Oil and Gas Issues

[Darvince]

The supply side is now preventing a spike in prices.  In a couple of years ..... 2 - 3 ..... it will be joined by the DEMAND SIDE as peak production hits, and the continuing move to EV's, continued move to renewables, combined with the DOWNWARD move in the cost curve for renewables, push more and more people into making the economic move into renewables.  While it would have been great (and I believe the proper thing) to move to renewables MUCH EARLIER than we have ..... it is, what it is.  I deal in reality .... not what I WANT reality to be.

Here you go. (Hint: check the date)

[Sigmetnow]

U.S.:
Salting the earth: North Dakota farmers struggle with a toxic byproduct of the oil boom
The state of North Dakota doesn't even know how many acres of cropland have been damaged by saltwater spills, a byproduct of the local oil boom.

Saltwater spills have plagued North Dakota since the latter part of the 20th century, when North Dakota experienced its first oil boom. They are more damaging than oil spills on land because of the contaminants they leave in the soil, and they are harder to clean up.

Though oil companies typically promised landowners in their drilling contracts that they would clean up spills, it wasn't until 1981 that state law began requiring oil companies to restore damaged land to its original condition. An unregulated industry in the 70s and 80s caused numerous saltwater spills, which led to what researchers call "legacy brine."

Legacy brine disperses and migrates throughout the oil-producing regions of the state decades after the original spill, said Miranda Meehan, environmental stewardship specialist in the Animal Sciences Department at North Dakota State University. While the state is trying to clean up legacy brine, it has to also deal with new spills. ...

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna895771

[Buddy]

Thank you SH. Oil consumption continues to rise steadily. Buddy - your "peak consumption due to EVs" thesis could be true in a decade, but not in 2-3 years as the total number of EVs expected to be in production is far too low.

A couple things to note/clear up for Oren:

1)  Like SharedHumanity ...... you continue to focus on CONSUMPTION, without addressing PRODUCTION.  On this thread ..... I said that the price of oil is in a LONG TERM DOWNTREND. It reached a HIGH in July of 2008 (WTIC) .... and ten years is LONG TERM in my book.  The PRICE of oil is where supply meets demand.  But like other things in life, it is prone to LONG TERM TRENDS .... and SHORT TERM TRENDS.  Now .... if someone wanted to argue/discuss that $27 was the LOW in a long term trend that started in 2008 ..... that would be a reasonable argument to me .... and $27 COULD be the start of the next LONG TERM UPTREND.   I'm not SURE that $27 for WTI set in January 2016 is the "low" or not......in fact I have said that oil is heading back to below $35.  Could we be in a long term up trend from that $27 low?  Sure ..... that is very possible.  Could we go BELOW that $27 mark?  We could do that as well.

By the way .... short term (next 6 - 12 months) I have said we'll likely see mid $50's in WTI.   

2) My "thesis" on EV's (as stated on the cars, cars, cars thread) was specific: New ICE only passenger cars will NOT be sold in the US AFTER 2025 by any major car manufacturer."

Things to note in that statement (that I noted on the other thread) are:  Hybrids are likely to still be sold after 2025 ...... trucks (ICE or Hybrids) may be sold after 2025 ...... and there are likely to be VERY SMALL "custom shops" with very small, local distribution where you can still order an ICE vehicle.

3)  Thirdly ..... my "thesis" (which has not yet been approved by my professor ) is NOT that EV cars is the only reason for "peak consumption" of oil by 2021 - 2022 (Tony Seba has 2020 I believe).

Perhaps you haven't noticed ...... but there are some other things that are happening that effect peak consumption of oil:

a)  Places (islands, states, Alaska, etc) that are changing from diesel to renewables.
b)  EV motor bikes, scooters, etc are now all the rage .... and I expect that to provide just one more small reason for city dwellers to NOT own a car AT ALL.  Especially in cities where car ownership is expensive like New York, Boston, Chicago, etc.  That is ALREADY STARTING.
c)  Those owning a car (at all) is on the rise ..... ALREADY ..... and we haven't yet reached the point of autonomous vehicle usage (except on test basis in Phoenix, Pittsburg, etc)
d)  Lawn tools are moving quickly to electric.  Mowers, edger's, etc.  Small stuff.... but just one more little thing to add to the heap.
e)  Electric yachts (EV cats are going to kill motor yachts).  This has just started in the last few years ..... but it is going to escalate.
f)  Ferry's going electric ..... Yes, large ferry's (no .... not fairy's:) are going electric.
g)  Delivery vans, trucks of businesses are moving QUICKLY to electric because of the fast payback.
h)  As solar increases in both business and home, it pushes the movement to "solar everything"

As far as you agreeing with "the analysts" ...... well let's look at what analysts have said in the past:

And we all know how good the analysts are:

May 21, 2008 in the New York Times
An Oracle of Oil Predicts $200-a-Barrel Crude

Mr. Murti, 39, argues that the world’s seemingly unquenchable thirst for oil means prices will keep rising from here and stay above $100 into 2011

.
https://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/21/business/21oil.html

I pay LITTLE attention to "analysts".  I'm a big believer in FACT BASED RESEARCH.

As noted by Tony Seba ...... the best "consulting shop" in 1986 said that cell phones would have a subscription basis of 900,000 phones by 2000.  They were low by a FACTOR OF 120

And ..... once more ..... the analysts will get it wrong....

