[shortonoil]

Zarquon wrote:"Anyway, I'm asking because a while ago I saw a presentation video by Steven Kopits (a presentation at Columbia Uni. IIRC, 2013 or 2014) where he stated that E&P costs in the industry had increased by about a whooping 500% in the last decade, a trend likely to continue, and that he wondered whether the big private players would still exist ten years from now, at least in their present form as industry giants. Back then I thought that to be a shocking statement."

One more thing. If we use Kopits data we can estimate (roughly) what it would cost to replace the reserves that are now being extracted. We have one good data point which is 2013, when the industry spent $75 billion to replace 4 Gb of the 32 consumed. That was $18.75 per barrel. Using Kopits 50% per year figure it would cost $142.38 per barrel in five years to discover another 4 Gb. All other things staying the same, it would cost $4.82 trillion to replace 4 Gb in five years. To replace the entire 32 GB being used will require 52% of the entire world's GDP in 5 years.

Obviously, the big integrated oil companies are not going to be around much longer. Of course, this is a linear interpolation of the data, and nothing is linear in the oil industry. If this function turns out to be exponential, which is likely, the cost could be 5 times the GDP of the world. Don't be fooled by the banna-rama commentary meant to distract you. The conclusions are simple, and straight forward.

[vtsnowedin]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonoil', '[')i]

Obviously, the big integrated oil companies are not going to be around much longer.

[ROCKMAN]

Z - Difficult to get a hard handle on "successful drilling" stats since there's a wide range of successes. For instance if success is defined by completing a well there are completed wells that will never make a profit. A not uncommon situation: the drilling drilling cost is $6 million and it finds only $4 million in reserves. But the well will only cost $2 million to complete and frac. So total cost for that $4 million in reserves but cost $8 million. But the completion decision made a 2:1 profit...$4 million income vs $2 million cost. Also consider the high success rate the Rockman had several years ago drilling very deep (16,000'+) NG prospects in S La using 3D seis. Almost all turned out to be just one well fields. IOW very small. And 30+ years ago a new discovery in the same trend might lead to 5 to 10 low risk develoment wells in the same reservoir. IOW my sucess rate was much higher (70%+ vs 20%) I found much less reserves per well.

Shooting seismic is always a crap shoot. First, not many apparent viable prospects are found. And if they are found you can still drill dry holes/marginal wells. Or another company bat you to the lease: many shoots are joint ventures by sometimes as many as 5 to 10 companies that can go after prospects on their own.

But as I pointed out before the big money saver of 3D seismic is cutting down the number of dry holes. And while it can increase success rates most of those successes in many trends will be much smaller then the fields discovered pre-seismic. The 23 out of 25 successful shallow NG wildcats I drilled in the late 80's discovered reservoirs that were less the 10% the size of the fields discovered in the same trends 30+ years earlier. That had been the same dynamic on the GOM shelf in the 80's and later. And is currently going that way in the Deep Water GOM.

Which, again, why Big Oil is swinging hard into the acquisition mode: regardless of better success rates the fields left to be found (at both high and low oil/NG prices) will generally be smaller and smaller. That's why the Deep Water GOM was hit so hard: virtually no potential to find individual fields that large onshore. And no: the Bakken and Eagle Ford Shale are NOT fields...they are TRENDS of fields. BTW the DEEP WATER GOM had been under development for more then 35 years. Last time I looked more than 150 fields have been found out there. And yes: even in the DW GOM the size of new discoveries tend to become smaller.

[ROCKMAN]

Z - And some interesting facts for you: in general the managers of the ExxonMobil refineries don't care if they crack oil produced from an XOM or Shell field. Likewise those producers don't care who refines their oil. Both are more focused on theif profit margins. Many of those decisions might be made be made on tax considerations. BTW do you realize that all the gasoline sold at XOM stations weren't made at XOM refineties? In fact even an XOM refinery doesn't make "XOM" gasoline per se. All refineries make base gasoline. IOW it's all the same and varies only by octane. Drive by a Valero refinery in Texas and you'll see "blending stations" with tankers being serviced. That XOM gasoline isn't XOM gasoline because of where the oil was produced or even what refinery cracked it: it's defined by the additives mixed into the base gasoline. I prefer Chevon's additives myself. And given I live across the highway from the second largest refinery in the Western Hemisphere (ExxonMobil) I wouldn't be surprised if that's where much of my Chevron fuel was produced at it. The Chevron refinery is about 15 miles away. And recently the largest refinery in the Western Hemisphere which was once 50/50 with Shell and Saudi Arabia is now 100% KSA.

