The New York Times never did pen an article about Exxon's big oil & gas find in the Gulf (mentioned yesterday in Part 1) though late yesterday they did reprint a Reuters story on the topic.
But it's a new day, there is more natural gas news, and the Times is once again behind the times. Bloomberg has the story, so do a few other news outlets, but since it can't compete with Congressman Weiner's travails, perhaps it doesn't get wide distribution. Today's news is that Exxon has purchased more natural gas assets, mainly in Pennsylvania's Marcellus Shale, for nearly $2 billion. That's real money, even for Exxon, and it is a clue about where you should be looking for real results in the energy field. Remember: wind and solar power in the US (which the White House is subsidizing and wants to double) account for less than 1% of our national consumption. Meanwhile, natural gas, which has infrastructure in place, burns clean, and has abundant domestic supply, accounts for 22%.
So take your pick: you can follow the politicians in their subsidized quest, or look to companies producing and delivering natural gas. I suspect one will benefit the investor more than the other.
(This article contains the current opinions of the author but not necessarily those of Brighton Securities Corp. The author's opinions are subject to change without notice. This blog post is for informational purposes only. Forecasts, estimates, and certain information contained herein should not be considered as investment advice or a recommendation of any particular security, strategy or investment product. References to specific securities and their issuers are for illustrative purposes only and are not intended and should not be interpreted as recommendations to purchase or sell such securities).