49 comments on US Natural Gas - May 09
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
| Show without comments | PDF version
49 comments on US Natural Gas - May 09
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
| Show without comments | PDF version
Search The Oil Drum with Google
Support The Oil Drum
Recently on TOD:World
TOD:Campfire
TOD:Europe
- Unique Times -- and the Future
- Peak Gold, Easier to Model than Peak Oil? - Part I
- Carbon Capture and Storage
TOD:Canada
- In this house, we obey the laws of thermodynamics!
- The Round-Up: October 24, 2008
- Compressed Air Energy Storage - How viable is it?
TOD:Australia/NZ
- The Bullroarer - Friday 27th November 2009
- International Energy Agency calls 'Peak' on OECD Oil Demand
- Australian Senate: Peak Oil motion defeated 31:6
TOD:Net Energy
Blogroll
Energy Sites
- The Coming Global Oil Crisis
- Die Off
- Dry Dipstick
- Energy Bulletin
- From the Wilderness
- Life After the Oil Crash
- Peak Oil Crisis
- Peak Oil News and Message Boards
- Powerswitch
- Rigzone
- Matthew Simmons
- Wolf at the Door
Environment & Sustainability Sites
- The Daily Green
- EcoGeek
- Eco Street
- Green Car Congress
- Green Options
- green.alltop.com
- Gristmill
- RealClimate
- Sustainablog
- Treehugger
- WorldChanging
Blogs
- Casaubon's Book
- Cleantech Blog
- Clusterf
k Nation (Jim Kunstler) - The Cost of Energy
- David Strahan
- Early Warning
- The Energy Blog
- European Tribune
- GraphOilology
- Health After Oil
- jeffvail.net
- Mobjectivist
- Peak Energy (Australia)
- Peak Energy (USA)
- R-Squared
- Resource Insights
Finance & Economics Blogs
- The Big Picture
- Calculated Risk
- The Crash Course
- Ecological Economics
- Econbrowser
- Environmental Economics
- Infectious Greed
- The Mess That Greenspan Made
- Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis
Organizations
Peak Oil Primers
Beware email scams!
Beware email scams claiming to be from this site. We do not have any job openings. If anyone contacts you about a job at The Oil Drum, do not reply to them, and definitely do not give them any personal information or send them money. Read more here.
“First they ignore you. Then they laugh at you. Then they fight you. Then you win.”
—Gandhi
User login
Contact
- Content: editors at theoildrum dot com
- Tech support: support at theoildrum dot com
Personnel
- Editors: Nate Hagens, Gail the Actuary, Prof. Goose
- DrumBeat Editor: Leanan
- Contributors: ace, Engineer-Poet, Heading Out, jeffvail, JoulesBurn, Sam Foucher, Robert Rapier
- TOD:Campfire: Glenn, Jason Bradford
- TOD:Europe: Chris Vernon, Euan Mearns, Francois Cellier, Jerome a Paris, Luís de Sousa, Rembrandt, Rune Likvern, Ugo Bardi
- TOD:Canada: benk, Libelle
- TOD:ANZ: Big Gav, Phil Hart, aeldric
- Emeritus: Stuart Staniford
- Technician: Super G
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.










GAIA Host Collective
The trick is what do you use for initial production and decline rates? The Canadian NEB has such data for every producing region and each region is quite different.
The Chesapeake model is hinting we will be down a bit more than 3 Bcf/d by early 2010, expanding quickly after that. Credit Suisse estimates that once we hit production bottom, it will take 2 years for increasing rig counts to claw production levels back up to our prior peak.
Figure 1: Future gas production based on final rig count drop
Source: Chesapeake Energy
-Click to Enlarge
Good article Gail!
Gail,
Thanks for an interesting piece.
Jon,
The diagram accompanying your comment is very comprehensive.
If I read it right, then assuming 750 rigs at work, US production may decline to about 56 Bcf/d by spring/summer 2011. US nat gas demand is presently showing some weakness and assuming some supplemental supplies of LNG (though the US nat gas prices presently suggests this will be the LNG market of last resort) and some time for an economic recovery to affect nat gas demand.
Further if Credit Suisseās estimates are right about taking two years for increasing rig counts to claw back production levels, it looks like the period 2011 - 2013 might be supplied constrained.
My prior comment was poorly worded. The time is 2 years from peak to peak for a simulated shale formation with 80% decline rates (like Haynesville).
The longer it takes for prices to rise back up to drilling costs the worse the drop in production will be and the more severe the price spike later.
Canadian NEB Short Term Deliverability Report
The NEB report has an appendix which lists the decline models and initial production by region. I thought others might like to see what a model might look like.
I only saw this after my last post. It gives .020 Bcf/d/rig/yr, vs my estimated .016. Horizontal vs current mix could account for that difference. This scenario has 6 months down, 12 months flat, 3 months back up and then 3 months at the new plateau. We are now 8 months down. At $7.00/kcf to encourage drilling, (see Rockman) we are surely in for close to a year flat. then it is very unlikely that a ramp up could be done in anything near 3 months. Also a good percentage of the old vertical rigs will be scrapped and have to be replaced. Looks to me like at least 3 years to get back to Jan 2009, and maybe as much as 4. Murray
Jon, that's very interesting and helpful. I had just been doing a "back of the envelope" attempt, and came out real close to Chesapeake. It looks like from 7/06 to 1/09 we went from 53 Bcf/d to 61 Bcf/d, of which 1 Bcf/d was Independence Hub, which we shouldn't use in estimating, so let's say 60. From early 2003 to mid 2005 we went from 700+ rigs to 1100 rigs )mostly vertical) and production dropped about 3% during that period. Mid 2005 to Sept 2008 we increased to 1600 rigs (a good % of the increase were horizontal) and production went up 10%. So it looks like now we need 1100 - 1200 rigs operating just to offset declines, which is pretty consistent with the curve. At about 700 rigs, where we are now, production should be down to 54 Bcf/d by mid 2010 or 10%. Yikes! The increase in horizontal in the mix might help that somewhat. LNG isn't likely to offset more than 1/4 of that decline, and may only offset declines in exports from Canada.
