Peak Oil
Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

THE Ghawar Thread (merged)

General discussions of the systemic, societal and civilisational effects of depletion.
Post a reply

Re: THE Ghawar Thread (merged)

Unread postby rockdoc123 » Tue 27 Nov 2012, 10:21:51

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'Y')ou apparently prefer to lecture me than read what I (or rather Jeffrey Brown) wrote. Why it is that after promising in 2004 to maintain oil at $22 the Kingdom proved unable to raise production (it even decreased) as it climbed above $60 in 2006?

it is quite simple and the Saudis even explained it at the time. They had not invested in increased spare capacity because they did not anticipate the sudden rise in demand. With no clear view that demand could ever outstrip where it was at the time the Saudis felt comfortable that they could gradually invest. Note that at the same time they were promising low oil prices the marginal costs on a barrel were accelerating due to increasing prices on steel, consumables and manpower. By 2006 the Saudis were needing closer to $60 a barrel just to make their budgeting process work. As I said that bottom price is now closer to $80 which puts a floor on oil price as long as the Saudis have spare capacity they can draw on. It isn't a coincidence that 2006 was the exact time that the megaprojects took shape, the plan being to increase their spare capacity to 12 MMBPD which by all accounts they have done even without the full commissioning of Manifa. Back in 06-07 I was saying on this site that the proof in the pudding for the megaproject success was whether or not the Saudis could deliver extra production quickly when there was an actual market shortfall. They proved that last year when they increased production by several hundred thousands of barrels a day to offset Libyan shortfalls.
User avatar
rockdoc123
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7685
Joined: Mon 16 May 2005, 03:00:00
Top

Re: THE Ghawar Thread (merged)

Unread postby AirlinePilot » Tue 27 Nov 2012, 11:48:07

rockdoc,

Im not 100% sure that some of the "production" for the Libyan crisis did not come straight out of storage. How would anyone know? They have a LARGE storage capacity at several locations which could have easily been drawn from to make it "look" like they ramped up production. I doubt we will ever know, but there was plenty of speculation about that when it happened.
User avatar
AirlinePilot
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 4378
Joined: Tue 05 Apr 2005, 03:00:00
Location: South of Atlanta
Top

Re: THE Ghawar Thread (merged)

Unread postby evilgenius » Tue 27 Nov 2012, 15:24:30

Does anyone know how much of the roughly $80 price per barrel needed is contributed by the Saudi's need to keep up their welfare system? As well as other things that is a pretty hard spot for them. I'm not certain if that alone might cause them to overproduce, should the price drop too much. My guess is that is an easy trap for them to fall into, but one which they might well try to avoid because of past lessons. If they face falling prices as a result of collapsed demand after what, a Euro meltdown or a US double dip, they might consider a political solution over a production solution. I can see them tempted to crawl into the Russian's bed in order to forestall restive activity(Russia having more sway over what the Iranians might do than the US does), thus giving them more cap room under that $80.
User avatar
evilgenius
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3730
Joined: Tue 06 Dec 2005, 04:00:00
Location: Stopped at the Border.
Top

Re: THE Ghawar Thread (merged)

Unread postby SamInNebraska » Tue 27 Nov 2012, 21:55:27

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ralfy', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('SamInNebraska', 'Y')eah, I'm not sure where you went with it Ralfy but I wasn't talking about all that stuff, but the comment on Ghawar on that blog. Ghawar was once a given size. It is now bigger. And not empty. If I understood the post correctly, it is supposed to be empty. But isn't. Yet. How did it get not empty? And why didn't people notice until it happened? Does it not being empty as predicted matter? It is a big field, right?


The problem isn't the size, as even Saudi Arabia argued in one article years ago that we've used only around 25 pct of oil worldwide. Rather, it's EROEI, the rate of extraction, and the ability to meet demand.

According to the IEA, the best-case scenario shows a 9-pct increase in energy production from all oil and gas sources worldwide for the next two decades, and that's assuming that conventional production doesn't drop. Meanwhile, demand has to go up by up to 2 pct a year to maintain economic growth.

The situation is even worse if we look at production per capita, which is more logical as we need to look at production in light of the population it serves. According to BP, that peaked back in 1979.


