Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

THE Natural Gas Thread Pt. 2

General discussions of the systemic, societal and civilisational effects of depletion.

Natural Gas Developments

Unread postby vampyregirl » Mon 28 Jan 2008, 02:23:33

Orman Lange field in the Norwegian Sea has three wells currently producing and 20 more planned. It has a potential output of 70 million cubic metres per day. By 2010 it will be supplying 20% of britains gas demand and will eventually be supplying gas to other European nations such as France and Germany.
Natural gas fields are under development in the eastern Meditteranean as well.
The Pearl GTL should be completed by 2010. It will be by far the largest Syndiesel plant in the world and will be producing 260k bpd of syndiesel for the European market.
In China fields are being developed and there is a project to extract Methane gas from coal beds. China is also buying large amounts of LNG from Australia. Increasing natural gas use is a priority for the Chinese government who want to reduce dependence on coal burning.
Japanese Mitsubishi Corporation has bought a fairly large share in the Sakhalin Island project in Siberia. This allows Mitsubishi Electric to have there own LNG source instead of having to buy it from other energy producers.
Whats the point of this post? Nothing really, just a little news if anyone is interested
vampyregirl
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 429
Joined: Wed 19 Dec 2007, 03:00:00

Re: Natural Gas Developments

Unread postby americandream » Mon 28 Jan 2008, 03:13:32

Could you post us your take market developments as well. Happy energy news does not appear to be echoed in the markets so I'm kinda curious whether you've taken cognisance of what's unfolding and if so, whether your optimistic take can perhaps be applied to interpreting the indexes. I'm not being a cynic, I'ld just like an energy optimists views on long term market trends as I trade.

Thanks
americandream
permanently banned
 
Posts: 8653
Joined: Mon 18 Oct 2004, 02:00:00

Re: Natural Gas Developments

Unread postby vampyregirl » Mon 28 Jan 2008, 03:41:34

Are you looking for infromation on spot market developments for LNG? Price indexes for NG? Or all of the above?
If you're choosing a company to invest in id recomend the Royal Dutch Shell Group and no its not just because i work for them. Shell is the largest producer of natural gas and the creator of GTL technology among other things.
vampyregirl
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 429
Joined: Wed 19 Dec 2007, 03:00:00

Natural gas flaring

Unread postby zoidberg » Tue 18 Mar 2008, 19:19:19

Is there any relationship between the amount of natural gas flared and the rate of production from an oil field? Or is it a characteristic unique to each oil field?
User avatar
zoidberg
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 635
Joined: Wed 23 Feb 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Center of north america

Re: Natural gas flaring

Unread postby joeltrout » Tue 18 Mar 2008, 20:24:28

It is totally unique to the field.

Some oil fields don't flare any natural gas while others flare a lot of natural gas.

Not all gas is flared. If there is a market for the gas then it is captured and sold. Gas is usually only flared when there is not a market for it and it is more expensive to pump it back into the ground.

It is also very regulated. Some areas cannot flare due to environmental reasons.

This is a good book for an intro to the oil and gas industry if you would like to learn more about it.

Joeltrout
joeltrout
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1297
Joined: Wed 19 Sep 2007, 02:00:00

Electricity and natural gas live consumption by country

Unread postby sandu635 » Tue 23 Aug 2011, 05:35:05

I want to make a list of sites that have current electricity and gas consumption

I have :

Romania : electricity
France : electricity
UK: gas
Spain: electricity

Please help if you know others
sandu635
Wood
Wood
 
Posts: 8
Joined: Tue 23 Aug 2011, 04:39:28

Re: Electricity and natural gas live consumption by country

Unread postby sandu635 » Tue 30 Aug 2011, 23:49:26

sandu635
Wood
Wood
 
Posts: 8
Joined: Tue 23 Aug 2011, 04:39:28

Re: Electricity and natural gas live consumption by country

Unread postby sandu635 » Wed 31 Aug 2011, 10:41:31

Poland : electricity --- 1 day old data
sandu635
Wood
Wood
 
Posts: 8
Joined: Tue 23 Aug 2011, 04:39:28

Re: Electricity and natural gas live consumption by country

Unread postby Keith_McClary » Wed 31 Aug 2011, 22:29:02

In Canada you might look by province: ONTARIO DEMAND AND MARKET PRICES
Facebook knows you're a dog.
User avatar
Keith_McClary
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 7285
Joined: Wed 21 Jul 2004, 02:00:00
Location: Suburban tar sands

Re: Electricity and natural gas live consumption by country

Unread postby sandu635 » Thu 01 Sep 2011, 15:51:11

California : electricity

it's a nightmare finding this data by state and province in USA and Canada.
sandu635
Wood
Wood
 
