Yc:rk (umlaufed u on its side, 'cause I don't know how to do it here)

In a bold statement about what is important to the Norwegian Academy, Elinor Ostrom won the Nobel Prize in Economics.  Ostrom, a political scientist, has spent her career defining how collectives should best manage the commons.  According to Wikipedia

"Ostrom's work has highlighted how humans have created diverse institutional arrangements over natural resources for thousands of years that have prevented ecosystem collapse. Yet, Ostrom is quick to point out that, while successes are abundant, humans are also responsible for countless ecosystem collapses. Her current work emphasizes the multifaceted nature of human-ecosystem interaction and argues against any singular "panacea" attempt to solve individual social-ecological system problems."

Not to take away from Dr. Ostrom's work, which I am sure is interesting, the fact that the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences deems the collective this important seems so..... Swedish.  Ikea might have been a better choice.  How do they make that stuff so cheap?  In a cradle to grave nanny state country? Now THAT seems fit for a Nobel Prize in Economics. Unless they make those umlaufed items in China...

Comments

[Scott]

Ostrum, an American, teaches at Indiana,…. i think. She is known as being anti big government. We could use some of her help here in Texas. Our Parks and Wildlife agency is prime example of how common resources can be mismanaged when right wing capitalists penetrate government agencies which manage common resources. A good part of what Texas P&W does is promote, sponsor and pay for “Wildlife Management”, which on its face sounds like an oxymoron to me. One pivotal aspect of “Wildlife Management” in the view of P&W is to promote the altering of the Whitetail Deer gene pool to cause larger antler growth, regardless of the effects on the wildlife population. Clearly, all native wildlife in the state of Texas are owned by the citizens, not the land owners. Landowners have a limited “right of capture”.

Unfortunately, there is a steady stream of hunters willing to pay big bucks for a canned hunt to bring home those big horns. Texas P&W is protecting the economic interests of the landed gentry, not the wildlife. A good example of how government control of a common interest can be perverted.

[Scott]

Counterpoint welcome from Crash, Choke, Fred or Joe Fitzsimmons.....

[Scott]

I read a recap of Berman’s talk at the Peak oil conference in Denver. Although Berman has been criticized for his early work in the Barnett, he seems to make some sense regarding the economics of shale plays in general. Are shale plays turning into pyramid scams? Below is a cut and paste from Petrohawk’s website. Berman is one of the few that are criticizing oil companies for putting out false, or “overly optimistic” numbers regarding reserves from these plays. It looks like he is on to something.

"During the second quarter, Petrohawk gained $2.34 per Mcf from hedging, bringing realized natural gas prices to $5.62 per Mcf. The Company also gained $2.92 per barrel from its hedging program during the quarter, bringing realized oil prices to $56.64 per barrel. Before the effect of hedges, Petrohawk realized 94% of NYMEX for its natural gas production and 90% of NYMEX for oil……. Cash costs (including lease operating, gathering and transportation, production taxes, workover, general and administrative, and interest expense) were $2.97 per Mcfe for the quarter, a 10% improvement over the prior quarter and 14% over the same period one year ago"

$2.97 per Mcf costs just to produce the gas, exclusive of land, drilling, completion and royalty costs? $5.62 per Mcf sales price.

@ 20% royalty PH is realizing about $2.12 per Mcf as far as I can tell. Can anyone explain to me how any of Petrohawk’s wells are going to make money given the NYMX futures? It looks like any money PH made in the 2nd quarter was related to hedging.

[Crash N. Burn]

Scott...so hunting on a high fence ranch is the moral equivalent of punching down shale wells? Effective, but not very emotionally or intellectually satifying. I'm good with that.

[Scott]

Crash,

My Berman post was off topic..obviously....not related to Choke's Post.