Thanks for the heads up, ROCKMAN.

From what you're saying, it sounds like these are highly speculative ventures, not only from a gelogical perspective, but from an operatonal one as well.

It makes one wonder whether the potential rewards justify the risks.

These domestic oil and gas producers face some pretty tough choices. Despite all the technological advances in seismic, drilling and completion technology, a panacea of quick riches doesn't seem to be in the cards: they can either opt for the low risk-low return that the resource plays offer, or they can go for the high risk-high return projects like the subsalt.

It's a hard business.

Joe Stiglitz has a new column out today. Even though I disagree with his conclusions, I nevertheless think his division of the economy into two parts--manufacturing vs. service--is insightful:

Some looking at the U.S. economy's decreasing reliance on manufacturing and increasing dependence on the service sector (including financial services) have long worried that the whole thing was a house of cards. After all, aren't "hard objects"--the food we eat, the houses we live in, the cars and airplanes that we use to transport us from one place to another, the gas and oil that provides heat and energy--the "core" of the economy? And if so, shouldn't they represent a larger fraction of our national output?

The simple answer is no. We live in a knowledge economy, an information economy, an innovation economy. Because of our ideas, we can have all the food we can possibly eat--and more than we should eat--with only 2 percent of the labor force employed in agriculture.

http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=947bf9e5-923b-409a-adac-579658...

Guys like yourself are out there doing the heavy lifting in the manufacturing sector. Meanwhile, the so-called "whiz kids" reap the huge monetary rewards in service sector endeavors like banking and finance.

Where I think Stiglitz gets it wrong is his characterization of the service economy as the "knowledge" economy, the "information" economy, the "innovation" economy. His blind spot is in thinking that guys like yourself, dedicated to the manufacturing sector, don't deploy as much knowledge, information and innovation as his fair haired boys in the service sector. The reality is that you probably deploy about 1000 times as much.

As much as I admire Stiglitz--his strident condemnations of the Iraq war and Bush's profligate and disastrous fiscal policies--I nevertheless think the time is rapidly approaching when we will see that he lives in a world of illusions, a dream world of smoke and mirrors.

I think Stiglits is right here, but only in times of great surplus.

Surplus energy, food, water, basically all resources.

However we are entering or in a period of huge forced constraints on all of the above.

So he is DEAD wrong. IMO

"His blind spot is in thinking that guys like yourself, dedicated to the manufacturing sector, don't deploy as much knowledge, information and innovation as his fair haired boys in the service sector. "

No, when someone like Stiglitz refers to the "knowledge" economy, he's including people like Rockman. Rockman is a knowledge worker, not a manual worker. That's Stiglitz's whole point - Rockman may not drag wellcasings around, but his services are essential to drilling.