Posts: 8
Joined: Tue 23 Aug 2011, 04:39:28

Re: Electricity and natural gas live consumption by country

Unread postby morph » Fri 02 Sep 2011, 13:32:46

UK - Electricity http://www.bmreports.com/bsp/bsp_home.htm - Load of details not just demand, also system warnings, mix, predicted demand etc...
User avatar
morph
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 106
Joined: Fri 28 Jul 2006, 02:00:00

Re: Electricity and natural gas live consumption by country

Unread postby sandu635 » Tue 06 Sep 2011, 02:36:41

Hungary : electricity
sandu635
Wood
Wood
 
Posts: 8
Joined: Tue 23 Aug 2011, 04:39:28

Re: Electricity and natural gas live consumption by country

Unread postby sandu635 » Fri 09 Sep 2011, 02:00:22

Slovakia : electricity
sandu635
Wood
Wood
 
Posts: 8
Joined: Tue 23 Aug 2011, 04:39:28

The Dirty Politics of Natural Gas

Unread postby seahorse3 » Thu 15 Dec 2011, 10:22:53

We hear lots of "news" stories lately about all the natural gas in the US. We hear its clean and plentiful and will make the US energy independent again, restoring us once again to our former status of a nation of plenty that needs nothing else from the rest of the world. We are literally told we have this vast, virtually untapped, clean energy source that can get us all off of dirty oil that is not only literally dirty and emmitting greenhouse gases but has dirtied third world politics and our own politics since it was first discovered. But is that true?

Let's start from the beginning. The US was a lot cleaner 200 years ago when the War for the West wasn't yet won and hundreds of thousands of native Americans still drank from streams and lived off the land eating buffalo. But the "West" eventually won the war, killed off the buffalo, and "industrialized" the nation linking each coast with the railroads powered by coal. So, what does that mean? It means our industrialized economy is inextricably and forever linked to energy to power 250 million automobiles in the US and countless trains and planes. Right now, all those trains, planes and automobiles are powered with oil.

So, business as usual in the US and West means we need oil and lots of it. The US uses about 18 million barrels of oil per day. The US produces less than 8 million barrels a day. So, if the US is to be independent once again, and if its economy and world economy are to grow, we need more oil, and lots of it. GDP means we make more stuff. To make more stuff, we need oil to make it.

Now, for some odd reason, we aren't producing more oil. The world produces about as much oil today as it did in 2005, even though oil prices are twice today what they were in 2005. In 2005, oil was about $40 per barrel and its about $100 a barrel as I type. So, if the price is higher, why aren't "they" producing more? Well, there is a lot of disagreement about that. It has the economists scratching their heads because higher oil prices are supposed to increase production but it hasn't worked. So, people get pissed and yell at politicians to do something about it. Politicians, being politicians, blame it on Middle East politics.

All that to say, if we are to continue this illusion of a perpetual goldilocks future with retirement for everyone, we either need more dirty oil or something to replace it. Maybe something "cleaner" like NG?

So, if we are to be energy independent using our NG, the question is, can all the planes, trains and automobiles be powered with NG? Is NG the answer its touted to be? Enter the natural gas industry. We've been inundated lately with all the news that "shale gas" is going to make the US energy independent once again. The NG industry is running lots of commercials about powering America's future. But I'm suspect. In America, commercials are intended to sell something, so what are they selling? Where is the product? If NG is the answer, why aren't there any NG cars for sale in my county? Why aren't there any NG stations in my county? Usually, when I see a commercial, the product is there to buy. So, where is the NG car? Where is the NG filling station? Commercials without products? What gives? Why, if NG is the answer, are only 114k cars out of 250 million running on NG? Doesn't sound like the answer its claimed to be.

Okay, if not now, when? If that is true, when is it going to happen that all our cars, planes and trains will be fueled with NG? Remember back in 2008 when former oilman Boone Pickens lead the political charge with his Pickens plan to get the US energy independent and off of foriegn oil and onto cheap US natural gas? Well, nothing has happened. Why? The reason NG is cheap is because, despite the hype, its not a replacement for oil. We simply don't use it as a transporation fuel. All the the NG they pump out of the ground just gets put in storage tanks. We keep adding more to storage, decreasing prices making it less economical to drill, but all this NG doesn't get used for anything, not transportation anyway, which is what it takes to be "energy independent." We don't use it to power planes, tranes and automobiles. How many US tanks use NG? How many planes use NG? There are an estimated 250 MILLION cars in the US and only 114k use NG. Big deal.

