Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Linn Energy, LLC (LINE) Message Board

  • ohohyodasoda ohohyodasoda Apr 8, 2011 10:06 AM Flag

    OIL north of $111

    Oil has hit a new high at over $111/barrel. I love it. In my entire investing life of over 40 years, I have never been is such good shape.

    The failed policies of this administration, that have put this country on the road to bankrupcy, along with a failed energy policy that panders to the Greenies who want us driving electric cars, and charging them wtih windmills and solar panels, is going to be the downfall of this administration. Forget about the failed pacifist international diplomacy efforts to placate the Muslem world that hates us, the price of energy and the falling value of the dollar as a result of printing money to cover expenditures we can't afford, is generating a deep resentment toward this administration.

    If you think the Right was angery during the November 2010 elections, you ain't seen nothing yet. The American electorate has most often voted with their pocket book and the price of oil effects the cost of everything. We are just starting the summer driving season. With oil sure to go higher from here, American will curtail driving vacations and stay home. That will effect the tourist industry, upon which millions of Americans depend for their livelyhood. The situation is very serious. This whole upward spiral in the price of energy could send us into a double dip recession.

    If we have a double dip recession, anybody could run against the current leadership (or lack thereof) in the WhiteHouse and Win. I am affraid we are probably looking at a one term president.

    I am so thankfull that I put most of my eggs in the Linn Energy basket. Linn is a fantastic hedge against inflation.

    Good luck to all the longs holding Linn as their life line.

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • zcar1@sbcglobal.net zcar1 Apr 10, 2011 10:34 PM Flag

      "If so, couldn't houses be fit with small compressors to accomplish this?"

      Google Phill

    • "We urge you to let (the 45-cent a gallon credit) expire and resist calls for spending on infrastructure for conventional biofuels," said a letter to congressional leaders signed by 90 livestock, foodmaker, budget hawk, environmental and international development groups.

      http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/01/us-usa-ethanol-idUSTRE7207XV20110301

    • The recent report on federal waste by the Government Accountability Office should signal a new era of frugality in the capital. Unfortunately, that's hardly a foregone conclusion, given past attempts to reduce waste and duplication.

      But the GAO report cites one mammoth government subsidy that is expected to get even bigger without congressional intervention. The federal government should stop mandating ethanol as a motor fuel additive and stop subsidizing corn-based ethanol. It would reduce a boondoggle that costs the federal taxpayer billions. And it would limit the upward pressure on food prices.

      The newly energized House of Representatives recently took a step toward that fiscal reform by voting to block EPA plans to increase the percentage of ethanol from 10 to 15 percent at the pump. Another measure approved by the House would halt federal subsidies for the blending pumps required to prepare ethanol for motor vehicle use.

      The GAO concluded that federal tax credits for ethanol should be allowed to die at the end of the year. It determined the tax credits were a duplicative incentive, since ethanol use already is mandated. ...

      Ending the ethanol mandate and subsidy would help, not hurt, the environment. It would improve vehicle fuel mileage. It would help put food on the tables of the poor.

      And it would save taxpayers $100 billion.

      Congress should move to harvest the benefits from this costly boondoggle.

    • The recent report on federal waste by the Government Accountability Office should signal a new era of frugality in the capital. Unfortunately, that's hardly a foregone conclusion, given past attempts to reduce waste and duplication.

      But the GAO report cites one mammoth government subsidy that is expected to get even bigger without congressional intervention. The federal government should stop mandating ethanol as a motor fuel additive and stop subsidizing corn-based ethanol. It would reduce a boondoggle that costs the federal taxpayer billions. And it would limit the upward pressure on food prices.

      The newly energized House of Representatives recently took a step toward that fiscal reform by voting to block EPA plans to increase the percentage of ethanol from 10 to 15 percent at the pump. Another measure approved by the House would halt federal subsidies for the blending pumps required to prepare ethanol for motor vehicle use.


      http://www.lancastereaglegazette.com/article/20110322/OPINION04/103220309/U-S-should-stop-subsidizing-corn-based-ethanol

      Go freshmen Republicans. Next year it should be lowered to 5%.

