Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
i finally have the answer to my question about what cultural resource is being threatened
http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/energy/story/2011-08-30/Daryl-Hannah-arrested-in-White-House-oil-protest/50191802/1
i hope Hillary seeks clemency
yeah, i saw the bit about the State Dept approval but i was wondering what cultural resources were threatened.
As far as i know the plains Indians are no longer tracking buffalo so i'm befuddled as to what 'culture' State is worried about.
i did like the threat and reference to greedy oil companies at the end of the FT article.
keystone pipeline
anybody know what the hell this refers to?
The government said, however, that the 1,700-mile pipeline would present "significant adverse effects to certain cultural resources"
Have they done anything to alleviate their dire financial straits?
EIA shale gas est.
growing scrutiny from Congress about how the administration calculates its numbers and why it depends on outside and industry-tied consultants to produce some of its reports.
Accurate estimates are important for lawmakers who are making long-term decisions about subsidies and policies relating to the nation’s energy mix. They are also essential for landowners and investors as they decide where and whether to lease their land to drillers or invest in gas companies.
Some market analysts say that the large differences between public estimates for natural gas resources provide further evidence that there may be more risk and uncertainty involved with gas drilling than many investors realize.
A spokesman for the administration added that ... drilling costs and well performance may have a larger impact on future natural gas productio
[OT] earthquake
i felt it in Cambridge. 2 episodes of gentle rocking over ~15 seconds.
re COP: lmao - again.
more seriously: i haven't heard a peep about service folk going back into Libya. I suspect all of the sane people are thinking what the COP guy said. It was extremely chaotic when folks were leaving and some of the stories were quite disturbing.
LMAO - bit 'unusual' commentary
LA foreign investmnt
what are they counting as investment? I believe that foreign ownership is restricted in most of those countries. I believe Brazil, for example, is developing a large ship/boat construction industry because importation of foreign built boats (for operation in Brazilian waters) is either restricted in some way (e.g. heavily taxed) or forbidden. That's my impression; i don't know it to be fact.
water
this might be useful for you
http://pubs.acs.org/cen/editor/89/8927editor.html
water is a tough thing to invest in: there does not seem to be a lot of differentiation in technology for recycling or purification. At the moment i think scale (as in operational capability), integration with other infrastructure, and experience in widely varying political/social/geologic environments are the important 'differentiaters'. Even then it's probably a low margin business.
i don't see long-haul trucks moving to NG anytime soon, c.f.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704740604576301550341227910.html
in inflation/devalued dollar terms, the price of oil now is close to what it was in 1980 (which is another reason why obama is compared to carter)
http://www.eia.gov/steo/fsheets/index.cfm
oil prices declined after 1981 and prices might decline again, although i would be very surprised if the same magnitude was achieved (i'd also be part of the U3 index)
As long as the US produces ~30% of the oil we consume, then we will be dependent on other countries. NG can not replace ~70% of our oil consumption. However, i suspect NG will eventually move up in price rather than oil moving down and part of the reason will be more utilization in vehicles.
as for the 'discovery after discovery'. The oil discoveries in the gulf have a bit of a problem at the moment (see above). As for NG: yeah, we have lots at the moment which is why the price is so low.
As for 'green energy'. Most 'green' concerns are well-intentioned but self-defeating. Case in point being the nice new natural gas fueled taxis scooting about Cambridge & Boston (supplemented to the tune of $8k/car thanks to the marvelous Recovery & Reinvestment Act). These cars and their non-subsidized gasoline brethren can only transport passengers 1-way if they travel outside of their respective cities. If a cab takes a passenger from a cambridge hotel to Logan airport it must return empty. Cab takes passenger from airport to city outside Boston, it must return to Boston empty. Van services like the "Super Shuttle" are not allowed to operate here. Unions and sanctioned monopolies continue to trump 'green' (but hey, it's not all bad. i just received a nice notice from the city informing me of the availability of my 'free' "CitySmart" package which will be delivered by "Metro Pedal Power". Hey, the package will "save money" and "reduce [my] carbon foot-print". And some folks don't think there are things that can be cut from govmint spending.)
