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) would prohibit banks with more than $100 billion in assets from denying services such as lending and payment processing to businesses in one industry over another as long as the potential client passes the risk assessment.
• The proposed rule comes as many of the world's largest banks are scaling back their lending in particular industries to align with environmental and social benchmarks.

 

[martybegan]

And yet that is exactly what they are doing.

You didn't answer the questions.

 

[DigitalDrifter]

Banks have been 'encouraged' to stop loaning money to oil companies. One big reason oil companies are wary to develop and produce more oil is they would have to self-finance.

Some banks have already pulled back before any EO or legislation gets enacted.

House Democrats want curbs on big-bank lending to fossil-fuel industry

Progressive House Democrats on Wednesday introduced a measure that would require the Federal Reserve to make sure that the largest banks start to reduce...

www.marketwatch.com

EXCLUSIVE Shareholder group pressures U.S. banks to drop fossil fuels faster

Climate-focused investors are calling on the major U.S. banks to quickly scale back their financing of new fossil fuel development, saying current commitments by the banks to curb global emissions are not enough.

www.reuters.com

This is why it's ridiculous for Dims to now start this bombardment of denying they are the reason gas prices have been surging.
We all know which party it is that has fought every step of the way to kill the fossil fuel industry.