• 2 minutes California to ban gasoline for lawn mowers, chain saws, leaf blowers, off road equipment, etc.
  • 6 minutes China and India are both needing more coal and prices are now extremely high. They need maximum fossil fuel.
  • 11 minutes Europeans and Americans are beginning to see the results of depending on renewables.
  • 20 hours Monday 9/13 - "High Natural Gas Prices Today Will Send U.S. Production Soaring Next Year" by Irina Slav
  • 40 mins GREEN NEW DEAL = BLIZZARD OF LIES
  • 25 mins Is China Rising or Falling? Has it Enraged the World and Lost its Way? How is their Economy Doing?
  • 2 hours Did China cherry-pick the factors that affected the economic slow-down?
  • 1 day "Here is The Hidden $150 Trillion Agenda Behind The "Crusade" Against Climate Change" - Zero Hedge re: Bank of America REPORT
  • 3 days U.S. : Employers Can Buy Retirement Security for $2.64 an Hour
  • 3 days Nord Stream - US/German consultations
  • 5 days "A Very Predictable Global Energy Crisis" by Irina Slav --- MUST READ
  • 409 days Class Act: Bet You've Never Seen A President Do This.
  • 5 days An Indian Opinion on What is Going on in China
  • 2 days Forecasts for Natural Gas
  • 2 days Australia sues Neoen for lack of power from its Tesla battery
  • 5 days Storage of gas cylinders
  • 5 days Can Technology Keep Coal Plants Alive and Well?
Hungary And Ukraine Butt Heads Over A New Natural Gas Deal

Hungary And Ukraine Butt Heads Over A New Natural Gas Deal

Ukraine’s ambassador to Hungary has…

Is America Doomed To Replicate Europe’s Energy Crisis?

Is America Doomed To Replicate Europe’s Energy Crisis?

Europe’s energy crisis is dominating…

Dave Forest

Dave Forest

Dave is Managing Geologist of the Pierce Points Daily E-Letter.

More Info

Premium Content

Natural Gas Royalties and Chaos Theory

We all know the famous (and oversimplified) explanation of chaos theory. If a butterfly flaps in Moscow, it creates typhoons in Manila.

The basic point being there are no closed systems. Everything is affected by everything else. Even very distant things.

U.S. producer Range Resources proved yesterday the same is true for natural gas royalties.

One of Range's main producing regions is the Marcellus shale in Pennsylvania and Ohio. Like many producers, the company drills wells here and then connects them to pipeline. The gas is transported away for processing (stripping of liquids and other substances), compression, and eventual shipment to market.

As in many gas plays, Range pays royalties on production to local landholders. If you own the ground above a gas pool, you get a small percentage of the revenue from each MCF flowed to surface.

But Range had a "chaos theory" issue with the definition of revenue. The company felt revenues are affected not only by what happens at the production site, but also by happenings at more distant locations.

Specifically, the company believed it should be able to deduct costs for transporting and processing gas before calculating royalty payments. Such costs are usually paid to third-party pipeline and facility operators, and can represent a significant amount.

Here's (quickly) how it works. Suppose a landholder has been given a 20% royalty on gas production. If a gas consumer (or third-party supplier) buys an MCF from the producing company for $6, the landowner gets $1.20.

But a gas buyer won't always take gas right out of the ground. A producer like Range may be distant from a pipeline gate where buyers accept delivery. And the gas may need processing before it meets specs for being allowed into the buyer's pipeline.

In such case, the producer can build its own pipeline to transport gas to the sale point. And construct its own processing plant along the way. Or, if this infrastructure has already been built by another company in the area, the producer can simply pay the owner of these facilities a fee to transport and clean the gas.

Here's where the problem comes in. Suppose our producer pays $1 per MCF in transport and processing fees to the third-party facilities owner. Once this gas arrives at the point of sale, the buyer still pays the producer a normal wellhead price. Remember, we assumed $6 per MCF in the above example.

Landowners looking at the arrangement see the producer selling gas for $6. You owe $1.20 in royalties. End of story.

But Range felt that what happened along the way matters. If the company has to pay $1 to get the gas to market, the value of that MCF is actually only $5. The 20% royalty should only apply on this amount, for a total of $1.

Range's Marcellus landowners didn't agree and the matter went to court. And in March judges upheld Range's claims. The upshot being that yesterday the company announced a new royalty arrangement. Range will be able to deduct $0.72 in transport and process costs per MCF of dry gas from its sale price before calculating royalty payments. For wet gas (which requires more processing), the deduction will be $0.80.

The change will have a material impact on the net present value of Range's operations. A good lesson in how modeling of oil and gas projects can get complex very quickly. Too often, investors (and even companies themselves) oversimplify things like royalties. Leading to poor judgment on a project's economic viability.

This analysis gets especially tough in many overseas production sharing contracts. Where government take (in terms of royalties and payable profit oil) can be affected by all kinds of outside variables. Commodity prices, production rates, "ring-fencing" of capital expenditures.

Bottom line: it usually sounds simpler than it is. A 20% royalty may seem straight-forward. Calculating it often isn't. Investor beware.

By. Dave Forest of Notela Resources


Download The Free Oilprice App Today

Back to homepage





Leave a comment

Leave a comment




EXXON Mobil -0.35
Open57.81 Trading Vol.6.96M Previous Vol.241.7B
BUY 57.15
Sell 57.00
Oilprice - The No. 1 Source for Oil & Energy News