North,
i know next to nothing about the Utica shale other than it's under the Marcellus. Following from the CHK website:
http://www.chk.com/News/Articles/Pages/1590490.aspx
Chesapeake Announces a Major New Liquids-Rich Discovery
in the Utica Shale in Eastern Ohio
Having achieved successful results from recent drilling activities in eastern Ohio, Chesapeake is announcing the discovery of a major new liquids-rich play in the Utica Shale. Based on its proprietary geoscientific, petrophysical and engineering research during the past two years and the results of six horizontal and nine vertical wells it has drilled, Chesapeake believes that its industry-leading 1.25 million net leasehold acres in the Utica Shale play could be worth $15 - $20 billion in increased value to the company. Chesapeake’s dataset on the Utica Shale includes approximately 2,000 well logs, full-suite petrophysical data on approximately 200 wells, 3,200 feet of proprietary core samples from nine wells and production results from three wells. As a result of its analysis, the company believes the Utica Shale will be characterized by a western oil phase, a central wet gas phase and an eastern dry gas phase and is likely most analogous, but economically superior to, the Eagle Ford Shale in South Texas.
Chesapeake is currently drilling in the Utica Shale with five operated rigs to further evaluate and develop its leasehold and anticipates increasing its rig count to eight by the end of 2011 and reaching at least a range of 16-20 rigs by year-end 2012. Also, the company believes that its leasehold position in the Utica Shale will support a drilling effort of at least 40 rigs by year-end 2014. Chesapeake is currently conducting a competitive process to monetize a portion of its Utica Shale leasehold position, which will be through an industry joint venture process or through a number of other monetization alternatives. The company anticipates completing a Utica Shale transaction in the 2011 fourth quarter.
Because of persistent and significant oilfield service inflation and a more accelerated drilling program in the Utica Shale play, Chesapeake has increased its planned drilling and completion capital expenditure budget for each of full-year 2011 and 2012 by $500 million to a range of $6.0-$6.5 billion in each year.
companion article to previous post makes some of the leftist arguments in that article even more pathetic
Left for Extinct, a Steel Plant Rises in Ohio
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111904233404576462562705511704.html?mod=ITP_marketplace_0
....France's Vallourec & Mannesmann Holdings Inc., one of the world's largest makers of steel tubes for the energy market, has decided to build the plant here next to an existing facility for two main reasons. Youngstown has an experienced steelmaking work force and the city is at the door of the Marcellus Shale, a natural-gas basin beneath New York, Pennsylvania, West Virginia and Ohio....
somewhat humorous WSJ article on shale gas jobs
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111904233404576462543376226516.html?mod=ITP_marketplace_0
Gas Drilling Bringing Jobs to Pennsylvania, but How Many?
By KRIS MAHER
At a time when creating jobs is one of the nation's top priorities, most tallies agree that the recent boom in gas drilling has put more people to work in Pennsylvania. But just how many new jobs the surge has generated in the state is open to debate......
David Passmore, a professor of education at Penn State University who has studied labor-market trends in the state, but wasn't involved in the report, said there are potential problems with linking industry expenditures to job creation. One is that it isn't clear if Marcellus-related companies are buying all their supplies in Pennsylvania. Another is that it isn't possible to determine the economic impact of royalty payments because people will put varying amounts into the bank where the money won't stimulate economic activity.
i think this may be a case of the NYTimes spinning its own stories; they are trying to give the impression that they prompted the SEC to investigate some O&G producers. There's no reason to believe that some O&G producers put forth questionable numbers (e.g. look at the companies DFRAI likes to pump) - just like any other industry and the SEC is investigating. Self-aggrandizement is a marvelous thing. Eventually a sufficient number of people will recognize the NYT for the propagandist rag that it is and it will wither away.
I can’t tell whether the Bloomberg writer who used the phrase, “water and chemicals” is simply dumb… or whether this is a deliberate attempt to discredit fracking
how wonderfully ludicrous
The proposal, incorporating four air regulations, would cut emissions of smog-forming volatile organic compounds by about one-fourth, with an almost 95 percent reduction in such discharges from new and updated gas wells using fracturing, or fracking,
Fracking, a technique that injects chemicals and water into rock formations
...has been tied to a rise in smog pollution in rural areas such as western Wyoming
The proposed EPA rules will cut emissions linked to increased cancer risks, asthma attacks and premature death
Pollution would by reduced by capturing gas that escapes during extraction, and making that gas available for sale, the agency said. The technology for the process is used by some companies and required in some states, according to the EPA.