Yeah, you and me ain't vibin Ralfy. I was talking about the thread topic, Ghawar. I thought it was a simple question, because it doesn't have anything to do with Saudi Arabia,or EROEI, or rates of extraction, all that is much bigger than the reference I provided to that blog. Ghawar is big, it has apparently gotten bigger somewhere along the way, because it ain't empty yet. I just wanted to know why that happened, why no one appears to have noticed, and can the same event/thing/bad estimate also affect every other big field on the planet? Which would be BAD.
SamInNebraska
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 313
Joined: Sun 14 Oct 2012, 23:05:58
Top

Re: THE Ghawar Thread (merged)

Unread postby Plantagenet » Tue 27 Nov 2012, 22:17:09

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('SamInNebraska', ' ')Ghawar is big, it has apparently gotten bigger somewhere along the way, because it ain't empty yet. I just wanted to know why that happened


Sam..I went back to your original post where you asked this question, and then to the link you provided. I think you are referring to this statement in your link:

And here's the kicker: the ultimate recoverable reserve (URR) estimate in 1975 was 60Gb.

Do the math. 5 million barrels a day times 365 days a year is 1.8Gb per year. Multiply that by 3 years (2006 minus 2003), and you get 5.4Gb. Add that to the cumulative production (55Gb+5.4Gb) and you get 60.4Gb. The amount of oil that has already been pumped out of Ghawar is greater than Ghawar's URR.

In layman's terms, this means that Ghawar is completely empty.


To understand what is going on you have to understand the jargon. The ultimate recoverable reserve (URR) estimate in 1975 was 60Gb, because that was the total amount of oil engineers believed could be recovered from Ghawar using 1975 technology. However in the last 37 years the technology of oil production has changed and improved, and much more oil is now recoverable from Ghawar then was originally thought possible back in 1975. By using techniques like horizontal drilling and developing better geologic models and employing supercomputers to model water injection and water floods to force more of the oil out of the rocks and up to production wells, the URR has been increased dramatically.

The amount of oil originally in the reservoir at Ghawar didn't change since 1975---just the amount that could be produced. This process of technological innovation continues today----a new "smartwater" injection treatment for Ghawar has just been proposed---this new program would engineer changes in the physical properties of the injected water to coax even more oil out of the ground.

New "smartwater" program proposed for Ghawar increase recoverable oil

Image
DEM of Ghawar field and sub-fields
User avatar
Plantagenet
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 26765
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).
Top

Re: THE Ghawar Thread (merged)

Unread postby ralfy » Tue 27 Nov 2012, 23:56:51

That's a good explanation. Thanks, Plant.
User avatar
ralfy
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 5651
Joined: Sat 28 Mar 2009, 11:36:38
Location: The Wasteland
Top

Re: THE Ghawar Thread (merged)

Unread postby SamInNebraska » Wed 28 Nov 2012, 01:03:49

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Plantagenet', '
')The amount of oil originally in the reservoir at Ghawar didn't change since 1975---just the amount that could be produced. This process of technological innovation continues today----a new "smartwater" injection treatment for Ghawar has just been proposed---this new program would engineer changes in the physical properties of the injected water to coax even more oil out of the ground.



Got it! So this is a problem then, right? We take all the oil fields in the US, apply technology to them, and suddenly what the IEA has been saying recently makes sense? I am selfish, I wish this could happen so the pipe through Nebraska would be canceled, Texans are used to oil spills and tearing up their land for some reason or another, let us develop all the oil there and leave the stuff in Canada alone. Or let the Chinese have it.

Edited to say:

PS: Thanks! [smilie=icon_thumleft.gif]
SamInNebraska
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 313
Joined: Sun 14 Oct 2012, 23:05:58
Top

Re: THE Ghawar Thread (merged)

Unread postby Tanada » Wed 28 Nov 2012, 10:15:17

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('SamInNebraska', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Plantagenet', '
')The amount of oil originally in the reservoir at Ghawar didn't change since 1975---just the amount that could be produced. This process of technological innovation continues today----a new "smartwater" injection treatment for Ghawar has just been proposed---this new program would engineer changes in the physical properties of the injected water to coax even more oil out of the ground.



