Leonard Cohen: Dead At 82 -- November 10, 2016

Pretty sad.

< Tower of Love, Leonard Cohen

****************************

The Political Page

The 2016 presidential election will be studied ad nauseum.

This is something I've heard no one mention. Fatigue. Hillary's.

The polls suggested this was going to be an incredibly close race. Both candidates had already pre-positioned lawyers in every swing state / every battleground state -- that's how tight they thought this race was going to be.

The day before the election, Monday, November 7, 2016: Trump visited ten swing states / battleground states.

Hillary? Visited one. She had one scheduled public event Monday, the day before the election. The one public appearance the day before the election was a "concert."

Again, the reporters and journalists are looking at this with their eyes wide shut. They look for every reason to explain why they lost. Some races were so tight, one wonders if one last visit, the day before the election would have made a difference.

There's only two reasons why she did not visit more than one state the day before the election: fatigue or a medical condition, or a combination of both.

She was no doubt resting on Monday to prepare for whatever Tuesday might bring.

Ten states in one day for a 70-year-old man. One concert for his opponent. On the last day before a very tightly competitive race.

*****************************

POFTA -- POOF

Both Canada and Mexico, apparently, have said they are willing to "re-negotiate" NAFTA.

This is two days after Trump was elected. There are still about 70 days before he is sworn in.

When Canada and Mexico are both willing to "re-negotiate" NAFTA it speaks volumes. It tells me the playing field is very, very uneven, and the United States is getting the worst part of the bargain.

I guess the "Pacific Ocean Free Trade Act" (POFTA) is dead. DOA. EIEIO.

******************************

The NFL Page

I thought the NFL ratings story was a bit overblown, maybe some hype. I thought that total number of eyeballs watching NFL had probably increased despite the lower ratings on Sunday, Monday, and Thursday. But now I'm not so sure.

The New York Times has this headline: "As Ratings Plummet, NFL Considers Reducing Ads and Length of Games."

As long as they're doing that, they might as well quietly ask the players to act like they respect the USA. The players don't have to really like the US, but if they would just pretend for 2 minutes, that might help. That issue was not mentioned in the article -- for the NY Times it would not be something they would want to bring up.

****************************

Closing Time

Closing Time, Leonard Cohen

Three New Permits -- November 10, 2016

Active rigs:

	11/10/2016	11/10/2015	11/10/2014	11/10/2013	11/10/2012
Active Rigs	38	66	192	182	191

No wells coming off the confidential list Friday.

Three new permits:

• Operators: BR (2), Sedalia Energy
  Fields: Croff (McKenzie), Pratt (McHenry)
  Comments:

Ten permits renewed:

• Murex (4): four Skari permits (Iner, Laura, Vernon, and Evar P.) in McKenzie County
• Whiting (2): two Faiman permits in Dunn County
• HRC (2): two Fort Berthold permits in McKenzie County
• Denbury (2): two CHSU permits in Bowman County

Four producing wells (DUCs) reported as completed:

• 30301, 810, Hess, EN-Weyrauch C-154-93-2932H-9, Robinson Lake, t11/16;  no production data,
• 30315, 791, Hess, EN-Weyrauch C-154-93-2932H-10, Robinson Lake, t10/16; cum -- 
• 32601, 834, Hess, EN-Rolfsrud-152-96-1720H-11, Westberg, t10/16, no production data,
• 32602, 947, Hess, EN-Rolfsrud-152-96-1720H-10, Westberg, t10/16, cum --

First Time Unemployment Claims Plummet By 11,000; Well More Than Forecast -- November 10, 2016

From Business Insider:

• initial jobless claims fell more than expected
• dropped to 254,000
• the forecast: to 260,000
• previous week: 265,000
• a drop of 11,000
• four-week moving average: 259,750, an uptick of 1,750 from the previous week's revised average

Also, here.

*****************************

GDP Now

4Q16: 3.1

From Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta:

The GDPNow model forecast for real GDP growth (seasonally adjusted annual rate) in the fourth quarter of 2016 is 3.1 percent on November 9, unchanged from November 4.

The forecast of the contribution of inventory investment to fourth-quarter real GDP growth inched up from 0.46 percentage points to 0.50 percentage points after this morning's wholesale trade report from the U.S. Census Bureau.

How Much Effect Did Hillary's Comments To Ban Fracking Have On The National Outcome -- It Turns Out It Was Huge -- November 10, 2016

I've gone over the math on this post over and over and I think I'm correct. Please, if I'm not, let me know, so I can correct it. 

