Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Jack Straw on July 6, 2014 at 9:24am

When it comes to fearing that fracing will cause Earthquakes, I believe this article helps put matters into perspective; The Sky is NOT Falling (not yet, anyways).

Source: http://energyindepth.org/national/report-seismicity-linked-to-waste...

Report: Seismicity Linked to Wastewater Injection, Not Hydraulic Fracturing

3:03pm EDT July 3, 2014

by Dana Bohan
dana@energyindepth.org , Washington, D.C.                                            

 

Today, a new report focusing on recent seismic activity in Oklahoma – an issue that has garnered increased media attention in recent weeks – was published by the American Association for the Advancement of Science. According to the report, “the recent surge in central Oklahoma seismicity is attributable to injection of wastewater at a small number of exceedingly high-rate wells.”

It’s certainly not news that wastewater injection has, at times, been linked to small seismic events – but there are a few important takeaways from this new report that are worth highlighting.

Seismicity related to waste water injection, not hydraulic fracturing.

As the report indicates – and as a wide array of other studies have highlighted in the past – hydraulic fracturing poses an exceedingly low risk for seismic activity.  According to the National Research Council (a research arm of the National Academy of Science), “The process of hydraulic fracturing a well as presently implemented for shale gas recovery does not pose a high risk for inducing felt seismic events.” Mark Zoback of Stanford University has also compared the seismic footprint of hydraulic fracturing to “on average, about the same amount of energy as a gallon of milk falling off a kitchen counter.”

Overwhelming majority of disposal wells show no signs of contributing to seismicity.

The report is also clear that there were only four injection wells out of the 4,500 that have been drilled across the state that were linked to seismic activity.  From the report:

“Although thousands of disposal wells may operate aseismically, four of the highest-rate wells likely induced 20% of 2008-2013 central US seismicity.”

This echoes numerous other reports finding that the risk for seismicity associated with injection wells is also very low.  For instance, the National Research Council stated, “Injection for disposal of wastewater derived from energy technologies into the subsurface does pose some risk for induced seismicity, but very few events have been documented over the past several decades relative to the large number of disposal wells in operation.”

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has also commented on the issue, and how to rectify some of these concerns. According to USGS’s Bill Ellsworth, “…in many of these cases, it’s been fixed by either shutting down the offending well or reducing the volume that’s being produced. So there are really straight-forward fixes to the problem when earthquakes begin to occur.”

Okla. has a long history of safe disposal well use in the state

As president of the Oklahoma Independent Petroleum Association (OIPA) Mike Terry highlighted in response to the study, the state of Oklahoma has a long history of both oil and gas development and waste water injection. From OIPA:

“Disposal wells have been used in Oklahoma for more than half a century and have met and even exceeded current disposal volumes during that time. Because crude oil and natural gas is produced in 70 of Oklahoma’s 77 counties, any seismic activity within the state is likely to occur near oil and natural gas activity. We have also seen increased seismic activity in North America, including Idaho, Virginia, Arizona and northern Mexico, where dewatering projects and unconventional oil and gas development are nonexistent.”

Bottom line

It’s also important to remember that injection wells would exist with or without shale development: many sectors, including chemicals, manufacturing, agriculture, plastics and steel also use the process and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has said that injection wells are a “safe and inexpensive” option for disposing of industrial waste.

While wastewater injection is not unique to oil and gas production, it is certainly appropriate to continue evaluating the issue and exploring ways to reduce any potential disruption to the environment or surrounding population.  That’s why the oil and natural gas industry remains dedicated to working with state and federal regulators, independent experts and others to the continued safe development of America’s vast shale resources, ensuring the continued protection of the surrounding environment and population.

........................................................................

I dedicate this song to all the friends of 'Chicken Little" out there:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8yRdDnrB5kM

Permalink Reply by Jack Straw on July 6, 2014 at 10:26am

Encouraging Responsible Marcellus Shale Development  

PA State Rep. Garth Everett discusses closing funding gaps through Marcellus Shale development.

