Wolfcamp 20 Billion BL Oil find shakes Tarsands


tay
#1
A vast field of shale rock in West Texas could yield 20 billion barrels of oil, making it the largest source of shale oil the U.S. Geological Survey has ever assessed, agency officials said.

The Wolfcamp Shale geologic formation in the Midland area also contains an estimated 16 trillion cubic feet of natural gas and 1.6 billion barrels of natural-gas liquids, the agency said in a release.

The discovery is nearly three times larger than the shale oil found in 2013 in the Bakken and Three Forks formations in the Dakotas and Montana, said Chris Schenk, a Denver-based research geologist for the agency.

The Wolfcamp Shale is part of the sweeping and energy-rich Permian Basin, which includes a series of basins and other geologic formations in West Texas and southern New Mexico. It’s one of the most productive oil and gas regions in the United States.

Ken Medlock, director of an energy-studies program at Rice University in Houston, said it seems “likely that we’re seeing the birth of a new Permian Basin.” The advent of horizontal drilling, hydraulic fracturing and other advancements will allow for the removal of shale oil at a volume that will make the basin “the dominant onshore platform for oil production,” he said.

Mr. Schenk said it’s been known for years that the region could yield new bountiful oil production, but it took the U.S. Geological Survey time to assess the Wolfcamp Shale and estimate the volume of that production.

“We think the potential is there for the future and it’s not going to be realized overnight,” he said.

The release issued by the Geological Survey on Tuesday hints at the resurgence the oil and gas industry likely will see in Texas in the coming years following a downturn during which energy prices tumbled and tens of thousands of jobs were lost.

Vast shale find in West Texas set to revive Permian Basin - The Globe and Mail
 
MHz
#2
If it starts raining a bit more try and plant some crops at the same time. That should take care of the energy needs for awhile. Is that in the form of gas or liquid oil??
Couldn't underground coal seams be heated up and the gases extracted and the 'ash' could be left in place underground.
Canada can forget about any pipelines going south so they better put a few in going west and east before the east is buying their gas from TexasCo
 
Cannuck
#3
What are "tar sands"?
 
tay
#4
Quote: Originally Posted by Cannuck View Post

What are "tar sands"?

You may be too young to recall what the Athabasca area was called before the Oil companies marketing teams pushed to soften the name to Oil sands but the Tar Sands were so called because the ground is like tar from where the Oil is separated.....


In Dunn County, North Dakota, there are around 2,000 square miles where the cost to produce Bakken shale is $15 a barrel and falling, according to Lynn Helms, head of the state's Department of Mineral Resources.

"Two years ago, we thought prices hovering around $50 to $60 meant that non-OPEC production growth would end. But U.S. production came back stronger."

In a recent earnings call, Hess Corp said it has improved its cost performance in the Bakken, with well costs falling and initial production rates rising, though it did not give more details.

"Everybody is drilling wells faster and completing them better," said Mike Breard, an energy stock analyst at Hodges Capital Management in Dallas. "It's not just a Bakken phenomenon."

"The success in Dunn County has been fantastic," said Ron Ness, president of the North Dakota Petroleum Council.

Dunn County's cost is about the same as Iran's, and a little higher than Iraq's. Dunn County produces about 200,000 barrels of oil a day, about a fifth of daily production in the state.

It is North Dakota's sweet spot because it boasts the lowest costs in the state, yet improved technology and drilling techniques have boosted efficiency for the whole state and the entire U.S. oil industry.

The breakeven cost per barrel, on average, to produce Bakken shale at the wellhead has fallen to $29.44 in 2016 from $59.03 in 2014, according to consultancy Rystad Energy. It added that in terms of wellhead prices, Bakken is the most competitive of major U.S. shale plays.

Wood Mackenzie said technology advances should further reduce breakeven points.

Landlocked Bakken producers still need a substantially higher international price than their breakeven cost to make a profit, since they pay more to transport crude to market than producers in most other U.S. regions.

International oil prices of $45 a barrel are enough for some Bakken producers to profit, Ness said, and $55 would encourage production growth.

Leaner and meaner: U.S. shale greater threat to OPEC after oil price war | Reuters


Last edited by tay; Nov 30th, 2016 at 05:20 AM..
 
tay
#5
In the last year alone, Big Oil has spent more than $25 billion US on deals in the Permian basin, an area of West Texas and New Mexico about 2½ times the size of New Brunswick. The land grab, dubbed "Permania," has put the venerable oilfields back at the centre of the petroleum universe, a spot that not long ago was happily occupied by Canada's oilsands.

That was before a Saudi-inspired price crash in 2014 told the world at large that something profound had changed in the oil industry. Optimism briefly returned when OPEC agreed last fall to trim output and prices began to rise but that recovery has stalled in the face of more U.S. production.

Now, Canada's scuffling oil industry is left to wonder when — and perhaps even if — the good times might return.

"You hear about Saudi Arabia and how it tried to break the American oil and gas producer and all it did was piss us off and we got more efficient," Lacy said during in an interview at his company's modest office space in a strip mall on the outskirts of Midland.

"We always know we're better than everybody, especially down here in Texas, when it comes to drilling for oil."

