• 4 minutes End of Sanction Waivers
  • 8 minutes Balancing Act---Sanctions, Venezuela, Trade War and Demand
  • 11 minutes Mueller Report Brings Into Focus Obama's Attempted Coup Against Trump
  • 14 minutes What Would Happen If the World Ran Out of Crude Oil?
  • 6 hours US Military Spends at least $81 Billion Protecting OPEC Persian Gulf Oil Shipping Lanes (16% DoD Budget)
  • 5 mins Populist Surge Coming in Europe's May Election
  • 1 hour New German Study Shocks Electric Cars: “Considerably” Worse For Climate Than Diesel Cars, Up To 25% More CO2
  • 9 hours "Undeniable" Shale Slowdown?
  • 7 hours Saudi Arabia Says To Coordinate With Other Producers To Ensure Adequate Oil Supply
  • 12 hours China To Promote Using Wind Energy To Power Heating
  • 13 hours Climate Change Protests
  • 12 hours Overheating the Earth: High Temperatures Shortened Alaska’s Winter Weather
  • 6 hours Don't Climb Onto the $80+ Oil Price Greed Roller Coaster, Please.
  • 9 hours How many drilling sites are left in the Permian?
  • 10 hours Gas Flaring
  • 4 hours Liberal Heads Explode as U.S. Senate Confirms Oil Lobbyist David Bernhardt as Interior Secretary
Alt Text

Environmentalists’ “Bomb Train” Concerns Are Overblown

President Trump’s executive order aimed…

Alt Text

This Legendary Shale Basin Just Broke Its 2011 Production Record

The Haynesville Shale in northeastern…

Alt Text

Did This Gas Major Just Ensure Its Survival?

Santos Ltd. just posted a…

Charles Kennedy

Charles Kennedy

Charles is a writer for Oilprice.com

More Info

Trending Discussions

Is Colorado Ground Zero For The Next Shale Gas Boom?

A new estimate from the U.S. Geological Survey finds that Colorado could actually hold 40 times more natural gas than previously expected.

The so-called Mancos Shale formation holds an estimated 66.3 trillion cubic feet (tcf) of natural gas, sharply up from the 1.6 tcf in the previous 2003 estimate. The Mancos formation is part of the greater Uinta-Piceance Province, and the large upward revision puts the Mancos basin second only to the Marcellus Shale in terms of the largest total gas reserves in the U.S.

“We reassessed the Mancos Shale in the Piceance Basin as part of a broader effort to reassess priority onshore U.S. continuous oil and gas accumulations,” said USGS scientist Sarah Hawkins, lead author of the assessment. “In the last decade, new drilling in the Mancos Shale provided additional geologic data and required a revision of our previous assessment of technically recoverable, undiscovered oil and gas.”

For now, prices are likely to be too low for companies to begin drilling to any large extent. According to David Ludlam of the West Slope Colorado Oil and Gas Association, drillers probably need natural gas prices near $3.50 per million Btu (MMBtu). That is much higher than Henry Hub spot prices, which have traded near $2/MMBtu for the last several months, although they have surged lately as storage levels are climbing much slower than expected for this time of year. Natural gas prices jumped to $2.60 on Thursday after the latest data from the EIA showed another smaller-than-expected inventory build. Related: Billionaire Investors Back A Gold Price Rally In 2016

But even if prices did rise to those levels needed for Colorado’s Mancos Shale, producers would have trouble finding a way to get that gas to market. The best bet would be for LNG export terminals on the West Coast, but previous proposals for such projects have gone nowhere. The Jordan Cove LNG export terminal in Oregon recently was denied a federal permit and is stuck on the drawing board.

That suggests that the Mancos Shale may not be developed in the near-term despite the massive volume of natural gas that the formation holds.

(Click to enlarge)

By Charles Kennedy of Oilprice.com

More Top Reads From Oilprice.com:




Download The Free Oilprice App Today

Back to homepage

Trending Discussions


Leave a comment
  • CapitalistRoader on June 11 2016 said:
    So, 66 * 10^12 new supply divided by 25 * 10^6 current US annual consumption equals 2.64 million years of consumption. Or is my math off?

Leave a comment




Oilprice - The No. 1 Source for Oil & Energy News