If you do nothing else tonight, look at the comment at this post:

http://themilliondollarway.blogspot.com/2016/11/reply-to-reader-regarding-election.html.

I brought the comment up to the top of that post to make it easier to read and to make it "browser-searchable."

A huge thank-you to the reader on the East Coast who sent me the data. It is a real eye-opener.

After reading that note, I am absolutely convinced that Hillary's comments in Detroit about banning fracking may have been the difference in winning  / losing the election. If the Pennsylvania data holds for Ohio that amounts to 38 electoral votes (18 for OH; 20 for PA) that might have been lost due to Hillary's comments on fracking.

Right now, over at CNN:

• Trump: 290 + Michigan (16) = 306
• Hillary: 232

Back out those 38 electoral votes from Trump and give them to Hillary and note what happens. At the CNN link it appears that Michigan is still not being officially called by some. But give those 16 electoral votes to Trump:

• Trump 306 - 38 = 268
• Hillary: 232 +38 = 270

Note: I often make simple arithmetic errors, and electoral vote counting is not as simple as it seems with Maine and Nebraska having "unique" way of awarding electoral votes. But I've done the math several times and that's what I get. If Trump takes Michigan (and it appears he will) but lost Pennsylvania and Ohio, it looks like he would have come up two electoral votes from winning.

Please let me know if I've done the math wrong. If accurate, this is bigger than I realized.

*********************************

Note:

I am always humbled when a reader sends me such great information (see linked post above). It obviously took a fair amount of time to figure this out and there was no reason he/she had to send the data. So, I am always humbled.

More so, because I realize that a lot of what I post on the blog is off-subject, and much of my stuff is of little interest to readers who are truly serious about the oil and gas industry, and they continue to come to the site. I am often embarrassed when I get these great notes from readers, wondering what they must think of my off-subject stuff, but hopefully I identify off-subject stuff well enough that folks can ignore it if they want.

I cannot discontinue blogging off-subject stuff. For me, simply posting numbers and data and information about the Bakken would grow tedious, and so much of my "other" stuff helps put the Bakken in perspective.

But again, when I get these notes, and links from so many readers, it tends to keep me on track.

Another Wind Farm Proposed For Williams County -- November 10, 2016

I can't remember if I posted this earlier but when I blogged about the two wind farms that were going up this summer in western North Dakota, I had also been told there would be two more wind farms announced.

Here's one of the two. Data links from The Tioga Tribune:

• same developer as the Lindahl Wind Farm, currently under construction
• Trade Wind Energy, a Kansas-based company; currently has about 20 projects under development throughout the US
• planned for South Meadow township, just west of the Lindahl Wind Farm
• northern border: a few miles south of Wildrose; southeast corner of the new farm will stretch down to the same southern borders of the Lindahl Wind Farm

Another story posted by The Williston Herald, November 21, 2016. 

• initial step is to place six (6) meteorological towers to collect wind data
• it will take up to a year to collect that information

Suitable For Framing, Part II -- November 10, 2016

For those that missed it, my suggestions for a Trump cabinet at this post, included my suggestion for Secretary of the Treasury to be Jamie Dimon.

Today, over at Yahoo!Finance:

********************************

Remember When Reagan Was Elected -- Two Days Later?

It is nothing short of incredible what's happening. Canadian PM Trudeau says he wants to meet with President Trump to discuss NAFTA. Wow, wow, wow. The irony here is that Trump may see more potential working with Mexico than working with Canada. Don't take that out of context, but imagine an episode of "The Apprentice" with the two final "contestants" sitting across the table from him: Mexico and Canada. Mexico's president was one of the first to tweet congratulations to President-elect Trump.

Finally, folks are paying attention. Time to level the playing field. And the big, big, big difference: the US has the cheapest energy in the world and won't have a president who feels he needs to "bow" to other national leaders or "apologize" for our history.

A lot of commentators are still talking about the past -- pardons, prison, what could have been, why did it turn out the way it did -- but others are moving forward, quickly.

My hunch is that the entrepreneurial spirit and American "know-how" is going to "make America great again" and the competition will be such that those who want to play and compete will do well. Those who do not want to play and who do not want to compete will fall farther behind. It will happen at the local level, at the state level, and at the international level.