Got it! So this is a problem then, right? We take all the oil fields in the US, apply technology to them, and suddenly what the IEA has been saying recently makes sense? I am selfish, I wish this could happen so the pipe through Nebraska would be canceled, Texans are used to oil spills and tearing up their land for some reason or another, let us develop all the oil there and leave the stuff in Canada alone. Or let the Chinese have it.


You forget many of the really big fields world wide have already added most or all of the techniques you have just been told about, they were not just used in Ghawar, they were used in Texas and Siberia and Mexico and China and Indonesia because the technology spreads all over and as the price of a bbl goes up it is more economical for more fields to deploy the technology off the shelf. They now have incredibly detailed imagery of the underground oil formations of many if not all of the major oil fields on earth. Horizontal drilling has already been used on most of them as soon as it was profitable to do so and the equipment was available to do the work. Not all fields use water injection, the giant field Cantarell in Mexico injects nitrogen gas instead, they built a huge nitrogen producing plant specifically for the purpose. Different grades of petroleum work better with different stimulation injections, that doesn't mean if they are not using water they are not doing what they can to get the most petroleum out. You can even say that Steam Assisted Gravity Drainage (SAGD) and Toe Heel Air Injection flame front drainage (THAI) being used in deep area's of the Alberta sands are advanced recovery methods because the alternative is physically mining and processing the sand above ground.

The first oil field exploited in Saudi Arabia was Dammam, it produced oil from the 1930's until 1982 when it was sealed up. A year or so ago I read that the KSA was re-drilling the shut in field using 4D seismic imagery and horizontal drilling. You don't go and reopen a very old depleted field and spend lots of money redeveloping it unless you can make back your investment. Dammam was not ever a giant field, but they are planning to invest over a Billion dollars in the expectation of getting 100,000 bbl/d out of the field once again. Because the field has been shut in for 30 years a lot of new technology will now be used on it that was not available when it was closed. That doesn't make oil magically appear, the oil being removed before was cheap and this oil will be much more expensive to produce, but the world price is high enough now to make that a profit making decision. Aha I found a link!
http://www.arabianoilandgas.com/article ... LYZS-_4JYg
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'S')audi Aramco is planning to re-start oil production at a field mothballed in the 1980s, as the national oil company aims to sustain production at a time when disruptions elsewhere are putting increasing reliance on Saudi crude, according to a report from the Economist Intelligence Unit.

Aramco is reportedly sizing up the Dammam field, which was first drilled by SOCAL (now Chevron) in 1936. The Dammam 7 well first gave an indication of the immense potential of Saudi Arabia’s oil deposits.

Aramco first planned to revive the Dammam field in 2008, with the 500 million barrel field thought to be easily exploitable to a level of 100,000 barrels a day. The well is now in a residential area so will require careful de-mothballing.

Reduced global consumption and the development of fields in other countries through the 1980s led the Kingdom to lower its production from 10 million barrels per day to just over 2 million. Production shut at Dammam 7 in 1982, after 45 years in service with 32 million barrels.

Aramco is responding to increasing calls on its production capacity, as both Asian and European markets are looking for the Kingdom to fill for Iran’s production, which is subject to sanctions from the US and EU.


If the numbers in the story are accurate then they will produce 500 Million bbl at a rate of 100,000/d so for 5000 days or about 13.7 years. Sounds great until you realize it ran for 45 years on its first production period and this production period is less than one third as long. When people talk about super straw technology this is the effect they are referring too, you get the oil out much faster now than you did in the past. That doesn't mean you get ultimately more, but in terms of return on investment you get it much quicker.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Alfred Tennyson', 'W')e are not now that strength which in old days
Moved earth and heaven, that which we are, we are;
One equal temper of heroic hearts,
Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.
Tanada
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 17094
Joined: Thu 28 Apr 2005, 03:00:00
Location: South West shore Lake Erie, OH, USA
Top

Re: THE Ghawar Thread (merged)

Unread postby rockdoc123 » Wed 28 Nov 2012, 11:52:42

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'Y')ou forget many of the really big fields world wide have already added most or all of the techniques you have just been told about, they were not just used in Ghawar, they were used in Texas and Siberia and Mexico and China and Indonesia because the technology spreads all over and as the price of a bbl goes up it is more economical for more fields to deploy the technology off the shelf.


