As part of its Energy and Financial Markets Initiative, EIA is assessing the various factors that may influence oil prices — physical market factors as well as those related to trading and financial markets. This website describes 7 key factors that could influence oil markets. The analysis explores possible linkages between each factor and oil prices, and includes regularly-updated graphs that depict aspects of those relationships. EIA's traditional coverage of physical fundamentals such as energy consumption, production, inventories, spare production capacity, and geopolitical risks continues to be essential. EIA is also assessing other influences, such as futures market trading activity, commodity investment, exchange rates, and equity markets, as it seeks to fully assess energy price movements. This analysis was published on June 16, 2011 and covers the period from 2000 forward. Several charts include projections through 2012 from EIA's Short Term Energy Outlook . Charts are updated with new data on a monthly, quarterly, and annual basis according to the schedule below. The analysis will be updated as needed. Feedback is welcome and can be submitted via the feedback form at the bottom of every page on this site. http://www.eia.gov/finance/markets/
The United States consumed 19.1 million barrels per day (MMbd) of petroleum products during 2010, making us the world's largest petroleum consumer. The United States was third in crude oil production at 5.5 MMbd. But crude oil alone does not constitute all U.S. petroleum supplies. Significant gains occur, because crude oil expands in the refining process, liquid fuel is captured in the processing of natural gas, and we have other sources of liquid fuel, including biofuels. These additional supplies totaled 4.2 MMbd in 2010. In 2010 the United States imported 11.8 million barrels per day (MMbd) of crude oil and refined petroleum products. We also exported 2.3 MMbd of crude oil and petroleum products during 2010, so our net imports (imports minus exports) equaled 9.4 MMbd. Petroleum products imported by the United States during 2010 included gasoline, diesel fuel, heating oil, jet fuel, chemical feedstocks, asphalt, and other products. Still, most petroleum products consumed in the United States were refined here. Net imports of petroleum other than crude oil were 2% of the petroleum consumed in the United States during 2010. About Half of U.S. Petroleum Imports Come from the Western Hemisphere Some may be surprised to learn that 49% of U.S. crude oil and petroleum products imports came from the Western Hemisphere (North, South, and Central America, and the Caribbean including U.S. territories) during 2010. About 18% of our imports of crude oil and petroleum products come from the Persian Gulf countries of Bahrain, Iraq, Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and United Arab Emirates. Our largest sources of net crude oil and petroleum product imports were Canada and Saudi Arabia. Sources of Net Crude Oil and Petroleum Product Imports: Canada (25%) Saudi Arabia (12%) Nigeria (11%) Venezuela (10%) Mexico (9%) It is usually impossible to tell whether the petroleum products you use came from domestic or imported sources of oil once they are refined. Reliance on Petroleum Imports has Declined U.S. dependence on imported oil has dramatically declined since peaking in 2005. This trend is the result of a variety of factors including a decline in consumption and shifts in supply patterns. 2 The economic downturn after the financial crisis of 2008, improvements in efficiency, changes in consumer behavior and patterns of economic growth, all contributed to the decline in petroleum consumption. At the same time, increased use of domestic biofuels (ethanol and biodiesel), and strong gains in domestic production of crude oil and natural gas plant liquids expanded domestic supplies and reduced the need for imports. http://www.eia.gov/energy_in_brief/foreign_oil_dependence.cfm
Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration, Form EIA-860 Annual Electric Generator Report , and Form EIA-860M (see Table ES3 in the March 2011 Electric Power Monthly) Note: Data for 2010 are preliminary. Generators with online dates earlier than 1930 are predominantly hydroelectric. Data include non-retired plants existing as of year-end 2010. This chart shows the most recent (summer) capacity data for each generator. However, this number may change over time, if a generator undergoes an uprate or derate. Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration, Form EIA-860 Annual Electric Generator Report , and Form EIA-860M (see Table ES3 in the March 2011 Electric Power Monthly ) http://www.eia.gov/energy_in_brief/age_of_elec_gen.cfm Which types of power plants are oldest? The current fleet of electric power generators has a wide range of ages. The Nation's oldest power plants tend to be hydropower generators. Most coal-fired plants were built before 1980. There was a wave of nuclear plant construction from the late 1960s to about 1990. The most recent waves of generating capacity additions include natural gas-fired units in the 2000s and renewable units, primarily wind, coming online in the late 2000s. What is the age of U.S. generating capacity? About 530 gigawatts, or 51% of all generating capacity, were at least 30 years old at the end of 2010 (see chart below). Most gas-fired capacity is less than 10 years old, while 73% of all coal-fired capacity was 30 years or older at the end of 2010. The 'other' category includes solar, biomass, and geothermal generators, as well as landfill gas, municipal solid waste, and a variety of small-magnitude fuels such as byproducts from industrial processes (e.g., black liquor, blast furnace gas). What are the trends for each type of generator? Learn more about trends in generating capacity additions by fuel type in the following articles: Coal — Today in Energy , June 28, 2011 Nuclear — Today in Energy , June 30, 2011 Natural Gas — Today in Energy , July 5, 2011 Hydropower — Today in Energy , July 8, 2011 Wind — Today in Energy , July 13, 2011 Oil — Today in Energy , July 18, 2011
2011年8约17日google首页纪念费玛诞辰410周年 今天是法国业余数学家费玛（Pierre de Fermat）诞辰410周年.费玛时间最小原理在地震学和地震勘探中有举足轻重的应用作用。我们做地球物理的要感谢他的理论。费玛最短时间原理在地震学中的应用英文表述如下： 谷歌Doodle纪念皮耶·德·费玛：“业余数学家之王”（ http://news.cnfol.com/110817/101,1587,10497441,00.shtml ） 北京时间2011年8月17日，刚过了12点，GOOGLE今天的Doodle又更新了。将鼠标移至今天的Doodle上方会发现这样一句话：“我发现了一个美妙的关于这个定理的证法 ，可惜这里 doodle 地方太小，写不下。” 这实际上是谷歌(GOOGLE)在用这种方式是纪念著名的业余数学家 皮耶·德·费玛的诞辰410周年。关于皮耶·德·费玛 Pierre de Fermat “业余数学家之王”皮耶·德·费玛Pierre de Fermat的故事： 皮耶·德·费玛(Pierre de Fermat)是一个17世纪的法国律师，也是一位业余数学家。之所以称皮耶·德·费玛「业余」，是由于皮耶·德·费玛具有律师的全职工作。著名的数学史学家贝尔(E. T. Bell)在20世纪初所撰写的著作中，称皮耶·德·费玛为”业余数学家之王“。贝尔深信，费玛比皮耶·德·费玛同时代的大多数专业数学家更有成就。17世纪是杰出数学家活跃的世纪，而贝尔认为费玛是17世纪数学家中最多产的明星。费玛的父亲多米尼克·费玛(Dominique Fermat)是一位皮货商，同时也是波蒙特－洛门地区的第二执政官。皮耶·德·费玛的母亲克莱儿·德·隆格(Claire de Long)则出身于国会法官世家。费玛于1601年8月出生(于8月20日在波蒙特－洛门受洗)，而父母一心要栽培皮耶·德·费玛成为地方首长。皮耶·德·费玛幼年在杜鲁斯求学，30岁时就任同一地的请愿委员，同年与露薏丝·隆格(Louise Long)结婚，育有三子二女，其中一个儿子克雷门·山缪·费玛(Clement Samuel Fermat)成了皮耶·德·费玛科研上的主要助手，并在费玛逝世后，整理出版了皮耶·德·费玛的工作成果。事实上，这份出版品也就是今日闻名已久的费玛最后定理之出处。 由于家境富裕，父亲特意给皮耶·德·费玛请了两个家庭教师，不入学校而在家里接受系统教育。小时后的费玛虽称不上是神童，却也相当聪明。费玛父亲比较开通，并不宠爱孩子，因此费尔玛学习十分努力，文科、理科都学得不差，不过，皮耶·德·费玛最喜欢的功课，还是数学。1617年，费玛准备考大学，父亲希望皮耶·德·费玛读法律，费玛也喜欢这门学科，所以没有多大的争议，就接受了父亲的安排。毕业后，费玛接受一个事务所的聘请，成了一名律师。由于工作认真，并热心于社会福利事业，30岁那年，皮耶·德·费玛被选为家乡-图卢兹的地方议会议员。 费玛洁身自好，并不汲汲于名利，因此，平时比较空闲。闲余时间，皮耶·德·费玛常看些古书，尤其爱读古希腊的数学名著。皮耶·德·费玛不时作些题目，并进行数学研究，与当时的数学名家，如巴斯卡、笛卡儿、渥里斯等人通信，交流心得体会。费玛虽说是一位业余的数学爱好者，但由于皮耶·德·费玛刻苦钻研，又敢于进行创造性的思考，所以取得的成果丰硕。皮耶·德·费玛在解析几何、数论、无穷小分析〈微积分之前身〉和概率论方面，都有重要之贡献。费玛私淑戴奥弗多斯，来研究数论，师从希腊几何学家，特别是阿波罗尼，来研究曲线，皮耶·德·费玛曾和其皮耶·德·费玛的人重建阿波罗尼失传的著作“On Plane Loci”。