Harvard has released a new study with a hyped up headline about America becoming a No. 1 oil producer due to fracking. But, in order to get that number one designation, they will need to drill 100,000 more wells in North Dakota and Texas because “Shale oil wells reach peak output almost immediately but quickly decline, so new wells are constantly needed.”
He noted that the Bakken-Three Forks region in North Dakota required 90 new wells per month to maintain production of 770,000 barrels per day
Now where have I heard that before? tap, tap, tap…thinking…
Oh yeah! This pretty lady , Deborah Rogers, has been saying that for several years now. HERE is her report.
?Leonardo Maugeri, a former oil industry executive from Italy” is the author of the report. He also said only the U.S. is capable of drilling with this “intensity.” And because this type of drilling is so intense they shouldn’t do it in populated areas.
Maugeri said this drilling intensity required for shale oil will limit production in densely populated areas, especially in Europe.
The report: Leonardo Maugeri. “The Shale Oil Boom: A U.S. Phenomenon” Discussion Paper 2013-05, Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard Kennedy School, June 2013.
P.S. Let me ass this from the media advisory because I love the wording.
Sustained Shale Oil Production Requires Dramatic Drilling Intensity: No other country in the world has ever experienced even a fraction of the overall U.S. drilling intensity for oil and gas. Shale oil wells exhibit their peak production rates during the first weeks of operation then dramatically decline. Oil companies intensively drill for new wells that offset the loss of production from older wells.
About Sharon Wilson
Sharon Wilson is considered a leading citizen expert on the impacts of shale oil and gas extraction. She is the go-to person whether it’s top EPA officials from D.C., national and international news networks, or residents facing the shock of eminent domain and the devastating environmental effects of natural gas development in their backyards.
- Web |
- More Posts(5121)
Seems they can’t drill fast enough for oil in the communities around Calgary, although it appears they’re running into a few “snags” … and are suing each other over it.
“Birch Lake Energy Inc. says that Bernum Petroleum Ltd. has filed a statement of claim against Birch Lake …
… The Company has taken immediate steps to vigorously defend this claim and preserve its rights in the joint venture assets including a detailed review of the completion operations on the initial well which led to the apparent collapse of the production casing string during the frac operation and the resulting loss of more than half the productive well bore.
The Corporation is also conducting a detailed review of the drilling operations of the second well during which intermediate casing was not able to be successfully run to depth drilled, resulting in drilling difficulties during the horizontal section and the eventual loss of the horizontal section after nearly reaching total depth.”
http://www.scandoil.com/moxie-bm2/financial/legal_Court/birch-lake-announces-claim-commenced-by-bernum-pet.shtml
The city of Calgary is slated to be frac’d soon, but the Alberta Energy Minister wants to give the city people their own special frac plan. I wonder if it will look anything like this:
“The Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission (COGCC), the state agency with dictatorial power over people and cities on all matters oil and gas, approved two new drilling proposals within the city, one for 67 horizontal wells on a pad, and another for 37 wells. A local company, Mineral Resources has been busy for a number of years buying the city out from underneath the residents, unbeknownst to most of them.”
http://ecowatch.com/2013/public-outrage-against-fracking-colorado/
Some people think they are safe because they live in a neighborhood. In Cleburne they bought up older neighborhoods, tore down the buildings and drilled within the setback distance. As long as there are hydrocarbons in the ground and as long as we depend on them for energy, no where is safe. EVER. Amen.
Buying up uncontaminated neighbourhoods? I’m sure that’s coming.
Currently here, the protocol appears to be – contaminate properties first – and then purchase them … seems they get a better deal that way. Hallelujah.
Good catch.
Goes directly to the completely parallel issues for shale gas of:
(a) Drilling density (really setback from things that are precious to us like water and air and so on). That is if/as shale gas drilling moves into higher population density areas (i.e., not extremely rural), problems, at least reported problems, increase dramatically. This “density issue has not, as far as I can tell, been taken at all seriously by regulatory bodies. Thus the rather dramatic increase in communities that are banning shale gas development.
(b) Decline rates: both oil shale and shale gas wells decline rapidly in output, compared to “conventional” wells; and so the drilling MUST be nearly continuous to maintain production levels. Again regulators and communities do not seem to understand this – thinking, I suppose of “daddy’s well.”
(c) Recovery rates: current technology appears to leave about 90+% in the ground. Is this a wise use of a somewhat limited resource. In NY, there is a policy mandate not to waste natural resources. This is entirely neglected by regulators when flaring and venting takes place and when the substances are left in the ground with no likely technology to harvest them.
The drillers answer being pretty much: “we’ll we follow all the rules and, hey, we have always done it this way, and anyway we know best”, isnt very comforting.
Stanley R Scobie, Senior Fellow, PSE Healthy Energy, New York.
In Texas waste means leaving it in the ground, not spilling and spewing it all over the place.