This isn’t quite true. The main breakthrough technology that has allowed Aramco to improve recovery and access reserves they couldn’t previously access is the employment of Maximum Reservoir Contact (MRC) wells along with SMART completions and expandable liners. The MRC wells are drilled as multilaterals from one pilot and often are referred to as “fishscale wells”. The individual laterals are completed downhole with SMART which provides surface monitoring of water cut and pressure and allows individual laterals to be shut-in if there are issues. New laterals can be drilled from the main hole by milling a window in casing and using expandable liners which avoids tubing constrained flow. This technology was pioneered by Aramco and not currently being used anywhere else to my knowledge. These wells were instrumental in the Mega-projects that were commissioned from 2009 onwards. Also Aramco has been a champion of the use of 4D seismic which allows for subsurface measurement water front progress. This technology is used elsewhere but not to the extent that Aramco uses it in their full field simulations.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')hey now have incredibly detailed imagery of the underground oil formations of many if not all of the major oil fields on earth.


This is a misunderstanding. Although seismic technology has improved considerably over the past decade both through improved acquisition techniques and processing algorithms the best technology has only been applied in a few areas in the world. As an example new techniques in acquisition and processing allow for better imaging of potential hydrocarbon traps below salt canopies. This approach has been used extensively in the Gulf of Mexico and offshore in the Atlantic margins but has seen only spotty application in other salt basins. There are still a lot of areas where new seismic technology has not been applied. In many countries in Latin America the application of simple 3D seismic technology has not occurred except in certain areas. So no, we do not have a “detailed imagery of the underground “ everywhere. What we do have is still subject to improvements.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'H')orizontal drilling has already been used on most of them as soon as it was profitable to do so and the equipment was available to do the work.


Not true. The application of horizontal wells is not universally appropriate. And not all horizontal wells are created equal. You have short laterals in some of the tight sandstone reservoirs in North America that are no more than a couple of hundred metres with a continuum up to the MRC wells in Saudi Arabia with total reservoir contact climbing to as high as 10 km. There are still a lot of fields around that could benefit from horizontal well applications.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')he first oil field exploited in Saudi Arabia was Dammam, it produced oil from the 1930's until 1982 when it was sealed up. A year or so ago I read that the KSA was re-drilling the shut in field using 4D seismic imagery and horizontal drilling. You don't go and reopen a very old depleted field and spend lots of money redeveloping it unless you can make back your investment.


The Megaprojects which received a lot of discussion in this forum back in ’05 – ’09 (before some mod decided to remove those threads) were all based on application of this technology. There are numerous papers in the SPE indicating how successful this has been and they chronicle the continuing improvements in drilling and completion technology that have occurred in the Kingdom. This is how SA brought their spare capacity numbers from 9 MMB/d up to 12.5 MMB/d where it apparently sits today.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'W')hen people talk about super straw technology this is the effect they are referring too, you get the oil out much faster now than you did in the past. That doesn't mean you get ultimately more, but in terms of return on investment you get it much quicker.

Acutally it does mean you will get ultimately more. It is all about recovery factor. Let’s say (simply for arguments sake) that the original oil in place in Ghawar was 200 Gbbls. Under the old method of vertical wells and inability to effectively deal with water coning you might have expected a 30% to 40% ultimate recovery of oil (60 Gbbl to 80 Gbbls). With the application of MRC wells and a host of other reservoir management techniques that Aramco have implemented they see ultimate recovery at Abaiq (northern Ghawar) of 73% based on laboratory analysis and reservoir simulations. If you get ultimate recovery in Ghawar overall up to say 60% your total recovery then ends up being 120 Gbbls or 2 times what it would have been under the old technology. So yes, it does result in ultimately more oil.
User avatar
rockdoc123
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7685
Joined: Mon 16 May 2005, 03:00:00
Top

Re: THE Ghawar Thread (merged)

Unread postby rockdoc123 » Wed 28 Nov 2012, 17:31:07

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'Y')ou know damn well that "spare capacity" is an unknowable, untestable metric, a measure of imaginary 'political' barrels primarily used to suggest 'economic' reserve increases.

