Like the illusion of Wall Street, with its vast and powerful investment banks, now shuttered, China too is an illusion perpetuated by the Globalists that gave us the 15,000 mile Caesar salad, poisoned cat food and lead based paint on babies' pacifiers. Like the illusion that money would come from thin air to always push housing prices higher, China has spent a generation pursuing its illusion. Pursuing an unattainable dream to be like the West, while 6000 years of its carefully shepherded top soil blows into the sea.
Posted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 6:30 pm Post subject: Re: Chesapeake Energy CEO: US soon to be awash in natural ga
I'm glad as hell about it if it's as good as what Oilfinder says it is.
What about Julian Darley? Is he just a denialist then? He doesn't seem like the sort who would just ignore such good news without comment, acknowledgement or rebuttal.
He showed a powerpoint at the New Urbanist Conference in Texas just last week re-iterating his dire warnings about NG in North America. It would appear that he is setting himself up to be not just wrong, but a liar to boot.
Why would he not comment about NG from shale? It just seems too curious to me - why I am hearing this here on PO.com but nowhere else.
Joined: Oct 23, 2004 Posts: 5928 Location: New Jersey
Posted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 6:45 pm Post subject: Re: Chesapeake Energy CEO: US soon to be awash in natural ga
This is going to be mighty costly - $100 billion. I'm still trying to figure the EROEI on this.
I wonder how much millions of barrels of oil it will take to provide the power and build the equipment that will let us "wean ourselves off oil"?
Quote:
Chesapeake CEO: Shale Play Investment Could Top $75 Billion Over Next Decade
By Mark Hengel
4/15/2008 3:08:01 PM
A recent economic impact study projected the impact of the Fayetteville Shale Play on Arkansas would total about $18 billion over the coming decade. That number will be much larger according to the CEO of one of the natural gas companies drilling in the region.
"We are about to make that completely irrelevant," Aubrey McClendon, CEO of Chesapeake Energy Corp., said of the economic impact study conducted by the University of Arkansas at Fayetteville. "The way I see it, [natural gas companies] are going to spend somewhere between $75 [billion] to $100 billion in your state over the next decade or so."
Joined: Mar 26, 2008 Posts: 1422 Location: Seattle
Posted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 8:02 pm Post subject: Re: Chesapeake Energy CEO: US soon to be awash in natural ga
DantesPeak wrote:
This is going to be mighty costly - $100 billion. I'm still trying to figure the EROEI on this.
I wonder how much millions of barrels of oil it will take to provide the power and build the equipment that will let us "wean ourselves off oil"?
Quote:
Chesapeake CEO: Shale Play Investment Could Top $75 Billion Over Next Decade
By Mark Hengel
4/15/2008 3:08:01 PM
A recent economic impact study projected the impact of the Fayetteville Shale Play on Arkansas would total about $18 billion over the coming decade. That number will be much larger according to the CEO of one of the natural gas companies drilling in the region.
"We are about to make that completely irrelevant," Aubrey McClendon, CEO of Chesapeake Energy Corp., said of the economic impact study conducted by the University of Arkansas at Fayetteville. "The way I see it, [natural gas companies] are going to spend somewhere between $75 [billion] to $100 billion in your state over the next decade or so."
Joined: Mar 26, 2008 Posts: 1422 Location: Seattle
Posted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 8:05 pm Post subject: Re: Chesapeake Energy CEO: US soon to be awash in natural ga
Schadenfreude wrote:
I'm glad as hell about it if it's as good as what Oilfinder says it is.
What about Julian Darley? Is he just a denialist then? He doesn't seem like the sort who would just ignore such good news without comment, acknowledgement or rebuttal.
He showed a powerpoint at the New Urbanist Conference in Texas just last week re-iterating his dire warnings about NG in North America. It would appear that he is setting himself up to be not just wrong, but a liar to boot.
Why would he not comment about NG from shale? It just seems too curious to me - why I am hearing this here on PO.com but nowhere else.
Maybe he just doesn't know about NG from shale? After all, you didn't know about it until you read this thread, maybe that's the case with him.
Perhaps we should get the CEO of Chesapeake Energy to give this guy a call.
Joined: Mar 26, 2008 Posts: 1422 Location: Seattle
Posted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 8:34 pm Post subject: Re: Chesapeake Energy CEO: US soon to be awash in natural ga
OK, here's another one of these which shows production going through the roof. This one is not as "old" as the Barnett Shale, but it's still been around long-enough to give you an idea that, yes, these shales can produce a ton of gas.
The Fayetteville Shale in Arkansas.
