Castuserraticus
-
Posts
536 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by Castuserraticus
-
-
Looks like a lucrative lawsuit by the thief to me. It appears he was not resisting arrest or displaying agression and got zapped anyway.
1 vote Cherry for defense minister - when you go to war inside another country you better be prepared to fight by their rules.
-
.......They're also almost silent......
You just gotta wonder why they're illegal?
Noise from the props is one of the biggest problems to proliferation. A quiet prop is the holy grail of wind.
-
Did you know the original method of finding oil was natural surface seeps? This is true in the Gulf and all over the world.
-
Looks like the fish are plump and Brian, the starving student, isn't.
I've often considered a road trip through that area. There's some fabulous fossil hunting in the SE corner.
-
I have shaw (home) and telus (office) internet access. It appears the linksys wireless router on shaw crapped out because it no longer shows as an available network on either computer that was on it. I picked up a d-link wireless router at Staples to replace it. I followed the instruction disk and it won't install. The laptop that was the main computer using the old router can not see the new router to configure it even when directly connected to it.
So I try to connect to the office wireless internet (2wire). I can not find a WEP key that it will accept. I can log into the router and browse around. The key that is listed under the broadband link (20 characters) gives an error message when I try to enter it. A printout I made after the initial setup has a 26 character WEP - does not work. I have vague memories of some problems with the telus connection at one point and had to exchange the router. The password on the printout is not the one for this router. How do I find the WEP code for this router?
I could log into the linsys router and see the WEP code in order to connect other computers.
My brain hurts after trying to find answers on the web.
-
I sure would like to own the wells shown in Figure 1. I don't now of any conventional plays where we can expect a 24 year well life. Most unconventional plays were not on the radar in 2007.
The graphs aren't as useful without scales or notes on the assumptions they come from. They seem to imply that payout is less than 1 year. That is a very rare project and certainly isn't the average of the different areas I've looked at.
Guys/Gals,For a summary of historical royalty rates in Alberta see:
http://www.energy.alberta.ca/Org/pdfs/Info...t3-Formulas.pdf
Trailhead,
According to the above, the royalty rate was 16.5% in 1970. The total cost of the gas plant, land, drilling, pipelines etc. was paid out in slightly better than 1 year.
Don
-
AAAHHHH! My eyes are burning!!!!
No Gortex breathables, real men wear these:http://www.google.ca/imgres?imgurl=http://...ved=0CCUQ9QEwCA
Regards Mike
-
Add me please
So maybe with all this nice weather we could start a little earlier.My list,
-Tungsten
-Jayvee
-Drew
-lethfisher
-420
-Teck
-rickr
-annapolis
-Rufus 28
-trout slayer
-Bhurt
-ladystrange
-FNG
-Jon on fire
-Keith
-Benbear
-Darryl
-Andicapp
-Avalanch
If I'm missing anyone let me no.
Maybe start first week of April,thoughts?
-
I never knocked teachers. My was one and my wife. I know the real hours that the good ones put in.
I don't begrudge anyone's pay. The market for their services determines their value whether anyone else thinks it's fair or not. If you don't feel you're paid enough then get other training. You cannot really judge until you walk in that person's shoes.
Except MP pensions. They are ridiculous - 6 years service (or just warming a chair - ie Rob Anders) and a lifetime free ride. I guess I should take up politics.
Castus (and jk sinders):FYI, we pack in 12 months of work into a 10 month school year. Trust me when I say we more than earn our "holidays". Don't believe me?
Spend 40 minutes teaching junior high math to 13 year olds. Lets keep the ignorance to a minimum, and skip the tired cliches (or implications) that teachers have an easy job.
Having said, that, I agree with a lot of what you have said in this thread; I'm as capitalist as the next guy (check my posts from years past defending said system).
As for the publicly funded education system, it is the single greatest investment a country can make.
Smitty
P.S. I don't believe in pensions; ask any Nortel employee how well that is working. Hence all the crap I took from more socialist posters way back for publicly outing myself as a Landlord (real estate being either my back-up or primary retirement plan).
P.P.S. No, we don't worry about well blow-ups; just former students who like to air their nearly decade old beefs by holding a secretary hostage...
P.P.P.S. Edit: don't mistake my tone, so let me be very clear: I don't (1) complain bitterly (despite that, yes, some of my colleagues do, they should get the hell out...another post) about the wages of a teacher - it is a truly a decent middle class salary and (2) I don't begrudge any former student that makes 2x what I do; good for them, I hope it works out because they're not hedging their bets by skipping post-secondary, plus I knew what I was getting into when I got my B.Ed; no one forced me to become a teacher.