Published on Jun 30, 2014

This is a 4:43 (less than five minute) YouTube video .... does not get interesting until 2:15. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vEFo6BfGBOE&feature=youtube_gdat...

I found some of the comments interesting .... in the manner that some things are placed into perspective.

JS

Permalink Reply by craig on July 6, 2014 at 1:41pm

Unfortunately, those that need to hear this and understand it, most likely won't.

I knew they had purchased acreage with State drilling revenue, but not that many acres.

Again, great post Jack.

Permalink Reply by Jack Straw on July 7, 2014 at 3:58am

Source: http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/07/03/usa-condensate-exports-idU...

Top News

Exclusive: First U.S. condensate cargo up for sale in Asia as ban eases

Wed, Jul 02 23:49 PM BST

By Florence Tan

(Reuters) - A U.S. energy company launched a broad effort this week to find buyers for the first ever U.S. exports of ultra-light condensate oil, signaling the start of what could be a growing trade as demand grows worldwide.

One week after U.S. authorities confirmed a ruling easing a 40-year ban on shipping lightly processed oil abroad, Enterprise Product Partners (EPD.N) has sold its first cargo to a Japanese trading house and was seeking more buyers in Latin America, according to trading sources.

Two Singapore-based sources said Japanese trading house Mitsui & Co Ltd (8031.T) had bought a 400,000-barrel cargo of U.S. condensate that is expected to be loaded and sent to Asia later this month or in early August. The firm was marketing that cargo to refiners, they said.

One trader at a major global oil company said Enterprise had offered to sell it condensate for export and asked about making potential sales to Latin America.

The preliminary marketing efforts are the strongest evidence yet that U.S. oil companies are on the verge of unleashing light, gaseous petroleum from the country's massive oil and gas fields to markets overseas. By the end of the year, as much as 300,000 barrels could be exported each day, according to an analysis done last week by Citi in New York.

The deal follows news last week that two companies - Enterprise and Pioneer Natural Resources (PXD.N) - have approval from the U.S. Department of Commerce to export condensate that had been minimally processed to reduce volatility.

The approvals represent a softening of a total ban on U.S. oil exports that has been in place since the Arab oil embargo of the 1970s, and they open up the United States to global oil consumers for the first time in a generation.

"A lot of traders are asking us about it and telling us they're trying to get more cargoes from Enterprise especially this week and next week," one of the traders said. "So far, I didn't hear any end users in Asia bought."

U.S. condensate supply is estimated at about 1 million barrels per day.

Enterprise and the U.S. unit of Mitsui were not immediately available for comment.

"I believe this is the first approved export of condensate outside of Canada (since the export ban)" said Al Troner, a condensate expert and president of Asia Pacific Energy Consulting. "It will become fairly regular now."

Traders are rushing to ship condensate to Asia, the major condensate import market where new processing units, known as splitters, are expected to begin operating in the third quarter, sources said. Condensate is a major feedstock for the petrochemical industry.

Importers like China, Japan and South Korea have splitting capacity that can turn condensate into naphtha and other products. In Asia Pacific, splitters can process up to 900,000 barrels per day of condensate, according to a presentation by Facts Global Energy.

Other potential buyers lie on the doorstep of the United States in Latin America, where it could be used as a substitute for naphtha as a diluent for heavy crude oil.

(Additional reporting by Julia Payne in London, Meeyong Cho in Seoul, Edward McAllister in New York and Marianna Parraga in Houston; Writing by Jessica Resnick-Ault and Edward McAllister; Editing by Marguerita Choy and Cynthia Osterman)

Permalink Reply by Jack Straw on July 10, 2014 at 4:00pm

They need our Natural Gas .... but they do not our pipelines and they do not want us to frc the wells 9as has been done for the last 50= years).

Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/11/business/energy-environment/new-e...

