[Beery1]

I just noticed the Bakken took a bit of a hit in November:

https://www.dmr.nd.gov/oilgas/stats/his ... lstats.pdf

A 5% drop in monthly production? I wonder what that's all about?

[Keith_McClary]

I just noticed the Bakken took a bit of a hit in November:

https://www.dmr.nd.gov/oilgas/stats/his ... lstats.pdf

A 5% drop in monthly production? I wonder what that's all about?

Drillers Bakken out of ND. Not hitting their bits.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-01-1 ... onths.html
Doesn't explain why. Links to this chart:
http://whttp://www.bloomberg.com/quote/ ... BTNDOI:IND

[Beery1]

Doesn't explain why. Links to this chart:
http://whttp://www.bloomberg.com/quote/ ... BTNDOI:IND

Seems to be a bad link.

[SamInNebraska]

I just noticed the Bakken took a bit of a hit in November:

https://www.dmr.nd.gov/oilgas/stats/his ... lstats.pdf

A 5% drop in monthly production? I wonder what that's all about?

Less drilling?

[dorlomin]

I just noticed the Bakken took a bit of a hit in November:

https://www.dmr.nd.gov/oilgas/stats/his ... lstats.pdf

A 5% drop in monthly production? I wonder what that's all about?

Less drilling?

Everyone off to Texas.

[rockdoc123]

This is a bit misleading I'm afraid. Although the rig count has decreased production in North Dakota has steadily increased from 16.9 MM bbls in January of 2012 to 21.9 MM bbls in November 2012. Although active rigs decreased in North Dakota they rose during this period in Montana. The Bakken doesn't respect state boundaries I'm afraid.

It is always difficult to read much into the number of active rigs unless you understand first what the rigs are doing (drilling, completing, workovers) and also whether or not it has something to do with seasonality. Often companies run out of budget late in the year and hence push activity into the next fiscal year. As well companies like to avoid drilling over the holiday season if they can, simply because you get staff whose minds aren't always on the task at hand and the potential for lost time incidents increases.

[Beery1]

I just noticed the Bakken took a bit of a hit in November:

https://www.dmr.nd.gov/oilgas/stats/his ... lstats.pdf

A 5% drop in monthly production? I wonder what that's all about?

Less drilling?

No. The rig count has grown from 4795 to 4910. The oil produced per well is down 7.5%.

I think the problem is that shale oil requires exponential increases in drilling to produce a linear increases in production. But exponential growth cannot be sustained. It's looking like the oil industry is now losing the Red Queen's race in the Bakken. To put it another way, the music is grinding to a halt and there's one less chair.

[Beery1]

This is a bit misleading I'm afraid. Although the rig count has decreased production in North Dakota has steadily increased from 16.9 MM bbls in January of 2012 to 21.9 MM bbls in November 2012. Although active rigs decreased in North Dakota they rose during this period in Montana. The Bakken doesn't respect state boundaries I'm afraid.

Okay, but that's kinda missing the point. You can't just say that the Bakken is bigger than the areas covered by the historicalbakkenoilstats website, as if that explains everything. Production in the areas covered by the chart has decreased. This suggests that they have run out of places to drill in those areas. Not exactly surprising, but it tends to contradict the notion that we have another few decades of increasing production.

It is always difficult to read much into the number of active rigs unless you understand first what the rigs are doing (drilling, completing, workovers) and also whether or not it has something to do with seasonality. Often companies run out of budget late in the year and hence push activity into the next fiscal year. As well companies like to avoid drilling over the holiday season if they can, simply because you get staff whose minds aren't always on the task at hand and the potential for lost time incidents increases.

Seasonality has never produced this much of a drop - last year there was no drop at all until February. Sure, maybe it's seasonal, but if so, it's a heck of a monthly drop. And if what you're saying about the holiday season is true, then we'll be looking at another drop next month - a drop in production in two consecutive months, which hasn't happened since 2004, when production was about 1/300th of what it is now.

[Plantagenet]

This suggests that they have run out of places to drill in those areas.

Really?

After five years of ever increasing activity, based on a small decrease in the latest month you interpret this single data point to mean drilling in the Bakken is coming to an end?

Really?

[Keith_McClary]

Doesn't explain why. Links to this chart:
http://whttp://www.bloomberg.com/quote/ ... BTNDOI:IND

Seems to be a bad link.

Oops.
http://www.bloomberg.com/quote/SMBTNDOI:IND

It's the " decline in rig counts " link in the article
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-01-1 ... onths.html

[Dybbuk]

IF a die-off happens, it will be the fault of politics?

That seems to be the sentiment expressed by the Alex Jones illuminaughty crowd. You know, the Bilderbergers are gonna neuter us with flouride in the water.

It doesn't have to be kooky stuff like that. If you define something "being the fault of politics" broadly as anytime someone's behavior is influenced by government action, you might make the case that the politics of the past and present have already put us in a position where there is a significant chance of a die-off.

The welfare/assistance programs of individual countries, along with international aid, are kinds of politics...and they have encouraged reproduction by sending the message that "you can have as many babies as you want, and you don't have to worry about them perishing if you can't provide for them, because we will step in and take care of them if you can't".

Another example...governments encourage maximum economic growth in the short-term, at the expense of long-term sustainability, in order to get the politicians re-elected and give them more money to spend. More growth means more energy consumption.

Isn't it true that most of the oil in the world is state-owned rather than privately owned? (You guys should know more about this than I do). Enter politics again. Politicians (including dictators) are more short-sighted than companies or individuals are. They're more likely to maximize production and sell the oil now, rather than preserve it for later.

