donstewart wrote:Which is why Mr. Hill keeps talking about reserve replacement.
onlooker wrote:the better days have passed regardless of what you hopeless optimists might say.
donstewart wrote:Doom is predicated on pretending that things don't change
No, most doom is predicted by studying trajectories and trying to figure out where they lead.
donstewart wrote: The ETP model, for example, is full of trajectories.
ROCKMAN wrote:Adam - Pay attention: the Rockman didn't define anything...Halliburton did. Don't like what the say go bust their balls. LOL.
Rockman wrote:And read it again: the define it by how wells are drilled and completed.
Rockman wrote:There have been thousands of wells completed in unconventional reservoirs that cost less then wells of comparable depth complete in conventional reservoirs. In fact by far the most expensive wells being drilled in the US today are the ones producing those Deep Water GOM conventional sandstone reservoirs.
onlooker wrote:It seems to me that Rockman is doing what your claiming he is not Adam. Focusing on Geological factors rather than economic with the statement
""Unconventional reservoirs are essentially any reservoir that requires special recovery operations outside the conventional operating practices. "
onlooker wrote:Asg, that is patently wrong. We Realists not Doomers constantly are relying on the Science and the Scientists to support our claims.
onlooker wrote:The general public and Media of the US are the ones who tend to denigrate that Science and what the Scientists are saying.
onlooker wrote: Not only that it is pretty clear that strong pressure and censorship is occurring to try and impede certain messages from the scientific community from coming out. As one example, the famous climate scientist Dr. James Hanson was muzzled at NASA when he tried to voice is concerns about climate change.
onlooker wrote: So, the literature is quite clear now on climate change. Peak Oil is a bit more convoluted but definitely we are on the downslope and waning days of the Oil Industry.
onlooker wrote: Nobody can say definitively when the final slide of our Oil dependent societies will occur but certainly the better days have passed regardless of what you hopeless optimists might say.
There is no formal definition of “unconventional resources” despite the fact that unconventional resources are the most active petroleum play in North America. Meckel and Thomasson, 2008, defined unconventional resources using purely a permeability threshold (< 0.1 md). Yet, coal bed methane plays are considered unconventional and many have permeabilities exceeding 1 md over large portions of the fairway (ex: San Juan Basin, Powder River Basin). Other workers have defined unconventional resources based on an interpretation of the petroleum system and have stated that unconventional resources are “continuous” or “basin centered” and lack traditional traps. While some have restricted the term to product type (i.e. unconventional gas), many shale and tight sand plays have gas, wet gas, and oil fairways and all can be considered unconventional. Heavy oil and oil sands are also unconventional resources and many of these deposits are in reservoirs with permeability exceeding 500 nd. Thus, unconventional resources include both low and high permeability reservoirs with both low and high viscosity fluids. Previous definitions have not accounted for all phases of petroleum in all types of reservoirs in all types of petroleum systems. This paper proposes a simple graphical definition that incorporates properties of both the rocks and their fluids. All petroleum reservoirs can be plotted on a graph of viscosity versus permeability (both in log scale). On this graph, conventional resources all plot in the lower right quadrant, regardless of fluid phase. All unconventional resources plot outside this quadrant due to a low ratio of permeability to viscosity. Unconventional resources are thus defined as those petroleum reservoirs whose permeability/viscosity ratio requires use of technology to alter either the rock permeability or the fluid viscosity in order to produce the petroleum at commercially competitive rates. Conversely, conventional resources are those that can be produced commercially without altering permeability or viscosity. This simple graphical definition avoids the pitfalls inherent in a petroleum system interpretation (i.e. basin centered or self- sourced versus migrated petroleum). The graphical definition accommodates and delineates tight gas, tight oil, shale gas, shale oil, heavy oil, coal bed methane, and even offshore reservoirs with low k/viscosity ratios.
donstewart wrote:No primary source of energy could approach crude oil in terms of powering transportation.
PStarr wrote:those who want to believe that trucks will simply convert to EV, CNG are fooling themselves.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 117 guests