Crashing oil prices decimate Texas boomtowns

tay

Hall of Fame Member
May 20, 2012
11,548
0
36
Notley effect reaches far......


Back when the oil money flowed, the Location 581 Saloon would be crammed with pipefitters, welders, derrickhands, truck drivers and all sorts of oilfield workers – as many as 35 of them a night together shelling out more than $2,000 for drinks and good times.

These days, the bar in this South Texas city 50 miles southwest of San Antonio sits mostly empty, except for a few locals. On a recent early evening, three clients sat at the bar. Only two were drinking.

“It’s just like a ghost town again,” said Troy Reeves, the bar’s owner.

Pearsall, like other towns that sit atop of the Eagle Ford Shale and soared during the recent oil boom, has had a harrowing crash back to Earth, as the price of crude has plummeted.

Crude’s free fall has rattled world markets, erased billions of dollars in stocks worldwide and led to thousands of layoffs in the oil and gas sector. But the steady march of declining prices – with no end in sight – and recent news that lifting of sanctions on Iran could deliver even more oil to the market has nudged the outlook in South Texas from depressed to near desperate.

Those who put their money in hotels and RV parks to house the deluge of oilfield workers that came during the boom are losing money fast as those workers were let go, Philips said. “Those people are sweating bullets right now,” he said. “There’s a tremendous amount of bankruptcies about to take place.”

Ironically, Eagle Ford Shale’s success and the technology used to unlock millions of barrels of oil stuck in previously unreachable crevices contributed to the oil glut and low prices. Other factors include China’s faltering economy, Saudi Arabia’s unwillingness to scale back its own production and overall weaker global demand.

Texas has experienced oil busts before, most memorably in the mid-1980s, when crude fell to under $10 a barrel and bankrupted towns across the state. This one feels similar to that bust in its length and global impact, said Scott Tinker, director of the Bureau of Economic Geology at University of Texas at Austin.

“This one is deeper and longer than the other ones in 1999, 2007, 2009,” he said. “And we haven’t seen signs of the bottom yet.”

more

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2016/01/20/texas-oil-prices-boomtowns-crash/79086400/
 

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,778
454
83
Let me know when Saskatchewan has more people living there than Montreal.

Until then, it doesn't matter.
 

captain morgan

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 28, 2009
28,429
146
63
A Mouse Once Bit My Sister
That makes it even more unbelievable, doesn't it?

An province with a fraction of the population of Montreal still can generate a GDP $86 Billion while the biggest city in Que does $120 B.

That equates to $75k per person in Sask and a paltry 31k for the greater Montreal area.

What a sad little number

Montreal might want to take a page from Sask in terms of how to succeed.
 

DaSleeper

Trolling Hypocrites
May 27, 2007
33,676
1,665
113
Northern Ontario,
So number of people occupying the area is the criteria for success?
Don't mind him too much...
Just the usual post from.....
.........................
who revels in other peoples' problems.............
 

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,778
454
83
So number of people occupying the area is the criteria for success?

The more you have, the more difficult the job.

An impressive economy is one that can benefit the most and I don't see anyone excited to move Sasquatchewan any time soon.
 

Bar Sinister

Executive Branch Member
Jan 17, 2010
8,252
19
38
Edmonton
That makes it even more unbelievable, doesn't it?

An province with a fraction of the population of Montreal still can generate a GDP $86 Billion while the biggest city in Que does $120 B.

That equates to $75k per person in Sask and a paltry 31k for the greater Montreal area.

What a sad little number

Montreal might want to take a page from Sask in terms of how to succeed.

Fortunately GDP in Canada is not measured by comparing city to city. Provincially Quebec had a GDP of $370 billion in 2014 compared to Saskatchewan's $83 billion. Considering that a big chunk of Saskatchewan's GDP was based on oil I wonder how it compares now? Of course, the big boy among Canadian provinces was Ontario with a GDP of $720 billion, which was larger than the next two provinces combines.
 

B00Mer

Keep Calm and Carry On
Sep 6, 2008
44,800
7,297
113
Rent Free in Your Head
www.getafteritmedia.com
Fortunately GDP in Canada is not measured by comparing city to city. Provincially Quebec had a GDP of $370 billion in 2014 compared to Saskatchewan's $83 billion. Considering that a big chunk of Saskatchewan's GDP was based on oil I wonder how it compares now? Of course, the big boy among Canadian provinces was Ontario with a GDP of $720 billion, which was larger than the next two provinces combines.

