Why Is America (Texas) Burning Millions of Dollars Per Day Of Natural Gas?

This is not a new thing, re-injecting the gas.

But it is a viable solution and can end  a lot of flaring.

I mentioned this as one of the solutions before.

On 5/29/2019 at 10:36 AM, ceo_energemsier said:

I have said this before under different topics on this forum about flaring and also about the indiscriminate waste of precious water resources used in drilling and hydraulic fracturing operations, both of which are being addressed but not fast enough. This is one area where I do support Federal/State intervention in passing science based, technology driven , sensible and meaningful regulation to put an end to environmental quality degradation, waste of natural resources, reuse and recycling of natural resources, proper management of natural resources and timely approval of permits for sound and safe build out of needed infrastructure such as storage tanks, feeder and trunk lines, processing and gathering facilities etc.

On the subject of exports, I do not believe that there should be a ban on exports unless it is defined and classified as a nationals security matter. It would boil down to the aspect of putting a ban on exports of any goods or services produced or grown in the US based on an industry's or a specific group's interest. We could just go on and start demanding to ban the export of US beef, poultry, soybeans, cotton, corn, beets, sunflower oil, canola oil , ethanol, US steel, US pharmaceutical products and the list goes on.

 

 

I have mentioned some where else on this forum recently and last year about the various options for produced gas before pipelines and processing/gathering facilities are in place to prevent the flaring.

These options below can be deployed rapidly in comparison to large scale facilities and can be dismantled and relocated to a new location/new production  basin as needed in the future.

One has to understand that when E&P companies go into an area to explore and drill, the midstream companies (pipelines, oil and gas separation and processing plants, storage and other related infrastructure and services companies) do not go before the E&P companies to lay the pipe and develop the infrastructure, until such time the basin/region proves out to be containing substantial resources (oil gas etc) for years to come and can be sustainable for the long term. Once that is established , they rush in to provide the services and develop the infrastructure. Federal, State and Local permitting is also a major factor how fast these facilities are developed and put into operations.

This, however does not preclude the E&P companies nor the services companies to sit idle and just flare the gas. Can you imagine if E&P companies just let the oil flow out of the wells into the fields and ditches and waterways? Why spew the gas then into the air?!!!

The industry needs to cooperate and collaborate with each other and out of industry players with the right techs and concepts to develop meaningful, sustainable, cost effective, environmentally safe methodologies, technologies and applications and implementation of all these to maximize the use of the resources available and being developed.

1) Produced gas re-injection into the formation or into another zone for later use and or increasing liquid hydrocarbons production volume sa an EOR for liquids recovery.. We tried that in several different parts of the country and different countries and it worked well. Saved a valuable resource for future use and also prevented the air quality issues etc.

2) Compact (and or small scale) GTL plants that would convert the gas to liquids fuels . There are several companies that offered the solution in the oil and gas fields and provided it as a service. Some companies provide tech services that will convert the natgas to high quality methanol, ethanol, formalin/formaldehyde and other petrochem feedstocks and liquid fuels  and further use of inhouse tech to components of cleaner burning fuels. This adds value to the end product compared to just the lower value of the gas and these liquids can be transported off site by tanker trucks with ease or stored at a nearby storage facility for further transportation via rail or connect to a products pipeline if feasible.

3) Compact LNG plants , offering the same as 2) for easy onsite or near site within a play /field region for gas to LNG and further transport by LNG trucks to points of storage/transport or re-gasification

4) On or near sites of production and or production basin based compact NG- LPG plants

5) Portable/mobile natgas power plants that can provide electric power to the operators on site and also can connect that generated electric power into the grid

6) Develop regional gas storage hub as the E&P companies ramp up exploration and production in the basin or region. It could be in salt caverns or man made storage facilities as the production is ramping up. It will require shorter pipeline distances or temporary pipeline setup that are safe and reliable to move the produced gas to the nearby basin /regional storage hub. Collaboration would be required with the permitting and approval process for these as well. Once the trunk pipelines are in place, the companies can move the stored gas to areas where the demand is.. power plants, main gas storage hubs, LNG plants etc.

 

Just some thoughts, some of which have been executed and implemented with success! Rampant, illogical, willful , negligent flaring for ease and convenience should end!

However, perhaps, probably, some folks who do not like the shale industry, would go on to demand , and actually have demanded the shut down of the shale industry, without any scientific merit to ban hydraulic fracturing. CO is on such a path.

 

There is no need to flare the gas in the Bakken or in the Permian, solutions and technologies exist to stop the flaring. I have done that in our operations from the start of any project development. States should start imposing strict and high value fines that will definitely impact the companies doing it and will make them stop. They should get fined certain $/boe gas flared.

 

_______________________________________________________________________

 

Texas Drillers Resort to Pumping Gas Down Wells

Bloomberg) -- Texas drillers may have found a solution to the stubborn natural gas glut that’s forced them to either burn it off into the air, or pay others to take it away.

At least five producers, led by EOG Resources Inc., are experimenting with shooting highly-pressurized natural gas into past-their-prime wells that have seen their output slip. The wells are then capped to build up pressure inside with the aim of dislodging any oil still hiding in the rock.

The methodology’s been used in conventional wells elsewhere with both natural gas and carbon dioxide for years, but it’s just now emerging in America’s fracked shale fields. The win-win goal: The trapped gas is put to work, and there’s a 30%-to-70% gain in oil output from older wells, according to EOG. As the shale boom ages, the potential could be extensive.

“If widely adopted, if it doesn’t lead to challenges and the formations behave as we expect, then we expect it could utilize 25% of the associated gas produced,” said Ramanan Krishnamoorti, the chief energy officer at the University of Houston.

Natural gas almost always comes up with oil during drilling, but it’s increasingly become a largely unwelcome byproduct in Texas. With pipeline capacity for gas limited, prices there have cratered, dropping as low as minus $9 per million British thermal units in early April.

Flaring Rises

The result: In late 2018, Permian flaring -- the burning off of associated gas -- more than doubled from a year earlier to 500 million cubic feet a day, and that’s likely to rise, said Stephanie Kainz, senior associate at RS Energy Group Inc. in Calgary. It’s a problem from both an economic point of view, and environmentally.

Generally, the use of injected gas is known as enhanced oil recovery, or EOR. Initially, EOG was the main company using natural gas to boost shale oil output, Krishnamoorti said by telephone. "But the fact is that now we have seen four other producers do it," he said. “And with remarkable results.”

EOG has been experimenting with EOR for at least three years in the Eagle Ford basin. Gas injection can potentially extend crude production volumes in older wells by 18 to 24 months, Krishnamoorti said. What’s still to be determined is how well EOR works in different types of rock formations.

Not all rock is the same, and while it does appear to be an attractive option in many parts of the Permian, it’s “not particularly good” in at least one section, the Wolfcamp zone, according to Krishnamoorti,

Stacked Wells

There are other questions as well, said Subash Chandra, an analyst at Guggenheim Securities LLC. The Permian is still in its early phases of drilling and ideally producers want multiple stacked wells because that will likely yield more oil than attempting EOR in a single well, Chandra said.

And other gases can be used if, for instance, the price of natural gas rises as new pipelines open up in the region. Occidental Petroleum Corp. Chief Executive Officer Vicki Hollub has been vocal about using carbon dioxide as a way to boost production and address climate change, bringing it up during Climate Week NY.

But that still leaves one big problem unsolved in Texas. It can be used to get more oil from older wells, and it’s more environmentally friendly. But it doesn’t address the natural gas glut.

For the most part, producers have disclosed little specific information about how well the new method performs, even in the Eagle Ford, where it is increasingly being adopted. As a result, ”it’s impossible” for an outsider to figure out how successful it might be moving forward, according to Chandra.

Real Application

”You are talking about something that’s probably two to three years out in terms of real application,” Chandra said.

EOG’s experiments into gas injections go back at least to 2016 when the driller implemented a 32-well commercialization pilot. Last year it “converted” 54 wells, bringing the total to 150, according to the Houston-based company’s first-quarter presentation.

This “secondary recovery,” as it’s called, will likely expand as primary drilling development is completed in areas, according to a May 3 conference call.

These Eagle Ford lessons could become “very important” for the Permian as drilling activity ages there, according to Chandra. “Oil and gas at the end of the day is a real estate game,” he said. “Once you have the right to the lease which you pay a good amount of money for and spend a lot of effort, you might as well squeeze every last barrel that you can.”

  • Great Response! 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hundreds of Billions of dollars worth of gas have been flared off through decades of waste.

