Recent

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

Occidental Petroleum Corporation Message Board

bnwild56 483 posts  |  Last Activity: 14 hours ago Member since: Feb 23, 2000
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • bnwild56 bnwild56 14 hours ago Flag

    well, local here in 70's there was oil sumps all around north high school and all over. In the 80's they did what ever and now there is shopping centers , public library and apartments all around. ya never know those sumps existed if you had not seen them...Cry me a river...The problem is too many humans bottom line...Animals a nature many of time pollute itself only to die off and then recover.. All politics and all media live on hyped problems...Just ask any ancient roman politician...I bet if we check Rome's pollution today it is not related to burning word or what ever for heating the Public Roman baths...Ya see time fixed the problem, LOL

    Your Hilarious .....What about all the human Excretment directly into rivers and disease and health problems in the third world today or even Mexico as I believe it still is recommended not to drink local water. Interestingly industrial and business operations is behind the clean up of this waste.
    Next you will be complaining the sun causes cancer and growing cotton and making oil based clothing pollutes to much so we need not wear clothes but wait what about cancer from the sun....

  • bnwild56 bnwild56 17 hours ago Flag

    Naw Dana they are paying full costs...Because in the End the consumer pays the Full costs...Wether it is on purchase or use or on Government clean up later in a dump, river, mountain...Government taxes said company if it's costs are higher Government collects less taxes...In the end the Public aways pays...so the full costs are paid...The activists just do not like the timing when the full costs are paid....Dumb really...Although a ounce of prevention could save a pound later....Stitch in time saves nine.

  • Reply to

    Where is Culley?

    by trmmara Aug 26, 2015 8:20 PM
    bnwild56 bnwild56 17 hours ago Flag

    Well, you or your experts cannot explain how CO2 can heat with molecule collisions at three times the rate of IR absorption/emission? Cannot explain why CO2 would cause forcing from water vapor when water vapor covers 90% of the CO2 Bands and at the 15 micron range covers 80% or more of the 15 micron band. Thus an increase of ten percent water vapor would equal an doubling of CO2... This a ten percent of water vapor at an low 1 percent.(noting vapor ranges from 1 to 5 % or 10k to 50k PPM). Do you even grasp those numbers?

    1% h2o vapor is 10,000 parts per million. An ten percent increase is an additional 1,000 parts per million. CO2 400 Parts per million.
    There is an excellent graph of the overlap done by: Robert A. Rohde for the Global Warming Art project. This graph shows the overlap.

    I wonder why with the 100 billion spent and continued billions none of our experts have put up(made) a graph to show this....I no computer program user but I recently thought maybe I should try to over lay the CO2 graph onto the graph for water vapor . make it translucent so water could be blue and CO2 be yellow then the overlap would show green....

    I think our expert climatologist do not produce such a graph because everyone would question their premise... What forcing then? the AGW scientist already know they need forcing to be very powerful to even have a chance at making CO2 a factor in heat...

    And as h20 overlaps CO2 and a mere 10 percent increase of the low end 1 percent range would factor to capture as much IR as a double of CO2 to 800 parts per million....This is a serious question it is not something to take lightly.

    And then of course there the Pressure density mass which acts like an regulating range for set amount of energy in...Thus no need for any GHG to get the heat...Experiments could be set up but we hear nothing about an experiment on this....WHY? It's not lack of money!

  • Reply to

    loaded up .52 , labor day pop

    by divin4tacos 19 hours ago
    bnwild56 bnwild56 18 hours ago Flag

    Do not know you Taco's...But if there were a trader the move would of been cover at .43 and go long at same time...Then sell half today at 0.52.
    0.10/0.42 or 25 % gain one week or less. on the upside trade.

    like i said pc's went crazy...My regret is I did not buy RDS....And I certainly did not see the coal bounce coming...Although I do not follow coal and only recently put cloud point on my radar....Naaa, what traders saw the FCX move? I like to here/read the chart reasoning on that one.

  • Reply to

    no dividend on yahoo...

    by mookmelodrama Aug 27, 2015 2:21 PM
    bnwild56 bnwild56 18 hours ago Flag

    Well, the news, bloomberg and all complain about Yahoo growth and revenues and all rallied Melissa Myers (sp?) CEO of yahoo. Well, updating the information and being timely would be TOP priority if I were running yahoo. but Yahoo CEO's have not a clue how to build the Business.(no one likes out of date info. example RDS is months out of date)....

  • bnwild56 bnwild56 18 hours ago Flag

    vladd, do not over sale DNR... I forget DNR's daily production but I always thought OXY CO2 EOR had fairly large production...Whom is the other CO2 EOR producers?

  • Reply to

    Where is Culley?

    by trmmara Aug 26, 2015 8:20 PM
    bnwild56 bnwild56 Aug 27, 2015 11:26 PM Flag

    we not as smart as the native indian as they burned forest as part of management

  • bnwild56 bnwild56 Aug 27, 2015 5:07 PM Flag

    ((""The scientific method thrives on rational "dissent" and skepticism. That's why it works so well."")) Then Dana why has not governments funded some Dissent and Skeptical research?

  • Reply to

    Where is Culley?

    by trmmara Aug 26, 2015 8:20 PM
    bnwild56 bnwild56 Aug 27, 2015 4:45 PM Flag

    any time in history i forest burned it your statement is true...nothing change...Except humans cut forest to live there. to build cities factories etc. All through history man has prospered near forest only to decline once humans had deforested the area...Forest in USA burns more these days because Americans/Gov. decided to put natural fire out and not let the natural cycle of forest fires continue...So today we get big fires we can no longer put out quickly because of all the extra growth that was never let burn off in the normal natural cycle....So yes, oxymoron.

  • bnwild56 by bnwild56 Aug 27, 2015 4:30 PM Flag

    Why they complain about dissent against climate change funding.
    Is Because they do not have math or science that can proved the dissenting argument wrong! No real science so they attack from emotions and emotions do not make science fact true! Nor does character assasination prove science...If the AGW have a good case let em argue the Science instead! the reason AGW does not is because it base on FICTION!

  • bnwild56 bnwild56 Aug 27, 2015 4:24 PM Flag

    Gee, Danna i think I given Donors Trust a $20.00 bill

  • Reply to

    Where is Culley?

    by trmmara Aug 26, 2015 8:20 PM
    bnwild56 bnwild56 Aug 27, 2015 4:14 PM Flag

    Your logic departs from logic and enters fallacy thinking. burning forest adding CO2 what an oxymoron as to grow the forest it had to use CO2.

    Pres. Obama Plan. Assume we reduced USA co2 today 30%.
    World use 90 million B/D increase co2 2 PPM per year.
    Usa uses 20 million B/D an 30% reduction = 6 million B/D
    90 million B/D less 6 Million B/D =84 million B/D

    2/90 as x/84. x= 1.86 PPM. SO 6 million B/D =reduction .14

    ten years 2015 to 2025
    400 + 2PPM(10) = 420
    .14 PPM reduction time ten = 1.4 PPM

    savings after ten years leaves 2025 with 418.96 PPM Total
    2025 no savings 420 PPM
    2025 with saving 418.96

    Holy-bat feathers the Earth's climate will not know the difference but the USA economy and Americans standard of living surely will! And we do not even get to the max reduction until 2025 so extend out to 2035...

    I bet technology will have more economic green energy by 2035.(Fossil costs versus green costs more equal or perhaps green cheaper than fossil in 2035 and no need of subsidies).. maybe Japans hydrogen cars will take root...they planning on selling 3,000 Hydrogen cars next year in ca.

    again it's over blown once it's economic it will take over overnight just like cell phones to smart phones...Or 30 years after apple II veryone has a PC or computer in their hand....

  • bnwild56 bnwild56 Aug 27, 2015 3:48 PM Flag

    The question should be Dana why is not the Government funding some denial research...That is how science is done(ya just do not study one view)...

