Home
And Offers cheaper gas; US could top Saudi output


Let's kill it!


Shale oil helps revive East Coast refineries

Quote



A year ago, the shutdown of several refineries serving the Northeast and the possibility they would not reopen threatened to boost New England�s already� high gasoline prices by as much as 15 cents a gallon. But an influx of cheaper crude oil extracted from shale rock formations in the United States has helped save most of those facilities and stabilized gas �prices.

The revival of the East Coast refineries is another example of how the controversial drilling process known as hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, is changing the energy equation for the region, nation, and world.

Just as fracking opened vast reserves of natural gas over the past decade, it is now unlocking crude oil trapped in shale deposits. It is so dramatically increasing domestic production that the United States is projected to surpass Saudi Arabia as the world�s biggest oil producer by 2017.

The influx of this domestic crude, known as �tight oil,� has allowed East Coast refineries to decrease their reliance on more expensive foreign oil, increase profit margins, and regain their economic competitiveness, refinery operators say. They estimate the domestic crude cuts oil costs by a few dollars per barrel, which can have a huge impact on their bottom line.
Related



Graphic: US on track to be world leader in oil

�A savings of $1 per barrel across our entire refining system is worth several hundred million dollars of net income to Phillips 66,� said Dennis Nuss, spokesman for the Houston company operating the Bayway refinery in New Jersey.

In Philadelphia, domestic supplies have helped resurrect a facility that accounts for nearly one-fourth of East Coast refining capacity. It was put up for sale in 2011 and expected to close for good last summer as high oil prices and slackening demand made it barely profitable. Today, it is refining up to 330,000 barrels of oil a day, getting about 10 percent of its crude from the Bakken shale formation in North Dakota.

Phil Rinaldi, chief executive of Philadelphia Energy Solutions, the company that now operates the refinery, said the domestic supplies are pressuring foreign producers to keep their prices competitive.

�It allows us for the first time in a very long time to have some genuine diversity of supply,� he said. �The shale plays are game-changers.�

Last week, the average Massachusetts gas price was $3.68 a gallon, 12 cents higher than a year ago and up 25 cents in the last month alone, according to AAA Southern New England. If the refineries had stayed shuttered, however, prices would have been driven even higher, analysts believe.

But the process used to extract the oil is controversial. Fracking pumps chemical-laced, pressurized water deep into the earth to split open shale, releasing oil or natural gas. The method has spurred fears that chemicals and other substances will pollute drinking water and the air.

Environmental groups such as the Natural Resources Defense Council are pushing for stricter regulations.

�It�s a lot of the same risks from any oil and gas production, and a lot of the same risks that people have been hearing about from shale gas production,� said Briana Mordick, a staff scientist at the NRDC. �There�s broad agreement that something needs to be done.�

These concerns have played against economic benefits that are lowering energy costs for consumers and businesses, creating jobs, and sparking booms in North Dakota and other oil- producing states.

The Lexington forecasting firm IHS estimates that extraction of shale gas and oil added $62 billion in revenues to federal and state coffers last year.

�Tight oil is allowing some of the refineries to operate,� said Alfred Luaces, an economist at IHS. �A couple of years ago they were in bad straits.��

One of those refineries given new life is Marcus Hook, owned by Sunoco in Pennsylvania. Sunoco�s pipeline subsidiary now plans to use the plant, shuttered in December 2011, to process natural gas products from the Marcellus shale formation, part of which is in Pennsylvania. ConocoPhillip�s shuttered refinery in Trainer, Pa., was purchased by Delta Air Lines, which is looking to produce jet fuel.

Still, part of the problem for Northeastern refineries has been a lack of pipeline capacity to move domestic supplies from oil-producing areas, meaning higher transportation costs and lower profit margins. But so much crude is coming from shale drilling in places such as Texas and North Dakota that refiners can buy it cheaply, ship it by rail or barge, and still beat the cost of imports.

The number of rail cars carrying petroleum or petroleum products jumped 46 percent last year, according to the Association of American Railroads.

Massachusetts companies such as Pan Am Railways, of Billerica, and the oil terminal operator Global Partners LP in Waltham are benefiting from the boom. In January alone, Global moved 100,000 barrels of oil a day from North Dakota to Albany by rail, said chief executive Eric Slifka. That, he estimated, amounted to a quarter of the products the company transported last month.