When was the last time you filled up at your neighborhood Saudi station? LOL.0

[Tanada]

What additives do each of the main retail systems use? Shell had a big sales pitch a few years ago about nitrogen cleaning compounds in their fuel, but other than that nothing much do I know LOL.

[AdamB]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonoil', '[')i]"Even more difficult to say how much of the replacement gaps is due to falling prices (reserves becoming uneconomical) and how much is due to simply being unable to find or buy enough new reserves. And even more difficult (but probably less important) is guessing how accurate these reserve statements actually are."

To answer that question it is first necessary to state that there is no shortage of liquid hydrocarbons on earth. According to a 2000 USGS study there could be as much as 4,200 Gb.

[Zarquon]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ROCKMAN', 'S')hooting seismic is always a crap shoot. First, not many apparent viable prospects are found. And if they are found you can still drill dry holes/marginal wells. Or another company bat you to the lease: many shoots are joint ventures by sometimes as many as 5 to 10 companies that can go after prospects on their own.

[shortonoil]

"I don't follow you there. Why won't they make just as much profit on scarce oil as they did on easy cheap oil?"

In 2015 all the Majors saw either huge losses, or profits slashed to the bone. WTI sold for $48.67. It is not likely that 2016 will see the price that high. Oil companies don't make money when oil is cheap, they lose money. The industry is now consuming its assets, its reserves, to stay in business; each barrel that they sell reduces their net worth by almost an equal amount.

Where did you get the idea that oil is scarce, the world is flooded with the stuff? The problem is that the economy can not pay a price high enough for the industry to recover its cost. What you are assuming is that the value of oil to the economy is a constant, its not. As its value goes down so also does its price. It is called depletion, and depletion never took a course in ECON 101. Scarcity is only significant if quality stays the same, and the quality of oil (the amount of economic activity it can power) is going down. Its price reflects that decline.

At this point in the cycle the Majors will stay in business until they have sold off their inventory (reserves) and then they will shut their doors. The reserves that they are now selling can not be replaced. The economy consumes oil because it acts as an energy source; not because it is black goo in a barrel. When it can no longer act in that capacity demand for it will go to almost zero. The confusion here lies in confusing two properties of matter, volume and energy. The units for volume are Length^3; energy is Force x Distance. We have the oil industry to thank for that commonly perceived misconception. They sell oil by the barrel, but the value of a barrel to the economy is not a constant. It changes will time, and source of supply.

[shortonoil]

That study was supplanted by the 2012 update. Any reason you reference dated material?

Is this a joke? Resource is so huge it doesn't make any difference. Are you planning on living for a another 300 years? Reserves are what is important, and the industry can no longer replace the reserves that they are now extracting. They have not been able to do that for the last 30 years, and the situation gets more critical with each passing year. If you have just arrived on planet Earth your comment might be excused. Otherwise, it is as valuable as a book of matches is to a fish!

[rockdoc123]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'S')o it can, in theory, become publicly available, if the public pays through the nose for it?

[AdamB]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonoil', ' ')The problem is that the economy can not pay a price high enough for the industry to recover its cost.

[AdamB]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonoil', '[')i]That study was supplanted by the 2012 update. Any reason you reference dated material?

Is this a joke? Resource is so huge it doesn't make any difference.