If NG is the answer to importing oil, why are Pickens and the NG industry needing legislation from CONgress to get it to happen? Why doesn't it happen based on its own economics? True capitalists always argue that government can't create solutions; energy people always say gov't needs to get out of the way and let them do there job, drill baybe drill; so if the capitalists and energy guys are right, why would the NG industry need legislation to make this NG panacea happen? The fact they need government intervention tells me, the layman, that it won't work based on the economics. Ifit takes legislation to make it work, its not economical on its own merits and its not as "clean" as they say, not if the politicians are involved. Already, we see that NG is not as clean, at least politically, its as dirty as oil. If NG was the great "hope" we've been looking for, it wouldn't need any help. It would make it on its own. This "legislation" to make NG feasible means NG isn't the answer. It is hype.

So, commercials that NG will save us from the Arabs yet no product to buy? Something doesn't add up. Maybe, they are selling a political message, hype if you will, to get us to overlook the fact that NG isn't really that clean. All this new shale gas is done by pumping toxic chemicals into the shales to get the NG out of the rock. That requires lots of fresh water we arguably don't have and, worse, dirties local water supplies. They dispose of this water by sending it to local municipalities to take care of and pump the chemicals deep into the earth hoping they never surface again. This new method of NG drilling has also been linked to earthquakes in various places in the US, Arkansas and Oklahoma to name two. So, whenever someone runs a commercial without a product, maybe they are selling hype to get you to overlook the fact that its not as clean as they hype it to be and is not really the economic panacea that they want you to believe.
seahorse3
Lignite
Lignite
 
Posts: 375
Joined: Tue 01 Mar 2011, 15:14:13

Re: The Dirty Politics of Natural Gas

Unread postby Plantagenet » Sat 24 Mar 2012, 01:04:54

seahorse3 wrote:Let's start from the beginning. The US was a lot cleaner 200 years ago


Actually, all those horses and horse-drawn buggies meant the streets in cities and towns were full of horse-poop. Towns were filthy cesspools 200 years ago.

seahorse3 wrote: Where is the product? If NG is the answer, why aren't there any NG cars for sale in my county? Why aren't there any NG stations in my county?


Where do you live?

seahorse3 wrote: All the the NG they pump out of the ground just gets put in storage tanks. We keep adding more to storage, decreasing prices making it less economical to drill, but all this NG doesn't get used for anything...."


Actually, about 25% of all the energy used in the US comes from natural gas.

seahorse3 wrote:There are an estimated 250 MILLION cars in the US and only 114k use NG. Big deal.


Oil has peaked----its inevitable that people are going to have to shift to alternative fuels like natural gas or electricty to power their cars---especially here in the US where the government is too stupid to build high speed rail and light rail networks into cities 8) .
User avatar
Plantagenet
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 21504
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 02:00:00
Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).

Re: The Dirty Politics of Natural Gas

Unread postby Plantagenet » Wed 28 Mar 2012, 15:56:44

Low natural gas prices in US fueling manufacturing boom

low natural gas prices help US manufacturing

Jobs jobs jobs thanks to frakking for NG
User avatar
Plantagenet
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 21504
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 02:00:00
Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).

Re: The Dirty Politics of Natural Gas

Unread postby kublikhan » Wed 28 Mar 2012, 16:25:30

Plantagenet wrote:Actually, all those horses and horse-drawn buggies meant the streets in cities and towns were full of horse-poop. Towns were filthy cesspools 200 years ago.
+1
People have this fantasy that before the automobile things were a lot cleaner. The reality is different from the fantasy.

While the nineteenth century American city faced many forms of environmental pollution, none was as all encompassing as that produced by the horse. The most severe problem was that caused by horses defecating and urinating in the streets, but dead animals and noise pollution also produced serious annoyances and even health problems. The normal city horse produced between fifteen and thirty-five pounds of manure a day and about a quart of urine, usually distributed along the course of its route or deposited in the stable. While cities made sporadic attempts to keep the streets clean, the manure was everywhere, along the roadway, heaped in piles or next to stables, or ground up by the traffic and blown about by the wind.

Nineteenth century urbanites considered the stench or miasmas produced by the manure piles a serious health hazard, but cleaning was sporadic at best. Manure piles also produced huge numbers of flies, in reality a much more serious vector for infectious diseases such as typhoid fever than odors. By the turn of the century public health officials had largely accepted the bacterial theory of disease and had identified the "queen of the dung-heap" or fly, as a major source.

