Peak Oil is You
Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)
Page added on December 16, 2013
EIA: U.S. shale oil production to peak in 2021 at 4.8 mln bpd
Production from shale formations in the United States, which has led to an unexpected reversal in long declining oil output, will peak at 4.8 million barrels per day (bpd) in 2021, according to an Energy Information Administration forecast issued on Monday.
This year is the bumper year for production out of the tightly packed shale rock. Output should rise by 1.2 million bpd, the highest annual jump, to 3.5 million bpd this year, according to tables in the EIA’s Annual Energy Outlook.
Production will exceed 4 million bpd next year and rise more gradually toward its peak. It will fall to 3.2 million bpd by 2040.
Last year, the EIA expected shale oil production to peak in 2020 at 2.8 million bpd with this year’s production at 2.3 million bpd.
11 Comments on "EIA: U.S. shale oil production to peak in 2021 at 4.8 mln bpd"
Ted on Tue, 17th Dec 2013 12:28 am
Why is the drumbeat of pushing the “we have massive amounts of oil in the U.S.” getting so loud this week?
BillT on Tue, 17th Dec 2013 1:09 am
2012 is forever in today’s world. Will we even be here?
rollin on Tue, 17th Dec 2013 3:43 am
Studies I have read give lower peak production values. However the faster and higher the peak, the steeper the slide down.
John_A on Tue, 17th Dec 2013 4:47 am
The EIA AEO is an annual report, and obviously there has been more and more shale oil production they need to report on. And others have noticed. While I’ll admit as quickly as anyone that increases are quite embarrassing for the “all decline, all the time” crowd, they will just have to buck up and wait for their next fear mongering opportunity.
Arthur on Tue, 17th Dec 2013 10:20 am
US Peak shale 2021 does not seem unrealistic. That’s only 8 years from now. Natural gas dominates the twenties.
Meanwhile Iowa placed the largest landbased windenergy order ever:
http://www.spiegel.de/wirtschaft/unternehmen/siemens-ergattert-weltgroessten-auftrag-fuer-land-windparks-in-den-usa-a-939317.html
1GW, 448 turbines. Way to go, Iowa!
rollin on Tue, 17th Dec 2013 11:05 am
It took about 10 years to bring tight oil up to 2.3 mmbpd. Since conventional is falling at about 4 mmbpd/annum, what is holding production level? Certainly not tight oil.
Why are the new discoveries not totaled and graphed each year? Are they secret or are the PO groups not interested anymore? The major topic appears to be economic now, not resource based. Are there two men behind the curtain, one Oil and the other Peak Oil?
I am getting annoyed at the constantly conflicting or , even worse, missing data relating to oil production, discoveries and reserves. This is not science, it’s more like an amateur magic show.
Terry Mcnamie on Tue, 17th Dec 2013 12:10 pm
Who cares? I was just watching something on BBC politics and one of the heads of some statistic bureau or another came out and said that living standards have been dropping since 2008, and even leading up to 2008 (from 2001 – 2008) living standards had effectively stayed the same. Anyone else think this has a remarkable correlation to the energy available to society? Of course in the session there was no mention of energy at all.
I think we all know living standards are going to drop exponentially whilst every government and business tries to make out like the “infinite growth” meme of the last few centuries is still our collective human narrative.
rockman on Tue, 17th Dec 2013 12:20 pm
Rollin – First, reserves: the vast majority of oil/NG resources on the planet are controlled by companies/countries that neither allow 3rd party audits of their numbers nor the distribution of raw data. As such you either believe what is published with no verification or reject those numbers. And, as I’m sure you’re aware, proven reserves as well as newly discovered volumes do not correlate to production rates. As such I don’t concern myself with any reserves numbers anyone puts out because they tell me nothing about the future dynamics of availability and pricing.
