|
|
Post by thirsty on Oct 23, 2011 20:53:36 GMT -5
I don't know about you, but this chart pretty much says it all. Three decade high in rotary rigs drilling for oil, six handle on imports, and all I hear is a slow sucking sound....   |
|
|
|
Post by looter on Oct 24, 2011 8:06:18 GMT -5
Nice chart! Isn't it baffling how all ya hear is that we need to "drill baby drill" when that's precisely what we are doing? I've heard folks in the Bakken in the same sentence brag about the oil boom up there and conversely curse the folks who are not allowing drilling. I'm like "huh"?
A guy should post the EIA chart for USA oil production over the same period and the Baker Hughes link to where in the world most of the drilling rigs are located. Will do so later......
|
|
|
|
Post by thirsty on Oct 24, 2011 12:57:25 GMT -5
Ya know, I gotta admit there is a good probability that we'd be eating a big fat double McCrowburger right now of it wasn't for that Libyan production missing since February. You add 1.6 million barrels to present production and you would have yourself a new all time high. I think is something the Peakists have to be honest with at this moment in time, myself included. There is a real possibility that we see an extended plateau here, I'm ok with that, it would present myself with opportunity to better prepare for the (possible) dystopic future.
In other news, wti cleared 90 dollars and narrowed the spread to brent. I reckon wti is going to have to increase in price in order to prevent a repeat of last weeks 'six' handle.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave-ECIA on Oct 24, 2011 13:27:10 GMT -5
God dammit Looter. I have an intelligent response formed, then I look at your profile pic and forget everything but my name......
Somebody knows something. Wanna bet the next administration makes a push for North American oil production and less dependence on the middle east.
Question: is most of the oil from the north slope still going to Asia???
|
|
|
|
Post by looter on Oct 24, 2011 19:01:07 GMT -5
Below is Thirsty's USA Rig Count Chart; Now compare the Rig Count above to USA oil production over that same period below;  Here's the part you don't hear when comparing time periods and drilling rig counts, today's drilling rigs = today's combines. There is NO comparison in productivity. The time lapse between intital Spud Date and first showing has dropped 4-fold even though we are drilling deeper than ever before. A lot of the productivity gain/rig has occured in the past 5 years. That's why Thirsty's chart is a bit misleading.... today's rediculously high rig count is like having 5 times more combines than just ten years ago, while comparing today's combine to an 8820 JD. Look at 1985 oil production. Now look at how many crappy old slow-ass rigs it took to get that 9 mbpd.... This is the TRUE picture, and I've never heard anyone anywhere look at it this way. |
|
|
|
Post by Grainbelt on Oct 24, 2011 19:12:15 GMT -5
What would the average rig size be today vs 5-10 years ago?
|
|
|
|
Post by looter on Oct 24, 2011 19:42:29 GMT -5
Wanna bet the next administration makes a push for North American oil production and less dependence on the middle east. How so? By jacking up the drilling count even more? Question: is most of the oil from the north slope still going to Asia??? Here is some data from the EIA on that one; www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=35&t=6The USA hasn't exported a lot of crude oil, but we do export a lot of products. (While maintaining status as a net importer of both oil and products to date) Here is a nifty page that shows where we all export to. Crazy to think we actually export petro to Saudi Arabia pretty regularly; www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/pet_move_expc_a_EP00_EEX_mbbl_m.htm |
|
|
|
Post by thirsty on Oct 24, 2011 20:05:51 GMT -5
What would the average rig size be today vs 5-10 years ago? Not much difference, but take it back to right before 1985 and there is no comparison. If I recall correctly 80-90% of the rigs drilling for oil in the late 70's, early 80's were service rigs, or singles. Most service rigs today are good for drilling water wells, seismic bore holes and/or shallow gas plays. I reckon today most oil is drilled for with directional/slants and HP power triples at 10 million a pop. It would be like comparing a 1979 F-150 Ford Explorer camper special to a 2011 F-450 Ford Lariat Diesel Dually.... |
|
|
|
Post by looter on Oct 24, 2011 20:43:20 GMT -5