The proposed rules would be “extremely cost-effective,” according to the EPA. The combined annual costs to comply would be $754 million in 2015, and the estimated value of the gas made available for sale is $783 million, the agency said.
Oil and gas production and processing account for almost 40 percent of all U.S. methane emissions, according to the agency
sued the EPA in a bid to force an update of standards that haven’t been revised since 1985.
“Drilling for oil and gas shouldn’t come at the expense of clean air.”
GE
i wouldn't under-estimate their abilities and dedication to growth in the energy services business. Much to the chagrin of some folks in at least SLB and probably HAL, i think GE will continue to grow their business in the oil-field services business as well as other parts of the energy sector. They are now producing downhole tools and surface services that are in direct competition with SLB and HAL. I think the consensus at the moment is that those services are not superior but i wouldn't bet on that situation persisting. Given the relative valuations, i like GE.
cheers,
Charlie
laughable. if corrosion is the objection, then it should take about an afternoon to come up with the pertinent data (this was undoubtedly done already). If the Ogailala aquifer is the problem, then unless the senators have an overly broad definition of the geographic extent of the aquifer, then the pipeline already bypasses all but a tiny bit in eastern Nebraska. They might also want to address their concerns to the existing oil pipelines that traverse the Ogailala. i'd venture that pesticide contamination is a greater threat than oil.
There have been oil spills from sections of the existing Keystone pipeline; however, i have seen no evidence that those leaks are due to corrosion. The documented cases i've seen have been due to things like over-torqueing fittings and other yuckhead human errors.
this contains maps showing existing oil and refined product pipeline maps
http://www.pipeline101.com/reports/Notes.pdf
well ok, but i hope they're also the leading 'producer' of O2 as well 'cause the H2S formed by the hydrosulfurization reaction subsequently gets reacted with O2 to form elemental sulfur (which is why the sulfur market is glutted)
typically shallow NYT piece. take a look at this more concise but informative article:
http://www.epmag.com/2011/June/item83723.php
the last paragraph is particularly enlightening as to why exploration in Argentina is likely to be muted.
nah. the world is glutted in sulfur. i suspect that Dew is getting at a service company that does more business in countries with high sulfur crudes than other service companies. I think all of the major service companies will see revenues increase as the world's crude oil reserves become progressively more sour. However, one will see a greater revenue increase (in absolute dollar terms) than others.
i haven't looked at the Nature article but somebody looks to be greatly over-stating the significance of this 'discovery'. Firstly, i have doubts of the grade of the supposed ore based on geologic environment. Secondly, the story is written in a way that appears to be deceptive. There is no mention of the geologic context. It is stated that an area of 1 km^2 could provide 20% of current world consumption of REEs without any description of sampling and extrapolations/modeling. Then the authors estimate the size of the discovery at 80 to 100 billion metric tonnes without giving any indication of deposit geometry. That stretches credibility. Even if the WSJ writer doesn't have any technical education, you'd think a claimed 1000x increase over existing reserves would prompt some doubt.
FL,
i am a geologist/geochemist & work for a large O&G service company. my previous comment was somewhat facetious. I'm well aware of why a production company should characterize shale gas reservoirs. The fact is that in the shale gas business, many production companies minimize their expenditures on such things.
also, induced fractures in shale gas do tend to be vertical - not horizontal as you indicated to moneyman. Not sure whether you misspoke but the least principle stress direction in these reservoirs is generally in the horizontal plane so fractures form most easily in the vertical. That is convenient because the rocks and wells tend to be mostly horizontal. It's also why folks worry about injected chemicals having opportunity to migrate upwared and out of the shales. Nobody really knows what happens to most of the injected water and that is something that i'm peripherally involved in.
http://www.3legsresources.com/media/A%20guide%20to%20shale%20gas.pdf
charlie
FL,
while your 1st sentence might be true, the reason for dicy-ness in estimates is because of the lack of logging and characterization. Many gas producers are happy just drilling holes and producing gas. Why detract from profits by spending money on logging, coring, and core analysis?
