Russian Energy and U.S. Implications

by: Michael Fitzsimmons posted on: May 18, 2008 | about stocks: COP / HMC / OGZPY.PK / RSX / SLB / STO / TM    

Despite the peak oil skeptics, we once again today find oil hitting another record over $127/barrel. Natural gas has likewise been very strong and is trading around $11.40. Donald Trump said on CNBC Friday that the solution to high oil prices is to send a better negotiator to Saudi Arabia and "demand lower oil prices now." Trump sounds like a US Senator or Congressman.

As I exchanged emails with Joe Kernen about peak oil and how ridiculous Trump's blubberings were, T. Boone Pickens came to the rescue with very sound energy analysis and details of his huge wind farm in Texas. When asked about Trump's statements, Pickens chuckled a bit and said "Trump should stick with real estate". True that. As Pickens and peak oil believers realize, the only solution to the energy crisis is adoption of a comprehensive US oil policy. Here's a good start.

Lost in a lot of the oil analysis these days is Russia's role. Over the past 5 years or so, Russia has provided roughly 80% of non-OPEC oil production growth. This increase in Russia's oil production was just what the doctor ordered to match concurrent increased demand from China, India, the Middle East, and Russia itself.

That said, Russia's oil production peaked a few months ago and is now contracting - under the 10 million BPD average production rate of 2007. One can find multiple explanations for the decrease in Russian oil production: aging infrastructure, less Western oil company participation, high tax rates, or perhaps just Russian government officials asking themselves, 'why pump all out now when we can wait a year or two and get double the number of US dollars per barrel'. Or perhaps depletion rates are catching up with new production.

Realistically, the answer is probably a combination of all of the above. All that said, Russia has the world's 7th largest oil reserves at 80 billion barrels. Meanwhile, global warming is making Siberia and the Arctic ever more accessible to continued energy exploration and development. Russia will be a major energy player for many years to come.

One thing is for sure: the lack of a comprehensive energy policy in the US is playing right into Russia's hands. The same could be said about the Middle East. Our President and our politicians speak philosophically about how we are sending oil money to countries that want to attack us, yet their energy policies only serve to amplify and accelerate the transfer of US wealth to these countries.

Anyone who doubts how strategically Russia considers their energy resources has not been paying attention to Russian policy. They have Europe by the short hairs with respect to natural gas. They have pushed out western oil companies, for the most part, to make sure Russian oil reserves stay off western oil companies books. At the same time, Russia clearly understands the need for western know-how and investment. Note that Russia has made several agreements along these lines with companies like StatOil (STO), ConocoPhillips (COP), and Schlumberger (SLB). These agreements are mutually beneficial and allow Russia to keep its fingers on the technology dials while increasing production and investment at the same time. It's one reason I can recommend STO, COP, and SLB for most investor portfolios. STO, in particular, will benefit from its European natural gas business, as well as its expertise in Arctic drilling technology. By the way, did anyone notice STO's outstanding earnings announcement on May 13th and the subsequent rise in the stock?

That said, the Europeans are attempting to fight back. Germany has deployed massive wind energy resources, as well as solar and geothermal. France of course has electrified their transportation systems and is now 70% nuclear. Europe is also beginning to tackle the difficulty of individual countries negotiating energy policy as opposed to negotiating on an EU basis. At the same time, multiple natural gas pipelines from Northern Africa are under considerations.

Back here in the States, what are we doing to combat Russian energy influence? Well, both the Canadian Arctic gas pipeline and the trans-Canadian Alaskan lower-48 pipeline have yet to break soil. Regulatory and governmental bickering continues. Meanwhile, the prices of pipe and oil services expertise has skyrocketed while the government continues to dilly-dally. So much for North American energy policy.

Awhile back I commented on Honda's (HMC) natural gas automobile. Perhaps it's the engineer in me, but I wanted to compare the mileage cost of this natural gas powered vehicle with say, a Toyota (TM) Prius. Well, I tried to find the tank capacity, in natural gas capacity, and I could not do so on the website. Wouldn't you think this would be under "Specifications"? It was not. Then I got sidetracked into trying to figure out how to fill up the car at home, and again the Honda website was no help here either. I finally concluded one would need to purchase and install in their garage a natural gas pump in the "Phill" at a cost of somewhere between $3-4000! I got sidetracked again looking for information about natural gas refueling stations across the country, and concluded rather quickly that the natural gas infrastructure just wasn't there yet.

