Shale Long Term Debt vs Growth

[DebtOfTomorrow + 1]

So I keep reading in the headlines how the USA will become an unstoppable force in terms of production growth:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-oil-eia-outlook/u-s-crude-output-to-surpass-12-million-barrels-per-day-by-mid-2019-eia-idUSKCN1NB2F5

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Crude-Oil/IEA-Chief-US-Oil-Output-To-Near-SaudiRussian-Production-By-2025.html

And at the same time I read contradicting articles such as these:

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/US-Shale-Has-A-Glaring-Problem.html

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/US-Oil-Companies-Face-240-Billion-Debt-Mountain.html

Can someone with knowledge in this matter explain how we can reconcile these two facts and what this actually means for production growth in American shale?

 

[Karl V + 33]

Loans are an investment into the positive future .

As long , as there are spots available for drilling , there is a positive outlook ; thus easy to have a reason to apply for loans , and because of old habbits , the individual clerk in the bank provides the loans .

 

Since the USA is importing large amounts of cheap Canadian Crude Oil and also crude from Arabia , there is a outlook to pump that amount of oil . The time , when the USA would export only , the outlook would need to focus on new targets , or the reason for applying for loans would not exist anymore . 

Paying back loans completely actually would reduce the printed money available in a economy ,  as far as I understand . 

A company , that would just earn enough after input , is like a pensioneer , who does not need to do much anymore . This is a nice goal , but every year there will be new competitors reborn , appear on the scene , and to ensure the existence of the company , the company has to invest by loans , bonds or shares ; since pumping oil is not a simple task , that needs only a few tools to purchase and begin with .

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

4 hours ago, DebtOfTomorrow said:

So I keep reading in the headlines how the USA will become an unstoppable force in terms of production growth:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-oil-eia-outlook/u-s-crude-output-to-surpass-12-million-barrels-per-day-by-mid-2019-eia-idUSKCN1NB2F5

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Crude-Oil/IEA-Chief-US-Oil-Output-To-Near-SaudiRussian-Production-By-2025.html

And at the same time I read contradicting articles such as these:

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/US-Shale-Has-A-Glaring-Problem.html

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/US-Oil-Companies-Face-240-Billion-Debt-Mountain.html

Can someone with knowledge in this matter explain how we can reconcile these two facts and what this actually means for production growth in American shale?

 

 

[Illurion + 894]

Like you,  i know little about the subject of shale,  and have read the same contradicting articles that you have.

My personal take is this:

NEW TECHNOLOGY WILL BE THE KEY ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.

Shale has always been there,  but wasn't profitable until recent technological processes allowed for doing the same job,  at less price.

The articles i have read saying Shale's days are numbered,  tend not to list any future technology upgrades as part of their decision making process.

I believe there almost certainly WILL BE FUTURE TECHNOLOGY UPGRADES.

So,  i tend the believe the stories of Shale's imminent decline are probably unfounded.

Edited December 25, 2018 by Illurion