[bigmama]

Here is a little Texas only snap shot. Peak of Texas production was in Mar 15. This was the highest monthly production since 1993 and maybe/probably the highest ever. Most interesting was the -8.9% in September and that Texas has lost 600,000bbls/day from the peak and Texas is only 2-3 months away from taking 1M bbls/per day out of production from the global total. So makes you wonder how much NA or the USA has lost since the peak. My guess is over a 1M bbls/day has been removed from USA production already.

............................% Chg........bbl/day
Dec-14 90,341,511
Jan-15 87,007,367.....-3.69%.......2,900,245.57
Feb-15 80,291,710.....-7.72%.......2,676,390.33
Mar-15 91,043,345.....+13.39.......3,034,778.17
Apr-15 85,973,234.....-5.57% .......2,865,774.47
May-15 85,749,600......-0.26% ......2,858,320.00
Jun-15 81,372,930......-5.10%.......2,712,431.00
Jul-15 82,351,260......+1.20%.......2,745,042.00
Aug-15 79,346,604......-3.65%......2,644,886.80
Sep-15 72,849,838......-8.19%......2,428,327.93

[Ron Patterson]

Bigmama, those Texas numbers are only preliminary numbers. Texas oil and gas production data are always late so the near months are always way, way lower than the actual numbers will eventually be. If you look at those numbers six months from now they will not resemble the numbers you quote.

Texas production may be falling but not nearly the rate you assume from those numbers.

[Pops]

Look at Ron's site, PeakOilBarrel.com for some good graphics on how the numbers are revised over time.

[ROCKMAN]

Ron - You may well be correct. But what is the source of Bigmama's numbers (as well as yours)? Some time ago the TRC recognized the lag correction they had to make for the state's official numbers. From the TRRC:

"Preliminary Crude Oil & Gas Well Gas Monthly Production Total - Significant changes to the preliminary production figures will occur in decreasing amounts for approximately six to eight months due to the filing of corrected and late reports by industry. Commission staff anticipates that the production totals following that period are substantially complete, although continued minor changes occur thereafter."

But the TRC recognized a correction vector to take into account this lag:

"TRRC PRODUCTION STATISTICS AND ALLOWABLES FOR JANUARY 2015: AUSTIN –– The Railroad Commission of Texas (Commission) reports that in the last 12 months, total Texas reported production was 870 million barrels of oil and 8.0 trillion cubic feet of natural gas. The Railroad Commission of Texas’ estimated final production for October 2014 is 80,591,275 barrels of crude oil and 526,837,629 Mcf of gas well gas. The Commission derives final production numbers by multiplying the preliminary October 2014 production totals of 68,675,991 barrels of crude oil and 458,438,591 Mcf of gas well gas by a production adjustment factor of 1.1735 for crude oil and 1.1492 for gas well gas.

The above from: http://www.rrc.state.tx.us/all-news/122314b

So do some of the oil production stats for oil represent the 1.1735 upward adjustment?

[Ron Patterson]

Rockman, that's all very well but Bigmama's post did not mention any correction. Her numbers were not corrected and bear little resemblance to what the final numbers will look like. That's what I was pointing out. That's ALL I was pointing out.

Her numbers, which is also the TRRC numbers, indicate that Texas oil production is in free fall. And we both know that is just not the case.

Yes, I know the TRRC gives a fudge factor for the final month. But I have found that this fudge factor most often misses the actual number, which is actually only known months later, by a country mile.

[ROCKMAN]

Ron - That was my point: are her numbers and yours the raw TRRC numbers, the TRRC corrected estimates or some others? Have you come up with a better correction factor then the TRRC? Difficult to debate any of the numbers if we don't know the source. But based upon the TRRC report numbers that are 8+ months older won't be subject to much future revision. Thus numbers for March 2015 or earlier should be rather accurate.

[Ron Patterson]

Yes, I know my numbers are raw numbers and I very clearly point that out in every post on Texas production. I also point out that if this month's (final month) raw numbers are below last month's (final month) raw numbers were then that generally indicates that there was a decline that month... and vise versa if the numbers were higher. Of course that has not always proved to be the case. But in a few cases, like January 2015, it did prove to be true.