Here is 2004 production from the Fayetteville shale:
LINK (PDF)
^
On the last page, it says that 100,627 million cubic feet of gas was produced from the Fayetteville Shale in 2004. Notice also that it's only about 1-1/4 pages of well listings.
Jump forward just 3 years . . .
2007 Fayetteville Shale production:
LINK (PDF)
^
On the last page, it says that 89,167,902 million cubic feet of gas have been produced. Not all of them say they are from the "Fayetteville" target, but most of them are. The page I got them from here is entitled "Fayetteville Shale Production Information," so maybe these other areas are sub-sections of the Fayetteville shale. At any rate, instead of just 1-1/4 pages of wells, it's got 109 pages of wells! And that production is almost a 900-fold increase!
Posted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 8:56 pm Post subject: Re: Chesapeake Energy CEO: US soon to be awash in natural ga
OilFinder2 wrote:
That's about $7.5 to $10 billion/year. But seriously, a billion dollars isn't much these days!
Imagine what this will do for local economies. I only say this because I lived in the Green River area (Grand Junction, Montrose) and the energy industry is already a huge commodity to these communities (coal and oil). It's as if they are untouched or have been "place on hold" for a number of years.
Joined: Apr 08, 2007 Posts: 488 Location: Cleburne, TX, USA
Posted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 9:07 pm Post subject: Re: Chesapeake Energy CEO: US soon to be awash in natural ga
I live in the heart of the Barnett Shale play in Cleburne, Texas. I can tell you this. We went from bucolic rural countryside to bustling gas field in no time flat. Looks like a giant pin cushion around here now.
This is a massive play. If they're able to use elsewhere the technology (developed over 26 years since the Barnett discovery) that they're now using here, we should be good to go for nat gas for a long time.
That is until our entire transportation system begins to suck it dry.
Here's a few pics I took while out getting material for my employer's website:
Joined: Mar 26, 2008 Posts: 1422 Location: Seattle
Posted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 9:50 pm Post subject: Re: Chesapeake Energy CEO: US soon to be awash in natural ga
^
Hey, nifty. They power some of the well with solar power.
PeakingAroundtheCorner wrote:
I live in the heart of the Barnett Shale play in Cleburne, Texas. I can tell you this. We went from bucolic rural countryside to bustling gas field in no time flat. Looks like a giant pin cushion around here now.
This is a massive play. If they're able to use elsewhere the technology (developed over 26 years since the Barnett discovery) that they're now using here, we should be good to go for nat gas for a long time.
So there you have it, folks. If you have a gas hot water heater, you can make your water as hot as you want in the winter, and you don't need to worry about running out.
Americans are used to hearing that their energy supplies are dwindling.
But new discoveries of huge new natural gas fields in the United States and Canada could change that, cutting foreign imports and boosting production of a relatively clean energy source as global warming concerns take center stage.
Natural gas is used to generate about 20% of the nation's electricity and heat half its homes. Many people also use it for cooking, and it's seeing a small but growing use in vehicles.
[...]
Output from the three new finds could boost production by six billion cubic feet a day over the next three to five years, according to Christopher Ruppel, an energy analyst at Execution LLC, a broker and research firm for institutional investors like hedge and mutual funds. That's about 9% more than the current U.S. output.
And regarding my opening comment about all those LNG terminals . . .
Quote:
In the short run, it could surprise the people who planned on building big terminals to import liquefied natural gas (LNG), mostly from places like Russia and Qatar.
"A lot of the companies that planned on importing LNG into the U.S. are looking at other options now," said Speaker.
I sent an email to Julian Darley asking for comment on this news. Hopefully, he'll reply to us here at this link (please don't be needlessly argumentative if he does).
In the CNN article, it says that North American NG production "could increase by as much as 10%". That's certainly welcome news but is it a fundamental change in North America's NG prognosis?
Darley had been estimating NG production in North America to peak in 2015 - 2020 with a rapid depletion cliff. If we suddenly have 10% more than we thought we had, how much does this change the energy calculus overall? Does it merely push the cliff out a few more years? Will this merely mitigate some of the pressure of high conventional oil prices, functioning as an economic replacement but little more? Or is this indeed better news than the CNN article makes it appear?
Oilfinder has made this seem like a sudden new bonanza yet, in actuality, it seems merely fortunate, perhaps adjusting the long-term picture, yes, but unlikely to fundamentally change it.
Don't get me wrong -- I'm not a member of the Doom Club on PO.com; I just like to get an accurate picture of good news and bad news re energy. I'd really like to hear from Darley since he's has so much invested in his NG forecast. And he is generally a thorough-thinker. I can't imagine him propagating a lie, if that is what this news means for his continuing to preach the message of "High Noon For Natural Gas".
