Open Thread- Non-Petroleum

I don’t have anything ready to post and have noticed the conversation has wandered far from Oil and Natural Gas in the previous thread.  Please post comments on non-Petroleum topics in this thread.  Petroleum (Oil and Natural Gas) topics should go in the Open Thread- Petroleum post.

It is too much work to move comments from one thread to the other so I may delete posts that are in the wrong thread.

It will help if you don’t respond to posts that are in the wrong thread, even simple stuff like “Wrong thread” will not allow me to delete the comment without messing up the conversation.

We will see how this works.

So two threads, Petroleum and non-Petroleum, when in doubt use the non-Petroleum thread.  By Petroleum, I mean Oil and Natural Gas.

Texas Oil and Gas Production March 2016

Most of the charts that follow were produced by Dean Fantazzini and are in barrels of output per day for oil, condensate, and oil plus condensate except where noted. In my opinion Dean’s estimates for Texas output for the most recent 24 months are the best that I have seen.  I appreciate him sharing his outstanding work with us.

TXchart/

In the chart above corrected output is 3477 kb/d for TX C+C in Jan 2016, an increase of 73 kb/d from Dec 2015.  Note that from May 2015 to Dec 2015 the most recent month’s estimate has been about 28 kb/d too high on average, so actual Jan 2016 output might be about 3450 kb/d. Read More

An Empirical Model For Oil Prices and Some Implications

This is a guest post by Ian Schindler (Schinzy).

The views expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of Ron Patterson or Dennis Coyne.

Introduction

This work is preliminary. It is a preview of part of a paper I am writing with Aude Illig. There are three main reasons I am making this post. The first is as a public service. There are many people reading this blog who are directly affected by oil prices and who have to make decisions based on future oil prices. Having a model to understand the dynamics of oil prices is of use to them. The second reason is that some people reading this blog model oil extraction. These models either omit price considerations or make assumptions on them. Our model is a large improvement on these assumptions so it should improve their extraction models. The final reason is that I consider the quality of the comments on this blog to be high. I believe that the feedback I get from this post will improve the quality of the final paper. Indeed, Dennis Coyne has already provided valuable feedback after previewing the post. This study has been a humbling experience. Get ready to throw out everything you thought you knew about oil prices.

Read More

Coal Shock Model

This is a guest post by Dennis Coyne.

The views expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of Ron Patterson.

blog1603/

The eventual peak in World fossil fuel output is a potentially serious problem for human civilization. Many people have studied this problem, including Jean Laherrere, Steve Mohr, Paul Pukite (aka Webhubbletelescope), and David Rutledge.

I have found Steve Mohr’s work the most comprehensive as he covered coal, oil, and natural gas from both the supply and demand perspective in his PhD Thesis. Jean Laherrere has studied the problem extensively with his focus primarily on oil and natural gas, but with some exploration of the coal resource as well. David Rutledge has studied the coal resource using linearization techniques on the production data (which he calls logit and probit).

Paul Pukite introduced the Shock Model with dispersive discovery which he has used primarily to look at how oil and natural gas resources are developed and extracted over time. In the past I have attempted to apply Paul Pukite’s Shock Model (in a simplified form) to the discovery data found in Jean Laherrere’s work for both oil and natural gas, using the analysis of Steve Mohr as a guide for the URR of my low and high scenarios along with the insight gleaned from Hubbert Linearization.

In the current post I will apply the Shock model to the coal resource, again trying to build on the work of Mohr, Rutledge, Laherrere, and Pukite.
Read More