Trump will set the tone. I think even more so than Reagan, who was more ideological than Trump. Trump has one ideology: "make America great again." He will not cede the Arctic to seven other countries just to be "politically correct." If Paul Ryan is unable to move Trump's agenda, Trump will find willing partners in Pelosi and Schumer. Trump strikes me as the guy who is not looking for excuses why something can't be done; he is looking for guys and gals who want to find a way to make America great again.

******************************

Fathomless Ignorance

When Donald Trump took Hillary's phone call at 3:00 a.m. to concede, market futures were down 700 points. James Cargill said it was going to continue, implying that the market was going to keep going down.

That morning, the market opened up and finished the day setting a new all-time record high. That was yesterday.

Today, I expected a bit of profit taking. The market is now up more than 225 points -- and that's after the phenomenal gain yesterday, setting an all-time high yesterday. Up another 225 points now.

President Obama and President-elect Trump must have had a very constructive meeting. Trump probably used the session as a warm-up or practice for his meeting with Putin next spring.

Reply To Reader Regarding Election Results In The Marcellus / Utica -- November 10, 2016

Updates

November 12, 2016: continuing the theme, the reader provided additional data regarding Ohio --

The swing in the twelve (12) Ohio counties with activity in the Utica play: the swing from Obama in 2008 to Trump in 2016 was 148,464.

This represents a swing from an Obama plurality of 59,418 to a Trump plurality of 89,046.

While less than Trump's margin, it is a larger percentage swing than in the neighboring counties in PA.

November 10, 2016: see first comment which I brought up here to make it browser-searchable --

I ran some numbers yesterday on this very topic.

The swing in vote from Democratic to Republican presidential candidates in the 10 Pennsylvania counties with the most wells, using Bush v Kerry in 2004 as a starting point was over 100,000 votes. Trump's margin was less than 70,000.

The county with the most wells went from a 552 vote margin for Kerry to a 24,505 lead for Trump.

I haven't crunched Ohio's numbers fully but the trend looks similar, using 2008 as a base, although 21012 might be a better figure based on activity in the Utica shale. 

So, again, in the Pennsylvania County with the most wells:

• 2004: Kerry wins by a margin of 552 votes
• 2016: Trump wins by a margin of 24,505

That is absolutely incredible. I guess Hillary's words certainly have consequences. Amazing.

And then more:

• 2004: Bush plurality in Pennsylvania counties with more natural gas wells -- 78,860
• 2016: Trump plurality in Pennsylvania counties with most natural gas wells -- 186,433
• between 2004 and 2016, that's an increase of 107,573 votes in the ten counties in PA that have the most natural gas wells
• 2016: Trump's margin in Pennsylvania -- 68,236

I guess that answers that question: how big a role was played by the voters in rural Pennsylvania counties which had the most natural gas wells.

Bottom line:

• the increase in votes from natural gas-rich Pennsylvania counties from 2004 to 2016 was 107,573
• Trump took Pennsylvania by 68,236 votes

By the way, early in the evening, Pennsylvania was in the Hillary column. This explains why it took until later for the Pennsylvania numbers to flip -- rural counties tend to be delayed in getting their numbers in.

Very, very interesting.
 

Original Post

 

Not necessarily ready for prime time (in a long note like this, there will be typographical and factual errors).

A reader asked about my thoughts on the oil and gas industry's influence on this election. The reader noted:

One overlooked argument that can be made is that the oil and gas influence won this election....winning Pennsylvania and Ohio was the key to electoral win and if you look at the red counties in those states and the evolution of them over the years, they all lie within the Marcellus/Utica shale play consisting of hundreds of thousands of land/royalty owners and thousands of jobs.

That's an incredibly interesting observation. I think you are incredibly "spot on." For me, it was a no-brainer -- Hillary had said she would ban fracking when she was in Detroit talking about water issues. For the life of me, I could not understand why the results in Pennsylvania were as close as they were. [More on that later.]

But back to the point.

I can't speak to Ohio and Pennsylvania but perhaps an analogy. Take a look at what happened in the North Dakota gubernatorial race. It was nothing short of amazing.  In the GOP primary, a staunch supporter of the oil and gas industry was knocked out of the running by a guy from Fargo. Fargo is as far away from the Bakken as one can possibly get in North Dakota.

There has long been an "east vs west" division in North Dakota. The Bakken is the "west" (and a very, very small geographical footprint in North Dakota, at that); the high tech, the money, the influence is all in the east (and more specifically, Fargo).

So, when the GOP picked a Fargo guy, I thought it was all over, with regard to North Dakota support for the oil and gas industry.