Charlie
yeah, the initial comment about companies relying on 'independent' reviewers or peers for reserve estimates is wrong. Shell would've loved to be able to blame their large reserve revision a few yrs ago on somebody else.
the point about using less water also refers to the fact that in some shale gas development areas water isn't an easy thing to come by, e.g.
http://theseventhfold.com/2010/09/13/add-saudi-arabia-to-the-growing-list-of-shale-gas-players/
http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/f62babbc-bf5c-11df-965a-00144feab49a.html#axzz1QWJyZCew
there are some interesting politics behind the above
ny times shale gas article
yep, pretty much just enough truth to sound credible but obviously written to buttress the NY & PA anti-shale gas crowd. Regarding the economic angle in the story: everyone in the business knows that many shale gas wells are uneconomic. At this time it is cheaper to drill and complete a large number of wells over a wide area with a high failure ratio than to use other exploration techniques to identify higher probability subsets of economically viable production targets. I suspect that companies like XOM and the larger service companies do not expect this to always be the case and thus their reasons for buying up smaller companies and continuing to build capability in the shale gas business in spite of low NG prices.
just for grins i've compared historical retail gasoline prices (left axis), WTI crude, and the S&P 500 (divided by 100)
unsurprisingly gas prices are correlative with crude prices with occasional deviations due to things like Katrina and Rita. Conversely, the S&P and the other major indices are poorly correlated with the price of crude although major changes in crude prices seem to lag changes in the index. Also note that oil and gas prices have been declining since the end of April. The Chinese economy seems to be slowing, not heating up. Releasing US strategic reserves does nothing for European refineries (where Libyan oil goes). So Obama and friends' reasons for releasing oil into an already over-supplied market seem spurious.
On the sort of positive side, the US gov't might actually makes some money out of this deal (wondering whether this was really done to weasel around the debt ceiling problem).
even if razed, most of those places are not conducive to growing crops without irrigation (i.e. they are borderline desert).
i thought the premise of the article was ludicrous as evident by the stock market's response the DOE announcement and a $5/bbl drop in oil prices.
Hugh Grant (MON) and corn stalks
i can only offer anecdotal commentary since my family owns a farm: prior to about 5 yrs ago i never saw stalks harvested; they were always plowed into the soil. Now stalks are routinely bailed and shipped off for processing into ethanol (and by-products?). The processing plants are hours away. I have no hard facts but i would be amazed if the process of bailing, trucking, and processing into alcohol produces a positive net energy equivalence over simply using the diesel fuel and natural gas for other purposes. In addition, i think the soil is being robbed of replenishment. I suspect that the only reason this part of the ethanol 'market' exists is because of federal subsidies.
However, there was a reason for ethanol subsidies to come into existence and that is because MTBE was out-lawed by congress and ethanol is the next best and cheapest thing to use to boost octane ratings although it is much more expensive than MTBE. People were either going to pay higher prices for gasoline or pay higher taxes to 'encourage' and enable ethanol production to use as a gasoline additive. This is similar to the approach that T-Bone is arguing for with regard to using natural gas for automobile and trucking fuel.
So I think Grant's comment about using something that would otherwise be waste is myopic. Of course, as stated above my conclusion is based on own unsubstantiated conjecture.
regards,
Charlie
rig. i haven't looked at the report yet. just the video which seemed entirely objective and presented photographic evidence to support their interpretation of events. The videos only address events in the BOP and make no mention of events below the BOP (other than saying that pipe was being extruded).
as for Hugh Grant: did he get caught with another ugly hooker and he's using booze as an excuse?
Transocean Deepwater Horizon report
http://deepwater.com/fw/main/Public-Report-1076.html
couple of very interesting videos and pictures
i thought the shork video was mostly sensible and there is no conspiracy or fear involved. it's a supply and demand market and the supply is outstripping demand. building pipeline infrastructure is expensive and the tax-payers are not going to pay to make pickens wealthier.
your comment about CNG having 30% less CO2 and 97% less CO ... than gasoline is meaningless nonsense.
from what i've seen lately, there are several posters on this board who really shouldn't be investing in oil and gas companies whether those companies are legitimate or not. What you, DFRAI and others seem to be interested in is speculation and quasi-social banter which is better suited for a Yahoo board.