在代数上已有所得后，皮耶·德·费玛献身于曲线的学习，而写成《Ad Locos Planos et SolidosIsagoge》(平面和立体轨迹入门)一书。费玛对于轨迹的研究有一般性的方法，这是古希腊所未能办到的。我们不知皮耶·德·费玛的坐标几何是如何孕育出来的，皮耶·德·费玛对韦达利用代数解几何问题应是相当熟悉，但更可能的是皮耶·德·费玛将阿波罗尼的结论直接转换成代数式。在1638年笛卡儿发表其《La Ge`ome`trie》大作后的第二年，费玛寄给皮耶·德·费玛一份如何找切线的论文。皮耶·德·费玛与笛卡儿并列为解析几何的发明者。 检查极大和极小问题时，皮耶·德·费玛先使一代数方程的变数作微小的变动，然后使这变动消失。皮耶·德·费玛还运用无穷小的思想到求积问题上，已具今日微积分的雏形。这也是费玛的卓越成就之一，皮耶·德·费玛在牛顿出生前的13年，提出了有关微积分的主体概念。牛顿以及同时代的莱布尼兹共同探讨运动、加速、力、轨道以及应用数学上连续变化的理论，而这也是后世所称的微积分。在数论方面，一直到高斯提出皮耶·德·费玛的贡献之前，费玛的研究始终左右著数论的研究方向。皮耶·德·费玛写过许多关于数论的定理，但顶多只给予简略的证明，数论上有许多重要事项与费玛的名字相连，皮耶·德·费玛可说是近代数论的开创者。。皮耶·德·费玛的费玛大定理：“xn+yn=zn，n大于等于3时，没有正整数解“，成为古今数学一大谜，多少的数学家投入这个问题，但直到今日仍无法完全解决。德国数学家P.Wolfshehl在1908年过世时遗赠十万玛克给Gottingen大学里的德国科学学术院，悬赏能够解决费玛大定理的人。这奖金已吸引了数千人，然而没有一个人提出正确的证法。此问题误证之多，数学史上无出其右。 费玛和帕斯卡是概率论早期的创立者，本来概率论是因应保险事业的发展而产生，但刺激数学家思考概率论的一些特殊问题，往往来自赌博者的请求。皮耶·德·费玛与巴斯卡分享开创概率论的荣誉。 (完) http://baike.baidu.com/view/1227061.htm
T his summer, a few dozen Boston-area high school students chose to spend their mornings toiling away with a variety of materials to create working marvels of engineering. They’re this year’s participants in the Engineering Design Workshop, a month-long program that gives teenagers a hands-on experience with the joys and challenges of engineering. Director Ed Moriarty, an instructor at MIT’s Edgerton Center, hesitates to categorize the workshop’s main goal as anything other than “fun.” But if students manage to learn a few basic engineering principles along the way, then all the better, he says. Twenty-two students make up this year’s cohort, a number that has grown steadily over the last decade. Most come from the John D. O’Bryant School of Math and Science in the Roxbury Crossing neighborhood of Boston, but the group also includes several students from other local high schools. Moriarty says the camp is run on a “pay-what-you-can” basis, with the majority of students attending for free. Projects developed during the program vary widely from year to year, depending on the interests of the students. None of the activities are prescribed; instead, students take part in brainstorming sessions on the first day, and things develop from there. Typically, the “counselors” — a mix of undergraduate and graduate students from MIT and other local universities — present a few ideas, and the students decide which projects they’d most like to work on. “I don’t care what they end up doing. I just care that they care,” Moriarty says. This year, the 22 students divided themselves into five projects: a modified Razor scooter, equipped with a motor and brakes; a sound system of giant tower speakers; remote-controlled “anything” (which ended up including cars, fish, birds and even a flying turtle); a mosaic tiger meticulously assembled from pieces of stained glass; and an electric cello. Each student is allotted $100 to spend on materials for his or her group’s project; this way, projects that attract more students have a larger budget to work with. Counselors help them purchase supplies online and work with them on the construction from the ground up. Moriarty and the counselors agree that it’s mostly about the process and not the final result — but still, the workshop produces some impressive finished pieces. The modified Razor scooter can attain speeds of up to 30 miles per hour. The stained-glass tiger is slated to be installed in the lobby of the O’Bryant School during a special ceremony this fall. And last week, on the morning of the last day of camp, a happy group of campers listened to music on the finished pair of booming tower speakers. Ixchel Garcia, a 15-year-old sophomore who helped build the speakers, says the camp has reinforced her desire to pursue engineering as a career. When asked what her group would do with their product, she said they planned to leave the sound system as a gift for the lab. “MIT gave us this camp, so we wanted to give them something back.” http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2011/video-edgerton-workshop-0805.html