Until.

Until I looked at his credentials (at the linked site above).

But this is what blew me away. The GOP gubernatorial candidate from the "east" made an inspired choice when he selected the mayor of Watford City to be his running mate.

Williston has done very, very well in the Bakken boom, but city politics and county politics almost killed the "golden goose" at times, or so it seemed to me. There was a lot of small-town thinking at a time when much more progressive imagining was needed. Fortunately, the Bakken is so big, even Williston/Williams County politicians couldn't kill it.

On the other hand, Watford City is an incredibly small town -- or at least it was. As "wild" as "western North Dakota is" one can argue that Watford City/McKenzie County is even wilder. And I say that in a good sense.

Perhaps Watford City had the advantage of seeing what was going on in Williston before the boom hit them. From various sources, it's my impression the Watford City mayor was the guy that really kept his city together and made a lot of inspired (to use that word again) decisions.

A highly successful Fargo personality with a maverick mayor from the heart of the Bakken? The results: they won with 77% of the vote. The Democratic opponent: 19%.  And it wasn't straight ticket. Trump got 66% of the vote, which means a lot of Hillary supporters crossed over to vote for the GOP gubernatorial candidate.

Seventy-seven percent of the vote is huge. The state has had some incredibly good and memorable Democratic governors (I'm thinking of Governor Guy and Governor Link).

My hunch is that a lot of folks (especially out east and maybe in Bismarck) were (very) unhappy with the oil and gas industry and that's why the GOP primary turned out the way it did -- choosing the Fargo guy over the individual closely associated with the North Dakota oil sector. But, by selecting the mayor of Watford City -- again, an incredibly small town with very few votes compared to the "major cities" in North Dakota, he reassured the folks who were strong oil and gas supporters that things would be fine.

I'm convinced that adding the Watford City mayor to the ticket was an inspired choice and probably added 10 - 20% to the final results.

So, if Pennsylvania and Ohio are anything like North Dakota oil and gas played a huge role.

***********************

Break, break.

So, why was it so close in Pennsylvania, and such a landslide in North Dakota? That's easy: the big urban areas in Pennsylvania are very, very different than the urban areas in North Dakota, both in relative size and political leanings. I bet the post-election analysis will show huge turnout for GOP in the oil and gas (rural) areas of Pennsylvania, but the turnout would have had to be huge to overcome the turnout in Philadelphia and Pittsburgh.

And I will bet the African-American population did not show up for Hillary the same way they turned out for Obama.

*************************

Break, break.

When Michigan was still "too close to call," a reporter on television remarked that rural voters in Michigan were overwhelmingly turning out for Trump (completely different from that being seen in Detroit and other urban areas). The reporter said it was the first time Michigan had gone to the GOP since 1988, or something to that effect. And then he gave the numbers. In previous elections, the turnout in rural Michigan was 19%. In this election, two days ago, the turnout was 26% and the reporter thought that incredible.

I thought it was terrible. Twenty-six percent turnout in an election like this? When the Iraqis got their vote after Saddam fell, their turnout approached 100%. Twenty-six percent tells me that for the most part, Americans are not involved politically. That's counterintuitive when one reads the newspapers, surfs the net, and watches television -- one gets the impression, 99% of Americans are involved politically. But, here 19% or 26% turned out to vote and it was a big deal.

***************************

Break, break.

Lots of rambling. I don't know if the parts make a whole, but one might get a gist of what I'm trying to say.

But you are so correct. Hillary was playing to her base when she said she would ban fracking; she was listening to her 20-something (in age) speech writers and strategists. She herself hadn't driven a car in ages. She would have done so much better by just saying that, like Obama, when it comes to energy, she is "for all of the above" but "will want to insure that safety is paramount" and leave it at that. But to be in Michigan and say she will ban fracking -- wow -- the folks (paying attention) in the neighboring states must have felt their hearts skipping a collective beat.

Suitable For Framing -- November 10, 2016

T+2:

Suitable for framing:

This, too, will be fleeting, but right now it feels like a light switch has been turned on, and for the first time in eight years, there is light.

Just wait until March 1, 2017, when a $1 trillion infrastructure bill is signed by President Trump. Lots of bridges, highways, airports, and harbors -- shovel-ready. Smart state governors are putting their packages together as we speak to participate in one of the biggest building booms we've seen ... perhaps since the end of WWII. The highways will include EV charging stations and additional natural gas corridors. Maybe even a "trillion-dollar tsar" to oversee all of this. Instead of vegetable gardens and White House tours, maybe that's something Melania would like to do.

