USGS Estimates 304 Trillion Cubic Feet of Natural Gas in the Bossier and Haynesville Formations of the U.S. Gulf Coast

[thackney]

USGS Estimates 304 Trillion Cubic Feet of Natural Gas in the Bossier and Haynesville Formations of the U.S. Gulf Coast
https://www.usgs.gov/news/usgs-estimates-304-trillion-cubic-feet-natural-gas-bossier-and-haynesville-formations-us-gulf
APRIL 13, 2017



The Bossier and Haynesville Formations of the onshore and State waters portion of the U.S. Gulf Coast contain estimated means of 4.0 billion barrels of oil, 304.4 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, and 1.9 billion barrels of natural gas liquids, according to updated assessments by the U.S. Geological Survey. These estimates, the largest continuous natural gas assessment USGS has yet conducted, include petroleum in both conventional and continuous accumulations, and consist of undiscovered, technically recoverable resources.

The Bossier and Haynesville Formations lie within the Gulf Coast Basin, which extends from the Texas-Mexico border in the west to the Florida Panhandle in the east. The Bossier Formation is estimated to contain means of 2.9 billion barrels of oil, 108.6 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, and 1.0 billion barrels of natural gas liquids, while the Haynesville Formation is estimated to contain a mean of 1.1 billion barrels of oil, 195.8 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, and 0.9 billion barrels of natural gas liquids.

“As the USGS revisits many of the oil and gas basins of the United States, we continually find that technological revolutions of the past few years have truly been a game-changer in the amount of resources that are now technically recoverable," said Walter Guidroz, Program Coordinator of the USGS Energy Resources Program. "Changes in technology and industry practices, combined with an increased understanding of the regional geologic framework, can have a significant effect on what resources become technically recoverable. These changes are why the USGS remains committed to performing the most up-to-date assessments of these vital resources throughout the United States and the world.”



Prior to this report, the USGS assessed the Bossier and Haynesville Formations in a 2010 assessment of Jurassic and Cretaceous rocks of the Gulf Coast. At that time, the Bossier was estimated to contain a mean of 9.0 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, while the Haynesville was estimated to contain 61.4 trillion cubic feet of natural gas.

“It’s amazing what a little more knowledge can yield,” said USGS scientist Stan Paxton, lead author of the assessment. “Since the 2010 assessment, we’ve gotten updated geologic maps, expanded production history and have a greater understanding of how these reservoirs evolved. All of that leads to a better geological model and therefore a more robust assessment.”

The Bossier and Haynesville Formations have long been known to contain oil and gas, but it wasn’t until 2008 that production of the continuous resources really got underway in East Texas and North Louisiana, the primary production areas for the two formations.

Continuous oil and gas is dispersed throughout a geologic formation rather than existing as discrete, localized occurrences, such as those in conventional accumulations. Because of that, continuous resources commonly require special technical drilling and recovery methods, such as hydraulic fracturing.

USGS assessments are probabilistic and statistic assessments, yielding a range of possible resource amounts. For the Bossier Formation, the assessment ranges from 37.1 trillion cubic feet of natural gas to 223.5 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, with 108.6 trillion cubic feet as the mean. For oil, the assessment ranges from 1.2 billion barrels of oil to 5.1 billion barrels of oil, with 2.9 billion barrels as the mean. For natural gas liquids, the assessment ranges from 424 million barrels to 2.0 billion barrels, with 1.0 billion barrels as the mean.

The Haynesville Formation, meanwhile, ranges from 96.3 trillion cubic feet of natural gas to 341 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, with 195.8 trillion cubic feet as the mean. For oil, the assessment ranges from 286 million barrels of oil to 2.5 billion barrels of oil, with 1.1 billion barrels as the mean. For natural gas liquids, the assessment ranges from 304 million barrels to 1.7 billion barrels, with 0.9 billion barrels as the mean.

Undiscovered resources are those that are estimated to exist based on geologic knowledge and statistical analysis of known resources, while technically recoverable resources are those that can be produced using currently available technology and industry practices. Whether or not it is profitable to produce these resources has not been evaluated.

The USGS is the only provider of publicly available estimates of undiscovered technically recoverable oil and gas resources of onshore lands and offshore state waters. The USGS assessments of the Bossier and Haynesville Formations were undertaken as part of a nationwide project assessing domestic petroleum basins using standardized methodology and protocol.

The new assessments of the Bossier and Haynesville Formations may be found online.

https://energy.usgs.gov/GeneralInfo/EnergyNewsroomAll/TabId/770/artmid/3941/articleid/1284/Bossier-and-Haynesville-Formations.aspx

Assessment of undiscovered oil and gas resources in the Bossier Formation, U.S. Gulf Coast, 2016
https://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2017/3015/fs20173015.pdf

Assessment of undiscovered oil and gas resources in the Haynesville Formation, U.S. Gulf Coast, 2016
https://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2017/3016/fs20173016.pdf

[IsailedawayfromFR]

That is a heckuva lot of gas there. No one knows what the % recovery is likely to be, but applying almost anything to that large amount is a lot.

I recall attending an unconventional gas meeting in Fort Worth years ago, and heard Steve Holditch, who at the time was the head of Petroleum Engineering School at A&M.  He had done some analysis with his grad students estimating resource amounts of 20 of the largest basins in the US.

His estimates were there were up to 10-20 x the amount of hydrocarbons that exist in unconventional resources compared to conventional resources.  In place volumes, but still staggering in amounts of hydrocarbons potentially exploitable in years to come.

