This thread is for comments related to oil and natural gas only. If a comment is not responded to I might move inappropriate comments to the non-petroleum thread. I reserve the right to delete comments that are off topic, I may or may not choose to do so.
Open Thread Non Petroleum
This open thread is for anything energy related that is not specifically about oil or natural gas.
Where possible comments might be moved to this thread if they are posted in the wrong place.
Petroleum Supply Monthly, Texas C+C estimate, Permian, and Eagle Ford
This post was written by Dennis Coyne and does not necessarily reflect the opinion of Ron Patterson.
I have considered an alternative way of estimating Texas oil (C+C) output using the Drilling info data provided in the EIA’s 914 monthly production reports.
The Texas estimate is a weak part of the EIA’s estimate for US C+C output. In the chart above I show the EIA’s most recent monthly estimate from the Petroleum supply monthly and compare with an alternative estimate that substitute’s my best estimate for EIA’s TX C+C estimate. The slope of the trend line needs to be multiplied by 366 to give the decline at an annual rate, for the EIA estimate it is 528 kb/d per year, and for the alternative estimate it is 364 kb/d per year. Read More
Texas Oil and Natural Gas- June 2016
Dean has shared his estimates for Texas Oil and Natural Gas output. Texas (TX) C+C output was revised lower by -10, -17, -22, -18, and -52 kb/d for Nov 2015 through March 2016 respectively. Output in April 2016 increased by 27 kb/d from the revised March 2016 estimate to 3511 kb/d. The EIA estimate for March 2016 is 3276 kb/d, and Dean’s revised estimate is 3484 kb/d, 208 kb/d more than the EIA estimate.
World Energy 2016-2050: Annual Report
This is a guest post by “Political Economist” and does not necessarily represent the opinions of Ron Patterson.
World Energy 2016-2050: Annual Report
“Political Economist”
June 2016
The purpose of this annual report is to provide an analytical framework evaluating the development of world energy supply and its impact on the global economy. The report projects the world supply of oil, natural gas, coal, nuclear, hydro, wind, solar, and other energies from 2016 to 2050. It also projects the overall world energy consumption, gross world economic product, and energy efficiency from 2016 to 2050 as well as carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuels burning from 2016 to 2100.
The basic analytical tool is Hubbert Linearization, first proposed by American geologist M. King Hubbert (Hubbert 1982). Despite its limitations, Hubbert Linearization provides a useful tool helping to indicate the likely level of ultimately recoverable resources under the existing trends of technology, economics, and geopolitics. Other statistical methods and some official projections will also be used where they are relevant.
Past experience with Hubbert Linearization suggests that Hubbert Linearization exercise tends to underestimate the ultimately recoverable oil and natural gas resources. To mitigate this “pessimistic” bias, I use the US Energy Information Administration (EIA)’s official projection to project US oil and natural gas production from 2016 to 2040, which may prove to be too optimistic.
About two years ago, I posted “World Energy 2014-2050” at Peak Oil Barrel (Political Economist 2014). The posts can be found here:
World Energy 2014-2050 (Part 1)
World Energy 2014-2050 (Part 2)