Jeffrey - when you say that the oil column is thinning, what do you mean? My understanding of Cantarell is that it is a seriese of separate oil pools and has multiple reservoir horizons - and will therefore have multiple oil-water and gas-oil contacts - and no single unique oil column.

the remaining oil column of about 800' was thinning at a rate of about 300' per year.

What is the oil column thinning between?

I'd be interested to read the articles by Shields - can you post some links or references?

Euan,

I did a quick web search on Cantarell. I found one reference to oil/water contact (singular) and one reference to contacts (plural). In any case, the oil column reference is shown below in the WSJ article published one year ago. Perhaps they were averaging the oil columns on various discrete fault blocks.

Shields has lots of stuff on the web, and he has written two books on Pemex.

Jeff

Mexico's oil output may decline sharply
David Luhnow, Wall Street Journal
Pemex Study Points to Possible Drop At Major Field, Which Would Strain Global Supply
(9 February 2006)
-------------

MEXICO CITY - Mexico's huge state-owned oil company may be facing a steep decline in output that would further tighten global oil supply and add to global woes over high oil prices.

The potential decline faced by Petroleos Mexicanos, or Pemex, also could undermine U.S. efforts to reduce dependence on Middle East oil, and complicate Mexican politics and financial stability.

An internal study reviewed by The Wall Street Journal shows water and gas are encroaching more quickly than expected in Cantarell, Mexico's biggest oil field, and might cause output to drop precipitously over the next few years. Currently, Cantarell produces two million barrels of oil a day, or six of every 10 barrels produced by Mexico. It is the world's second-biggest-producing field after Saudi Arabia's Ghawar.

The worst two scenarios suggest a drastic decline in output to 875,000 barrels a day by the end of 2007 and to just 520,000 a day by the end of 2008. If such projections turn out to be correct, Mexico's overall oil exports would decline by about one million barrels a day -- equal to about 63% of its daily crude exports to the U.S. -- from its current 1.8 million.
(9 February 2006)

From the WSJ website (same article):

Mexico has been bracing for a decline in Cantarell for years, and previous predictions of imminent decline have turned out to be wrong. But the internal study is the most complete look at the field to date. It says the difference between the layer of gas that sits atop the oil and the water that is creeping into the rocks below is now just 825 feet and is diminishing at a rate of between 248 and 363 feet a year. The report, which recommends that Pemex scrap 26 of 30 new wells planned for the northern part of the field due to gas encroachment, concludes that the "window of exploiting the reserve is closing fast."

"In my mind, this report suggests a collapse scenario is the most likely," says David Shields, an energy consultant in Mexico who first published the study's findings. Mr. Shields doubts Pemex can make up for lost output at Cantarell because it only discovers one new barrel of oil for every 14 it extracts at the moment, leading to falling reserves.

BTW, for the first time, insofar as I know, CNBC just mentioned the Cantarell crash.

The worst two scenarios suggest a drastic decline in output to 875,000 barrels a day by the end of 2007 and to just 520,000 a day by the end of 2008.

Jeffrey, I'm afraid I have to view this as DOOOOOMER journalism. In Khebab's Jan 2007 article, Figure 5, he estimates Cantarell production at around 1.75 MMBD for 2007 - and the WSJ article is suggesting around half that - not credible IMO - and to be ignored.

Euan,

This is not doomer journalism. They were reporting on a leaked internal Pemex report, which outlined five scenarios. When they talk about the worst two scenarios, they are talking about internal Pemex scenarios.

The Wall Street Journal engaged in DOOOOOMER journalism. Wow! I guess the noun SCENARIO, preceded by the adjective, WORST, has a different sense than I might have thought.

Yes, to be objective, the best case scenarios need also to be discussed - maybe the WSJ did that - and a balanced view presented.

From the WSJ article (February, 2006):

But the study already prompted the company in December to predict a slightly sharper decline at Cantarell than its previous forecasts -- with output down 6% this year to an average rate of 1.9 million barrels a day and off to 1.43 million barrels as an average for 2008. That prediction now roughly matches the study's most optimistic scenario.

So the most optimistic scenario, assuming 2.0 mbpd for 2005, was for an annual decline rate of 11% per year.

