As I noted last week, the FOE, Caroline Lucas and Greenpeace have a habit of holding up a Deutsche Bank report from 2011 as proof  UK and European shale gas will be far off and inconsequential on price. Even Tim Yeo, who should know better, mentioned the uncertainty of European shale this morning on Radio 4 Today. 

We should ask ourselves: How truly informed can we be today if we depend on a report over a year old? Especially when the author Michael Hsueh told me on Friday:

 Granted there have been some new developments which would warrant a review

This from a Barclays Capital Commodities Research 2013 European Energy Matters report by Trevor Sikorski report is dated yesterday. Not public domain by the way, but this is the full section on the report referred to by Bloomberg today. Will Caroline and the Greenpeace gang ignore this one just as much as they ignored the DECC report on shale reserves? They will, of course. But they need to ask can they keep on doing so?:

Recent comments

  • Roger

    What does it matter if prices don’t fall, its better to be producing 25BCM/yr at 60p a therm contributing to the UK than importing 25BCM/yr at 60p a therm contributing to Qatar. They are already richer than the UK they don’t need more.<br /><br />To add my own 2 pence , I don’t think pro...
    0 Like
  • Draughtsman

    All very clever people no doubt, but why not just stop trying to make predictions from inspired guesswork and let Cuadrilla and the other companies involved get on with it and find out for sure. I have been in utility engineering all of my working life and the old joke amongst us lot is that once th...
    0 Like
View other comments

The subject of the size of the amounts of UK shale gas been open to much speculation and misunderstanding right from the start. Key opponents such as Damian Carrington of the Guardian have derided Cuadrilla's estimates from the very start and they have been consistent in insisting that we don't even have any gas, so why bother looking and full speed ahead, although whether that would be under wind, nuclear or coal isn't specified. The main thing is we don't have any gas anyway. Andrew Rawnsley famously told us the weekend previous: 

Then there is the huge hole at the heart of the frack-heads' dream. No one even knows yet how much shale gas can be profitably extracted. Estimates of the exploitable reserves vary wildly.

The explanation is geology. Shales in Europe are generally thinner and deeper, and therefore much more expensive to tap, than those that have been successfully exploited in the United States. And Britain looks likely to be one of the less promising prospects in Europe because its shales are typically among the thinnest.

The Daily Telegraph yesterday asked the question how much gas do we actually have without getting even close to providing an answer.The discussion is complicated by basic misunderstandings of the reserve and resource figures.This definition is from the Society of Petroleum Engineers may help

Unlike the inventory of a manufacturing company, reserves are physically located in reservoirs deep underground and cannot be visually inspected or counted, but rather are estimates based on the evaluation of data that provides evidence of the amount of oil and gas present. There is no definitive answer until the end of a reservoir's producing life. All reserve estimates involve some degree of uncertainty. The estimation of reserves volumes is generally performed by highly-skilled individuals who use their experience and professional judgment in the calculation of those volumes. 
 
Reserves represent that part of resources which are commercially recoverable and have been justified for development.
 
Meanwhile, this is the introduction to a presentation DECC made at Prospex in London last week. It hasn't  yet been published on the DECC site, but is in the public domain and I've placed the full report in the NHA Library to your right.

Recent comments

  • andagain

    [QUOTE]Therefore for each hole into the ground they could potentially fracture 100x as much rock and hence produce 100x as much gas for the same cost assuming the shales bare a similar quantity of gas per volume of rock.[/QUOTE]<br /><br />Would that imply 100x the seismic activity? Reme...
    0 Like
  • Roger

    Don’t forget that the size of the fractures can be varied.<br /><br />Just because the bowland is 20x as thick it does not mean that you necessarily need to drill and frack 20 layers. I suppose it is an option but far more likely they will just fracture the shale deeper.<br /><b...
    0 Like
  • One thing, the Horn River formation in British Columbia is also brittle shale, though much thinner than the Bowland is claimed to be. They put the resources of gas in place at 250 trillion cubic feet, of which they expect 20% to be recoverable. Could the Bowland be similer?
    0 Like
View other comments

Here's more great news on shale gas in Europe that  shouldn't get lost in the shuffle surrounding the UK decision on fracking.  Germany, a country with the largest Green Party in Europe has been a bit of a mystery in European shale. We saw an absolutely massive resource estimate earlier this year which was notably ignored even within Germany itself.

Unconventional gas reserves inGermany amount to trillions of cubic metres (cbm) and can be safely exploited if the right rules are in place, federal authorities said on Monday with the release of the first findings of an ongoing long-term study.

The Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources (BGR) said between 0.7 trillion and 2.3 trillion cbm of the gas could be technically extracted.

This is calculated as a 10 percent extraction rate they believe is achievable from the 6.8 trillion-22.6 trillion cbm of shale gas they have located in the country.

"Germany has a significant shale gas potential," the Hanover-based authority said in a press statement.

These are truly mind boggling figures, although anyone familiar with Northern Germany potential won't be too surprised. But this news, equivalent to a huge gas field in Europe's largest economy was met with a collossal ho hum by those who said that we would never get it out with German Greens. How does this fit in that narrative? A narrative of course important to the UK since allegedly all our gas will get exported to Europe and we won't reap the benefit according to well known energy economist Caroline Lucas. 

Chancellor Angela Merkel’s government won votes that will permit fracking to continue in Germany, saying the technique may help the country’s energy supply security.

Recent comments

  • The google translator on German is a wonder to behold. it seems they have 13 years supply on the 10% recovery estimate. A more likely 20% would give them 26 years. I wonder if it is true that the types of geology which produce coal also contain shale gas? They seem to be found in the same places....
    0 Like
View other comments

Right now is as good a time as any to understand some issues about both the UK electricity generation mix and a realistic assessment of the chances of both renewables and gas. In fact 1800 on December 12 is a really good time. Demand is likely to be one of the highest of the year. It's the perfect electrical storm:

It's a Tuesday - always a good demand day, better than the weekend or Friday

It's cold: It's not hit 0 degrees at Heathrow or most of England all day. It's also very foggy and we'll not get much solar gain (sunshine to most people) pouring through several millions windows.

While 85% of people use gas for central heating,  even that uses up more energy to run compressors and heat pumps. People with badly insulated homes will use electric heaters in cold spots

It's dark.That sounds obvious, but lighting use at it's annual peak at about 17 to 18. Everyone's still in the office, stores are open late, restaurants are at their peak Christmas party season and of course all those decorations. Throw in that demand with the domestic peak time. Dinner's cooking the TV's on, the lights are on, people come home and put the heat on etc etc.

Meanwhile the food processing industry is at it's peak.

Recent comments

  • John Law

    The obvious green solution , if you believe AGW ( I am sceptical personally), is to go to nuclear baseload with some increase in CCGT, certainly needed in the shorter term. I think though that the bonus (I think Nick will be right on the size of the bounty) should be mainly used to supply home heati...
    0 Like
  • Riddi of England

    I think I sense some hard left progressives ... watermelons even... starting to grow up. We all do eventually thankfully !
    0 Like
  • Nick,<br />Thanks for another excellent post.<br />It is an inditement of our media that such common sense realism is not getting any airtime.<br />That graphic of the generation balance should be the backdrop to every TV feature on energy - brilliant.
    0 Like
View other comments