Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘natural gas’

“Natural gas and LNG are fast becoming the gravitational center of the global energy system, but some energy experts said the world is only beginning to grasp the scale of what’s to come.” ~Natural Gas Intelligence

Demand and high well producibility are stimulating exploration in the high pressure, high temperature Western Haynesville (Texas) and other ultradeep onshore gas prospects. Is it time to revisit ultradeep gas on the Gulf of America shelf? See the above targets map from 2004.

20 years ago Newfield, Exxon, and McMoRan drilled pioneering ultradeep wells targeting gas-prone reservoirs below salt welds in Miocene and older formations (diagrams below). The water depths were <100 feet but well depths exceeding 30,000 feet, and high temperatures and pressures, pushed the limits of drilling technology at the time. Noteworthy wells:

  • Blackbeard West (Exxon): Spudded in early 2005 in 70 feet of water in South Timbalier Block 168. The target was gas in Miocene sands at 27,000-32,000 feet total depth. Drilling reached 30,067 feet by 2006, but was prudently suspended due to extreme pressures, temperatures (up to 600°F), and technical challenges with equipment.
  • Blackbeard West, part 2: In 2008, McMoRan re-entered the well with upgraded equipment and drilled to a record 32,997 feet below the mudline. They encountered hydrocarbon shows in multiple zones, including potential gas pay in Middle and Deep Miocene sands below 30,000 feet, validating the ultradeep concept.
  • Followup McMorRan wells:
    • Blackbeard East (2010-2011): Drilled to 33,400 feet in South Timbalier Block 144, logged potential hydrocarbons in Sparta and Vicksburg sands.
    • Davy Jones (2009-2010): South Marsh Island Block 230 in 20 feet of water; reached 29,122 feet; discovered gas in Wilcox sands, but faced flow-testing challenges.
    • Lafitte (2011): Eugene Island Block 223, found additional pay in ultradeep Miocene zones. These wells targeted gas reservoirs but encountered operational hurdles.

This program pioneered ultradeep drilling on the shelf, influencing later deepwater successes. Over the past 10 years, the deepwater industry has successfully demonstrated high pressure high temperature (HPHT) technology which could facilitate ultradeep exploration on the shelf.

Also, note that a company targeting hydrocarbons below 25,000 feet (true vertical depth subsurface) may earn an additional 3 years on their lease. (See the Notice for next week’s lease sale.) Will improved technology and demand expectations finally open the ultradeep gas frontier?

Read Full Post »

In light of the fantastic Middle East news, planning for the redevelopment of Gaza is underway. The Gaza Marine Gas Field should be a high priority given the power generation and revenue potential.

The field, which was discovered in 1999 by British Gas (now part of Shell), is located approximately 30-36 km off the coast of Gaza in the eastern Mediterranean and has estimated natural gas reserves of ~ 1 Tcf.

Who should be licensed to develop the field? In June 2023, there was a proposed agreement between the Palestinian Authority and an Egyptian consortium led by state-owned Egyptian Natural Gas Holding Company (EGAS). A resurrection of this arrangement may align with Palestinian interests. EGAS has experience in Mediterranean gas projects including the giant Zohr field (see map below).

Other candidates for developing the Gaza Marine field (pure speculation):

  • Chevron would be a logical choice given their extensive eastern Mediterranean experience as a result of their acquisition of Noble Energy. However, there might be concerns about undue US and Israeli control of this important resource.
  • Regional giants like Saudi Aramco, Qatar Energy, and Abu Dhabi National Oil Company (ADNOC) would be good candidates.
  • Another interesting possibility might be Equinor, which is 2/3 owned by the Norwegian govt. Equinor seems to sometimes make socially desirable investments that are less profitable.

Some combination of the above companies might also be a possibility. In any event, it’s critical to manage this resource in a manner that best benefits the recovery effort.

Read Full Post »

All rankings are suspect, especially those I agree with 😉. The full scoreboard report is attached, so you can judge for yourself.

I was an early advocate for the use of natural gas in improving urban air quality. (I still have the ancient graduate school paper! 😀). This blog has repeatedly saluted natural gas and its compelling economic and environmental benefits.

