I think I’m a bit keen on Woodside’s plays in meeting future energy needs.
Black Gold, Anyone?
- Thread starter AgStalker
- Start date
COVID has reduced CO2 emissions by something like 4 - 8%. We’re going to need that to happen every year if we’re going to reach net zero carbon by 2050.
So we either have a crisisevery year for the next 30 years, or we get a ramp up in investment in carbon neutral fossil fuels - oil, LNG and atomic number 1.
So we either have a crisisevery year for the next 30 years, or we get a ramp up in investment in carbon neutral fossil fuels - oil, LNG and atomic number 1.
We are having the coolest weather locally for as long as I can remember. It has been raining non stop for months. The Indonesians burn their forests around August or Sept, a dry season, a reason why we don't believe in the green movement, it's a joke when this happens yearly. But it has been raining non stop since June so the dry season has disappeared this year. You can't burn the forest when the ground is soaked.
If the wet weather continues to December, it will become snow in the northern part of asia, snow and snow non stop. This winter is going to be very very cold. People are going to burn anything they can get hold of to generate heat.
If the wet weather continues to December, it will become snow in the northern part of asia, snow and snow non stop. This winter is going to be very very cold. People are going to burn anything they can get hold of to generate heat.
Pleasing to see the NSW government supporting Santos in meeting future energy demands. I worry about projects in that jurisdiction.
I’ll be following both them and Woodside’s venture into blue hydrogen with interest, but probably not with any $$$$.
Santos for me is a medium term bet, Woodside Hydrogen is long term, but in reality I am trader in them. If oil hits $100 again, I will sell and when it drops to $50 Ill buy.
As for Hydrogen many people dismiss it without realising that many industrial users of hydrocarbons won't consider battery technology like Long Haul Truck, Buses, Trains, Bulk/Cargo ships and Air transport.
For many of the industrial users mentioned above time and or weight is a bigger issue with batteries and logistics of Hydrogen unlike for general public is not a concern, ie Buses, Planes, Trains and Ships all fuel at a designated depot, port or airport. For long haul trucks it is not that hard to map out Hydrogen to major trucking stops.
Once Hydrogen is produced for the above industries the cost of hydrogen will fall drastically. As for hydrogen cars for the masses it depends for example South Korea government plans build and open 1200 hydrogen stops and private companies are also planning hydrogen stations.
Hydrogen in cities like Seoul Korea, Tokyo, Beijing and HK makes sense with 80% living in apartments without chargers. Of course new apartment developments could build chargers in each carspot but that doesn't help many tens of millions apartments with open plan parking that is already built and won't be replaced for 50 fifty years or more.
Last edited:
Cost averaged all the way as the price dropped to $2.70. Averaged $3 per stock, and 2019 dividend was $2, EPS about the same as dividend. Until now, I can't believe it, let's see what happens next year or so. This experience thought me that the US stock market is totally crazy. People are investing based on hype rather than fundamentals.
You're spot on for XOM. I just opened a position in INTC, my only buy for almost a year, as I've been selling past couple of months. INTC is much better than AMD, but valued way less.
My 2C
Looking forward 12 months, dont worry about official interest rate upto 2%, for sure every rate rise will create a dip but at worst major indexes will be around the levels today on 1 Jan 23.
The indicator to watch is JOB NUMBERS basically below 5% unemployment rate mean 2% official interest rate is non issue unless you are Turkey/Zimbawee
As for the mortgage rate, this is only a worry for individuals, for the broader economy with Unemployment below 5% property prices will keep going up, for sure some will have to sell due to higher interest rate but that is a individual family issue. House hunters will always be complaining lol and they will find another meme issue to complain about loudly but it is a nothing burger story. ie blame the currency, the chinese, blame the banks and the government but this is only because buyers under stress have only thier circumstances to blame.
For every fore closure there will be dozens of willing buyers hocking themself to buy.
Though I said broader market will stay around the same level, certain sectors will keep rising and others will go down, so look at sectors/thematics.
For guaranteed wining sectors look at battery materials, energy (green and black) and base ores.
For guaranteed losing sectors look at pseudo tech stocks with no moats
Looking forward 12 months, dont worry about official interest rate upto 2%, for sure every rate rise will create a dip but at worst major indexes will be around the levels today on 1 Jan 23.
The indicator to watch is JOB NUMBERS basically below 5% unemployment rate mean 2% official interest rate is non issue unless you are Turkey/Zimbawee
As for the mortgage rate, this is only a worry for individuals, for the broader economy with Unemployment below 5% property prices will keep going up, for sure some will have to sell due to higher interest rate but that is a individual family issue. House hunters will always be complaining lol and they will find another meme issue to complain about loudly but it is a nothing burger story. ie blame the currency, the chinese, blame the banks and the government but this is only because buyers under stress have only thier circumstances to blame.
For every fore closure there will be dozens of willing buyers hocking themself to buy.
Though I said broader market will stay around the same level, certain sectors will keep rising and others will go down, so look at sectors/thematics.
For guaranteed wining sectors look at battery materials, energy (green and black) and base ores.
For guaranteed losing sectors look at pseudo tech stocks with no moats
Last edited:
Im a firm believer in nuclear power, I would never invest in the sector.
ie
In any politcal action or tension, accident or war that effects OIL = price is guaranteed to go up
In any political action or tension, accident or war that effects Nuclear = price is guaranteed to go down
Bill Gates is heavily invested in the sector.
Reassuring to conspiracy theorists I guess.
Im following a Danish or Norwegian company (can’t remember off the top of my head which one) lol. They’ll be looking to go public later in the year.
Reassuring to conspiracy theorists I guess.
Im following a Danish or Norwegian company (can’t remember off the top of my head which one) lol. They’ll be looking to go public later in the year.
Bill Gates can fund anything he wants however Bills outlook does not match mine.
I am in the markets to make money over 1 to 2 year cycle, Bill is in the market to change the world for better over 10 or 20 years.
Ive doubled down in oil because I see $100 usd oil in due course but $150 if there is a war in Ukraine or a terrorist attack in middle east.
I wont invest in nuclear because I dont want to be holding any shares when the next accident or terrorist attack occurs.
Last edited:
My oil etfs are doing well too. Kind of a no brainer.
When was the last nuclear accident or terrorist attack involving nuclear weapons?
You can google when the last accident was and the next accident is easy to predict, sometimes in the future but I wont be holding any shares.
Lol.
That's fine, I don't care one way or another. One of your criteria is regulatory risk. Another is the potential for disaster.
I'm just going to say that your fundamentals are shaky.
There's huge regulatory hurdles in many countries around nuclear, granted. But the regulatory risk associated with fossil fuels is greater. And the track record of disasters around nuclear is far outweighed by petrochemicals and other sources of energy.
If it counted deaths and displacement of wildlife solar and wind would probably top the list. Its so green.
Lol.
That's fine, I don't care one way or another. One of your criteria is regulatory risk. Another is the potential for disaster.
I'm just going to say that your fundamentals are shaky.
There's huge regulatory hurdles in many countries around nuclear, granted. But the regulatory risk associated with fossil fuels is greater. And the track record of disasters around nuclear is far outweighed by petrochemicals and other sources of energy.
The thing is, I dont actually factor in regulatory risk that much. Like Germany decided to shut down its NP's but it did little to the price of yellow cake.
An Accident is an Accident no one plans for it
The issue with Nuclear is much like plane crashes, even though flying is the safest form of transport, every accident is world wide news like it is the most dangerous decesion a person can make.
Last edited:
@Ipv6Ready, ok, I misunderstood what you were saying initially then. I went back and re-read your post and it’s a sound strategy