[AdamB]

How can you understand fluid mechanics and not get that Permian, with 1 mile laterals, will overlap at a 1 mile distance it's already at and not grow anymore?

Fluid mechanics? Can you add, subtract and multiply? Multiply out the number of horizontal wellbores in each of the 4 benches of the Wolfcamp, against their bench specific drainage area, to get the total current non-interfering produced area. Feel free to deduct a little for pads that you believe are current sub-optimal spacing. Subtract that number from the sum of all area available in each of those 4 benches, and you'll have the total area with remaining non-interfering potential development in each bench.

Prove you can add, subtract and multiply and we'll talk farther. I mean really, where do you expect anyone should start with an admitted engineer that can't engineer?

And you should drop your trolling comments on the Wolfcamp into the thread that has devolved down to your level of ignorance, in this one we are apparently talking about what you don't know about Russia in general, or reservoir dynamics of Russian fields in particular.

[mustang19]

How can you understand fluid mechanics and not get that Permian, with 1 mile laterals, will overlap at a 1 mile distance it's already at and not grow anymore?

Fluid mechanics? Can you add, subtract and multiply? Multiply out the number of horizontal wellbores in each of the 4 benches of the Wolfcamp, against their bench specific drainage area, to get the total current non-interfering produced area. Feel free to deduct a little for pads that you believe are current sub-optimal spacing. Subtract that number from the sum of all area available in each of those 4 benches, and you'll have the total area with remaining non-interfering potential development in each bench.

Prove you can add, subtract and multiply and we'll talk farther. I mean really, where do you expect anyone should start with an admitted engineer that can't engineer?

And you should drop your trolling comments on the Wolfcamp into the thread that has devolved down to your level of ignorance, in this one we are apparently talking about what you don't know about Russia in general, or reservoir dynamics of Russian fields in particular.

I don't have that kind of data. There are not four meaningful wolfcamp benches. Wolfcamp D is useless, all the production takes place in A, B and C with A and B being the majority.

So we really have A and B and depending on the area only one of those is actually drilled. The benches are only 100m thick and a well produces 500,000 tons of oil at 10% recovery and porosity so that's the entire layer to a thickness of meter. Including bitumen and 10% TOC basically the entire 100m is consumed by any well.

So it's not nearly as complex as you make it, typically all the wells in a section will be on the same bench consuming the entire area. The Permian is 65,000 square miles with more wells than that so it is very crowded. I'm sure there's still room for growth but it's obviously not the huge 70gb numbers given by Dennis.

Is any of this disputed?

[AdamB]

I don't have that kind of data. There are not four meaningful wolfcamp benches. Wolfcamp D is useless, all the production takes place in A, B and C with A and B being the majority.

I know what is, or is not, the majority. And what others (folks who know stuff) have quantified when it comes to "useless". Remember when folks pretended that light tight oil and shale gas were useless? And suckers like you thought Colin Campbell was selling you the real deal?

Is any of this disputed?

Yes. And I told you, if you want to pollute a thread with you demonstrating why you don't have the ability to engineer (let alone add, subtract and multiply), it exists elsewhere. This thread is all about you demonstrating that you don't know anything about Russian oil fields, not US light tight oil plays.

[mustang19]

I don't have that kind of data. There are not four meaningful wolfcamp benches. Wolfcamp D is useless, all the production takes place in A, B and C with A and B being the majority.

I know what is, or is not, the majority. And what others (folks who know stuff) have quantified when it comes to "useless". Remember when folks pretended that light tight oil and shale gas were useless? And suckers like you thought Colin Campbell was selling you the real deal?

Is any of this disputed?

Yes. And I told you, if you want to pollute a thread with you demonstrating why you don't have the ability to engineer (let alone add, subtract and multiply), it exists elsewhere. This thread is all about you demonstrating that you don't know anything about Russian oil fields, not US light tight oil plays.

Adam, if you don't explain why I'm wrong this doesn't go anywhere.

So what if Wolfcamp D isn't useless? Would that just mean 4x more reserves? It can't possibly be productive across its entire area, even if there are four benches the success rate of wildcat wells is probably 25% also.

[AdamB]

Adam, if you don't explain why I'm wrong this doesn't go anywhere.

Absolutely right. And if you refuse to respond to the comments made and make up nonsense to respond to, there is no requirement I tackle non-sensical claims. Such as the infallible Hubbert curve.

