<More thoughts about GazpromThe Oil DrumMore Coal Equals More CO2>
<DrumBeat: October 21, 2006DrumBeatDrumBeat: October 23, 2006>

127 comments on DrumBeat: October 22, 2006

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

elwoodelmore on October 22, 2006 - 8:31am Permalink | Subthread | Comments top
alrighty then   i am wondering about the coming winter demand for nat gas     noaa is predicting a warmer than normal winter  based i believe  mostly on the soi (el nino')      while the old farmer's almanac is forcasting a significantly colder winter    up to 5 degrees in december    while 5 degrees dont sound like much    it will translate into a lot of natural gas   the farmer's almanac  relies on cycles of sun spot activity ( chart reading for weather)     this may be an opportunity to make (or loose) a lot of $$$$$$ on gas futures
0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
jhm on October 22, 2006 - 9:15am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Nymex has the Dec '07 contract at $9.176 and the Dec '11 at $7.592!

What is the consensus about the tail of the strip for energy futures?

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
elwoodelmore on October 22, 2006 - 9:26am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
dont believe you will make a lot of money in any market based on consensus       just my opinion    i have a brother in law  who reads every newsletter he can get his hands on    and he is in a constant state of confusion
0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Nate Hagens on October 22, 2006 - 4:39pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Nymex has the Dec '07 contract at $9.176 and the Dec '11 at $7.592!

What is the consensus about the tail of the strip for energy futures?

By definition, the consensus is exactly the prices you indicate - the market is a dollar weighted aggregate vote of consensus, and given the distribution of size and shape of players, probably a pretty good people vote as well as dollar vote

Bulls will point to NA supply cliff, written about here.  They will also point out that a price floor seems to have been reached, as producers will willingly leave gas in ground if they cant make money on it.

Bears will point to the price elasticity of demand for moving industry offshore if prices get high enough. They will also point to a large increase in expected LNG imports. The more esoteric among them will point to global warming trends reducing the amount of gas needed for heat in winter.

Myself, I see gradually higher highs and higher lows with increased volatility over next 5 years, including periodic outages, brownouts and blackouts. The risk reward long term favors buying these contracts insofar as you can make more than you can lose - but a warm winter 2006/7 and you will lose money near term almost for sure.  Better to buy natural gas stocks with long term quality reserves which might have less volatility than the futures. But as always, depends on your risk parameters and objectives.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
jkissing on October 23, 2006 - 12:26am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
bears might also point out that some industrial users, eg fertilizer and plastic precursors, are moving offshore... or, to put it differently, the onshore producers can't compete against those producing from cheaper supplies. Moving these uses offshore is both cheaper, less risk, and more energy efficient that importing lng to continue doing these things here.
0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
alistairC on October 23, 2006 - 6:59am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
mmm yes but beware of false outsourcing analogies.

Manufacturing labour may be outsourced to places where wages are always going to be significantly lower.

But where are these places that have long-term cheaper energy prices for manufacturing?

... the moons of Saturn?

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
AlanfromBigEasy on October 23, 2006 - 7:16am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Qatar
0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
jkissing on October 23, 2006 - 10:20am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
All of those places that are planning large lng projects, including qatar, as noted by alan below, plus australia, iran, even tobago.  The total cost of liquifying ng, transporting it in special ships, gasifying it, and finally selling it at current US prices of 7/mcf means the value in the exporting country is maybe half, say 3.50/mcf.  Naturally it would be cheaper to make fertilizer/plastic precursors with 3.50 input and then shipping the easily shippable products.
0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
DIYer on October 22, 2006 - 11:45am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
In relocalization news, the neighborhood next to mine has just dug up all their gas lamps. The builder had installed gas lights for street lighting in the development (about 6 or 8 'square blocks'? -- curvy suburban streets and cul-de-sacs aren't square) back in 1999 and they were so, so quaint. Every time a kid would hit one of the poles with a basketball, the mantles would break and when a car hit one, the whole thing would be smashed and leaking gas. That and the neighborhood association had to pay for the gas to be on 24/7/365, I presume.

They're probably going to install electric lights like we have. We got the faux-gas-lamp look in our electric street lights for a slight premium over the city standard, galvanized steel poles. And the city pays for the electricity; it doesn't go through our meters.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
fleam on October 22, 2006 - 3:46pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
is that in San Diego or in the Phoenix area? I know a few areas have set up what they called "gas lamp" or "gas light" districts, walking-friendly and supposed to rejuvenate dead downtown areas, this was big in the late 90s.

Have they finally realized gaslight went out of style because better things came along?

I can just see the "LED light district" someday lol......

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
DIYer on October 22, 2006 - 6:23pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Yeah, or they could use those neon fake flame lights. You know, the bulb has a flame-shaped electrode and allows just barely enough current to light the neon with a flickering effect?

I hate those things...

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
DIYer on October 22, 2006 - 6:24pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
is that in San Diego or in the Phoenix area?

And no, it's just a McBurb at the northwest corner of Austin. It was built in '98-'99.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.