Natural Gas Pipeline Plan Roils Rural Massachusetts

New England Confronts Surging Demand for Natural Gas

By TOM ZELLER Jr.JULY 10, 2014

Photo

Walter Jaworski, who opposes a proposed pipeline that would slice through his Massachusetts ranch, with the letter he sent to Kinder Morgan revoking its permission to survey his property. CreditTom Zeller

 

 

 

 

 

NORTHFIELD, Mass. — Standing on a dirt road outside his aging barn, Walter Jaworski, a former veterinarian turned cattle rancher in this rural part of north-central Massachusetts, points south across his 200 acres of forest and pasture to a nearby tree line. If things don’t go his way, he says, that’s about where a new natural gas pipeline will slice through his land on a 180-mile journey from central New York to a transmission hub north of Boston.

The project, proposed by the pipeline giant Kinder Morgan at a cost of $2 billion to $3 billion “or more,” according to the company, is only in the earliest stages of consideration. But debate over its placement — and even its overall need — is in full swing, with anti-pipeline yard signs and heated public meetings.

Mr. Jaworski is just one of thousands of public and private property owners here who find themselves wedged between the mammoth shale gas supply being unleashed in states to the west, like Pennsylvania, Ohio and West Virginia, and the increasingly insatiable market for the fuel in New England.

Added to the region’s existing market for natural gas as a heating fuel, new demand for gas by electricity generators has created wintertime shortfalls and price spikes beyond previous experience — a situation that officials are eager to address. New England’s governors have gone so far as to propose a tariff on electricity users to cover the cost of building new pipeline capacity.

But Mr. Jaworski, along with a growing number of critics of pipeline expansion in general, remains unmoved, arguing that there are less costly and intrusive ways to address the region’s energy needs.

“They’re saying that New England is in need of gas, but I understand that that’s not necessarily true,” Mr. Jaworski said. “We’d probably have enough if we did a little conservation.”

There is little question that demand for natural gas here is rising fast. Tougher environmental regulations and low natural gas prices have combined to nudge many electricity generators to retire aging coal- and oil-fired plants in favor of ones burning cleaner — and cheap — natural gas, which now accounts for approximately half of the region’s electricity mix, up from less than 15 percent in 2000, according to data from New England’s grid operators.

But all of that gas moves through a network of transmission pipes largely built to serve the region’s heating needs. When surges in winter demand drive prices to record highs, electricity generators must resort to expensive backup fuel sources like stored oil.

A report by the engineering consultancy Black & Veatch, commissioned last year by the New England States Committee on Electricity, or Nescoe — a cooperative linking the interests of Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island and Vermont — concluded that without change, the region’s natural gas infrastructure would be under severe stress in coming years.

Birud Jhaveri, a deputy commissioner with the Massachusetts Department of Energy Resources, called it a “crisis like no other.”

A separate, industry-backed study, presented to Nescoe last winter, concluded that in order to bring New England’s energy prices in line with neighboring regions’, planners should contemplate an additional two billion cubic feet per day of pipeline capacity — an increase of about 50 percent over current pipeline capacity into the region, according to federal data.

It was around the same time that Kinder Morgan began seeking permission from property owners to conduct surveys in an effort to fine-tune the path of its proposed pipeline.

Photo

A protest sign sits in the path of the proposed pipeline.CreditTom Zeller

It has not been warmly welcomed in many cases.

At a meeting with Kinder Morgan representatives in the town of Montague this spring, Jonathan Mark Haber, a resident of nearby Warwick, asked why the company didn’t seek to build along existing pipeline corridors, rather than digging trenches through large tracts of greenfield — including his own property.

“To choose this section of Massachusetts for a pipeline — can you guarantee it will never leak?” Mr. Haber asked. “Can you guarantee that there won’t be a tree falling on it, or another accident? This is, like, more precious to me than the gas you’re providing.”

Mr. Haber said he refused the company’s survey request.

Richard Wheatley, a company spokesman, said via email that a “significant portion” of the project, which is an extension of its Tennessee Gas Pipeline system, could be buried alongside existing pipeline or electricity transmission corridors. But he also said that in many instances, the pathways that opponents would prefer — like paralleling Interstate 90, which crosses the length of the state — did not make sense.