By the way ..... I'll address SharedHumanity's post(s) on another post or two.  There are some important things to address ..... and hopefully will be good information for you and others as well.....  I LOVE FACTS.

Cheers ....

[oren]

I believe all the big and little trends you mentioned will bring about peak oil consumption in a decade, but certainly not in 2020-2022, when coupled with continued population growth and increased standard of living in developing countries. Maybe in that timeframe oil consumption growth will finally slow from its steady rise, but will not peak.
( BTW you can spare the lecture on analysts and their achievements as I was not agreeing with them - not sure where you got that.)

[Shared Humanity]

Thank you SH. Oil consumption continues to rise steadily. Buddy - your "peak consumption due to EVs" thesis could be true in a decade, but not in 2-3 years as the total number of EVs expected to be in production is far too low.

1)  Like SharedHumanity ...... you continue to focus on CONSUMPTION, without addressing PRODUCTION. 

I have tried to explain to you how supply and demand and current stocks of oil drive the price of a barrel of WTI, the benchmark. Substitute 'Production' for 'Supply' and 'Consumption' for 'Demand' if it makes it easier for you to understand. Heck, use whatever term you would like.

The simple fact is that production and consumption (supply and demand) always trend in the same direction for Gawd's sake. A company will not produce more product without seeing an increase in demand. What we have currently in the worldwide market for oil is increasing demand for and supply of oil (1st chart).

Now, if you look at the price behavior for a barrel of oil, you will see that the price dropped precipitously late in 2014 (2nd chart), from $110 per barrel to $55 per barrel. It did this because oil producers missed the mark and overproduced, adding to the worldwide stock of oil. This drove the price down dramatically. The prices firmed briefly before dropping again through the end of 2015, bottoming out at $30 per barrel, also due to continued overproduction. Beginning in 2016, production declined while unsurprisingly, the price of a barrel of oil rebounded to $50 per barrel. As worldwide stocks shrunk through the latter half of 2016 and throughout 2017, the price of oil has steadily climbed. This is how all commodities behave. Prices fluctuate, sometimes wildly, driven by the interplay of supply and demand.

I would like to point out that throughout these wild price swings, oil consumption steadily climbed. You insist on focusing on the price of a barrel of oil, mistakenly thinking that a drop in price says something about the health of the market for oil. This is simply not the case.

You can talk all you want to about electric scooters and the adoption rate of cell phones. This does not invalidate the fact that oil production and consumption is steadily rising.

[Sigmetnow]

Electric Motor Club of High Point
8/14/18, 5:53 PM
You know, these things just happen. Fortunately, not as often as solar panel explosions or wind spills. ...
https://twitter.com/emc_hp/status/1029486215727329283

   Nine hurt as gas explosion levels Denver building | Reuters
   https://www.reuters.com/article/us-colorado-blast/natural-gas-explosion-collapses-denver-building-people-trapped-idUSKBN1KZ2D7

[Shared Humanity]

Can't seem to make enough of the stuff.

https://money.cnn.com/2018/08/14/investing/oil-refinery-gasoline-demand/index.html   

[Sigmetnow]

U.S. Federal judge: Employees can pursue climate fraud suit vs. Exxon

A federal judge in Texas has ruled that a case brought against Exxon for allegedly deceiving its employees about the risks of climate change will continue.

U.S. District Court Judge Ed Kinkeade on Tuesday denied the oil giant’s attempt to stop the suit, Ramirez v. Exxon, that was filed last year. He said the plaintiffs, led by the Pennsylvania Carpenters Pension Fund, had established sufficient claims of securities fraud against the company and several executives, including former chief executive Rex Tillerson.

Alleging the value of their retirement accounts has been endangered, employees filed the suit under the Employee Retirement Security Act (ERISA), alleging that the company has fraudulently inflated its stock and misrepresented what it knows about the risks of climate change.

https://www.climateliabilitynews.org/2018/08/15/climate-fraud-suit-exxon-employees-ramirez/

[Sigmetnow]

Are you listening, Exxon?

If the Saudis do help Elon Musk take Tesla private, the company could actually take over the world

… The biggest impediment to Tesla growing by true leaps and bounds was the capital-intensive nature of its business. Multi-billion-dollar new factories would need to be built, for example.

But the Saudi fund — it's officially known as the Public Investment Fund and has been around since the early 1970s— is legitimately enormous. Its total heft is debated, largely due to much of it being tied up in Aramco and its troubled IPO, but it could at some point be worth $2 trillion. In any case, it's still capable of accessing more than $100 billion, making a Tesla equity buyout an easy lift.

What's tantalizing about such a deal is that it would provide Musk with a veritably unlimited funding partner — and ironically place the globe's largest oil economy in a pretty big seat at the table to world's most influential sustainable transportation and energy enterprise.

https://www.businessinsider.com/a-tesla-deal-with-saudi-arabias-fund-could-be-good-2018-8

[Buddy]

I keep trying to find enough time to put together a more "robust" entry regarding oil, fracking, and intermediate term future of fracking and the oil patch .... and other things keep pushing it to the back of the line.  So here is a SHORT VERSION of what I view as IMPORTANT in looking at the oil markets, ESPECIALLLY THE SUPPLY SIDE, over the next couple of years:

1)  The break even point for frackers on the price of oil ..... IS NOT $65.  It is much lower than that.

