by Guntis Moritis, OGJ Production Editor, OGJ, Apr 6, 2011
Initial estimated technically recoverable shale gas resources in the 32 countries assessed in an Apr. 5 report is 5,760 tcf compared with the 862 tcf in the US. The report was commissioned by the US Energy Information Administration from Advanced Resources International Inc. (ARI). [Please see remarks below -- D.R.]
The report includes 48 shale gas basins in 32 countries, containing almost 70 shale gas formations.
EIA noted that world proved reserves of natural gas as of Jan. 1, 2010, are about 6,609 tcf [please see my post "World's Top 22 Natural Gas Proven Reserve Holders...," here. -- D.R.] and world technically recoverable gas resources are about 16,000 tcf, largely excluding shale gas. Thus, adding the identified shale gas resources to other gas resources increases total world technically recoverable gas resources by more than 40% to 22,600 tcf [i.e., 5,760 tcf + 862 tcf + 16,000 tcf -- D.R.].
EIA said these shale reserves are uncertain given the relatively sparse data that currently exist and the approach ARI employed would likely result in a higher estimate once better information becomes available.
At the current time, efforts are under way to develop more detailed shale gas resource assessments by the countries themselves, with many of these assessments being assisted by several US federal agencies under the auspices of the Global Shale Gas Initiative (GSGI) which was launched in April 2010.
EIA explained that shale gas development was more likely to emerge for two company groupings.
The first group consists of countries such as France, Poland, Turkey, Ukraine, South Africa, Morocco, and Chile that are highly dependent on natural gas imports, have at least some gas production infrastructure, and their estimated shale gas resources are substantial relative to their current gas consumption. South Africa also could use shale gas as feedstock for its existing gas-to-liquids and coal-to-liquids plants.
The second group consists of countries with more than 200 tcf of shale gas resource such as Canada, Mexico, China, Australia, Libya, Algeria, Argentina, and Brazil, [that already produce substantial amounts of natural gas].
The report did not include Russia and Central Asia, Middle East, Southeast Asia, and Central Africa primarily because of existing significant quantities of conventional natural gas reserves in place (Russia and the Middle East) or because of a general lack of information for even an initial assessment. [Full story]
(Please see EIA overview, World Shale Gas Resources: An Initial Assessment of 14 Regions Outside the United States, April 5, 2011, here. And/or please see especially Table 1: Estimated Shale Gas Technically Recoverable Resources for Select Basins in 32 Countries, Compared to Existing Reported Reserves, Production and Consumption during 2009, here. In 2010, US shale gas production reached 4.87 trillion cubic feet/tcf, constituting 23 percent of total US natural gas production, compared with 0.39 tcf in 2000. This shows both the rapid growth and absolute importance of the shale gas resource to the United States. Rising production from shale gas resources has been credited with both lower natural gas prices and declining dependence on imported natural gas. As is often the case with resource development, shale gas production also has raised local environmental concerns, largely centering on the amount of water used in the fracturing process and the need to handle, recycle, and treat fracturing fluids in a manner that addresses the risk of spills that can potentially affect water quality. EIA's Annual Energy Outlook 2011 Reference case also reflects the growing importance of US shale gas. It projects that shale gas will account for about 46% of US natural gas production in 2035---please see U.S. EIA, Today in Energy, Apr 5, 2011, here. For exploration of shale gas in Poland, please see my post "Marathon, Nexen to Jointly Explore Shale in Poland," here. For shale gas in Europe, please see my post "World Watch [Shale Gas Development in Europe]," here. For China's quest for unconventional gas, please see my post "China Plans to Exploit its Shale Gas Resources," here. For Mexico's first shale gas production, please see, inter alia, here. -- D.R.)
Thursday, April 7, 2011
Wednesday, April 6, 2011
World Watch -- Comment & Interpretation on Today's News [Third Tanzanian Gas Discovery for Ophir-BG]
by Daniel O'Sullivan, London, EI
Hopes for a first LNG scheme in East Africa have risen following a third gas strike offshore Tanzania by Ophir Energy and BG Group. The discovery adds further weight to the idea that the three blocks the two partners share there will form the basis for a new Asian-facing LNG export project, which despite a lack of hard volumetric figures is already being talked up by Ophir as a “multi-train” venture. The pricing and marketing prospects for new supplies of LNG improved overnight with the earthquake and tsunami that knocked out a significant chunk of Japanese nuclear power generating capacity in early March. Privately held Ophir -- which ranks Mittal Holdings, South African black empowerment vehicle Mvelaphanda, hedge fund Och-Ziff and Polish industrial group Kulczyk as its major owners, accounting for 70% between them -- is riding this momentum, with reports saying it is now preparing to float 25% of the company in a stock market listing to raise some $500 million.