Because of the manure on the streets, especially when rain created a quagmire, "crossing sweepers" (like those in London), appeared, to help ladies and gentlemen wade through the liquid manure. Citizens frequently complained about the "pulverized horse dung" which blew into their faces and houses and which covered the outside displays of merchants. The paving of streets accelerated the problem, as wheels and hoofs ground the manure against the hard surfaces and amplified the dust. Writing in Appleton's Magazine in 1908, Harold Bolce argued that most of the modern city's sanitary and economic problems were caused by the horse. Bolce charged that each year 20,000 New Yorkers died from "maladies that fly in the dust, created mainly by horse manure."
The Horse & the Urban Environment

seahorse3 wrote:Where is the product? If NG is the answer, why aren't there any NG cars for sale in my county? Why aren't there any NG stations in my county?
Quite simply: OIL IS BETTER! It has a higher energy density, is easier to transport, allows vehicles to go farther, gasoline cars don't carry a 10K price premium over NG cars, etc. Why would you pay more for something that gave you less utility? Of course you would by the cheaper gasoline powered car that has more utility(range, etc.). Unfortunately oil is getting more scarce and more expensive. As it does, alternatives like NG start to look more attractive.
The oil barrel is half-full.
User avatar
kublikhan
Master Prognosticator
Master Prognosticator
 
Posts: 4222
Joined: Tue 06 Nov 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Illinois

The Future of Natural Gas - An Interview with Raymond Learsy

Unread postby Oilguy » Mon 04 Jun 2012, 12:12:10

Massive natural gas discoveries along with new extraction techniques have led many to claim nat gas as the fuel of the future – which could ensure U.S. energy independence, reduce geopolitical risks, and help meet U.S. electricity demands for the next 575 years.
Yet why have we seen so many negative publications and reports? Does natural gas really have a place in our future and is it the golden chalice we have been led to believe?

To help us investigate these issues and others we were fortunate enough to have a chat with the well known author and energy trader Raymond Learsy.

In the Interview Raymond talks about the following:

• Why Natural gas could displace gasoline
• The top 3 forms of energy for national security
• The New York Times Vendetta Against Natural Gas
• Nuclear Energy’s place in America’s energy future
• The future of Fracking
• Why we can’t rely on coal for future power generation

Oilprice.com: What do you think is the link between say the New York Times and some of the concerns in the commodity market?

Raymond Learsy: Well, some of the reporting of the New York Times I feel is weighted too heavily on the fiction that surrounds the pricing of oil. I've written a number of posts, some of which are in my new book, some of which are in my previous book, that deal with the way the New York Times repeats without any serious, in-depth questioning the sort of general handouts of the oil industry and OPEC. For example, if Saudi Arabia says, "Oh, we're having difficulty meeting current demands," there's no insightful discussion of what their potential is, how long they've been sitting on the fence before they expanded their production capability, etc., etc. It's always taken at face value. And then, of course, you have this extraordinary series of articles that came forward earlier in 2011 about natural gas.

For the full interview please visit: http://oilprice.com/Interviews/The-Futu ... earsy.html
Oilguy
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 93
Joined: Sat 13 Feb 2010, 13:37:11

Re: The Future of Natural Gas - An Interview with Raymond Le

Unread postby pstarr » Mon 04 Jun 2012, 12:23:54

Oilguy wrote:Massive natural gas discoveries along with new extraction techniques

• The New York Times Vendetta Against Natural Gas

For the full interview please visit: http://oilprice.com/Interviews/The-Futu ... earsy.html

You have three problems here; 1) horizontal drilling and rock fracturing is not new, 2) New York times does not do vendettas, and 3) you are supposed to include your own thoughts on linked or extracted material.

The future for natural gas remains (at best) a handy peak-load electric generating fuel. At worst just another lousy AGW fossil fuel.
November 2016
pstarr
NeoMaster
NeoMaster
 
Posts: 27391
Joined: Mon 27 Sep 2004, 02:00:00
Location: Behind the Redwood Curtain

Re: The Future of Natural Gas - An Interview with Raymond Le

Unread postby Plantagenet » Mon 04 Jun 2012, 13:38:12

pstarr wrote:
Oilguy wrote:The New York Times Vendetta Against Natural Gas

New York times does not do vendettas


The New York Times ownership is dominated by extremely wealthy people like Carlos Slim of Mexico. They are also closely tied to other parts of the New York corporate elite, including Citigroup and their Saudi money. The NY Times has even given space on its editorial page directly to Saudi Prince Alwaleed.

Of course the NY Times and other parts of the MSM are strongly influenced by their corporate masters, and often push agendas that favor their corporate owners. Call it a vendetta or call it bias----I'm surprised that you don't realize that the NYT and every other part of the MSM has agendas and pushes viewpoints.

Image
"Its a brave new world"
---President Obama, 4/25/16
User avatar
Plantagenet
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 21504
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 02:00:00
Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).

Next

Return to Peak Oil Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 29 guests

cron