I watched a presentation yesterday of a possible game changer in the oil patch

http://www.petroleumnews.com/pntruncate/25681081.shtml

The way fields are conventionally developed on the slopes cost $55/bbl to break even requiring 100's of millions to billions in capital investments before producing a drop of oil. By going with portable facility that is leased and trucking crude instead of installing pipelines at $5mil/mile the projection is this approach will allow oil to be profitable at $37/bbl and drastically reduce the risk of conventional developments. There are many small lease holders all over the slope with wells that can be profitably produced with this model. What struck me was the statement that of the dozen of test wells that were drilled over the past 50 years but not produced, the worst of them flows 10 times better than the best Backen wells.

Will be interesting to see how this plays out, bet seems like a game changer that could be exactly what the state needs for increased oil revenue and jobs.

Interesting concept... but the more human involvement the more oil finds its way to the tundra, generally.

I agree, the design on these facilities are they will be operated remotely so the only human interface is the tanker driver filling up.

I think the niche these will serve is as an extended well flow test that will produce a sales quality crude. If the field proves out, put in a conventional field and pipeline, if not cancel your lease and the facility gets trucked to a new puddle.

Definitely quite a few risks and shortcomings. I can't imagine it'll be cheap to put in gravel roads and pads to remote spots, keep the snow plowed and truck oil 24/7. Not to mention every time you have a phase condition you need to shut in the pad, and how do you keep lines between modules from freezing, etc.

But I don't see much movement from the majors or minors expanding in the near future and BP is making major cutbacks in capital expenditures and maintenance. Yeah, not like that move hasn't bitten them before.

I see where the Italians are heading off to drill in our (Shell) old stomping grounds.

https://www.alaskapublic.org/2017/1...on-in-arctic-federal-waters-since-shell/

Or a couple hundred miles to the East. As I recall Shell was drilling ~40 miles offshore in the Chuckchi, Eni is drilling the Beaufort.

from your keyboard to God's eyes.

would certainly like to see production pick up, this state needs it, we're just now getting ready to feel the worm turn imo.


things could get a bit dicey for awhile without something positive happening

biz in FBKS is bleh, don't get to ANC much but hear they've felt it more than us, don't know the veracity of that, just what I've heard.

Unfortunately I don't see an instantaneous turnaround, but I'm hoping by the middle of next year the oil industry will start rebounding with the rest of the state following. I'm afraid Anchorage hasn't seen the worst of it and sadly figure some businesses will be closing in the next year or so. It's been a solid 2 1/2 years of continuing cutbacks in the oil patch far and away the worst I've seen in 20 years up here. The group I just joined earlier this year, every one of those dozen or so positions is gone by the end of this year, so that's 24 or so peoples jobs, and I'd think between direct oil co job cutbacks, contractors being told they don't have gigs anymore and construction projects being pushed back months or years that equates to 100's of additional jobs being lost. Many of those folks are just retiring but quite a few are a decade or so away from saying take this job and shove it. In theory I've got something lined up for next year but I've learned it ain't real until you can charge to it. Driving across and around the field is like a ghost town.

Does not seem to have affected your mayor’s spending.

I've yet to see liberal that could resist spending someone else's money

"Please, God, just let there be one more oil boom. I promise not to piss this one away!"

That idea is intriguing! I can see a big boost in general construction, particularly along the Haul Road, and associated infrastructure happening as the beginning of such a project.

Ed

Maybe down-sizing the human population is just a trick to get at the Permanent Fund!

If they are doing open air skids there will have to be a lot of insulated and heated pipe.

Only the queens minions from Houston have been stupid enough to designe and build open air skids in the arctic. I haven't seen one of those abominations floated since their heyday in the mid 2000's and had several projects to partially enclose most of them. Then again with the recent re-org and moving management decisions to the young hot shots in the Anchorage tower I could see many bright ideas in the future

The MAPS will be fully enclosed heated skids with fire protection. As they said in the presentation, "We're not a major who can afford to write off a plant if it blows up, the plant is our asset, not the field."

I don't know what the major's economic threshold is, but from the projects I've been involved in the only fields developed have a minimum daily production of 10,000 bpd. There are hundreds of "puddles" that will produce 1000's of bbl's/day. Even at a nominal 1000 bbl/day and $50/bbl that's $18 million a year per puddle. Bring a couple puddles on line and you're talking real money. Though what the state really needs is some elephants to get us back to 1 mil bbd, an extra 50-100k bbd sure would help in the near term.

Those are big numbers...

But IIRC, ARCO built a number of open air skids. I spent plenty of time at DS15.

I guess stupid is contagious Most of my projects have been on the west side, though I'll be heading out to DS15 next hitch.

Take a look at the electrical panel doors in the truckable on the front pad... long story...

Back pad has one of the first open air skids.

I sure hope they manage their business up there better than they did with Kashagan.

None of you need to worry.

We have natural gas and China. Problems solved.

Thank you!!! I feel so much better now!

DFTFT.

that goodness for Conoco pumping out new wells & pipelines, pads & rds... & last yr they approved for another phase 8 miles farther out coming up I heard.....may not support us all but better than the alternative!

You may be right. I read that Alaska pump enough N.G. back into the round to supply the whole west coast . They didn't at the time cause it was so expensive to move it.

That gas is used to maintain reservoir pressure, lift oil (and water), and wash the oil out of the rock itself. Selling it will increase the difficulties and cost of getting the rest of the oil out.

The fields have decades more life left in them albeit at reduced production rates. Leaving the gas to maximize oil output and looking at bring the gas to market in 10-20 years seems like the better option.

The economics of a gas line today just don't pencil out. Converting the gas to NGL and shipping down TAPS would seem like a potentially better option but I haven't heard any numbers on whether or not such an option is fiscally viable.

Hard to get it small enough to ship reasonably without getting it to liquid phase which requires too much pressurse these days.

It probably pencils out if one is running for re-election as guv.

I learned something today. Do they keep some NG for heat or anything close by?

They run their gas turbine power plants with some of it. The fuel is (practically) free...........

Quite a bit is burned to keep flares burning... in case of emergencies and plant upsets. They need it burning so it ignites immediately when dumped to the pit.

Heat is easy to come by in the big plants as they are bringing in lots of product at high temperatures and especially the gas. They can pump a lot more cool gas down the injection wells than hot gas.