What democratic policy has been good for the industry in the short term?
Houston..we have a problem....
7,333,633 Views |
28767 Replies |
Last: 1 day ago by Sims
This is a bit specific, but does anybody here know a lot about MIC (microbial corrosion) that would be willing to talk to me for a few minutes? I'm considering a jump back into the industry and the company I'm talking to is new to the space. I'm trying to model out how big/realistic their opportunity is.
Kicking off a few wars seemed to have helped briefly.
I may have just the guy for you. Will check with him tomorrow and let you know.
We mostly see MIC in stagnant potable water lines (way downstream end of things). Nasty stuff, super aggressive pitting. Worse in stainless because it finds a weak spot and stays super localized. Key for us is flushing to keep things chlorinating and fresh. Are you looking at it in crude?
No specifics beyond just a remedial understanding of it. Just wanted to share that any industry involved in corrosion or erosion prevention will have demand until the end of time. You can't stop physics and nobody wants to pay for material that can withstand that type of corrosion.SweaterVest said:
This is a bit specific, but does anybody here know a lot about MIC (microbial corrosion) that would be willing to talk to me for a few minutes? I'm considering a jump back into the industry and the company I'm talking to is new to the space. I'm trying to model out how big/realistic their opportunity is.
CEOs have already said if the president calls and says to Drill Baby Drill they won't place any extra weight in their words. The market and investors payback demands set the drill schedule.Dreigh said:
I know this isn't a the Pol forum, but I am interested to hear this thread's thoughts on the potential effects of a Trump presidency on the US oil and gas sector.
Many of the opinions I've seen so far on Twitter would suggest he would be bearish for oil, while a few don't believe the industry is in a place to drill the price down to whatever low number Trump might post on social media.
Personally, I don't think either candidate is in a place to dictate the oil price much, outside of additional SPR releases.
Not posting this to promote dooming or pessimism, just value the thoughts of folks here that I know are smarter and more insightful than me.
The president can certainly stabilize/destabilize the near future of the industry through permitting ease/obstruction and SPR releases. I think the most damage the president can do is through enforcing/not enforcing sanctions. Letting Iran and Venezuela be the first new barrels on the market instead of Saudi Arabia and America is bad short term and long term for American interests.
My strategic take is that oil companies have kept a lid on inflation regardless of the president. The west texas oilman who hates Biden has kept Biden's presidency palatable to the left leaning suburbanite because of his hard work producing oil. The global market has basically shrugged its shoulders at international conflicts nowadays because the spice will flow.
I think the only thing about Trump vs Harris is that Trump could see the American oil industry as a backstop if he decides to allow Israel to take out Iranian oil. Trump could be convinced that America and its oil allies could lead the way in adding 2 million barrels a day to the market inside a year. Harris would never allow American oil companies greater influence to offset inflation and work to add supply.
As a side note, America really is blessed resource wise and has avoided the 'resource curse.' Being able to feed the world, produce oil, have two giant oceans and two relatively friendly bordering countries is just a huge leg up over everyone else. Its not perfect as we have raw material, rare earth and tech dependence on China. But if China closed its borders to american trade it would be a rough 5 years but we would recover. If America shut off its oil and food to China they would starve and society would collapse over there.
The markets won't accept an operator burning through cash anymore, so I don't see a Republican presidency being bad for WTI. What it can do, is ease regulations driving down the cost to produce.
I know in my little sector of this industry (sand), there is not one sand plant in NM despite the fact that there's enormous amounts of sand there. Instead, every ton of sand that is pumped down hole in NM comes from Texas. That is solely due to the Bureau of Land Management and the State of NM. Get rid of a few people there and you immediately make those wells more economic. Not to mention, the roads become safer because you aren't having to haul your sand 80+ miles each way.
I know in my little sector of this industry (sand), there is not one sand plant in NM despite the fact that there's enormous amounts of sand there. Instead, every ton of sand that is pumped down hole in NM comes from Texas. That is solely due to the Bureau of Land Management and the State of NM. Get rid of a few people there and you immediately make those wells more economic. Not to mention, the roads become safer because you aren't having to haul your sand 80+ miles each way.
xMusashix said:
What democratic policy has been good for the industry in the short term?
Go look at the price of oil on a chart overlaid with who is in office and tell me democrats aren't good for the industry.
Fear and limiting exploration & production, driving down supply which causes prices short term to rise... hurting all Americans...?xMusashix said:
What democratic policy has been good for the industry in the short term?
Long term, restrictions hurt domestic companies due to fewer opportunities and forces importation of hydrocarbons, driving up the price further.
The industry is good either way, but the constant changes in strategy and rules enforcement every 4-8 years leads to uncertainty and reduces investment.
Democrat administrations are most often great for the major's bottom lines. The big guys make their money on price, not volume, and the price tends higher under Dems.xMusashix said:
What democratic policy has been good for the industry in the short term?