  • Reply to

    BP heading to 43 dollars soon

    by sameas55 Aug 27, 2015 12:50 PM
    bnwild56 bnwild56 Aug 27, 2015 3:29 PM Flag

    I have to refresh on NPV's etc. But without doing that the 18 bill settlement probably has a today NPV of 11billion @ 7% interest...S it would not b a reduction in book value of 18 billion today but more like 11 billion NPV but again it cost BP only a little over 1 billion a year for 18 years....so without other on simple math I would add back 8 billion to your $ 70 billion...Ot I would less 11 billion from the $90 billion and arrive at 79 billion...So range on back envelope is 78 to 79 billion. Share outstanding 3 billion...
    Oil companies usually in normal market trade above 1 times book...
    Current Book per yahoo is $34.00 a share......So your all wet good luck with your short....You could always sell long term puts.....That's how i would short.....Limits the run away squeeze because you set the cover price in event of squeeze..

  • Reply to

    SD

    by caliumhound Aug 27, 2015 12:18 PM
    bnwild56 bnwild56 Aug 27, 2015 2:02 PM Flag

    Cali hound I not so sure it will not try again. I think the companies will drop around/after earnings this qtr. as price been under $50.00 for more than half the 90 day qtr. which end Sept. 30. Do we get an Iran approval late Sept? If one like NG I might suggest considering Shell/BG; the sabine Pass will start up soon and they will benefit. Not to mention he BG start ups off Australia (LNG)...Of course if China Flat, Korea, Japan , and Asia as whole Flat there may be pricing pressure coming in LNG....I think Sabine is going to Europe though but then maybe Russia be willing to sell NG for lower prices.....Anyway I think we can see another plunge...

  • Reply to

    market

    by harehau Aug 24, 2015 8:17 AM
    bnwild56 bnwild56 Aug 27, 2015 1:49 PM Flag

    I dumb, but on JV Schlum buying CAM gives Schlum 100% of the JV. OR CAM share...I know Cameron provides many things including valves(which has always been a good business I think) and BOP's...
    BOP's are really the only thing I ever associated with CAM.(hence why O dumb)...smile. I think the future involves offshore East coast of USA. Do not know what they will do about resistance off west coast. The west coast beach drops off a cliff and the east coast beach just keeps going out on a gradual decline....Maybe a lot of Gas off east coast....

  • Reply to

    Is it a right time to buy up some more COP ?

    by blueosyster Aug 24, 2015 4:31 AM
    bnwild56 bnwild56 Aug 26, 2015 2:47 PM Flag

    "" We don’t expect a recovery before 2017 (at the earliest), and anticipate a protracted period of fits and starts in activity before the sector’s overcapitalization is sufficiently eased through consolidation and attrition…[We] are 1) shifting our proxy for next cycle’s “normalized” earnings from 2017 to 2018, 2) reducing our base outlook to an extended trough in activity through 2016, 3) rolling price targets for much of our coverage to December 2016 (from Dec-2015),"" says JP morgan chase

  • bnwild56 by bnwild56 Aug 26, 2015 1:44 PM Flag

    "" We don’t expect a recovery before 2017 (at the earliest), and anticipate a protracted period of fits and starts in activity before the sector’s overcapitalization is sufficiently eased through consolidation and attrition…[We] are 1) shifting our proxy for next cycle’s “normalized” earnings from 2017 to 2018, 2) reducing our base outlook to an extended trough in activity through 2016, 3) rolling price targets for much of our coverage to December 2016 (from Dec-2015),""

  • Reply to

    Crude up & another oil company takeover.

    by getuserid Aug 26, 2015 8:53 AM
    bnwild56 bnwild56 Aug 26, 2015 1:01 PM Flag

    Service company mergers. In the 80's there were many many different companies and many many were mauled. With all the consolidation and even more such as Cameron ; I wonder whether I would ever want to own the massive survivor in a downturn....In oil....

  • bnwild56 by bnwild56 Aug 26, 2015 3:21 AM Flag

    Cramer: Time to dump your danger stocks!
    I not listen to him in long time. Bad news if he even half right.

OXY
71.84+1.28(+1.81%)Aug 28 4:04 PMEDT