Cynthia Scarano, executive vice president for Pan Am Railways, said that increase in crude shipments has helped offset a drop in transporting coal, which has been increasingly replaced by cheaper and cleaner natural gas. �What we have lost in coal we have gained in oil,� Scarano said. �It saved jobs.�

Transporting shale oil via barge and rail has helped the region access cheap supplies, but New England will be able to reap the full benefits of lower-cost domestic oil only by building more pipelines, said Joe Petrowski, head of Cumberland Farms Gulf Oil Group, a major Northeast fuel distributor. Transportation costs, he said, still erase much of the savings from domestic oil.

�What I�m trying to do is get energy prices down for New England,� he said. �The less your average person in Brockton has to spend on gas and heating oil, the more they can spend on a sweater, a vacation, or a sub from Cumberland Farms.�
Steve,

Are there any estimates of the reserves of shale oil the US has? Is there any potential for oil independence from the ME?

Regards,

Peter
With increased pumping the companies will sell their crude to the highest bidders in or out of country. Energy costs stabilizing? I think not.
money in the pocket.

[Linked Image]

[Linked Image]
Originally Posted by stxhunter
money in the pocket.

[Linked Image]

[Linked Image]


How big is the fish on the other end of that cable. shocked
Originally Posted by 1minute
With increased pumping the companies will sell their crude to the highest bidders in or out of country. Energy costs stabilizing? I think not.


When supply meets demand prices will stabilize.
Oil industry jobs pay good. I know lots of people that work in it. One of my best friends barely made it out of high school, but a willingness to work means he makes more than 95% of my graduating class.
coil tubing, not a cable. used to drill out plugs after fracking or like in this case to go in and wash out a well that screened in while they were fracking.
But but but but nancy,harry and bam-bam say it's baaaaad!!
And yet there is an enormous amount of money added to cost of production by the mere fact that the oil is being transported an enormous distance from the site of extraction. Thank the EPA, no new refineries built since 1976.
Originally Posted by ranger1
And yet there is an enormous amount of money added to cost of production by the mere fact that the oil is being transported an enormous distance from the site of extraction. Thank the EPA, no new refineries built since 1976.


Still a lot closer than importing from the ME though..
Pete,

Not sure out the US as a whole. I know that the Green river formation has about 3.2T barrels, of which half is estimated as recoverable. That's about equal to the world current reserves.

http://www.gao.gov/assets/600/590761.pdf

-Steve
Originally Posted by Steve
Pete,

Not sure out the US as a whole. I know that the Green river formation has about 3.2T barrels, of which half is estimated as recoverable. That's about equal to the world current reserves.

http://www.gao.gov/assets/600/590761.pdf

-Steve


Thats good to hear for you guys as I would have thought one of the major goals for any US President would be securing energy independence if financially viable..

There has been interest in fracking over here too, but operations at least one site allegedly caused a couple of minor earth tremors so it was shut down for a period. I think its now been re allowed albeit with some restrictions on how they operate put in place..
Originally Posted by Pete E
Steve,

Are there any estimates of the reserves of shale oil the US has? Is there any potential for oil independence from the ME?

Regards,

Peter


We have more oil than any other country in the world. Unfortunately, we have more idiots also.
Originally Posted by Pete E
Steve,

Are there any estimates of the reserves of shale oil the US has? Is there any potential for oil independence from the ME?

Regards,

Peter


If the politicians and tree huggers will allow it, we will be energy independent in five to ten years, tops.
Quite right, Pat.
Well, I wish them luck. I also wish they would do the pipeline from Canada....yesterday.
Originally Posted by ltppowell
Originally Posted by Pete E
Steve,

Are there any estimates of the reserves of shale oil the US has? Is there any potential for oil independence from the ME?

Regards,

Peter


We have more oil than any other country in the world. Unfortunately, we have more idiots also.


exactly.......
Not to rain on your parade but "shale oil" and petroleum derived from fracking shale formations are two different things. There is no "shale oil" currently being processed in US refineries.

If in-situ shale oil extraction was currently technically and economically feasible on a commercial scale (it's not, the process used in Canada for oil sands is ex-situ) oil companies would be all over it but they're not. And there would still be the problem of where all the water required to process it would come from. In a state lke Colorado, that much water is a big deal, and someone would have to give theirs up.