(Ophir announced on April 4 it has made a third Tanzanian gas discovery with the Chaza-1 well, located in Block 1 about 11 miles (18 kilometers) offshore southern Tanzania in a water depth of about 3,117 feet (950 meters). Drilled by the Deepsea Stavanger semisub, the discovery is situated nearly 124 miles (200 kilometers) south of the Pweza and Chewa discoveries---please see Rigzone, here---and closer to the Mozambique border where Anadarko Petroleum has made four gas discoveries. An estimated 40 miles separates Chaza-1 from Windjammer, the Anadarko group’s northernmost discovery to date in Offshore Area 1. Also, for East Africa's oil and gas, please see my post here. -- D.R.)
Hopes for a first LNG scheme in East Africa have risen following a third gas strike offshore Tanzania by Ophir Energy and BG Group. The discovery adds further weight to the idea that the three blocks the two partners share there will form the basis for a new Asian-facing LNG export project, which despite a lack of hard volumetric figures is already being talked up by Ophir as a “multi-train” venture. The pricing and marketing prospects for new supplies of LNG improved overnight with the earthquake and tsunami that knocked out a significant chunk of Japanese nuclear power generating capacity in early March. Privately held Ophir -- which ranks Mittal Holdings, South African black empowerment vehicle Mvelaphanda, hedge fund Och-Ziff and Polish industrial group Kulczyk as its major owners, accounting for 70% between them -- is riding this momentum, with reports saying it is now preparing to float 25% of the company in a stock market listing to raise some $500 million.
(Ophir announced on April 4 it has made a third Tanzanian gas discovery with the Chaza-1 well, located in Block 1 about 11 miles (18 kilometers) offshore southern Tanzania in a water depth of about 3,117 feet (950 meters). Drilled by the Deepsea Stavanger semisub, the discovery is situated nearly 124 miles (200 kilometers) south of the Pweza and Chewa discoveries---please see Rigzone, here---and closer to the Mozambique border where Anadarko Petroleum has made four gas discoveries. An estimated 40 miles separates Chaza-1 from Windjammer, the Anadarko group’s northernmost discovery to date in Offshore Area 1. Also, for East Africa's oil and gas, please see my post here. -- D.R.)
Sunday, April 3, 2011
ExxonMobil Fuel Supply up 140 Percent into Area Devastated by Earthquake
ExxonMobil website, news releases, Tokyo, Business Wire, Mar 28, 2011
In an ongoing effort to quickly and safely supply much needed fuel to the areas in Japan hardest hit by the earthquake, ExxonMobil Group Japan has increased fuel supply into its Tohoku region dealer service station network by 140 percent above pre-earthquake levels.
Since the March 11 earthquake and tsunami, ExxonMobil has moved more than 24 million liters of fuel, including gasoline, diesel, and kerosene, into the Tohoku region in northeast Japan, enough to fill 1,200 tank trucks.
“We are acutely aware of the suffering and anxiety of the many people affected by the earthquake,” said Philippe Ducom, president of ExxonMobil Group Japan. “The top priority of our 2,900 employees in Japan is to work together to continue to build a stable supply chain and help restore operations at our dealer services stations so that people in the most affected areas can get much-needed fuel.”
“The rapid and safe restoration of our Esso, Mobil, and General service station network is a result of the tremendous effort of our supply business partners, fuels marketing local representatives, and service station dealers in Tohoku,” added Ducom. “It is through their strong commitment and dedication that more than 60 percent of our dealer sites are back in operation and more are being added every day [compared with just 31 percent on Mar 19 -- D.R.]. Yet there is still much work ahead to get fuel to people in Tohoku.”
ExxonMobil dealers have a network of 360 Esso, Mobil, and General service stations in the Tohoku region. [...]
All [four] of ExxonMobil’s refineries in Japan [i.e., TonenGeneral Sekiyu’s 335,000 b/d Kawasaki, 156,000 b/d Sakai, 170,000 b/d Wakayama and Kyokuto Petroleum Industries/KPI’s 175,000 b/d Chiba -- D.R.] are running at higher than normal rates, continuing increased supply to stock devastated areas. In addition, the reopening of ExxonMobil’s Shiogama Terminal in Sendai continues to boost fuel supplies into the Tohoku region. [Read more]
(ExxonMobil is the world's largest refiner---please see my post "World's Top 25 Largest Refining Companies, Jan 1, 2011 -- OGJ," here. According to Oil & Gas Journal via the EIA's Japan Country Analysis Brief, Mar 2011, Japan had 4.7 million bbl/d of oil refining capacity as of January 2011, and has the second-largest refining capacity in the Asia-Pacific region after China. According to Wood Mackenzie, Japan is the second largest refining base in the Asia-Pacific region (after China) with crude distillation capacity of 4.4 million bbl/d. The devastating 9-magnitude earthquake which struck Japan's northeast March 11 had in its immediate aftermath shut almost 1.4 million bbl/d or some 30% of refining capacity because of either physical damage, loss of power or as a safety precaution. All or parts of the refinery units were shut down after the earthquake at Exxon's Kawasaki refinery and the Chiba refinery. Exxon's other two refineries---the Wakayama refinery and the Sakai refinery---were not affected by the disaster in Japan. Also, the Kawasaki refinery cogeneration unit is now maximizing electrical generation to provide power to the electricity grid, which is under supplied following the tragedy. About 33 megawatts of power is currently---as of Mar 23---being transmitted to the grid, which is enough electricity for about 10,000 Japanese households. ExxonMobil typically sends 10-15 megawatts/month of surplus power from an in-house power generator at the Kawasaki refinery to Tokyo Electric Power Co./Tepco prior to the earthquake. Kyokuto Petroleum Industries Ltd., i.e. KPI, is a 50-50 joint venture of Exxon Mobil and Mitsui Oil Co. Also, ExxonMobil holds a 50.02 percent stake in TonenGeneral Sekiyu. For information on Japan's nuclear crisis and its impact, please see my posts under the category/label "Japan." -- D.R.)