[ROCKMAN]

Z – I’m not sure what part of the country doc is talking about but I know of no other country where log data is as available as in the US. I work the Gulf Coast and all the states require the release of log data. And while there’s an option to hold that data off the market for a year or two it is seldom done. You can go to each state and get that data or make it a lot easier by using a service like Cambe. They have hundreds of thousands of logs from all across the country in their files. BTW they can be had for as little as $2 each. From their website:

“Cambe offers over 75 years of historical log collection and adds hundreds of new logs each month, all high quality, accurately scaled and continuous format for the entire Gulf Coast area including:

Texas RRC (1-6)
Louisiana
South Arkansas
Mississippi
Alabama
Florida
Georgia, and
State Waters
Offshore Gulf of Mexico

The library includes 1" and 5", induction electric, sidetracks, directional surveys, porosity's, offshore velocity surveys, core/paleo and test data now available as digitized logs and raster images. For the Gulf Coast, Cambe offers the most extensive log file in existence with hundreds of both historical and newly released logs added each month. In addition, Cambe gives you ready access to the largest file available of 5" sonic and density logs and an extensive database of cross/references. Most logs are available within 24 to 48 hours for average-size orders. And of course, if you need them digitized or reproduced, Cambe's digitizing and reproduction departments are ready to help.”

Now add to that detailed production history of almost every produced well. Again you can go to the individual states for that info. Much more user friend subscribing to a company like Drilling Info. Right now as I type I can pull the detailed production history of every well produced in every county in Texas. It down loads into Excel and it takes about 15 seconds to pull down every one of the many thousands of wells in each county. In fact the Rockman can click 1 button and see every well log that DI has in its files that can also be downloaded with one more click,

Well logs and production histories are the primary tools the Rockman uses every day. But I doubt you want to get any of that data to analyze. The good news is that you don’t have to: there are many thousands of US field studies available to the public. Go to the websites of the AAPG (American Association of Petroleum geologists), the SPE (Society of Petroleum Engineers), the GCAGS (Gulf Coast Association of Geologic Societies), the Houston, Dallas and Corpus Christi geologic societies, the BEG (Texas Bureau of Economic Geology). Here's their on-line book store: http://begstore.beg.utexas.edu/store/) etc. and you can find very detailed maps and descriptions of numerous US fields dating back more then80 years. And a great many of those studies were published by the geologists/engineers working for the companies that developed the fields.

Another huge source of very detailed data is the university system. Thousands of MS and PhD studies are available. While in grad school the Rockman’s thesis was a study of field in southern CA done under a research grant from the operator of that field, Tenneco. Beside the financial support they also provide all the data. And all can be had for just the cost of copying it.

Given that the Rockman is a development/reservoir geologist he seldom bothers to get the base data on all the fields in a trend since there are usually numerous studies available on line. Now if you want to dig into a hot new trend, like the Eagle Ford or Deep Water GOM you’ll find less available mostly because they are new.

But, hey, want to learn more about the fracture patterns in the Bakken formation? Here’s an entire book written in 2010 (“Fracture Analysis of the Bakken Formation, Williston Basin: Field Studies in the Little Rocky Mountains and Big Snowy Mountains, MT, and Beartooth Mountains, WY, and 3D Seismic Data, Williston Basin”). Notice it also includes some selected 3d seismic data. For your convenience you can order it from Amazon. LOL. Really…you can.

https://books.google.com/books/about/Fr ... vMZwEACAAJ

Want to know the details of hundreds of major oil fields in every production trend in the state? Here is the "Texas Oil Atlas" from the BEG:

http://begstore.beg.utexas.edu/store/at ... results=13

Now go try to find a comparable publication from any other country. I doble dog dare you. LOL.You might notice the Rockman seems to come up with a lot of data in areas where he’s not working. For instance the Rockman doesn’t know sh*t first-hand about the Marcellus Shale. Yet he can come up with mucho details in no time at all. The secret? It’s called the Internet. LOL. Want to burn a few hours go onto the net and discover many thousands of sources of very detailed data covering the US oil patch.

And then take a little time and see if you can find anything close to the oil patch data base you can find in the US for any other region of the world. I dare you. LOL.

[GoghGoner]

On page 16, you can see that debt to equity ratios increased from 25% to 45% in the last 10 years. The oil industry is changing quickly.

Financial Review of the Global Oil and Natural Gas
Industry 2015

[Zarquon]

Rockdoc, Rockman, et al.: first of all, thanks for taking the time. I read a couple of books about oil over the past few years; OPEC, oil and ME history, then Oil 101, Peeking at Peak Oil, TOD and thousands of bits and pieces of info and opinion that the MSM, bloggers, PR whores, nutters, experts self-styled or real, pour all over the internet.