So, the spread between the best case decline rate and worst case decline rate--based on an internal Pemex report--was 11% to about 40% per year. Note that Pemex had been talking in public about increasing production from Cantarell.

The one year decline for 2006 was 25%, from 12/05 to 12/06. They did report somewhat of a rebound for January, but they have just been oil that was not produced when the field was down due to surface problems. We will know soon; however, what we do know now is that Pemex is eliminating or reducing crude oil deliveries to several Gulf Coast refineries.

if nitrogen injection has been real sucessful at canatrell and now the plan is to divert nitrogen supply to neighboring fields, that 40% decline scenario seems at least as reasonable as that 14% decline scenario.
it has been my experience that a 22 degree api field can be waterflooded successfully depending on the rate and permeability anisotropy. the powder river basin (wyoming)has dozens of examples where the typical recovery from a water drive or a real successful waterflood is in the 40 % range. nothing in the same league with canatrell, however. maybe the nitrogen injection has done better i dunno.

I have closely watched Cantarell for the last 18 months. My tentative conclusion is that neither the best (-14%/yr) or worst (-40%/year) scenarios are coming to pass. Reality seems somewhere between #2 & #3 with -20% to -25% (early results). New production is coming on-line (as other older Mexican fields decline) and +100,000 b/day seems doable outside Cantarell (for at least a year or two).

I see net Mexican production down only -4% as highly unlikely. I also see at least minimal Mexican oil exports in 2010 (no -40% compounded).

Eaun is way too optmistic IMHO, Jeffrey a bit too pessimistic. But the future is still dark, especially for Mexico & the US.

Mexican oil export income is largely recycled into US imports. We actually have stuff that an oil exporter wants ! This is far less true of other oil exporters (Russia wants what from the US ? Venezuela is moving away from US imports, we refuse to sell to Iran, Nigeria, Norway, etc. traditionally buy little but aircraft & food from the US, KSA seems to be moving away from US imports, China is creating a large new market in Angola, etc.)

KSA can stop using "we have no customers" excuse though.

I keep wondering about what happens when oil soars to 100 euros/barrel and the world decides that they have "enough" US dollars. We can liquidate our foreign investments (gov't nationalizes as UK did during WW I & II ?) to buy "critical" imports for a while, but not for long.

Boeing will grab market share from Airbus (as the weak $ is doing today) but we have few other exports that can be "ramped up".

Best Hopes,

Alan

Imagine a collapse of the dollar, say to .5Euro. US imports of european autos would collapse, us exports, eg caterpiller, would surge.

Most asians, eg those that tie their currency to the dollar, would continue... there is already a dollar region and a euro one, and the dollar region is growing much faster than the euro one as the US provides needed liquidity to developing markets. Oil exporters may eventually tie to euroland, but slowly and quietly, raising the price of oil in dollars, anyway a good thing.

The WSJ is probably the best paper in the country these days. Their editorial page is often nutty, but they have a strong firewall between the editorial and the news sections.

Dante posted this article at PO.com. He translated it from the Spanish, I think:

Mexico: Energy Consultant Shields Says Cantarell's Reserves To Last One Decade

Commentary by energy expert David Shields: "Pemex in Its Death Throes"

The directors of Mexican Petroleum (Pemex) have kindly decided not to worry Mexicans with bad news about Cantarell, whose decline is turning out to be worse than in the most pessimistic scenarios. They are keeping a low profile and downplaying the problem. They are not explaining it, not proposing solutions, and not implementing changes in the company. Business as usual, but until when?

Total crude oil production dropped to 2.978 million barrels a day (b/d) this past December, 400,000 b/d less than in the same month of the year before that.00A0, Some time ago, there was a warning that, according to an internal analysis by Pemex Exploration and Production (PEP), production at Cantarell would fall from 1.938 million b/d in December 2005 to 1.54 million in December 2006 because of the presence of water in the wells. In fact, it fell 100,000 b/d more, ending the year at 1.439 million b/d.

That same internal analysis anticipated that production at Cantarell would fall another 665,000 b/d in 2007, based on a 30% recovery factor. Since it will be hard to exceed that recovery factor, it is predictable that the decline this year will be of that magnitude, in other words, worsening in 2007 before moderating in 2008.