This is probably the most important point when you are looking at oil.  If you're using $65 as a benchmark BE point .... you're likely dealing with old information.  Technology AND execution is becoming much better (unfortunately .... because fracking is BAD) .... but I deal with reality, not what I want reality to be.

https://nationalinterest.org/feature/dont-bet-against-american-shale-25798?page=0%2C1

Today, as production levels reach all-time highs, the breakeven point for tight oil projects are a fraction of what they were in 2014. According to  Rystad Energy , the median breakeven point for shale oil in the top fifty most commercial acreages ranges between $23/bbl and $49/bbl. In addition to new efficiencies and better experienced frac crews, breakeven costs were lowered by finding more mature shale deposits. By concentrating on these, many costs such as expenditures for exploration, land acquisition, pad construction, and transportation infrastructure have become no longer needed.
 
Additionally, more operators now choose to drill wells without fracturing them, leaving oil and gas unreleased until commodity prices are favorable. The EIA estimates that the breakeven price for these drilled but uncompleted wells is on average 39 percent below the breakeven price for a new well. Some six thousand wells are currently drilled but uncompleted, versus 4,500 in 2015, with most of them in the Permian.

2)  Not only is the break even point much lower than $65, THAT is for NEW WELLS.  You also have to consider the "shut in price" of oil for wells that are already drilled.

The "shut in price" is the price you stop producing oil from a well, and "shut it in" until prices recover.

3)  Right now .... the US provides more than 95% of the "fracked oil".  That will likely change in coming years, as Russia, China, and others improve their technology and execution.  That will effect the supply side and put pressure on oil pricing over the coming few years.

4)  Right now..... the main bottleneck in the Permian Basin is pipeline availability.  That will be maxing out SOON.... and they have new pipelines coming on line in 2019.  The pipeline companies AND the oil rig operators are trying to PULL THOSE dates in and speed up the completion dates.  Right now .... they fall heavily in the "back half" of 2019 .... and they are working to pull those dates CLOSER.

There are other things of course that will effect the price of oil in the SHORT TERM .... like sanctions on Iran.  But we don't know yet what China will do regarding sanctions, and whether or not China may choose to purchase MORE Iranian oil as they put a tariff on US oil imports.

As well ..... any softening of world economies will effect the DEMAND side.

For the next few years ..... my eyes are focused on the SUPPLY SIDE.  It will be a few years out (I say 2021 - 2022) until renewables issues will be large enough to impact oil prices.

Obviously renewables are effecting pricing in a VERY SMALL way right now.  But as that "very small" grows into just "small" ..... and that happens as more oil comes to market (especially from frackers that DON'T have nearly as long a lead time) ...... I expect oil to come under SIGNIFICANT pricing pressure over the next 2 - 3 years.

As always ...... GREED eventually will kill them.  The next few years will be interesting to watch in the oil patch.  And just as oil companies move MORE AND MORE assets to NATURALL GAS because they see the end of the tunnel for oil in the transportation area ...... natural gas' "long tunnel" will become shorter and shorter as well (still more than a decade or two out .... but MUCH shorter than I thought only a couple years ago).

 

   

[rboyd]

Great post Buddy...

Fracking reminds me of the 1980's when I worked at an IBM magnetic disk drive manufacturing plant. The manager was sure that magnetic disks would be replaced by optical ones within a decade. What he underestimated was the ability to wring out ongoing efficiency gains from a tried and tested technology. I see the same dynamic with fracking, where there is an ongoing drive to wring out efficiencies that only intensifies with falling oil prices. Also, as rig counts fall the service companies cut prices to try and keep up business volumes.

This dynamic, together with the low ongoing costs of in place wells, provides the "stickiness" or short to medium term (3-5 years) price inelasticity of fracking output. Together with the very low costs of Middle East production, and the Russian dependence on oil exports, it will not take much of a fall on the demand side to produce a large price fall.

The big problem will be for the Tar Sands in Canada, and perhaps some Deep Sea fields. The short-termism of the Canadian government in driving through pipelines for the Tar Sands is quite stunning in this context, and just shows how captured they are by big oil interests.

We are well overdue for an economic contraction, which could get quite nasty given the extremely high levels of debt.The resulting drop in oil demand could then hit some operators very hard, with any recovery then being at least partly stymied by the increasing electrification of transport (especially in China).

[GoSouthYoungins]

1)  The break even point for frackers on the price of oil ..... IS NOT $65.  It is much lower than that.

Riddle me this: How have the frackers spent $280 billion more than they have made in the last decade, when WTI was under $60 for less than 2.5 years, if the break even point is so low?  What exactly do you think the "break even price" means?

[Buddy]

Riddle me this: How have the frackers spent $280 billion more than they have made in the last decade, when WTI was under $60 for less than 2.5 years, if the break even point is so low?

If you read the article that was linked..... you will find your answer.  There are a LOT of other articles (RECENT ARTICLES) that discuss it as well.  A LOT of the money was committed when oil was over $100 (and when they used $100 oil for their analysis  ).  That makes a BIG DIFFERENCE....  Thus... you have now solved your riddle.

What exactly do you think the "break even price" means?

There is a BIG DIFFERNECE between what people THINK break even is at the start of a well .... and what IS break even at the END OF THE WELLS LIFE. It depends on what price does in the meantime.

