Pages

Monday, August 29, 2016

Richard Zeits On The Bakken -- Optimistic -- SeekingAlpha -- August 29, 2016

Mike Filloon has had four articles on the Bakken recently and now we have an article from Richard Zeits. This all suggests to me, along with other stories coming out of the Bakken, that things are "happening."

The newest contribution from Richard Zeits: shale oil -- the "upcycle" is already underway.

Summary:
  • For U.S. shale oil, $50 per barrel is the “new $80” - a result of the industry's evolution since the beginning of the downturn in oil.
  • Capital spending and capital availability will continue to be forward-looking: operators and investors will anticipate improvements in drilling economics.
  • Using the current strip curve, activity acceleration is sustainable and should become particularly visible in 2017.
The article will disappear over time.

The comments are incredibly good. I particularly liked the comment about shareholders: agree 100%. I think a lot of folks forget that.

**************************
Cool -- 
Marijuana State Hasn't Lost All Sense
Hunter S Thompson Would Be Proud

Colorado anti-oil initiatives fall short of qualifying for ballot.
Two proposed initiatives that would have increased restrictions on oil and gas activity in Colorado failed to make the November 8, 2016, ballot because they did not collect enough valid signatures.

Officials of the Colorado Oil & Gas Association (COGA) and the Colorado Petroleum Council (CPC) separately welcomed the news.
Backers submitted the signatures in early August. Initiative No. 75 would have let local governments to prohibit, control, or impose moratoriums on oil and gas development; enact local laws that are more restrictive than state laws; and bar the state from preempting such law.

Initiative No. 78 would have changed Colorado’s setback requirements for any new oil and gas development to at least 2,500 ft from the nearest occupied structure or other specified or locally designated area, and authorize the state or a local government to require that any such new development be more than 2,500 ft away from such structures.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.