[Sixstrings]

US poised to become world’s leading liquid petroleum producer

US production of oil and related liquids such as ethane and propane was neck-and-neck with Saudi Arabia in June and again in August at about 11.5m barrels a day, according to the International Energy Agency, the watchdog backed by rich countries.

With US production continuing to boom, its output is set to exceed Saudi Arabia’s this month or next for the first time since 1991. Riyadh has stressed that the rise of the US should not detract from its own critical role in oil markets. It says it has the ability to increase its output by 2.5m b/d if needed to balance supply and demand.

Prince Abdulaziz Bin Salman Bin Abdulaziz, Saudi Arabia’s deputy oil minister, said earlier this month that the kingdom was the “only country with usable spare oil production capacity”.

However, even Saudi officials do not deny that the rise of the US to become the world’s largest petroleum producer – with an even greater lead if its biofuel output of about 1m b/d is included – has played a vital role in stabilising markets.

Global crude prices have fallen in the past two years, in spite of the turmoil in Syria and Iraq, fighting in Libya and Russia’s conflict with Ukraine.

Brent crude hit its lowest level in more than two years last week at about $95.60 a barrel, down from a peak of over $125 a barrel early in 2012.

Over that period, the growth in US production of more than 3.5m b/d has almost equalled the entire increase in world oil supplies.

New extraction techniques and high oil prices boost US oil production. The US industry has been transformed by the shale revolution, with advances in the techniques of hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling enabling the exploitation of oilfields, particularly in Texas and North Dakota, that were long considered uncommercial.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/98104974-47e4-11e4-be7b-00144feab7de.html#axzz3EnmuLmL2

Well.. so what's this mean for the peak oil picture?

I think I posted about this before but now it's ready to happen, next month or the month after, US will pass the Saudis in liquid petroleum production.

Could this eventually turn the economy around over here, being #1 producer in the world again?

How long will the oil boom last?

Thoughts?

[ROCKMAN]

"Could this eventually turn the economy around over here"? Are you asking if the US consumers paying 300% more for oil then they were 10 years ago will bring a great economic boom? I suppose the economy will be doing a tad better than if it were paying $100/bbl instead of $90/bbl. But the economy is still that huge ocean going vessel that takes a long time to change course significantly. Now if oil prices stay under $90/bbl for several years I might expect to see some improvement. OTOH the economy isn't solely dependent upon the price of oil. A significant factor but not the only one.

[BobInget]

Too bad US oil CONSUMPTION is so much higher than Saudi Arabia. Such headlines are just misleading to the average casual reader.

US oil companies need to limit production till prices catch up with production cost. Look at NG.
That won't be long coming.

The reason we are being told World Oil War Three will last three to ten years is to prevent panic run-ups in oil pricing. Ya know what? It's working.

[AirlinePilot]

BE CAREFUL!!!!

What is total US crude and condensate production?

What is Saudi total crude and condensate production?

Total liquids is NOT what you think it is.

I am pretty sure the US is still number 3 behind Saudi and Russia. Total liquids is a GAME being played for public and political opinion. Its meaningless and basically a lie to uphold the BAU mantra that all is well and no need to worry about the future.

[copious.abundance]

According to the EIA, in June ...

... the US produced 8,531,000 bpd of crude/condensate
... Saudi Arabia produced 9,690,000 bpd of crude/condensate
... Russia produced 10,095,000 bpd of crude/condensate

So we are still third, but given our recent growth it looks like we could catch up.

Given the recent weekly data for August and (so far) September it looks like August will be somewhere in the 8.6 million bpd range, and the last two weeks have been over 8.8 million bpd so we could even see 8.7 or more million bpd in September. 9 million bpd wouldn't surprise me late in the year or early next year.

[Subjectivist]

If the headline was, as cheap as a decade ago, then it would have meaning. Prices for the last three years have been persistently high so this is a very small fluctuation in what has become the new normal.

[Pops]

Chinese demand is dropping - negative actually with a lot of imports going to their version of the SPR
The dollar is rising - a 4-year high against the basket and 6 year high to the yen - what else are you gonna stuff under the mattress?
The EU is stagnating - gdp flat last qtr

China’s oil-demand growth, on the other hand, remains uncertain, with a large portion of its imports this year going into strategic stockpiling instead of consumption. Its oil demand fell into negative territory in July and its oil imports declined for the first time this year.

http://blogs.wsj.com/moneybeat/2014/09/ ... il-demand/

But don't go all gushy over USA beating KSA, they still have the ability to manipulate the price and will be doing so long after we've shot our wad.

In its closely watched monthly oil market report, the [IEA] said it expects global oil demand to grow by 0.9 million barrels a day in 2014, a decrease of 65,000 barrels a day compared with last month's forecast and down by 300,000 barrels a day since July.

