I don't see how this study supports your view that fracking is a bubble. What page are you looking at?

Even worse, Hughes points out that capital inputs to offset field decline will necessarily increase going forward as the sweet spots within plays are drilled off and drilling moves to lower quality areas. Average well quality (as measured by initial productivity) has fallen nearly 20 percent in the Haynesville, the most productive shale gas play in the US. And it is falling or flat in eight of the top ten plays. Overall well quality is declining for 36 percent of US shale gas production and is flat for 34 percent.[28]

Not surprising in this context, the major shale gas players have been making massive write-downs of their assets to reflect the new reality. Companies began in 2012 reassessing their reserves and, in the face of a gas spot price that was cut in half between July 2011 and July 2012, are being forced to admit that the long-term outlook for natural-gas prices is not positive. The write-downs have a domino effect as bank lending is typically tied to a company’s reserves meaning many companies are being forced to renegotiate credit lines or make distress asset sales to raise cash.

Beginning August 2012, many large shale gas producers in the US were forced to announce major write-downs of the value of their shale gas assets. BP announced write-downs of $4.8 billion, including a $1 billion-plus reduction in the value of its American shale gas assets. England’s BG Group made a $1.3 billion write-down of its US shale gas interests, and Encana, a large Canadian shale gas operator made a $1.7 billion write-down on shale assets in the US and Canada, accompanied by a warning that more were likely if gas prices did not recover. [29]

The Australian mining giant BHP Billiton is one of the worst hit in the US shale gas bubble as it came in late and big-time. In May, 2012 it announced it was considering taking impairments on the value its US shale-gas assets which it had bought at the peak of the shale gas boom in 2011, when the company paid $4.75 billion to buy shale projects from Chesapeake Energy and acquiring Petrohawk Energy for $15.1 billion.[30]

rickyp wrote:ray

I don't see how this study supports your view that fracking is a bubble. What page are you looking at?

The study was linked from a story, and i lazily linked it.... It doesn't go into the detail I assumed it would. Sorry.
But here's more specifc information. Whole article is great but the important stuff are the financial writedowns most frakking companies have been taking as they reported lower reserves and lower production rates than originally forecast. Will you the word of the financial reports and forecasts of the companies? (chart in article clearly indicates the bubble effect)

http://nsnbc.me/2014/03/13/fracked-usa- ... as-bubble/

Even worse, Hughes points out that capital inputs to offset field decline will necessarily increase going forward as the sweet spots within plays are drilled off and drilling moves to lower quality areas. Average well quality (as measured by initial productivity) has fallen nearly 20 percent in the Haynesville, the most productive shale gas play in the US. And it is falling or flat in eight of the top ten plays. Overall well quality is declining for 36 percent of US shale gas production and is flat for 34 percent.[28]

Not surprising in this context, the major shale gas players have been making massive write-downs of their assets to reflect the new reality. Companies began in 2012 reassessing their reserves and, in the face of a gas spot price that was cut in half between July 2011 and July 2012, are being forced to admit that the long-term outlook for natural-gas prices is not positive. The write-downs have a domino effect as bank lending is typically tied to a company’s reserves meaning many companies are being forced to renegotiate credit lines or make distress asset sales to raise cash.

Beginning August 2012, many large shale gas producers in the US were forced to announce major write-downs of the value of their shale gas assets. BP announced write-downs of $4.8 billion, including a $1 billion-plus reduction in the value of its American shale gas assets. England’s BG Group made a $1.3 billion write-down of its US shale gas interests, and Encana, a large Canadian shale gas operator made a $1.7 billion write-down on shale assets in the US and Canada, accompanied by a warning that more were likely if gas prices did not recover. [29]

The Australian mining giant BHP Billiton is one of the worst hit in the US shale gas bubble as it came in late and big-time. In May, 2012 it announced it was considering taking impairments on the value its US shale-gas assets which it had bought at the peak of the shale gas boom in 2011, when the company paid $4.75 billion to buy shale projects from Chesapeake Energy and acquiring Petrohawk Energy for $15.1 billion.[30]

But leaping from the accounting change r to the notion that "now that we know fracking is a bubble" is silly.

The source for the 96 percent downgrade on oil recoverable in the Monterey shale formation ( containing 2/3 of the nation's shale oil ) is the Los Angeles Times.http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-o ... story.html

rickyp wrote:Germany has bought into the idea that we are going through another Industrial revolution. And part of the revolution is the move to renewable energy.
see

Yet nearly 75% of Germany's small- and medium-size industrial businesses say rising energy costs are a major risk, according to a recent survey by PricewaterhouseCoopers and the Federation of German Industry.

BASF, which consumes as much electricity every year at its main German plant as the entire country of Denmark, said in May it would substantially reduce its investments in Germany as a result of the country's energy policy. It said its plan for the next five years is to cut investment in Germany to one-fourth the €20 billion global total investment, from one-third currently, and that it would invest in Asia and the U.S. instead. BASF has more than 50,000 employees in Germany, about half the company's total workforce.

SGL Carbon, SGL.XE +0.31% a maker of carbon-based products, in May decided to invest an additional $200 million to its plant in Washington state on top of $100 million previously invested instead of investing in its home base of Germany. The company, which makes carbon fibers used to lighten the body of BMW's new electric car at the Washington facility, said electricity at the site costs less than one-third German rates.

danivon wrote:Arming them with what? Ukraine has quite a lot of weaponry already.

Doctor Fate wrote:

danivon wrote:Arming them with what? Ukraine has quite a lot of weaponry already.

Argue with Menedez.

Meanwhile, we have a President who still consumes himself with offering Putin "off-ramps" and worries about normalizing relations with Russia during the rest of his term in office.

danivon wrote:

Doctor Fate wrote:

danivon wrote:Arming them with what? Ukraine has quite a lot of weaponry already.

Argue with Menedez.

When he comes on redscape and puts an actual position across, maybe I will.

If you think he's right, say so. If not, say so. If you don't know, then what is your point?

Meanwhile, we have a President who still consumes himself with offering Putin "off-ramps" and worries about normalizing relations with Russia during the rest of his term in office.

Because we don't want an actual war with them?

Or do we?

Doctor Fate wrote:I think we should offer Ukraine whatever assistance they ask for short of troops.

danivon wrote:

Doctor Fate wrote:I think we should offer Ukraine whatever assistance they ask for short of troops.

Blank cheques are rarely a wise course of action.

Doctor Fate wrote:

danivon wrote:

Doctor Fate wrote:I think we should offer Ukraine whatever assistance they ask for short of troops.

Blank cheques are rarely a wise course of action.

I didn't say "blank cheque."

danivon wrote:

Doctor Fate wrote:

danivon wrote:

Doctor Fate wrote:I think we should offer Ukraine whatever assistance they ask for short of troops.

Blank cheques are rarely a wise course of action.

I didn't say "blank cheque."

You didn't need to. "Whatever assistance they ask for" covers an awful lot of possibilities even if you do exclude troops.

(as for the rest, "Argue with Obama" - I am not he, in case you forgot)