![]() | The House is poised to debate and pass an Energy Bill this week...get your thoughts in...UPDATED | The Oil Drum | DrumBeat: August 2, 2007 | ![]() |
41 comments on Easy Come, Easy Go..
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
| Show without comments | PDF version
41 comments on Easy Come, Easy Go..
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
| Show without comments | PDF version
Search
Blogroll
- 321 Energy
- The Archdruid Report
- ASPO Canada
- Ali Samsam Bakhtiari
- The Sir Robert Bond Papers
- Briarpatch Magazine
- Chatham House
- Paul Chefurka
- The Council of Canadians
- The Daily Canuck
- The Daily Reckoning
- The Dominion
- Energy and Capital
- Energy Bulletin
- Feasta
- Financial Sense
- Global Public Media
- Graphoilogy
- The Garret Hardin Society
- Richard Heinberg
- Thomas Homer-Dixon
- The Housing Bubble Blog
- iTulip
- James Kunstler
- LATOC
- Darryl McMahon
- George Monbiot
- Murky View
- Dmitri Orlov
- Plants for a Future
- Raise the Hammer
- Ramsay House Project
- Rigzone Canada
- R-Squared
- Nouriel Roubini
- Safe Haven
- Shack in the Middle
- Michael Shedlock
- Treehugger
- The Tyee
- Jeff Vail
- Vive le Canada
- John Warnock
- Whiskey and Gunpowder
User login
Personnel
Archives
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.




GAIA Host Collective
I'm rather suspicious of the coincidence of the drop in reserves estimates and the hand outstretched to the Canadian government for financial assistance. I'd expect that those estimates of reserve paucity go right back up to 'economic' once the loan guarantees are in.
When you approach a banker, you want to convince him that you are giving him an opportunity to be in on a sure thing; when approaching government you want to appear to be in need of assistance in doing a public service, in this case providing gas that would otherwise be uneconomic.
How much gas - and oil - is up there? Depends.
Last I recall, Exxon made something around 100 billion in 2006. But 16 for a pipeline down to their 'oilsands' projects is too much? Maybe I should just leave what I might say at this point to your imagination. Suffice it to say, these guys never quit.
If you can't trust an oilman, who CAN you trust? ;-)
Ran across a humorous misspell that might be appropriate; demogouge.
You can trust an oilman - to do the appropriate thing. As in any competitive industry, there is no real obligation to tell the truth to those who have the audacity to ask a silly question. It isn't lying, but just silly answers to silly questions.
Watch what they do. I'd postulate that coalbed methane tells you what you need to know on gas; it used to be passed over. Once the oilsands went from pilot to production you didn't have to ask. Deploying that much money is the answer. It's the old 'follow the money'.
Superdeep holes and Arctic turf wars corroborate where we are in the scheme of things. As Laherrere stated, 'nine women can't make a baby in a month'. Plan accordingly.