In an ongoing effort to quickly and safely supply much needed fuel to the areas in Japan hardest hit by the earthquake, ExxonMobil Group Japan has increased fuel supply into its Tohoku region dealer service station network by 140 percent above pre-earthquake levels.
Since the March 11 earthquake and tsunami, ExxonMobil has moved more than 24 million liters of fuel, including gasoline, diesel, and kerosene, into the Tohoku region in northeast Japan, enough to fill 1,200 tank trucks.
“We are acutely aware of the suffering and anxiety of the many people affected by the earthquake,” said Philippe Ducom, president of ExxonMobil Group Japan. “The top priority of our 2,900 employees in Japan is to work together to continue to build a stable supply chain and help restore operations at our dealer services stations so that people in the most affected areas can get much-needed fuel.”
“The rapid and safe restoration of our Esso, Mobil, and General service station network is a result of the tremendous effort of our supply business partners, fuels marketing local representatives, and service station dealers in Tohoku,” added Ducom. “It is through their strong commitment and dedication that more than 60 percent of our dealer sites are back in operation and more are being added every day [compared with just 31 percent on Mar 19 -- D.R.]. Yet there is still much work ahead to get fuel to people in Tohoku.”
ExxonMobil dealers have a network of 360 Esso, Mobil, and General service stations in the Tohoku region. [...]
All [four] of ExxonMobil’s refineries in Japan [i.e., TonenGeneral Sekiyu’s 335,000 b/d Kawasaki, 156,000 b/d Sakai, 170,000 b/d Wakayama and Kyokuto Petroleum Industries/KPI’s 175,000 b/d Chiba -- D.R.] are running at higher than normal rates, continuing increased supply to stock devastated areas. In addition, the reopening of ExxonMobil’s Shiogama Terminal in Sendai continues to boost fuel supplies into the Tohoku region. [Read more]
(ExxonMobil is the world's largest refiner---please see my post "World's Top 25 Largest Refining Companies, Jan 1, 2011 -- OGJ," here. According to Oil & Gas Journal via the EIA's Japan Country Analysis Brief, Mar 2011, Japan had 4.7 million bbl/d of oil refining capacity as of January 2011, and has the second-largest refining capacity in the Asia-Pacific region after China. According to Wood Mackenzie, Japan is the second largest refining base in the Asia-Pacific region (after China) with crude distillation capacity of 4.4 million bbl/d. The devastating 9-magnitude earthquake which struck Japan's northeast March 11 had in its immediate aftermath shut almost 1.4 million bbl/d or some 30% of refining capacity because of either physical damage, loss of power or as a safety precaution. All or parts of the refinery units were shut down after the earthquake at Exxon's Kawasaki refinery and the Chiba refinery. Exxon's other two refineries---the Wakayama refinery and the Sakai refinery---were not affected by the disaster in Japan. Also, the Kawasaki refinery cogeneration unit is now maximizing electrical generation to provide power to the electricity grid, which is under supplied following the tragedy. About 33 megawatts of power is currently---as of Mar 23---being transmitted to the grid, which is enough electricity for about 10,000 Japanese households. ExxonMobil typically sends 10-15 megawatts/month of surplus power from an in-house power generator at the Kawasaki refinery to Tokyo Electric Power Co./Tepco prior to the earthquake. Kyokuto Petroleum Industries Ltd., i.e. KPI, is a 50-50 joint venture of Exxon Mobil and Mitsui Oil Co. Also, ExxonMobil holds a 50.02 percent stake in TonenGeneral Sekiyu. For information on Japan's nuclear crisis and its impact, please see my posts under the category/label "Japan." -- D.R.)
Saturday, April 2, 2011
Iraq Says to Produce 6.5 mil b/d by 2014; Disputes IMF Figures
Platts, Dubai, Mar 30, 2011
The Iraqi Oil Ministry Wednesday insisted that it was on track to achieve a crude oil production target of 6.5 million b/d by 2014, and disputed a recent IMF report suggesting a lower output rise because of infrastructure challenges.
Oil Ministry spokesman Assem Jihad said in a statement that Iraq expected its oil production, currently at around 2.7 million b/d, to rise to 3.3 million b/d in 2012, 4.5 million b/d in 2013 and 6.5 million b/d the following year.
Iraq is targeting close to 13 million b/d of production capacity by 2017 after awarding long term service contracts to foreign oil companies for development and further development of some of its biggest oil fields [output is projected to increase considerably, following the two bid rounds in June and December of 2009, that resulted in 11 Technical Service Contracts---TSCs---with most of the world's top oil companies, please see David Rachovich, Iraq's Oil Sector: Present, Past and Future -- D.R.].