“Routing along a highway or interstate corridor can present a higher degree of land disturbance than other, more remote areas, especially if there is a high population density,” Mr. Wheatley said.

The company plans an initial permit filing this fall with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the ultimate arbiter of interstate pipeline projects. If approvals proceed as planned, Mr. Wheatley said, the pipeline could be delivering 600 million to 2.2 billion cubic feet per day of additional natural gas capacity to the region by late 2018.

That would be enough to ease the capacity problem, but Shanna Cleveland, a lawyer at the Conservation Law Foundation, an environmental nonprofit in New England, argued that the same thing could be accomplished by relying on backup stores of liquefied natural gas and improving efficiency so that less gas was needed over all. She also said that other, smaller pipeline expansion projects were already planned, and that adjusting the region’s wholesale market, so that unused gas capacity could be bought and sold in real time, would adequately address shortfalls.

Ms. Cleveland also worried that longer-term downsides, including the potential for natural gas prices to rise across the board, were being overlooked — as were the effects of natural gas on global warming.

Photo

Residents of eight towns came together to discuss ways to prevent a proposed natural gas pipeline from crossing their communities. CreditCheryl Senter for The New York Times

“Building big pipelines not only locks us into a system we need to outgrow,” she said, “but also undermines efforts to address the climate crisis.”

Not all landowners oppose the pipeline. William Gaida, a retired railroad foreman, brokered a deal with the state’s wildlife division to protect his 80 acres in Orange, Mass., from development in 2002. But after a Kinder Morgan agent visited him at his home last winter, he granted the company permission to survey. Although Mr. Gaida now says he wished he had done more research before signing the Kinder Morgan form, he doesn’t object to the project.

“My own opinion is that if they do it right it’s probably O.K.,” he said. “Some people — I don’t know where they think they’re going to get their electricity from, because they’re opposed to everything.”

Still, a crucial question in the brewing showdown will be whether Kinder Morgan can navigate a dense patchwork of public and private lands bearing conservation restrictions. To install a pipeline like this, a company typically needs to clear 50 feet of right of way on both sides of a trench, normally three feet in depth, where the pipe will be laid. Once the pipe is buried, the company retains a 25-foot easement on each side, and property owners face a number of restrictions on land use over the pipeline thereafter.

A provision in Massachusetts law sets numerous hurdles for those seeking to override conservation restrictions, although federal approval could supersede these.

Recognizing that federal authorities will ultimately decide whether the pipeline is in the larger public interest, Leigh Youngblood, executive director of the Mount Grace Land Conservation Trust in Athol, Mass., encourages local landowners to dig in their heels.

“Ultimately, eminent domain will supersede all the protections,” Ms. Youngblood said. “But the process can be made much more difficult — and maybe too difficult — by raising objections at every possible place.”

Mr. Wheatley of Kinder Morgan said that only about half of the 1,650 potentially affected property owners in Massachusetts had granted survey permission. The rest either refused or have not responded to company queries.

If push comes to shove, the company can obtain permission from state regulators, although Mr. Wheatley said that process had not started.

Mr. Jaworski, who initially agreed to a survey, but then changed his mind, says he hopes it never gets that far. Like many residents in the region, he opposes hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, which is how much of the natural gas that would flow through the new pipeline is obtained.

“I’d rather have a wind farm up here than a natural gas pipeline,” he said. “I know the turbines bother some people, but they don’t really bother me.”

Permalink Reply by Jack Straw on July 14, 2014 at 6:01pm

This was posted on another Discussion a few minutes ago .... but I felt that it was worth repeating here; hoping that it would find a wider audience; it might explain some of the frustration that results from differing predictions that you might encounter.

I am going to let people in on a deep dark secret of the Oil & Gas Industry.

The Earth Scientists (Geologists & Geophysicists) are optimistic by nature; if they were pessimists (and looked at things in that light) there would be no prospects and no wells would be drilled (and nothing found).

