smith199
23 hours ago
What energy sources do you rely on in your life?
I see no popular support for a decline in our collective quality of life in the USA (or globally).
We all still need to heat and cool our homes. We require fuel for transportation in commercial, private business, and recreational travel. We need homes, jobs, food, medicines, manufacturing, clothing, etc.
Insights from Exxonās Outlook through 2050:
āThe worldās future energy needs will be determined by the number of people there are and the level of economic growth they enjoy. On both counts, the numbers are staggering. 2 billon more people and a global economy 2X the size.
āTo support a growing population with rising living standards, we project the world will need to produce 15% more energy in 2050 than it does today.
āEven with an unprecedented rise in lower-emission options, oil and natural gas are still projected to meet more than half of the worldās energy needs in 2050.
So despite the political aspirations of some, oil is not going away anytime soon, and energy demand will require that exploration and production become a higher priority just to maintain the standard of living we currently desire and enjoy.
Absent any startling new technological developments in energy production, one should expect to see no substantive evolutionary changes unless it is clear that the majority of voters prefer a decline in their quality of life and will tolerate a third-world lifestyle for themselves and their families.
Those that wish to stifle and punish oil companies need to āpull their heads outā before it becomes too late to avoid the unintended consequences to our society that will result from the incompetency of this approach.
So I support the prediction of the Exxon forecast that oil and gas investments will not only continue, but will increase over time.
These GSPE āExpert Marketā travails may just be a hint that I should be prepared to update my alias to āNo Oil Gal 199āā¦.
And as well as the active phone lines, the company is maintaining their website, complete with recent changes.
The flagrant truth is, Biden has his foot on the neck of GOM exploration, and it is not going to change until he is out of office. Expectations for future good news may come as a result from a new political outcome in November.
So at most, about six months to go the way I see it. Until then, I will continue to hold my @$k and be a moderator for this board.
Remembering an old saying āPatience is a virtue that attracts happiness and brings near that which is farāā¦.
Mrs Smith
smith199
6 days ago
I greatly appreciate these clarifying insights from both spec and Werbe.
I also share the belief that the company and the stock price could rebound. After all, even though there are no visible flames, the smoke around Gulfslope Energy is visible and hard to miss.
It appears that the biggest issues holding the company back after Tau1 have been the effects that Covid had on the world economies and markets, followed by the huge effect of the Biden administrationās enormously unfortunate energy policies and outlook.
Those of us that remain shareholders are all about to become āexpertā watchers, keeping an eye out for certain future developments.
After reading the Delek Group financials released on March 29th, it is evident that Gulfslopeās partner is still holding on to their 23% ownership of the company and continues to maintain a 75% ownership interest in the Tau prospect as well.
These audited financial reports are heavily scrutinized before being released, so I am curious as to why Gulfslope Energy is still being mentioned in the partnerās financials to itās shareholders, despite being written off for tax reasons in 2019, and Gulfslope itself being delinquent in their filings. This cannot be just a coincidence.
Also, if a billion $$$ company like the Tau partner has no intention of drilling in the GOM, then why does it continue to acknowledge and support the entity managing their GOM assets? And why continue to pay the costs related to these GOM investments?
There are forecasts that predict the price of crude will reach $100/bbl. So should shareholders be expecting internal discussions about another Tau drilling project anytime soon? Like after an election that changes administrations and outlooks on energy. These conversations are very likely to happen.
But itself being a BOEM approved GOM Operator from back in 2018, could the partner be considering drilling Tau on itās own? Which will be OK for shareholders, because Gulfslope Energy still owns 25% of the Tau lease, and should benefit accordingly from any successful endeavor.
And does the partner have any designs on increasing ownership in the company? This action could result in a needed infusion of cash into the depleted company treasury. Can this activity alone get the companyās SEC filings current?
Coincidentally, it appears the Tau partner continues discussions with the BOEM since they are still listed on the weekly BOEM Chief Notes. This activity confirms the partnerās interest in the Tau.