...the belief that natural gas prices will not stay at this level for very long..
the documents are all public but they've set up their websites so you can't back up thru the urls which might eventually get you to places where they don't want you. i suspect it's just a simple security protocol.
after i submitted the first post it occurred to me that HAL might have some other interesting things under the "...contents/Shale/..."
path so i googled the truncated path for all pdf documents and there ya go. Of course, you might find other wonderful things if you truncate before the 'Shale'. I frequently take this approach when i know there's likely to be something useful in a place but i don't know specific words or titles that may exist in a location.
sorry for spamming on this but this is a nice trick. google entire line below as is (don't click on the link, it won't do anything for you)
filetype:pdf site:http://www.halliburton.com/public/solutions/contents/Shale/
just some interesting and potentially useful stuff regarding shale gas and the NG business in general
http://www.imemo.ru/ru/conf/2010/021210/Shale_IMEMO_Dec_2_2010.pdf
a BP presentation: "Shale Gas Global Challenge" ~6 months old
http://www.halliburton.com/public/solutions/contents/Shale/related_docs/Canadian_Montney.pdf
http://www.all-llc.com/publicdownloads/ALL-CURIPC_10202010.pdf
won't comment on your questions but this presentation carries information which may explain, at least in part, why petrochina backed out. (Montney shale is one of the relevant plays).
http://www.encana.com/investors/presentations/investorday/pdfs/canadian-division-overview.pdf
the good news is that it's only 10%. the other good news is that it will almost certainly never be 100% unless the quality of education and living standard in Kazakhstan increases dramatically. while there is a lot of valuable stuff there, it is a complex reservoir that requires some technology and infrastructure to monetize.
snippets from 2003 AAPG Memoir 78, p. 237– 250
"Karachaganak was discovered in 1979, with the drilling of stratigraphic well P-10, and was placed on pilot production in October 1984. The hydrocarbons initially in place, consisting of 1.236 billion tons (9.7 billion bbl) of liquids and 1.371 trillion m3 (48.4 tcf) of gas, were formally reviewed and approved by the Republic of Kazakhstan in May 1999. Together, these give total in-place hydrocarbons of 17.78 billion BOE for Karachaganak."
"Fluid Composition and Model
The complex fluid system at Karachaganak field consists of a rich gas-condensate lying above volatile oil and is categorized as a retrograde gas-condensate. For the given depth interval of 3500–5150 m subsea (mss), reservoir temperatures are relatively cool, ranging from 70 to 90 C (158–194 F), and initial reservoir pressures range from 51.5 to 59.5 MPa (7469–8630 psi).
Karachaganak liquids belong to the methane-naphthene hydrocarbon group. The condensates contain high paraffin (1–5%), asphaltene (0.1–0.3%), resins (1.0–1.7%), and sulfur (0.6–2.2%), including mercaptans (0.1–0.25%). On average, the oils also contain high paraffin (3.6–5.1%), asphaltene-resins (2.0–4.4%), and sulfur (0.5–2.0%), including mercaptans (0.2%). The gas is sour, with H2S content averaging 3.5%, mercaptan content averaging 0.07%, and CO2 content averaging 5.5%."
"Karachaganak has a large number of development options and challenges because of remoteness of the location, size of the reservoir, and fluid composition (Hsu et al., 2000). The location of the field far from Western markets presents perhaps the largest challenge."
"Karachaganak is a giant retrograde gas-condensateoil reservoir with a 1650-m hydrocarbon column and in-place hydrocarbons of 17.78 billion BOE (9.7 billion bbl of liquids and 48.4 tcf gas)....
An ongoing workover program has restored previously declining production to historic maximum levels. Recent daily production averaged 230,571 BOE. The sanctioned optimization plan calls for a partial depletion and enhanced gravity-drainage strategy that involves partial pressure maintenance through gas recycling and development of the oil rim using horizontal wells. The current full-expansion development plan includes the workover of 81 wells and the drilling of 161 new wells from surface. These wells could allow maximum daily production to exceed 735,000 BOE."