...allow me to finish this for you, if I may.

Originally Posted by smokepole
Not to rain on your parade but "shale oil" and petroleum derived from fracking shale formations are two different things. There is no "shale oil" currently being processed in US refineries.

If in-situ shale oil extraction was currently technically and economically feasible (it's not, the process used in Canada is ex-situ) there would still be the problem of where all the water required to process it would come from. In a state lke Colorado, that much water is a big deal, and someone would have to give theirs up.


...or it would have to be piped to the water, where facilities already exist.

Originally Posted by ltppowell

...allow me to finish this for you, if I may.

Originally Posted by smokepole
Not to rain on your parade but "shale oil" and petroleum derived from fracking shale formations are two different things. There is no "shale oil" currently being processed in US refineries.

If in-situ shale oil extraction was currently technically and economically feasible (it's not, the process used in Canada is ex-situ) there would still be the problem of where all the water required to process it would come from. In a state lke Colorado, that much water is a big deal, and someone would have to give theirs up.


...or it would have to be piped to the water, where facilities already exist.



I think its the other way around, that is you'd need to pipe in water to the site of the fracking..
Originally Posted by ltppowell

...allow me to finish this for you, if I may.

Originally Posted by smokepole
Not to rain on your parade but "shale oil" and petroleum derived from fracking shale formations are two different things. There is no "shale oil" currently being processed in US refineries.

If in-situ shale oil extraction was currently technically and economically feasible (it's not, the process used in Canada is ex-situ) there would still be the problem of where all the water required to process it would come from. In a state lke Colorado, that much water is a big deal, and someone would have to give theirs up.


...or it would have to be piped to the water, where facilities already exist.




Allow me to elucidate, if I may.

"Shale oil" is not in liquid form, so it can't be put in a pipeline until it's extracted from the shale.

Besides that little stumbling block, in Colorado most of it's too deep to be economically mined, processed, and extracted at the surface so the oil has to be extracted in-situ. This requires huge amounts of water, heat, and energy.

Like I said, if it was technically and economically feasible on a commercial scale, the oil companies would be all over it. They're not.
Originally Posted by Pete E
I think its the other way around, that is you'd need to pipe in water to the site of the fracking..


Pete, you'e confusing fracking with extraction of oil from shale, they are not the same. Fracking fractures the rock to make it more permeable to liquids and gas. Shale oil is a solid that has to be heated until it's in liquid form, then extracted.
Originally Posted by smokepole
Originally Posted by Pete E
I think its the other way around, that is you'd need to pipe in water to the site of the fracking..


Pete, you'e confusing fracking with extraction of oil from shale, they are not the same. Fracking fractures the rock to make it more permeable to liquids and gas. Shale oil is a solid that has to be heated until it's in liquid form, then extracted.


My mistake, thanks for the correction!
Right...sorry, I was speaking to the whole, not just Colorado.

On that note, Colorado has Benchmark crude that the birdwatchers won't let be mined.
Personally, I like Pickens' idea to liquify natural gas and run all our vehicles on it. We have as much gas as Saudi hs oil.
I don't care what we use, as long as it works and we can afford it. The problem is that 51% of the country thinks that there is no reason to drive anything other than a bicycle or the magic underground train.
We're in a wet gas area that might have some good oil here in nw Pa. They just drilled a Utica well about 6 miles from me and if it's as good as I'm hearing, we should get a ton of wells like our neighbors in Ohio in the Point Pleasant play.




Come'on baby, drill on my property!


You're problems in PA are, or are going to be, dealing with the enviro wackos on disposing of all the liquids involved after fracking. I heard just today that PA is going to require all cuttings, reclaimed water, fluids, acid, etc to be hauled off out of state somewhere. There's also no infrastructure to speak of.
Doubt it. We've had tons of wells drilled in the state for years. Doubt our politicians will cut off an extra income stream rather than give the eco weenies some lip service.


We do need more compressor stations which can handle these larger flows of gas. There's one going in near the well that's near me.
Never ever underestimate the ability and focus of the enviro greenies. They are going to be relentless and unbiquitous!
Fracking has opened up extraction techniques once thought to be economically impossible.
Look at the bastards who showed up in D.C. this weekend sponsored by the Sierra Club. These bastards want us pulling rickshaws on unplowed broken roads.
Look at the pushback on the Keystone Pipeline. Canada is just begging for Skeeter to let it happen. The State Dept. is
delaying it right now. Thousands of contruction jobs created by Skeeter in a nano-second. Hundreds of new jobs down on the Gulf in the refineries.

