• 4 minutes Pompeo: Aramco Attacks Are An "Act Of War" By Iran
  • 7 minutes Who Really Benefits From The "Iran Attacked Saudi Arabia" Narrative?
  • 11 minutes Trump Will Win In 2020
  • 15 minutes Experts review Saudi damage photos. Say Said is need to do a lot of explaining.
  • 18 mins Ethanol, the Perfect Home Remedy for A Saudi Oil Fever
  • 1 hour Hong Kong protesters appeal to Trump for support.
  • 12 hours Europe: The Cracks Are Beginning To Show
  • 13 hours Memorize date 05/15/2018 cause Huawei ban is the most important single event in world history after 9/11/2001.
  • 14 hours Iran Vows Major War Even If US Conducts "Limited Strikes"
  • 3 hours Millennials: A boil on the butt of the work ethic
  • 17 mins A little something for all you Offshore swabbies
  • 9 hours Ban Fracking? What in the World Are Democrats Thinking?
  • 13 hours LA Times: Vote Trump out in 2020 to Prevent Climate Apocalypse
  • 11 hours When Trying To Be Objective About Ethanol, Don't Include Big Oil Lies To Balance The Argument
  • 2 hours US and China are already in a full economic war and this battle for global hegemony is a little bit frightening
  • 4 hours Saudi State-of-Art Defense System looking the wrong way. MBS must fire Defense Minister. Oh, MBS is Defense Minister. Forget about it.
  • 4 hours Shale profitability
  • 22 hours Yawn... Parliament Poised to Force Brexit Delay Until Jan. 31
  • 9 hours Let's shut down dissent like The Conversation in Australia
Is A Full-Blown War In The Persian Gulf Inevitable?

Is A Full-Blown War In The Persian Gulf Inevitable?

Following Saturday’s crippling attacks on…

New Study Claims US Shale Gas Quantities Grossly Exaggerated

US government estimates of the amount of natural gas that can be extracted by fracking may be far too optimistic, according to a new study by the University of Texas (UT) at Austin.

In 2013, the US Energy Information Administration (EIA) issued a report saying that, according to its analysis, shale wells, which require fracking to release their gas, would be productive at current levels for “over 30 years,” that is, at least until 2040.

But researchers from UT’s Department of Petroleum and Geosystems Engineering say shale gas production may peak 20 years earlier, followed by a rapid decline in output. Their findings were reported in a feature story published Dec. 3 in the scientific journal Nature.

Related: US Shale Under Pressure From More Than Just Low Prices

The problem, according to the UT researchers, goes far beyond merely running out of natural gas. The researchers warn that the US and many other countries, relying on a long-term availability of inexpensive gas, are investing billions of dollars in vehicles, factories and power plants that depend on gas.

Major proponents of fracking are President Obama in the US and Prime Minister David Cameron in Britain. Obama has boasted that “our 100-year supply of natural gas is a big factor in drawing jobs back to our shores.” And Cameron has dismissed fracking opponents as “irrational.”

But if the UT scientists are right and gas production begins to fall off around 2020, all those billions of dollars put into gas-based vehicles and infrastructure will have been wasted.

The researchers conducted their own analyses of natural gas production at the four leading US shale gas formations: the Barnett in Texas; the Fayetteville in Arkansas, the Haynesville in Louisiana, Arkansas and Texas; and the Marcellus in and around the Appalachian Basin. These four formations provide two-thirds of US gas production.

The UT team then extrapolated future output based on the formations’ geology and the expected market forces, including pricing. Their conclusion: Not only will gas production peak in 2020, output will be cut in half by 2030.

Related: Global Drilling Slowdown On The Way

How did the EIA and the UT team reach such different conclusions? The Texas researchers said they simply studied the shale formations in greater detail.

“Resolution matters because each play [group of energy fields] has sweet spots that yield a lot of gas, and large areas where wells are less productive,” Mason Inman writes in Nature. “Companies try to target the sweet spots first, so wells drilled in the future may be less productive than current ones.

“The EIA’s model so far has assumed that future wells will be at least as productive as past wells in the same county,” Inman writes. “But this approach, [UT petroleum engineer Ted] Patzek argues, “leads to results that are way too optimistic.”

By Andy Tully of Oilprice.com

More Top Reads From Oilprice.com:



Join the discussion | Back to homepage

Leave a comment
  • HairyHerry on December 10 2014 said:
    What about all the Bakken gas being flared off? At least North Dakota seeks for companies to begin gas capture. Now to get infrastructure in place...
  • Avaz on December 09 2014 said:
    Restimulatation of current wells. Studies show we are only recovering certain percentages of reserves when wells are first brought on. Restimulation will be a viable option in the future. Gh Jacoby is correct too there are many other shale plays that have oil and gas. But companies already vested a great deal of money in current projects r and d is not in that budget.
  • Tina on December 09 2014 said:
    It baffles me that the fossil fools have been able to get so many companies to invest is this obvious Ponzi scheme. So many people are going to lose their shirts, what a shame.
  • gmathol on December 09 2014 said:
    ! barrel oil investment to get one barrel oil back? Common. Shale gas in America would lead to lower natural gas prices and it would be more available, but it is not.

    Permian Basin. 35 billion bbl reserve? Laughable - like the rest of the US schema scam.
  • GH Jacoby on December 08 2014 said:
    SHHHHHH! HUSH-UP! ..... don't mention the Cline Shale with its 35 billion bbl reserve under the Permian Basin. We have a long way to go before this country runs out.

Leave a comment

Oilprice - The No. 1 Source for Oil & Energy News
Download on the App Store Get it on Google Play