Decades from now, our grandchildren will curse the laziness/ lack of will/ cowardice displayed by our generation of oil executives, when gas is scarce, and they are trying to heat their homes and cook their food with windmills and Solar energy.

I HATE govt. intervention in private enterprise, but the industry needs to be forced to recover this gas.

  • Great Response! 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, ceo_energemsier said:

But that still leaves one big problem unsolved in Texas. It can be used to get more oil from older wells, and it’s more environmentally friendly. But it doesn’t address the natural gas glut.

The fundamental issue with natural gas is that it is miscible with the oil. The reason it needs to be separated in the first place is because it fails pipeline spec to have the GOR above x (depending on pipeline operator). Pumping CH4 into an oil well gives you gassy oil. Pumping CO2 works much better because it is more immiscible so is a better EOR drive. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Ward Smith said:

The fundamental issue with natural gas is that it is miscible with the oil. The reason it needs to be separated in the first place is because it fails pipeline spec to have the GOR above x (depending on pipeline operator). Pumping CH4 into an oil well gives you gassy oil. Pumping CO2 works much better because it is more immiscible so is a better EOR drive. 

Atleast reinjection will prevent the flaring and you can have the equipment on site to process the gas and reinject it till the rest of the infrastructure is built out.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

What's really funny with all this complaining about the flaring is the fact that most of the end product ends up being wasted on frivolous uses anyway.  For example, electricity used by bitcoin miners is a total loss, nothing of value is produced at all.  Look at the statistics on how much energy is consumed in bitcoin mining, it's way more than what's being flared and that's just one use. 

Next consider the amount of energy consumed by phones and computers that simply are used for gaming or other forms of entertainment with no value produced.  Then there are the companies that buy huge amounts of data storage and use applications to mine that data in order to figure out what customers to target with advertising to consume more useless stuff.  I get constant emails that I have to delete because they are spam.

Surely there could be some outrage about the egregious waste of energy in all those examples which far exceed the energy lost by flaring in the Permian or Bakken.  Oh, right, those don't serve the shale hate agenda though.

Edited by wrs
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 5/28/2019 at 11:21 PM, ronwagn said:

Sorry to say, but it sounds like you have little or no concern about wasting natural gas, which is a precious national resource and Texas resource. The greener of us should also be concerned about taking the natural gas out of the ground and turning it into heat and air pollutants. 

It does seem extremely short-sighted to be flaring so much. Our oil sands in Alberta are cleaner when you count in the flaring of the methane. And whether you believe in CO2 causing Global Warming or not, it does not help the oil patch reputation to flaunt it like this.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Jeff_Calgary said:

It does seem extremely short-sighted to be flaring so much. Our oil sands in Alberta are cleaner when you count in the flaring of the methane. And whether you believe in CO2 causing Global Warming or not, it does not help the oil patch reputation to flaunt it like this.

Oil sands eat ~3 BCFd...  and produces ~3Mbl   Permian(worst offender) ~ 0.5BCFd and produces ~ 4Mbl...

Yea......🙄

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Wastral said:

Oil sands eat ~3 BCFd...  and produces ~3Mbl   Permian(worst offender) ~ 0.5BCFd and produces ~ 4Mbl...

Yea......🙄

Flares are only 65% efficient -so the rest is methane-which is 30 times worse than CO2. So 175 million times 30 is 5.25 BCFd of CO2 equivalent.

In the oilsands, the gas is completely burnt -ie: 98% efficiency. 

Yea.........LOL.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Jeff_Calgary said:

Flares are only 65% efficient -so the rest is methane-which is 30 times worse than CO2. So 175 million times 30 is 5.25 BCFd of CO2 equivalent.

In the oilsands, the gas is completely burnt -ie: 98% efficiency. 

Yea.........LOL.

You need to learn what the word "efficient" means.  Give ya a hint: it does not mean percentage.  Enjoy your education. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

2 hours ago, Jeff_Calgary said:

Flares are only 65% efficient -so the rest is methane-which is 30 times worse than CO2. So 175 million times 30 is 5.25 BCFd of CO2 equivalent.

In the oilsands, the gas is completely burnt -ie: 98% efficiency. 

Yea.........LOL.

Here is another bit of your education: IF 1/3 of all the NG being flared was not being burned, you better not be a smoker in the fields as the entire area would blow up... 