Ya know, I gotta admit there is a good probability that we'd be eating a big fat double McCrowburger right now of it wasn't for that Libyan production missing since February. You add 1.6 million barrels to present production and you would have yourself a new all time high. I think is something the Peakists have to be honest with at this moment in time, myself included. There is a real possibility that we see an extended plateau here, I'm ok with that, it would present myself with opportunity to better prepare for the (possible) dystopic future. In other news, wti cleared 90 dollars and narrowed the spread to brent. I reckon wti is going to have to increase in price in order to prevent a repeat of last weeks 'six' handle. Ya, we were cruising for a bruising before the Libya mess bailed our asses out at the start of the year. As you point out, the 2005 record was gonna fall, and those of us cultist 2005 nut-huggers (all two of us) would live life like a kicker who shanked a feild goal in OT in the Super Bowl. Here's the thing though, I don't see anybody talk about the 2005 record except us guys. Seriously, who brings it up? Beside's, it's not like 2005 (or any other year ever) was without it's production hiccups. Take away Hurricanes Katrina and Rita and you add another 1.2 mbpd to global 2005 figures for a quarter. Take away the 2005 Chavez's confiscation of private oil assets and you add some serious barrels to the 2005 figure. Nigeria pipeline bombings wrecked more havoc on 2005's would-be record. That "lost production" we inadvertantly preserved for today. While I'm ranting, let's consider what those 1.6 mbpd of missing production would have done to the 2011 price? My guess is it would have depressed investment enough to shave some barrels off the high cost producers, maybe delay some mega-projects, you know the drill. Next year, we will gain much of the Libya production, and we will lose some from who knows where for who knows why. If the 2005 record falls in 2012, nobody will notice except you and me 'migo. My Grandpa's favorite quote comes to mind, "If the dog wouldn't have stopped to take a shit, it would have caught the rabbit". |
|
|
|
Post by Grainbelt on Oct 24, 2011 21:15:33 GMT -5
How much of the '05 record holding has to do with the fact that many producers (I'm thinking of the likes of Kuwait) have decided one of the most profitable investments the last 10 years or so has been to have proven reserves sitting in the ground?
|
|
|
|
Post by thirsty on Oct 24, 2011 21:28:55 GMT -5
Ya know, I gotta admit there is a good probability that we'd be eating a big fat double McCrowburger right now of it wasn't for that Libyan production missing since February. You add 1.6 million barrels to present production and you would have yourself a new all time high. I think is something the Peakists have to be honest with at this moment in time, myself included. There is a real possibility that we see an extended plateau here, I'm ok with that, it would present myself with opportunity to better prepare for the (possible) dystopic future. In other news, wti cleared 90 dollars and narrowed the spread to brent. I reckon wti is going to have to increase in price in order to prevent a repeat of last weeks 'six' handle. Ya, we were cruising for a bruising before the Libya mess bailed our asses out at the start of the year. As you point out, the 2005 record was gonna fall, and those of us cultist 2005 nut-huggers (all two of us) would live life like a kicker who shanked a feild goal in OT in the Super Bowl. Here's the thing though, I don't see anybody talk about the 2005 record except us guys. Seriously, who brings it up? Beside's, it's not like 2005 (or any other year ever) was without it's production hiccups. Take away Hurricanes Katrina and Rita and you add another 1.2 mbpd to global 2005 figures for a quarter. Take away the 2005 Chavez's confiscation of private oil assets and you add some serious barrels to the 2005 figure. Nigeria pipeline bombings wrecked more havoc on 2005's would-be record. That "lost production" we inadvertantly preserved for today. While I'm ranting, let's consider what those 1.6 mbpd of missing production would have done to the 2011 price? My guess is it would have depressed investment enough to shave some barrels off the high cost producers, maybe delay some mega-projects, you know the drill. Next year, we will gain much of the Libya production, and we will lose some from who knows where for who knows why. If the 2005 record falls in 2012, nobody will notice except you and me 'migo. My Grandpa's favorite quote comes to mind, "If the dog wouldn't have stopped to take a shit, it would have caught the rabbit". Interesting. My thinking is that Saudi Arabia is making up a big part of the difference in regards to that missing Libyan oil. Thats all in good, but you know, and I know, that actively pumping reservoirs above a certain limit can be long term damaging, especially with the amount of water injections they have already done to date. One has to wonder when the collapse comes, there once was an idea that Saudi could easily pump out 12 million barrels a day.... |
|
|
|
Post by looter on Oct 24, 2011 21:57:32 GMT -5
