tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10911751.post9045133201162461593..comments2024-03-07T02:00:01.582-05:00Comments on NEI Nuclear Notes: Energy 101 Quiz on Oil and GasUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10911751.post-50564930957411850062008-07-25T11:15:00.000-04:002008-07-25T11:15:00.000-04:00Thanks!Thanks!David Bradishhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02439638522932781068noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10911751.post-37666278298803494712008-07-25T10:25:00.000-04:002008-07-25T10:25:00.000-04:00I like the way you write and i love reading your p...I like the way you write and i love reading your post.<BR/>Keep comming!!!<BR/><BR/>Abhishek<BR/>http://innovideas.blogspot.comAbhishekhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14995944329916450100noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10911751.post-75987347375245872802008-07-25T04:18:00.000-04:002008-07-25T04:18:00.000-04:00Interesting quiz. I only scored a 70%. I would cer...Interesting quiz. I only scored a 70%. I would certainly have trouble naming the 13 oil and gas companies that are bigger than ExxonMobil.<BR/><BR/>One fact that the major oil and gas companies keep touting as a positive is something that I believe is actually quite negative - insiders own less than 5% of the stock in the company. They are managers with interests other than the best interests of the stockholders. Their compensation is based on metrics that might not be best for the long term health of the company.<BR/><BR/>I think it is very telling that ExxonMobil has poured more than $118 billion of its capital in the past five years into stock purchase plans. The main purpose of such plans is to bump the stock price - usually temporarily. If they really wanted to return the money to the investors - especially tax exempt pension funds, they would raise the dividends, not buy back stock.<BR/><BR/>ExxonMobil is not the only major making that choice. From my point of view it really makes it clear that their message of "do not raise our taxes, we need the money for investing in future energy" a blatant lie.Rod Adamshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03652375336090790205noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10911751.post-14994412454579227012008-07-24T09:50:00.000-04:002008-07-24T09:50:00.000-04:00I looked at the quiz. A careful selection of half-...I looked at the quiz. A careful selection of half-complete information, worthy of Heritage Foundation propaganda. <BR/><BR/>No mention of how much oil can be drilled on US offshore, how quickly can it be put to market and how long it lasts. <BR/><BR/>No mention of how much EROEI the Canadian tar sands have, and its polluting effects. <BR/><BR/>No mention of how close we are to next generation biofuels and how much land is needed to cater to US oil needs by growing switchgrass. <BR/><BR/>No mention of how much needs to be invested on trains and electrifying the transport sector. No mention of how that compares to investing in oil.<BR/><BR/>Oil is a weak thing as compared to coal, you don't need nuclear to beat oil. Oil could be beaten by pretty much anything.. natural gas, wind, biofuels. <BR/><BR/>Fighting oil is not an environmental issue, it is purely an issue of economic security. <BR/><BR/>Nuclear is needed when we talk of replacing coal, this is the true environmental issue.Ray Lightninghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08882462553270746059noreply@blogger.com