[Update, November 12, 2016, The Wall Street Journal:

Donald Trump’s proposal for $1 trillion worth of new infrastructure construction relies entirely on private financing, which industry experts say is likely to fall far short of adequately funding improvements to roads, bridges and airports.

The president-elect’s infrastructure plan largely boils down to a tax break in the hopes of luring capital to projects. He wants investors to put money into projects in exchange for tax credits totaling 82% of the equity amount. His plan anticipates that lost tax revenue would be recouped through new income-tax revenue from construction workers and business-tax revenue from contractors, making the proposal essentially cost-free to the government.

Mr. Trump has made a $1 trillion infrastructure investment over 10 years one of his first priorities as president, promising in his victory speech early Wednesday morning to “rebuild our highways, bridges, tunnels, airports, schools, hospitals.”

$1 trillion over ten years is the wrong way to model this. Make it $1 trillion with no "time limit." As quickly as states can put together their infrastructure plans, release the money. But hold the states accountable: the timelines have to be met; and the money has to be used for approved infrastructure. If not, the money is withheld in future outlays. Once the $1 trillion is obligated, the pot is empty. That will result competing for the money quickly, getting people back to work as quickly as possible. And include no carve-outs for special interest groups. If Trump's folks see such carve-outs, the request is denied.

The Trump Daily Thought -- The First 30 Days

The Trump Presidency
The Third 100 Days

The Third 30 Days + 10 (261 - 300)
The Second 30 Days (Days 231 - 260)
The First 30 Days (Days 201 - 230)

The Trump Presidency
The Second 100 Days
 The Third 30 Days + 10 (161 - 200)
The Second 30 Days (Days 131 - 160)
 The First 30 Days (Days 101 - 130)

The Trump Presidency
The First 100 Days
The Third 30 days + 10

The Second 30 Days 
The First 30 Days

Between Election And Inauguration
The Third 10 Days

The Second 30 Days
The First 30 Days


Where President Trump Can Have Immediate Impact
Without (Much) Congressional Interference
(in draft;  not ready for prime time)

UN

• veto renewal of all UN peacekeeping roles; US pays upwards of $2 billion for UN peacekeeping roles around the world

Executive orders

• appoint "tsars" but actually have them do something

Defense 

• simply change the ROE
• promote a 350-ship US Navy; largest US Navy buildup since Reagan administration 

War on Mexico

• via tweets, shaming US manufacturers to shift to US from Mexico 

The wall

• the law was passed under previous administration; it simply wasn't executed by the occupants of the Oval Office; time to execute that law; reconciliation to fund it now; Mexico will pay later

 ******************************************************************

December 9, 2016, T+30: one month. So much oxygen has been sucked out of the room by Jill Stein and Donald Trump, no one else on stage.

December 8, 2016, T+29: after listening to "Morning Joe" this morning it's impossible to overstate how fortunate for the average American that Trump was elected

December 7, 2016, T+28: December 6 -- the stock market hit its eleventh (11th) all-time high President Trump was elected president. Polls overnight now show favorability/approval/hopeful ratings for Trump have jumped to 50 - 51% range. If there is a shift in Trump's global warming stance in 2017, it will be a "practical shift." Trump will work on projects to protect the US coastlines against erosion and damage caused by major storms. One can be a denier and/or an agnostic and still "build" things to prevent problems along the coastlines. [Update: markets surge today; both NYSE and Nasdaq hit new all-time highs. Dow 30 up 297 points -- yes, almost 300 points.] As president-elect, Trump is doing more for the average US worker than Obama did in his entire eight years: giving them hope instead of another speech.

December 6, 2016, T+27: yesterday (December 5) the stock market hit another all-time high. It is being reported that Trump's tax plan will add $29 billion in book value to Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway. Assuming BRK's liabilities and debt remains unchanged, Trump's tax plan will add $29 billion to Warren's top line (assets -- as in cash). This -- although not $29 billion -- will extend to all US corporations. Congress men and women will fall all over themselves to support Trump on this kind of corporate tax relief once it is obvious he has the 51% support in the House and the Senate.

December 5, 2016, T+26: President Obama's decision to kill the $3.9 billion DAPL will make the first 100 days for Trump as easy as shooting fish in a barrel. Add the DAPL to the list of 100 things Trump will do in his first 100 days.

