Natural Gas : Bel micione, si parte?

Come pensate vada ad inserirsi la crisi europea nelle quotazioni del natgas e conseguentemente dell’etc?

quando il lunedì parte così poi va sempre a finire male…speriamo che questa volta non sia così

non so che dire se non …………….aspettiamo le 19:00

…brrr che freddo a -3,80! …E’ ufficiale, il levgas che ho in portafoglio ha raggiunto livelli da era glaciale!!! 

oggi ho ricevuto posta dall’america..tutte cose che sapevamo già, o no?

Natural
Gas Monthly

The
November issue of the NGM, featuring data for September 2011, has been
released.  Driven by continued strong production and attractive prices
abroad, year-to-date exports of natural gas reached 1,135 billion cubic feet
(Bcf), putting 2011 on track to have the highest natural gas exports on
record.  Year-to-date dry production of 17,056 Bcf is nearly 7 percent
above dry production for the same period in 2010.

ETFS LEVERAGED NATURAL GAS = TRUFFA

Un disastro …………. comincio a credere che , per la prima volta nella storia dei mercati finanziari, una materia prima possa ……………………… FALLIRE!!!!!!!!!!!
Il QE debbono farlo sul NAT GAS!!!!!!!!!!
Comunque ((((((

il Contango sta sparendo !!! magra consolazione ………….

a vedere le quotazioni storiche, ovviamente recenti, del ETC si nota come questo strumento sia assolutamente ingestibile….quello che vorrei capire da qualcuno di voi è: visto che mi pare di capire che il disallineamento del prezzo della materia prima (che è un dato assoluto) con il prezzo dell’ETC (che oggi quota molto meno a parità di prezzo del sottostante rispetto a due-tre mesi fa…) è causato da ‘sto contango (che già il nome è tutto un programma..), mi piacerebbe sapere secondo quale formula e quindi in quale misura questo influenza il prezzo dell’ETC…..cioè a dire qual’è il peso percentuale del contango sul prezzo finale dell’ETC??? 
Spero che qualcuno di voi mi sappia rispondere, perchè la differenza di prezzo che noto fra sottostante ed ETC è talmente elevata che comincio a pensare che questo tipo di strumenti finanziari siano al limite della truffa…………!! spero che qualcuno di voi mi dica che mi sbaglio. Grazie 

Non sono un trader né un economista. ma stamattina stavo guadagnado ben 50 euri. “bene” mi son detto… ma a fine giornata..-25 euri. ho perso 75 euri in un solo giorno. oggi non ho guardato il future, ma che cavolo: se l’economia è depressa il prezzo scende. se ci sono rallies delle borse, il prezzo scende. In più ci manca solo che l’euro si apprezzi sull’usd e allora si che siamo fritti… boh…

già!! Visto che le scorte son in AUmento… l’INVERNO è finito!?!?!?

visto che siamo nella m.. e per ora ci restiamo, per non spingere qualcuno al suicidio  me compreso vi faccio osservare che nel 2009 e 2010 ci sono stati 2 momenti in cui il   etc  lev gas è salito  nel giro di 2-3 mesi del 50%.  , se si ripetesse il target è 0.19  (  sogno di una sera di mezzo autunno )

per gli 0,24 ci vuole un +50%del natgas e non dell’etc=miracolo

grazie mille 

da oggi anche io cercherò di guardarlo il meno possibile, anche se ogni volta è sempre un BRUTTO VEDERE!!!!!
intanto il petrolio veleggia sopra i 100 $

ho fatto caso che quando il petrolio sale il gas scende e viceversa . si dice che se il petrolio sale anche il gas dovrebbe seguirlo. invece non mi sembra. il mio pensiero e’ che con gli introiti del petrolio si asalvaguardano le perdite del gas. chi mi puo’ smentire.

game over…………………..

credo che sia arrivata l’ora di vendere il lev. io non ce la faccio piu’ a vedere che tutti i santissimi giorni scende

-3%….mi permetto di dire che ci sfugge davvero qualcosa….la realà però e che il Gas non fa altro che scendere, o meglio sale con il cambio di future e poi riscende….lo fa ora che siamo a Dicembre….ma a febbraio marzo dove arriverà davvero a 2 $????? comincio a temerlo sul serio

Ho dimenticato di inserire il link al sito, eccolo

http://www.energyeconomist.com/a6257783p/NaturalGas/monthly/production.html

Caro Otello,  mi dispiace per Monica, per non fare discriminazioni, le chiederai cosa desidera di piu’, ma a noi la p…..a a tuo carico ce la devi fornire ( no cessi verminosi ). in piu’ vista la depressione aggiungi 1 cp viagra. le promesse si mantengono !!!!
al 31.12 !!
stupidaggini a parte , visto che il lev gas ha sempre sofferto molto di contango, fino a quando pensi possiamo stare dentro?