Joined: Mar 26, 2008 Posts: 1422 Location: Seattle
Posted: Sat Apr 19, 2008 12:49 am Post subject: Re: Chesapeake Energy CEO: US soon to be awash in natural ga
@Schadenfreude,
With the exception of the Barnett, most of these shale plays are just beginning to be tapped. Many of them have only been "discovered" in the past year, or less. The prof. who made the huge estimate for the Marcellus shale, for example, only did so in January, and that was in response to a Range Resources well drilled back in the fall. Many of these new shale plays have only a handful of wells drilled from them, so it's not as if these new plays are going to run out of gas (no pun intended) any time soon.
And as I already said before, the success of the Barnett shale essentially proves that large amounts of gas can be extracted from these things.
Here is a link to the EIA's stats on yearly dry natural gas production in the US. Production last year was higher than any other year since 1980, with the exception of 2001:
http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/dnav/ng/hist/n9070us2a.htm
EDIT: And also look at this chart on monthly US production (which unfortunately only goes back to 1997). Look at the number for January of this year. There is not another number on that whole chart as high as the one in January, so NG production in January reached at least an 11-year high:
http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/dnav/ng/hist/n9070us2M.htm
Proven reserves are also at an at least 27-year high:
US Natural Gas Proven Reserves source _________________ Abundance - what a concept!
Posted: Sat Apr 19, 2008 1:45 am Post subject: Re: Chesapeake Energy CEO: US soon to be awash in natural ga
OilFinder2 wrote:
@Schadenfreude,
With the exception of the Barnett, most of these shale plays are just beginning to be tapped. Many of them have only been "discovered" in the past year, or less. The prof. who made the huge estimate for the Marcellus shale, for example, only did so in January, and that was in response to a Range Resources well drilled back in the fall. Many of these new shale plays have only a handful of wells drilled from them, so it's not as if these new plays are going to run out of gas (no pun intended) any time soon.
And as I already said before, the success of the Barnett shale essentially proves that large amounts of gas can be extracted from these things.
Here is a link to the EIA's stats on yearly dry natural gas production in the US. Production last year was higher than any other year since 1980, with the exception of 2001:
http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/dnav/ng/hist/n9070us2a.htm
EDIT: And also look at this chart on monthly US production (which unfortunately only goes back to 1997). Look at the number for January of this year. There is not another number on that whole chart as high as the one in January, so NG production in January reached at least an 11-year high:
http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/dnav/ng/hist/n9070us2M.htm
What sort of general estimate would you venture as a percentage increase in North America NG production? How far out would you guess this might push out the peak?
Considering that a barrel of oil went for $117 today, one would think that enormously good news like this would make some big headlines. However, I haven't seen anything at all mentioned on TV News and the CNN article is the first one I've seen in MSM print.
Americans are hungry for good news right now and the media knows this. If this were a sudden bonanza of magnificent proportions, it would be all over the news - even more the Jack 2 pilot well in the Gulf. Jack 2 got a lot of coverage. Where is the media now?
Joined: Feb 20, 2005 Posts: 2888 Location: Uppsala, Sweden
Posted: Sat Apr 19, 2008 1:58 am Post subject: Re: Chesapeake Energy CEO: US soon to be awash in natural ga
OilFinder2 wrote:
Marcellus Shale in the Appalachians could hold a staggering 516 trillion cubic feet, with at least 50 tcf of it extractable. This was really just "discovered" late last year.
Are these low extraction fractions (gah, forgot the English word) typical for shale plays?
OilFinder2 wrote:
It would be interesting to see a situation where we have a resource that is abundant, but somewhat expensive.
Think nuclear electricity. Massively abundant resource only constrained by very big capital costs and temporary lack of competent workers.
By the way, I wish people would stop wasting gas on heat and power. NG makes excellent motor fuel. _________________ Peak oil is not an energy crisis. It is a liquid fuel crisis.
Joined: Feb 20, 2005 Posts: 2888 Location: Uppsala, Sweden
Posted: Sat Apr 19, 2008 2:05 am Post subject: Re: Chesapeake Energy CEO: US soon to be awash in natural ga
Pablo2079 wrote:
I believe NG is a big component in fertilizer, so that will also help a lot....
Yes, the energy and the hydrogen in it is used. But you can just as well use electricity from any source to make fertilizer. _________________ Peak oil is not an energy crisis. It is a liquid fuel crisis.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
News
Discussions
Resources
Members
Forum FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
