about that story about parshall, nd.

two words "waste gas", waste gas indeed, as parshall is flaring more that 11 mmcfd.

If you don't have pipelines, the gas is likely viewed as waste gas, no matter how much it is. Building pipelines takes a lot of capital, and long term assurance that the natural gas will be there. I doubt either of those are present, so no gas pipelines.

I presume the Parshall oil installation was put in place before the current credit crisis. With the low price of oil, it is hard to see how a company would get financing for production in the Bakken Formation.

it is waste gas because the state of nd industrial commission allows it to be flared. flaring gas in north dakota is forbidden, but the penalty for flaring gas is that the operator has to pay royalties on the flared gas after a one year free ride. so they are against it and they are for it. in some cases, the ndic will restrict production until gas sales are in place, parshall is not restricted.

flaring gas in the bakken is extra wasteful due to the nature of the reservior and fluids.

other states do not allow gas to be flared, except for a limited test period and developement seems to happen. wyoming is a good example and in the pinedale area, companies dont flare gas even during drilling operations.

financing is indeed a problem for some of the operators, it cost about $6 million to drill and complete some of these wells. parshall is an exception, most of these wells pay out in a few months at the current price. but outside the sweet spots, there will probably be a slow down in activity if the price stays where it is now. some of the smaller companies will probably get hit real hard, their expectations exceeding reality.

and the good news is that some of the wells are slowly being connected to gas sales. gas processing capacity is probably a bigger problem than extending a pipeline a few miles.

ND production vs. US total:

I inadvertently did this in monthly kilobarrels, not kb/d, fyi. Scale is the same. MT production has recently peaked - so much for shale formation oil. In re: credit: Boom or bust, a look at oil prices

Many believe the magic number is $65 dollars a barrel for production to stop in the Bakken formation — the nickname given to a massive oil reserve.

Ness said while Bakken formation drilling is capital intensive, the $65-dollar figure isn’t necessarily accurate.

“I don’t really believe there’s any particularly set price because of the productivity of the variations across the Bakken,” Ness said.

Ness said Mountrail County in northwestern North Dakota is one area where Bakken oil production has been so good it will not be affected by lower prices.

Areas where a decrease may take place are Divide, Burke, Mercer counties and parts of Dunn County, Ness said.

difficult to read your scale, but nd is producing a little over 165,000 barrels per day (165 kb/d)which is more than their previous 1984 peak. parshall field is producing about 30 kb/d, 1 million barrels per month.

and ness is basing his minimum price upon press release reserve figures. buyer beware.
generally, the available production data does not support the figures being cast about in almost daily press releases.

elwood,

In your estimation is the bulk of Bakken flare gas a result of the potential to never getting access to pipelines or more of not wanting to wait for connections to get within reach? I'm guess that much of the drilling has gotten ahead of gathering system development. A true shame if they're wasting NG that might otherwise be sold in a year or two.

Last year I watched 20+ million cf per day of NG flared from a platform of the coast of W Africa. The operator even offered to lay a line for free to the mainland and give it free to the gov't but was turned down: the gov't didn't want to bother with building a distribution system. Truly sickening to watch it day after day.

parshall was isolated when it was discovered in '06 there was no pipeline close. as of august, there were 68 wells producing in parshall and 29 rigs running in all of mountrail county. so developement may have been less than orderly, but the ndic apparently doesnt wants to discourage the drilling of additional wells so they let the operators flare on. and who is going to wait for a pipeline connection to start producing when the company formerly known as enron can and will drill baby drill(and flare baby flare) and drink your milkshake.

i dont know why the company formerly known as enron cant see the foolishness of wasting that much gas. or why the ndic, whose mission is to prevent waste and protect correlative rights continues to allow that much gas to be flared.

probably because the company formerly known as enron is mainly interested in the bottom line on their next quarterly report. north dakota is a red state.

Like I said the chart gives kb/month, not kb/day, if that's what's throwing you. My point was to illustrate how minor a part the Bakken is playing in increasing US supply.

https://www.dmr.nd.gov/oilgas/stats/historicaloilprodstats.pdf

North Dakota Production is over 177,000 barrels per day in August, 2008. Barrels per well increasing from 1000 last year to 1400 this year. This does not include about 50,000 bopd from Montana or the Saskatechwan bakken oil.

April 2008 oildrum talking about 75000 bopd in 2007.
http://www.theoildrum.com/node/3868

There may be a Bakken Pipeline spur
http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/articles/apwire/412a90b669b872d9a419...

The "waste gas" could be used to generate electricity (rural electrification has put most of USA within a couple of miles of a medium voltage distribution line (capable of accepting at least 12 MW (often 18 MW) typically).

Cheap, portable ICE generators for smaller volumes (up to 10 MW or so) and gas turbines above that.

It ought to be against the law to flare NG like that ! More "climate change". If such a law depresses oil production slightly, then good. More oil later.

Best Hopes for Less Waste and Carbon Emissions,

Alan

hi afbe,

yes electrical generation would be an option. re-injecting the gas would be another, but that too would delay the almighty depletion. i told one poster that this is not 1900 and not spindletop either.

edit:
and are the small scale ice generatrors capable of generating 3 phase power in the 2-300 hp range ? if so, they could be used to supply power for electrical submersible pumps. the operators are capable of extending 3 phase power lines, even if they cant get a gas line built.

still, gas processing might be a problem as this is a rich h-c gas in the 1700 btu/scf range. the waste boggles the mind.

and 11 mmcf/d at 1700 btu/scf is the energy equivalent of over 3000 boepd. up in smoke.

Landfill gas (low BTU, rich in CO2, nitrogen, I think sulfur too) is used in gensets in the one to several MW range (1 hp = 3/4 kW roughly) at over 100 sites in the USA.

pdf warning
www.netl.doe.gov/publications/proceedings/01/hybrids/messics.pdf

Waste Management has 39 landfill power plants, 179.4 MW (plus more that sell gas to largely industrial users).

Almost all (RARE exceptions) MW range power is generated in 3 phases (just easier from EE POV).

Caterpillar et al sell gensets in a variety of sizes, including 200 to 300 hp. I do not see where rich gas would be a problem in these gensets (they can be set-up to run on pure propane with minor changes)

Primitive gas processing could save some propane/butane mix for sale to local farmers & small towns. Surely low cost local production of home heating fuel (which is already set up for propane/butane mixes) would be attractive in ND.

As noted earlier, rural electrification has reached almost every rural farmstead (thanks to a half century of gov't subsidy). Few areas of the USA are more than a few miles from a medium voltage distribution line that can accept 12+ MW of generation.

Alan