checkAd

    Rohstoff-Explorer: Research oder Neuvorstellung (Seite 1724)

    eröffnet am 13.03.08 13:14:32 von
    neuester Beitrag 23.03.24 10:47:27 von
    Beiträge: 29.512
    ID: 1.139.490
    Aufrufe heute: 6
    Gesamt: 2.697.201
    Aktive User: 0


    Beitrag zu dieser Diskussion schreiben

     Durchsuchen
    • 1
    • 1724
    • 2952

    Begriffe und/oder Benutzer

     

    Top-Postings

     Ja Nein
      Avatar
      schrieb am 26.05.14 06:23:59
      Beitrag Nr. 12.282 ()
      bin meine letzten SLCA los für gutes Geld....
      aktuell nur noch in OCIR drin
      momentan denk ich wieder an Victory Nickel für eine weitere Runde....
      1 Antwort?Die Baumansicht ist in diesem Thread nicht möglich.
      Avatar
      schrieb am 26.05.14 06:05:00
      Beitrag Nr. 12.281 ()
      Stupidgame, weil DU DIch mal mit Global ENergy Development beschäftigt hast.

      Global Energy Development -A 'GO' for Bocachico - ED - May 8, 2014

      - Global Energy Development has petroleum production and development operations concentrated in oil-rich Colombia.

      Their second farm-out in less than two months activates the group's Bocachico reserves in the Middle Magdalena Valley in Colombia. The terms appear to be similar to those for Bolivar - for a 50% farm-out, a cash payment of $1m (as opposed to $5m), with a commitment to re-enter two existing wells within one year, and to drill a development well within two years.

      GED has a risk-free carried interest of 50% in the development of the Bolivar and Bocachico contract areas, with gross 1P reserves of 33.2 MMBL and 2P of 90.4 MMBL. In addition, Bolivar contains further gross 3P reserves of 129.3 MMBL.

      There is also the core producing Llanos Valley business (2P reserves 5.6 MMBL), on which we have put a risked value of 114p per share, against the current market price of 70.5p. ...-
      www.equitydevelopment.co.uk/doc/1211.pdf

      Gruß
      P.
      Avatar
      schrieb am 25.05.14 19:29:31
      Beitrag Nr. 12.280 ()
      Antwort auf Beitrag Nr.: 47.042.956 von Popeye82 am 25.05.14 18:40:14hmmm klingt natürlich sehr interessant.
      kenne den wert nur vom namen her.

      ein interview noch zu Inca One vom Februar.
      find´s immer ganz nett wenn man den CEO mal sieht und hört.

      http://www.commodity-tv.net/c/news/news,155,Inca_One_Begins_…
      Avatar
      schrieb am 25.05.14 18:58:21
      Beitrag Nr. 12.279 ()
      da es hier ja eine Menge Ölschiefer Skeptiker gibt.
      Ich kann es nicht beurteilen.

      The "California Shale Bubble Just Burst" - CT/LAT/OP.com/EIA - May 22, 2014
      http://cleantechies.com/2014/05/22/the-california-shale-bubb…
      www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-oil-20140521-story.html

      "The great hype surrounding the advent of a shale gas bonanza in California may turn out to be just that: hype. The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) – the statistical arm of the Department of Energy – has downgraded its estimate of the total amount of recoverable oil in the Monterey Shale by a whopping 96 percent. Its previous estimate pegged the recoverable resource in California’s shale formation at 13.7 billion barrels but it now only thinks that there are 600 million barrels available.

      The estimate is expected to be made public in June.


      The sharply downgraded numbers come amid a heated debate in California over whether or not the state should permit oil and gas companies to use hydraulic fracturing (“fracking”) – the process in which a combination of water, chemicals and sand are injected underground at high pressure in order to break apart shale rock and access trapped natural gas.

      Fracking involves enormous quantities of water; an average of 127,127 gallons of water were required to frack a single California well in 2013, according to the Western States Petroleum Association. That’s equivalent to 87 percent of the water a family of four uses in an entire year.

      California is home to an enormous agricultural industry, and with the Monterey Shale located beneath the fertile Central Valley, fracking is going to compete with agriculture, ranching and other commercial and residential users for water use. With 100 percent of California now in a state of “severe” drought, critics of fracking have gained traction in the debate over the extent to which the government should allow oil and gas companies to move in.

      On March 20, Santa Cruz became the first county in California to ban fracking, the biggest win by environmental activists thus far in their campaign to rid the state of the practice. The move may have been symbolic though, since there isn’t much of a presence by the industry in that locality; it was more aimed at putting pressure on Governor Jerry Brown to stop fracking in the water-starved state. That follows a unanimous February vote by the city of Los Angeles to ban the practice, the largest city to do so in the country.

      Indeed, activists are pushing for a statewide ban on fracking, and a bill to do just that is working its way through the state senate. It passed a committee vote in April, but faces an uncertain future. Brown supports fracking and has trumpeted its potential for state revenues. The state has projected that fracking could bring up to 2.8 million new jobs and boost state coffers by $24.6 billion each year. He signed a bill last year that tightened regulations on the industry but also set up a permitting regime that could allow the industry to move forward.