The latest oil ministry figures obtained by Platts show that Iraq produced 2.63 million b/d in February, down slightly from a post-war record of 2.652 million b/d in January [also, please see my post "OPEC's Top Crude Oil Producers, 2010-Jan. 2011," here -- D.R.]
Jihad said the targets were in line with plans established in coordination with the foreign oil companies.
Oil Minister Abdul Karim Luaibi had not seen the figures contained in the IMF report but they appeared based on "inaccurate data and reports," he added.
The IMF said in a country report issued March 28 that while Iraqi oil production was projected to increase considerably over the medium- to long-term, to 12.2 million b/d over the next seven years in a best case scenario, there were infrastructural risks that could hamper the developments.
"While these production goals could be feasible in the longer term, the main risks in the coming years will be bottlenecks in the export infrastructure that will need to be addressed," the IMF said.
Noting that the government had plans to expand the country's oil, pipeline and export infrastructure, it said execution would take time, in which case production would rise to 5.35 million b/d by 2017 if a more conservative scenario was adopted.
"In addition, large investments in supporting activities are also underway and planned, including the construction of desalination plants to produce water for injection in the fields, and storage facilities. These investments will require time to implement, and suggest a more gradual increase in Iraq's oil production," the IMF said. "Based on more conservative assumptions for the time it will take to expand Iraq's export capacity, oil production could still increase to over 5 million b/d by 2017."
Jihad, referring to the report, said that the ministry had put port and storage expansion projects on a fast track.
These plans include building 24 new storage tanks with capacity of over 300,000 b/d as well as floating platforms with capacity of 900,000 b/d each to absorb the anticipated higher exports [sic]. The plans also include two single point moorings to link the storage tanks to southern export terminals [sic].
The project, which Jihad said would normally take 4-5 years to complete, will raise export capacity by 1.8 million b/d and be completed by the end of this year. The second phase will be finished by the end of next year, he said.
Current export capacity from the south is estimated at 1.6 million b/d [sic, Basra - 1.6 million b/d, Khor al-Amaya - 0.7 million b/d, but their efffecive capacity is less -- D.R.] and the lack of storage facilities has hampered a more rapid rise in oil production from southern oil fields, where output has risen by more than 300,000 b/d since the start of the year.
The additional crude has come as the leaders of three foreign consortia awarded contracts to develop the giant Rumaila, Zubair and West Qurna 1 oil fields have reported reaching the 10% initial output hike from the three fields. However, latest figures from the oil ministry show that output has fallen slightly, apparently because of restricted export and storage capacity. [...]
The IMF said that oil export revenues in 2010 exceeded budgetary projections as higher oil prices offset lower export volumes. It said exports last year averaged 1.85 million b/d, well below Baghdad's 2.1 million b/d target.
"The shortfall reflected periods of bad weather and attacks on pipelines, as well as the lack of an agreement with the Kurdish region to secure additional exports," it said.
"Export prices were substantially higher, however, averaging just over $74/barrel during the year, compared to a budgeted price of $62.50/barrel," it said, adding that total oil export revenues reached $50 billion in 2010 compared with a budget forecast of $48 billion and up from $39 billion in 2009.
But this was still well below the peak of $63 billion in 2008, when oil prices [WTI] rose to a record above $147/b [the price of Kirkuk crude oil reached an all-time high of $134/b in July 2008 -- D.R.] before shedding more than $100/b by the end of that year.
The resumption of Kurdish oil exports in early February pushed up Iraqi oil exports to 2.2 million b/d, the highest since March 2003 [and the highest figure in 22 years, please see David Rachovich, Iraq's Oil Sector: Present, Past and Future, Table 1 -- D.R.]. Iraq has targeted exports of 2.25 million b/d in 2011, including 100,000 b/d [sic] from the Kurdish province.
It based its 2011 budget on an oil price assumption of $76.50/b, below current global oil prices. [Read more]
(Please see the International Monetary Fund/IMF's report, published on Mar 28, 2011, especially Box 1, here. Iraq was the sixth largest supplier of crude oil to the United States in 2010, after Canada, Mexico, Saudi Arabia, Nigeria and Venezuela---please see my post "U.S. Crude Oil Imports from Top 15 Countries," here. For Rumaila, West Qurna-1 and Zubair, please read my Dec 2010 - Jan 2011 blog posts under the category/label "Iraq." -- D.R.)
The Iraqi Oil Ministry Wednesday insisted that it was on track to achieve a crude oil production target of 6.5 million b/d by 2014, and disputed a recent IMF report suggesting a lower output rise because of infrastructure challenges.
Oil Ministry spokesman Assem Jihad said in a statement that Iraq expected its oil production, currently at around 2.7 million b/d, to rise to 3.3 million b/d in 2012, 4.5 million b/d in 2013 and 6.5 million b/d the following year.