Although combustion of natural gas emits 30% and 45% less CO2 than oil and coal respectively, the CO2 emissions are still significant. As a result, those who focus solely on greenhouse gases and ignore all other impacts (e.g. other air pollutants like NOx, SO2, and particulates, land use and space preemption, visual effects, and wildlife risks), want to limit the production and use of gas. However, whether or not fossil fuel consumption is significantly affecting the climate, the use for natural gas will be economically and environmentally imperative for the foreseeable future.

Not all natural gas production is equal from an environmental standpoint. Because this is an offshore energy blog, I draw your attention to the unique advantages of offshore gas production: minimal visual impact, bird friendly (rigs-to-roosts!), no risks to freshwater aquifers, and few land use issues.

Currently, most offshore gas production is in the form of oil-well gas (AKA associated or casing head gas). Offshore gas production is thus being primarily driven by oil demand, and is an added benefit from deepwater oil development.

Offshore gas-well or non-associated gas is largely the domain of independent operators producing in the shallower waters of the continental shelf. Non-associated gas has an added benefit in that there is little or no spill risk (depending on how dry the gas is). Shelf gas platforms also provide ecosystem benefits through their reef effect (rigs-to-reefs). Sustaining this non-associated gas production is therefore desirable from both energy and environmental standpoints.

Read Full Post »

While a graduate student more than 50 years ago, I wrote a paper entitled “The Use of Natural Gas in Improving Air Quality.”  My professor, Dr. Richard Gordon (RIP), a terrific economist who greatly influenced my thinking about energy, liked the paper but thought I was too optimistic about the availability of gas. 

The sense at the time was that natural gas was a premium energy source in short supply. I was blissfully ignorant and thought we geologists and petroleum engineers would find and produce the gas. The Shale Boom, for which I can take zero credit, has proven me correct, so I’m taking another victory lap. 😀

Last week, the great Dan Yergin and his team at S&P Global issued a report that explains how economically and environmentally important natural gas has become. Key findings from the report are pasted below:

Environmental Benefits:

  • Higher US LNG exports lead to lower overall global emissions by displacing the more GHG intensive fuels that would replace them.
  • End use combustion is responsible for 57–87% of GHG intensity for coal, oil, gas and LNG, with supply chain methane emissions the key driver of variation between fuels (e.g., domestic vs. international LNG, domestic versus piped natural gas imports, or different crude oil streams).
  • Coal emits roughly 70% more greenhouse gases than the US LNG it would replace across all the alternatives analyzed.

Economic Benefits:

  • US LNG’s unprecedented growth is enabled by an extended cross-state value chain, that reaches beyond the core-producing states – about 90% of every dollar spent remains within United States supply chains
  • Of the annual average of 495,000 US jobs supported through 2040, 37% will be in non-producing states. As many jobs will be supported in on-producing states as in Texas
  • Over the same period, LNG Exports will contribute $1.3 trillion in GDP, with $383 billion or 30% in non-producing states. On a per capita basis, producing states benefit from a cumulative $13.2K GDP per capita
  • The US Northeast (NE) has vast amounts of low-cost gas reserves in the Marcellus and Utica formations (New York, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Ohio), sufficient to meet nationwide demand for ~17 years
  • Due to pipeline constraints these reserves are being developed at a suboptimal rate, pushing gas prices at Boston, Chicago and New York City Gates up 160% higher than the national gas market in peak months
  • Expanding NE pipeline capacity by 6.1 Bcf/d could reduce HH gas prices by $0.20/MMBtu and significantly lower prices across the region. Cumulative nationwide consumer savings could reach $76 billion through 2040

Should you be interested in learning more, the above findings are well supported by detailed information in the report.

Read Full Post »

Seattle Times: “Don’t block the will of voters on natural gas”

Nearly 2 million residents voted to approve Initiative 2066, which aims to protect the use of natural gas as an energy source in state law and within Washington’s building codes. This month, climate advocates, joined by King County and the City of Seattle, filed suit in court to block the will of those voters.

While the courts will have final say, Gov. Jay Inslee and Democratic legislative leaders support killing off what they see as a misguided and overly broad initiative. Their view brushes aside the concerns of the majority of state voters. Those leaders fail to see a genuine fear that, during the clean energy transition, the fundamental supply of energy to homes and businesses — the basic ability to stay warm, cook food and bathe — is under threat.” 

