Wed, Apr 23, 2014, 4:36 PM EDT - U.S. Markets closed

Recent

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

SPY Inc. Message Board

bobbellis 1171 posts  |  Last Activity: 1 hour 47 minutes ago Member since: Oct 21, 2009
  • Reply to

    James Skalko?

    by bobbellis Apr 20, 2014 11:18 AM
    bobbellis bobbellis Apr 21, 2014 3:17 PM Flag

    tip of the iceberg

  • ...
    Associated Press

    Scientists have long expressed concern about how a lack of data and access to drilling sites prevents a complete scientific assessment of how hydraulic fracturing and oil and gas production affect the climate, environment and public health.

    A new University of Texas-Austin analysis of natural gas drilling and fracking in urban areas near Dallas and Fort Worth, Texas, not only criticizes state and federal regulatory agencies for dismissing public concern about the health and environmental impacts of shale oil and gas development, but illuminates the large gap in understanding about what shale oil and gas production mean for public health and the environment in Texas and beyond.

    Shale oil and gas production, which is expanding rapidly across much of the central United States, is likely to be a driver of climate change, not only because burning petroleum products produced there emits vast amounts of carbon dioxide, but because natural gas production and distribution systems are likely to leak methane, a gas about 35 times more potent than carbon as a greenhouse gas.

    But the gap in scientists’ understanding of what shale oil and gas development means for the environment and human health is significant, said Susan Brantley, a Pennsylvania State University biogeochemist studying the impacts of shale gas development in Pennsylvania. Brantley, unaffiliated with the UT-Austin study, is among the scientists who have spoken out about the fracking data gap.

    “A few health studies have been initiated, but data are few and far between that allow scientists to interpret potential impacts,” Brantley said via email. “In addition, the lack of federal oversight on a lot of activity which is controlled by the states makes for difficulties for scientists to evaluate or even get hold of needed data. In Pennsylvania, it is even difficult to determine exactly where spills have occurred, let alone the volume of the spill, the timing or the chemicals that were spille

    Sentiment: Sell

  • Reply to

    Does this rise have to do with the UK report?

    by wright.tom64 Apr 21, 2014 12:43 PM
    bobbellis bobbellis Apr 21, 2014 3:11 PM Flag

    Ha! Ha! MPET is a penny stock. It's a "petroleum" company, yet it's total annual revenues are only about $7 million dollars. For a company that's been in existence since the 1950's!

    Sentiment: Sell

  • bobbellis bobbellis Apr 21, 2014 2:44 PM Flag

    Repost for newbies....

  • Reply to

    Nothern Petroleum DOWNGRADES UK Assets

    by bobbellis Apr 20, 2014 4:10 PM
    bobbellis bobbellis Apr 21, 2014 2:42 PM Flag

    Dd dd dd dd dd dd
    dd dd dd dd dd dd
    dd dd dd dd dd dd

    Sentiment: Sell

  • bobbellis by bobbellis Apr 21, 2014 2:40 PM Flag

    Yuck ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

    Sentiment: Sell

  • Reply to

    Very low volume!

    by wildbullus Apr 21, 2014 1:01 PM
    bobbellis bobbellis Apr 21, 2014 2:39 PM Flag

    No it's because it's a dead carcass with no prospects........

    Sentiment: Sell

  • What a pumper creeep!

    Sentiment: Strong Sell

  • Any bookmaker's on board who want to place a bet?

    Sentiment: Sell

  • Reply to

    ----------- Carlo Civelli ----------------

    by bobbellis Apr 17, 2014 11:24 AM
    bobbellis bobbellis Apr 20, 2014 4:22 PM Flag

    John Thomas Financial

    Thomas Belesis

    Wayne Kaufman

    Sentiment: Sell

  • Reply to

    Grade A Basher:

    by meandcody1 Apr 19, 2014 5:42 PM
    bobbellis bobbellis Apr 20, 2014 4:12 PM Flag

    Tell us all about it, dykk wad.

    Sentiment: Strong Sell

  • Bill Lehane 09 April 2014 11:24 GMT
    London-listed explorer ditches Havant prospect as it focuses on international plays
    Northern Petroleum has ditched the licence for the Havant oil prospect and downgraded the resources at two other UK onshore conventional plays.

    The AIM-listed explorer said that after discussions with its joint venture partners – which include Magellan Petroleum and Premier Oil - it had decided to relinquish the PEDL256 and PEDL155 licences containing the Havant oil prospect.

    The acreage in the Hampshire sector of the Weald basin has been permitted for a well since 2009 but has not seen any drilling.

    Northern Petroleum also said that it and Igas Energy had decided to downgrade the Baxter’s Copse and Markwells Wood discoveries from 4.3 million barrels of proven and probable reserves to 2C contingent resources.

    “While both assets have the potential to become commercial discoveries, the company believes that further appraisal needs to be undertaken to produce a viable development plan which would lead to commercial production,” Northern Petroleum said.

    Markwells Wood partner Egdon Resources admitted in 2012 that the Great Oolite oil discovery had failed to meet expectations after testing.

    Igas Energy acquired Baxter’s Copse from Ireland’s Providence Resources in 2012 but has not yet moved ahead with well site selection previously envisaged for the asset.

