Originally posted by dbates
Cantarell's output dropped by more than 540,000 barrels a day in May from a year earlier as the deposit lost pressure, making it more difficult and
expensive to extract crude. Pemex has been injecting nitrogen for more than 10 years to stimulate production.
And yet the field keeps producing meaning that it is cheaper to inject nitrogen than to develop new fields even with oil being as cheaply extracted as
it is in that region. This is just economics and it does not in my opinion prove anything about the availability of oil. In fact declining production
can be very profitable if the decline is made up for by a rise in the prices of what you still sell. The fact that the remaining resource stays in the
ground assures that you are in fact almost doubling ( or more) your profit in a long term analysis.
The development peaked at 65 percent of the company's 3.3 million barrels of daily crude output in 2003. In May, it fell to 37 percent of
total production.
Which is not very revealing unless one knows more about the companies other investments and oil fields in operation. Basically the company has been
injecting nitrogen for ten years and knowing that they were extracting resources from that field too fast they have diversified their holdings in the
ten years since.
The world's largest oil field is Ghawar in Saudi Arabia, followed by Burgan in Kuwait and Cantarell.
www.bloomberg.com...
Saudi Arabia has declared ( without much publicly disclosed data in support i admit) that they in fact have a trillion barrels of PROVEN oil reserves
remaining in that country and since they used the word proven they will eventually have to suffer the consequences of claiming it as fact if it's not
validated later. There are other massive oil fields in the world but since oil is VERY cheap to extract in the region ( those few large fields have
carried a large share of world production because similarly large fields were deeper or not of the same quality.
So who all here still thinks that the speculators are dumping money into the oil commidity unfounded?
/me raises hand.
They speculators are speculating on something. That something is the fact that oil production is declining.
Speculation is about profit and given sufficient capital you do not in fact need to motivate your 'bet' by anything other than massive investment.
This is the obvious downside of unrestrained speculation that you have shown no interest in either understanding or admitting to. Various speculators
have admitted this much and even a US senate commission admitted that even back in 2006 a large percentage of the price were not related to demand and
supply of physical oil stocks.
Should we really expect the prices of oil to drop when Saudi Arabia says they'll add an extra 200,000 barrels a day to the
market?
Yes we should but since the capitol forces in question can just continue to bet against a declining oil price would you rather believe what the MSM
says or that actions ( them putting some of their money where the MSM isn't always) speaks louder than words? Why can so many agencies legitimately
admit that there is no shortage of oil on world markets and that oil stocks are fast rising in most countries? Does that speak to a physical shortage
or does it speak to 'fears' that oil prices might keep rising for whatever reason or non reason? If i had that much money to invest i would ALSO bet
against oil as it's clear that whoever is keeping this shell game going has the capitol to do so.
Not when oil production is down even more in other areas. Their increase is a net loss when you look at the world market.
This is just not true according to the premier organizations who are commonly admitted to be knowledgeable on this matter. If you can supply me with
even one link to premier ( i know it's subjective but we can discuss that as well ) agency claiming that there are physical oil shortages on the
world market i would look at it and then start to wonder how physical inventories of oil seems to be growing in all the developed countries that can
afford to lay out the cash in the fear that oil prises might rise even further.
Pemex is the proud owner of the world's largest nitrogen plant. What do they do with all that nitrogen? For the last 10 years they have been
injecting it into the Cantrell field to keep the pressure up.
In an interview on the oil news website www.oilcast.com in November 2005, a PEMEX employee spoke anonymously of the company's inability to grow
production, stating that the company and country is at Hubbert's Peak. The person interviewed believed export levels could not be recovered once peak
had passed, as the size of current fields that have been discovered or are coming online represent a fraction of the size of the oilfields going into
terminal decline.
Annual production has dropped each year since 2004. [1] Furthermore, it has been reported the 2005-2006 daily oil production was down by approximately
500,000 barrels a day (a large proportion of the country's 4.5 million barrels) on the previous year.
PEMEX averaged 3.71 MMBPD in 2006. [2] PEMEX has never produced 4 MMBPD or higher for a yearly average. [3]
en.wikipedia.org...
And some more background information
en.wikipedia.org...
www.energybulletin.net...
As you can see their estimations were on target ( and i presume the exercise of nitrogen injection thus profitable) and things proceeded according to
plan. They have already started to shift nitrogen injection to other fields in the region and if they did not the decline in the Cantarell fell could
be slowed substantially but , i presume, not so much so that the application of nitrogen in other higher pressure fields would not yield greater
returns on investment. That at least seems to be their claim as to why they are allowing Cantarell to decline at current rates. Interestingly this
massive concentration of oil were discovered in 1976; not exactly good evidence that major finds are no being found any more.
All this does is speed up the recovery process and expedite the depletion rate.
But since it's imminantly profitable what are you crying about?
Pssst! Saudi Arabia is pumping over 7,000,000 barrels of sea water into it's fields.
Any guesses as to where the next oil shock story is going to come from?
No i don't but why you would believe such stories is far more interesting than your capacity to say exactly what the peak freaks ( investment bankers
; doh) have been claiming all this time. No one is denying that some fields are declining and especially not when some of these fields have been
producing oil for almost a hundred years! The oil industry is very well aware of decline rates and how to best stimulate oil formations to keep up
profitable production volumes and the decline of major well developed fields are a positively exciting time for smaller companies to move in and
develop smaller reserves now that world production is becoming more fractured and widespread. At the current price regimes the worlds recoverable oil
supplies are many times higher than they are at the 10-30 dollar range ( presuming constant dollar which is hard to do these days) and this alone may
be incentive enough eventually result in oil prices once again receding to the ten dollar range as they did back in 1998.
It's only a matter of time. Very little time till they see decline rates like Mexico is having. Expect to pay $10 a gallon for gasoline
then.
Doom and gloom, without much substance in terms of evidence, is all you got and while that is certainly enough to drive speculative financial markets
into overdrive , to say nothing of the few hundred million more people it drives to starvation, it does not today, or have ever in past, had anything
to do with how much oil there is in the Earths crust.
Stellar
Edit for spelling
[edit on 11-7-2008 by StellarX]
