Another "golden egg" laying goose is dead?
As we have seen, the Marcellus shale drilling success has lead to an over-supply of natural gas and a depressed price.
The driller's answer was - go to the wet gas Utica areas to capitalize on the higher value of natural gas liquids mainly ethane. Now this success has lead to an over-supply of ethane and the price of ethane is now less than the equivalent methane. The ethane cannot be left in the gas going into the pipeline because it contains more BTUs than methane (1070 vs approx 1025) and that would raise the value too close to the limit pipelines allow - 1100 BTU.
The answer may be to shut-in some Utica wells and return to the dry gas areas, but wait there is an over-supply of gas. What's needed is more useage, but that is going to take time and even then there's such an over-supply that prices are not going to change much for a long time.
The drillers are between a rock and a hard place.
Here are a couple of articles from Platts.
http://www.platts.com/RSSFeedDetailedNews/RSSFeed/Petrochemicals/60...
http://www.platts.com/RSSFeedDetailedNews/RSSFeed/NaturalGas/6987988
Views: 17201
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Vera Scroggins on
-
good news; the gas companies not only fracked the earth and the people, now they've fracked themselves.
they can keep running around trying to figure out how to make the next dirty buck from their dirty gas.
-
-
good news; the gas companies not only fracked the earth and the people, now they've fracked themselves.
they can keep running around trying to figure out how to make the next dirty buck from their dirty gas.
now we can turn to really, clean fuels and renewables and move on with our lives without fracking and polluting the planet for the Almighty Buck...
-
Permalink Reply by Jack Straw on
-
Actually Vera, you need to do your homework.
Natural Gas is the true Clean, Green Fuel; when burnt, it produces only two combustion products – H2O (aka water) and CO2 (aka plant food). When the Natural Gas from a fraced well is consumed, it produces much more water than was ever used in the fracing process. When the Natural Gas from a fraced well is consumed, it produces the CO2 that plants need to grow …. And in growing, the plants trap the carbon and exhale the Oxygen we need to live.
By using Natural Gas, we are recycling the byproduct of ancient plant and animal life.
Natural Gas is a Clean, Green alternative to the dirty fuels: Coal, Heating Oil, Diesel, Gasoline, Biodiesel, Solar and Wind.
If you want Clean and Green … it is either: Natural Gas, Geothermal or Hydroelectric.
We have pretty much exploited the Hydroelectric potential (and the damming of rivers does have a negative effect on our environment). Geothermal does not work everywhere.
The construction of the Solar Panels results in considerable pollution in the mining and manufacturing process, with much toxic waste left behind (just because the environmental damage in hidden in the far reaches of China does not mean it does not exist). The fact that Solar is dependent upon the Sun being visible means that a secondary back up system needs to be installed.
The construction of the Wind Farms results in considerable pollution in the mining and manufacturing process, with much toxic waste left behind (again, just because the environmental damage in hidden in the far reaches of China does not mean it does not exist). The fact that Wind Farms are dependent upon Wind being present means that a secondary back up system needs to be installed. Wind Farms kill millions of birds (including endangered species), particularly migrating birds who for millions of years have depended upon utilizing flyways that are now occupied by Wind Farms. Wind Farms are a blight on the landscape and have been found to be a health hazard for nearby residents.
Electric Cars need to get their electricity from somewhere; often that is from Coal or Nuclear. The manufacture of the batteries that store the electrical energy results in considerable pollution in the mining and manufacturing process, with much toxic waste left behind (again,just because the environmental damage in hidden in the far reaches of China does not mean it does not exist).
Biodiesel requires using land that would otherwise be producing food; food that could feed the hungry. And Biodiesel is still diesel, and its combustion still produces pollution; no way is it as clean as Clean, Green Natural Gas.
When you look at all the alternatives, the best one for the environment is Clean, Green Natural Gas.
Vera, you need to do your homework; and then you too will join the educated and intelligent who have embraced a future benefitting from Clean, Green Natural Gas.
Frac away, frac away, frac away … for America, for American jobs, for America’s environment.
JS
-
Permalink Reply by hunter4440 on
-
I also agree with Jack. I assume Vera rides a bike for transportation.... or maybe a broom.
-
Permalink Reply by Bluflame on
-
Jack,
I'm in your camp. But to be fair to all the alternatives, you also need to consider for shale wells the ~20k lineal ft of casing pipe required for each well, the gathering pipes and the distribution pipes. The manufacturing process going back to the iron ore mines and extending through basic steel-making and pipe manufacturing is energy-intensive and environmentally-unfriendly.
Then there is the mid-stream processing required. Also energy intensive and somewhat environmentally unfriendly.
However, in the final analysis, I'll take NG over the other alternatives!
BluFlame
-
Permalink Reply by Jack Straw on
-
RE: "you also need to consider for shale wells the ~20k lineal ft of casing pipe required for each well, the gathering pipes and the distribution pipes. The manufacturing process going back to the iron ore mines and extending through basic steel-making and pipe manufacturing is energy-intensive and environmentally-unfriendly."
The manufacture of steel pipe starts with the mining of Taconite in Minnesota and moves on to the resurgance of the Ohio and PA steel industry. Good, high paying jobs for Americans - in America. What starts in America and stays in America is good for America.