    Northern Petroleum also said it was continuing efforts to sell its UK portfolio as it chases bigger prospects internationally, but that expressions of interests had to date failed to match its valuation of the assets.

    Chief executive Keith Bush said that “management time and capital allocated to the UK will be limited” in advance of any sale, which he said would require an offer that recognised the “small but consistent source of income” derived from its Horndean and Avington fields...

    Sentiment: Strong Sell

  • Still spreading
    Poplar residents find time doesn't heal all wounds
    by Kelly Conde

    Residents of the town of Poplar on the Fort Peck Indian Reservation continue to deal with a massive groundwater contamination from oil and gas activity, and a new report released last week by the U.S. Geological Survey shows that the contamination is only spreading. The federal agency says the issue has led to polluted drinking water for more than 3,000 people.

    The contamination was first discovered in the 1980s, when residents living near the East Poplar oilfield noticed their drinking water tasted especially salty and contained an odd, amber hue. Since those initial complaints, the USGS and the Fort Peck Office of Environmental Protection have worked to understand the cause of the contamination and its extent. Though it is now well established that the problem resulted from antiquated oil production practices nearly 60 years ago, experts have had considerably more trouble determining just how far the polluted water has spread.

    The terrain surrounding Poplar includes a predictable mix of soft rolling hills and deep gullies, but the area is more complex below the surface. The USGS can only track the contaminated water by drilling small individual wells and sampling the water beneath, or by flying expensive electromagnetic detectors over the area via helicopter. The report released last week used a combination of the two methods to draw its conclusions, and found the contamination has increased from 12.1 square miles in 1997 to 17.9 square miles today.

    The reason the contamination continues to spread can be linked to the location of the oilfields. The East Poplar oilfields connect to the Williston basin. "The water that is produced with oil and gas development in the Williston basin is extremely saline," USGS hydrologist Joanna Thamke says.

    In fact, the water beneath the Williston basin is some of the most saline water in the n

  • bobbellis bobbellis Apr 20, 2014 2:52 PM Flag

    ------ "Grants from the aid package, called the “Eastern Montana Impact and Infrastructure Project,” can go toward the planning, designing, repairment, improvement and expansion for water and wastewater treatment systems. Also eligible for the aid package is the payment of existing debt incurred on or after July 1, 2011, for water and wastewater systems." --------

    carson. Stop BS'ing and do something constructive for once in your miserable message board existence: Explain to your fellow investors the difference between NORM and TENORM ( species of radioactive waste )

  • Reply to

    MBOGC and Class 2 injection wells

    by wright.tom64 Apr 20, 2014 10:48 AM
    bobbellis bobbellis Apr 20, 2014 12:53 PM Flag

    Have you seen the latest report dated April 15, 2014?
    USGS blames oil drilling for water contamination in Montana
    APRIL 15, 2014
    Oil drilling in the East Poplar oil field in Montana is the cause of brine contamination of an 18-mile shallow aquifer, a new report released by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has revealed.

    Researchers said that disposal of brine water from oil operations for decades has affected the quality of both private drinking water wells and public water supply wells for the city of Poplar. According to USGS estimates, the amount of groundwater impacted by contamination ranges between 15 billion and 37 billion gallons, affecting supplies to about 3,000 people in the area.

    The report claimed that possible sources of groundwater contamination included pipelines, storage tanks, production wells and brine disposal wells. USGS researchers noted that identifying a specific source of contamination was often not possible because of the presence of several features occurring at the same time and place.

    An earlier study by the USGS involving samples of water taken in 2009/2010 confirmed that water from the public water supply of the city of Poplar was contaminated with chemicals present in oil-field brine. This prompted the city to construct a pipeline in 2011 to carry treated water from the Missouri River to the city and communities nearby.

  • Reply to

    google "dreamteamgroup"

    by avi.morax Apr 15, 2014 8:04 AM
    bobbellis bobbellis Apr 20, 2014 12:08 PM Flag

    Enlightening!

    Sentiment: Strong Sell

  • bobbellis bobbellis Apr 20, 2014 12:02 PM Flag

    TOP-SIDE

  • Reply to

    MBOGC and Class 2 injection wells

    by wright.tom64 Apr 20, 2014 10:48 AM
    bobbellis bobbellis Apr 20, 2014 11:21 AM Flag

    You're totally flumoxxed, "carson".

    Sentiment: Strong Sell

  • bobbellis by bobbellis Apr 20, 2014 11:18 AM Flag

    FINANCIAL CONSULTING AGREEMENT

    THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into as of May 10, 2003, by and between CYTRX
    CORPORATION, located at 11726 San Vicente Blvd., Suite 650, Los Angeles, CA
    90049 ("CytRx") and JAMES SKALKO, located 1858 Bridgewater Drive, Lake Mary, FL
    32746 ("Consultant").

    Sentiment: Sell

  • Reply to

    Remember Cytrx Director Dr. Louis Ignarro?

    by bobbellis Apr 18, 2014 7:02 PM
    bobbellis bobbellis Apr 20, 2014 11:09 AM Flag

    DD DD dd
    dd
    dd
    dd

XSPY
1.250.00(0.00%)Apr 22 1:44 PMEDT

Trending Tickers

i
Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.