So while their policies toward the O&G industry typically are malevolent the results of their administrations are typically positive for the companies...lastly the ones who suffer most from the spite of Dems against O&G are the citizenry.
Sims said:Democrat administrations are most often great for the major's bottom lines. The big guys make their money on price, not volume, and the price tends higher under Dems.xMusashix said:
What democratic policy has been good for the industry in the short term?
So while their policies toward the O&G industry typically are malevolent the results of their administrations are typically positive for the companies...lastly the ones who suffer most from the spite of Dems against O&G are the citizenry.
Like a fluttering sparrow or a darting swallow, an undeserved curse does not come to rest.
- Proverbs 26:2 (NIV)
Less work for more money. Screw the country and line my pockets!Sims said:Democrat administrations are most often great for the major's bottom lines. The big guys make their money on price, not volume, and the price tends higher under Dems.xMusashix said:
What democratic policy has been good for the industry in the short term?
So while their policies toward the O&G industry typically are malevolent the results of their administrations are typically positive for the companies...lastly the ones who suffer most from the spite of Dems against O&G are the citizenry.
Volatility hurts the oil and gas business because it becomes harder to forecast a price premise. Couple that with the duration to bring a project online and the capex you have to spend before you make a drop exacerbates the problem.
Definitely an issue in a longer term view - but as it pertains to the short term where you question focused - I'd say democrats are good to O&G companies finances but probably not their operations.xMusashix said:
Volatility hurts the oil and gas business because it becomes harder to forecast a price premise. Couple that with the duration to bring a project online and the capex you have to spend before you make a drop exacerbates the problem.
One thing that stands out here is the # of active rigs under Trump and XOM net income. Obviously this is badly flawed analysis because of Covid but I think it's generally illustrative.
Drill Baby Drill ultimately lowers oil prices, Dems raise oil prices for the opposite reason.
I'm curious to see if the paradigm under Biden is the new norm - fewer rigs, higher profits. I think consolidation moves things in that direction since the majors will have more drilling discipline than independents.
waryman said:
I may have just the guy for you. Will check with him tomorrow and let you know.
Thanks! This company is focused on advanced detection and typology of MIC in processes and systems rather than the specific treatment. If you have a contact I am all ears!
Cramer was doing an interview from a platform this morning on CNBC. Dump your entire O&G portfolio now.
Is that why gas plummeted just now?
Just sent you a PM with contact info.
Can anyone confirm....heard COP is going back to mandatory 5 day office work weeks in Houston starting next year.
Clear Eyes. Full Heart. Might Lose
They are, starting 1/1, and also going through the organization to see where there are "inefficiencies" and where they can reduce workforce.
No more work from home Wednesday and Friday. Still have 9/80
Not just Houston, worldwide.
Bummer, hope this isn't the start of other operators going this route. Currently have a Mon/Fri work from home and office Tues-Thurs and don't want to lose this.
Clear Eyes. Full Heart. Might Lose
companies across all industries are finding out this is an excellent way to get people to quit without having to do a RIF and pay anything.donkeykick90 said:
Bummer, hope this isn't the start of other operators going this route. Currently have a Mon/Fri work from home and office Tues-Thurs and don't want to lose this.
Pretty sure XOM has done the same thing, bringing everyone back 5 days a week.
Yeah I know quite a few people that have joined XOM recently and it sounds like that is the case.txaggie_08 said:
Pretty sure XOM has done the same thing, bringing everyone back 5 days a week.
Maybe this opens up the door for some of the people from Marathon to keep their jobs after the acquisition by COP?
PS - is that ever going to close??
PS - is that ever going to close??
HAL is as well, at least at the North Belt campus.
Furlock Bones said:companies across all industries are finding out this is an excellent way to get people to quit without having to do a RIF and pay anything.donkeykick90 said:
Bummer, hope this isn't the start of other operators going this route. Currently have a Mon/Fri work from home and office Tues-Thurs and don't want to lose this.
Certain people
Can you share who the company is? I just accepted an offer from a company with the same schedule…
Wiggletrace said:
Can you share who the company is? I just accepted an offer from a company with the same schedule…
Lots of companies have that schedule….
Pretty sure that's what Oxy does.
Yep, can confirm
Was just curious if we might be working together soon.
Featured Stories
See All
SEC Round-Up: Dawgs facing possible playoff elimination this week
by Olin Buchanan
33:59
6h ago
845
Pick 'Em & Rip 'Em sponsored by PrizePicks: Week 12
by Matthew Dawson
14:58
6h ago
915
Assessing Earley's first signing class at the helm of Texas A&M baseball
by Ryan Brauninger
Tom Kazansky 2012
Number of football tickets A&M provided to t.u.
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
94