I think that's because of Bill 101. Most smart companies moved to Toronto when Quebec brought in Language Laws, basically killing it's own future to secure their "culture."
 

tay

Hall of Fame Member
May 20, 2012
11,548
0
36
The number of working US oil rigs has dropped 71 per cent from its peak in October 2014, to its lowest level in almost six years.

The slowdown in activity is expected to contribute to a decline in US oil production over the coming months.

RT Dukes of Wood Mackenzie, a consultancy, said the sharp drop was a sign that the slowdown in the rig count was “not over yet”.

Several US oil producers have said in recent weeks that they expect their output to decline this year, after announcing another round of capital spending cuts as they attempt to conserve cash.

Continental said its planned spending would be 66 per cent lower this year than last. It expected its oil and gas output to drop by 5-9 per cent in 2016, ending the year on a declining trend.

ConocoPhillips on Thursday cut its planned spending by a further 17 per cent from the plans it set out in December. It abandoned its earlier projection that its output would rise by 1-3 per cent this year, and now expects unchanged production.

Ryan Lance, Conoco’s chief executive, told analysts the company could hold production flat and keep paying its dividend “for many years” with internationally traded Brent crude at $45 per barrel, about $11 above its current level.

Wood Mackenzie on Friday published an analysis showing that although about 3.4m b/d of production worldwide was losing money with Brent at $35 per barrel, most of it was not being shut down.

About 96.5 per cent of global oil production can cover its operating costs with Brent crude at $35 per barrel, including most of the US shale industry, but that does not include the cost of drilling and completing new wells. Analysts say very few US shale wells can cover their full costs with oil at $30.

As production from existing wells declines, and fewer new wells are brought into production, US oil output is expected to decline.

Mr Dukes said production from countries not in OPEC was likely to drop this year, and the US would contribute a “supermajority” of that decline.

Fall in number of oil rigs drilling in US speeds up - FT.com
 

Angstrom

Hall of Fame Member
May 8, 2011
10,659
0
36
Canada needs to go back to providing goods for the United States of America. Plain and simple.
 

gerryh

Time Out
Nov 21, 2004
25,756
295
83
The number of working US oil rigs has dropped 71 per cent from its peak in October 2014, to its lowest level in almost six years.

The slowdown in activity is expected to contribute to a decline in US oil production over the coming months.

RT Dukes of Wood Mackenzie, a consultancy, said the sharp drop was a sign that the slowdown in the rig count was “not over yet”.

Several US oil producers have said in recent weeks that they expect their output to decline this year, after announcing another round of capital spending cuts as they attempt to conserve cash.

Continental said its planned spending would be 66 per cent lower this year than last. It expected its oil and gas output to drop by 5-9 per cent in 2016, ending the year on a declining trend.

ConocoPhillips on Thursday cut its planned spending by a further 17 per cent from the plans it set out in December. It abandoned its earlier projection that its output would rise by 1-3 per cent this year, and now expects unchanged production.

Ryan Lance, Conoco’s chief executive, told analysts the company could hold production flat and keep paying its dividend “for many years” with internationally traded Brent crude at $45 per barrel, about $11 above its current level.

Wood Mackenzie on Friday published an analysis showing that although about 3.4m b/d of production worldwide was losing money with Brent at $35 per barrel, most of it was not being shut down.

About 96.5 per cent of global oil production can cover its operating costs with Brent crude at $35 per barrel, including most of the US shale industry, but that does not include the cost of drilling and completing new wells. Analysts say very few US shale wells can cover their full costs with oil at $30.

As production from existing wells declines, and fewer new wells are brought into production, US oil output is expected to decline.

Mr Dukes said production from countries not in OPEC was likely to drop this year, and the US would contribute a “supermajority” of that decline.

Fall in number of oil rigs drilling in US speeds up - FT.com


Is Notely and Trudeau in Texas too?
 

tay

Hall of Fame Member
May 20, 2012
11,548
0
36
Why would a bulk importer lower domestic production? Somebody is out to lunch or full of sh-t.
If you mean the USA the article states that the cost of establishing new wells is prohibitive at $30.00 prices. They will pump Oil out of already established wells which the initial costs were covered when the price was higher.