REAL BREAK EVEN .... is easy.  It's where TOTAL COST EQUALS TOTAL REVENUE from a well OVER ITS LIFETIME.  But.... BE is "forecast" at the beginning of the well... and what is breakeven NOW .... will not likely be what is break even next year .... or two years after that.

In other words.... POST MORTUM BREAKEVEN IS MUCH DIFFERENT THAN FORECAST BREAK EVEN.

I think drillers and operators are going to get "STUCK" once again.  Because NOW .... the FORECAST BE cost is lower ..... BUT .... their BE analysis is done USING $70 oil.  If you get a few years out ..... I don't think you're going to be seeing $70 oil.  I think you're going to be seeing $35 oil OR LESS.

THAT ..... is where the oil companies will once again get their posterior handed to them.

And as more and more operators move their "mix" of oil and natural gas wells ..... to using a higher percentage of natural gas ..... it will push up the supply of natural gas, and they will eventually get killed their as well (but that is a LONGER TERM STORY).

[rboyd]

Riddle me this: How have the frackers spent $280 billion more than they have made in the last decade, when WTI was under $60 for less than 2.5 years, if the break even point is so low?  What exactly do you think the "break even price" means?

We are taking about marginal cost of current production and the marginal cost of adding a new well. With ongoing reductions in operating costs, historical profits/losses are not that useful. A chunk of those losses may also be from the high priced land deals done at the start of the fracking boom, when everyone was competing for acreage and oil prices were assumed to be staying above $100/barrel. Very low interest rates also help greatly with costs.

[GoSouthYoungins]

They haven't gotten more efficient and lowered operating company. They are just using bigger fracks. They get more oil out faster, but the depletion rate increases. The companies continue to assume old depletion rate #s, which were overly optimistic.  I believe there is no price where they'd break even. I think it takes as much energy to recover as is recovered. When you have used a quarter of a TRILLION dollars more capital than you have created, it should be a give away.

[Sebastian Jones]

..... When you have used a quarter of a TRILLION dollars more capital than you have created, it should be a give away.

Yup, and to expand upon this definition of unsustainability, the entire global economy is looking more and more that way....Very big time oops!

[Sigmetnow]

Are you listening, Exxon?

If the Saudis do help Elon Musk take Tesla private, the company could actually take over the world

… The biggest impediment to Tesla growing by true leaps and bounds was the capital-intensive nature of its business. Multi-billion-dollar new factories would need to be built, for example.

But the Saudi fund — it's officially known as the Public Investment Fund and has been around since the early 1970s— is legitimately enormous. Its total heft is debated, largely due to much of it being tied up in Aramco and its troubled IPO, but it could at some point be worth $2 trillion. In any case, it's still capable of accessing more than $100 billion, making a Tesla equity buyout an easy lift.

What's tantalizing about such a deal is that it would provide Musk with a veritably unlimited funding partner — and ironically place the globe's largest oil economy in a pretty big seat at the table to world's most influential sustainable transportation and energy enterprise.

https://www.businessinsider.com/a-tesla-deal-with-saudi-arabias-fund-could-be-good-2018-8

Does anyone else see this as a potential for Saudi Arabia — who is already taking massive steps away from depending on oil for its economy — to step outside of (flip a finger at) OPEC and the rest of the oil countries, and profit by assuring a massive growth of clean energy and a quicker death of ICE transportation?  Never mind legacy automakers’ tentative steps toward EVs;  Saudi Arabia could have Tesla vehicle and clean-energy factories up and running on all continents in no time, if it funded global clean tech to its own advantage.  Why bother with OPEC debates about each countries’ oil production limits if you can drive oil companies out of business by reducing global demand?  SA’s oil is, as I recall, one of the cheapest to produce, so they could anticipate continued, but decreasing, oil income until the Oil Age comes to an end.

[GoSouthYoungins]

Does anyone else see this as a potential for Saudi Arabia — who is already taking massive steps away from depending on oil for its economy — to step outside of (flip a finger at) OPEC and the rest of the oil countries, and profit by assuring a massive growth of clean energy and a quicker death of ICE transportation?  Never mind legacy automakers’ tentative steps toward EVs;  Saudi Arabia could have Tesla vehicle and clean-energy factories up and running on all continents in no time, if it funded global clean tech to its own advantage.  Why bother with OPEC debates about each countries’ oil production limits if you can drive oil companies out of business by reducing global demand?  SA’s oil is, as I recall, one of the cheapest to produce, so they could anticipate continued, but decreasing, oil income until the Oil Age comes to an end.

Ya, that all makes sense to me. Except calling it clean energy is a stretch..."cleaner energy"?

[crandles]

Does anyone else see this as a potential for Saudi Arabia — who is already taking massive steps away from depending on oil for its economy — to step outside of (flip a finger at) OPEC and the rest of the oil countries, and profit by assuring a massive growth of clean energy and a quicker death of ICE transportation?  Never mind legacy automakers’ tentative steps toward EVs;  Saudi Arabia could have Tesla vehicle and clean-energy factories up and running on all continents in no time, if it funded global clean tech to its own advantage.  Why bother with OPEC debates about each countries’ oil production limits if you can drive oil companies out of business by reducing global demand?  SA’s oil is, as I recall, one of the cheapest to produce, so they could anticipate continued, but decreasing, oil income until the Oil Age comes to an end.

