In search of Arab Heavy

FF is privy to gravity and sulfur content data for the above reservoirs. They are as follows (feel free to make this into a legible table and repost)

Field API Sulf Cont,%
Ghawar 34 1.7
Shaybah 42.4 .7
Safaniyah 28.0 2.84%
Abu Safah 30.0 2.7
Hawtah 49.3 .03
Khursanyah 31.0 2.5
Berri 30-38 1-2
Zuluf 30.60 2.3
Marjan 32.4 2.5
Qatif 30-36 1.6-2.5

Of the 10.35 MMBOPD shown in the above pie chart, which of the "heavy" oils above don't the Chinese want???


Field API Sulf Cont,%
Ghawar 34 1.7
Shaybah 42.4 0.7
Safaniyah 28.0 2.84
Abu Safah 30.0 2.7
Hawtah 49.3 0.03
Khursanyah       31.0 2.5
Berri 30-38      1-2
Zuluf 30.60 2.3
Marjan 32.4 2.5
Qatif 30-36 1.6-2.5


I guess Abquaiq is completely watered out, since it does not show up in this pie chart. Ghawar next?

http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=233014740&play=1

Pickens..does he lurk here? Sounds like WT, FF and SS. '.....Saudis are stuggling with old production, trying hard to bring on new production, lots of infill drilling, just to keep it about where it is'

Meat and potato quality here but for the CERAbrally blinded a bombshell!

('scuse C185 wrong spot)

c185 (great plane by the way)

Sometimes the combine Ghawar with abqaiq it seems.

I think everyone can agree with the following from the above chart and the last several day's discussions:

As goes Saudi Arabian oil production so goes the world,

As goes Ghawar- so goes Saudi Arabia,

As goes Ain Dar/Shedgum and Uthmaniyah - so goes Ghawar.

Are there any critics of the above conclusions ... who wish to speak up???

I would like to hear from the CERA experts about the above specifics... more than anything.

To dampen the hysteria a bit:

As you move up to larger and larger areas, the effects get smaller / slower. So if Ain Dar / Shedgum drop by 4%, SA would drop by less as a result of the AD/S drop - perhaps 2%, and the world would drop by even less (less than 1%). So your statement is probably directionally correct, but is misleading in its implications.

CW
Global peak: 2007 - 2010
Global decline rate, Post peak: 2%
Economic response: Severe global recession, ~5 years, then slow recovery

To Dampen your enthusiasm a bit:

You would be correct if it were only Ain Dar/Shedgum in decline. And you would be closer if Ani Dar/Shedgum were declining by only 4%. However ALL Saudi existing fields are declining by an average of 8%.

One challenge for the Saudis in achieving this objective is that their existing fields sustain 5 percent-12 percent annual "decline rates," (according to Aramco Senior Vice President Abdullah Saif, as reported in Petroleum Intelligence Weekly and the International Oil Daily) meaning that the country needs around 500,000-1 million bbl/d in new capacity each year just to compensate.
http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/saudi.html

So your conclusion Hindmost, is totally misleading in its implications.

Ron Patterson

Ask me a question about the weather, and I talk about exports.

The one year increase in domestic Saudi consumption was 360,000 bpd to 2.0 mbpd (Total Liquids, EIA), from 2004 to 2005, while their current crude oil production is down about 1.1 mbpd from 2005 to early 2007. It currently takes 100% of the Total Liquids production of the 14th largest oil producer in the world, Brazil, to meet domestic Saudi consumption.

Try an exponential increase in domestic consumption against an exponential decline in production. What you get in a worst case scenario is something like the UK, which went from probably peak exports of one mbpd in 1999 to a net importer in 2005, so they probably crossed the zero line in 2004. Think of it--maximum exports to zero net exports in about five years.

We won't see that in Saudi Arabia, but if, as I suspect, Russian production starts falling later this year or next year, IMO we could easily see a 50% drop in net oil exports by the top 10 net oil exporters within five years.

Apparently, the Nimitz battle group is headed for the Persian Gulf. Pretty soon, US warships are going to start running into each other in the gulf.

The number of ships underway does not appear unusually large but the number of aircraft carriers in the North Arabian sea is unusual. I am not aware of any list of naval ships on deployment or deployment locations. The only way to derive this information would be to watch the above linked page daily and see who drops off the list after being underway. However, you'd also have to try to ascertain whether a ship was underway to or from port at any given time.

If anyone is aware of any additional sources of information about Naval ship movement, I'd be interested in seeing those.

Ghawar Is Dying
The greatest shortcoming of the human race is our inability to understand the exponential function. - Dr. Albert Bartlett

According to this page the Nimitz is scheduled to relieve the Esienhower in the Gulf this March and has been for some time.

Xyleth,

Your link is empty. I double checked the raw HTML and the link is empty. Could you please repost whatever link you intended?

