US shale oil production is plummeting

Forum for general discussion of Peak Oil / Oil depletion; also covering related subjects

Moderator: Peak Moderation

vtsnowedin
Posts: 6595
Joined: 07 Jan 2011, 22:14
Location: New England ,Chelsea Vermont

Post by vtsnowedin »

kenneal - lagger wrote:The timing of high tide varies around the British coast as the tide comes in from the Atlantic and flows around the North of Scotland and south into the North Sea and also up the Channel so there is an overlap in the production of power. Also most of the time according to research there is wind blowing somewhere in or around Britain so given sufficient renewable capacity the need for backup power is minimal.
I'm aware of that but will stick by my earlier point of
but if we build all three out to the extent practicable

and we will not know exactly how much we can get from that until we actually build it.
But let's not turn off or dismantle the old system or it's plants before we have the new up and running and carrying the load.
Yves75
Posts: 265
Joined: 13 Jul 2008, 13:27
Location: Paris, France
Contact:

Post by Yves75 »

Some impressive images regarding shale :

Image

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/201 ... ation.html

Scorched earth strategy if there is one ..
User avatar
ReserveGrowthRulz
Banned
Posts: 730
Joined: 19 May 2019, 08:00
Location: Colorado

Post by ReserveGrowthRulz »

What the American E&Ps have managed to do is quite amazing, isn't it?
User avatar
clv101
Site Admin
Posts: 10555
Joined: 24 Nov 2005, 11:09
Contact:

Post by clv101 »

ReserveGrowthRulz wrote:What the American E&Ps have managed to do is quite amazing, isn't it?
It is amazing, the scale of the fossil fuel extraction industry is the key reason why large scale CO2 sequestration is hopeless. CO2 is 'bigger' than the original fossil fuel, and when in the atmosphere, very low concentrations. Attempting to capture and sequester the CO2 would need another, mirror, industry... But without the energy/profit.
User avatar
ReserveGrowthRulz
Banned
Posts: 730
Joined: 19 May 2019, 08:00
Location: Colorado

Post by ReserveGrowthRulz »

clv101 wrote:
ReserveGrowthRulz wrote:What the American E&Ps have managed to do is quite amazing, isn't it?
It is amazing, the scale of the fossil fuel extraction industry is the key reason why large scale CO2 sequestration is hopeless.
If the scale of the production can be amazing, so can the scale of sequestration.
Last edited by ReserveGrowthRulz on 17 Jun 2020, 04:11, edited 1 time in total.
kenneal
Posts: 12
Joined: 06 Dec 2019, 21:04

Post by kenneal »

Yves75 wrote:Some impressive images regarding shale :

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/201 ... ation.html

Scorched earth strategy if there is one ..
Development on that scale in the country side in the UK would provoke riots and any MP in the area who supported it would be out at the next election. The UK is so much more densely populated than the US.
Yves75
Posts: 265
Joined: 13 Jul 2008, 13:27
Location: Paris, France
Contact:

Post by Yves75 »

ReserveGrowthRulz wrote:What the American E&Ps have managed to do is quite amazing, isn't it?
For sure, they definitely are your typical barbarian idiots ("Americans" anglos), fed by quantitative easing. But all this doesn't matter much anyway, these days, so no need to bother.
Last edited by Yves75 on 11 Dec 2019, 19:14, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Mark
Posts: 2522
Joined: 13 Dec 2007, 08:48
Location: NW England

Post by Mark »

vtsnowedin wrote:So we have solar power that doesn't work at all after sundown.And wind power that doesn't work if the weather is wrong and tidal power that predictably doesn't work at neap tide at any given location. So we can't rely on any one of them for total power production, but if we build all three out to the extent practicable we can take a big chunk out of total demand and fill the gaps with some new modular nuclear power or a few lingering fossil fuel plants.
That much is possible and we should do that and then see where we can go from there.
A little bit of sense & add in the rapid development of battery technology too

However, the bit that most people forget:
WE ALL NEED TO USE A LOT LESS !!!
Last edited by Mark on 11 Dec 2019, 19:05, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Mark
Posts: 2522
Joined: 13 Dec 2007, 08:48
Location: NW England

Post by Mark »

Yves75 wrote:For sure, they definitely are your typical barbarian idiots ("Americans" anglos), fed by quantitative easing. But all this doesn't matter much more anyway, these days, so no need to bother.
Sadly, you´re probably correct....

