The Briefing Room
General Category => Science, Technology and Knowledge => Energy => Topic started by: IsailedawayfromFR on February 01, 2018, 01:34:27 pm
-
U.S. oil production surpassed 10 million barrels a day in November for the first time in nearly 50 years, a milestone that underscores the growing dominance of the U.S. oil industry.
While global oil exporters once dismissed shale as a flash in the pan, the industry has emerged more efficient than ever from a three-year oil price rout and is poised to take advantage of prices that are at their highest levels since late 2014.
In November, production rose to 10.038 million barrels a day, 4% more than the previous month, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. That is just shy of the monthly record of 10.044 million barrels a day in November of 1970.
The resurgence of the U.S. shale industry is the latest turn in the tug of war between shale producers and the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries, which last year coordinated an output cut with other major exporters, including Russia. The group has been trimming about 2% of global oil supply in a bid to work off a glut and raise prices.
The efforts have paid off: prices have surged this year amid tightening supplies and world-wide economic growth that stirred surprisingly strong demand.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-oil-production-tops-10-million-barrels-a-day-for-first-time-since-1970-1517429674 (https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-oil-production-tops-10-million-barrels-a-day-for-first-time-since-1970-1517429674)
Those around the world who attempt to control the price of oil should be worried.
-
(https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/images/2018.02.01/main.png)
U.S. monthly crude oil production exceeds 10 million barrels per day, highest since 1970
https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=34772 (https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=34772)
FEBRUARY 1, 2018
(https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/images/2018.02.01/chart2.png)
(https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/images/2018.02.01/chart3.png)
Drilling Productivity Report
https://www.eia.gov/petroleum/drilling/pdf/dpr-full.pdf (https://www.eia.gov/petroleum/drilling/pdf/dpr-full.pdf)
January 2018
For key tight oil and shale gas regions
-
That didn't take long
-
That didn't take long
Just about a decade to feel the full effects from the frackers.....
-
(https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/images/2018.02.01/main.png)
U.S. monthly crude oil production exceeds 10 million barrels per day, highest since 1970
https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=34772 (https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=34772)
FEBRUARY 1, 2018
(https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/images/2018.02.01/chart2.png)
(https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/images/2018.02.01/chart3.png)
Drilling Productivity Report
https://www.eia.gov/petroleum/drilling/pdf/dpr-full.pdf (https://www.eia.gov/petroleum/drilling/pdf/dpr-full.pdf)
January 2018
For key tight oil and shale gas regions
@thackney , do you have the historical uncompleted wells graph or table to see how that effect is playing in?
-
Anyone remember "peak oil" in the late 2000's?
-
If production levels are so high, why aren't crude prices falling?
-
Anyone remember "peak oil" in the late 2000's?
The guy who developed that peak oil theory made millions off the label until he died in an 'accidental drowning' in his hot tub in 2010.
He was also into green schemes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matthew_Simmons
-
Winning!
-
@thackney , do you have the historical uncompleted wells graph or table to see how that effect is playing in?
@IsailedawayfromFR
https://www.eia.gov/petroleum/drilling/xls/duc-data.xlsx (https://www.eia.gov/petroleum/drilling/xls/duc-data.xlsx)
-
If production levels are so high, why aren't crude prices falling?
Oil is a global commodity and global demand is rising with global production.
(https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/steo/images/fig32.png)
US consumption is rising as well.
-
The guy who developed that peak oil theory made millions off the label until he died in an 'accidental drowning' in his hot tub in 2010.
He was also into green schemes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matthew_Simmons (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matthew_Simmons)
Simmons talked about peak oil decades after Hubbert.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/rrapier/2016/09/08/what-hubbert-got-really-wrong-about-oil/#b7155b52a3bc (https://www.forbes.com/sites/rrapier/2016/09/08/what-hubbert-got-really-wrong-about-oil/#b7155b52a3bc)
...In a 1956 paper, Nuclear Energy and the Fossil Fuels, Hubbert suggested that oil production in a particular region would approximate a bell curve, increasing exponentially during the early stages of production before eventually slowing, reaching a peak when approximately half of a field had been extracted, and then going into terminal production decline.
A peak in oil production, that is the maximum rate of production after which a field, country, or the world as a whole begins to decline is at the core of the peak oil issue. A country is said to have peaked, or reached peak oil after it becomes apparent that oil production in the region is steadily declining year after year. Hubbert is widely credited with accurately predicting the peak of U.S. oil production. In fact, his prediction has taken on a mythological status...
-
@IsailedawayfromFR
https://www.eia.gov/petroleum/drilling/xls/duc-data.xlsx (https://www.eia.gov/petroleum/drilling/xls/duc-data.xlsx)
Thx.
Good grief, the DUCs are increasing in number, so apparently they do not explain the phenonema of increased production occurring.
Now almost 7500 waiting for fracs.
A lot of oil to come without any drilling effort, just completion dollars.
-
Anyone remember "peak oil" in the late 2000's?
Peak oil predictions for the U.S. have been around for well over hundred years.