Sounds like some risk diversification to me but whether they can get enough such diversification? Hmm. Some diversification is better than none.

[Sigmetnow]

"Normally people think of the Arctic as a very clean environment—it's remote, it's sparsely inhabited.  But if there is human activity, there are human emissions."

Surrounded by Oil Fields, an Alaska Village Fears for Its Health
When the wind blows in from the vast oil operations, noses run and asthma flares up. Concerns about respiratory illness have risen as North Slope drilling spreads.
https://insideclimatenews.org/news/01082018/alaska-north-slope-oil-drilling-health-fears-pollution-risk-native-village-nuiqsut

[Sigmetnow]

Let them drink... oil?

Water Use in Fracking Soars — Exceeding Rise in Fossil Fuels Produced, Study Says
As drillers compete for oil and natural gas, more fluids are going into and out of each fracking well. Researchers warn it’s headed for a tipping point.

As the fracking boom matures, the drilling industry's use of water and other fluids to produce oil and natural gas has grown dramatically in the past several years, outstripping the growth of the fossil fuels it produces.

A new study published Wednesday in the peer-reviewed journal Science Advances says the trend—a greater environmental toll than previously described—results from recent changes in drilling practices as drillers compete to make new wells more productive. For example, well operators have increased the length of the horizontal portion of wells drilled through shale rock where rich reserves of oil and gas are locked up.

They also have significantly increased the amount of water, sand and other materials they pump into the wells to hydraulically fracture the rock and thus release more hydrocarbons trapped within the shale.

The amount of water used per well in fracking jumped by as much as 770 percent, or nearly 9-fold, between 2011 and 2016, the study says. Even more dramatically, wastewater production in each well's first year increased up to 15-fold over the same years.

"This is changing the paradigm in terms of what we thought about the water use," Avner Vengosh, a geochemist at Duke University and a co-author of the study, said. "It's a different ball game."

Monika Freyman, a water specialist at the green business advocacy group Ceres, said that in many arid counties such as those in southern Texas, freshwater use for fracking is reaching or exceeding water use for people, agriculture and other industries combined.

"I think some regions are starting to reach those tipping points where they really have to make some pretty tough decisions on how they actually allocate these resources," she said. ...

https://insideclimatenews.org/news/15082018/fracking-environmental-impacts-data-water-usage-oil-natural-gas-sand-pollution-study

[Sigmetnow]

U.S. Mid-Atlanic region:

Feds halt work on Atlantic Coast Pipeline

One week after the federal government tapped the brakes on the Mountain Valley Pipeline, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission made the same decision about the Atlantic Coast Pipeline, ordering a stop-work order Friday evening.

In a letter to Dominion Energy, the company building the Atlantic Coast Pipeline, FERC ordered a halt to construction of the 600-mile-long, $5.5 billion project. When it’s built, the buried pipeline will run from West Virginia to an extension in Chesapeake, Virginia, and continue into eastern North Carolina. The project is being developed by Dominion Energy, Duke Energy, Piedmont Natural Gas and Southern Company Gas, but Dominion Energy is leading the construction and operation of the project.

The letter cites the 4th U.S. Circuit Court’s decision issued earlier this week that found the National Park Service and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service hadn’t followed environmental rules when they issued permits for the project. ...

https://www.wvgazettemail.com/news/feds-halt-work-on-atlantic-coast-pipeline/article_df5870c9-020b-58cb-b956-94815ac5e75e.html

[Sigmetnow]

US says conserving oil is no longer an economic imperative

WASHINGTON (AP) — Conserving oil is no longer an economic imperative for the U.S., the Trump administration declares in a major new policy statement that threatens to undermine decades of government campaigns for gas-thrifty cars and other conservation programs.

The position was outlined in a memo released last month in support of the administration's proposal to relax fuel mileage standards. The government released the memo online this month without fanfare.
...
"American businesses, consumers and our environment are all the losers under his plan," said Sen. Tom Carper, a Delaware Democrat. "The only clear winner is the oil industry. It's not hard to see whose side President Trump is on." ...

https://apnews.com/amp/18583e5da59d4329bc6a409e233aad7f

[Sigmetnow]

Offshore drilling reappears just in time to complicate Florida elections

Seven months after Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke made a surprise offshore drilling exemption for Florida following bipartisan outcry, the issue has roared its head again, just in time for the state’s midterm primary elections.

Oil and gas companies are pushing Florida lawmakers to reconsider their opposition to drilling off of the state’s coast, Politico reported Wednesday. Drilling in the eastern Gulf Coast has been a source of contention for years in Florida, but energy insiders are lobbying heavily regardless.

If successful, oil rigs could come within 75 miles of the state’s shores. It is unclear which companies specifically have been lobbying lawmakers, but Exxon Mobil, Chevron, and Shell are among the fossil fuel giants that have long pushed for such measures. ...

https://thinkprogress.org/offshore-drilling-florida-elections-a212d04db648/

[GoSouthYoungins]

Let them drink... oil?

Water Use in Fracking Soars — Exceeding Rise in Fossil Fuels Produced, Study Says
As drillers compete for oil and natural gas, more fluids are going into and out of each fracking well. Researchers warn it’s headed for a tipping point.

Indeed. The amount of every resource used to extract fossil fuels has to be increased over time: water, sand, metal. Likewise, the amount of energy used to extract each of those resources increased over time. It's a really wicked set of feedbacks. The only reasonable option is to use much much less, do most everything locally, and invest primarily in very durable and resilient goods.