The Petroleum Engineers (who calculate reserves, once something has been found) tend to be very cautious (I will not say pessimists, as they are simply very cautious).

Why do I categorize them as cautious? Well Engineers are cautious by natural temperament and training … that is why bridges do not fail and airplanes rarely fall out of the sky … engineers build into their calculations a reserve for error.

If a Petroleum Engineer calculates an ultimate recovery of X … and the ultimate recovery is 2X … well everyone is eventually happy …. more money was made than was initially anticipated (I cannot tell you how many times this has happened). If a Petroleum Engineer calculates an ultimate recovery of X … and the ultimate recovery is 1/2X …well I hope he does well with his new employer.

Optimists tend to become Earth Scientists.

Conservative individuals tend to become Petroleum Engineers.

That is just the way things tend to be … and, IMHO, that is the best way for things to be.

Pleasant surprises (resulting from conservative assessments) lead to happy outcomes; unpleasant  surprises tend to lead to a waste of resources and bankruptcies.

This dichotomy has worked out very well in the past; and will work out well if practiced in the future; if one is cautious in their expectations …. It is likely that the only surprises will be pleasant ones.

If you think that EUR's are too low; they probably are ... better to be too low than too high .... if you are betting YOUR money on the outcome.

All IMHO,

                    JS

Permalink Reply by Jack Straw on July 15, 2014 at 6:15am

To clarify my use of the term 'conservative' in reference to Engineers; my use of the term 'conservative' was not meant to have any political connotation; the dictionary definition of conservative I was alluding to is: "cautiously moderate: a conservative estimate".

And I would never describe an Earth Scientist as "liberal".

Earth Scientists look at data and make interpretations; using all available information. But, typically it is an interpretation ... for many situations, there is no single unique answer; there can (and often are) multiple possibilities. It is the Earth Scientist's job to decide upon which interpretation best fits the data and is the most logical answer (Occam's razor comes into play).

I will revise my comment that Earth Scientists are (by nature) optimists; I will change that to cautiously optimistic .... if they were not optimistic about their ability to find O&G, the task of eventually solving the problem of finding O&G would be much more difficult. Caution comes into play, as they are obligated to look at all available data and to be cautious in the manner that they interpret that data.

Engineers like to work with hard data.

They like three decimal place accuracy.

Engineers seek out THE answer; tend not to be comfortable with 'interpretations' which by their very nature carry an element of uncertainty.

There tend to be differences in personality between Earth Scientists and Engineers; in that they approach their different types of problems in different ways (exacting in the case of Engineers; interpretative in the case of Earth Scientists).

I always considered an important part of an Earth Scientist's job to be to gain the trust of the Engineers that he or she is working with.

When it comes to Earth Scientists and Engineers; I have equal respect for all qualified professionals; each discipline brings their unique skills to the road to success.

All IMHO,

                  JS

Permalink Reply by Jack Straw on July 15, 2014 at 8:07am

Source: http://www.platts.com/latest-news/natural-gas/washington/us-shale-d...

US shale drillers becoming immune to oil and gas prices: Raymond James

Washington (Platts)--14Jul2014/316 pm EDT/1916 GMT

US exploration and production companies will become the long-promised "factories" with positive cash flow starting this year as growing production efficiencies make them relatively immune to flat commodity prices, investment bank Raymond James said Monday.

"With rising US production and falling costs per unit of production, US E&P companies are now poised to actually grow cash flows even in a flat or modestly lower energy price environment," Raymond James' top oil and gas analyst Marshall Adkins said in a note to clients.

"We now think the US oil and gas business can be viewed as more of a sustainable growth industry rather than a pure commodity call," Adkins said.

After a decade of spending roughly 40% more than it took in in revenues during the shale land grab, E&Ps have driven per barrel and per Mcf costs down to a point where in a flat price environment profits are made by expanding production volumes, Raymond James said.