And what is the value of all those NOLs anyway? Who can use them and when? My answer is that the best bang for Gulfslopeās bucks is for the $70 million in NOLs to stay with the company considering they would be allowable as a deduction against future taxable income.
All these are curious questions lacking satisfying answers. If the situations surrounding any of these questions evolves into impactful activity or actionable operations, how will it affect shareholder risk and the GSPE share price?
Unfortunately, the minutiae of the ābig pictureā still remains obscured and fuzzy, so I do not have answers to these questions. But for now, I believe that Gulfslope Energy is favored to maintain the BOEM Operating Status for the Tau field.
Waiting to seeā¦.
Mrs. Smith
smith199
2 weeks ago
I do agree with your points about enhancements to the overall design of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR).
Considering that the SPR came into existence in the 1970ās after an oil boycott, I do support āmodernizingā to better address issues the country faces today. A new administration should be the ones to address it now, and Make It Greater, lol.
As far as a definition for the SPR, I would prefer that it be crude oil stored in underground caverns and reserved for use due to disasters, economic considerations from oil boycotts, military fuels in time of war, and in response to other catastrophes.
I think the underground storage caverns should be filled to 100% of capacity and maintained at this level at all times. If necessary to release volumes, they must be refilled as soon as practical. Price should not be an impediment (Poor Joe. He may not understand the purpose of the SPR).
This STRATEGIC supply could be all that Americans have to rely on in times of catastrophe or emergency and must therefore be protected at all costs and at all times. How long should we expect to go without power (electricity) and fuel (vehicles)? The current authorized capacity of the SPR is 714 million barrels. But after Joeās release, it is now filled to only 50 percent of itās capacity.
And it may also be necessary to use it to provide fuel for military activity (ships, planes) to protect the population during time of war. In this instance having this supply available and ready for refining is critical and may make a difference to the outcome.
And recognizing the time (1-3 yrs) needed to plan the projects, manufacture the tubulars (made overseas), execute drilling, and transport the crude to refineries, to replenish 700 million barrels, makes me uneasy. How about you?
I will admit being upset over the position the countryās (D) leadership has placed us all in while pursuing their political CYA games.
These underachievers supported an inept and naive energy plan intended to force the country toward a goal that will give them more of a political advantage. Manipulative, Not Smart.
They deserve the costs and the price required.
I hope they are made to pay it in November.
Mrs. Smith
smith199
2 weeks ago
Seasonal demands look favorable for oil producers at this time.
āGlobal Oil Demand In Summer Months of 2024ā - OPEC Featured Article, released April 11, 2024
https://momr.opec.org/pdf-download/res/pdf_delivery_momr.php?secToken2=accept
In 2024, global oil demand is expected to grow by a healthy 2.2 mb/d, y-o-y, led by robust demand from non-OECD regions, mainly China, Middle East and Other Asia. On a quarterly basis, global oil demand is expected to grow by around 2.0 mb/d, y-o-y, in 1Q24, 2.2 mb/d y-o-y in 2Q24, 2.7 mb/d y-o-y in 3Q24 and 2.1 mb/d y-o-y in 4Q24.
In the upcoming summer months, and focusing on transportation fuels, global demand for jet/kerosene is forecast to grow by 0.6 mb/d, y-o-y, in 2Q24 and by 0.8 mb/d, y-o-y, in 3Q24. At the same time, demand for gasoline and diesel is forecast to increase by 0.4 mb/d and 0.2mb/d, y-o-y, respectively, in 2Q24. In 3Q24, gasoline demand is forecast to improve further and expand by 0.8 mb/d, while diesel is projected to increase by 0.3 mb/d, y-o-y.
In OECD, the upcoming driving season in the US is expected to provide the usual additional demand for transportation fuels. Economic activity is also expected to pick up in 2H24, supported by a likely more accommodative monetary policy by the US Federal Reserve in 3Q24, as fears of inflation risks subside. Overall, OECD Americas is forecast to lead demand growth in the region with around 0.2 mb/d, y-o-y, in 2Q24 and same in 3Q24, while oil demand in OECD Europe and Asia Pacific is expected to also rise, albeit only slightly in both quarters.