      Although the topic has been highly controversial, the ramifications may not be as significant as previously believed, now that the federal government believes only a small fraction of the Monterey Shale’s reserves are accessible. The main reason for the downgrade was that the original 2011 estimate mistakenly assumed that California’s shale oil and gas could be recovered with as much ease as it is elsewhere in the country.

      But the geology of the Monterey Shale is much more complex than in the Marcellus, Bakken, or Eagle Ford Shales – the three formations principally responsible for the surge in oil and gas production in the United States. The layers of shale in the Monterey are folded in such a way that drilling is difficult, and test wells thus far have come up disappointing.

      The Los Angeles Times quoted a downbeat assessment from an official with the EIA. “From the information we’ve been able to gather, we’ve not seen evidence that oil extraction in this area is very productive using techniques like fracking,” said John Staub, a petroleum analyst with the EIA. “Our oil production estimates, combined with a dearth of knowledge about geological differences among the oil fields, led to erroneous predictions and estimates,” he added.

      The oil and gas industry was quick to point out that the calculation could change once again if drillers could improve technology to access the Monterey. After all, no one saw the shale revolution coming only a few short years ago. But as Staub, the EIA analyst noted, for now oil and gas production in “the Monterey formation is stagnant.” And it could remain that way. "
      Avatar
      schrieb am 25.05.14 18:40:14
      Beitrag Nr. 12.278 ()
      Das Schreiben doppele ich mal.

      Inca One Resources, ehemalige Inca One Metals, eine kleine Goldfirma mit bisschen unkonventionellem Konzept in Peru, im Endeffekt mehr eine Art "Verarbeiter". Das Konzept an sich finde ich ganz interessant. Weil sie im Endeffekt quasi auch ein "(potenzieller)Problemlöser" sind, und für sowas kann man Kunden meine ich noch am ehesten zum Geld ausgeben bewegen.
      Nach eigenen Angaben sind sie jetzt auch vollständig -für eine 100t/d operation- finanziert, via Kreditaufnahme. Damit dann auch, fast, unverwässernd.
      Wenn Deren Angaben so realistisch sind, dann würden sie künftig, relativ zur Bewertung, ganze Menge verdienen.
      Ob sie das sind, weiss ich nicht.
      Die Vorstellungen der Kapazität gehen aber scheinbar noch einiges darüber hinaus.
      In dem Zusammenhang ist wohl auch die "potenziell erweiterte Kreditzusage", des jetzigen Gebers, zu sehen.
      Ich nehme die Typen mal auf meine Beobachtungsliste, habe aber keine unmittelbaren Absichten.

      Inca One Resources is now fully funded, to fourfold its production rate - CR - May 20, 2014
      www.caesarsreport.com/blog/inca-one-resources-is-now-fully-f…
      www.incaone.com/_resources/news/nr_2014_05_20.pdf
      www.incaone.com/_resources/presentations/IO_Corporate_Presen…


      Gruß
      P.
      1 Antwort?Die Baumansicht ist in diesem Thread nicht möglich.

      Trading Spotlight

      Anzeige
      Was die Börsencommunity nach Ostern auf keinen Fall verpassen willmehr zur Aktie »
      Avatar
      schrieb am 25.05.14 08:30:45
      Beitrag Nr. 12.277 ()
      Antwort auf Beitrag Nr.: 47.041.636 von Boersiback am 25.05.14 01:48:16Naja, mehr noch findet die Preisfindung beim hier auch schon angesprochenen Rhodium statt. Das wird in der Tat 1x täglich in einer Kungelrunde ermittelt.
      Bei Uran - wie bei diversen anderen - erweisen sich mal wieder die diversen bullishen Prognosen für die Tonne. Das passiert meist, wenn zuviel "Glaube" im Spiel ist.
      Trotz einiger politischer Ankündigungen ist Japan derzeit mit Großbritannien zusammen der Überraschungs Solar Boom-Markt. Wenn es die nicht gäbe, dann sähe es für die diversen Solarbuden noch deutlich finsterer aus.
      Avatar
      schrieb am 25.05.14 02:31:47
      Beitrag Nr. 12.276 ()
      Antwort auf Beitrag Nr.: 47.041.636 von Boersiback am 25.05.14 01:48:16
      Jooo, ich denke dass die Firmen schlussendlich ein "gewisses Mindestniveau" brauchen.
      Noch einige Zeit weiter so, und die Minenbetreiber dürften anfangen sich auszudünnen.
      Von daher rechne ich, über kurz oder lang, -von hier an- mit steigenden Uranpreisen.
      Gehöre aber ausdrücklich nicht zu einigen "superbullischen".



      bisschen zu heiss gekocht.

      " Are These Signs of Coal's New World Order?

      A few interesting data points from different parts of the world in coal this week. Which could be signalling a big change underway in global production patterns.

      First stop: Indonesia. Where a number of indicators emerged suggesting that thermal coal production may not be sustainable.

      First, there was word early in the week that the nation's largest producer will probably cut capital spending this year.