Iraq is targeting close to 13 million b/d of production capacity by 2017 after awarding long term service contracts to foreign oil companies for development and further development of some of its biggest oil fields [output is projected to increase considerably, following the two bid rounds in June and December of 2009, that resulted in 11 Technical Service Contracts---TSCs---with most of the world's top oil companies, please see David Rachovich, Iraq's Oil Sector: Present, Past and Future -- D.R.].
The latest oil ministry figures obtained by Platts show that Iraq produced 2.63 million b/d in February, down slightly from a post-war record of 2.652 million b/d in January [also, please see my post "OPEC's Top Crude Oil Producers, 2010-Jan. 2011," here -- D.R.]
Jihad said the targets were in line with plans established in coordination with the foreign oil companies.
Oil Minister Abdul Karim Luaibi had not seen the figures contained in the IMF report but they appeared based on "inaccurate data and reports," he added.
The IMF said in a country report issued March 28 that while Iraqi oil production was projected to increase considerably over the medium- to long-term, to 12.2 million b/d over the next seven years in a best case scenario, there were infrastructural risks that could hamper the developments.
"While these production goals could be feasible in the longer term, the main risks in the coming years will be bottlenecks in the export infrastructure that will need to be addressed," the IMF said.
Noting that the government had plans to expand the country's oil, pipeline and export infrastructure, it said execution would take time, in which case production would rise to 5.35 million b/d by 2017 if a more conservative scenario was adopted.
"In addition, large investments in supporting activities are also underway and planned, including the construction of desalination plants to produce water for injection in the fields, and storage facilities. These investments will require time to implement, and suggest a more gradual increase in Iraq's oil production," the IMF said. "Based on more conservative assumptions for the time it will take to expand Iraq's export capacity, oil production could still increase to over 5 million b/d by 2017."
Jihad, referring to the report, said that the ministry had put port and storage expansion projects on a fast track.
These plans include building 24 new storage tanks with capacity of over 300,000 b/d as well as floating platforms with capacity of 900,000 b/d each to absorb the anticipated higher exports [sic]. The plans also include two single point moorings to link the storage tanks to southern export terminals [sic].
The project, which Jihad said would normally take 4-5 years to complete, will raise export capacity by 1.8 million b/d and be completed by the end of this year. The second phase will be finished by the end of next year, he said.
Current export capacity from the south is estimated at 1.6 million b/d [sic, Basra - 1.6 million b/d, Khor al-Amaya - 0.7 million b/d, but their efffecive capacity is less -- D.R.] and the lack of storage facilities has hampered a more rapid rise in oil production from southern oil fields, where output has risen by more than 300,000 b/d since the start of the year.
The additional crude has come as the leaders of three foreign consortia awarded contracts to develop the giant Rumaila, Zubair and West Qurna 1 oil fields have reported reaching the 10% initial output hike from the three fields. However, latest figures from the oil ministry show that output has fallen slightly, apparently because of restricted export and storage capacity. [...]
The IMF said that oil export revenues in 2010 exceeded budgetary projections as higher oil prices offset lower export volumes. It said exports last year averaged 1.85 million b/d, well below Baghdad's 2.1 million b/d target.
"The shortfall reflected periods of bad weather and attacks on pipelines, as well as the lack of an agreement with the Kurdish region to secure additional exports," it said.
"Export prices were substantially higher, however, averaging just over $74/barrel during the year, compared to a budgeted price of $62.50/barrel," it said, adding that total oil export revenues reached $50 billion in 2010 compared with a budget forecast of $48 billion and up from $39 billion in 2009.
But this was still well below the peak of $63 billion in 2008, when oil prices [WTI] rose to a record above $147/b [the price of Kirkuk crude oil reached an all-time high of $134/b in July 2008 -- D.R.] before shedding more than $100/b by the end of that year.
The resumption of Kurdish oil exports in early February pushed up Iraqi oil exports to 2.2 million b/d, the highest since March 2003 [and the highest figure in 22 years, please see David Rachovich, Iraq's Oil Sector: Present, Past and Future, Table 1 -- D.R.]. Iraq has targeted exports of 2.25 million b/d in 2011, including 100,000 b/d [sic] from the Kurdish province.
It based its 2011 budget on an oil price assumption of $76.50/b, below current global oil prices. [Read more]
(Please see the International Monetary Fund/IMF's report, published on Mar 28, 2011, especially Box 1, here. Iraq was the sixth largest supplier of crude oil to the United States in 2010, after Canada, Mexico, Saudi Arabia, Nigeria and Venezuela---please see my post "U.S. Crude Oil Imports from Top 15 Countries," here. For Rumaila, West Qurna-1 and Zubair, please read my Dec 2010 - Jan 2011 blog posts under the category/label "Iraq." -- D.R.)