So what if Wolfcamp D isn't useless?

Then there is a bunch more oil (or in the case of the Wolfcamp D, possibly natural gas) available.

Would that just mean 4x more reserves?

No, it would not. As a 4th bench, it would mean 1/4 of the total of the 4 benches. Learn math and you'll get better answers. And because it probably isn't as productive as others, it would be less than that. And it might not even be reserves. Yet.

It can't possibly be productive across its entire area, even if there are four benches the success rate of wildcat wells is probably 25% also.

It might possibly be productive across an entire area, but it is unlikely. Good thing we've got geologic experts who can figure that out for us. And you don't have a clue as to the success rate, because you don't know what success is, and can't calculate it using your infantile methods of simply stating something is true when it is not. Mr. "The Hubbert curve is infallible."

And "going somewhere" with a troll is an oxymoron. And you are still in the wrong thread. This thread is for you trolling with Russian field information that you know nothing about.

[mustang19]

Adam, if you don't explain why I'm wrong this doesn't go anywhere.

Absolutely right. And if you refuse to respond to the comments made and make up nonsense to respond to, there is no requirement I tackle non-sensical claims. Such as the infallible Hubbert curve.

So what if Wolfcamp D isn't useless?

Then there is a bunch more oil (or in the case of the Wolfcamp D, possibly natural gas) available.

Would that just mean 4x more reserves?

No, it would not. As a 4th bench, it would mean 1/4 of the total of the 4 benches. Learn math and you'll get better answers. And because it probably isn't as productive as others, it would be less than that. And it might not even be reserves. Yet.

It can't possibly be productive across its entire area, even if there are four benches the success rate of wildcat wells is probably 25% also.

It might possibly be productive across an entire area, but it is unlikely. Good thing we've got geologic experts who can figure that out for us. And you don't have a clue as to the success rate, because you don't know what success is, and can't calculate it using your infantile methods of simply stating something is true when it is not. Mr. "The Hubbert curve is infallible."

And "going somewhere" with a troll is an oxymoron. And you are still in the wrong thread. This thread is for you trolling with Russian field information that you know nothing about.

Ok so no dispute every american will die in peak oil in 3 years? Cool

For Russia I think I've thoroughly obliterated the Vostok project.

[AdamB]

Ok so no dispute every american will die in peak oil in 3 years? Cool

You see, this is why you just don't talk to idiot trolls. I don't mind those whom are clever, but you are as ignorant as your eroei paper indicated.

[theluckycountry]

Ok so no dispute every american will die in peak oil in 3 years? Cool

You see, this is why you just don't talk to idiot trolls.

But you are talking to them? And I have to read it even though I have mustang on my ignore list, and that because you are not on the list, but their comments show up in your posts. The only solution I can think of Adam is to ignore you as well, but that would be a pity because you have good input here. Why don't you just ignore the bloody troll and be done with it? If we all did that it would be a pleasant place. You don't have to engage the troll you know.

[AdamB]

Ok so no dispute every american will die in peak oil in 3 years? Cool

You see, this is why you just don't talk to idiot trolls.

But you are talking to them?

Haven't been with Short's short puppet, as he got it banned.

But yeah...I should resist the urge better. I had managed to leave Short/Mustang alone, and then he exploded stupid over a bunch of other threads and got banned.

The only solution I can think of Adam is to ignore you as well, but that would be a pity because you have good input here. Why don't you just ignore the bloody troll and be done with it?

I was able to man up and leave Short/Mustang alone, I'm trying hard to do the same with his newest sock puppet.

[Outcast_Searcher]

The only solution I can think of Adam is to ignore you as well, but that would be a pity because you have good input here. Why don't you just ignore the bloody troll and be done with it?

I was able to man up and leave Short/Mustang alone, I'm trying hard to do the same with his newest sock puppet.

I appreciate that Adam is much quicker than I to point out such sock puppet ID's. I consider that a service to the site (since members can make their own calls, based on posts / behavior, once such an ID is made).

For me it's helpful because once the pattern is clear, I can just go ahead and ignore (at least the vast majority of the time), vs. wasting time trying to engage and then realizing that ignoring is a far more productive thing to do. Especially considering the historical signal to noise ratio of the sort of ID's in question.