As far as predicting future production rates from shales as well as all other plays there are two factors that must be known for those projections to have any validity. The first should be obvious to everyone: price. If one believes we would have seen the increase in US oil production if oil had not risen above $40/bbl they should stop reading this post now because you’re beyond help. LOL. Second, even if one could accurately predict oil price 10 to 15 years out there’s a second controlling factor: the number of viable wells to drill at $X/bbl. Even for companies actively involved in developing shales and all other plays this is a nearly impossible task to do with any significant accuracy. Consider about 2 years ago a company drilled a Bakken test where they were sure there was a valid reason to expect commercial production. You probably expect me to tell you their Bakken well wasn’t that great. Not only was it not great the Bakken formation wasn’t even present in this area. It’s very easy to predict URR in such a situation: it’s ZERO. If a company can be that wrong just how accurate can anyone be about the reserves present at other locations at least until they are drilled and tested.
I can model future shale production better than probably most on this site and use those models to make projections. But they would be models whose validity would depend on the accuracy of my price projection years into the future as well as my geologic model predicting reserves where they have yet to be drilled. But I can’t offer any proof of my price prediction…all I can do is guess. And since I can’t map reserves accurately where there hasn’t been wells drilled all I can do is assume a certain number of viable locations based upon a price I can’t be sure is correct. It doesn’t matter if I make those assumptions or if the EIA makes the assumptions: in the end they are just guesses. Educated at best and no so educated at worse.
So where does that leave me? Since I have little faith in anyone accurately predicting oil price far into the future (including me) and I know of no one who can accurately map the reservoir limits of any play where wells haven’t been drilled none of those predictions mean much to me. And there’s an equally important question IMHO: why do those projections matter? Are companies going to drill more or fewer wells because of the EIA predictions? Are people going to conserve more or less because of the EIA projections? Is President Obama going to approve or never approve the Keystone XL border crossing permit based upon the EIA predictions? Is China going to cancel their big refinery JV with the KSA or decide to build two more because of the EIA predictions? Is New York going to lift its ban on frac’ng or reverse itself based upon the EIA predictions?
As best as I can tell the greatest functionality of the EIA prediction is for nerds like us here to debate its accuracy. Well, hell, I guess we have to talk about something here otherwise our lives would have little meaning. LOL.
shortonoil on Tue, 17th Dec 2013 3:35 pm
At least 30% (and maybe more) of what is produced out of the Bakken is “field condensate”. At least 70% of the Eagle Fords’ production is also “field condensate” “Field condensate” is basically pentane, with a little hexane, and butane included. Pentane has an API of 94.5, and a boiling point of 97 deg F. Because of the glut coming out of the Eagle Ford its price has fallen recently to $73/b. Pentane (C5H12) has only limited commercial use, and it can not be used to produce transportation fuels. It is a very poor energy provider with an energy content of 107,559 BTU/gal. 35.7 API crude has an energy content of 140,000 BTU/gal.
Why all the corporate media shrills are hyping the wonders of shale oil, probably has more to do with economics, and the Petro$ than “American energy independence”; American energy independence is certainly not going to come about from pentane production. One of the primary corner stones of US reserve currency status is the Petro$. World petroleum is bought and sold in US $s. This has recently come under attack, and what better way to perpetuate the Petro$ status illusion than to masquerade as the world’s largest petroleum producer. Of course, as has been shown many times before, only Americans are ignorant enough to buy into this propaganda. The rest of the world is probably already aware of the absurdity of the claims, and will act accordingly.
Of course the oil industry is more than happy to go along with the whole charade; Cushing and the Gulf Coast refineries are now jammed full of field condensate. Unfortunately, the EIA categorizes condensate in the same category as crude; which means that it can only be exported to Canada. If they can convince the American people (simpletons) that the nation is awash in oil, they can lobby (buy) Congress into lifting the band. They can then ship all that junk to China, who in their very clever way will find something to do with it!
GregT on Tue, 17th Dec 2013 6:58 pm
” They can then ship all that junk to China, who in their very clever way will find something to do with it!”
Maybe they’ll even figure out a way to put a man on the moon?
rollin on Tue, 17th Dec 2013 7:57 pm
Rockman is right, why give two hoots about oil production. Why should we think sustainable and less destructive methods of energy generation will be pursued. Most likely coal, natural gas and even methane hydrates will be pursued as oil production fades.
Ride the wave and when it crashes on the beach, hope for another one. That’s the philosophy of civilization. Party on.