Oddly enough, due to copious amounts of methane floating around spontaneous explosions in oil fields does not make the headlines.  Who knew

Edited by Wastral

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Wastral said:

Here is another bit of your education: IF 1/3 of all the NG being flared was not being burned, you better not be a smoker in the fields as the entire area would blow up... 

Oddly enough, due to copious amounts of methane floating around spontaneous explosions in oil fields does not make the headlines.  Who knew

Using the natural gas onsite. compressing it and transporting it has been fully explained on this site. There are a multitude of ways to do it. Just do it and quit flaring.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

14 hours ago, Wastral said:

Here is another bit of your education: IF 1/3 of all the NG being flared was not being burned, you better not be a smoker in the fields as the entire area would blow up... 

Oddly enough, due to copious amounts of methane floating around spontaneous explosions in oil fields does not make the headlines.  Who knew

Uncontained gas does not 'blow up' but it does rise and dilute very quickly -especially when hot. Still - oil sands are cleaner at the moment. You could at least incinerate instead of flare. Plus that BTEX is going to create a lot of asthma in the areas nearby. 

Here is a good paper on it....

https://ags.aer.ca/document/SPE/SPE_005.pdf

 

Edited by Jeff_Calgary

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Jeff_Calgary said:

Uncontained gas does not 'blow up' but it does rise and dilute very quickly -especially when hot. Still - oil sands are cleaner at the moment. You could at least incinerate instead of flare. Plus that BTEX is going to create a lot of asthma in the areas nearby. 

Here is a good paper on it....

https://ags.aer.ca/document/SPE/SPE_005.pdf

 

With a population density of 1 person per square mile out there I don't think the risk of asthma is too high.  Of course the population density around Orla might be as high as 100/sq mi but only during the day.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Solutions not just whining!!!

small step but meaningful.

_________________

 

North Dakota makes small bet on natural gas infrastructure company

North Dakota, home to the second-largest U.S. shale producing basin, has invested in a startup company that is proposing to develop new markets for shale gas and reduce unwanted burning of natural gas.

 

North Dakota’s government, in an unusual move, said it would invest $200,000 in natural gas infrastructure company Bakken Midstream Natural Gas LLC at a time when oil producers have been burning excess gas due to the shortage of pipelines to move it.

 

The shortage has resulted in nearly 20% of gas produced in North Dakota being flared, well above the state’s 12% target. The goal is to cut flaring to less than 9% by late 2020.

Raymond James analyst Muhammed Ghulam said no party was benefiting from burning the excess natural gas and that the state was losing out on taxes while also causing environmental concerns.

Ghulam also said the investment was “immaterial given the significant amount needed to fund infrastructure in the region”.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Low natural gas prices drive up generation share in US Midwest

Gas-fired power 25% less expensive than coal

Switching may boost July, August power burn

Low natural gas prices in the Midwest have helped boost gas-fired generation in the region this year and could lead to even greater coal-to-gas switching during the peak summer months of July and August.

 

 

Total electricity loads across the Midcontinent Independent System Operator shows coal has dropped by 9 average GW year on year while gas-fired generation has increased by 0.6 average GW year on year, according to MISO data.

In fact, gas as a percentage of thermal loads is averaging 45% month to date in June, or nearly 10% higher year on year. For the summer in general, gas as a percentage of thermal loads are averaging 46%, or roughly 6%, higher year on year.

Looking ahead, seasonally expanding loads should help drive gas burns higher. Notably, relative to June's month-to-date average, S&P Global Platts Analytics forecasts total loads within MISO will average about 90 average GW and total gas generation will be 25.7 average GW, up 18% and 14%, respectively.

Based on Platts Analytics reference prices, gas as a percentage of thermal loads is forecast to average 42% for the peak summer months of July and August, 3% higher than last year. But the recent selloff in both Henry Hub and regional gas hub prices will likely stimulate higher than expected levels of coal-to-gas switching. This would allow gas to take more incremental market share than previously expected.

COAL-TO-GAS SWITCHING

Regarding switching, with Chicago city-gates pricing below $2.15/MMBtu over the next few months, gas is much more economical relative to coal across MISO's North and Central regions. Looking at delivered coal costs to the region, and adjusting for a gas-fired combined-cycle power plant heat rate advantage, gas is trading at more than a 25% discount to the price level over a coal-fired power plant.

Because of this pricing advantage, Platts Analytics sees MISO adding anywhere from 300 MMcf/d to 400 MMcf/d of more-than-expected gas-fired generation over the peak months of July and August.

