Following on from yesterday's Eagle Ford discussion, this graph from The Energy Policy Research Foundation shows the actual contribution expected from only the biggest  shale oil plays (Bakken, Eagle Ford, Niobrara and Permian Basin).

Unconventional oil

These four show an extra 2 million barrels a day by end of 2017.  I hate to be the bearer of bad news,  but I think it's wrong. As we see from the Eagle Ford example,  production can ramp up quicker and faster than these impressive, yet still relatively mild slopes show.

Secondly, this doesn't incude  the Utica (which CHK call stronger than the Eagle Ford) or any of the California oil shale basins.

Thirdly, the story of shale is that projections are meaningless. What would predictions have looked like one or two years ago based for example? What if there are more shales yet to emerge but just as unknown as the Eagle Ford was only two or three years ago? Moving back to gas, here is a chastening example comparing projections of gas imports with what actually happened:

lng import_prediction

Forecasters won't be humble of course. They will sell their models to anyone who wants to enter the gipsy's tent. The difference between charts like these and the little Spanish language books of lucky lottery numbers that you can buy in the NYC subway is that the ones underground are far cheaper and just as likely to be right.

Leave your comments

Post comment as a guest

0 / 3000 Character restriction
Your text should be less than 3000 characters
  • No comments found