"In 2013, the over-spending gap closed to only 20% above operating cash flows (versus 60% in 2012)," Adkins said. "More importantly this gap should be relatively nonexistent in 2014 (assuming year-over-year US E&P capex growth of 12.5%). In 2015 and 2016, assuming 7.5% capex growth, we expect E&Ps to actually be cash flow positive despite modestly lower oil and gas prices!"

Getting to positive cash flow in Raymond James' model came early because of the bitter 2014 winter, which boosted natural gas prices at least 16% using the NYMEX strip.

Looking at the same strip, Raymond James projected average natural gas prices will be flat at roughly $4/MMBtu in the next two years, while natural gas liquids and crude oil prices see modest 3-5% declines.

"The reason for the improved capital efficiency is oil and gas volumes have been increasing at a rapid clip," Adkins said. "Initial oil and gas production from three key horizontal plays [Bakken, Eagle Ford, and Marcellus] has increased an incredible 10-fold since 2007."

"The key point is that improved efficiencies have allowed US E&P production per unit of capex to scream higher over the past decade," Adkins said. "We expect this trend to continue over the next few years. That means even in a flat or backwardated commodity price environment, E&P cash flows can still improve."

"We now think E&Ps are capable of growing cash flows solely through volume growth and cost efficiencies and in spite of a backwardated oil curve. This is a massive paradigm shift in the energy sector," Adkins said.

Freed from commodity prices, US E&Ps will obtain stock market multiples in line with manufacturers, Raymond James said, with drillers that currently see stock prices at 5 to 7 times their earnings moving up to multiples of 8 to 10.5 times earnings.

In a separate note to clients, Bernstein Research analyst Bob Brackett said the market is rewarding E&P companies for volume growth first with larger profit margins (lower costs) second.

"We looked at the last four years of equity performance for 49 North American E&Ps and found that above-average production growth and above-average margin expansion yielded 8.4% cumulative annual growth rate returns to share price," Brackett said Monday.

Despite the emphasis on lower costs and increased margins, drilling stocks that have increased production growth with below-average profit margins saw 4.4% gains in value while those with below-average production growth but increased profit margins had their value trimmed 6.3%, Bernstein said.

--Bill Holland, bill.holland@platts.com --Edited by Jeff Barber, jeff.barber@platts.com

Permalink Reply by Jack Straw on July 21, 2014 at 8:26am

Source: http://thetimes-tribune.com/news/gulf-oil-plans-lng-facility-in-gre...

TheTimes-Tribune.com

Gulf Oil plans LNG facility in Great Bend

By Brendan Gibbons

Published: July 19, 2014

An oil company with Pennsylvania roots plans to have a liquefied natural gas facility up and running in Susquehanna County by the end of 2015.

The Great Bend facility would accept natural gas from Williams’ Windsor-Montrose-Washington gathering line and compress it for storage and delivery as a liquid, according to a petition the company, Gulf Oil LP, filed with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission in April.

The facility would produce 100,000 to 300,000 gallons of liquefied natural gas per day, the petition states, using electric compressors. Its target markets are operators of drilling rigs and hydraulic fracturing unit fleets who want to run their equipment on natural gas instead of diesel fuel.

The gas would also go to storage facilities operated by utility companies. These plants, known as “peak-shaving plants,” store excess gas until periods of high demand, according to the U.S. Department of Transportation.

On Thursday, FERC issued an order stating the project does not fall into its jurisdiction because the project would not involve shipping gas through an interstate pipeline.

FERC issued an environmental assessment on July 3, stating “no environmental impact” would be tied to its decision of whether it could legally regulate the facility. The facility is subject to review and permitting by the state Department of Environmental Protection, the state Public Utility Commission and “other Pennsylvania and federal agencies,” the assessment states.

“The FERC decision was only one of the many steps in the long path before the project will become a reality,” Gulf Oil spokesman Derek Beckwith said. “Our next steps over the weeks and months ahead include, first and foremost, communicating and working closely with state and community officials to discuss our ideas. After that, we will be able to share specifics.”