Friday, April 1, 2011
U.S. Crude Oil Production, 1970-2010 -- EIA
by Aaron and David Rachovich
United States Crude Oil Production, 1970-2010
Year
|
Crude Oil Production*
(million barrels per day)
|
Year
|
Crude Oil Production*
(million barrels per day)
| |
1970
|
9.637
|
1991
|
7.417
| |
1971
|
9.463
|
1992
|
7.171
| |
1972
|
9.441
|
1993
|
6.847
| |
1973
|
9.208
|
1994
|
6.662
| |
1974
|
8.774
|
1995
|
6.560
| |
1975
|
8.375
|
1996
|
6.465
| |
1976
|
8.132
|
1997
|
6.452
| |
1977
|
8.245
|
1998
|
6.252
| |
1978
|
8.707
|
1999
|
5.881
| |
1979
|
8.552
|
2000
|
5.822
| |
1980
|
8.597
|
2001
|
5.801
| |
1981
|
8.572
|
2002
|
5.746
| |
1982
|
8.649
|
2003
|
5.681
| |
1983
|
8.688
|
2004
|
5.419
| |
1984
|
8.879
|
2005
|
5.178
| |
1985
|
8.971
|
2006
|
5.102
| |
1986
|
8.680
|
2007
|
5.064
| |
1987
|
8.349
|
2008
|
4.950
| |
1988
|
8.140
|
2009
|
5.361
| |
1989
|
7.613
|
2010
|
5.512 (5.482 updated)
| |
1990
|
7.355
|
2011
UPD |
5.644
|
*Includes lease condensate. And since the mid-2000s, oil production from shale formations.
Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)
Please also see Figure 1. U.S. Crude Oil Production, 1970-2010
Please also see Figure 1. U.S. Crude Oil Production, 1970-2010
(In 1970, U.S. crude oil production was at an all-time high of 9.637 million barrels per day---please see table and Figure 1. above. Also, please see my post "United States: Domestic Oil Production Reversed Decades-Long Decline in 2009 and 2010," here. And in a speech at Georgetown University in Washington, March 30th, President Obama said, "Last year [i.e., 2010], American oil production reached its highest level since 2003, and for the first time in more than a decade [last time 1997 - 49% -- D.R.], oil we imported [net imports of both crude oil and refined products -- D.R.] accounted for less than half the liquid fuel we consumed [i.e., 49% -- D.R.]."---please see table above and my post "US to Find 'More Oil at Home,' While Cutting Consumption: President Obama," remarks below, here. Currently, the United States still relies heavily on imported oil. In 2010, it imported 9.163 million b/d of crude oil and nearly 2.6 million b/d of refined products. Half of all U.S. net imports (imports minus exports) of liquid fuels, i.e., net imports of crude oil and petroleum products, etc., in 2010 came from the Americas---please see my post "Half of U.S. Liquid Fuels Net Imports in 2010 Came from the Americas," here. Moreover, please see our post "United States: Top 8 Crude Oil Producing States, 2006-Feb.2011," and U.S. oil reserves in our post "World's Top 22 Proven Oil Reserves Holders," here. Update: please see my post "EIA Expects Higher U.S. Crude Production," UPI, Mar 7, 2012. Update 2: North Dakota passed Alaska in March 2012 to become the second-leading state in
crude oil production, trailing only Texas. Recent advancements in horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing in North Dakota's Bakken shale play as well as other shale plays, such as South Texas Eagle Ford shale, have led to an increase in U.S. oil output. For a detailed account of North Dakota's oil production and its recent oil boom, please see my post "North Dakota Tops Alaska in Oil Production, Trailing Only
Texas," including remarks. Furthermore, please see EIA data on weekly U.S. field production of crude oil, Jan 7, 1983 - Nov 30, 2012. -- D.R.)
US to Find 'More Oil at Home,' While Cutting Consumption: President Obama
Platts, Washington, Mar 30, 2011
US President Barack Obama on Wednesday called for the country to reduce oil imports by one-third within the next decade, warning that the US cannot "afford to bet our long-term prosperity and security on a resource that will eventually run out."
In a speech at Georgetown University in Washington, the president presented a "Blueprint for a Secure Energy Future" that would reduce US oil imports by increasing the use of domestic natural gas, promoting advanced biofuels, boosting vehicle fuel efficiency and increasing US oil output.
The president said that while gasoline price increases have historically been temporary, the long-term trend suggests "there will be more ups than downs. That's because countries like India and China are growing at a rapid clip. And as 2 billion more people start consuming more goods, driving more cars and using more energy, it's certain that demand will go up a lot faster than supply."
But Obama warned that "there are no quick fixes, and we will keep being a victim to shifts in the oil market until we get serious about a long-term policy for secure, affordable energy."
"Meeting this new goal of cutting our oil dependence depends largely on two things -- finding and producing more oil at home and reducing our dependence on oil with cleaner alternative fuels and greater efficiency," he said.
The US currently relies heavily on imported oil. In 2010, it imported 9.163 million b/d of crude and nearly 2.6 million b/d of refined products, according to data from the Energy Information Administration, the statistical arm of the Department of Energy. US crude production last year averaged 5.512 million b/d [please see my post "U.S. Crude Oil Production/Table," here -- D.R.].
Neighboring Canada and Mexico were top crude suppliers with 1.972 million b/d and 1.14 million b/d, respectively [please see my post "U.S. Crude Oil Imports from Top 15 Countries, Dec 2010 and Full Year 2010 -- EIA," here -- D.R.].