December 4, 2016, T+26: Trump targets second plant with plans to re-locate to Mexico. Good, bad, or indifferent, at least he's keeping his word; someone in Washington who seems to care. Compare with Harry Reid's attitude:


December 3, 2016, T+25: beer summit with Harvard professor and local police officer vs taking a congratulatory telephone call from the president of Taiwan. They both generated about the same amount of media interest. Tomorrow we will move on to something else. It's gonna be a fun four years.

December 2, 2016, T+24: it is so refreshing to hear a president-elect speak his mind, not worrying about being politically correct. Most interesting: he often steals "outrageous" ideas from Hillary Clinton and her party and others. For example: the Secure Fence Act? Hillary. Flag burning? Supreme Court Justice Scalia.

December 1, 2016, T+23: Something tells me the news cycle with Trump will be 24/7. None of this "9-to-5" stuff with a news dump Friday afternoon after normal business hours, and then three days of golf where the press pool is hanging out at the burger bar, and no one sees the president for 72 hours. The tea leaves suggest this is going to be a very, very exciting, unconventional four years. Once he hits his stride, Trump will set the narrative. [From a reader: "He already has (set the narrative).]



November 30, 2016, T+22: Not even president yet -- Carrier will keep its Indiana plant open.

November 29, 2016, T+21: Not even president yet -- US consumer confidence at 9-year high. President Obama will take credit: folks with renewed confidence after he has set the stage for future president to succeed. 

November 28, 2016, T+20: We've gone from "fake news stories" to "fake newspapers." For example, The Los Angeles Times is a "fake newspaper." The Onion is a fake newspaper, but at least it's more fun to read.

November 27, 2016, T+19: Pelosi needs to be "re-elected" as the minority leader of the US House. She is the gift that keeps on giving. In the US House, the average age of the Democratic representatives is 68 years old; the average of the GOP representatives is 48 years old. In addition to everything else, generally speaking, it is not unusual for the US House to be the stepping stone to the US Senate. 

November 26, 2016, T+18: Hillary has undone all the goodwill she generated in her concession speech by participating in the recount. Even Richard Nixon did not go this far. The US House of Representatives will be watching this closely.

November 25, 2016, T+17: It was refreshing to see Trump working on Thursday, Thanksgiving Day, instead of golfing. No word where Obama was but generally on holidays and weekends, he's golfing, ala Eisenhower. I'll say it again. I'm getting tired of GOP'ers publicly criticizing Trump.

November 24, 2016, T+16: very orderly transition to the surprise of mainstream media.

November 23, 2016, T+15: the end of the feminization of America.

November 22, 2016, T+14: Outgoing Senator Harry Reid triggered the "nuclear option" back in 2013. Under that "option," the Democrats do not have the votes to stop any Trump appointment. That does not mean RINOs won't scuttle that opportunity.

November 21, 2016, T+13: something tells me Camille Paglia will be impressed with Trump. Maybe even Susan Faludi. Is Trump the first president that never bought into feminization of the United States?

November 20, 2016, T+12: the president-elect met with Mitt Romney over the weekend. The facts suggest that Mitt Romney would not be a good fit for the Trump team; the tea leaves suggest they both know that.

November 19, 2016, T+11: this past week, the chairman of the Ford automobile company telephoned President-elect Trump to tell him that the Ford company had decided to keep Lincoln production in Kentucky, not move that production to Mexico. Apple also released a statement that the company might manufacture (some?) iPhones in the US, moving some of that production out of China. [By the way, I now follow Trump over at Twitter: this is the only "political" Twitter account I follow.]

November 18, 2016, T+10: Trump's "Valerie Jarrett": Jared Kushner.

November 17, 2016, T+9: conversation has really shifted on MSNBC. An incredibly well-balanced, fair first hour. 

November 16, 2016, T+8: we're only eight days past the election, and the nuts over at MSNBC are saying that Trump is moving too slowly putting his transition team and his cabinet together; and, then in the next breath, are upset with the choices he is likely to make. I'm lovin' it.

November 15, 2016, T+7: Trump on same-sex marriage on the 60 Minutes interview -- "that fight is over; we lost, they won." Refreshing. He is ending the culture wars. [Supreme Court: he will appoint pro-life judges -- one disconnect.]

November 14, 2016, T+6: the Dow hit a new all-time record high; the fourth record high in as many days. We'll see if trickle down economics has any merit. One wonders if Pocahontas is upset?