[careinke]

The only solution I can think of Adam is to ignore you as well, but that would be a pity because you have good input here. Why don't you just ignore the bloody troll and be done with it?

I was able to man up and leave Short/Mustang alone, I'm trying hard to do the same with his newest sock puppet.

I appreciate that Adam is much quicker than I to point out such sock puppet ID's. I consider that a service to the site (since members can make their own calls, based on posts / behavior, once such an ID is made).

For me it's helpful because once the pattern is clear, I can just go ahead and ignore (at least the vast majority of the time), vs. wasting time trying to engage and then realizing that ignoring is a far more productive thing to do. Especially considering the historical signal to noise ratio of the sort of ID's in question.

You don't have to ask to be banned with all your posts deleted. YOU CAN DO IT YOURSELF!! Take responsibility for your own actions Karen.

PEACE

[AdamB]

You don't have to ask to be banned with all your posts deleted. YOU CAN DO IT YOURSELF!!

I checked all the account options available to me within the user panel, and can't find the ability to delete all of my posts along with my account. Are you sure users have this capability?

[careinke]

You don't have to ask to be banned with all your posts deleted. YOU CAN DO IT YOURSELF!!

I checked all the account options available to me within the user panel, and can't find the ability to delete all of my posts along with my account. Are you sure users have this capability?

Actually I'm not positive. I saw someone do it a couple of years ago. I remember it because I was not happy I could not go back and review some of his posts. However I think the software may have been changed. Newfie probably has the correct answer.

PEACE

[RepublicanfromEngland]

Russia oil production decline began decades ago, late 80's.

Even with what has happened now, Europe does need its Natural gas supply due to the decline in Europe over the years. The recent increase in price upwards leaves some other countries to take its place. There was broken Venezuela.

[TireFire]

I seriously doubt Russia has discovered the fullness of their reserves even now.

[Plantagenet]

I seriously doubt Russia has discovered the fullness of their reserves even now.

Russia (and the USSR before it) has extremely competent geoscientists and engineers, and they have extensively studied and explored all of Russia.

Oil is by far the largest component of the Russian economy. They devote enormous resources to their oil industry.

If the Russians say they are at peak oil, then it wouldn't be unreasonable to take them at their word.

AND, independent groups that analyze the oil biz like Rystad agree that Russia is near its peak.


If the Russians say they are at peak oil, then it wouldn't be unreasonable to take them at their word.

Cheers!

[theluckycountry]

Russian oil consumption: 3.5 million barrels per day. Population 145 Million
US oil consumption: 18~19 million. Population 334 Million

So per-capita consumption in Russia is about half that of the US. They have very good public transport networks in their cities I believe.

In February 2023, crude oil production in Russia was estimated at 9.8 million barrels per day
https://www.statista.com/statistics/130 ... roduction/

That's a hell a lot of buffer. If they cut back exports by half they would still have the home base covered for decades to come. Then there is their Gas! I know people here probably think I am a Russian apologist but that's not the case at all. I simply point out the obvious facts, that the world runs on oil and gas and they are sitting on an ocean of it. Plus any mineral you can name (in abundance)

I have met a few Russians and I don't particularly like them. They were either criminals, or believe it or not, Stalin Worshipers.

[TonyPrep]

That 9.8 billion barrels is based on a world oil consumption of 100 billion. They may not be able to afford to maintain that capacity if just supplying their own oil. Of course, with depletion, the capacity will eventually decline.

[AdamB]

Russian oil consumption: 3.5 million barrels per day. Population 145 Million
US oil consumption: 18~19 million. Population 334 Million

And of that 18-19 "consumption", 5.97 mmbbl/d are exported, so deduced American consumption is 18-19 mmbbl/d - 5.97 = 12.03-13.03 mmbbl/d.

[AdamB]

That 9.8 billion barrels is based on a world oil consumption of 100 billion. They may not be able to afford to maintain that capacity if just supplying their own oil. Of course, with depletion, the capacity will eventually decline.

World oil consumption runs closer to low -80's mmbbl/d most of the time, the other 20 mmbbl/d (not billion) is liquids and all the other sorts of hydrocarbon products, and sometimes not even hydrocarbon products but ethanes and nonsense like that.

Now that we've been suffering 164 years of depletion, I agree that capacity will enventually decline, but DAMN have we been waiting for awhile.

Long time no see Tony. Still a McPeakster red white and blue, dyed and true?