When the Ogallala Aquifer delayed Keystone the first time, I said here and elsewhere the enviro commie bastards do not want this pipeline built. The parent company re-drew the map around the aquifer, added a couple of new pumping stations. Skeeter delayed it cause it was too close to his re-coronation. He wanted to keep the commie enviros on his side.

Now that he is going to be king for as long as he wants, Keystone is still on the edge. The rest of the oil producing
countries are laughing at the USA. They can't believe how stupid we are.

Look at the present high prices. We have around 9 refineries down for maintenance and an early conversion to the "summer blend". We have more demand from China adding pressure to the world supply.

We could have gasoline down to $3 and below with SAFE recovery of our fossil fuels. Yet these sons of bishes just don't want the US economy to grow and prosper.

Look at those axxholes who were arrested in DC this weeked. RFK Jr. and his moronic offspring. Not to mention that washed out shred of human debris, Darrayl Hannah.
I wonder how the hell they got to DC?

The public needs to get riled up over this issue like they do with 2A concerns.

The EPA is writing new frac sand regs that will make it more expensive to mine, store and haul. The EPA is writing their own mandated regs WITHOUT the approval of Congress. Skeeter just let them have free reign.

Elections matter.
Originally Posted by rrroae
We're in a wet gas area that might have some good oil here in nw Pa. They just drilled a Utica well about 6 miles from me and if it's as good as I'm hearing, we should get a ton of wells like our neighbors in Ohio in the Point Pleasant play.




Come'on baby, drill on my property!




I wish you much luck and a huge oil contract. But be on the lookout for the enviros. They know what is going on and will stop at nothing to curtail or prevent anything that they don't approve of.
Yeah, if I see Darryl Hannah I'm throwing some rocks.





Damn, use to like her to.
Ain't any blessing so big it can't be bonered by libs.


They need their minds fracked ----- constipation of thought, ya know.

I'm fairly confident the libs in my state aren't going to screw too much with the oil and gas companies. They like the Billions in tax revenue way too much.


Even the commie NY politicians are looking to lift their moratorium on fracking because they know it means huge increases in tax revenue.


Now, I'm not so confident they won't try to screw us landowners with some new outrageous property tax assessment on oil and gas land. They've already tried once.
Originally Posted by rrroae
Doubt it. We've had tons of wells drilled in the state for years. Doubt our politicians will cut off an extra income stream rather than give the eco weenies some lip service.


We do need more compressor stations which can handle these larger flows of gas. There's one going in near the well that's near me.


They're already at it. I see lots of PA boys, service trucks, etc out here in W TX now for that very reason. They tell me that's why they're here.
The drillers in my state have moved away from the Dry gas areas because of the low natural gas prices but they're increasing drilling in the wet and volatile areas which is on the western side of the state and heavily in the eastern part of Ohio.



Here's where activity is highest around us(in pink)

[Linked Image]

Originally Posted by Pete E
Originally Posted by ranger1
And yet there is an enormous amount of money added to cost of production by the mere fact that the oil is being transported an enormous distance from the site of extraction. Thank the EPA, no new refineries built since 1976.


Still a lot closer than importing from the ME though..


i imagine at some point we are gonna be off ME oil, doubt we will truly independent though, i foresee us buying from Canada and other places closer to home for as long as we are heavily using oil......

but the other side of the coin is the oil they are talking about like the Bakken formation and the other two here and some of these shale deposits where fracking is needed is its not cheap to get the oil out of the ground, yeah its there, and there is alot of it but it doesnt mean we are gonna see $1.50 a gallon gas again cause if it drops that far and stays there drilling here will come to a quick halt cause they cant sell it for that and make money while paying to drill new wells....

last number i saw, and this is 10 years old, is that oil needs to stay at $60 a barrel or above or you cant make money drilling here on the Bakken cause it costs more to drill than you will get selling the oil out of it....im sure that number is higher now....
Here's a pretty good map of shale plays in the US.