Economist and oil analyst Daniel Yergin notes that the first predictions of imminent oil peaks go back to the 1880s, when some American experts believed that exhaustion of the Pennsylvania oil fields would kill the US oil industry. Another wave of peak predictions occurred after World War I.[12]
-
Simmons talked about peak oil decades after Hubbert.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/rrapier/2016/09/08/what-hubbert-got-really-wrong-about-oil/#b7155b52a3bc (https://www.forbes.com/sites/rrapier/2016/09/08/what-hubbert-got-really-wrong-about-oil/#b7155b52a3bc)
...In a 1956 paper, Nuclear Energy and the Fossil Fuels, Hubbert suggested that oil production in a particular region would approximate a bell curve, increasing exponentially during the early stages of production before eventually slowing, reaching a peak when approximately half of a field had been extracted, and then going into terminal production decline.
A peak in oil production, that is the maximum rate of production after which a field, country, or the world as a whole begins to decline is at the core of the peak oil issue. A country is said to have peaked, or reached peak oil after it becomes apparent that oil production in the region is steadily declining year after year. Hubbert is widely credited with accurately predicting the peak of U.S. oil production. In fact, his prediction has taken on a mythological status...
Yes, but I was responding to a post about the peak oil rhetoric in the 2000s.
I attended a conference in which Simmons spoke about Peak Oil. He twist was fixation on Ghawar field, the king of oil fields in Saudi Arabia. He was describing that the way that field went, so went peak oil as SA was using Ghawar as the swing oil supplier. When it could no longer do that and was required to go full throttle to supply SA needs, Simmons said peak oil would have arrived.
He made millions being an advisor with that theory which he trumpeted to the end.
It remains a mystery how he died in his hot tub at a fairly young age. Perhaps his venture into the green energy schemes may not have been appreciated by some.
-
Just about a decade to feel the full effects from the frackers.....
Not even close. In 5 years the price of gasoline at the pumps was going back down. This despite the most anti-fraccing, anti-drilling, anti pipeline, anti-refining, anti-flaring, anti energy administration in history.
-
Yes, but I was responding to a post about the peak oil rhetoric in the 2000s.
I attended a conference in which Simmons spoke about Peak Oil. He twist was fixation on Ghawar field, the king of oil fields in Saudi Arabia. He was describing that the way that field went, so went peak oil as SA was using Ghawar as the swing oil supplier. When it could no longer do that and was required to go full throttle to supply SA needs, Simmons said peak oil would have arrived.
He made millions being an advisor with that theory which he trumpeted to the end.
It remains a mystery how he died in his hot tub at a fairly young age. Perhaps his venture into the green energy schemes may not have been appreciated by some.
I have a book in my office I keep as a curiosity. "When the Oil Runs Out" was published, iirc, in 1947, and deals with the coming 'peak oil'. We've had a couple of peaks since then, but there seems to always be another, higher peak when you get to the one everyone was scared of. Every time the low hanging fruit is picked, someone invents a taller ladder.
-
There are huge hydrocarbon reserves left:
- Oil shale (different from shale oil/gas) in the green river formation in colorado
- huge hydrocarbon energy reserves in frozen methane under the sea
And to get funky:
- huge methane reserves on the Saturnian moon of Titan.
-
There are huge hydrocarbon reserves left:
- Oil shale (different from shale oil/gas) in the green river formation in colorado
More info for the curious:
OIL SHALE VS. SHALE OIL:
http://files.geology.utah.gov/surveynotes/articles/pdf/oil_shale_vs_shale_oil_44-3-2.pdf (http://files.geology.utah.gov/surveynotes/articles/pdf/oil_shale_vs_shale_oil_44-3-2.pdf)
- huge hydrocarbon energy reserves in frozen methane under the sea
Not just under the sea. They have produced NatGas from Methane Hydrates under the permafrost in Alaska. Estimates are slightly more gas than the entire Marcellus Shale field just at that location.
Another round of Slope methane hydrate research planned
http://www.alaskajournal.com/business-and-finance/2015-07-15/another-round-slope-methane-hydrate-research-planned#.WnhuuKinE2w (http://www.alaskajournal.com/business-and-finance/2015-07-15/another-round-slope-methane-hydrate-research-planned#.WnhuuKinE2w)
Exploring Gas Hydrates as a Future Energy Source
https://www.usgs.gov/news/exploring-gas-hydrates-a-future-energy-source (https://www.usgs.gov/news/exploring-gas-hydrates-a-future-energy-source)
And to get funky:
- huge methane reserves on the Saturnian moon of Titan.
The lack of oxygen at that location (which is why it exists) is going to make that tough to use.
-
The lack of oxygen at that location (which is why it exists) is going to make that tough to use.
Definitely. None of these will be used in our lifetimes in any appreciable amounts, IMO.
The price of oil will drive their feasibility, but IMO, at one point or another, the science and economics will be around to take advantage of them.
-
Definitely. None of these will be used in our lifetimes in any appreciable amounts, IMO.