Not everything is negative. PEP's expectations for other projects have been fulfilled, for the most part. The Ku-Maloob-Zaap project is already producing 400,000 b/d, and new production will be added in the short term. It could reach 600,000 b/d soon, perhaps exceeding 700,000 b/d within two or three years, thanks to new works projects. Small volumes will be added at a few other projects. But these good results will not do much good given the drop at Cantarell.

The performance in exploration has been poor. It would be healthy to accept that failure and explain it. In the 2002-2005 period, there was an addition to proven oil reserves equivalent to just 6% of the volume extracted. The numbers are better in gas, but that is not much consolation. We can see that there is a shortage of technological skills and tools at PEP. Contracting instead of developing technologies of its own has not been the right way to go. Many wells are not adding proven reserves, and we have not managed to drill at the most suitable locations. Only one ship is working on exploring in deep waters, and it is not achieving success, but it does cost a lot of money. At the same time, there are good geological prospects that could be the oil industry's strength in the future, but the industrial and financial models that will allow them to be developed optimally need to be found.

Cantarell's decline changes everything. Costs will be higher at other oilfields. Now a much greater part of PEP's investments will be allocated to activities that involve high-risk, uncertain work and, therefore, unpredictable profitability, like exploration work in general and the development of the Chicontepec region. Gone are the days when we could obtain safe, easy revenue for the state.

Pemex is in its death throes today because there is a risk that it might end up without reserves of its raw material in a decade. But it is also in its death throes due to other problems: fiscal milking, over-indebtedness, lags in maintenance, an unsustainable collective work contract, theft from pipelines, an obsolete oil fleet, etc. It is unjustifiable for there to be no investments in refining and petrochemicals, by either the state or the private sector. Apparently, the heap of problems is exceeding the ability of its directors and the political system to solve them.

The challenge should be to ensure that Cantarell's decline turns into a driving force for profound changes - that are positive and agreed on by consensus, even if they are painful - in the Mexican oil industry and that those changes cause neither the collapse of Cantarell nor political and ideological confrontations. For that, we need leadership and intellectual honesty from those who manage that industry. We still do not know the Calderon administration's diagnosis and proposal for Pemex, or the vision of its director general, Jesus Reyes-Heroles, or of Energy Secretary Georgina Kessel, or the solutions that they are considering, if, by any chance, they have something to propose.

No one in the government has been able to communicate the vision of a more viable model for the Mexican oil industry. No one has convinced society to join together to find solutions. Neither do we perceive urgency on the part of the executive or legislative branches. The unions have not been proactive in agreeing to cut personnel and slash the collective contract. Now is when we need political will and unity of goals, beyond ideologies and group interests, for a real change in Pemex.

It's from here: http://www.reforma.com/

Dante has been finding a lot of Cantarell articles in the Mexican press, in Spanish only, unfortunately. They are reporting that Mexico expects to become a net importer by 2012.

Is there 1559 mmbd of extra capacity available currently?
They sound like they are drilling with the same problems as KSA increasing drilling and flat to declining production. I get a very bad feeling from this.

Thanks for posting this.

They are reporting that Mexico expects to become a net importer by 2012.

I posted an export model at the bottom of the thread - based on a 4% decline - and this still shows net exports by 2012. The exports disappear with an 8% decline (and 2% annual rise in consumption). 8% decline is similar to the North Sea - but the feeling I have is that Mexico has more in reserve by way of new production waiting to come on.

Here's an excerpt from another Dante's articles. It's from a site called El Economista.

Consulted by the Economist, the experts of the Independent Technological Institute of Mexico (ITAM) and the Latin American University (UIA) agreed that the risk of the reduction in the supply of Mexican petroleum has put already a time limit so that the reforms are completed that facilitate the investment deprived in the operation and transformation of the power one. "There are between 6 and 8 years of life utility those that it has left to Cantarell and this means that, independently of the international price of petroleum, by 2012, the country will become an importer of hydrocarbon."

Wish I could get a better translation of this article, but my Spanish is terrible.