Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Here's an intriguing switch in the energy market: U.S. oil firms have been selling off their assets overseas and investing the money in America's domestic fields.
Last year ConocoPhillips (COP, Fortune 500) announced plans to sell its stake in Kazakhstan's Kashagan oil field -- the largest energy project in the world -- for $5 billion. It was just one of at least six major foreign sales last year for Conoco, which totaled nearly $11 billion, according to industry data provider PLS.
Much of that money is being redirected to investments Conoco has in Texas' Eagle Ford Shale and North Dakota's Bakken Shale, according to PLS Managing Director Brian Lidsky. Conoco did not return a call seeking comment.
American oil firm Hess (HES, Fortune 500) did something similar, selling over $4 billion of assets in the U.K., Azerbaijan and Russia. A company spokesman said that money went to a number of different initiatives, including paying down debt and building up the company's balance sheet. The spokesman said Hess invested $3.1 billion in North Dakota in 2012, where the company boosted its oil production by 55%.
But it does keep money in the country, which then has a multiplier effect.
Too bad Obama won't open up federal lands to energy exploration and won't stop his impediments to exploration on private land. If we had a pro-energy president, things could really be going well.
The energy boom in North Dakota has occurred INSPITE of Obama.
Too bad Obama won't open up federal lands to energy exploration and won't stop his impediments to exploration on private land. If we had a pro-energy president, things could really be going well.
Things ARE going really well in that sector. Oil companies have all the land they can handle, and US will be the largest oil producer in the world in seven years.
Remember this oil shale is not going to make 99 cent a gallon gas. It has a cost last I read of 80 bucks a barrel break even. It takes a lot of water injection and about two barrels to get three out. Unless we see an economic meltdown 2.5 a gallon is about the best we can hope for.
Remember this oil shale is not going to make 99 cent a gallon gas. It has a cost last I read of 80 bucks a barrel break even. It takes a lot of water injection and about two barrels to get three out. Unless we see an economic meltdown 2.5 a gallon is about the best we can hope for.
Yes, this is true. We will have to get used to more expansive gas, and hopefully the salaries improve to a point where $3.00 gas is affordable.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