So even if you grant Econ 101 his point (which I don't) that markets are a magical tool to make everything turn out wonderfully, and that politics is the only reason they haven't done so thus far...it could be that politics has already dug us too deep of a hole for the markets to pull us out of.

[ennui2]

My point is not that politics doesn't play a legitimate role. What I'm saying is that the constant drumbeat about politics degrades the discussion to the level of scapegoating and fails to see the forest through the trees. There's plenty of blame to go around and, by and large, we get the government we deserve.

[sparky]

.
On peak oil and politics ,
It should be mentioned that government in ALL the main countries have swallowed the debts
the old social democratic model of the government providing goodies ,services or the odd war
is now pretty stretched
Europe Japan and the U.S are buying stability with a lot of IOU
on top of saving the kosher bacon of financial giants with less financial brainpower
than the local bartender ( no open ended credit for drunks )

The plan is called "the gnomes underpants theory " from South Park
gnomes steal all the underpants , when confronted they present their business plan

1- get plenty of underwears
2- ???????????????
3- get a big profit

porn doomsters did a lot of damage to the credibility of Peak Oil
since they are demonstrably wrong , then the theory must be wrong

for meself , no wurries , peak oil is as certain as gravity

the"when" bit is rather immaterial ,it looks like we are there this decade
I don't work on a schedule and don't believe there are any remediation
It's all for the greater good ,
things will sort themselves eventually , it will not ( ? ) be a cliff , more like falling a set of stairs

the real question is will oil again be at ~20 $ equivalent a barrel ..... want to bet ?

[copious.abundance]

Seasonality has never produced this much of a drop - last year there was no drop at all until February. Sure, maybe it's seasonal, but if so, it's a heck of a monthly drop. And if what you're saying about the holiday season is true, then we'll be looking at another drop next month - a drop in production in two consecutive months, which hasn't happened since 2004, when production was about 1/300th of what it is now.

Wrong. Twice in recent years there have been 2+ month declines in ND production. In the winter of '08-09, ND production went from 215,637 bpd in November to 187,733 in January, a decline of almost 13% (though back then, crashing prices certainly didn't help) in 2 straight months. In the winter of '10-11, ND production went from 357,043 bpd in November to 342,923 bpd in January, a decline of almost 4% in 2 straight months. The decline this past November was 2.2%. With the weather in ND being pretty bad this winter, I wouldn't be surprised to see further drops for another month or two, but there's nothing that unusual about a decline of 2.2% in one cold/snowy month in North Dakota. Some winters when the weather isn't that bad, you don't get any declines at all.

Data is here, if you want to check it. Notice the winters of 2008-09 and 2010-11:
https://www.dmr.nd.gov/oilgas/stats/his ... dstats.pdf

[copious.abundance]

This suggests that they have run out of places to drill in those areas.

No, they have not run out of places to drill in the Bakken.

As of November there were 4,910 producing wells in the Bakken. I don't know if there are any abandoned ones yet, maybe there's a few, but likely not many. So let's round it up to 5,000 wells drilled into the Bakken. An analysis I posted here calculates the build-out of the ND Bakken at 38,980 wells. So they're only about 13% done drilling the Bakken!

[dolanbaker]

Don't forget that the best spots are drilled first, that 13% may account for 50% of the recoverable oil!

[Beery1]

This suggests that they have run out of places to drill in those areas.

Really?

After five years of ever increasing activity, based on a small decrease in the latest month you interpret this single data point to mean drilling in the Bakken is coming to an end?

Really?

A 5% reduction in monthly production is not 'small', and I never even suggested drilling in the Bakken is coming to an end. This is the typical corny straw man - a peakist suggests that the peak may be just around the corner and the cornys all accuse him of saying the age of oil is over. You'll need to try a bit harder.

[Beery1]

This suggests that they have run out of places to drill in those areas.

No, they have not run out of places to drill in the Bakken.

As of November there were 4,910 producing wells in the Bakken. I don't know if there are any abandoned ones yet, maybe there's a few, but likely not many. So let's round it up to 5,000 wells drilled into the Bakken. An analysis I posted here calculates the build-out of the ND Bakken at 38,980 wells. So they're only about 13% done drilling the Bakken!

Those areas are not the whole of the Bakken. It's a straw man to suggest they are. I never said anything about the entire Bakken. I'm only talking about the oil stats website that I posted a link to.

I wonder why it is that the corny brigade are so desperate to change the discussion to the whole Bakken when we are not talking about that?

[copious.abundance]

Those areas are not the whole of the Bakken. It's a straw man to suggest they are. I never said anything about the entire Bakken. I'm only talking about the oil stats website that I posted a link to.

Which was a link to production from the Bakken formation located in North Dakota.

I just noticed the Bakken took a bit of a hit in November:

https://www.dmr.nd.gov/oilgas/stats/his ... lstats.pdf

Then the analysis I linked to here also discussed the future number of wells in the Bakken formation located in North Dakota:

The carrying capacity of the North Dakota Bakken is established above at 38,980 wells.

Notice it did not say Montana, Saskatchewan and Manitoba. Just "North Dakota." In other words, the geographic extent and geologic formation you were referring to was the exact same geographic extent and geologic formation the analysis I linked to was referring to.

I wonder why it is that the corny brigade are so desperate to change the discussion to the whole Bakken when we are not talking about that?

I wonder why it is the doomer brigade is so desperate to ignore reality that they cannot even realize that "the North Dakota Bakken" = "the North Dakota Bakken" when they read two separate sets of data.