Mr. Beckwith would not answer any questions about the facility.

Gulf Oil, founded in the early 1900s during the Texas Oil Boom with financial backing from by Pittsburgh banker William Larimer Mellon, joined with Chevron in 1984, in what was then the biggest corporate merger in U.S. history, according to The New York Times.

Its current incarnation is a joint venture between Massachusetts gas station and convenience store chain Cumberland Farms and Catamount Petroleum LP, according to a company history on Gulf Oil’s website. The partnership is based in Framingham, Massachusetts.

Contact the writer: bgibbons@timesshamrock.com, @bgibbonsTT on Twitter

Permalink Reply by 015334grltd9m on July 21, 2014 at 1:57pm

Andrew Mellon's biography is a must read for those who follow industry history.

Permalink Reply by Jack Straw on July 23, 2014 at 2:47pm

Source: http://www.genscape.com/press-releases/daily-natural-gas-production...

Daily Natural Gas Production in the U.S. Reaches New Record High of 70 bcfd; Proprietary Models Provided Advance Notice of Production Milestone - See more at: http://www.genscape.com/press-releases/daily-natural-gas-production...

Genscape’s detailed natural gas production forecasts are integrated with forward gas prices, rig activity levels, and pipeline flow data to provide early indicator of market trends
 
July 23, 2014, Houston, TX - Genscape’s proprietary pipeline models indicate that natural gas production for the Lower 48 reached the 70 bcfd level for the first time on Monday, July 21, 2014. This unique milestone demonstrates the ongoing growth in gas production and the continued reliance on natural gas in North America.
 
Using regional natural gas prices in combination with well economics, Genscape provides the most accurate gas production forecasts in the market, with weekly updates and detailed production forecasts for over 50 regions in the Lower 48 and Canada. Genscape has been aggressive in forecasting increasing U.S. natural gas production from shale plays across the country, with record flows in the Marcellus and Utica Shale leading the way.
 
This dynamic economic forecast of rigs and natural gas production uses the most up-to-date available data and incorporates infrastructure impacts and deferred gas well inventory to help inform trading and hedging strategies. Traders and analysts can utilize the report’s analyst insight and market intelligence, in combination with the granular data behind the forecasts, to make more efficient, intelligent decisions.
 
Genscape’s Natural Gas Production Forecast includes forecast commentary every six weeks, as well as weekly rig breakout, price, and pipe flow analysis reports. The forecasts are integrated to price and rig activity levels and pipeline flow data to ensure the forecasts are calibrated accurately with up-to-date signals of changes in production levels, allowing for price signals to flow through models and enabling reports to be adjusted based on market changes.
 
To learn more about Genscape’s Natural Gas Production Forecast or speak with one of the team’s gas experts, visit: info.genscape.com/natgas-production-high
 
Read the full press release: Daily Natural Gas Production in the U.S. Reaches New Record High of...
 
About Genscape
 
Genscape is the leading global provider of real-time data and intelligence for commodity and energy markets, driven to improve market transparency and efficiency. With thousands of patented monitors strategically deployed worldwide, Genscape is unique in its ability to collect and report proprietary market fundamentals in real-time or near real-time. Genscape delivers innovative solutions across a number of asset classes including: Oil, Power, Natural Gas and LNG, Agriculture, Petrochemical and NGLs, Maritime, and Renewables. Genscape clients often gain first-mover advantage, improve risk management, or increase operational efficiency. For more information, please visit: www.genscape.com
 
For all press inquiries please contact:
 
Jaimie Weiss
Marketing Communications Manager
Office: +1 617 790 0959
jweiss@genscape.com - See more at: http://www.genscape.com/press-releases/daily-natural-gas-production...

Permalink Reply by Jack F on July 23, 2014 at 11:05pm

Jack: Thank you for your "pick's" I always learn something with your contributions. Keep up the good work.

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
• 6
• …
• 16
• Next ›
• Page