Bringing Digital Geology Back To Life Advancements in technology rooted in classic geologic concepts are giving mainstream geologists a whole new spectrum of interpretation tools. Bill Ross, Landmark For years, the development of modern digital technologies for geology and well log interpretation has lagged behind constantly evolving software tools for geophysics. It wasn’t so long ago, 2006 in fact, that former AAPG Distinguished Lecturer Cindy A. Yeilding of BP gave a popular talk at local society meetings titled “Is the workstation killing geology?” In it, she cited serious limitations of the digital workstation, including aesthetically pleasing maps that are not always geologically valid, failure to recreate best practices based on the first principles of geology, and the lack of stratigraphic interpretation tools for mainstream users. She was, however, optimistic that one day geologists would be able to create, iterate, collaborate, and capture their projects in a completely digital framework. The day Yeilding hoped for is finally dawning. In the years since she nailed the shortcomings of geologic software, dramatic progress has been made. New technologies like Landmark ’s Dynamic Frameworks to Fill capability – an integral part of the DecisionSpace Desktop environment – are bringing digital geology back to life. Next-generation interpretation and mapping tools designed specifically for mainstream geoscientists combine classic geologic concepts in sequence stratigraphy and structural geology with automated processes and intuitive interfaces to improve quality, efficiency, and performance. How? For one thing, technology workspaces enable geologists and geophysicists to build a properly sealed, three-dimensional “framework” of structural and stratigraphic surfaces, fault networks, and unconformities as a natural part of interpreting seismic and well data. They can interactively fill selected intervals with 2-D or 3-D reservoir properties computed automatically from well logs. And all it takes to generate consistent, high-quality structure or property maps from an integrated, multi-surface framework is a few clicks of the mouse. Now, mapping is a byproduct of accurate 3-D framework construction. What’s more, dynamic updating tools allow geologists to change an interpretation or add a new pick and watch every related part of the framework shift accordingly – without manual intervention. Saving a sealed framework with reservoir properties to a common project database makes it accessible to every member of the team through a unified, multi-discipline workspace. Geological and geophysical workflows in a digital environment like this leverage two new additional technologies built on classic geologic concepts. One of these is “conformance.” All geologists know that the majority of stratigraphic units comprising sedimentary basin fill are relatively parallel or “conformable.” That is, layer thicknesses tend to remain uniform over large areas. This fundamental principle represents a valuable tool that can assist geologists in correlating logs, identifying discontinuities – faults and unconformities – and building more accurate stratigraphic and structural frameworks. What modern conformance technology essentially does is use a well-sampled surface – a seismic horizon or marker bed with numerous well tops – as a reference to guide, or conform, the shape of poorly sampled surfaces above or below it. With conformance technology, geoscientists can interpret stratigraphic layers between wells at essentially the same lateral resolution as the most detailed surface available. Apart from picking tops or seismic, the process is automated. http://www.epmag.com/Magazine/2011/7/item85078.php