What would the average rig size be today vs 5-10 years ago? Not much difference, but take it back to right before 1985 and there is no comparison. If I recall correctly 80-90% of the rigs drilling for oil in the late 70's, early 80's were service rigs, or singles. Most service rigs today are good for drilling water wells, seismic bore holes and/or shallow gas plays. I reckon today most oil is drilled for with directional/slants and HP power triples at 10 million a pop. It would be like comparing a 1979 F-150 Ford Explorer camper special to a 2011 F-450 Ford Lariat Diesel Dually.... It seems like the time/days required to drill a well have really fallen in just the past few years? Guys in the Bakken claim they are doing in a month what used to take several, but perhaps that isn't the case everywhere? Here's a site that talks about drilling time in the Bakken; Record rig activity has been increasing rapidly thanks to high oil prices and the technology improvements in drilling. Currently it takes only 25 days to drill a well compared to 65 days in 2008. www.oilslick.com/commentary/?id=2113&type=1Here's some stuff on using latest generation of Rotary Steering Systems to cut drill time 63%; www.slb.com/resources/case_studies/drilling/rosneft_sakhalinmorneftegaz_sakhalin.aspxI did a google search on "RSS cut drilling time" and got a ton of eye-popping info. Some of it is new tech, and a lot of it is expertise, but it's just shocking that reducing drilling time + increase drill count = less production. 2005's record is a lot more impressive when you consider how much the bull market in oil since 2005 has descreased drilling time.... |
|
|
|
Post by looter on Oct 24, 2011 22:16:23 GMT -5
How much of the '05 record holding has to do with the fact that many producers (I'm thinking of the likes of Kuwait) have decided one of the most profitable investments the last 10 years or so has been to have proven reserves sitting in the ground? It's a HUGe factor GB. Hoarding by smart exporters is why it's impossible to overstate what a big deal the North Sea was. It wasn't just its production that changed the game. It completely nutered OPEC. You had Reagan/Thatcher pushing econ growth to finance their wild spending, and over-producing oil was the way to do it. By exceeding the MER, they bankrupted USSR and ended OPEC hoarding. Once the free world had spare capacity, it made absolutely no sense to hoard. Kuwait became like a single farmer in the wheat market. Today, there is no spare capacity. There is ZERO threat of a bull market leading to increased production elsewhere. Unless energy-free lasers start boring wells, it makes more sense to hoard everyday. Here is a cool site on some guys trying to use laser to drill for oil; www.ne.anl.gov/facilities/lal/laser_drilling.htmlA guy can't take for granted that BAU is a corpse, so its good to keep an eye out for threats of it's resurgence. It's still important to watch for surges in oil flows. The North Sea caught Ag off guard once, no sense letting such a travesty happen again... |
|
|
|
Post by looter on Oct 24, 2011 22:20:41 GMT -5
Ya, we were cruising for a bruising before the Libya mess bailed our asses out at the start of the year. As you point out, the 2005 record was gonna fall, and those of us cultist 2005 nut-huggers (all two of us) would live life like a kicker who shanked a feild goal in OT in the Super Bowl. Here's the thing though, I don't see anybody talk about the 2005 record except us guys. Seriously, who brings it up? Beside's, it's not like 2005 (or any other year ever) was without it's production hiccups. Take away Hurricanes Katrina and Rita and you add another 1.2 mbpd to global 2005 figures for a quarter. Take away the 2005 Chavez's confiscation of private oil assets and you add some serious barrels to the 2005 figure. Nigeria pipeline bombings wrecked more havoc on 2005's would-be record. That "lost production" we inadvertantly preserved for today. While I'm ranting, let's consider what those 1.6 mbpd of missing production would have done to the 2011 price? My guess is it would have depressed investment enough to shave some barrels off the high cost producers, maybe delay some mega-projects, you know the drill. Next year, we will gain much of the Libya production, and we will lose some from who knows where for who knows why. If the 2005 record falls in 2012, nobody will notice except you and me 'migo. My Grandpa's favorite quote comes to mind, "If the dog wouldn't have stopped to take a shit, it would have caught the rabbit". Interesting. My thinking is that Saudi Arabia is making up a big part of the difference in regards to that missing Libyan oil. Thats all in good, but you know, and I know, that actively pumping reservoirs above a certain limit can be long term damaging, especially with the amount of water injections they have already done to date. One has to wonder when the collapse comes, there once was an idea that Saudi could easily pump out 12 million barrels a day.... 12 mbpd indeed! They are almost certainly doing irreversible harm to their reservoir psi by producing too fast to make up for the loss of Libya. For a good read on oilfield damage from fast production, a person could google the term "Maximum Efficient Rate". |
|
|
|
Post by thirsty on Oct 24, 2011 22:22:16 GMT -5
I reckon before its all over a good quarter of the worlds population and a good third of global capital will be tied up in the search for BAU juice in some way or another.....
|
|