So, trying to be constructive here, I have some recommendations for Honda and FuelMaker (who manufactures the "Phill"):

  • Make the Honda website a one-stop solution center!
  • Include nat gas fuel tank capacity in the "Specifications" section.
  • Bundle the purchase price of the Phill with the automobile.
  • Be up front about the costs associated with refueling at home.
  • Build out the natural gas refueling stations. A good start would be for Honda to commit to having a 24-hour a day natural gas refueling station at all Honda dealerships througout the country. That would be a good and dependable start.

Long term, of course, we still have the issue of declining natural gas production in Canada and the lower-48. It is imperative we get to work on the natural gas pipelines I spoke of earlier. It is also imperative that the US begin licensing and building LNG terminals on both coasts. Otherwise, it won't matter if we have natural gas powered transportation because the cost and availability will simply not enable its successful deployment.

Disclosures: the author owns COP, STO, and SLB.

This article has 25 comments! Add yours below...

Michael Fitzsimmons

About this author:
Become a Contributor Submit an Article

This article has 25 comments:

  •  
    sirlacksalot
    May 18 09:27 AM
    I have a lot of trepidation about promoting the use of natural gas in autos. Sure, there'd be less carbon emissions, but if you think gasoline prices are high, just think what natural gas prices would be. The cost of heating would skyrocket. Fertilizer prices would jump through the roof, as if they aren't already heading there already. China is already heading that direction, building out a massive NG infrastructure for use in motor vehicles, and already having trouble supplying large enough quantities of NG for all the stations that are coming on line. Exploration and production for NG would never be able to keep up.
  •  
    The FItzman
    May 18 10:29 AM
    My Website
    I had cut-n-paste issues with this article. Let me finish a sentence that was "lost in translation": ".....or perhaps just Russian government officials asking themselves why pump all out now when we can wait a year or two and get double the number of US dollars per barrel."

    sirlacksalot: i am not suggesting we change ALL auto transportation to natural gas. the magnitude of the energy crisis facing the US means will we need ALL types of energy we can get for the transportation arena: NG, electric, biofuels, etc and yes, oil. The promising thing about natural gas is that there are huge supplies the world over, and if the US had a clue we'd be building the LNG terminals on both coasts now to support its importation. The same people now who are refusing licensing and construction of these terminals (for instance, in the northeastern US) will be the very first people who complain about high natural gas prices while watching their frozen breath from inside their homes.

  •  
    Jack Yetiv
    May 18 11:43 AM
    I STRONGLY agree with Sirlacksalot,

    Switching from one carbon-based, finite-supply fossil fuel to another is sheer folly for a whole host of reasons:

    1) I believe nat gas pricing is on an uptrend and will continue to climb as oil does. The fact that we have lots of gas in the US will moderate this rise, but won't stop it completely. Also, you will see more gas-powered ppowerplants get built in the next few years as coal-fired plants become politically untenable.

    On a per-BTU basis, gas is already too cheap compared to oil, which is why gas has moved from $8 a year ago to above $11 for much of the past couple of months.

    Therefore, nat gas isn't going to be that cheap going forward, and if you want to figure the cost of nat-gas-powered transportation going forward, plan on $12 to $13/MCF. Don't use historical numbers like $8/MCF.

    2) Nat gas still produces CO2.

    3) The infrastructure to use nat gas as a public transportation fuel will cost tens (if not hundreds) of billions of dollars and will take at least a decade and probably much longer to install.

    4) LNG terminals are pretty darn hard to get permitted--the ONLY one on our Pacific West coast is in Mexico, not the US.

    5) By the time nat gas infrastructure would be ready, solar power will cost half of what it does now, and less than any fossil-fuel-based power plant (because all coal and nat gas plants will be obligated to have CCS equipment, and because coal and gas will probably be substantially higher than they are now).

    There is NO doubt in my mind that the solution to transportation in the US (and Europe) is plug-in hybrids that are charged by renewable energy sources such as solar, wind, wave power, biomass, etc.

    We already have THAT infrastructure built (your house wiring and transmission lines thereto), most people will plug in their cars at night because of TOU pricing (time-of-use pricing that will charge much more for peak KWH versus off-peak at night), and this will help balance the load (many power plants are essentially idled at night, thus increasing the cost per KWH).

    Also, PIH's will average 100+ mpg because most people would never use the gas engine on short trips, and most commuting trips are short and within the battery range of most PIH's that are in prototyping right now.

