Watching CSPAN this morning I heard that the EIA believe that all the refineries will be back by Christmas- then hastily corrected to say within the limits of approximation.  Then further corrected to there being about 300,000 bd short at that time (which is the Conoco Philips refinery with the flooded switchgear).  They also expected Gulf production to be back at pre-Katrina levels by March, but it was not clear if this included some new production (say Thunder Horse) to make up the losses.

WILMA!!!

and the plot thickens...  (and the NE shivers a little more)

I've seen in the past week several estimates for the low cycle in working nat'l gas in March and very silly statements about low pressure in the system etc.  Folks, the graph u commonly see has no "real" Zero base.  This graphic is a top third, if u will, of a larger representation of the total nat' gas which is in the magnitude of about 8500-Bcf.  In short, the conventional graph is looking at the top 5k to 8.5K portion.

Also, some have questioned my sanity wrt my September forecast for 900-Bcf as the next cycle low. Well, we will be releasing the October Energy Reserves shortly and we have upped to low cycle point to 950-Bcf based on better news from the Gulf, as outlined by Stuart. In watching the other estimates it is my humble opinion that all have missed the LNG import component.  Remember last winter, when long-term contracts in the Pacific were as low as $2.25?  Not much of it was destined for the USA but that was indicative of the marketplace and the future for Nat'l Gas thax to lotsa new terminals and ships (many from Poland).

In 2004, the USA imported 650-Bcf.  680 in 2005.  And 1000-Bcf is the estimate for 2006.

Similarly with crude, of the over 700-Mb in the SPR, only 13 were needed for refinery shortfalls.  As the Secretary for Energy keeps saying, "what we have folks is a fear of shortages!"