-
I agree with your observation on the employment rates. I graduated in 1984. Unemployment was chronically over 10% back then and the world continued to tick along. The only thing that allowed many of my classmates and I to get jobs was some new drilling incentives by the province. So you're not quite correct in that we didn't "give away the resources" in the past also. Royalty payments have been tinkered with for decades in order to direct the pace of develpment and will be tinkered with in the future. This resulted in a hodge podge of different rates for wells of different vintage. When Stelmach initially announced his review the industry liked the idea of one royalty structure for all wells.
I'm not sure a single royalty policy will work. There exremely varied resources. The government's mandate is to responsibily develop the resource for the benefit of the people. If royaltyies are too high then resources do not get developed and the resulting economic benefits are never seen. With the high gas prices of the early 2000's resources were developed that many of us grey-haired professionals never dreamed would be economic earlier in our careers.
Government statistics do not capture all the unemployed. Anyone, like myself, who is a small businessman who owns more than 10% (I think) of their business is not eligible for unemployment insurance. Even though I was not paid for 3/4 of 2009 and could not find any other work, I was not counted. The many farmers with water trucks and other field operations staff are in the same situation. When I get together with groups of friends it seems over half of us are unemployed or underemployed.
From an economic theory standpoint, the road back to fuller employment involves wages dropping to a level consistent with the "new normal". Wages are the stickiest component of operating costs but I believe adjustment will occur. There are more job applicants now than there are jobs. I know I'm doing my part.
Castuserraticus says"So Don - What do you think the royalties should be? Maybe we should be like Norway where the average well produces 8000 Bbl/d and the government takes 80%. That would kill 100% of the industry. What is the unemployment level you want to see?"
So Cast..... Alberta has grown from 2>3.5 million over the past 15 years with an employment rate exceeding 96%. So there is a drop in energy prices and the employment numbers go to 8%. Last time the oil prices tanked from $35 to under $10, 85,000 Albertans hit the bricks and this was with a population of under 2.5 million. This time was a drop in the bucket. Nobody suggested a give away of the citizens resources then - why now?.
I do get a kick out of Stelmach being the goat in all of this. Like it was his fault that the currency traders were diving outta US bucks and into oil ramping it up to double and then diving out again. Just 'cause Stelmack aint from Calgary doesn't make him all bad.
catch ya'
Don
-
In Newfoundland hundreds of millions of dollars were spent on dryholes with a small number of discoveries being made. When the government takes an equity interest in the succesful projects there is no reimbursement for all the costs of the dryholes. Individual wells cost up to $60MM. Dryholes are a part of the business. Very rarely is a company successful in a frontier area with the first few wells. Successful projects have to be able to carry the burden of the dryholes.
Once again the scale of production and reserves offshore Newfoundland is not comparable to Alberta.
The "fair share" study did not consider land sales bonuses and rentals to be part of government take. In actuality it is a considerable expense to industry and cash cow for the government. The report writers thought very wrongly that companies could pay higher royalties and still pay large land bonuses.
Every business and individual has a certain tax and operating cost load that they can bear. If your individual tax load were to increase you have to cut back on your living expenses (no more fishing?). The Stelmach plan doubled royalties on the small number of good wells in the province.
Kinda two in one here:No not the Venezuela model and no to nationalizing, our fed Government could never do something that would work.
Currently the canadian government has a 8.5% interest in the Hibernia project on the East coast, which was pretty much bail out money for a project that wasn't going to go ahead after a partner (Murphy's I think) pulled out, or so they say. So it paid 8.5% of ~6 billion dollars ( 700mill recoverable that is now over 1.2 billion recoverable, and who know who much more other than the oil companies)and has had a nice return on their dollar.
Not sure how Alberta invites oil companies into the province to look for oil, but currently Newfoundland does not collect money from oil companies to lease land (mostly water) but the highest bidder must spend that winning price of the lease auction in a exploration program in the said waters. Since the Hibernia, Terra Nova, & White rose project have come and have only increased in "expected recoverable oil" . The Newfoundland Governement has since required a equity stake in all developments stalling the Hebron project (700 mil recoveable)for years in dispute with the oil companies. Since then both sides have come together on a 4.9% equity stake on the said project and the governement has pasted Legislation that all projects and expansions to have a 10% equity stake for Nalcor (Newfoundland's energy company). Since then expansions to White Rose (just finished up working this job and is currently in production) and Hibernia South (just starting) have moved forward under these terms. So I wouldn't say "Invite companies in and then nationalize projects" & "government ownership" just get a piece of the action and not pay for the looking part. The governemnt is puting up money on projects that can't mess, not paying the lotto on punchin holes in the ground, hundred million dollar holes. Then there is still the royalites that are so complex it would make your head spin, from 5% untill payout, up 50% after pay out when oil is more than $X/b.