[Elderberry]

Why aren't we running our cars on natural gas?

[thackney]

Why aren't we running our cars on natural gas?

Because of the cost of compressing enough gas to a comparable volume of a tank of gasoline to provide a comparable number of miles.

If you compress it half as much, it is almost the same amount of cost.

I've looked at it several times.  There are enough CNG filling stations in the greater Houston area to make a dual fuel vehicle feasible for me.

There is not enough cost savings to get payback for me in 5~7 years for the added expense of tank and fuel system added to my truck.  And that is based upon my driving 36,000 miles per year.

I could by a CNG only vehicle, but the cost savings of fuel are eaten up by the costs associated with adding another vehicle on top of the existing vehicles (additional insurance, etc).

There is enough infrastructure finally for some long haul trucking to switch over to LNG.  And it is becoming used more often for fleet service like garbage and delivery trucks.  I think the US is going to use it more in the future.  I have a lot of doubts it will ever be more than 30% of our transportation fuel.  Existing infrastructure has a lot of cost advantages.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

Why aren't we running our cars on natural gas?

I'll add to @thackney 's comments:

There are many areas that do indeed run on CNG.  Australia is gas-rich and oil-poor. When I used to travel there 30 years ago, all of their buses ran on CNG.  I have been to other places and seen the same.

The technology is there but commercially it must make sense as well.  Due to the need to have CNG filling stations, a distributive network of them will be needed prior to any large-scale conversion of autos to CNG. IN the meantime, one has to restrict their usage to fleet vehicles in cities like buses, ports, etc.  I envision the next phase will be setting up CNG stations along interstates for truckers.

When the US becomes oil-poor like Australia, we will certainly have more incentive.

@Elderberry

[thackney]

I envision the next phase will be setting up CNG stations along interstates for truckers.

For interstate trucking, LNG has an advantage over CNG.  More BTU's per volume.  LNG is not a good choice for residential type transportation, but is good for a vehicle that is moving more than it sits still.

Pickens' company clean energy made a push to get LNG on many major highways has already put in a lot.

https://www.cnglngstations.com/

http://www.afdc.energy.gov/locator/stations/results?utf8=%E2%9C%93&location=&fuel=LNG&private=false&planned=false&owner=all&payment=all&radius=false&radius_miles=5&lng_vehicle_class=all

[uglybiker]

When the US becomes oil-poor like Australia, we will certainly have more incentive.

@Elderberry

But since we keep finding more, I don't see that happening any time soon.

[endicom]

https://www.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/n9140us2a.htm

[thackney]

And some short term predictions:





SHORT-TERM ENERGY AND SUMMER FUELS OUTLOOK
Natural Gas
https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/steo/report/natgas.cfm

[Free Vulcan]

The Bossier and Haynesville Formations of the onshore and State waters portion of the U.S. Gulf Coast contain estimated means of 4.0 billion barrels of oil, 304.4 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, and 1.9 billion barrels of natural gas liquids, according to updated assessments by the U.S. Geological Survey.

Is that all? 

[IsailedawayfromFR]

But since we keep finding more, I don't see that happening any time soon.

Actually, we are not finding more.  We have settled into just a few areas of the US that have enough high gravity crude or gas liquids that permit the commercial exploitation from unconventional zones.  These zones have always been known to exist, but were overlooked for more favorable, higher permeability horizons.  These zones now are being tapped due to the utilization of horizontal drilling and multi-stage fraccing.

What we see now that is causing the upward swing over the past ten years of US liquids production is caused mostly by the Williston basin in North Dakota, the Eagleford in South Texas and some from the Niobrara in the Rockies.  In all of these, the hydrocarbon accumulation is widespread, and the production growth has come from so-called 'sweet spots' within.

The Permian basin is also a center of recent production growth, not so much from unconventional zones but from redrilling the basin using horizontals rather than verticals.

I imagine @thackney has a chart at hand that shows these production trends and source.

[thackney]

Actually, we are not finding more.  We have settled into just a few areas of the US that have enough high gravity crude or gas liquids that permit the commercial exploitation from unconventional zones.  These zones have always been known to exist, but were overlooked for more favorable, higher permeability horizons.  These zones now are being tapped due to the utilization of horizontal drilling and multi-stage fraccing.

What we see now that is causing the upward swing over the past ten years of US liquids production is caused mostly by the Williston basin in North Dakota, the Eagleford in South Texas and some from the Niobrara in the Rockies.  In all of these, the hydrocarbon accumulation is widespread, and the production growth has come from so-called 'sweet spots' within.

The Permian basin is also a center of recent production growth, not so much from unconventional zones but from redrilling the basin using horizontals rather than verticals.

I imagine @thackney has a chart at hand that shows these production trends and source.

The falling oil production rates of 2015~2016 are finally starting to recover in these unconventional plays.

https://www.eia.gov/petroleum/drilling/pdf/dpr-full.pdf

[IsailedawayfromFR]

The falling oil production rates of 2015~2016 are finally starting to recover in these unconventional plays.

https://www.eia.gov/petroleum/drilling/pdf/dpr-full.pdf

The Marcellus is an outstanding powerhouse that has to be driving a lot of the economy of Ohio and Pennsylvania.  If only the people of New York could experience the same.

The Utica is a pleasant surprise.

[Taxcontrol]

Why aren't we running our cars on natural gas?

Three reasons:

Lack of CNG infrastructure
Cost of conversion of a vehicle (~6,000)
Current Gas/Diesel prices are cheaper than CNG price per gallon equivalent.