<Anyone for insurance?The Oil DrumNational Hurricane Center and the Likelihood of Hurricanes>

48 comments on Breaking news: Mexico finds the next Cantarell?

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

Leanan on March 14, 2006 - 7:07pm Permalink | Subthread | Comments top
FWIW, we discussed this a bit previously, when the news first broke.
0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
westexas on March 14, 2006 - 7:50pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
I had three points on the other thread:  (1)  it's going to take a long time to get the oil to markets; (2)  based on Khebab's work, Mexico is right at about the 50% mark of Qt (at least 50% of current reserves), so in all likelihood, Mexico will never equal its peak production (consumption is also growing fast) and (3)  the world uses--from nuclear + fossil fuel sources--the energy equivalent of one Gb of oil every five days.
0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Stuart Staniford on March 14, 2006 - 10:06pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
This new find suggests to me that the discovery curve for Mexico is very immature. If they only just found the Queen or King, that suggests a lot more nobles are still out there. That raises the specter that the Hubbert linearization for Mexico will fail (for similar reasons to the early misleading linear region in the UK P/Q plot).

Our insider (who we trust) told us "According to my sources at Diamond, it is supposed to be nearly as big as Cantarell, but is a lot heavier".

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Dave Cohen on March 14, 2006 - 10:19pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Hmmm.... We'll see. And it's a lot deeper and harder to produce too, if all this is true. I wouldn't be jumping to any conclusions yet but I'd like more detail about what the trusted "insider" actually said.
0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Stuart Staniford on March 14, 2006 - 10:35pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
The quote I gave you is about it. I agree that the omens point away from very near term production of this new find.
0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
jkissing on March 15, 2006 - 9:07pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
They can't form alliances to develop oil without changing their constitution, which won't happen. They can contract to drillers, but not many deep rigs available, and anyway pemex is starved of funds, both because the state takes it plus vast internal pemex corruption and/or overmanning. My guess is 2015-2020, if then, and assuming the find is real. Mexico output (and, more importantly, exports) will be down substantially by then - maybe if they become an importer they will have the impetus to change their constitution.
0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Leanan on March 15, 2006 - 7:52am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
This new find suggests to me that the discovery curve for Mexico is very immature.

That was my thought, too.  Cornucopians often claim Mexico has barely begun to explore deepwater oil, because they don't have the expertise.  Maybe they're right.

OTOH, it seems like a lot of these (potentially) "huge discoveries" don't pan out.  And Mexico has a record of exaggerating their finds.  This may not be a king or queen at all.  Or even a noble.  

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Whitehall on March 15, 2006 - 11:25am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
I had the same thoughts about using Simmons' classification.  However, why do we apply a political boundary to Mexico's discoveries and not a geological one?

While not a geologist, I'd guess that the arc of the Gulf of Mexico is the correct vision of a province so that Spindletop in coastal Texas is the King and Canteralle and this new ones are queens and nobles.  It doesn't matter whether they have to be accessed from sea or shore.

What are the biggest fields discovered in Louisiana, Alabama, and Florida?  

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
wkwillis on March 15, 2006 - 11:49am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Spindletop in Texas was not a particularly big field. Those were East Texas and Hugoton. Cantarell was pretty big, too.
0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
westexas on March 14, 2006 - 8:12pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
This report (based on one well?) may have a lot to do with the impending collapse in Cantarell Field production.  

The worst case scenario outlined in the recent WSJ article on the Cantarell Field suggests that the worst case annual decline rate could be as high as 45% per year.   I have forgotten the exact numbers, but I think that the remaining oil column at Cantarell is on the order of 800' and it is thinning at the rate of 250' or so per year.

Production at huge Mexican oil field could collapse

PARIS, Feb 9, 2006 (AFP) - Oil production at the world's second-biggest field, operated by Pemex at Canterell in Mexico, could fall sharply by 2008, the Wall Street Journal reported Thursday, citing an internal study by the Mexican group.

The consequences would be tighter global oil supply, making it harder for the United States to rely less on the Middle East as President George W. Bush has proposed.

Cantarell currently produces two million barrels of crude oil per day, or 60 percent of Mexico's total output.

Under a worst-case scenario sparked by rising water and gas levels in the field, oil production could plunge to 875,000 barrels per day next year or to 520,000 bpd by the end of 2008, according to a study that took place late last year.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.