[Tanada]

This graph pretty much sums up the concept of plateau is peak. From 1990-2000 world oil production increased by 7.3 MM/bbl/d from conventional formations. then when prices started doing interesting things production increased another 4.7 MM/bbl/d from 2000 to 2005 for a total growth of 12.1 MM/bbl/d between 1990-2005 from conventional sources.
From 2005 to 2016 despite half that period having high to very high sale prices compared to the previous 15 year period conventional oil production has barely clawed its way up by just over 2 MM/bbl/d while during the same period world consumption has grown in a very robust manner.

[ROCKMAN]

OK, not to hurt the feelings of anyone in particular let me again explain why much of the discussion of conventional vs unconventional oil is wasted space. As pointed out before oil is oil and it doesn't matter if it came from a conventional or unconventional RESERVOIR. A detailed analysis of a sample of 41 API oil would not tell you if it came from a fractured shale reservoir or a high porosity sandstone reservoir: I've produced wells completed in both.

And the C+C numbers for the last 50+ years includes billions of bbls of oil produced from unconventional ("tight", if you prefer) reservoirs. In fact, the vast majority of Permian Basin fields that began producing a half century ago are classified as unconventional/tight reservoirs. And many required frac'ng to produce at economical flow rates. This whole idea that LTO or unconventional oil production is something new is bullsh*t. Don't believe it? Check the distribution of low porosity/low permeability fields in the Permian Basin:

http://www.ogj.com/articles/print/volum ... voirs.html

BTW definition of "tight oil" from Schlumberger: Oil found in relatively impermeable reservoir rock. Production of tight oil comes from very low permeability rock that must be stimulated using hydraulic fracturing to create sufficient permeability to allow the mature oil and/or natural gas liquids to flow at economic rates.

Of course all this ignores the fact how relatively unimportant the date of PO, LTO, tight oil, conventional oil, C+C, etc really is .

[AdamB]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Plantagenet', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('AdamB', 'T')he article referenced doesn't claim that global production of oil will peak with the Permian, but then they probably know that the Permian Wolfcamp and Spraberry formations aren't the sum total of light tight oil yet to be produced

[AdamB]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Plantagenet', '
')Global Conventional Oil Production has been on a "bumpy plateau" of between 72-74 million bbls per day since ca. 2005.

conventional-crude-oil-production

[AdamB]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('dcoyne78', '
')It is simpler to talk about C+C rather than "conventional" oil, much easier to find the data.

[AdamB]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Plantagenet', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('dcoyne78', '
')
I have also looked at this and if conventional oil is defined as Euan Mearns defines it and we use annual data then 2016 was the peak at 73.2 Mb/d for conventional output.

[Plantagenet]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ROCKMAN', 'O')K, not to hurt the feelings of anyone in particular let me again explain why much of the discussion of conventional vs unconventional oil is wasted space. As pointed out before oil is oil and it doesn't matter if it came from a conventional or unconventional RESERVOIR.

[AdamB]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Plantagenet', '
')But Peak Oil isn't about the kind of reservoir the oil is coming from. Peak Oil is about the maximum rate of global oil production from ALL reservoirs and ALL sources.

[Plantagenet]

Is "Peak Permian" only three years away?

OPJ: Is-Peak-Permian-Only-3-Years-Away

"The world’s hottest shale basin, the Permian, is leading the second U.S. wave of tight oil production growth...

However, signs have started to emerge that the relentless intensification of drilling leads to diminishing returns, Simon Flowers, Chairman and Chief Analyst at Wood Mackenzie, said in an article this week. Pumping twice as much sand as usual into Permian wells and drilling longer laterals doesn’t deliver commensurate volumes of oil, Flowers notes.

“Drilling costs rise exponentially with depth, and there’s a suspicion that longer wells are hitting a cost efficiency ceiling,” WoodMac’s chief analyst writes.

Moreover, after the early production-exuberance stage, drillers are now much more focused on delivering profits and higher profit margins. They now favor quality over quantity, and value over volumes.

“Might the Permian be reaching the limits of well size and design? Maybe—as Star Trek’s Scotty might observe of an underwhelming high intensity completion ‘you cannae change the laws of physics, Jim’,” Flowers says.

Cheers!

[ROCKMAN]

P - "The discussion of conventional vs. unconventional reservoirs is simply a way to keep track of the various sources of oil to better facilitate discussion of when each of these various sources might reach their peak and when global peak oil will occur." Exactly correct. Which is why your chart is complete bullsh*t. Much of the "conventional oil" on your chart in 1982 is actually "unconventional oil" as you and others seem to define it. In fact much of the new oil production coming from "unconventional wells" drilled several years ago in the Permian Basin were drilled in fields that have been producing from the same reservoirs for more then 40 years. Did you look at my link? The majority of the 240+ Permian Basin fields that have produced many billions of bbls of oil are tight reservoirs that typically required frac'ng to be produce commercial flow rates. In fact the highest % of PB fields have the lowest porosity and permeability recorded. Something like 80 fields or so from what I remember. Granted the new shales plays in the PB are a different group of "unconventional reservoirs" that doesn't make the tens of thousands of previously developed PB wells conventional.

And again back to your chart: it counts all the production from the Austin Chalk in the 1990's as conventional production. It was the hottest oil play on the planet at that time. And the nature of that reservoir was identical to Eagle Ford Shale except it was made from carbonate mud instead of silicate mud. IOW the horizontally drilled Austin Chalk play was just as "unconventional" as any shale play drilled during the last 10 years.