BS…you forget I worked in this industry for 30 odd years and know a bit about it. Spare capacity is the hydrocarbons that you are capable of producing without huge investments. Hence all the investments in the Saudi megaprojects put a lot of hydrocarbons in a position that they could be accessed quickly and with little additional investment of capital or time. It is measureable and is reported by pretty much all of the international finance analysts. The EIA defines it as production which can be brought on within 30 days and sustained at that level for at least 90 days. The uncertainty comes with regards to the less transparent countries and what is the exact level of expenditure beyond which something becomes undeveloped reserves versus spare capacity. Under the typical SEC/OSC categorization spare capacity would be addressed by proved, developed non-producing reserves.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'Y')ou just contradicted yourself. How do you know that the dirty fields do not account for the bulk of the production increases?

A number of years ago in one of the threads that seems to have disappeared from the forum I outlined specifically what the quality of the oil was from each of fields that were contained in the megaprojects as well as the increased capacity which would be added by each of the field projects. It is quite clear that the majority of the oil added is light and mostly less than 1.5% sulphur. The only other heavy crude project besides Manifa (which hasn’t been commissioned yet) is Safaniyah and the demand for that oil is somewhat limited. The Saudis now process some of the heavy oil themselves and sell product but that would not show up in their monthly oil sales data but rather in product sales, all which should be found in the monthly OPEC newsletter.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', ' ')But more to my point; the fact that these heretofore difficult fields have finally been brought into production after more than one-half a century is proof, not denial that Ghawar has seen better days--is in decline.

Ghawar as of the last presentation I saw was still being maintained at the production level of 2008 when everyone was arguing it would fall apart. The water cut has stayed pretty much the same according to the Saudis. I don’t think anyone argues that Ghawar production was higher at some point in time and that it is unlikely it could ever be increased to those levels again without jeopardizing total recovery. By definition it has peaked having already reached it’s maximum production rate but that does not say anything about how much reserves are left. You can reach peak production well before half of the reserves have been removed from a reservoir, especially if technology is being employed in the later stages to improve recovery. By definition a reservoir is depleting from the first day it is brought on production. It is declining if overall production continues to see year on year decreases. To my knowledge there is no evidence this is happening yet in Ghawar.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'S')haybah is in the Empty Quarter, the most remote, dangerous, difficult place in the world. That these service companies had to spend tens of billions to upgrade these old dinosaurs (not to mention the ongoing costs and losses for upgrading and discounting heavy and moving oil across the Rub' Al-Khali) is specifically why SA needs $80/bbl. All the new SA projects have crappy eroei, like deep-water pre-salt, tar sands, and tight-shale. You know; high-hanging fruit.

And once again oil companies are not concerned with eroei but rather with economics. The billions of dollars of investment still result in a relatively high rate of return or they would never have been undertaken.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'W')ell there you go with your distraction. I already showed how the $75-$80/bbl uptick was specifically a function of the Kingdom's inability to raise production back in 2007. Now that they have all this "spare capacity" do you expect them to make good on their commitment to maintain oil in the $22-$28bbl range?
Why would they or why would they be expected to? Attendant with the rapid unexpected increase in demand that caught the Saudis with their dish dashes down we saw a rapid and continuous rise in all goods and services as companies sought to take advantage of the higher oil prices. Steel, consumables and labor all increased quickly and largely have not retreated. IT is still likely that the Saudis could produce and make money in the $50 - $60/bbl range but anything lower would require service companies, labor, steel etc all accepting lower compensation. Take a look at salaries in the oil and gas industry through the economic downturn in 2008 – 2009, they stayed flat to slightly increasing. During the period when oil rose to $140/bbl salaries rose as well but when oil backed off to $80 there was no significant decrease in salaries. This is a major contributing factor to why break even oil prices are much higher now than a few years ago. A major reason the Saudis have a higher base requirement now is the increased number of social investments they have undertaken, some no doubt to avoid an Arab spring type of uprising.
User avatar
rockdoc123
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7685
Joined: Mon 16 May 2005, 03:00:00
Top

Re: THE Ghawar Thread (merged)

Unread postby evilgenius » Thu 29 Nov 2012, 13:23:05

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('rockdoc123', '
')A major reason the Saudis have a higher base requirement now is the increased number of social investments they have undertaken, some no doubt to avoid an Arab spring type of uprising.