Next year, daily U.S. oil production will approach 10 million barrels, according to the Energy Information Administration, a feat made more remarkable given that in 2008, the country's output was at five million barrels a day and falling.

That ended when the oil bust hit in 1986. By the early 2000s, the Permian was an afterthought, its legendary oil reserves believed to be largely tapped.

In the last decade, though, breakthroughs in hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling have remade the basin's fortunes.

"A lot of the world is just finding out something that we who have lived out here a long time have always known, just the enormity of the resource we have here," said Clint Walker, general manager of Cudd Energy Services. "The geology is a gift from God."

At last count, more than 40 per cent of the active drilling rigs in the U.S. — some 349 or four times the number at work in Canada — are operating in West Texas.

West Texas oil boom threatens recovery in Canadian oilpatch - Business - CBC News
 
Tecumsehsbones
+1
#6
Quote: Originally Posted by Cannuck View Post

What are "tar sands"?

They're like tar pits, only less pitty and more sandy.

Good news is high-school football is back on in Odessa!
 
taxslave
+2
#7  Top Rated Post
And as usual Canadians were too busy navel gazing to developers the infrastructure necessary to capitalize our lead in oil sands production.
On the bright side many third world countries will no longer have so much money to spend on arms race.
 
coldstream
#8
Shale oil is much more expensive and environmentally intrusive to extract than that of tar sands. There's lots of markets for oil. Canada should focus on developing its refining capacity to fuel its own industrial and domestic needs and to export as finished petroleum product. It'd be cost competitive with anything the Americans could produce from shale.
Last edited by coldstream; May 15th, 2017 at 01:05 PM..
 
petros
#9
Kerogen (oil from shale) is excellent for making fuel but lacks paraffin to make plastics.
 
bill barilko
#10
Quote:

could yield 20 billion barrels of oil


Couldah....Wouldah....Shouldah
 
Tecumsehsbones
#11
Quote: Originally Posted by coldstream View Post

Shale oil is much more expensive and environmentally intrusive to extract than that of tar sands. There's lots of markets for oil. Canada should focus on developing its refining capacity to fuel its own industrial and domestic needs and to export as finished petroleum product. It'd be cost competitive with anything the Americans could produce from shale.

Who cares? It's west Texas. They can turn that place into a toxic, radioactive hell for all anybody'll care.
 
captain morgan
+1
#12
Quote: Originally Posted by petros View Post

Kerogen (oil from shale) is excellent for making fuel but lacks paraffin to make plastics.

Shale oil & gas are hugely capital intensive.... That and, while the IP rates are fantastic, the declines are so steep that it makes for an extremely tough economic argument to be made relative to conventional reserves
 
petros
#13
It needs heat. Lots of heat but don't forget you make plenty of heat and power(hydro for the simple) with from the source NG and extract a fuel almost precooked into diesel.

It's GREEN

Being Green means the most bang for the buck. Less energy in than extracted is crazy assed green by definition.
 
Bar Sinister
+1
#14
I'm guessing that most if not all of it will stay in the ground. Getting it out would be incredibly destructive to the water table, and more importantly, green energy development is proceeding so rapidly it will be unnecessary.
 
Retired_Can_Soldier
#15
Quote: Originally Posted by Bar Sinister View Post

I'm guessing that most if not all of it will stay in the ground. Getting it out would be incredibly destructive to the water table, and more importantly, green energy development is proceeding so rapidly it will be unnecessary.

Ah, an optimist. I thought they were all extinct.
 
Tecumsehsbones
#16
Quote: Originally Posted by Bar Sinister View Post

I'm guessing that most if not all of it will stay in the ground. Getting it out would be incredibly destructive to the water table, and more importantly, green energy development is proceeding so rapidly it will be unnecessary.

What part of "it's west Texas" are you not getting?
 
Curious Cdn
#17
I was in West Texas, just a few years ago. Think "Mars" ....
 
Tecumsehsbones
#18
Quote: Originally Posted by Curious Cdn View Post

I was in West Texas, just a few years ago. Think "Mars" ....

Bingo. How do you f*ck up Mars?
 
Bar Sinister
#19
Quote: Originally Posted by Retired_Can_Soldier View Post

Ah, an optimist. I thought they were all extinct.

No - a realist. Worldwide green energy is outstripping conventional energy sources for a variety of reasons:
1. Green energy frees users from the tyranny of unstable energy producers
2. People prefer clean air over dirty air
3. The cost of green energy continues to drop while its efficiency continues to increase
4. Green energy does not damage the environment

Far from being an optimistic I am actually quite surprised at the rapid growth of green energy. I never expected such a rapid increase in its use, the rapid improvement of green tech, or the innovative genius of people like Elon Musk.

Quote: Originally Posted by Tecumsehsbones View Post

What part of "it's west Texas" are you not getting?

I've been through West Texas. Most of it appears to be semi-desert, however there are vast areas of land under irrigation and huge areas are devoted to raising cattle. I don't think there is anyone more ornery than an angry Texas rancher or farmer.
 

Similar Threads

14
Salt overload shakes kids health
by VanIsle | Aug 24th, 2009