I must admit it is very hard to understand how unconventional wells with a first year decline rate of 60% or greater can push the national decline rate lower.

A recent article took a look at CERA's track record in the North Sea, one of the most open and transparent producing regions on earth, and the writer found that the CERA considerably overestimated future production, even there, which led the writer to ask why, if CERA couldn't get it right in the North Sea, they would they be any better in more difficult to evaluate producing regions?

IMO, CERA is paid to produce optimistic production reports, so they produce optimistic production reports.

In any case, Matt Simmons is concerned that the industry may never again be able to match the 2008 production rate--because of the slowdown in drilling versus high decline rates.

I agree. Figure 6 is amazing in that half our production came from only the last 3 years worth of drilling. A slow down is going to take some time to recover. And how will it be funded in the credit crunch?

I am seriously worried about prices at the end of 2010 if the rig count keeps dropping like is now.