    Indeed, someone who makes almost all short trips within the capacity of the batteries will experience mileages of several HUNDRED miles to the gallon, and might only fill up their tank once or twice PER YEAR.

    PIH's are undoubtedly the wave of the future. And several car manufacturers are expected to roll out PIH's before the end of next year, with large-scale rollouts in 2010 (I estimate that the US public will have 3-4 choices before the end of next year, and probably 10 choices by the middle of 2010--24 months from now).

    Jack Yetiv
  •  
    Jack Yetiv
    May 18 11:44 AM
    Sorry, forgot to say that other than the above, I completely agree with the author's comments about the need for a meaningful energy policy because I think energy is much more threatening to the Western world today than all the 9/11 terrorists combined--times 10.

    Jack
  •  
    Brian
    Pursley
    May 18 12:20 PM
    My Website
    It should be noted that Russians drill for oil based upon abiogenic principles. So any peak in Russian production is either temporary or else by design.

    Another successful oil well was drilled into granite basement in Yemen: oilismastery.blogspot....
  •  
    The FItzman
    May 18 12:23 PM
    My Website
    Jack: appreciate your comments. that said, just because i am a proponent of nat gas vehicle transportation doesn't mean i think the price of nat gas will go down. i too believe it will increase, as peak oil will drive all sources of energy higher in price. what i do believe is that there are huge resources of natural gas available in the world, and the US will definitely need its share as oil field depletion rates as well as demand both increase going forward. with respect to the infrastructure for nat gas, i believe i mentioned in the article that it is not currently sufficient. that said, natural gas is available in many home across the US today. that is why i mentioned Fuelmakers "Phill" device and the need for Honda and Fuelmaker to team up and offer a complete solution, complete with Honda having 24-hour per/day refueling support.

    As you guys are aware, i totally support plug-in hybrids and totally electric transportation. However, I continue to believe that the energy crisis facing us will require ALL available non-gasoline alternatives. You are seeing the front wave of peak oil affects in the economy today: inflation, falling US dollar, financial stress in almost every sector, and extreme consumer discomfort. Imagine what will happen by 2010. The US has waited so long to adopt a sane energy policy, that we need to adopt, embrace, and incentivize ALL non gasoline powered internal combustion engine solutions. Please read my entire energy policy:

    seekingalpha.com/artic...

    If you agree, send it to your congress person and senator. If you don't agree, please send me feedback to consider as I update this policy with feedback from time to time. Thanks.
  •  
    John Egan
    May 18 12:51 PM
    I'm impressed that Israel, Iceland and Brazil can aim for energy independence (as well as the countries named above..) and the US can't get out from in front of the train...

    As an aside.. Does anyone really care about Donald Trump....I mean, come on.. he's a reality show star now.. Ranks right up there with the 'little people' family, has-been child stars, has been rock stars and the 'Kardashians'... And who are these Kardashians anyway????

    Thx jegan ;-)
  •  
    Brian
    Pursley
    May 18 01:17 PM
    My Website
    John - People care about Donald Trump because they don't care about themselves. They watch TV to fill the void that exists in their own hollow and empty lives. So they end up living their lives vicariously through people who actually do things in life.
  •  
    paultaut
    May 18 01:48 PM
    One thing about Trump, his businesses have gone bankrupt multiple times but he is the ultimate Energizer Bunny.

    Everything has to go into the pie now because the lesson of the past was not heeded. Meanwhile Opec has heeded and now has the power to keep prices aloft all by itself. It needs the cash flow to keep its TRILLIONS of dollars of infrastructure+ projects going.

    Just because they are not exporting more doesn't mean they are producing less. Internal needs are far outpacing those of the rest of the world and they have the refineries to handle all types of crude.