That's what I said. I think this is very important. The rough agreement with the West vis a vis the export land model may begin to bite now. Yes, if the Saudis had decided to use their own oil in order to build an industrial superpower based on easy cheap energy advantages, like the US did, they would not have been as instrumental in the world oil game as they have been. The flip side is that decision has had ramifications for the people of the region. A great many of them have migrated to the West in order to find opportunity that doesn't exist for them in the economically and industrially undeveloped places they come from. The bulk of those that remain are in a habit of dependence upon the state for their sustenance. Such an enfeebled populace is difficult to control when the fat of the land is not so fat. They don't have the traditions of societal interaction and belief in work ethic, nor experience which a Western country in decline depends upon to keep its core intact during such changes of the very definition of what a country is in the first place. I don't see why this situation wouldn't cause the Royal Family to look outside of its relationship with the US in order to politically seek a solution that would then impact upon the ratio of money needed to calm unrest in the event oil falls to a price below that which can sustain the current order.
User avatar
evilgenius
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3730
Joined: Tue 06 Dec 2005, 04:00:00
Location: Stopped at the Border.
Top

Re: THE Ghawar Thread (merged)

Unread postby rockdoc123 » Thu 29 Nov 2012, 19:00:44

What is interesting in this regard is that it didn't work for Ghaddafi. I spent some time in Libya and have to say that he might have been a crazy despot but he did reinvest the oil field money in the country and tried to create an effective social net for people. Food and petrol were subsidized heavily in the Ghaddafi years and he invested heavily in projects such as the great underground river which brought water from the south to the coastal regions for irrigation. Regardless of his attempts at placating the populace he was ousted, all it seems to have taken is a group that gets some momentum with little in the way of obstacles to overthrowing the government. The large distances from Benghazi to Tripoli coupled with the small number of poorly trained military Ghaddafi had didn't help him.
The only difference with the situation in Saudi is the general populace is a bit better off (newer cars, access to western goods, education etc) and more importantly I think is the fact the Saudis have a much more effective internal security system (police, military etc) that stop uprisings before they get any momentum. As long as that security system stays loyal to the family it is difficult to see how there could be a successful revolt. In Egypt Mubarak had ruled with an iron fist for years, using the loyal military to stop any sort of protests that might occur. Once the military become disenchanted he was screwed.
just my opinion of course.
User avatar
rockdoc123
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7685
Joined: Mon 16 May 2005, 03:00:00
Top

Re: THE Ghawar Thread (merged)

Unread postby Quinny » Fri 30 Nov 2012, 03:04:06

The group that overthrew Ghadaffi did have a little help from their friends. A friend of mine who worked Libya (and the rest of North Africa/Middle East ) said the only place he would have considered living in the region was Libya. Ghadaffi may have had several faults, but the one major defect that lead to his downfall was not sucking up to the West.
Live, Love, Learn, Leave Legacy.....oh and have a Laugh while you're doing it!
User avatar
Quinny
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3337
Joined: Thu 03 Jul 2008, 03:00:00
Top

Re: THE Ghawar Thread (merged)

Unread postby zxc123 » Sat 01 Dec 2012, 20:20:42

Ghawar itself is the most important market moving event in respects to conventional oil. Every oil field around the world pales in comparison. When this field declines in a big way, the world will realize that change must come. Let's hope that change comes in a manner that is civil.
zxc123
Wood
Wood
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Fri 30 Nov 2012, 14:21:07
Top

Re: THE Ghawar Thread (merged)