According to the IEA, oil demand growth in the second quarter was at its lowest in 2½ years, dented by economic weakness in Europe and China, a trend the agency expects will continue to weigh on demand.

"While demand growth is still expected to gain momentum, the expected pace of recovery is now looking somewhat more subdued," the IEA said. The agency expects oil demand to increase by 1.2 million barrels a day next year, though that is still 100,000 barrels a day less than it forecast last month

Meanwhile, Saudi Arabia, the biggest oil producer in the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries finally appears to be responding to the lower demand outlook.

According to the IEA, Saudi Arabia cut its oil output by 330,000 barrels a day last month, apparently in response to lower demand from its customers and a shift in the oil producer's focus toward Asian markets. The Kingdom's oil exports are likely to have run below 7 million barrels a day for the last four months, their lowest level since September 2011, as domestic consumption ratcheted up over the summer and supply to the U.S. fell, the IEA said.

http://online.wsj.com/articles/iea-cuts ... 1410425253

[Herr Meier]

Are you asking if the US consumers paying 300% more for oil then they were 10 years ago will bring a great economic boom?

I'm not sure if that really matters, for the economy, I mean. Instead of spending their money on imported Chinese crap, people are spending it on domestic and imported oil. What's the difference?

[Tanada]

Are you asking if the US consumers paying 300% more for oil then they were 10 years ago will bring a great economic boom?

I'm not sure if that really matters, for the economy, I mean. Instead of spending their money on imported Chinese crap, people are spending it on domestic and imported oil. What's the difference?

I would say the difference is simple if you pause to think about it for a minute. People in the USA have always bought gas so the people working the gas stations are still working. When people buy less of something else because gasoline costs more that means the people selling the other stuff are no longer employed.

[ROCKMAN]

T - So true. And not everything the US imports from other countries is crap...even from China. Unless you consider cell phones, construction equipment, steel, etc. crap. $400+ million more is being transferred to oil producers. Additionally whatever US consumers were buying from China they continued buying more y-o-y throughout the period of booming oil process. So more money going to China for imports while more money being transferred to all the oil producers. That rational doesn't hold water. Total US trade deficit is around $120 BILLION/yr today. Even with the increase in US oil production as of July 2014 we were sending over $250 BILLION/yr overseas for our oil imports.

[Herr Meier]

Are you asking if the US consumers paying 300% more for oil then they were 10 years ago will bring a great economic boom?

I'm not sure if that really matters, for the economy, I mean. Instead of spending their money on imported Chinese crap, people are spending it on domestic and imported oil. What's the difference?

I would say the difference is simple if you pause to think about it for a minute. People in the USA have always bought gas so the people working the gas stations are still working. When people buy less of something else because gasoline costs more that means the people selling the other stuff are no longer employed.

Yes, but now it costs more to produce oil, so the money just flows that way, creating high paying jobs, need for equipment, material etc. So instead of having a job opening at starbucks, the job opening is in the oil fields.
It is clear that the standard of living for the individual is lower, because the money goes to gas instead of pleasure etc. But the overall GDP (for what it's worth) of the nation should not be different.

[Herr Meier]

we were sending over $250 BILLION/yr overseas for our oil imports.

It doesn't matter if we send it overseas for oil or for I-phones.
It doesn't matter if a person is employed in the oil field or in pier 1 import.
It doesn't matter if the money is transferred to exxon or it's transferred to google.
In the end what matters is the overall productivity of the nation and individual.

[Plantagenet]

now it costs more to produce oil, so the money just flows that way, creating high paying jobs, need for equipment, material etc. So instead of having a job opening at starbucks, the job opening is in the oil fields.
It is clear that the standard of living for the individual is lower, because the money goes to gas instead of pleasure

Not necessarily. People working for oilcos instead of Starbucks makes several times as much money. Oil exploration and development produces more high wage jobs in manufacturing, trucking, refineries, government regulation, etc. That creates what economists call a "virtuous circle."

An economy based on high wage jobs associated with the oil biz will probably be a lot wealthier than an economy based on low wage jobs in the service industry.

[Pops]

LOL

[Plantagenet]

The "cost floor" in your diagram seems to have a hole in it.

Oil dropped 3 bucks a barrel just yesterday---oil prices are now well below the "cost floor" in the diagram.

[Strummer]

The "cost floor" in your diagram seems to have a hole in it.

Oil dropped 3 bucks a barrel just yesterday---oil prices are now well below the "cost floor" in the diagram.

Yes, oil companies are abandoning new exploration and development projects, thereby lowering their CAPEX, so the "cost floor" sinks lower. Is that supposed to be good news?

[Pops]

The price went through the floor in '09 as well.

[Herr Meier]

LOL

You could have full-employment economy where most productive output of the economy is geared towards finding, pumping and processing oil. High oil price has nothing to do with economic contraction, assuming the change in price is slow enough to be able to gear the industrial output towards oil production.