    They can afford to wait, we cannot.
  •  
    galewhitaker
    May 18 02:50 PM
    My Website
    None of you guys have talked about conservation. J. H. Kunstler says its way too late to convert to alternatives. He says the only way we can come close to saving ourselves from chaos is conservation. Get those stupid trucks off the road and ship stuff on the cho cho. Build some high speed trains and dump the airline industry. Tax the poo out of new cars that get poor gas milage. Require all new buildings and homes to install solar panels, solar hot water heaters and geo thermal systems for heating and air conditioning. What you say! Regulations disagree with our capatilistic mantra. Wellll I think that these unregulated business people that run the country with their lobbies are the ones that got us into this mess. The super rich won't have to worry though, I'm sure they have their bank boxes full of gold doubloons. That should get them comfortably through the chaos and energy wars.
  •  
    yank
    May 18 03:26 PM
    My Website
    Great posts. Someone mentioned financial stress in every sector (more than likely related to this credit mess) as being a major problem. What's really disturbing is when you examine how we got into this "credit" problem many people figure it was just too much money chasing too few goods. But the reality is that you can trace the current meltdown to one absolutely disastrous (what else is new) decision by Congress in 1999. Back then in all their "wisdom" they decided we could do without an obscure law called the "Glass-Steagall Act" (GSA). Essentially GSA was passed in the early 1930s in a depression-era move to keep the different financial sectors apart in their business dealings as a means of protection for the consumer. So basically back then insurance companies were restricted to selling life insurance, annuities, etc. while banks were limted to loans, checking accounts, etc. When GSA was abolished in 1999 all bets were off as it set off a "frenzy" of activity by all financial cos. including investment banks, brokers, insurance cos. etc. Now virtually "anyone could sell anything." You can imagine the type of mischief that produced along with some good old-fashioned greed thrown in. Anyway, today we are reaping the disastrous consequences of that decision where banks have no idea what is on their balance sheet or how to properly value an asset. What a complete unmitigated disaster brought about by our misguided, incompetent boobs that run Washington.
  •  
    The FItzman
    May 18 10:15 PM
    My Website
    thanks for the comments. some tit-for-tat:

    gale: if you click on the link "Here's a good start" in this article, it will take you to my suggested energy policy. i am sure in that policy mentions conservation and mass transit. i would disagree with Kunstler's conclusion, if indeed it is his conclusion, that it is too late to convert to alternatives. we have no choice but to do so unless we want to simply lay down and let peak oil win without even a fight. of course, presently, that is damn near what we are doing anyway ;)

    yank: wrt GSA, i agree that the financial "regulators" in the US have rigged the game for wall streeters. i guess it's not enough they get all the tax breaks. ever read "the shock doctrine" by naomi klein? i had to laugh during this latest "financial crisis" when paulsen comes out and says "our financial regulations are out-dated and we need to change them for the new world order" or something to that effect. yeah, regulations that have seen us through a depression, two world wars, etc. etc. and now they want to change them. get ready to bend over. then, the federal reserve takes over a PRIVATE publically traded investment firm (bear stearns). boy, if this is the new world order...we better call naomi and see what we should be doing about it (besides voting the current bums in charge out of office). it's not bad enough the current administration has bankrupted our treasury...now they want to go further and put everything on the back of the middle class taxpayer...let's bail out financial institutions, lenders, borrowers, let's bail out everyone and let the taxpayer (but not the wealthy taxpayers!) pay the tab. and these are supposedly "conservative republicans". what a joke. this is the biggest bunch of radicals in the history of US government.
  •  
    jjason
    May 19 10:28 AM
    I will keep my 250 gallon heating oil tank empty until September or October and then, if oil is still sky high, heat with a home made solar collector for November and December and then use electric heaters.

    Screw OPEC, oil speculators, big oil companies and wall street.

    It is time that we all did more to conserve energy. You can imagine what would happen if everyone pressed Congress to do the things that we read on SA.

    Are there any US Congressman/women or Senators who read Seeking Alpha?

    I have a friend in New Jersey who installed solar heating and hot water in his home. He did it with tax breaks and N.J. passed a law that mandates electric utility companies to buy excess power from him.

    He told me that without the help, it would not have been cost effective. Does anyone have any thoughts on whether the approach of the N. J. legislature is a good one?

    PS. Thanks for the good ideas folks.
  •  
    Isaac the
    Terrible
    May 19 11:39 AM
    To Brian P.- It really dosn't matter if one believes that fossil fuel occurs for one reason or another. Regardless of origin, they are effectively a non-renewable/ finite resource. And while there may be alot more reserves out there then we know, the important fact that we are all trying to come to grips with is that the era of inexpensive fuel is in the rear view mirror. You can take that to the bank. So your statement "It should be noted that Russians drill for oil based upon abiogenic principles. So any peak in Russian production is either temporary or else by design" shows either a great fear of this reality, or you are just a massive fool. Which ever the case, I say "please don't dominate this rap, jack, if you've got nothing new to say!"
  •  
    sibiriyak99
    May 19 12:26 PM
    I've been working in the Siberian oil fields for the last 15 years. One factor to consider is that Russians live and die by their production plans. The current regime has begun to punish managers for missing their targets, so the managers are lowering their declared volumes. There is about 15% additional capacity they are holding back so they can meet their daily/monthly/yearly/5 year production targets.