Kudos to the Seattle Times for their common sense editorial. In addition to noting the economic and social necessity of natural gas, it would have been nice if the editorial board had also acknowledged natural gas’s environmental benefits. However, that would have probably been a bridge too far in Seattle.

The reasons for transitioning to natural gas are arguably clearer and better substantiated than the reasons for transitioning from natural gas.

Read Full Post »

Germany: Coal and gas vs. Die Dunkelflaute

Reuters

Spot-on from Bernie, a UK poster on X:

NET ZERO – I want to be clear: I am not against advancement in energy technologies. Humanity should always develop and progress.

What I oppose is bankrupting the country by gambling taxpayers’ money on the emperor’s new clothes. Because that’s what these experimental technologies are currently. The misinformation being fed to the public is a disgrace.

Technologies like carbon capture, flywheels, and large-scale battery storage are being sold to us as the future and that we can lead the world! I don’t want to gamble with my tax thanks. The only thing we will lead the world in, is being the first country to bankrupt itself on the alter of Net zero and they haven’t even given us a choice!

These experimental technologies will cost not £ billions but £ TRILLIONS and provide little benefit to the average citizen, they simply benefit global corporations and those with vested interests.

The government should have focused on upgrading the national grid as a first step. At the very least it would enable us to use the renewable energy we are creating currently, rather than paying £ billions in subsidies for providers not to supply.

Instead, we’re rushing headlong into experimental technologies that are still in test phase. We are investing in these theoretical technologies before we can even observe their real world performance, evaluate value for money, or knowing if practically they will even work! And let’s face it, installations of both fly wheels and carbon capture machines have both failed financially or practically worldwide.

The hypocrisy around emissions and claims that these new technologies are “cleaner and greener” is an outrageous lie. Whether deliberate or misguided, this misinformation is unacceptable. The British public deserves open-book transparency on costs, timelines, and actual impacts. If the government cannot provide this, they must step aside and bring in independent teams—free from vested interests—to evaluate and advise. And then the British public should be offered a vote.

The ideological, socialist pipe dream of hitting a fictitious 2030 target will bankrupt the country. Worse, it will make us entirely dependent on banks and foreign entities that will dictate our policies for decades.

And we are doing all of this whilst we have at least 200 years of domestic energy resources in the ground, the ‘emergency’ propaganda is simply untrue. But instead of bringing energy prices down in order to enable growth, which in turn would generate GDP, which in turn frees up domestic funds to invest in research, we’re sacrificing our economic stability and sovereignty for technology that will be outdated before we’ve even finished building it!.. because technology works like that!

Some people are getting very rich, some people are gaining global attention and others are simply fools. It is unacceptable to me.

Read Full Post »

Culzean facilities

Total has announced plans to install a 3 MW floating wind turbine 2 km west of the Culzean platform, 220 km off the coast of Scotland. This turbine, expected to be fully operational by the end of 2025, will supply around 20% of Culzean’s power requirement. This project is interesting from an R&D standpoint, but makes little sense otherwise. Here’s why:

  • Culzean is a gas condensate field that is capable of meeting 5% of the UK’s gas demand. There is thus ample produced gas to reliably and economically power the platform.
  • Gas will be required to meet 80% of the power requirement even after the wind turbine is operating.
  • In light of installation, maintenance, and decommissioning costs for the floating turbine, the cost of the intermittent wind power will no doubt be much higher than the cost of the power generated by platform gas.
  • Some tax benefits may be associated with adding the wind turbine, but this won’t affect the real costs, other than to perhaps make them higher.
  • In addition to affecting profitability, higher operational costs could reduce the ultimate recovery of gas and condensate from the field.
  • Gas not consumed at the offshore facilities will be marketed and consumed onshore, so there is essentially no net reduction in global CO2 emissions.
  • As JL Daeschler reminds me, the floating turbine complicates operations and could create safety issues: obstruction for helicopters and supply boats to avoid, trenching and installing power cable in a spare “J” tube, and feeding power to an electrical distribution system in accordance with standards and platform specifications. As JL notes, “I think we have plenty to do offshore already!”
  • And what if there are mooring failures and the turbine drifts toward the platforms? Turbine blade failures?
  • Bottom line: adding costs and risks for no apparent benefit.

See a related post on platform electrification in Norway.