It's fascinating, it's much more important than I would have imagined, but without a solid base to put it all in perspective, all the unconnected bits and pieces - some misunderstood, much of it forgotten almost immediately after reading - somehow leave just a dense fog in my head. For every fact there's three contradicting explanations and four voices from the peanut gallery screaming that it's not a fact at all.

And I guess that's when it becomes convenient to just grab the facts and explanations you like best, pretend to understand them and run with it. Join the pissing contest and throw somebody else's pie charts at the opposition till they shut-the-fuck-up.

That's why I registered here, to try and get at least some of the basics straight. And from what I've gathered it doesn't matter much how many drops or oceans of oil are left, or when the exact month, day and hour of PO is, was or will be. What matters is that costs are exploding in the industry and that it gets harder every year to replace reserves and keep production levels up. Oil prices are just the throttle which can speed up or slow down the process.

I know that the big IOCs are not even that important anymore in terms of their share of total production, but what is true for them should hold true for most others as well and it's probably harder for them to fudge their numbers than for the NOCs. That's why I started this thread.

[ROCKMAN]

Z - Don't feel bad about not getting all the puzzle pieces together...almost no one can. Even us "experts" only know our particular area. Why I usually end up digging for much of the facts I toss out from the Internet. Yes: I am something of a "search junkie". And not just about the oil patch. Probably because I'm stuck in a chair 24/7. LOL.

For instance you would be shocked how many folks I work with had no idea the US has been a net NG importer for a long time. IOW we consume more then we produce even though we're one of te biggest NG producers on the planet. Or that since 1977 when the federal govt imposed the ban on exporting oil from the US that we have in fact (according to the same fed govt that passed the export ban) we have exported 1.5 BILLION BBLS OF OIL.

Every word true. Really. LOL.

[vtsnowedin]

[vtsnowedin wrote]"I don't follow you there. Why won't they make just as much profit on scarce oil as they did on easy cheap oil?"
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonoil', '
')In 2015 all the Majors saw either huge losses, or profits slashed to the bone.

[ROCKMAN]

"In 2015 all the Majors saw either huge losses, or profits slashed to the bone." No they didn't in terms of actual monies and not the "paper loses" of their oil remaining in the ground. This compares to the huger paper gain when oil increased from $30/bbl to $100+/bbl about 10 years ago. At the current price of $40/bbl the value of a bbl of Big Oil's reserves in the ground today is greater then it was a decade ago. ExxonMobil brought in $16.2 billion in revenue during 2015. And like every other operators none of us are going to produce a well if it isn't generating positive cash flow. That's true even for wells that will never recover 100% of the investment. In fact XOM has been so flush with cash it had been buying back large amounts of its own stock.

As mentioned before when a public company posts a "loss" the term doesn't mean what many folks think it does. I won't try to explain the tax accounting and SEC rules covering such calculations. While Big Oil saw a big decline in revenue thanks to lower oil prices as well as lower stock prices it didn't lose a single $ of actually money during 2015.

[StarvingLion]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ROCKMAN', '&')quot;In 2015 all the Majors saw either huge losses, or profits slashed to the bone." No they didn't in terms of actual monies and not the "paper loses" of their oil remaining in the ground. This compares to the huger paper gain when oil increased from $30/bbl to $100+/bbl about 10 years ago. At the current price of $40/bbl the value of a bbl of Big Oil's reserves in the ground today is greater then it was a decade ago. ExxonMobil brought in $16.2 billion in revenue during 2015. And like every other operators none of us are going to produce a well if it isn't generating positive cash flow. That's true even for wells that will never recover 100% of the investment. In fact XOM has been so flush with cash it had been buying back large amounts of its own stock.

As mentioned before when a public company posts a "loss" the term doesn't mean what many folks think it does. I won't try to explain the tax accounting and SEC rules covering such calculations. While Big Oil saw a big decline in revenue thanks to lower oil prices as well as lower stock prices it didn't lose a single $ of actually money during 2015.

[Zarquon]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ROCKMAN', 'A')s mentioned before when a public company posts a "loss" the term doesn't mean what many folks think it does. I won't try to explain the tax accounting and SEC rules covering such calculations. While Big Oil saw a big decline in revenue thanks to lower oil prices as well as lower stock prices it didn't lose a single $ of actually money during 2015.