Rshermr
VIP Member
Use your brain, me boy, if you can. Why do you think the Saudi's are concerned about a very, very, very small oil reserve that is under 1% of the size of theirs, and that costs over twice as much to produce the oil, and way more to ship it to refineries. jesus, you want to believe your own bullshit. Dipshit.You're such a fucking idiot that you don't even read enough of your own cites to realize they don't prove what you claim they do!
"North Dakota Sour is a high-sulfur grade of crude and “is a small portion of the state’s production, with less than 15,000 barrels a day coming out of the ground,” Bloomberg notes, citing John Auers, executive vice president at Turner Mason & Co. in Dallas. “The output has been dwarfed by low-sulfur crude from the Bakken shale formation in the western part of the state, which has grown to 1.1 million barrels a day in the past 10 years.”
North Dakota Sour is what the Koch Brothers Refinery is paying -$0.50 for...not the low sulfer crude coming from the Bakken formation!
Damn. A personal attack. Based on another untruth posted by Oldstyle. I did not suggest that all, most, or a majority of oil had negative value. I know you suggest I did. That would be, me boy, another lie.
However, depending on the day of the week, oil from the baken is costing more than they get for it. Partly because the Baken is in the middle of nowhere. And shipping costs are high. Then, you will find that the costs of getting the oil from generally deep pools, is high. And, much of the oil is not of the highest quality and costs more than oil from other areas to refine. And because fracking is a relatively expensive process.
Now I know you like to make the Baken look like a shining star. It is not. Here are a few reasons why:
1. Oil costs, including transportation Tcosts, are very high, often more the cost to supply the crude being produced in the Baken.
2. There are only 49 drilling rigs now on the Baken, down from 187 at the peak. That would be just over 25% of the rigs once producing, since oil drillers are looking for ways to cut costs.
3. Oil companies are declaring bankruptcy.
So, the Baken today keeps producing, but less than before. It has under 1% of the worlds volume of available oil.
Next.
God but you're an idiot! In case you hadn't noticed...MOST oil reserves are found in the middle of nowhere! You think it's more expensive to ship crude from North Dakota than it is from any other remote area?
Uh, that would be your opinion. And you know how much I value your opinion, dipshit.
I know this is difficult for you to understand, but being in the miccle of nowhere is a big problem if you have no pipeline, like N. Dakota, dipshit. It is not in Saudi Arabia or the gulf nations, since they have a major infrastructure. Dipshit. Net is it costs a lot to ship from N. Dakota via TRUCK, in comparison to other countries VIA PIPELINE.
As for the importance of the Bakken oil field? Some estimates put the oil reserves there at a par with oil reserves in Saudi Arabia. Only bat shit crazy sources. I notice you did not provide a link, dipshit. Is that because you are ashamed of where you get your information??
Use your brain for once, Rshermr! If the Bakken oil field was insignificant then the Saudis wouldn't have slashed their oil prices as they have done!
So, as opposed to the con tools, like oldstyle, ideas, what ACTUALLY has caused declining costs of oil and oil products:
Four things are now affecting the picture.
Demand is low because of weak economic activity, increased efficiency, and a growing switch away from oil to other fuels.
Second, turmoil in Iraq and Libya—two big oil producers with nearly 4m barrels a day combined—has not affected their output. The market is more sanguine about geopolitical risk.
Thirdly, America has become the world’s largest oil producer. Though it does not export crude oil, it now imports much less, creating a lot of spare supply.
Finally, the Saudis and their Gulf allies have decided not to sacrifice their own market share to restore the price. They could curb production sharply, but the main benefits would go to countries they detest such as Iran and Russia. Saudi Arabia can tolerate lower oil prices quite easily. It has $900 billion in reserves. Its own oil costs very little (around $5-6 per barrel) to get out of the ground.
http://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2014/12/economist-explains-4
So, while baken has been reducing oil production, overall oil production has increased
You think the price of gasoline has gone from plus four dollars to sub two dollars because of "low demand"? God but your posts get stupider with each passing hour! We had weaker economic activity when the price was close to five dollars! If you DID get a degree in economics, Georgie...which I HIGHLY doubt...then you are probably the dumbest economics major to graduate from a college or university this century!
So, lets see what you just said, me boy. You saidI said the price had dropped because of low demand. Now, me boy, you are either but stupid (possible) or lying. Because if you could read, I said there were 4 reasons. You picked one of 4. So, look again, me lying con. Second, you said I said that was the reason. It was 1. Not what I said as the only reason, but one of 4 reasons. And 2 it was not I that made that determination. The link took you to the article I quoted. It was by the Economist. Now, unless you are a complete fool (possible) you know they are an extremely credible and knowledgeable impartial source. So, there you go, me boy. Making things up again. I try to educate you, and you come back with unnecessary insults. Relative to my econ degree, you already stated that I did not have one, but lost that argument when you refused to take a simple bet, and if you were correct, make some money.
So, you say what I said was wrong. But by implication you said that the Economist was wrong. Sorry, me boy, you loose. If I have to believe someone, either you or the economist, you loose.
You should be embarrased. But that would require that you had some integrity, which you do not.
But it was a normal post for you. You loose your argument, then come back with personal attacks. o, me poor ignorant con tool, apparently you have no rational argument. Saying that the Saudis, who control 50% of the worlds crude oil, are concerned about the relatively insignificant Baken reserve, is your argument. It is too stupid for anyone to believe. So, then you revert to personal attacks and attacks on the study by the Economist. You, me boy, are an all time clasic con tool. Congratulations, dipshit.