RE: RE: RE: Coal to LiquidHowdy, Kerogen.
I'll agree that there are plenty, possibly too many, shale gas plays, and there is plenty of gas. So much that drilling for natural gas is slowing down severely, and prices are way down, hurting the economics of gas plays. It's hard to justify building huge pipelines for a product that has little profit in it. I meant that oil shale is not a good feedstock as compared to coal for making oil. I wasn't in the most coherent mode when I posted, and in retrospect I should have logged out before getting the urge to type that mess.....
The economics of coal oil are something to consider for sure, as much as any resource spec. The environmental aspects are also a concern to many, and I would like to see a comparison of environmental cost compared to something like the oil sands as part of the weighing of costs and benefits.
I actually have way more of my portfolio in uranium than coal plays. And I have been doing that for a long time before the "recent" uranium rush so I have already done quite well there and I am positioned well for a much bigger gains as the rush continues. Hopefully that will allow me to exit the U rush ahead of the herds to capitalize on the next rush before it gets on the Average Joe's radar, whatever that next big thing may be.
I have left my SH portfolio alone, because I really enjoy the bogus 1000% gains caused by the inability if SH to handle the rollbacks that have caused the BS gains to be so spectacular.
It is still my opinion that turning food into fuels is immoral. Corn to alcohol for fuel is crazy, and doesn't make a dent in the North American oil/gas fuel needs. The environmental gains from corn ethanol are negligible to non-existent. The politics that allow corn to be more profitable (read subsidized irrationally) as fuel stock rather than selling it for food needs to be seriously examined.
Cheerio and Merry Christmas,
HT