International crude prices climbed above $100/barrel early this year as unrest spread across North Africa and the Middle East, with North Sea Brent trading close to $120/b in the latter part of February as the unrest spread to Libya and reduced oil production there [please see my post/remarks here].
To spur an increase in US production, Obama said the White House is developing "incentives" for oil companies to speed up development in areas already open to drilling. Although Obama did not provide details, a White House fact sheet issued Wednesday said the US Department of Interior is already shortening some lease terms and requiring drilling to begin before granting lease extensions. DOI is also studying a graduated royalty rate structure to reward faster development.
Obama set a goal of building four commercial-scale biofuels refineries in the next two years and pledged that the US government would buy only low-emissions vehicles by 2015.
"The fleet of cars and trucks we use in the federal government is one of the largest in the country," Obama said. "That's why we've already doubled the number of alternative vehicles in the federal fleet, and that's why, today, I am directing agencies to purchase 100% alternative fuel, hybrid or electric vehicles by 2015."
"We've known about the dangers of our oil dependence for decades," the president said. "Presidents and politicians of every stripe have promised energy independence, but that promise has so far gone unmet.
"I've pledged to reduce America's dependence on oil too, and I'm proud of the historic progress we've made over the last two years towards that goal. But we've also run into the same political gridlock and inertia that's held us back for decades.
"That has to change. We cannot keep going from shock, when gas prices go up, to trance on the issue of energy security, rushing to propose action when gas prices rise, then hitting the snooze button when they fall again."
Reaction to Obama's speech was mixed, with oil producers saying the president's criticism was misguided and some green groups taking issue with his proposed solutions.
The president of the Independent Petroleum Producers [/Association] of America [i.e., IPAA -- D.R.], Barry Russell, said slow permitting by the federal government is partially to blame for the slow development that Obama cited.
"Leases can't be developed if companies don't have the permits necessary to proceed with exploration and production activities, which take several years and billions of dollars to develop," Russell said. "There is also no guarantee that oil and natural gas will be found on all of the land that is leased."
Democrats and environmental groups had a largely positive reaction, to the speech, although Friends of the Earth criticized Obama for relying too heavily on nuclear and natural gas power.
Frances Beinecke, president of environmental group the Natural Resources Defense Council, said Obama's goal of cutting oil imports is achievable.
"We can get there by driving higher-gas-mileage vehicles, expanding mass transit systems, using more wind and solar, and building more efficiency into the products we use and the buildings we live and work in," Beinecke said. [Full story]
(In a speech at Georgetown University in Washington, March 30th, President Obama also said, "Last year, American oil production reached its highest level since 2003, and for the first time in more than a decade [last time 1997 - 49% -- D.R.], oil we imported [net imports] accounted for less than half the liquid fuel we consumed [i.e., 49% -- D.R.]."---please see my post, including remarks, here. Please watch President Obama's speech, here. In his State of the Union address in January, President Obama set a goal of generating 80% of US electricity from clean energy sources by 2035. -- D.R.)
US President Barack Obama on Wednesday called for the country to reduce oil imports by one-third within the next decade, warning that the US cannot "afford to bet our long-term prosperity and security on a resource that will eventually run out."
In a speech at Georgetown University in Washington, the president presented a "Blueprint for a Secure Energy Future" that would reduce US oil imports by increasing the use of domestic natural gas, promoting advanced biofuels, boosting vehicle fuel efficiency and increasing US oil output.
The president said that while gasoline price increases have historically been temporary, the long-term trend suggests "there will be more ups than downs. That's because countries like India and China are growing at a rapid clip. And as 2 billion more people start consuming more goods, driving more cars and using more energy, it's certain that demand will go up a lot faster than supply."
But Obama warned that "there are no quick fixes, and we will keep being a victim to shifts in the oil market until we get serious about a long-term policy for secure, affordable energy."
"Meeting this new goal of cutting our oil dependence depends largely on two things -- finding and producing more oil at home and reducing our dependence on oil with cleaner alternative fuels and greater efficiency," he said.
The US currently relies heavily on imported oil. In 2010, it imported 9.163 million b/d of crude and nearly 2.6 million b/d of refined products, according to data from the Energy Information Administration, the statistical arm of the Department of Energy. US crude production last year averaged 5.512 million b/d [please see my post "U.S. Crude Oil Production/Table," here -- D.R.].
Neighboring Canada and Mexico were top crude suppliers with 1.972 million b/d and 1.14 million b/d, respectively [please see my post "U.S. Crude Oil Imports from Top 15 Countries, Dec 2010 and Full Year 2010 -- EIA," here -- D.R.].
International crude prices climbed above $100/barrel early this year as unrest spread across North Africa and the Middle East, with North Sea Brent trading close to $120/b in the latter part of February as the unrest spread to Libya and reduced oil production there [please see my post/remarks here].
To spur an increase in US production, Obama said the White House is developing "incentives" for oil companies to speed up development in areas already open to drilling. Although Obama did not provide details, a White House fact sheet issued Wednesday said the US Department of Interior is already shortening some lease terms and requiring drilling to begin before granting lease extensions. DOI is also studying a graduated royalty rate structure to reward faster development.