      America is not going to create the jobs our people need if $60 billion is wasted on misallocation of food production and higher food prices destablize the world.

      Do the right thing and do it now!

    • http://www.theledger.com/article/20110308/NEWS/103085029/1001/BUSINESS?Title=Corn-Based-Ethanol-Plants-Fire-Up-as-Oil-Prices-Spike-Corn-Based-Ethanol-Plants-Fire-Up-as-Oil-Prices-Spike

      I expect corruption in failUfornia. Ethanol is a big reason we pay a 10% to 20% more for gas than anywhere else in the lower 48.

    • How does a farmer special interest political group explain the shortage of food?

      Why they go to the fair tale stuff on efficiency like the dishonest greens. Watch me pull a magic efficiency bullet out of my hat.

      "Ross Korves, economic policy analyst at ProExporter Network, examined the ability of U.S. corn growers to supply adequate grain supplies to the feed and fuel industries from 2016 to 2030. Corn yields steadily increased over the past 60 years as fertilizers, pest control chemicals and genetically modified corn varieties were adopted by corn growers. By tracking average yield growth since 1990, Korves concluded that by 2030, corn farmers could support the production of 36 billion gallons of ethanol per year on the same number of acres, plus meet increased demand for feed, food and industrial products."

      Terrible just horrible people. What actually happened?
      http://www.ethanolproducer.com/articles/5146/studies-remeasure-corn-based-ethanol's-impact-potential/

    • Corn-based ethanol producers are cranking up as oil prices soar
      Ethanol production hit record levels last year, and some companies are looking to expand. But the alternative fuel has critics, including some scientists who say it's just as harmful to the environment as oil.

      Brian Newport lost his job when Pacific Ethanol closed its Stockton facility… (Anne Cusack, Los Angeles Times)March 02, 2011|By P.J. Huffstutter, Los Angeles TimesCorn-based ethanol is the renewable fuel environmentalists love to hate. But as turmoil in the Middle East and North Africa has sent oil prices soaring, U.S.-made ethanol is making a comeback.

      Plants mothballed during the economic downturn are reopening. Domestic ethanol production hit record levels last year, topping 13.2 billion gallons, according to the Renewable Fuels Assn. in Washington. Oil companies including Valero Energy Corp., Sunoco Inc. and Marathon Oil Corp. that snapped up facilities when the industry hit a rough patch a few years ago are looking to expand.

      http://articles.latimes.com/2011/mar/02/business/la-fi-oil-ethanol-20110303

      --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    • CU scientist terms corn-based ethanol 'subsidized food burning'
      By Roger Segelken
      Neither increases in government subsidies to corn-based ethanol fuel nor hikes in the price of petroleum can overcome what one Cornell agricultural scientist calls a fundamental input-yield problem: It takes more energy to make ethanol from grain than the combustion of ethanol produces.

      At a time when ethanol-gasoline mixtures (gasohol) are touted as the American answer to fossil fuel shortages by corn producers, food processors and some lawmakers, Cornell's David Pimentel takes a longer range view.



      "Abusing our precious croplands to grow corn for an energy-inefficient process that yields low-grade automobile fuel amounts to unsustainable, subsidized food burning," said the Cornell professor in the College of Agriculture and Life Sciences. Pimentel, who chaired a U.S. Department of Energy panel that investigated the energetics, economics and environmental aspects of ethanol production several years ago, subsequently conducted a detailed analysis of the corn-to-car fuel process. His findings will be published next month in the forthcoming Encyclopedia of Physical Sciences and Technology.

      Among his findings:

      An acre of U.S. corn yields about 7,110 pounds of corn for processing into 328 gallons of ethanol. But planting, growing and harvesting that much corn requires about 140 gallons of fossil fuels and costs $347 per acre, according to Pimentel's analysis. Thus, even before corn is converted to ethanol, the feedstock costs $1.05 per gallon of ethanol.

      The energy economics get worse at the processing plants, where the grain is crushed and fermented. As many as three distillation steps are needed to separate the 8 percent ethanol from the 92 percent water. Additional treatment and energy are required to produce the 99.8 percent pure ethanol for mixing with gasoline.

      Adding up the energy costs of corn production and its conversion to ethanol, 131,000 Btu are needed to make 1 gallon of ethanol. One gallon of ethanol has an energy value of only 77,000 Btu. "Put another way," Pimentel said, "about 70 percent more energy is required to produce ethanol than the energy that actually is in ethanol. Every time you make 1 gallon of ethanol, there is a net energy loss of 54,000 Btu."

      Ethanol from corn costs about $1.74 per gallon to produce, compared with about 95 cents to produce a gallon of gasoline. "That helps explain why fossil fuels -- not ethanol -- are used to produce ethanol," Pimentel said. "The growers and processors can't afford to burn ethanol to make ethanol. U.S. drivers couldn't afford it either, if it weren't for government subsidies to artificially lower the price."

      Most economic analyses of corn-to-ethanol production overlook the costs of environmental damages, which Pimentel says should add another 23 cents per gallon. "Corn production in the U.S. erodes soil about 12 times faster than the soil can be reformed, and irrigating corn mines groundwater 25 percent faster than the natural recharge rate of ground water. The environmental system in which corn is being produced is being rapidly degraded. Corn should not be considered a renewable resource for ethanol energy production, especially when human food is being converted into ethanol," Pimentel said.

      If all the automobiles in the United States were fueled with 100 percent ethanol, a total of about 97 percent of U.S. land area would be needed to grow the corn feedstock. Corn would cover nearly the total land area of the United States.

    • Stagg insisting to compare ‘subsidies’ is insanity. We have been over and over this as well and you do know better.
      Look ethanol subsidies in the form of forced use and exploding food prices are in excess of $60 billion dollars year. This does not include the extreme cost of shipping this stuff and additional wear and tear it causes of vehicles..
      • Energy Subsidies and Mandates. Solar and wind receive subsidies of over $23/Mwh (megawatt hour) compared with $1.59/Mwh for nuclear, $0.44/Mwh for conventional coal, and $0.25/Mwh for natural gas. This does not include the $27.2 billion allocated in the 2009 “stimulus” bill for energy efficiency and renewable energy research and investment. Congress mandated that renewable fuels be mixed into the gasoline supply and required production of 36 billion gallons of ethanol by 2022. Energy subsidies and mandates reduce competition, inflate prices, and stifle technological innovation, and Americans have to pay twice for the subsidies: first through higher taxes and second with higher energy prices.
      You should be ashamed of yourself stagg. Corn prices have been linked to imported oil and you are reaping a share of that exploitation. Now it is clear you will say anything and resort to any tactic to keep your share of exploiting your fellow Americans using OPEC as an excuse.
      Do you really think farmers like you can get away with $60 billion a year in government sponsored corruption?
      You need to get honest with yourself before this comes home to roost in 2012.
      Funny how folks like you force me to become more and more conservative. You will exploit our government to prey upon your fellow Americans and point at others to justify your behavior. No wonder our government is not working. There are to many selfish people like you and to few of us traditional Americans attempting to be fair to make you stop.
      Right now I think traditional American have no choice but to simplify the tax code and eliminate all subsidies and most especially farming. Our money is not buying a stable food supply at reasonable cost but exploitation at the hands of people like you.
      Shame.

      Our only choice is to elimate all the crazy ethonol regardless of crop price. That is the only logical action your abusive behavior allows.Never thought an AMerican farmer would become the ally of OPEC against America.

    • jackhiller@ymail.com jackhiller Apr 10, 2011 1:00 PM Flag

      It cost more, because market forces of supply demand pemits producers and buyers to achieve the sales price. We can recall when diesel sold at a discount to gasoline, and then diesel engines gained popularity, especially for large trucks--supply-demand at work.

    • View More Messages
 
LINE
9.1201-0.0399(-0.44%)10:29 AMEDT