[jacksmith4tx]

It is being widely reported today that Saudi Arabia has pulled their ARAMCO stock offering.
One side effect of this action is we will be stuck using Saudi Arabian 'official' oil reserve estimates for calculating future carbon budgets. Being a publicly traded company does allow reserve estimates to be audited periodically.
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/saudis-call-off-aramco-ipo-report-2018-08-22
No reason cited but this was mentioned last month:
"The Wall Street Journal reported last month that the preparations for Aramco’s public listing had stalled amid fears of the heightened public scrutiny that being public would bring to the oil company."

Hey as long as the checks to US defense industry don't bounce it's not a problem.

[Tor Bejnar]

DeSmog Blog offers a link to a Shell Oil Company made in 1991 showing its knowledge about climate change issues, in
Exclusive: Shell Took 16 Years To Warn Shareholders of Climate Risks, Despite Knowing in Private All Along

...
What Shell knew about climate change at the end of the 1980s is well-established and revealed in a confidential report commissioned by and for Shell called “The Greenhouse Effect”.

The report was dated 1988 and made public for the first time this year after being uncovered by Jelmer Mommers of De Correspondent and published on Climate Files. It reveals the company’s examination of climate change had already been ongoing for at least seven years.

The 87-page report warned Shell that its own products were responsible for global warming and that “there is reasonable scientific agreement that increased levels of greenhouse gases would cause a global warming”.
...

[Sigmetnow]

This looks… significant.

Art Berman (@aeberman12).  8/17/18, 9:59 AM
Iran-Nigeria-Libya-Venezuela crude + condensate output has fallen 1.16 mmb/d since May 2018.
#OOTT #oilandgas #oil #WTI #CrudeOil #fintwit #OPEC
https://twitter.com/aeberman12/status/1030454110884179968
Graphic below.

ValueAnalyst (@ValueAnalyst1)
8/24/18, 2:06 PM
... #Brent crude oil prices will surge above $100 per barrel in Q4, pushing regular and premium gasoline prices to $4 to $5/gallon across the US, reducing cost of #Model3 ownership by $5k to $10k including residual value.*
https://twitter.com/valueanalyst1/status/1033053012418355200

*VA’s thinking, as I understand it, is that the resale value of an electric car increases under a high-gas-price scenario, since it becomes a more attractive alternative to an ICE vehicle.

Edit — VA added:
ValueAnalyst (@ValueAnalyst1)
#OOTT Global oil demand will peak sooner than many think; potentially as early as 2020 if all-electric vehicle production accelerates in #China as planned, and if global auto manufacturers including $TSLA & $GM achieve full self-driving by 2020. Both plan to do so in 2019.
https://twitter.com/valueanalyst1/status/1033055312880840705

[Buddy]

Saudi Arabia now looking for 11 - 12 billion in loans (bonds) since they weren’t able to take Saudi Aramco public yet. 

[TerryM]

Saudi Arabia now looking for 11 - 12 billion in loans (bonds) since they weren’t able to take Saudi Aramco public yet.

Does this put the final nail in the Saudi Wealth Fund taking Tesla Private stories?
Terry

[sidd]

Say what ? 11-12 billion ? thats penny ante.Arammco was supposed to be valued at a trillion ...

Salman's looking in the couch cushions now.

sidd

[Sigmetnow]

Saudi Arabia now looking for 11 - 12 billion in loans (bonds) since they weren’t able to take Saudi Aramco public yet.

Does this put the final nail in the Saudi Wealth Fund taking Tesla Private stories?
Terry

No, because Musk just did that himself. 

https://www.tesla.com/blog/staying-public

[Sigmetnow]

Bill McKibben:  Huge win in S. Portland Maine, where pipeline fighters--and city councilors--have been utterly unyielding!

Judge rules in favor of Maine city in pipeline lawsuit

SOUTH PORTLAND, Maine (AP) — A Maine city's ordinance prohibiting bulk loading of crude oil onto tankers does not violate the U.S. Constitution.

That was the ruling of a federal court that had been considering South Portland's "Clear Skies" ordinance on Friday. Portland Pipe Line Corp. challenged the ordinance on the grounds that it violated clauses of the Constitution that give Congress sole power over foreign and interstate trade.

The Portland Press Herald reports the ordinance blocked the company from reversing the flow of its 236-mile underground pipeline. The pipeline has carried foreign crude from harbor terminals in South Portland to Canadian refiners for decades. ...

https://apnews.com/amp/0d85e880be504c60a592bb55d4d70dbb

[Sigmetnow]

8/22/18
Even with a conservative crude production loss estimate from Iran, Rystad Energy projects that OPEC-12 will need to raise supply further to avoid a decline in overall OPEC-12 production through 1Q-19.
https://twitter.com/rystadenergy/status/1032247396334542849

Will gasoline prices continue to climb?

[sidd]

The King slapped down the rown prince on Aramco IPO. Salman don't like being slapped down. I fear this rift will lead to coup by Salman or removal of Salman from line of succession. Saud looks shakier.