In non-OECD countries, China is projected to drive oil demand, supported by strong mobility and industrial activity, growing by 0.5 mb/d, y-o-y, in 2Q24 and 0.7 mb/d, y-o-y, in 3Q24. Similarly, the Middle East is forecast to expand by 0.3 mb/d, y-o-y, in 2Q24 and 0.5 mb/d, y-o-y, in 3Q24. Indiaās oil demand is forecast to grow by 0.2 mb/d, y-o-y, in 2Q24 and 0.2 mb/d, y-o-y in 3Q24. Other Asia and Latin America are also expected to see healthy growth in the range of 0.2 mb/dā0.4 mb/d, y-o-y, on average in 2Q24 and same in 3Q24.
On the refining side, global crude intakes have declined since the start of the year despite a slight recovery in March. Intakes fell to 79.5mb/d in February, and in March they were still 2.4 mb/d lower compared with the peak level of 82.1 mb/d seen in December 2023 (Graph 2). Refinery runs declines were mostly in the US, China, Russia and Europe on the back of severe weather, seasonality and weakening refining margins. In March, however, refinery intakes improved slightly, with a gradual capacity return in the US and rising demand in select Asian countries.
In the US, gasoline markets on the Gulf Coast strengthened on tightening gasoline availability, elevated octane prices (a gasoline blending component), and a positive outlook for summer gasoline demand. In Europe, ongoing geopolitical tension could further intensify upward pressure on regional diesel markets. Meanwhile, Asia has so far remained well supplied amid strong refinery runs, particularly in India, and product supplies from the Middle East.
Expected growing demand for gasoline and diesel in the Atlantic Basin is expected to establish stronger East-to-West export opportunities for these products. Moreover, strong near-term upside potential for residual fuel in Southeast Asia is expected to add strength to Asian product markets. Jet/kerosene markets are projected to show solid upward potential across regions in the coming months as air travel picks up.. Demand for naphtha, however, may remain soft, amid new capacity additions despite projections for robust gasoline blending demand in the coming months. Outside of the US, propane could become the preferred petrochemical feedstock on the back of stronger margins.
The robust oil demand outlook for the summer months warrants careful market monitoring, amid ongoing uncertainties, to ensure a sound and sustainable market balance. To this end, the countries participating in the Declaration of Cooperation (DoC) will remain vigilant, proactive and prepared to act, when necessary, to the requirement of the market.
smith199
2 weeks ago
I will emphatically āsecondā your comments regarding the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) and the changing of administrations. Respectfully, āKudosā.
Not everything in Texas is big, but the oil reserves are. Interesting fact about this is, without continuous exploration drilling, the U.S. has about 5 years left before depleting production from all existing wells.
So, without further capital investments in oil and gas exploration over the next five years, our country will be vulnerable to forces from outside our borders.
The USA will not be energy independent, and will be at risk of pressure from other countries because of a reliance on imports. This is why the replenishment of the SPR is vital.
With our current capabilities, I am wondering how long it takes to drill enough wells to offset this inevitable decline. The answer is āWoe is Usā.
We need to get started. Time is a factor. This will not happen overnight, and failure is not the preferred option.
I agree that the USA cannot tolerate another 4 years of attacks on the oil and gas industry. It is an undesirable risk for our quality of life, security, and freedom.
No administration should be allowed to sell our SPR assets on a whim. Or print additional billions of inflationary dollars to have monies to cover for the failure of the progressive green agenda.
The bottom line here is, if the progressive ideals on our energy future were workable, why was it necessary to deplete the SPR to keep the country going? And what happens next?
That it was necessary to pirate the SPR is all you need to know to realize the flaws existing in the progressive perspective on energy sources.
So they have only proved to all of us that drilling is required. Because, once the SPR is exhausted, what hope is there for us?
This is a real-world, vivid example of why the progressive perspectives on oil and gas energy cannot continue.
The saddest thing is that they had to have realized this too, or they would never have compromised the SPR in the first place. But unfortunately, that did not deter them in any way. This is why I believe they cannot be trusted to remain in charge of the destiny of the USA.