From memory, global USA production decline rates were near 20%/yr in 2000 and 28%/yr by 2005 or 2006, with almost no contribution from tight sands/shale. Now tightsands/shale are a rapidly growing part of the mix of producing wells, and appear to fall off 50 to 60%/yr, so the global decline rate is probably >30%/yr and growing. So 1100 to 1200 rigs must be able to generate new production of 18 Bcf/d/yr, or .016 Bcf/day/rig/yr, just to offset declines. We are now light at least 400 rigs light so will see a decline of roughly 6 Bcf/d/yr, which is pretty close to the rough-cut 10%. During 2008 we had an average of roughly 1450 rigs operating which should have offset declines and added 5-6 Bcf/d/yr which is about what happened, so these numbers seem close enough. Some computer whiz can certainly do a more informative job, but this isn't bad. Thanks muchly.
I think the Horizontal wells may be overweighted i.e when they do decline it will be both steeper and to a much lower end production rate.
Also ROCKMAN has mentioned this a few times here and there but I really question if people are going to put in compressors as pressure falls off. My opinion is that any production needing a compressor is more likely to get temporarily shut in.
So I think production is going to be fairly non linear. Lets see where we are in six months since if these secondary issues are both real and large then they should start to show up within six months of now give what your saying about the number of rigs being dropped.
Next if the oil prices continue to increase strongly there is still significant dual fuel use with NG and fuel oil. This will flip to NG. And also as I've posted before we seem to also have a tight relationship between heavy sour crude refining and additional NG usage in refineries. If the US begins to favor the cheaper heavier sour crude esp with the relatively low NG price then this is another source of increasing NG demand.
I'm going stick my neck out and call a bottom for NG near the current price we may bump around it for another month but I think the bottom is in.
Next I'm going to even stick my neck out further and call for NG to move to the 7-8 dollar range within the next six months maybe hitting 10 or higher if some of my ideas are on the mark.
However I don't think this is going to bring the rigs back. I don't think that the rig count will actually turn around until after we see NG break at least 10 and then only slowly.
So maybe a month bouncing around near the bottom then fairly smooth increase toward eight over the remaining 4-5 months.
I'd not be surprised in the least to see rig counts continue to drop even as we pass eight.
memmel -- adding compression to the wells probably won't be much of a problem except for operators near bankruptcy. Granted, as you say, production has drop to rather low levels at this point. But even if adding compression only offers a very modest return there is another big benefit: you keep the lease active. Most oil/NG leases terminate automatically if a well is shut-in for more then 30 days. If that happens not only does the operator lose the mineral rights but is also obligated to spend $'s to P&A the well. The operational costs come out of cash flow so that's usually not an issue. Buying or leasing the compressor is the bigger hurdle. But if the compression companies have units just sitting in the yard they'll often let the operator pay for it out of cash flow. of course this all assumes there is a net gain of income by going to compression. NG pricing will pretty much control that call.
I agree with you: it's difficult to see rig rates improve significantly even if NG comes back up to $7 or $8/mcf. The NG players are hurting from a cash flow perspective. Add that to being badly burned by the rapid expansion of drilling followed by an even more rapid collapse. The mindset I hear around the coffee pot these days is that they won't be so fast to jump back into water.
Memmel, the problem in the next few months is storage. We will have enough supply to put at least 4.3 Tcf into storage by the end of the injection season, but only have storage capacity for 3.85 Tcf at the most optimistic. Prices will tend to drop to increase demand, and the only real temporary demand increase is coal substitution, which will require a price at or below $3.00/kcf. Some wells may be shut in, but that seems to be a choice of last resort. Rockman can provide enlightenment on that subject.
At 3.85 Tcf in storage, and line pack at max., we will have plenty of NG to get through the next withdrawal season, with high enough storage that, at even 2007 production rates, we would get to fairly adequate storage by Oct 2010, so for some months there will be little pressure on price. However, by maybe late June 2010 it will start to become evident that supply is declining, and adequate storage refill is doubtful. At that point the bidding war for the available supply will start. In Sept. 2010 there is likely to be something close to panic as storage goals get unmeetable. I would guess that there will be delivery failures due to low supply by late Feb. 2011.
Price should stay between $3.00 and $7.00 until about 6/10, and then start to rise. Sept. could see anything from $10.-20. The last time we came close to supply failure, (Q1 2003), prices went to $18.00 interday, and $28.00 for a brief spike intraday.
My "back of the envelope" conclusion is that for the year from end March 2010 to end March 2011, supply will be between 1 and 2 Tcf below demand. One Tcf would bring Q1 2011 storage to a dangerously low level, and 2 Tcf would wipe out storage altogether. Of course, that can't be allowed to happen, so price will go high enough to decrease demand and increase supply, which can lead to an extreme short term spike.
I think Rockman is right about the reluctance to get back into drilling in a big way until it looks like high prices are here to stay, which means fairly delayed return to Sept 2008 capacity. From 2005 to Q3 2008, rig count grew by near 200 rigs per year. I think the highest 12 month period was about 240 rigs. Even at 200 rigs per quarter from Q3 2010 on, my scenarion would likely develop. Murray