"The king’s interlocutors told him that the IPO, far from helping the kingdom, would undermine it. Their main concern was that an IPO would bring full public disclosure of Aramco’s financial details, the sources said. "

The royals have been using Aramco as their personal checking account forever, putting a huge beating on free cash. No surprise that the bankers took a look, blanched and included themselves out. The holes are too big to plaster over.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-saudi-aramco-ipo-king-exclusive/exclusive-saudi-king-tipped-the-scale-against-aramco-ipo-plans-idUSKCN1LC1MX

sidd

[Sigmetnow]

Price of Crude oil rises to $77.77, highest since July on sanction concerns

Brent has risen by almost 10 percent over the past two weeks on widespread perceptions that the global oil market is tightening and could run short in the next few months as U.S. sanctions restrict crude exports from Iran.

“There are a lot of supportive factors here,” said John Kilduff, a partner at Again Capital Management in New York.

In addition to support from geopolitical events, natural disasters could impact the market if a potential storm system currently off the coast of Africa strengthens and heads to the Gulf of Mexico, he said.

“The oil market is once again tightening,” said Giovanni Staunovo, analyst at Swiss bank UBS in Zurich. “Iranian oil export declines are already visible well in advance of U.S. oil-related sanctions, which enter into force in November.” ...

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-global-oil/crude-rises-to-highest-since-july-on-sanction-concerns-idUSKCN1LF03O

[Sebastian Jones]

A major setback for Canada's Liberal government was handed down by the Federal Courts today. It quashed the approval for the Trans Mountain Pipeline on two major grounds: The assessor, the National Energy Board failed to include the effects of increase tanker traffic, especially on the endangered orca, and Canada failed to adequately consult affected First Nations. Canada had recently agreed to purchase the pipeline project from Kinder Morgan after it threw in the towel over opposition from environmentalists, First Nations, the province of British Columbia and affected municipalities.
Canada agreed to pay $4.5B for the pipeline in the hope that it would bolster the current Alberta government which is not opposed to a federal carbon tax.
While the effects of this decision have yet to be fully digested, it place Canada's government in a tough position and greatly reduces the likelihood of further rapid expansion of Alberta's bitumen mines.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/trans-mountain-pipeline-approval-1.4804791

[TerryM]

A major setback for Canada's Liberal government was handed down by the Federal Courts today. It quashed the approval for the Trans Mountain Pipeline on two major grounds: The assessor, the National Energy Board failed to include the effects of increase tanker traffic, especially on the endangered orca, and Canada failed to adequately consult affected First Nations. Canada had recently agreed to purchase the pipeline project from Kinder Morgan after it threw in the towel over opposition from environmentalists, First Nations, the province of British Columbia and affected municipalities.
Canada agreed to pay $4.5B for the pipeline in the hope that it would bolster the current Alberta government which is not opposed to a federal carbon tax.
While the effects of this decision have yet to be fully digested, it place Canada's government in a tough position and greatly reduces the likelihood of further rapid expansion of Alberta's bitumen mines.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/trans-mountain-pipeline-approval-1.4804791

As a card carrying Canadian Liberal, this is wonderful news. Alberta can't say that Trudeau didn't try to bail out their filthy festering nest egg, and the project is stopped in it's tracks.
Terry

[gerontocrat]

A major setback for Canada's Liberal government was handed down by the Federal Courts today. It quashed the approval for the Trans Mountain Pipeline on two major grounds: The assessor, the National Energy Board failed to include the effects of increase tanker traffic, especially on the endangered orca, and Canada failed to adequately consult affected First Nations. Canada had recently agreed to purchase the pipeline project from Kinder Morgan after it threw in the towel over opposition from environmentalists, First Nations, the province of British Columbia and affected municipalities.
Canada agreed to pay $4.5B for the pipeline in the hope that it would bolster the current Alberta government which is not opposed to a federal carbon tax.
While the effects of this decision have yet to be fully digested, it place Canada's government in a tough position and greatly reduces the likelihood of further rapid expansion of Alberta's bitumen mines.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/trans-mountain-pipeline-approval-1.4804791

As a card carrying Canadian Liberal, this is wonderful news. Alberta can't say that Trudeau didn't try to bail out their filthy festering nest egg, and the project is stopped in it's tracks.
Terry

Bloomberg.com greeted the news that Canada was daft enough to cough up 4.5 billion for this crock of.. with the headline " Trudeau - Meet the World's Newest Oil CEO". So glad that the boy is getting a smack in the face. Wonders might never cease - he might grow up.

[Shared Humanity]

Nice statistical overview by bp on oil.

https://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/energy-economics/statistical-review-of-world-energy/oil/oil-production.html

[oren]

Thank you SH. Very interesting. It also covers all other energy forms (nat gas, coal, nuclear, hydro, renewables etc.)

[mitch]

New article in Science Magazine "Global carbon intensity of crude oil production"
http://science.sciencemag.org/content/361/6405/851

Canada has 4th highest carbon intensity (total CO2 emissions per unit energy), US is at the average, and Saudi Arabia 2nd from bottom. Watch out for heavy crudes...

[Sigmetnow]

U.S.

Colorado to vote in November on proposal to toughen oil drilling rules

A Colorado ballot initiative that would sharply increase the required distance between new oil wells and populated areas will go before voters in November, Colorado officials said on Wednesday.

The proposal, opposed as anti-fracking by oil and gas producers, would require new projects to be at least 2,500 feet (762 m) from buildings, parks and certain wildlife areas. The state currently requires as little as 500 feet (152 m) of separation.