November 13, 2016, T+5: just how bad was it? It must have been fairly "bad" under the Obama administration -- again, another story not reported. Here it is: China said it is ready to improve relations with the US now that President Obama is leaving office.

November 12, 2016, T+4: That "frustration energy" driving protests? It could be worse. We could have "gloating energy" driving the news cycle 24/7.

November 11, 2016, T+3: the Obama legacy may be erased by the end of next week, based on the action of the US stock market. 

November 10, 2016, T+2: An Obama do-over: a $1 trillion infrastructure bill in first 100 days. It will be interesting to see who supports the "do-over."

November 9, 2016, T+1: the telephone call came in at 3:00 a.m. this morning. I can't make this stuff up.

**********************************

What A Trump Presidency Might Mean

Overall Leadership

• pragmatism over ideology 
• collegial, not confrontational or purposely divisive
• public, not personal

Defense

• pay day for US military active duty

US Economy

• trade wars are not good for anyone, but level playing fields are
• federal government will focus on infrastructure
• Silicon Valley technology, stronger than ever, but won't need Trump support, cronyism

Immigration

• law of the land
• sanctuary cities: the rhetoric will last until mayors start losing federal monies (think the 55-mph speed limit during OPEC embargo; states could voluntarily support, but would lose highway transportation funding if 55-mph not enforced)

Energy

• capitalize on America's abundant resources
• wind and solar energy will fall by the wayside
• nuclear energy: rise or fall will depend on economics

EPA

• science-backed decisions
• weigh economic impact of EPA rules and regulations

Marijuana legalization

• no idea; states are at odds with federal govt; no idea how this will play out 

California, the state

• another big question; does Trump take an interest in California?
• does Trump let California handle its own immigration problem? let that state build its own wall? as the problem moves from Texas to California; the wall will go up first in Texas;
• budget: this state may have the most to lose; all media reports suggest that CA is doubling down on "ObamaCare"; comes at a time when immigration challenges from Mexico will probably swing from Texas to California

Media

• control: Trump will control media events, not the media
• might establish own television network through Brietbart -- Breitbart News Network
• Breitbart News
• Breitbart Business
• Breitbart Sports
• regardless of her viewership, Rachel Maddow becomes less relevant
• late-night talk shows: most political jokes will fall flat 
• until he's president, he will "own" his own press pool, photographer 

********************* 

"Things" Taken Off The Table With A President Trump

A lot of silly talk is now off the table:

• that silly talk of banning fracking
• that silly talk of settling social problems over a glass of beer; if anything, bottled water (I understand Mr Trump is a teetotaler)
• that silly talk about global warming
• that silly talk of sending $100 billion in unmarked $100-bills to the Maldives to help them combat rising water; GDP of the Maldives ($6,666 per capita in 2013). In 1990, the GPD of the Maldives was less than $1,000 per capita; obviously global warming has not hurt the Maldivians yet. Their growth has been surging compared to that of the US; maybe they need to send the US some money.
• that silly talk about how much Americans love EVs

Several "fake" issues off the table

• federal credits for solar and wind energy
• risk fracking poses to ground water

****************************

Miscellaneous

A bio.

Update On Alaska Oil Industry -- November 10, 2016

Dow: the "Dow" hit an all-time high yesterday, hours after Hillary's concession speech.

Russian Northern Fleet: has remained in same location for the past two days; off-shore from western Syria. 

Active rigs:

	11/10/2016	11/10/2015	11/10/2014	11/10/2013	11/10/2012
Active Rigs	38	66	192	182	191

RBN Energy: update on Alaskan oil production. Not a pretty picture for Alaska.

Forty years ago, Alaska was seen as the next big thing for U.S. crude oil production––and it was. With the completion of the Trans Alaska Pipeline System in 1977, Alaska North Slope production took off, and by early 1988 it was topping 2 MMb/d and accounting for nearly one-quarter of total U.S. output. But that was the peak; since then, ANS production has fallen steadily, and in August 2016 it averaged only 443 Mb/d, or 5% of the national total. While there is clearly a lot of oil (and natural gas) still in the ground in the North Slope region, developing those resources would be very costly. Today we begin a two-part series on energy production in the 49^th state with a look at the oil side of things.