Sarebbe una bella Truffa.. da CLASS ACTION!! Mercato falsato senza trasparenza… ed informazioni

min 3,40 rispettato, domani si arriva in area 3,65

sempre belle notizie

sono usciti i dati delle trivelle?

hei Otello mi sa che quest’anno devi mettere da parte un po di soldi per pagare a tutti cosa sappiamo

hehehe

rido per non piangere

che cazzo

rigs…….BH -36 gas. 23 month low.

Wyoming frack storm shows
need for better regulation: Kemphttps://research.tdwaterhouse.ca/res…ule-tab=Energy

Wyoming
frack storm shows need for better regulation: Kemp
3 hours ago by Thomson
Reuters
(John Kemp is a Reuters market analyst. The views expressed are his
own)

By John Kemp

LONDON, Dec 9 (Reuters) – Preliminary evidence
that hydraulic fracturing may have contaminated drinking water at a small hamlet
in Wyoming shows why the industry urgently needs to embrace intelligent
regulation and engage with safety officials if North America’s unconventional
oil and gas reserves are to be exploited fully.

Responding to complaints
about foul-tasting water in local wells at Pavillion (population 165),
investigators found concentrations of benzene and dissolved hydrocarbons near
pits used for storage of drilling waste, and dissolved chemicals and methane
associated with fracking in two wells drilled 200-300 metres down into the
drinking water aquifer.

In a draft report released on Thursday, the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) concluded leaking waste had contaminated
the nearby shallow wells. The most likely explanation for contamination at
deeper levels was that methane and fracking fluids migrated up from the fracking
zone into the overlying aquifer.

Like the battle over routing the
proposed Keystone XL pipeline, the issue of groundwater contamination in
Pavillion has a broader political importance that transcends the risk of
pollution in the local area.

Possible contamination at one tiny town in
America’s least-populated state risks becoming the epicentre of a national
battle over fracking. Sensible exploitation of shale gas and oil that could
provide affordable energy, lower greenhouse emissions and reduced dependence on
imported energy all hang in the balance.

SYMBOLIC BATTLE

EPA
emphasised its findings are provisional and subject to an independent scientific
review to ensure a transparent and rigorous process, after an opportunity for
public comment.

The agency noted the findings are specific to Pavillion,
where gas-bearing formations are unusually shallow and close to the drinking
water aquifer. “Production conditions (are) different from those in many other
areas of the country.”

It reiterated “natural gas plays a key role in
our nation’s clean energy future, and the Obama administration is committed to
ensuring that the development of this vital resource occurs safely and
responsibly”.

Nonetheless, the draft has ignited a predictable
firestorm. Fracking opponents have seized on it as evidence that the technology
is unsafe and should be heavily restricted or banned.

“No one can
accurately say that there is ‘no risk’ where fracking is concerned. This draft
report makes obvious that there are many factors at play, any one of which can
go wrong. Much stronger rules are needed to ensure that well construction
standards are stronger,” the Natural Resources Defense Council said.

The
industry and some congressional Republicans backed Encana Corp, owner of the gas
field in Pavillion, when it promptly hit back, blasting the report’s methodology
and reliability.

“The synthetic chemicals could just as easily have come
from contamination when the EPA did their sampling or from how they constructed
their monitoring wells,” said Doug Hock, a company spokesman.

RISK
MANAGEMENT

No form of energy is without risk. Conventional oil and gas
wells leak. Nuclear power stations melt down. Coal-fired power stations emit
lots of mercury and greenhouse gases. And wind farms kill migrating birds and
disfigure the landscape.

Like any other technology, fracking imposes its
own costs and benefits, but there is no reason to think it is inherently any
worse than conventional oil and gas production or other forms of energy.