A warning for shale gas investors By Steve Hargreaves @ CNNMoney August 3, 2011: 5:22 AM ET Possible SEC investigation highlights how hard it is for investors to value emerging shale gas companies. NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- Recent reports of an investigation by the Securities and Exchange Commission into whether shale gas companies are overstating their gas reserves highlights the challenges investors face in navigating this emerging sector. Last week a research note from the investment management firm Robert W. Baird, citing industry lawyers, said the SEC is looking into whether shale gas companies may be overestimating the amount of natural gas they hold beneath the ground. The investigation is most likely politically motivated and not entirely unwelcome, the note said, sparked by congressional calls for SEC action following a scathing report in the New York Times questioning the reserves held by some shale gas firms. "We view it as appropriate and expected for the SEC to evaluate compliance with new regulations if compliance is publicly questioned," Christine Tezak, an energy and environmental policy analyst at Baird, wrote in the note. "A regulatory investigation may provide a clearer investment horizon than a 'trial' in the press." The SEC would not confirm or deny if an investigation is underway. Extracting natural gas from shale is a relatively new phenomenon. It's been made possible in just the last few years thanks to advances in drilling technology and the broader use of hydraulic fracturing . Known as fracking, it's a controversial process that injects water, sand and chemicals deep into the ground to crack the shale rock and unleash the gas. The process has sparked concern over its effects on the water . The fracking public relations mess Gas from the Northeast's Marcellus shale, Texas's Barnett Shale and Arkansas' Fayettville Shale, among others, promises vast amounts of cleaner-burning fuel for the nation's energy use for decades to come. Its also caused the share price of firms involved in the space to surge over the last few years. But it may be hard for the SEC, the companies themselves, and investors in general to determine just how much gas these firms hold in the ground - a key metric in determining the stock price for any energy company. "The history of these wells is so limited," said Neal Dingmann, a Houston-based analyst at investment bank SunTrust Robinson Humphrey. "It's going to be a very touchy call to determine what you can book on these reserves." Dingmann said it's not uncommon for a shale gas well to see its production fall 70% in the first year. He said the hope is that they then continue to produce gas at the much slower but steadier rate over the next several decades. But until several decades pass, no one will really know for sure. Most analysts, including Dingmann, believe there is lots of gas there. So do the biggest names in the energy businesses. Exxon Mobil ( XOM , Fortune 500 ) would not have paid $40 billion for shale gas producer XTO last year if it thought the company was spinning a yarn when it came to its reserves. Interest in shale gas by other oil majors like BP ( BP ) and Chevron ( CVX , Fortune 500 ) continues, with the smaller shale firms like Chesapeake ( CHK , Fortune 500 ), Range ( RRC ), Devon ( DVN , Fortune 500 ) and EOG ( EOG , Fortune 500 ) the periodic subject of takeover talk. But the Times isn't the only one to question the viability of this resource. Petroleum geologist and noted oil-supply skeptic Arthur Berman has been arguing for years that shale gas estimates are overstated by at least 100%. "Shale gas in the U.S. is an important and permanent feature of supply," Berman wrote on his blog earlier this week. "But it will not fulfill mainstream expectations of either supply or cost." Retail investors should at least be aware of the debate.
标签: 毛宁波