Read Full Post »

July 24 (Reuters)The amount of electricity produced by wind farms in the U.S. fell to a 33-month low on Monday, forcing power generators to crank up natural-gas fired plants to keep air conditioners humming during a hot summer day.

Over the past few years, much of the money energy firms have invested in new generation has gone into renewable power sources like wind and solar. But when the wind stops blowing and the sun does not shine, gas is still needed to keep the lights on.

Funny how that works! Being trendy and highly promoted doesn’t make you reliable!

Saluting natural gas.

Read Full Post »

Florida HB 1645 (attached) was signed by Gov. DeSantis on 5/15/2024. The bill boosts natural gas, prohibits offshore wind turbines, and deletes references to climate change and greenhouse gases in state law. Given the State’s support for traditional energy sources, is it time to renew the dialogue about exploration and production in the Eastern Gulf of Mexico (EGOM)?

HB 1645 prohibits offshore and coastal wind development (p. 30), acknowledges that natural gas is critical for power resiliency, prohibits zoning regulations that restrict gas storage facilities and gas appliances (p.8), and relaxes permitting requirements for pipelines <100 miles long.

Given Florida’s energy preferences as expressed in this legislation, the State could assist regional energy planners by better defining its position on oil and gas leasing in the EGOM. What limits, in terms of lease numbers and minimum distances from shore, would best improve Florida’s energy supply options while further minimizing environmental risks?

As illustrated on the map below, the petroleum geology of the EGOM and Florida’s preferences are likely aligned in that the best prospects for oil and gas production are in deep water and more than 100 miles from the State’s coast. Does Florida support a 100 mile buffer?

The 4/20/2010 Macondo blowout was a tragic failure that has been, and will continue to be, discussed at length on this blog. We should also acknowledge that prior to Macondo 25,000 wells were drilled on the US OCS over a 25 year period without a single well control fatality, an offshore safety record that was unprecedented in the U.S. and internationally. We should also applaud recent advances in well integrity and control, including the addition of capping stack capabilities that further reduce the risk of a sustained well blowout.

Florida’s independent thinking on energy policy is commendable. That independence is contingent on importing petroleum products and natural gas from elsewhere in the Gulf region. Securing that supply over the intermediate and longer term should be a priority for Florida. In that regard, EGOM production is an important consideration.

Read Full Post »

Add Dunkelflaute to the list of interesting and expressive compound German words. Die Dunkelflaute is a dark lull, a period of time in which minimal energy can be generated by the sun or wind. More specifically in German:

Die Dunkelflaute als sogenanntes Kofferwort beschreibt das gleichzeitige Auftreten von Dunkelheit und Windflaute. Diese Wetterlage entsteht typischerweise im Winter und sorgt für geringe Erträge aus Solar- und Windenergie bei gleichzeitig saisonal hohem Strombedarf. Eine Dunkelflaute kann mehrere Tage andauern. Kommen zu Dunkelheit und Windflaute noch niedrige Temperaturen hinzu, die für gewöhnlich den Strombedarf weiter ansteigen lassen, spricht man auch von “kalter Dunkelflaute.”

Note the prolonged Dunkelflaute (below) during which renewables provided minimal power in the middle of winter.

Unsurprisingly, wind and solar output are the lowest when the temperatures are the coldest. See the Danish summary for 2023 below. Note that wind output was also low when temperatures were above 15 deg. C.

Regional wind energy grids are not always an effective solution as Danish physicist Jens Christiansen, a nuclear energy advocate, has illustrated:

‘The wind always blows somewhere.’ Is that really true though? Here I’ve looked at the capacity factors of wind from five northern European countries in August The winds seem highly correlated, and there is almost a week-long period without significant wind anywhere.

Christiansen illustrates Denmark’s reliance on imported electricity:

Paraphrasing Margaret Thatcher: “The problem with electricity imports is that you eventually run out of other people’s electricity.” In the U.S., California imports more electricity than any other state and typically receives between one-fifth and one-third of its electricity supply from outside of the state.

Given that massive battery storage is well beyond current capabilities and restrictions on electricity consumption and economic growth are undesirable, redundant or complementary power sources are essential for a reliable grid. Natural gas power generation is most responsive to variable demand, and is thus a good complement to variable sources like wind turbines and solar panels.

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »