Thursday, December 3, 2015
Three New Permits -- December 3, 2015
Active rigs:
Three (3) new permits --
| 12/3/2015 | 12/03/2014 | 12/03/2013 | 12/03/2012 | 12/03/2011 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Active Rigs | 64 | 189 | 193 | 182 | 199 |
Three (3) new permits --
- Operators: QEP (2), Oasis
- Fields: Grail, Siverston
- Comments:
- 28256, 1,804, XTO, Nelson Federal 41X-5H, Antelope, a Sanish pool well, permit for a Three Forks B1 well, 4-section spacing, t10/15; cum 5K 9/15 after 6 days
- 28068, 1,519, Oasis, Helling Trust Federal 5494 44-22 5B, Alkali Creek, t11/15; cum --
- 28080, 1,587, Oasis, Helling Trust Federal 5494 42-22 3B, Alkali Creek, t10/15; cum 4K 9/15 after 2 days;
- 28854, 1,575, Oasis, Helling Trust Federal 5494 41-22 14T3, Alkali Creek, t10/15; cum 5K 9/15 after 6 days;
- 28855, 2,190, Oasis, Helling Trust Federal 5494 41-22 8T, Alkali Creek, t10/15; cum --,
- 31622, 902, Whiting, Julia TTT 34-22H, Sanish, t11/15; cum --
Connecting The Dots In The War On Coal -- December 3, 2015
Updates
December 4, 2015: I don't understand anything about coal leasing and I have no plans to get into that arena. However, a very knowledgeable reader has sent me a long note explaining that a single bidder in a coal basin is not necessarily nefarious. It may simply mean good management. That's extremely important. The writer in the New Yorker article below certainly implied that a single bidder represented something that might be considered nefarious. That may not be accurate at all.
Original Post
Consider, for instance, the Powder River Basin—an immense area of northeastern Wyoming and southeastern Montana, which contains the richest coal deposits in the U.S.
In the past few decades, Powder River has become our most important coal-producing region. More than forty per cent of the coal we burn is mined there—nearly five hundred million tons every year.
Unlike the Appalachian coal fields back East, almost the entire basin belongs to the government, which leases the coal rights to mining companies. You might think that regulators would manage this land with an eye toward the coal’s impact on the environment in the U.S., or at least would insure that the government was getting a fair price for its assets. But you’d be wrong.
Back in 1990, the Bureau of Land Management declared that the Powder River Basin was not a “federal coal-production region.” That decertification meant that, instead of the government’s picking which tracts of land it would lease and then putting them up for bid, coal companies could effectively do the picking themselves.
As Mark Squillace, a professor of natural-resources law at the University of Colorado, told me, “This turned a program that was supposed to be proactively managed by the government into one that is entirely reactive to the demands of the coal industry.”
And while the law stipulates that all mining leases are subject to competitive bidding, the Center for American Progress found that, since 1990, nearly ninety per cent of federal coal leases have had just one bidder. That’s held down the price of leases, in effect handing the coal industry a giant subsidy. A study released in September by a coalition of research groups found that production subsidies in the basin amount to nearly three billion dollars a year.One bidder? Peabody Energy? One bidder on anything starts to suggest a monopoly of sorts. And who knows best how to take advantage of a monopoly? GS. No, not Goldman Sachs, but George Soros. Soros is now called the "new" king of coal with his financial interest in Peabody. I was aware of two of the three dots. The New Yorker connected the third dot. I find it interesting that James Surowiecki, the writer of that New Yorker op-ed did not mention the third dot. But if one connects the fourth dot, it all makes sense.
Time To Check What Condition One's Condition Is In; Ford Has Quietly Activated Siri's Eyes Free On Five Million Vehicles Dating Back To 2011 -- December 3, 2015
On a day like today, one might want to drop in to see what condition one's condition might be in:
- the market plunges 300 points based on talk of maybe, just possibly, a very, very small rate increase because the economy is getting too "hot" and needs to be slowed down a bit;
- 14 people are killed and scores injured by a Saudi mom-and-pop team in full-body battle armor, armed to the teeth with thousands of rounds of ammunition with a small IED arsenal, and the FBI is hesitant to call it an act of terrorism (at least we know why there's a shortage of ammunition; California Saudis have bought it all);
- we have a meteorological ideologue for president, who no longer wants to be briefed on terrorism; because a) he gets it; and b) there is no credible evidence of imminent danger;
- people get excited about saving a buck a month on their utility bills by locking in a 25-year solar energy contract in a state that has six months of darkness (some call it winter); based on rates going up 4% a year for the next 25 years; and,
- Saudi thinks it's great to see Venezuela implode.
FBI: Terrorism = Fanatic Islam And Nothing Else?
Syed Rizwan Farook and his wife, Tashfeen Malik — the couple who stormed a county social services office in San Bernardino, CA yesterday morning killing 14 at an office gathering, before dying hours later in a shootout with police — had an ample arsenal of high-power weapons, ammo and explosive devices, in addition to running an 'IED factory' out of their home. The FBI still is not ready to call them terrorists, as it examines computer and cell phone equipment taken from the couple's home.
Correct me if I'm wrong (that's rhetorical; please don't comment) but it appears that to be labeled "terrorism" in this country, it has to be radicalized Islam. If not, then it's not going to be labeled "terrorism." Workplace violence? Hate crime? PTSD? A bad day at the office?
On another note, California has some of the strongest gun-control laws on the books. If all those high-power weapons were legally purchased and bought by the same person, wouldn't that warrant a second or third or fourth look? And then the purchaser travels to Saudi Arabia? Something tells me the government is doing a lousy job of integrating databases. Maybe "they" need to integrate computer data identifying folks returning from overseas with high-power weapon purchases. I'm beginning to wonder what customs/passport control really accomplish at US points of entry.
On another note, California has some of the strongest gun-control laws on the books. If all those high-power weapons were legally purchased and bought by the same person, wouldn't that warrant a second or third or fourth look? And then the purchaser travels to Saudi Arabia? Something tells me the government is doing a lousy job of integrating databases. Maybe "they" need to integrate computer data identifying folks returning from overseas with high-power weapon purchases. I'm beginning to wonder what customs/passport control really accomplish at US points of entry.
****************************
Solar Will (Maybe) Save You $1/Month Over 25 Years
But If Solar Works In Minnesota, It Can Work Anywhere
I can't remember if I posted this before. I think I did, but if not, from Midwest Energy News:
After speaking to several solar developers earlier this year, a Minnesota town decided last month to subscribe to a community solar garden that will be operated by Sunshare.
Jordan, a community of 6,148 residents southwest of Minneapolis, became the largest and one of the first cities in Minnesota to announce it would be offsetting its electric use through community solar.
That short but growing list of cities subscribing to gardens includes, for now, just the nearby community of Cologne, which signed a contract with Sunshare earlier this year.
Jordan's power would come from a 5 megawatt community garden proposed for Blakely Township in Scott County. The garden could also serve nearby Savage, where city council members in October heard about the benefits of community solar from a Sunshare representative.
Under the 25-year contract Jordan could save as much as $1.6 million by 2040, according to Tom Nikunen, city administrator. That is based on the assumption that Xcel Energy, which serves Jordan, will increase costs on average of four percent a year over the length of the contract.
Disclaimer: I often make simple arithmetic errors. $1.6 million savings / 25 years = $64,000 / year divided by 6,000 residents = $10 saving / year or less than a dollar a month. Just to have a huge solar farm in your backyard, land that can no longer be used for anything else.
****************************
At Her Own Peril
Ms Yellen knows that she may end up putting the country into recession. Today, "just" the talk of a paltry rate hike causes the market to plunge 300 points -- at least that's what folks smarter than I are blaming the market's reaction on today.
*****************************
The Apple Page
Yesterday I mentioned that every car in the universe coming out in 2016 will have Apple's CarPlay installed (okay, that's not quite accurate, but it's close), today we learn that Ford is taking it a step further. Ford will activate Apple's Siri on five million automobiles dating back to 2011. Macrumors is reporting:
While many carmakers are starting to roll out support for Apple's CarPlay in-vehicle functionality, an older Siri Eyes Free feature is also designed to help minimize driver distraction by using Siri voice recognition and spoken responses to allow drivers to interact with an iPhone without needing to look at the screen.If you go to the linked article at Macrumors, be sure to read the comments. Readers confirm this is actually accurate and Ford "pushed" the update to their older model Fords. One reader noted that this is virtually unheard of in the automotive world, getting something like this for free. Updating other mapping systems will cost you upwards of $200 according to one reader.
Siri Eyes Free is generally activated through a hardware button on the vehicle's steering wheel and is available in a number of makes and models, and Ford today is officially announcing the launch of Eyes Free support for over five million vehicles dating back to the 2011 model year via a software update to Ford's second-generation SYNC infotainment system.
Minneapolis Airport Solar Project Twice The Quoted Rate For Solar Energy Projects At $7 Million / MW; No Problem -- Increase Landing Fees -- No One Will Notice -- December 3, 2015
A solar energy project at the Minneapolis airport came in at twice the going rate for solar energy projects.
The solar energy project came in at almost $7 million / MW compared to the usual price of $3.5 million / MW and compared to $2 million / MW for wind, and significantly less for natural gas and coal.
From the Minneapolis StarTrib:
The smaller project comes in about the same price / MW. At $8.5 million / 1.3 MW = $6.5 million / MW.
Interestingly enough, the $7 million / MW price tag is similar to the $6 million / MW price tag at a Milwaukee, WI, airport. Something about airports? Not a problem: simply increase the landing fees which will then be passed on to fliers (compare your airline tickets into Minneapolis vs DFW).
Disclaimer: I often make simple arithmetic errors. If this information is important to you, go to the source, and use a reliable calculator. These numbers are so off the scale, I'm sure I made a mistake somewhere. If indeed the numbers are accurate ($7 million/MW), I would think the state's attorney general might want to have an independent auditor / inspector check into the bidding process.
From an August 25, 2014, post, this is 30-second sound bite for "cost of renewable megawatt":
The solar energy project came in at almost $7 million / MW compared to the usual price of $3.5 million / MW and compared to $2 million / MW for wind, and significantly less for natural gas and coal.
From the Minneapolis StarTrib:
Minnesota’s largest solar power project is now generating electricity atop two parking ramps at the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport.The $20 million project for 3 MW = almost $7 million / MW.
The 3 million-watt system containing 8,705 solar panels went online Tuesday, and is expected to supply 20 percent of the electricity used in Terminal 1 and to cut carbon emissions by nearly 7,000 tons per year, airport officials said. [It would be interesting to know how much carbon is emitted by a/c flying into this airport in one day.]
“It is a big deal for us,” said Dennis Probst, executive vice president for the Metropolitan Airports Commission. [At $7 million / MW -- it is a big deal.]
The $20 million solar project is the first of two at the airport. The commission recently approved a plan to install a 1.3 million-watt solar array atop a parking ramp at Terminal 2, at a cost of $8.5 million. Construction is expected to begin next year.
Both solar arrays are expected to make money immediately for the airport — with 30-year savings of $10 million on the first project, and about half that on the second, smaller project.
The smaller project comes in about the same price / MW. At $8.5 million / 1.3 MW = $6.5 million / MW.
Interestingly enough, the $7 million / MW price tag is similar to the $6 million / MW price tag at a Milwaukee, WI, airport. Something about airports? Not a problem: simply increase the landing fees which will then be passed on to fliers (compare your airline tickets into Minneapolis vs DFW).
Disclaimer: I often make simple arithmetic errors. If this information is important to you, go to the source, and use a reliable calculator. These numbers are so off the scale, I'm sure I made a mistake somewhere. If indeed the numbers are accurate ($7 million/MW), I would think the state's attorney general might want to have an independent auditor / inspector check into the bidding process.
From an August 25, 2014, post, this is 30-second sound bite for "cost of renewable megawatt":
- Solar: $3 million / MW
- Wind: $2.5 million / MW
- Natural gas: $865,000 / MW
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)