[Linked Image]
Keystone is a red herring. The oil is coming to the Gulf Coast whether anybody likes it or not. Look at the Enbridge/Energy Transfer deal announced yesterday. There is more than one way to skin a cat. Look at the various pipeline companies asset maps available on-line. Overlay those maps. A couple of deals, interconnects and change of service and you can pump anything anywhere.


On another note, the only gas liqufaction that is going to happen in the US in the near future will be for export. Domestically gas isn't worth anything. Overseas is another story.
Originally Posted by rattler
Originally Posted by Pete E
Originally Posted by ranger1
And yet there is an enormous amount of money added to cost of production by the mere fact that the oil is being transported an enormous distance from the site of extraction. Thank the EPA, no new refineries built since 1976.


Still a lot closer than importing from the ME though..


i imagine at some point we are gonna be off ME oil, doubt we will truly independent though, i foresee us buying from Canada and other places closer to home for as long as we are heavily using oil......

but the other side of the coin is the oil they are talking about like the Bakken formation and the other two here and some of these shale deposits where fracking is needed is its not cheap to get the oil out of the ground, yeah its there, and there is alot of it but it doesnt mean we are gonna see $1.50 a gallon gas again cause if it drops that far and stays there drilling here will come to a quick halt cause they cant sell it for that and make money while paying to drill new wells....

last number i saw, and this is 10 years old, is that oil needs to stay at $60 a barrel or above or you cant make money drilling here on the Bakken cause it costs more to drill than you will get selling the oil out of it....im sure that number is higher now....


Once there is one well on every lease the frantic drilling will be over, as it already may be, and the costs are goin down. I believe it is below $60 now.
Originally Posted by Pete E
Steve,

Are there any estimates of the reserves of shale oil the US has? Is there any potential for oil independence from the ME?

Regards,

Peter


6 TRILLION barrels in West slope of Colorado - about 20X what they have in Saudi Arabia. And what was the first thing Obama did after he was re-elected? He banned all mineral exploration on federal lands - 1.6 million acres off limits.
Originally Posted by oldtrapper
Originally Posted by rattler
Originally Posted by Pete E
Originally Posted by ranger1
And yet there is an enormous amount of money added to cost of production by the mere fact that the oil is being transported an enormous distance from the site of extraction. Thank the EPA, no new refineries built since 1976.


Still a lot closer than importing from the ME though..


i imagine at some point we are gonna be off ME oil, doubt we will truly independent though, i foresee us buying from Canada and other places closer to home for as long as we are heavily using oil......

but the other side of the coin is the oil they are talking about like the Bakken formation and the other two here and some of these shale deposits where fracking is needed is its not cheap to get the oil out of the ground, yeah its there, and there is alot of it but it doesnt mean we are gonna see $1.50 a gallon gas again cause if it drops that far and stays there drilling here will come to a quick halt cause they cant sell it for that and make money while paying to drill new wells....

last number i saw, and this is 10 years old, is that oil needs to stay at $60 a barrel or above or you cant make money drilling here on the Bakken cause it costs more to drill than you will get selling the oil out of it....im sure that number is higher now....


Once there is one well on every lease the frantic drilling will be over, as it already may be, and the costs are goin down. I believe it is below $60 now.


trading at around $95 ATM....and the $60 was it staying there for a good while, short term dips dont matter as much...
Originally Posted by jmac4
Keystone is a red herring. The oil is coming to the Gulf Coast whether anybody likes it or not. Look at the Enbridge/Energy Transfer deal announced yesterday. There is more than one way to skin a cat. Look at the various pipeline companies asset maps available on-line. Overlay those maps. A couple of deals, interconnects and change of service and you can pump anything anywhere.


On another note, the only gas liqufaction that is going to happen in the US in the near future will be for export. Domestically gas isn't worth anything. Overseas is another story.


Right on Jmac.
Originally Posted by jmac4
Keystone is a red herring. The oil is coming to the Gulf Coast whether anybody likes it or not. Look at the Enbridge/Energy Transfer deal announced yesterday. There is more than one way to skin a cat. Look at the various pipeline companies asset maps available on-line. Overlay those maps. A couple of deals, interconnects and change of service and you can pump anything anywhere.


On another note, the only gas liqufaction that is going to happen in the US in the near future will be for export. Domestically gas isn't worth anything. Overseas is another story.


Exactly and we are in full development of an LNG export facility feed that very need.
© 24hourcampfire