      That's Bumi Resources. Whose management was quoted by local press as saying that project spending in 2014 "may be lower than last year."

      That's potentially significant. Given that Bumi produced over 80 million tonnes of coal last year--accounting for approximately 20% of Indonesia's overall output.

      At the same time, high-profile Indonesia miner PT Timah gave the local coal sector the thumbs down. Saying the industry appears uneconomic.

      Timah--which currently operates tin mining concessions in Indonesia--had been looking at acquiring a coal mine in East Kalimantan. But this week it called off the deal. Saying that the target mine is unprofitable.

      Both of these events suggest that Indonesian coal production is facing increasing headwinds. Even as output seems to be growing in another key coal-producing nation: Australia.

      Reports this week show that coal loadings at Australia's Newcastle port have been robust of late. With shipments hitting 3.45 million tonnes for the week ended this past Monday.

      That's a 39% jump in coal exports as compared to the previous week. And represents a 13-week high for coal loadings out of Newcastle.

      Some 80 to 85% of these shipments are thermal coal (as opposed to metallurgical coal). Suggesting that demand for the product here is seeing a resurgence.

      Here's the really interesting part. All of these observations make perfect sense in light of recent events in major coal consumer China. Where a reported ban on low-quality coal imports should see less Indonesian supply coming in. And more imports being sourced from alternate suppliers of better-quality coal--Australia being the closest at hand.

      Could we be seeing the start of a "new world order" in coal, triggered by this rule change? The numbers are off to an interesting start.

      Here's to shifting patterns,
      Dave Forest

      dforest@piercepoints.com "
      2 Antworten?Die Baumansicht ist in diesem Thread nicht möglich.
      Avatar
      schrieb am 25.05.14 01:48:16
      Beitrag Nr. 12.275 ()
      Antwort auf Beitrag Nr.: 47.041.550 von Popeye82 am 24.05.14 23:45:11hab ich auch mitbekommen

      der uranpreis geht ja schon länger bergab, obwohl die lieferverträge im bereich 50-60 $ liegen pro pfund.
      zu 28 würde glaub keiner mehr gewinn machen ;)



      ...zeigt letztlich wohl auch mehr wetten richtung japan, als reales pricefixing. ohne terminbörse ist das auch mehr gewürfelt als, daß es was mit preisabsprachen der produzenten mit Abnehmern zu tun hätte.
      vermutlich wird´s zurück auf 5 gezockt und dann wieder hoch richtung 100-120. wie damals auch schonmal, frei nach laune und whiskeysorte ;)
      4 Antworten?Die Baumansicht ist in diesem Thread nicht möglich.
      Avatar
      schrieb am 24.05.14 23:45:11
      Beitrag Nr. 12.274 ()
      Japan not allowed restarting nuclear plant, This is the 1st time a lawsuit brought by anti-nuclear plaintiffs has been successful, in Japan's forty-year history of nuclear power - M.com/R/DW - May 22, 2014

      - C. Jamasmie -
      www.mining.com/japan-not-allowed-restarting-nuclear-plant-84…

      "A Japanese court has forbidden Kansai Electric Power (TSE:9503) from carrying out a plan to restart two idled nuclear reactors at Ohi north, near Osaka, because their potential vulnerable to earthquakes.

      The ruling is not only the first such intervention since the Fukushima disaster three years ago, but also marks the first time a lawsuit brought by anti-nuclear plaintiffs has been successful in Japan's forty-year history of nuclear power.



      - Ohi power station. -


      The rare victory for activists, reports Reuters, could disrupt an already complicated and politically charged effort to restart some of the 50 Japanese reactors that have been shut over safety concerns since the Fukushima accident.

      Controversy has centered on the existence of an inactive geological fault line that runs underneath Ohi, which hosts four nuclear reactors —two of them built in the 1970s, and two built in the late 1980s and early 1990s.

      The two reactors at issue in the suit, at Ohi power station, were restarted temporarily in 2012 and remain the only units in the country to have been put back in use after Fukushima. But they were taken offline again in September last year for maintenance.

      Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe wants to restart some of his country's nuclear reactors. In April, his government published a long-delayed energy policy statement that aims to revive nuclear power as a core part of Japan's energy mix.

      But restarting reactors means complying with a raft of new safety standards introduced in the country in the wake of Fukushima.

      Since 2011, Japan has relied heavily on imported fossil fuels for its electricity generating needs. This has led, Deutsche Welle reported last week, to a negative trade balance for the past two years – an exceptional circumstance for a country that is an export powerhouse. "
      5 Antworten?Die Baumansicht ist in diesem Thread nicht möglich.
      Avatar
      schrieb am 24.05.14 17:47:18
      Beitrag Nr. 12.273 ()
      Antwort auf Beitrag Nr.: 47.040.660 von Popeye82 am 24.05.14 16:32:27stimmt... ich glaub da wurde mal vor nicht allzu langer zeit eine "vergessene" pyramide gefunden aufgrund von satelitenbildern.
      • 1
      • 1724
      • 2952
       DurchsuchenBeitrag schreiben


      Rohstoff-Explorer: Research oder Neuvorstellung