Still, there will be a group of people whose thoughts do not venture beyond their day to day secure bubble, and they have no desire to ever be inconvenienced by the truth. All they seek is the power to control the lives and fates of other Americans for the benefits of their own continued wealth and welfare. We should deny them this outcome.
Now Joe is setting up another token gesture which is doomed to fail and increase costs for all. I refer to āGreen Banksā. And they are fast coming to a community near you. How is this really reducing inflation? And especially in the poorest of communities? It will not. In my opinion, this is only a smokescreen to obscure the results from the populace.
I suggest the bulk of these monies will be used for large projects that mostly benefits the profits of those banks. And will not have a great influence on reducing inflation in poor communities.
And thank you for including the wishes for Gulfslope Energy to play a supporting role in rescuing our country from the potential collapse of our energy security.
I now realize that my stomach growling yesterday must not have been due to fasting. But rather, it was because of climate change.
Mrs. Smith
smith199
4 weeks ago
Just to be clear to all readers, even though the Department of Energy (DOE) has always released the EIA Annual Energy Outlook in prior general election years (at least as far back as 2000), the DOE has declared it will NOT be releasing one in 2024, although the DOE will continue issuing the EIAās monthly Short-term Energy Outlook.
Considering that the World relies heavily on hydrocarbons, and the data from this annual report is often referenced when companies are reporting financial results to shareholders, or planning business strategies and budgets, this is definitely a curious occurrence.
The good news is the DOE will be issuing the EIA Annual Energy Outlook once again in 2025. Better late than never, especially since this Outlook includes projections out to 2050.
And despite all of the DOEās efforts to hinder oil exploration, the Tau lease remains active. It is by now obvious the Tau partners are resilient enough to roll with the punches and stay off the ropes.
In view of the unprecedented actions, policies, regulations, and general hostility directed towards the Oil and Gas Industry by this administration, the presidential election cannot come soon enough.
So, ā¦. Hit the Road Joeā¦.
And do not come back no moā.
Meanest Olā Woman,
Mrs. Smith
smith199
1 month ago
The Tau BOEM lease G36121 remains āactiveā, but no SEC filings at this time.
The theme of this post is a true oil exploration story. And the wildcatting moral of the story is essentially āif you quit, you will not find itā. But please remember to guard against overlooking the real risks facing the company in the pursuit of a GOM discovery.
Two large international energy companies decided to become partners in an exploration plan drilling for offshore oil.
Six years later, one partner dropped out after millions of dollars were spent, and only a few dry holes resulted.
But the other partner continued on alone, while following trusted seismic data, and found new partners.
The following year (2015), the first discovery was made. Since then, other successful wells have been drilled. And developmental drilling continues.
It is estimated that these reserves are 3X larger than those of Saudi Arabia. A big deal discovery for sureā¦. Kudos to these exploration professionals.
The company that dropped out (Shell) is scrambling around searching for other drilling blocks in the area with potential for a similar result.
The company that continued on (Exxon) has created wealth for their new partners, their shareholders, and the country of Guyana (which is now considered to have the worldās fastest growing economy as a result of this discovery of more than 11 billion barrels of oil and gas reserves). It is estimated that by 2027 oil output in Guyana will be over 1.2 million barrels per day (currently 645K bpd).
Despite the huge differences between Gulfslope and Exxon, there are a couple of parallels to point out. If there exists good seismic data worthy of confidence, and if the partners are determined to continue the search, then the potential for success still remains. Additionally, Gulfslope obtained much desirable data and drilling experience from the Tau1. Who knows what the future holds?
If any readers see this post as being too optimistic regarding the prospects for the company, I say this is just the way the oil exploration and drilling business works. I offer no encouragement or enticement for following any particular path.
Mrs. Smith
Register for real-time alerts, custom portfolio, and market movers
Tbags7
2 days ago
Werbe
1 week ago
Byurwherevergirl
2 weeks ago
elcheepo
3 weeks ago
Hot Features
Premium