A 2,500-foot setback would render about 85 percent of all new oil and gas development on non-federal lands in the state off-limits to drilling, according to a 2016 study by the state's oil and gas conservation commission. ...

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-oil-colorado-ballot/colorado-to-vote-on-new-oil-drilling-rules-in-november-state-officials-idUSKCN1LE2IQ

[Sigmetnow]

China's slowing demand for oil is a serious concern for the Middle East
• The risk of declining Chinese demand for oil is worrying Middle East oil ministers.
• Prices could rise due to Iranian supply being curbed due to U.S. sanctions.
• But prices could also be hit by lower demand from China due to a trade war with the U.S.
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/09/03/china-demand-for-oil-is-a-serious-concern-for-the-middle-east.html

[Sigmetnow]

Williams pipeline, off New York shore, would be ‘monumental step backwards,’ NYC Comptroller Stringer says

A proposed offshore natural gas pipeline through New York’s lower bay was denounced by City Comptroller Scott Stringer Wednesday, but the company behind it says it is necessary to reduce the city’s use of oil.

The 23-mile pipeline, stretching from New Jersey to the Rockaways, was proposed by the energy company, Williams Partners L.P., as part of its Northeast Supply Enhancement project. The $1 billion project will expand and upgrade the existing 10,000-mile-long Transco pipeline, which runs from south Texas to New York City and provides more than half of the natural gas across the city and Long Island, according to Williams.

The expansion of the pipeline would be “a monumental step backwards” in New York City’s goal of cutting 80 percent of emissions by 2050, Stringer said in a statement.

“Rather than enhance the energy infrastructure of yesterday, our city must instead do all that it can to transition to renewable energy sources and promote greater energy efficiency,” the statement said.
...
The project, which also includes a new 10-mile pipeline in Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, and a new 3.5-mile pipeline in Middlesex County, New Jersey, must be approved by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, which issued a draft environmental impact statement in March of this year.

“FERC staff determined that construction and operation of the NESE Project would result in some adverse environmental impacts,” the statement said. “Most of these impacts would be temporary and occur during construction.”

But Stringer said the construction “risks damage to many of New York’s most precious habitats and natural assets, including New York Harbor, Jamaica Bay and the Rockaways’ many beaches,” and climate advocates are critical of the use of natural gas since it is not a renewable source of energy.

“NYC Comptroller Stringer’s opposition to the massive fracked gas Williams pipeline raises the bar for elected officials to join us as we rise for climate,” Pete Sikora, the climate campaigns director for New York Communities for Change, said in a statement. “Together, we can stop these polluting projects and move to 100 percent renewable energy through good union jobs.”

New York Communities for Change, along with several other groups, will participate in a Peoples Climate Movement NY rally in Battery Park at 5:30 p.m. Thursday to call for a transition to 100 percent renewable energy.

https://www.amny.com/news/williams-pipeline-new-york-1.20851262

[sidd]

Saudi royal talks out of turn, exiles himself:

https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/exclusive-saudi-kings-brother-considering-self-exile-841116473

He likes his head where it is, apparently.

sidd

[bluesky]

Recent disastrous court ruling from the International Court of Justice in La  Haye, decision in favour of Chevron, overturning a previous court ruling condemning Chevron to several billions of compensation in favour of the population of Lago Agrio / Equator

https://www.bbc.com/mundo/noticias-america-latina-45454965

[Sigmetnow]

Happening now:  dozens of homes with natural gas service have exploded and are burning near Boston, Massachusetts.

"it's our understanding that it has to do with gas pressure."

Nearly 40 Fires And Explosions Are Burning Homes Near Boston, Forcing Evacuations
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/jimdalrympleii/nearly-two-fires-and-explosions-are-burning-homes-near

[TerryM]

Happening now:  dozens of homes with natural gas service have exploded and are burning near Boston, Massachusetts.

"it's our understanding that it has to do with gas pressure."

Nearly 40 Fires And Explosions Are Burning Homes Near Boston, Forcing Evacuations
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/jimdalrympleii/nearly-two-fires-and-explosions-are-burning-homes-near

Residential gas pressure is regulated in each structure by a mechanical regulator most often at the meter.
I've difficulty imagining how >70 of these could fail simultaneously?
Terry

[Sigmetnow]

Happening now:  dozens of homes with natural gas service have exploded and are burning near Boston, Massachusetts.

"it's our understanding that it has to do with gas pressure."

Nearly 40 Fires And Explosions Are Burning Homes Near Boston, Forcing Evacuations
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/jimdalrympleii/nearly-two-fires-and-explosions-are-burning-homes-near

Residential gas pressure is regulated in each structure by a mechanical regulator most often at the meter.
I've difficulty imagining how >70 of these could fail simultaneously?
Terry

Me, too.  I can only think that the pressure in the feed line to the whole area was so high it blew the regulators?

Edit:
“The cause of the explosions wasn’t immediately clear.
The Columbia Gas company had announced earlier Thursday that it would be upgrading gas lines in neighborhoods across the state, including the area where the explosions happened.”

Another edit:
“RT @AndreaWBZ Andover Fire Chief, "It was an over pressurization of a gas main. We have not been able to confirm that. We have not yet spoken to anyone from @ColumbiaGasMA." #MerrimackExplosions
https://twitter.com/lazertrade/status/1040402814822952960