They are also doing some small land ing drill exploration, but peanuts (20 Million, so far) compared to the offshore. But with bigger interest over 60% owner shipI think.
I can't get into all the production rates, politics, taxes etc involued cus I just don't know anything about it. Just saying if it works for other countries and provinces why not Alberta, on what ever scale. Maybe Newfoundland expience into the patch might me a bad one for the government and the tax payers on these equity stakes, who know, but it looks promising, and seems to be working so far.
-
The province doesn't need to spend money on exploration, just don't let the discovery go into production without agreeing to a equity share of the production project.
Whats wrong with that, last I heard Norway wasn't hurting from their tuff rules in the patch. Nothing happens in their water unless they are involved. Hey Yank, we have oil, teach us how to drill, thanks, now get out of our country. Hey Brit, teach us how to build oil rigs, thanks, now get out of our country. Maybe we should own a oil company and call it Norsk Hydro and thensplit it and merge with statoil to become one of the largest oil companies in the world......................seems like its working to me.
An "equity share" would mean the province would have to invest in the project. That's what equity is. The province has chosen a passive interest. The province pays administration to collect money without risking equity.
The average well in Norway produces over 8000 Bbls/d and produces millions of barrels. The average well in Alberta starts at about 50 Bbls/d and produces 50,000 barrels.
Apparently you like the Venezuela model. Invite companies in and then nationalize projects. When the projects begin to fail under government ownership repeat the cycle. Maybe the government should do that here with your house. There are lots of people on the street who would love to have it. Teh government could sell it back to you once it's trashed.
Alberta does not compare to huge international and offshore projects.
Alberta used to have a government owned company - AEC. It started with the exclusive rights to drill on the defense weapons ranges and it was successful. Anyone remember why the government sold it? I think because they believed they should not be in the business of competing with their own taxpayers.
-
So you don't think the people (shareholders) should have jobs?
You think people should work for free?
Do you lobby the government to raise your taxes or just those of everyone else?
If the province wants to spend tax money drilling it's own wells then it should entitled to 100% of the benefits - and those benefits include drilling dryholes (at least $250,000 / well with 30% of wells today being dry) . The province chooses not to risk taxpayer money and so forfeits benefits. Surely all of you industry bashers can't be ignorant enough to think that companies will invest money without an expectation of profit. Do you choose jobs that pay you less than your living expense or do you have a profit motive also? If you think hard earned money should be given away I'll send you my address.
Here's a little lesson free of charge on the economics of energy. In a 10 well program 3 will likely be dryholes, 2 will be very successful, and 5 will do OK. When you go to work each day, do you get paid that day or just whenever you get lucky?
If you think it's so f%$#*@g easy to make money in the oil industry and it gets a free ride you should start your own company with your own money.
The situation with the best balance leaves both sides wanting more. As the government found when they did the "Fair share" changes you can't tax activity that isn't there.
So Don - What do you think the royalties should be? Maybe we should be like Norway where the average well produces 8000 Bbl/d and the government takes 80%. That would kill 100% of the industry. What is the unemployment level you want to see?
Stelmach was an idiot for touching anything other than oilsands. There the change was justified because the situation around oilsands had changed so much.
Now - release the hounds.
-
I have faith in the professionals as well. Though most of the changes on the gulf coast commercial fisheries were spearheaded by highly organized rec fishing groups. These groups bring about changes using the political process more than anything else. So I've seen the political process in action. If highly organized fishing groups can force changes, why would I doubt that highly organized, politically hooked up environmental groups can't do the same thing?
The last line does cause the stomach to turn as it touches on a real truth. The environmental groups can always find one or two dissatisfied people who can be used to appeal to emotions over science. Dont' let the facts stand in the way of a good cause.
-
Brad121's reply summarizes life nicely. Heimdallr too.
-
bhurt,
I've watched the organized programs effect my kids & grand-kids. Certainly lots of organized stuff.
But I get back to my original observation - other than organized play, I hardly seen any kids @ either the playgrounds to the east/north/south of us unless they are accompanied by parents.
About this time of year when I was a kid a 22, a can of beans, a knife and some matches and I was gone for the whole day. I'd suspect that if you treated a kid like that today - somebody or other would be howling child abuse.
regards,
Don
The parents are largely afraid to let the kids out of their sight. I grew up in the country and my wife grew up in the city. Her fears generally ruled over what I would have let them done.