Unread postby Keith_McClary » Sun 02 Dec 2012, 01:22:13

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('rockdoc123', 'R')egardless of his attempts at placating the populace he was ousted, all it seems to have taken is a group that gets some momentum with little in the way of obstacles to overthrowing the government
Thanks to "humanitarian" bombing.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('rockdoc123', 'm')ore importantly I think is the fact the Saudis have a much more effective internal security system (police, military etc) that stop uprisings before they get any momentum. As long as that security system stays loyal to the family it is difficult to see how there could be a successful revolt.
My impression is that the "internal security system (police, military etc)" is heavily dependant on mercenary corporations to keep the jets, helicopters and secret police computer systems running. These would be pulled out instantly if the regime were put on the "bad guy" list. Do you think Saudi subjects (not really "Saudis") could keep all this running even if they were loyal?
Facebook knows you're a dog.
User avatar
Keith_McClary
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 7344
Joined: Wed 21 Jul 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Suburban tar sands
Top

Re: THE Ghawar Thread (merged)

Unread postby rockdoc123 » Sun 02 Dec 2012, 12:41:54

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'M')y impression is that the "internal security system (police, military etc)" is heavily dependant on mercenary corporations to keep the jets, helicopters and secret police computer systems running. These would be pulled out instantly if the regime were put on the "bad guy" list. Do you think Saudi subjects (not really "Saudis") could keep all this running even if they were loyal?

Not sure about that. I have a friend who was ex-regiment and worked as a security consultant for a number of firms. He spent time in SA but according to him foreigners were advisors, instructors etc. and not needed other than the Saudi rulers wanted to train their police/troops at the highest level possible. The same thing is happening in Oman and Qatar. The point being the Saudis likely do not need outside intervention to provide the services, they do need them to fine tune their operations. Not sure where your view that the population isn't really Saudi comes from, last I checked the non-Saudi proportion of the populace accounts for about 30%, mostly from Pakistan.
User avatar
rockdoc123
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7685
Joined: Mon 16 May 2005, 03:00:00
Top

Re: THE Ghawar Thread (merged)

Unread postby evilgenius » Mon 03 Dec 2012, 12:49:56

I think that if the Saudis had been able to influence the American action in Iraq to produce a Sunni ruling regime they would have been happy. Then they could have looked forward to linking their oil production, refining and transport system to that of Iraq. This would have obfuscated whatever truth there might be about the state of Ghawar indefinitely. As it stands, they will probably get many years of obfuscation out of the new fields they are bringing online both now and in the next few years. Incidentally, I don't think it's necessary for Ghawar to decline in order for this obfuscation to be of value to the Saudis. The uncertainty is what they need. As long as it exists the guessing game the other producers have to play puts the Saudis in the driver's seat.
User avatar
evilgenius
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3730
Joined: Tue 06 Dec 2005, 04:00:00
Location: Stopped at the Border.
Top

Re: THE Ghawar Thread (merged)

Unread postby Tanada » Wed 05 Dec 2012, 12:04:40

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('zxc123', 'G')hawar itself is the most important market moving event in respects to conventional oil. Every oil field around the world pales in comparison. When this field declines in a big way, the world will realize that change must come. Let's hope that change comes in a manner that is civil.


I don't think you will find much argument around here, but knowing when it happens and preventing civil unrest when it does are both very challenging!
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Alfred Tennyson', 'W')e are not now that strength which in old days
Moved earth and heaven, that which we are, we are;
One equal temper of heroic hearts,
Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.
Tanada
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 17094
Joined: Thu 28 Apr 2005, 03:00:00
Location: South West shore Lake Erie, OH, USA
Top

Re: Is peak oil dead?

Unread postby Plantagenet » Fri 16 Sep 2016, 17:14:59

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('killJOY', '
')
As a movement, a phenomenon, and a prediction, [peak oil] is quite dead.


Don't forget the world is using 93 million bbls of oil each day with OPEC providing about 35 million bbls per day. All the oil OPEC provides is conventional, the vast majority of from legacy fields that have been producing for decades. Ghawer in Saudi Arabia alone produces about 6 million bbls per day.

Those fields are going to peak, one by one, and quickly decline.

Lets return to this topic after Ghawar peaks---which it is very close to doing. Peak Oil theory will seem a lot more viable then.

Cheers!
Never underestimate the ability of Joe Biden to f#@% things up---Barack Obama
-----------------------------------------------------------
Keep running between the raindrops.
User avatar
Plantagenet
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 26765
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).
Top
PreviousNext
Post a reply

Return to Peak Oil Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests



cron