[AdamB]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', ' ')
Three years after causing an oil-price crash, the shale boom may not be enough to meet rising global demand because the industry has cut back so sharply on higher-risk mega-projects. Discoveries of new reserves this year were the fewest on record and replaced just 11 percent of what was produced, according to a Dec. 21 report by consultant Rystad Energy. While shale wells are creating a glut now, without more investment in bigger, conventional supply, the world may see output deficits as soon as 2019, according to Canadian producer Suncor Energy Inc. “Tight rock is not going to solve the global supply-demand issue,” said Adam Waterous, chief executive officer at the Calgary-based Waterous Energy Fund, which invests as much as C$400 million ($265 million). “Its going to take a long time for those mega-projects to come back on.” Spending Slump Capital expenditures still well below levels before

[AdamB]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', 'T')he old shale plays (vaca is decades old) had their day in the sun.

What new shale plays?

[shortonoil]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'W')hat new shale plays?

[MD]

I will assume that given the shale experience in North America, similar experiences will eventually crop up in other parts of the world. The tools will move around to where they are needed, eventually.

[GHung]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MD', 'I') will assume that given the shale experience in North America, similar experiences will eventually crop up in other parts of the world. The tools will move around to where they are needed, eventually.

[shortonoil]

As mentioned, in the post above, Shale is not generally a net energy provider; it is a volumetric source of liquid hydrocarbons. Although it is not a contributor to the general economic state of the economy (it is actually a liability) it does contribute to one aspect of it. It is a huge source of increased income for a part of the petroleum industry. The refining industry, which is mostly owned by a number of producers and their affiliates, consumes 18 million barrels of crude a day, and they must pay market price for that crude. The increase in volume which is added to crude stocks from the production of Shale suppresses the price of crude. At a $10 per barrel reduction in price because of shale, the production of shale saves the refining industry $66 billion per year in raw material costs. With a negative cash flow of about $15 billion per year the Shale industry would be subsidized by the remainder of the industry if other financing became unavailable. It probably already is with the present tightening happening in the HY bond market?

Petroleum's ability to supply energy to the general economy is declining. It has already fallen 34% since its peak in 1979, even though on a volumetric bases production has increased by 56% over the same period. The economy is becoming slowly starved of energy. Many more attempts to reduce energy consumption in the transportation sector will occur as this trend (as the Second Law requires) must continue. The sudden interest now seen in EVs is testimony of that now happening.



A $10 per barrel reduction in price from all sources for just producing shale, which accounts for only 3.6% of total world production, gives the industry tremendous leverage, and incentive for the subsidizing of shale. A 440% return on an investment, each year, would be attractive to any business in today's economy.

[AdamB]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonoil', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'W')hat new shale plays?

[shortonoil]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'R')ight. The shale production discussed in the Appalachian Gas Play atlas beginning between 1860 and 1880 and continuing on through the 1990's when the atlas was published never was a long term economic process.

[dirtyharry]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MD', 'I') will assume that given the shale experience in North America, similar experiences will eventually crop up in other parts of the world. The tools will move around to where they are needed, eventually.

[AdamB]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('GHung', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MD', 'I') will assume that given the shale experience in North America, similar experiences will eventually crop up in other parts of the world. The tools will move around to where they are needed, eventually.

[AdamB]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', ''')Right. The shale production discussed in the Appalachian Gas Play atlas beginning between 1860 and 1880 and continuing on through the 1990's when the atlas was published never was a long term economic process.'

Sure Adam. Them old timeys had horizontal drill strings, and fancy surfactants made from animal hides.

[AdamB]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('shortonoil', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'R')ight. The shale production discussed in the Appalachian Gas Play atlas beginning between 1860 and 1880 and continuing on through the 1990's when the atlas was published never was a long term economic process.

[GHung]

Yet another obnoxious juvenile gif posted by someone who expects to be taken seriously. Really?
Even my 8 year old grandson has moved beyond his attention-seeking phase.

[rockdoc123]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')hey crop up from time to time .Poland ,UK have tried to devolp their shale resources ,but failed . Why ? Because they do not have the liberty of printing unlimited amount of their currency ,unlike the USA . Shale is drilled only in the USA because of unlimited finance .

[shortonoil]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 's')hortonoil wrote:
Right. The shale production discussed in the Appalachian Gas Play atlas beginning between 1860 and 1880 and continuing on through the 1990's when the atlas was published never was a long term economic process.

[rockdoc123]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'E')ven the Chinese, that have huge shale deposits, aren't developing them, and cash is in no short supply for them.

[evilgenius]

It's only on an atomic, a chemical level, where you can count energy transfer without regard for filters of efficiency. Unless you do that you can't account for how one person on foot can carry something heavy a certain distance while another person on a bike can carry it the same distance, the heavy thing being carried that distance amounting to the work being done. Energy is simply a measure for amount of work that can be done. The two people don't have to put themselves out equally to accomplish the task. One, the person on foot, has to put their self out more.They only have all of the innate levers of their own body, which work to do a much wider variety than toward what is needed. The bike is more specialized, for just carrying. You might complicate the bike, to get over rough ground or increase the total capacity it can carry, but the basic thing will pretty much cover what you are about doing.

By the same token, it doesn't cost as much to keep an endeavor in business as to start one the same size from scratch, especially if there are a lot of problems to solve in that type of business. Hard definitions like using hours worked to compare economic viability can get you into trouble when the output from the hours is expected to be a 'eureka' moment. The number of hours required to discover how to do things the best way as to take the best advantage of what is available to you shouldn't come back into the calculation unless there is a whole new process transformation taking place, otherwise, no matter how long the benefit lasts, it is a sunk cost.

Any business running a similar process would arrive at the same place. Their costs may or may not equal yours. The only thing that matters is making enough going forward to cover operational costs. Those are, again, managed. I don't know that there is a hard tipping point with EROI. The biggest, and perhaps most important, thing to look out for would probably be debt. The efficiency of how a company runs its operations might show up in how much debt a company keeps.

[rockdoc123]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')he biggest, and perhaps most important, thing to look out for would probably be debt. The efficiency of how a company runs its operations might show up in how much debt a company keeps.