I was able to pass on fire and knife/axe skills to them when we were camping.
One strange thing is that, when I was a kid, my parents would not allow me and my brother to stay inside if the outside weather was reasonable. Now my Dad spends 90% of his waking hours sitting and channel surfing. It seems the mindless TV sucks in more than just the younger generation.
-
Hey I am not implying that Broduer did NOT suck... and a host of other things mentioned in this thread, but did you WATCH the damn game? From an objective veiwpoint? I counted 75 calls (high sticks, holds, crosschecks, trips, hooks) the refs COULD have made against team USA. I counted 43 they COULD have made against canada. I have the thing on PVR.
But no....... 4 penalties for canada and 3 for the USA team. even the NHL.com site is trying to say each team went 1-4 on the PP last night. what a joke. The canadians dominated the game. Our goaltending sucked. And wether or not you want to believe it, the officiating was, as usual, assinine.
When you finish your cop training will you charge every offence you see or will they be graded in severity? You are taking on a pretty similar role (and you'll be able to drive fast cars and shoot things).
-
Very well written - evokes images and emotions that many of us can relate to.
Thank you for sharing.
-
Last night's game gave me the same sick feeling I had watching the Torino team. They seem to be trying to slow the game down - crawling out of our zone on the break out, turning back on the slightest forecheck pressure, slowing down at the Swiss blue line. The Swiss were a bouncing puck away from winning on Lemm's shot because they were always skating. They showed no fear of the Canadians.
MOVE YOUR FEET, GET AFTER THE PUCK, PASS IT HARD
Getzlaf was scary - trying to get too fancy, even on the shoot out.
The Marleau line is the only one that really showed up and worked.
-
So while you're reading the display, does it warn you about upcoming obstacles by flashing the words "You're screwed"?
-
I remember a few fights when I was in high school (+30years ago). Guys went one-on-one. If your buddy got has ass kicked that was his issue. There was never any of the ground and pound or kicks to the head. The fights stopped when there was a winner. What's with this pervasive cowardly attitude that results in gang beating? Is it because this crap gets filmed and put on youtube? Even girls do it to each other these days and the video makes the evening news.
-
Either you have a doppleganger or I just saw you on the news. Random violence hits closer when you recognize the victim.
-
I didn't know we were almost twins. Hope you had a good day too.
I would have forgotten my own if my wife hadn't reminded me in the morning.
-
rehsifylf,
Like you, I've pondered my effect on fish due to the numbers of trout I catch. A typical year [from personal angling records for 40 years] shows I landed approx. 1000 fish in the 110>130 days I spend angling. Using a 3% C&R mortality, I killed 30 trout.
From the DFO Recreational Angling survey site below, I found the following quote:
http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/stats/rec/can/2005/section4-eng.htm
In 2005, anglers caught 215 million fish of all species and retained nearly 72 million (Annex A.7). Resident anglers in all provinces and territories caught 157 million of this total harvest. Foreign anglers caught 54 million (25%) while Canadian non-resident anglers caught a relatively small proportion of the total fish harvest (4 million) during the year (Figure 4.5 and Annex A.8).
Resident anglers kept 39% of the fish they caught compared with 22% and 18% share of fish kept by Canadian non-resident and foreign anglers. On average, each resident angler kept 24 fish in 2005. Every Canadian non-resident angler kept an average of 7 fish, while foreign anglers retained an average of 16 fish of various species.
Residents caught 157,000,000
Kept 39% = 61.230,000
C&R - 95,770,000
C&R mortailty = 3% * 95,770,000 = 2,873,100
Total killed by residents = 61,230,000 + 2,873,100 = 64,103,100
Total Residents = 2,456,876
Residents killed 26.09 fish
I must therefore conclude that although I fish a lot, my effect on the fish population is nearly the same as the Average Kill & Keep angler. It must be admitted though that through my C&R practices, the Average Kill & Keep Angler will not catch/kill nearly as many fish.
You be the judge whether or not this is a good thing.
catch ya'
Don
Interesting and informative analysis.
Trust
in General Chat - Not Fishing Related (NFR)
Posted
I remember my Dad helping me across a river or two when I was young. He seemed so strong and solid. Now Dad is 84 and has become quite frail. In the cycle of life, I've been able to help my own kids in a few situations where I got to be the strong one. My amazing kids are about grown now and can stand on their own. Stories like this bring back fond memories of lifting small kids across streams, up steep trails, or, sleeping, into their rooms but I like that they are becoming my equal in strength. In the future, I'll get to hold my grandkids' hands.