Climate change: Methane pulse detected from South Sudan wetlands:
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-50708544
woodburner
Posts: 4124
Joined: 06 Apr 2009, 22:45

Post by woodburner »

Mark wrote:
vtsnowedin wrote:So we have solar power that doesn't work at all after sundown.And wind power that doesn't work if the weather is wrong and tidal power that predictably doesn't work at neap tide at any given location. So we can't rely on any one of them for total power production, but if we build all three out to the extent practicable we can take a big chunk out of total demand and fill the gaps with some new modular nuclear power or a few lingering fossil fuel plants.
That much is possible and we should do that and then see where we can go from there.
A little bit of sense & add in the rapid development of battery technology too

However, the bit that most people forget:
WE ALL NEED TO USE A LOT LESS !!!
Meanwhile China is building HUNDREDS of coal fired power stations, so they are not thinking the same as you.
To become an extremist, hang around with people you agree with. Cass Sunstein
User avatar
Mark
Posts: 2522
Joined: 13 Dec 2007, 08:48
Location: NW England

Post by Mark »

woodburner wrote:
Mark wrote:
vtsnowedin wrote:So we have solar power that doesn't work at all after sundown.And wind power that doesn't work if the weather is wrong and tidal power that predictably doesn't work at neap tide at any given location. So we can't rely on any one of them for total power production, but if we build all three out to the extent practicable we can take a big chunk out of total demand and fill the gaps with some new modular nuclear power or a few lingering fossil fuel plants.
That much is possible and we should do that and then see where we can go from there.
A little bit of sense & add in the rapid development of battery technology too

However, the bit that most people forget:
WE ALL NEED TO USE A LOT LESS !!!
Meanwhile China is building HUNDREDS of coal fired power stations, so they are not thinking the same as you.
Partially agree, but think you read the Daily Mail too much....

I am the only one who thinks we need to use less ?
We obviously share the climate globally, so no use one country doing good stuff, if others do the total opposite.
The UK is doing some good things, but only in certain areas.....
As you mention, China is doing some terrible things, but they are also doing some great things......
They recently closed down thousands of polluting factories and are well on the way towards electrifying public transport....
Yes, we should be critical of certain things, but we should also learn from others with good practice, no ?
https://www.forbes.com/sites/trevornace ... crackdown/
https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2018 ... -bus-fleet

That is why there is a COP25 Meeting at the moment in Madrid ?

Global Agreements have worked before (eg Montreal Protocol for Ozone Depleting Substances), but as we know, Greenhouse Gases are much more problematic due to all the vested interests and economic factors.
As Greta T highlighted in her speech, these meetings are deeply flawed, but they are the only game in town ?
The world will properly wake up soon, but I fear it is already too late......,
I guess that is the Doomer in me.....
User avatar
Mark
Posts: 2522
Joined: 13 Dec 2007, 08:48
Location: NW England

Post by Mark »

ExxonMobil warns of $30bn writedown of shale assets amid energy price slump:
https://amp-theguardian-com.cdn.ampproj ... rices-fall

Announcement follows record quarterly loss of $680m, its third quarterly deficit in a row. ExxonMobil has warned it may write down the value of its US shale assets by up to $30bn (£23.2bn) following a steep drop in global energy prices that has led to the oil giant’s third consecutive quarterly loss. The US oil and gas producer told investors it plans to reassess its North America gas business over the coming months, which could lead to impairment charges as high as $25bn to $30bn if it changes its long-term strategy.

Continues...
vtsnowedin
Posts: 6595
Joined: 07 Jan 2011, 22:14
Location: New England ,Chelsea Vermont

Post by vtsnowedin »

Exxon's actions are just the rational and even legally required response to the current market conditions driven by the depressed demand created by the Covid pandemic. Once they get past the pandemic and demand returns they will happily the value of those assets back up to meet the new market conditions. They are a big enough dog in this hunt to make it there to the tree.
User avatar
Mark
Posts: 2522
Joined: 13 Dec 2007, 08:48
Location: NW England

Post by Mark »

vtsnowedin wrote:Exxon's actions are just the rational and even legally required response to the current market conditions driven by the depressed demand created by the Covid pandemic. Once they get past the pandemic and demand returns they will happily the value of those assets back up to meet the new market conditions. They are a big enough dog in this hunt to make it there to the tree.
True - but will demand ever return to the previous levels ?
Also, not great news for Trump just before the election, as he's so wedded to both stock prices and shale....
vtsnowedin
Posts: 6595
Joined: 07 Jan 2011, 22:14
Location: New England ,Chelsea Vermont

Post by vtsnowedin »

Perhaps not as high as the previous peak as I expect the airline and cruise ship industries to be changed forever but after we get a handle on Covid-19 and it's successors I do expect demand to recover enough to make all of the known reserves viable.
As to Trump he makes his own bad news every time he speaks.
Post Reply