The price of oil will drive their feasibility, but IMO, at one point or another, the science and economics will be around to take advantage of them.
I think the methane hydrates will. The Alaska and Northwestern Canada test wells produced them from an on land drill rig by dropping the pressure.
Also had production from CO2 injection.
http://www.petroleumnews.com/pntruncate/512154321.shtml (http://www.petroleumnews.com/pntruncate/512154321.shtml)
If the Alaskan Gas Pipeline gets built for an LNG terminal. The market would drive the production.
-
There are huge hydrocarbon reserves left:
- Oil shale (different from shale oil/gas) in the green river formation in colorado
- huge hydrocarbon energy reserves in frozen methane under the sea
And to get funky:
- huge methane reserves on the Saturnian moon of Titan.
Sorry to bust your bubble, but those are not what one calls 'reserves'.
They are at best speculative hydrocarbons, including those in Co
-
Sorry to bust your bubble, but those are not what one calls 'reserves'.
They are at best speculative hydrocarbons, including those in Co
Pedantics.
It is a hydrocarbon reserve. Whether or not it's feasible energy depends on a lot of factors. But there are jourles of energy there.
-
Pedantics.
It is a hydrocarbon reserve. Whether or not it's feasible energy depends on a lot of factors. But there are jourles of energy there.
Nope, go look it up at the SEC, among other places.
An oil company exec would go to jail if it used words like 'reserves' so cavalierly.
Think of it this way: A bank who says it has 'reserves' of cash in the bank when in fact it had nothing but IOUs in the vault would similarly have a serious issue.
-
Sorry to bust your bubble, but those are not what one calls 'reserves'.
They are at best speculative hydrocarbons, including those in Co
Oil shale has been produced, so it can be put down as 'reserves' (Unocal at Parachute Creek, CO had that kiln setup). However, those reserves only become economic at ridiculous prices, so until someone comes up with something better, they are not practical to consider. http://articles.latimes.com/1991-03-27/business/fi-898_1_shale-oil (http://articles.latimes.com/1991-03-27/business/fi-898_1_shale-oil)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colony_Shale_Oil_Project (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colony_Shale_Oil_Project)
Unfortunately, in times where writers don't know fraccing from drilling, or a pump jack from an oil rig, the difference between oil shale and shale oil is lost...
-
Nope, go look it up at the SEC, among other places.
An oil company exec would go to jail if it used words like 'reserves' so cavalierly.
Think of it this way: A bank who says it has 'reserves' of cash in the bank when in fact it had nothing but IOUs in the vault would similarly have a serious issue.
You mean like the Federal Reserve?
-
Oil shale has been produced, so it can be put down as 'reserves' (Unocal at Parachute Creek, CO had that kiln setup). However, those reserves only become economic at ridiculous prices, so until someone comes up with something better, they are not practical to consider. http://articles.latimes.com/1991-03-27/business/fi-898_1_shale-oil (http://articles.latimes.com/1991-03-27/business/fi-898_1_shale-oil)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colony_Shale_Oil_Project (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colony_Shale_Oil_Project)
Unfortunately, in times where writers don't know fraccing from drilling, or a pump jack from an oil rig, the difference between oil shale and shale oil is lost...
There was a proposal back in the mid 1970's to build a twin unit 1200 MW nuke plant there to supply steam and electricity to start tapping the green mountain shale. Alas, the economics made it totally unfeasible.
-
Pedantics.
It is a hydrocarbon reserve. Whether or not it's feasible energy depends on a lot of factors. But there are jourles of energy there.
No, Reserves have a legal meaning, regardless if you chose to ignore it. For a company to list barrels as reserves, it has to be drilled, flow tested and economic under current conditions with existing technology.
You are talking about possible or maybe probable reserves.
-
Oil shale has been produced, so it can be put down as 'reserves' (Unocal at Parachute Creek, CO had that kiln setup). However, those reserves only become economic at ridiculous prices, so until someone comes up with something better, they are not practical to consider. http://articles.latimes.com/1991-03-27/business/fi-898_1_shale-oil (http://articles.latimes.com/1991-03-27/business/fi-898_1_shale-oil)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colony_Shale_Oil_Project (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colony_Shale_Oil_Project)
Unfortunately, in times where writers don't know fraccing from drilling, or a pump jack from an oil rig, the difference between oil shale and shale oil is lost...
That piece is known is a known reservoir, but they are not proved reserves unless commercially recoverable and under current economic conditions, operating methods, and government regulations.
-
That piece is known is a known reservoir, but they are not proved reserves unless commercially recoverable and under current economic conditions, operating methods, and government regulations.
A LOT has changed since the Arab Oil Embargo.
-
You mean like the Federal Reserve?
:silly:
-
Nope, go look it up at the SEC, among other places.
An oil company exec would go to jail if it used words like 'reserves' so cavalierly.
Think of it this way: A bank who says it has 'reserves' of cash in the bank when in fact it had nothing but IOUs in the vault would similarly have a serious issue.
*****rollingeyes*****