BTW there have been many thousands of "unconventional wells" drilled decades ago in fractured carbonate shale reservoirs in Mississippi, Alabama, East Texas, etc. In fact, the first commercial NG play in the US was the unconventional New Albany Shale play. In the late 1800's street light in Kentucky were burning New Albany NG. And the play was hot again in the early 2000's when NG prices were booming. That's why I'm familiar with the play...I was drilling it in Kentucky at that time. It's actually more "unconventional" then the shales being drilled to day. It does contain free NG in fractures. The methane molecules are absorbed onto the organic material in the shales. As the water is produces from the formation the pressure is reduced. This destabilizes the molecules and the methane is released. So actually over time production actually increases as more NG is produced. These are not big wells: typically 100 mcf/day or less. But there have been thousands of wells that have produces such so flows for 60+ years. The biggest hindrance to development is that low pressure gathering systems are required. And they aren't built unless hundreds of new wells are drilled. Ad no one drills unless a low pressure gathering system is in place. There are many TCF of NG locked up in the NAS in Kentucky but the state still has to import supplies.

Likewise for the Marcellus Shale. While hz drilling has made the trend boom recently it had been producing a small amount of commercial NG for decades from vertical wells.

[Plantagenet]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ROCKMAN', '.')...your chart is complete bullsh*t.

[AdamB]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Plantagenet', '
')It wasn't until the 1990s that hydraulic fracking began to be used in places like the Austin Chalk.

[Plantagenet]

IHS backs Pioneer's estimate of 60-70 Billions Bbls of recoverable oil in Permian Basin, worth 3.3 trillion at today's prices

permian-super-basin-holds-up-to-3-3-trillion-in-untapped-oil

IHS spent three years studying output data from more than 440,000 wells to calculate the amount of crude remaining within the sprawling, mile-thick rock formation that pumps more oil than any other U.S. field, the London-based researcher said in a statement on Monday. The estimate may grow as IHS geologists and data scientists extend their analytical techniques to deeper geological zones.

“The Permian Basin is America’s super basin in terms of its oil and gas production history and for operators it presents a significant variety of stacked targets that are profitable at today’s oil prices,” Prithiraj Chungkham, director of unconventional resources for IHS, said in the statement.

The assessment may boost Pioneer Natural Resources Co. Chairman Scott Sheffield’s claim that the Permian is a 75 billion-barrel field that may rival Saudi Arabia’s massive Ghawar field.

Cheers!

[Plantagenet]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', '
')
Plant, "60-70 Billions Bbls of recoverable oil in Permian Basin, worth 3.3 trillion at today's prices" you should know better, especially you. Really?

Recoverable is no measure of reserves, and reserves are meaningless without a specific price point.

[coffeeguyzz]

The 20 billion barrel assessment was for the Wolfcamp in the Midland sub basin ONLY! It explicitly did NOT include the Wolfcamp in the much larger Delaware sub basin.
The Spraberry assessment in the Midland sub basin was for an additional 4 billion barrels.

When all is said and done, including the various trends in south east New Mexico, the USGS assessments may approach 100 billion barrels.

[GHung]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('coffeeguyzz', 'T')he 20 billion barrel assessment was for the Wolfcamp in the Midland sub basin ONLY! It explicitly did NOT include the Wolfcamp in the much larger Delaware sub basin.
The Spraberry assessment in the Midland sub basin was for an additional 4 billion barrels.

When all is said and done, including the various trends in south east New Mexico, the USGS assessments may approach 100 billion barrels.

[Plantagenet]

OPEC admits that unconventional oil from tight oil shale in the USA is here to stay

OPEC-Concedes-That-US-Shale-Wont-Die

In the 2016 version ... OPEC predicted that North American shale would decline from 4.9 million barrels per day (mb/d) in 2015 to just 4.1 mb/d in 2017....Low prices would have successfully halted shale in its tracks, ending one of the most dramatic growth stories the world of oil has ever seen.

But a year later, OPEC is conceding that a different reality could be playing out. The 2017 ... predicts North American shale output rises from 5.1 mb/d in 2017 to a massive 7.5 mb/d by 2021 and 8.7 mb/d in 2025. The 2021 figure is a whopping 56 percent higher than last year’s forecast.

IMHO the new OPECE world oil outlook is no more accurate then their past view. Yes, US shale oil may output may grow a bit more, but the Bakken has already peaked, and some insiders are predicting the Permian Basin may peak in a few more years.


It can't go up forever, can it? It has to peak sometime.........

Cheers!

[coffeeguyzz]

Just did some checking on the Bakken production numbers late 2014/early 2015 when the decline kicked in.
Should be interesting what this coming late spring/summer numbers show.

At the trough, ND ATW pricing was under $32/barrel ... pre DAPL.
Last week, it was about $49 and probably 5 to 8 bucks higher today.

The EIA Bakken region includes the poorly producing Montana, which can skew things somewhat.
There are almost 1,500 wells temporarily shut in in the North Dakota Bakken/Three Forks.

Wouldn't surprise me to see a new high this summer if pricing holds.

[Plantagenet]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('coffeeguyzz', '
')
The EIA Bakken region includes the poorly producing Montana, which can skew things somewhat.
There are almost 1,500 wells temporarily shut in in the North Dakota Bakken/Three Forks.

[rockdoc123]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'P')ossibly. But its also possible that most of the better and more productive parts of the Bakken have already been drilled, making it more and more difficult to greatly increase production from current levels.

In fact, a peak in Bakken production ca. 2015 was predicted by a number of analysts, including SRC and Jean Laherrere. So far it looks like they were right.