5 ms·
This is a pretty misleading headline. If you look at the price graph in the article, it shows prices between $5-12/MMBTU between 2015-19, a decline to around $1
by sjburt 5y ago
This is a pretty misleading headline. If you look at the price graph in the article, it shows prices between $5-12/MMBTU between 2015-19, a decline to around $1.50 during the peak of pandemic economic slowdown, and a rise up to $15. So prices are 1.5-3x historical values and we're coming off a price dip that would have suppressed supply. It seems as much likely that it will return to the norm as that it will continue to rise.
- fuoqi 5y agoAlso let's not forget about the amount of USD printed since 2015-2019.
- thepangolino 5y agoA big chunk of the money printed was in 2020-2021 https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/money-supply-m0 https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/money-supply-m0
- fuoqi 5y agoYes, this is why I wrote "since".
- 1123581321 5y agoTypically this would be written as “since 2019.” The earlier number in the date range is a bit ambiguous, especially to ESL readers.
- brewdad 5y agoThe earlier number is completely unnecessary if you intend to refer only to anything after 2019. Writing 1790-2019 would be just as meaningful (not at all).
- tomc1985 5y agoAren't they in the process of recalling some of that money?
- vmception 5y agoNo. The only tool on the table right now is a discussion about potentially slowing down the speed and amount of money being created. Only the central bank head and committee’s opinion matters. They are still pretty split on what to do but that is normal. You can ignore things that senators say when one expresses concern over the money supply, unless dozens of senators say it. It is much more likely that a scare gets them to pass a prewritten bill which forces the federal reserve to accelerate more money creation. (It creates money by purchasing investments from people at inflated prices, so people like that and try to make it do more of that)
- kktkti9 5y agoSo? The health of a social system isn’t the state of its fiat currency. It’s the literal state of its people. If you’re going to be led around by ephemeral catastrophe hype, why not just join a church?
- pfdietz 5y agoThe current natural gas price at the Henry Hub is $4.13. What is this $15 referring to? https://markets.businessinsider.com/commodities/natural-gas-price https://markets.businessinsider.com/commodities/natural-gas-...
- sjburt 5y agoEuropean and Asian prices, from the chart in the article. Seems like US is cheaper. https://www.cmegroup.com/markets/energy/natural-gas/dutch-ttf-natural-gas-usd-mmbtu-icis-heren-front-month.html https://www.cmegroup.com/markets/energy/natural-gas/dutch-tt...
- pfdietz 5y agoSo my takeaway from this is that the trade in LNG is going to expand. Good news for US natural gas producers. This price differential is not sustainable given the ability to ship LNG.
- state_less 5y agoThis article below mentions that shipping LNG between continents is now profitable and transporting energy via a gas network is more efficient than electrical transmission (<0.1% loss vs 8%). Electric transmission has benefits in other regards/uses though. I’m also interested in the idea that we could overbuild solar/wind arrays and make SNG (Sabatier reaction) or town gas with the excess energy. Even if the process is currently 30-40 % efficient, renewable energy has come down in cost enough to make a 2x or 3x larger array more reasonable, all things considered (e.g. environmental concerns). https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power-to-gas https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power-to-gas
- ramesh31 5y ago>transporting energy via a gas network is more efficient than electrical transmission (<0.1% loss vs 8%). That's only one half of the equation though. You'd have to integrate the efficiency loss from transmission with the effiency loss from burning gas in multiple smaller generators rather than one large one with electrical distribution.
- woobar 5y agoRemember when oil futures went negative? I wonder what kind of clickbait they can use: "US oil prices have surged more than <infinity>% from a record low in April 2020 due to the pandemic".
- yissp 5y agoWow, more than infinity!
- seanp2k2 5y agoOPEC hates this one simple trick!
- johnnyb9 5y agoCOVID cases are up 600% from 3 months ago!
- chris_j 5y agoBeing pedantic, wouldn't oil prices have risen by <some negative number> percent since that record low?
- BobbyJo 5y ago"Oil prices are up less than negative 15%!" would be a very confusing thing to parse.
- zinekeller 5y agoI mean, both are correct though (this is an inherent problem between statistics and (natural) languages - both are correct depending on context).
- hodgesrm 5y agoOff topic but...Does anybody else find the use of large percentages to show growth as annoying as I do? 1000% is an 11x increase but to see that easily you have to enumerate the values 100% = 2x, 200% = 3x, ... , 1000% = 11x or do a quick inductive proof. Why not just say 11x? The article pointed out that Asian LNG prices increased six-fold.