Ghawar Is Dying
The greatest shortcoming of the human race is our inability to understand the exponential function. - Dr. Albert Bartlett

very odd. how about this ?

Thanks! That works.

Ghawar Is Dying
The greatest shortcoming of the human race is our inability to understand the exponential function. - Dr. Albert Bartlett

Link for aircraft carrier locations - don't know how accurate

http://www.ne.jp/asahi/gonavy/atsugi/gonavy604.html

Maybe a surprise land invasion from Oman's Musandam Peninsula, walking across a floating bridge of US Navy ships? ;-)

The time for games is over?!

U.S. winds up war games in Gulf

The U.S. navy said on Thursday it had ordered an aircraft carrier to the Gulf to replace one of two patrolling the region, as the United States winds down naval war games on Iran's doorstep.

The Nimitz carrier strike group will sail from San Diego for the Gulf on Monday, a navy spokesman told Reuters, to replace the Dwight D. Eisenhower, as tensions mount between Iran and the West over captured British troops and Iran's nuclear programme.

"She (the Nimitz) will deploy to the Gulf region. She is the relief for Eisenhower, who leaves and she replaces her," Lieutenant Commander Jeff Davis said by telephone from Naval Headquarters in Washington.

Strike groups typically include four or five frigates and destroyers and a submarine.

"You are looking at the early part of May that you would have the transition. It would be without any overlap. There is no plan to overlap them at all," he added.

The Eisenhower and fellow carrier John C. Stennis took part in this week's U.S. war games, the largest in Gulf waters since 2003, when the U.S. led an invasion of Iraq.

The drills, which included anti-submarine, anti-surface and mine warfare drills, end on Thursday. For the first time since the Iraq invasion four years ago, two U.S. aircraft carriers were deployed in the Gulf.

Fifth Fleet spokesman Lieutenant-Commander Charlie Brown said there were currently no plans for more.

"We do not expect to have three carriers in the Gulf region ... but we cannot talk about future needs or future operations," he said.

For a list of ships and aircraft carrier strike groups, see:
Massive Deployment of Naval Power directed against Iran

"we could easily see a 50% drop in net oil exports by the top 10 net oil exporters within five years". You have said this a number of times, wt, but what approximate % reduction in TOTAL oil on the open market would that equate to? Presume it's much less than 50%, maybe 25%? Even the latter would be pretty devastating.

Fractional Flow

M.K.Horn in his 2004 update of the Giant Oil fields (932 Oil and Gas Fields with original oil in place of more than 500 mmbls or 3 Tcf of gas) specifically gave Ghawar as 79322 BBOE depleted with 17766 BBOE remaining out of a total URR of 97 BBoe. This would put it about 86% depleted now.
He gave a total of just under 900 BBOE for the whole Arabian Plate

I have given Stuart a number of links on this and hope he does a post on it

Love my 185 FF. Will continue flying so long as 100LL is available. Not much price elasticity for my demand. Paying $3.92 per gallon now. Someday maybe Ghawar will be like the Arbuckle, 99.9% water and lots of downhole pumps. I figure they run away from the water in Ghawar because they can't handle it on the surface and the well won't flow with much more than 70% water. They will need pumps--big downhole ones and lots of surface dewater/desalter. To get 1 million b/d out of Ain Dar/shedgum or uthmaniya they may need to handle and reinject 100 to 200 million b/d of water. The numbers become oulandish. They will need armies of service workers, and where will they come from?
rebuilding pumps, servicing wells, work-overs, etc, etc,
Getting to 9 million b/d with wells that flow 10,000 b/d of oil is one thing, but 10,000b/d of fluid with 99% salt water that corrodes everything--that is anothert animal altogether.

i dont think pumping is a real option (in general). transmitting that much power downhole (electrical submersible or hydraulic pumps) presents some real challenges. rod pumps are probably out of the question. the saudi's have managed their reservoirs to avoid pumping. gas lift is, imo, more likely. gas lift requires a fairly high reservoir pressure. gas lift and water handling infastructure would be massive.

I have a 1973 Cherokee 235 Charger Regular Unleaded.

Back to the original post for you oilfield guys... If these are the fields in production in 2004 and SA has 1.5 MMBOPD shut-in because it is too heavy, where is it??

Could be Munifa (sp Manifa?). If I recall correctly, that's heavy, and also happens to be essentially unsellable due to high vanadium content. I admit that's stretching the description "too heavy". But if the intent of the description is that the oil is undesirable, Manifa fits.

Edited to add:

Oops - I was under the impression that Manifa was ready to produce crude (awaiting only completion of specialized refineries to handle the oil) but some quick checks say that's probably not true, because there's field development in parallel with refinery building.

Besides which, it would have been imprudent to develop the field with no feasible market, so my assumption that it had been developed was unrealistic.