[bigmama]

Interesting. The #'s came from RRC site, where I load my production #s every month. As an operator, you have 60 days to get production information into the RRC site. After 60 days, you begin to receive lease severance emails/certified mail that you will have your lease severed. So I really doubt the numbers change at all over time, but I could be wrong as I do not look at Texas on this large of a scale historically.

Should see October's #s in the next few weeks.

On a side note, if Texas is down 600,000bbls already and the USA might be down 1M bbls already, the EIA #s are only showing a 400,000 drop for the USA; Iran's new production(when it comes) doesn't even fill this gap.

[Pops]

Here is a chart from Ron's site, which I think illustrtes the reporting
http://peakoilbarrel.com/texas-rrc-2/#more-10165




Notice as the months go by (different colored lines are different reporting months) the estimate increases and in fact seems to keep increasing for years until it finally aligns with the EIA estimate.

Not that the EIA estimate is never revised.

[vtsnowedin]

Whatever the final correct figure is it looks to be a downward trend. My question would be is some of the drop off due to producers that aren't financially forced to pump all out leaving oil in the ground waiting for the price to go back up? Pundits here have often said that won't happen but this drop seems a lot faster then what you would expect from a declining rig count etc.

[Pops]

Lots of fracking in TX.
Lots of little strippers may be losing money their little owners can not afford so are being shut in. I mentioned that somewhere.
Just guessing.

[vtsnowedin]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Pops', 'J')ust guessing.

[Synapsid]

vtsnowedin, pops,

No need to guess, just ask shallow sand.

[bigmama]

Strippers, yeah they are hurting but there are several examples of mid-size guys that are in the process of blowing up.

Here is a Real Example: Not sure how you pay back the $275M when your revenues have decreased by 83% while your production has declined 63% and is declining because(I am guessing) your credit lines have been reduced/cancelled. If your $275M loan was at 5%, your monthly payment would be $1,145,833. There would be nothing left over for operations or certainly new projects.


"EnCap and Riverstone have invested at least $275 million in Venado, according to a press release last year." http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/ ... on-in-sale


date..mnthly prod....monthly rev based on WTI price that month
Dec-13 23,030
Jan-14 40,387
Feb-14 33,177
Mar-14 33,260
Apr-14 56,568
May-14 61,155
Jun-14 59,828
Jul-14 85,631
Aug-14 97,814
Sep-14 84,502
Oct-14 96,788 $6,194,432.00
Nov-14 84,423
Dec-14 72,767
Jan-15 60,102
Feb-15 48,429
Mar-15 54,949
Apr-15 52,646
May-15 49,196
Jun-15 45,840
Jul-15 44,102
Aug-15 41,275
Sep-15 35,391 $1,047,573.60

[Revi]

According to Ron Patterson. Eagle Ford is down quite a bit already. It looks like the boom has gone bust already.
http://peakoilbarrel.com/eia-says-shale-continues-to-decline/#more-10504

[PeakOiler]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Pops', '.')..Not that the EIA estimate is never revised.

[GoghGoner]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Revi', 'A')ccording to Ron Patterson. Eagle Ford is down quite a bit already. It looks like the boom has gone bust already.
http://peakoilbarrel.com/eia-says-shale-continues-to-decline/#more-10504

[Pops]

Another factor is offshore. I'm thinking those projects don't turn around on a dime. This from the IEA OMR says GOM is keeping production up, at least was in august...

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I')n contrast, offshore production posted sharper than expected gains. According to EIA data, Gulf of Mexico production rose by more than 60 kb/d in August to 1.65 mb/d, its highest level since February 2010. With year-on-year gains of 210 kb/d, the US Gulf of Mexico took over as the largest contributor to US supply growth in August.

[Subjectivist]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Pops', 'A')nother factor is offshore. I'm thinking those projects don't turn around on a dime. This from the IEA OMR says GOM is keeping production up, at least was in august...

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I')n contrast, offshore production posted sharper than expected gains. According to EIA data, Gulf of Mexico production rose by more than 60 kb/d in August to 1.65 mb/d, its highest level since February 2010. With year-on-year gains of 210 kb/d, the US Gulf of Mexico took over as the largest contributor to US supply growth in August.

[Pops]

Look at the drilling productivity report Sub. It has charts specifically for these regions.
Here is the pdf... https://www.eia.gov/petroleum/drilling/pdf/dpr-full.pdf

It must be in html somewhere, I just don't know where