Obama set a goal of building four commercial-scale biofuels refineries in the next two years and pledged that the US government would buy only low-emissions vehicles by 2015.
"The fleet of cars and trucks we use in the federal government is one of the largest in the country," Obama said. "That's why we've already doubled the number of alternative vehicles in the federal fleet, and that's why, today, I am directing agencies to purchase 100% alternative fuel, hybrid or electric vehicles by 2015."
"We've known about the dangers of our oil dependence for decades," the president said. "Presidents and politicians of every stripe have promised energy independence, but that promise has so far gone unmet.
"I've pledged to reduce America's dependence on oil too, and I'm proud of the historic progress we've made over the last two years towards that goal. But we've also run into the same political gridlock and inertia that's held us back for decades.
"That has to change. We cannot keep going from shock, when gas prices go up, to trance on the issue of energy security, rushing to propose action when gas prices rise, then hitting the snooze button when they fall again."
Reaction to Obama's speech was mixed, with oil producers saying the president's criticism was misguided and some green groups taking issue with his proposed solutions.
The president of the Independent Petroleum Producers [/Association] of America [i.e., IPAA -- D.R.], Barry Russell, said slow permitting by the federal government is partially to blame for the slow development that Obama cited.
"Leases can't be developed if companies don't have the permits necessary to proceed with exploration and production activities, which take several years and billions of dollars to develop," Russell said. "There is also no guarantee that oil and natural gas will be found on all of the land that is leased."
Democrats and environmental groups had a largely positive reaction, to the speech, although Friends of the Earth criticized Obama for relying too heavily on nuclear and natural gas power.
Frances Beinecke, president of environmental group the Natural Resources Defense Council, said Obama's goal of cutting oil imports is achievable.
"We can get there by driving higher-gas-mileage vehicles, expanding mass transit systems, using more wind and solar, and building more efficiency into the products we use and the buildings we live and work in," Beinecke said. [Full story]
(In a speech at Georgetown University in Washington, March 30th, President Obama also said, "Last year, American oil production reached its highest level since 2003, and for the first time in more than a decade [last time 1997 - 49% -- D.R.], oil we imported [net imports] accounted for less than half the liquid fuel we consumed [i.e., 49% -- D.R.]."---please see my post, including remarks, here. Please watch President Obama's speech, here. In his State of the Union address in January, President Obama set a goal of generating 80% of US electricity from clean energy sources by 2035. -- D.R.)
Thursday, March 31, 2011
World Watch [BP-Rosneft Alliance?]
by Jim Washer, London, EI
BP’s proposed alliance with Russia’s state Rosneft is running into trouble. Alfa Access Renova (AAR), BP’s [Russian] partners in the TNK-BP joint venture, have succeeded in halting the deal, at least in its current form, by convincing an arbitration tribunal in Sweden that the pact did violate the TNK-BP shareholder agreement [please see remarks below -- D.R.]. BP has said the deal is worth fighting for and is not giving up, but the longer the uncertainty goes on, the greater the risk that Rosneft and its Russian government owners will lose patience, cut their losses and look for another partner – Shell is already being mentioned as a possible replacement for BP in Rosneft’s proposed Arctic exploration venture. BP might still be able to proceed with its cross-shareholding with Rosneft, but to what purpose? What BP had really wanted from the Rosneft alliance was to show investors that, despite the Macondo disaster, it was still a desirable upstream partner and could still secure attractive upstream opportunities. Those twin objectives are now in serious jeopardy.
(The AAR partners had accused BP of violating their shareholder agreement which, they claimed obliges both parties to pursue new projects in Russia through the 50-50 TNK-BP venture. For information on BP-Rosneft alliance, unveiled in January, please see my post, here. For the Macondo disaster, please see my post here. -- D.R.)
BP’s proposed alliance with Russia’s state Rosneft is running into trouble. Alfa Access Renova (AAR), BP’s [Russian] partners in the TNK-BP joint venture, have succeeded in halting the deal, at least in its current form, by convincing an arbitration tribunal in Sweden that the pact did violate the TNK-BP shareholder agreement [please see remarks below -- D.R.]. BP has said the deal is worth fighting for and is not giving up, but the longer the uncertainty goes on, the greater the risk that Rosneft and its Russian government owners will lose patience, cut their losses and look for another partner – Shell is already being mentioned as a possible replacement for BP in Rosneft’s proposed Arctic exploration venture. BP might still be able to proceed with its cross-shareholding with Rosneft, but to what purpose? What BP had really wanted from the Rosneft alliance was to show investors that, despite the Macondo disaster, it was still a desirable upstream partner and could still secure attractive upstream opportunities. Those twin objectives are now in serious jeopardy.
(The AAR partners had accused BP of violating their shareholder agreement which, they claimed obliges both parties to pursue new projects in Russia through the 50-50 TNK-BP venture. For information on BP-Rosneft alliance, unveiled in January, please see my post, here. For the Macondo disaster, please see my post here. -- D.R.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)