If RBN had been blogging about the energy industry in the mid-1970s, the development of the vast crude oil reserves on Alaska’s North Slope would have been Topic #1. After the shock of the 1973-74 OPEC oil embargo, U.S. consumers welcomed the 1977 completion of the 800-mile Trans Alaska Pipeline System (TAPS) and the increasing flow of ANS oil to West Coast refineries with open arms. Alaskan oil didn’t give the U.S. “energy independence”––a rallying cry in the Ford, Carter and Reagan years––but it sure helped. While our blogging focus the past few years has understandably been on the Shale Revolution and its effects on oil, natural gas and natural gas liquids (NGL) markets, we’ve checked in on Alaska from time to time.

Way back in 2013, after presenting at the Alaska Oil and Gas Infrastructure and Development Summit in Anchorage, AK, we discussed the ANS production declines that had already occurred, as well as the competition from shale and tight-oil plays in the Lower 48 that were attracting an increasing share of investment dollars. The physical characteristics of the North Slope’s medium sour crude, with a 31.5 API gravity and about 1% sulfur, were (and are) a plus––West Coast refineries were configured to use it, and ANS crude is marketable in Asia too, at the right price.

But without a new round of investment in new production, North Slope production was (and is) destined to continue falling, a point driven home in mid-2015. There, we also talked about the fact that, as volumes transported on the 2.1-MMb/d TAPS ratchets down from 550 Mb/d to 350 Mb/d, more and more mitigation would be needed to keep the oil flowing through the pipe (due to freezing, wax buildup and other problems), and that if and when volumes fell below 350 Mb/d or 300 Mb/d all bets were off on whether the pipeline could continue to operate without a major re-do.

COP update: from SeekingAlpha --

• the asset sale program will be focused primarily on North American gas assets;
• debt reduction of $20B; a 20-30% payout ratio of operating cash flow to shareholders; and
• 2017 capex of $5B, down 4% from this year, and 50% lower than what was spent in 2015. 

US natural gas production, data links:

• 2016 production: reduction from all-time hight in 2015, from 74.14 bcfd to 72.34
• 2017 production: will hit a record high, rising to 75.06 bcfd

*********************************

Daily Trump Thought

An Obama do-over: a $1 trillion infrastructure bill in first 100 days. It will be interesting to see who supports the "do-over."

Imagine A Hillary Presidency; California Oil County Bans All Fracking -- November 9, 2016

Updates

November 10, 2016: oops! I may have misread the importance of this story. I did not think the story was that big a deal, but it appears the story "may have legs," or at least it may have some marginal interest to some folks.

The Wall Street Journal found this story interesting enough to do a story on it before the voting took place.  

SALINAS, Calif.—The movement to ban fracking is winning victories across the U.S. Yet the campaign has largely failed to win where it matters most—in places oil and natural gas are produced.

A Nov. 8 ballot measure will test that pattern in Monterey County, famed for its farms and scenic coastline.

Two counties bordering Monterey, San Benito and Santa Cruz, have banned fracking, although neither has a sizable oil industry. Monterey’s San Ardo oil field has been churning out crude for nearly 70 years, and the county has no ban.

Original Post

 

From Platts:

Voters in California’s Monterey County passed a ballot initiative Tuesday to ban hydraulic fracturing in the county, a vote which may shut down all oil production in the coastal county after roughly 70 years there.

Voters approved the initiative, known as Measure Z, which will ban the use of fracking and other high-intensity methods of oil and gas extraction, such as acid stimulation, prohibit new oil and gas operations in the county and phase out operational oil and gas wells.

The measure was approved by a vote of 40,332, or 55.8%, to 31,949, or 44.2%.

The approval of the ballot measure Tuesday marked the first time a US county with relatively significant oil production has voted to ban fracking. Monterey County’s San Ardo field has produced, on average, 21,900 b/d of crude this year, about 4.4% of California’s overall 499,000 b/d of onshore production.

The measure was expected to be challenged by industry in court.

Bottom line: a pittance. 4.4% of California's 500,000 bopd of onshore production.

Wow, this brings back great memories. Monterey County is on the south side of Monterey Bay. Santa Cruz County is on the north side of Monterey Bay.

I studied biochemistry at UC-Santa Cruz during my college years. What an incredible story. What incredible memories. Pebble Beach is in Monterey County. At that time, many decades ago, for about $10, one could drive through the golf course -- a scenic tour -- I don't know if one can still do that. Carmel-by-the-Sea is also in the county, the seaside town that Clint Eastwood was mayor for one term, 1986 - 1988. I was in the USAF those years, stationed in Germany and England.

If they want to ban drilling for oil there, that's not the end of the world. Life will go on.

California Blue, Roy Orbison