    Global warming was mentioned in the article as enhancing the oil field development. It is sooooo much easier to move men and equipment in winter that not much work gets done in summer, too swampy. This is especially true for exploration and construction work.
  •  
    The FItzman
    May 19 01:05 PM
    My Website
    sibi: interesting comments! wow...15% of roughly 10 million is 1.5 million barrels. that is a huge cushion. as far as the global warming goes, sounds like i should have left siberia out of that comment. however, would you agree that ice breakup in the arctic is leading to more oil & gas exploration, or no? thanks.
  •  
    ripskii
    May 19 05:05 PM
    Good insights on gas use, supply and cost. While there has been talk for years of building an LNG terminal on the west coast of the US, finally one in Mexico has just been completed. It remains to be seen what impact it will have on local pricing, but can't hurt. Using NG for transportation fuel is clearly gaining and I see new trucks and buses from fleets (like Waste Management) on the road ever growing. Auto use is problematic as note by others. I looked into the Honda GX and noted its range was fairly low, something in the 220 mile range as I recall. It holds the equivalent of 8 gallons of gasoline even though the storage tank is quite large, taking up about half the trunk.

    www.signonsandiego.com...
    www.caranddriver.com/r...
  •  
    iThinkBig
    May 19 05:18 PM
    My Website
    Plug-in hybrids are certainly the way for the short-term, although it will be interesting to see my electric bill in 2012. How about those nuke plants? What, we have four in development? How many billions of tons of coal do we have? Yet bickering on that front too from state and federal legislatures, about environmental regulations of building more plants.

    My idea would be to partner with the Japanese and subsidize affordable hybrid build-outs alongside the other solutions. Entrepenuars have already built a home-filling compressor. That uses water, plenty of that on this planet until some no-good Washington legislator gets involved...
  •  
    Brian
    Pursley
    May 19 10:45 PM
    My Website
    Isaac: How do you know petroleum is finite and non-renewable? After studying and researching the issue for several years now, I've reached the conclusion that hydrocarbons are infinite and renewable. Please prove me wrong so I can unhedge, leverage all my longs, and become a billionaire before 40. Thx in advance...=)
  •  
    Isaac the
    Terrible
    May 19 11:20 PM
    Brian. The earth isn't a sphere. Humans are not a form of animal. And you're so right- petroleum is infinite, cheap and costs $19 bucks a barrel.
    Have you ever realized that a position you staked out, after reality testing for a while, just didn't ring true anymore? Or, are you the kind of person who sticks to your original conclusion despite new facts or perspectives, come hell or high water? The idea of picking the facts to fit your predetermined conclusion sounds familiar, kind of like the thinking that put us in Iraq. Enjoy paying for your infininate oil when you fill up your Hummer, dud.
  •  
    Brian
    Pursley
    May 19 11:43 PM
    My Website
    Isaac: I've been long oil since $8 a barrel. Actually I'm a big fan of Socrates, Hume, Whitman, Heisenberg, Popper, Taleb, and uncertainty in general. I'm happy to change my mind at a moments notice (apparently you aren't?). I am a student of Peak Oil. However I suggest it's you who need a lesson in unlearning. See here: www.the7thfire.com/pea...

    It is you who cling to your religion despite elephant discoveries such as Tupi, Jupiter, and Carioca to regard one country in particular.

    I suggest you reexamine you prejudices - I don't own a Hummer. I wouldn't care if Hummer's were illegal. I live In NYC and hardly use any transportation fuel.
  •  
    Brian
    Pursley
    May 19 11:55 PM
    My Website
    Pardon the typos =(
  •  
    The FItzman
    May 20 12:36 AM
    My Website
    The question isn't whether oil is finite or renewable, or even at what rate it is renewable. Economically, the question is simply can worldwide oil supply keep up with worldwide oil demand? An objective open-minded person would have to conclude, with oil at $127/barrel, up 50% this year, up 100% in 12 months, and up >5x over the last 6 years, that at least some people (who happen to have a whole lot of money), feel that the supply/demand balance may be an issue. Sure, the US dollar is an issue, but it's only down 50% in the last 6-7 years. Where did the other 4.5x come from if oil is so abundant and easily accessible? Well, it ain't no more. China, India, Russia, and the Middle East are sucking it up as fast as it is pumped. And, it's not like the total worldwide supply is growing that fast...just a lil bit the last couple years. Whether you're religious about peak-oil, or a non-peak oil believer, it doesn't take a genius to know that a country (the US) that uses 25% of the world's oil, and imports >60% of that (!) should do something about it - soon!

    seekingalpha.com/artic...