A lot of the energy for this energy intensive endeavor can be supplied by Natural Gas. Currently efforts are being made in adapting large engines to run on CNG or LNG, as an alternative to diesel. This includes truck engines, heavy equipment engines, railroad locomotive engines, the engines that power drilling rigs and the engines that power the fracing pumps. And Natural Gas as a fuel in smelting and steel making. Amazingly, Natural Gas has the ability of supplying much of the energy required in its exploitation.
And, for a given well, this is a "one-off" upfront proposition that will result in the availability of a Clean, Grean Fuel that will continue being produced from that well for decades. The amount of energy consumed in getting a well in production is quite small in comparison to the amount of resultant energy. And, all alternatives require upfront expeditures of energy that would equal or exceed (percentage of energy expended/energy obtained) that of Natural Gas.
RE: "Then there is the mid-stream processing required. Also energy intensive and somewhat environmentally unfriendly."
Compressor stations run on the Natural Gas they are producing. Processing of Natural Gas is minimal and the means of transporting it are almost entirely buried underground.
And, once that infrastructure is in place, it humms along nicely, with little need for additional expenditure.
The act of moving fuel and/or energy, regardless of the type of fuel and/or energy requires upfront expenditures of energy. Natural Gas is no different in that regard. A benefit of Natural Gas development and the bulk of infrastructure is in that the expenditures of energy are largely upfront and non-recurring .... and result in American jobs (often local) rather than exporting jobs (and monies) to places such as China, Iran, Nigeria, etc.
Moving Natural Gas from Ohio to The Dakota Apartments in NYC is much less energy intensive (and cleaner) than pipelining Crude Oil to the coast of Nigeria, loading it onto an Afrimax Tanker, then moving the oil onto a Panamax or Supermax Tanker, Tankering it to a refinery on Chesapeake Bay, refining it (an energy intensive and dirty process), and moving the various products by pipeline, truck, tanker, barge and rail to end users.
My argument is that the exploitation of Clean, Green Natural Gas has a small footprint, and one that allows a maximum amount of ultimate benefit to remain in America; particularly when contrasted against the alternatives.
Also, when a well can no longer be economically produced, it is easily plugged and abandoned (all required is cement and a bit of welding). The same cannot be said for the decommissioning of a Nuclear Power Plant (with nuclear waste to contend with, ad infinitum). The same cannot be said for the removal of a hydroelectric dam that has silted up. The same cannot be said for the piles of polluted coal fly ash resulting fro the use of coal powered power plants and the remediation of coal surface mines and acid drainage from subsurface coal mines. Nor can the same be said for the hazardous waste from the scrapping of electric vehicles and their batteries.
If/when a pipeline is ultimately abandoned, the steel pipe is a valuable resource suitable for recycling.
When I look at all the alternatives, Clean, Green Natural Gas comes out on top .... economically and environmentally and dependably.
All IMHO,
JS
-
Permalink Reply by Bluflame on
-
Jack,
You are a great asset to GMS. But on an apples-to-apples basis considering you cited the environmental one-time manufacturing disadvantages of both solar & wind (very well, I might add), we need to consider the same factors for NG. Jobs and potential conversion of certain power sources to NG apply to all of the alternatives.
Midstream processing (both cryogenic and fractionation) are energy consumers, but I really don't want to debate this further.
You are preaching to the choir!
BluFlame
-
Permalink Reply by Jack Straw on
-
RE: "Jobs and potential conversion of certain power sources to NG apply to all of the alternatives."
Solar manufacture provides jobs in China. The manufacture of Solar Panels in the US has been a disaster; even massive subsidies and taxpayer financed loans have been able to keep an American industry afloat.
Regarding Wind Turbines, the principal beneficiaries are likewise largely foreign and (other than installation and maintenances) the jobs are offshore.
RE: "Midstream processing (both cryogenic and fractionation) are energy consumers"
To clarify; my intent was to deal with the benefits of Natural Gas (dry Gas), I had not addressed the concerns of other more complex hydrocarbons: NGLs, Condensate or Oil; nor had I intended to,
I continue to maintain that the Midstream processing of the Natural Gas (dry gas) that is present (as dry Gas) in the bulk of the Marcellus and much of the Utica is minimal.
And, LNG is a Downstream process, and it was not my intent to discuss that; as an aside, I do not see LNG export as becoming significant to our area - I think that we can find approprite uses for Natural Gas and CNG (Compressed Natural Gas). And, I expect the use of CNG to be locally Downstream, compressed for vehicle fleet of truck stop use ( I do like the idea of GE's "CNG in a Box").
All IMHO,
JS
-
-
I have done my homework the past five years; I live in the middle of this;
Gas Drilling produces tons of waste which you can find on the DEP site and it's being dumped in dumpsites in NY, Ohio, PA. and NJ.
we do need new alternatives without waste and pollution.
it's out there....
-
Permalink Reply by Jack Straw on
-
RE: "I have done my homework the past five years"
Vera, I have looked at your homework.
Bad news, I have graded it and it is an F-.
JS
-
Permalink Reply by Larry Gander on
-
GREAT REPLY.........
SOMETIMES ATTITUDE DOES IT BEST.
Top Content
Latest Activity
© 2024 Created by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher).
Powered by