The first frack job dates back to 1947, and up to 95 percent of all oil
and gas wells drilled today are hydraulically fractured, accounting for 43
percent of total U.S. oil production and 67 percent of natural gas production,
according to a report prepared by the National Petroleum Council for the U.S.
Department of Energy.

From time to time, it is inevitable fractured
wells will contaminate drinking waters. There is no such thing as zero risk. The
challenge is to manage risks carefully and ensure those affected are properly
compensated when things go wrong.

In theory, it should be possible to
design a system of intelligent regulation that maximises the benefits from
unlocking unconventional gas and oil reserves while minimising adverse impacts
on local communities — from groundwater contamination, disposal of briny waste
water, use of freshwater supplies and the enormous increase in traffic.

In practice, this remains a depressingly distant goal. EPA,
environmental groups and the oil and gas industry must all share the blame for
inadequate fracking regulation and an increasingly hostile political environment
for a technology that promises to transform the energy supply picture in coming
decades — but only if voters allow it to be deployed more widely.

SOCIAL LICENCE TO OPERATE

To be fair, there are signs the
industry recognises the problem. The National Petroleum Council’s landmark
report published in September 2011 was entitled, “Prudent Development: Realising
the Potential of North America’s Abundant Natural Gas and Oil Resources.”

The report recognised “if these resources are to be available and
economic for development, continuous attention to reducing risks is essential to
ensure pollution prevention, public safety and health, and environmental
protection. These outcomes are important in their own right, but also to enjoy
access to the resources for extraction.”

This was an oblique way of
saying the industry needs to demonstrate social and environmental responsibility
if it is to obtain authorisation to drill. The authors admitted, “while most
natural gas and oil companies operate at a high environmental performance level,
some companies are not as far along”.

Real changes in behaviour, not
just PR campaigns, are crucial. “Maintaining access to the resource does not
depend on changing public perception so much as earning public confidence with
excellent performance,” the report said.

But the 111 pages devoted to
operations and the environment were notably short on concrete suggestions. The
industry is still reflexively hostile to government restrictions, even though
they can be an effective way to drive best practice and solve the free-rider
problem, when some operators cut corners and create accidents that affect the
industry as a whole.

Encana’s furious response is typical of the
combative, no-holds barred, litigation-driven approach to any and all evidence
of environmental problems.

CONSTRUCTIVE ENGAGEMENT

On the
other side, environment lobbyists tend to conflate local pollution with broader
concerns about global warming — using the former to set impossibly high
standards for oil, gas and coal producers to drive them out of business in
favour of cleaner sources of energy such as wind and solar.

EPA also has
often confused its technical role as a pollution regulator with its broader one
as a policy advocate for carbon controls. As a result, it is seen by many in the
oil and gas industry as instinctively hostile and has forfeited its credibility
as a neutral umpire and regulator.

All sides have an urgent interest in
better regulation. While fracking was mostly about gas, it has been treated by
Congress and local lawmakers as primarily an environmental issue. But as it
moves into the oil patch, fracking is set to become an issue of national energy
security.

Environmental aspects will be much lower down Congress’ list
of concerns. Now is the time for EPA and environmental groups to compromise if
they want a stronger regulatory framework. If they refuse, they risk
over-reaching and seeing their concerns swept aside, which is what happened with
cap-and-trade.

Better regulation is in the industry’s interests too.
Fracking is only one major incident away from a clampdown. Pavillion is too
small

Etfs Leveraged Natural Gas.  Ammetto  di non  esssere  un  esperto,  ma  niente  mi  toglie  dalla  testa  che  qualcuno  abbia  fatto  il  gioco  sporco  su  questo  ETC.  Ci  vorrebbe  un  competente  che,  pensandola  come  me,  sappia  muoversi  nella  giungla  di  quei  loschi  figuri    che  se  ne  approfittano   dei  risparmiatori,  e  se  è  il  caso  di  denunciare  qualcuno lo  faccia  subito,  sto  con  lui.  Perchè  va  bene  guadagnare  anche tanto  indovinando  un  trend,  ma  l’andamento  delle  quotazioni  da  gennaio 2010  a  me  dimostra  che  mi  hanno  fregato  e  non  mi  va  giu.  E  la  Consob  dov’è?  Faccia  qualcosa  anche  lei.
 P.S.  Siamo  in  Italia,  scrivete  in  italiano,  grazie.