    To simply state that oil is in abundance everywhere while a crisis is happening before your eyes is a bit foolish, don't you think?

  •  
    DIEGOJAMES
    May 20 09:13 PM
    My Website
    WE ARE IN BIG TROUBLE.....A total lack of management exists in the USA's government...we need someone courageous, smart and respectable to start running government and all the whinners, give-away congressional money types to follow.
    We are in a ENERGY WAR and we cannot FIGHT because we are whinning and crying and denying and giving away billions. DO THE SAUDI'S GIVE FREE OIL TO THE POOR????NO!!!GET THE PICTURE???
    SPEND THE $$$$FOR A STAMP OR PHONE CALL OR EMAIL YOUR CONGRESSIONAL REPRESENTATIVE AND ASK FOR IMMEDIATE LEGISLATION TO PROVIDE:
    1. NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS TO PROVIDE ELECTRICITY TO MAJOR CITIES
    A. FOR OVER NIGHT CHARGES FOR PIH CARS
    B. FOR TGV STYLE CROSS COUNTRY TRAIN LIKE EUROPE

    2.JAIL GM,FORD,CHRYSLER SENIOR DESIGN MANAGEMENT

    3.TRAFFIC CONTROL LANES WHICH FAVOR SMALL HYBRIDS IN CITIES, MORE BART TYPE COMMUTER TRAINS IN EVERY MAJOR CITY..

    4. LIMIT ETHANOL TO SUGAR WHICH DOES NOT CAUSE FOOD INFLATION

    5. ALL CORPORATIONS TO BE GIVEN TAX DEDUCTIBLE QUOTA'S TO BE USED IN SOLARIZING ROOF TOPS EVERYWHERE IN THE SOUTHWESTERN UNITED STATES

    6.FINE ALL INTEGRATED OIL COMPANIES 33% OF
    MANAGEMENT BONUSES FOR LAST 3 YEARS , FINE ALL CONGRESS 15% OF THEIR BENEFITS FOR THE PAST 20 YEARS.

    7. STOP ALL CONGRESSIONAL DEBATE OVER ABORTION, MARRIAGE AND SEXUALITY UNTIL A ENERGY POLICY IS FORMULATED OR 10 YEARS -WHICH EVER IS SOONER.

    8.TURN OFF 48% OF ALL NIGHT LIGHTING EVERYWHERE IN OUR CITIES.
    9.LIMIT ALL NIGHT MALLS OR SHOPPING OR FAST FOOD TO ONE EVERY 1O MILES.
    10.I HAVE ELK WALKING THROUGH MY PROPERTY IN WASHINGTON STATE 45 MINUTES FROM RANDLE. AND I HAVE SEEN THEM IN OREGON... DO NOT WORRY ABOUT THEM...
    11. I CAN SOLARIZE THE SLOPE BEHIND MY HOME AND BUY SEVERAL MEDIUM SIZED VERTICAL WINDMILLS FOR THE MOUNTAINS IN PORTER RANCH ,CALIFORNIA AND SELL YOU ALL ENERGY ..

    REGARDS AND HAPPY SOLARIZING AND BLESSINGS TO HONDA AND CURSE GM, CAN A 5 SERIES BMW BE CONVERTED TO LNG?
    DIEGOJAMES
    PORTER RANCH , CALIFORNIA
  •  
    Peter
    Sterling
    May 21 09:38 AM
    My Website
    America has lost its way. It is run by corporations and their lobbyists with the collective IQ of intelligent morons.
    America can get nearly all the oil and gas it needs from the Arctic Commons and Blake Ridge, South Carolina. unoilgas.com strategicnine.com But because various "agencies", working for their "friends" and relatives want to steal the resources from the owners without any payment, America is going into the energy toilet. Any questions?
Loading...
Symbols:
Authors:

  • Long Ideas

  • Short Ideas

  • Cramer's Picks

SA Partners

Hedge Fund Jobs

Job Seekers:

  • Search jobs by category
  • Get job alerts by email or live feed
  • Apply online
See full list of jobs »

Employers

  • See all recruitment options
  • Get applications online or by email
Post a job »

Trading Center