Part of the higher gas-fired generation stems from a wave of coal plant closures. Nearly 10 GW of coal generation has retired since 2015 while more than 2 GW of gas generation has come online in the Midwest over the same period. Platts Analytics' expects another 2 GW of coal retirements by the end of 2019 combined with 2 GW of new gas-fired generation online by year's end.

The coal retirements played a significant role in the Midwest reaching record-high levels of gas-fired generation last winter. In January, Midwest power burn averaged 3.2 Bcf/d, reaching a single-day, all-time high of 3.9 Bcf/d, according to Platts Analytics. This record occurred despite the Chicago city-gates averaging more than $3/MMBtu for the month.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

If Shale oil is the big thing that it appears to be then surely it would make sense to clean or scrub the gas and use it to provide the electrical grid with GNV fueled power stations. Which in turn could power the shale operations and more, with free electricity.

But that’s obviously a stupid idea as it will cut into the profit margin.

Edited by James Regan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

World Bank: Global gas flaring up 3% in 2018

Flaring of natural gas rose 3% year-to-year in 2018 to an estimated 145 billion cu m, the World Bank’s Global Gas Flaring Reduction Partnership (GGFR) disclosed on June 12. The growth was associated with increased US crude oil production, although US flaring intensity—the volume of gas flared per barrel of produced oil—remained low at 0.3 m/bbl of gas, it said.

The worldwide flaring growth last year was equivalent to the total annual gas consumption in Central and South American countries, the GGFR reported.

It noted that in the US, flaring climbed 48% year-to-year as crude production rose 33%. “Satellite data indicate that increased flare volumes were concentrated almost exclusively in the shale oil basins in the Bakken in North Dakota and the Permian and Eagle Ford in Texas,” the GGFR said. “These areas saw rapid development in 2018, with shale oil production increasing by around 29% in the Bakken, 40% in the Permian, and 15% in the Eagle Ford.”

Countries struggling with conflict also experienced a gas flaring increase from 2017 levels, the GGFR said. “In Venezuela, gas flaring soared even as oil production declined sharply, indicating a state in crisis, similar to trends seen previously in Syria and Yemen,” it noted.

In Angola, gas flaring declined by 27% year-to-year during 2018. Associated gas that likely would have been flared was exported instead through an LNG plant, representing a positive development for the country’s strategy to reduce gas flaring, the GGFR said. In Syria, gas flaring fell by 42% from 2017 levels, suggesting restoration of more normal oil field operations following a sustained period of conflict, it said.

The GGFR is composed of governments, oil companies, and international institutions. The US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and GGFR have developed the flaring estimates in cooperation with the Colorado School of Mines based on observations from advanced sensors in a satellite launched in 2012.

http://www.worldbank.org/en/programs/gasflaringreduction

 

  • Great Response! 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, James Regan said:

If Shale oil is the big thing that it appears to be then surely it would make sense to clean or scrub the gas and use it to provide the electrical grid with GNV fueled power stations. Which in turn could power the shale operations and more, with free electricity.

But that’s obviously a stupid idea as it will cut into the profit margin.

 

1 hour ago, James Regan said:

If Shale oil is the big thing that it appears to be then surely it would make sense to clean or scrub the gas and use it to provide the electrical grid with GNV fueled power stations. Which in turn could power the shale operations and more, with free electricity.

But that’s obviously a stupid idea as it will cut into the profit margin.

I will repeat this here again. There is no need to flare the gas from gas wells and or mixed wells and or associated gas in any of the basins. I have not heard too much about flaring gas in the Marcellus shale? why? because that is the main product operators and drillers are after in that region. So they have every need, want and desire to capture that hydrocarbon stream to make $$$$4.

The companies in the Bakken, EF and Permian have no reason whatsoever to continue flaring. They are past the stage of claiming any excuse for flaring. They should be just fined each and everyday they flare gas based on a $/boe basis, they will sure enough stop very very fast and find the means to do any number of things to save the gas and or use it or move it. The companies that have been flaring are not ehtical, are not operating in the best interest of the environment, the state, the county, the people, the tax payers, the investors, the shareholders and the country as a whole. The flared gas cannot be replaced. They are ignorant, or cheap or outright and willfully doing this because they can get away and need to be held accountable. The only way that accountability will mean anything is , they start getting fined for every boe of gas flared on a daily basis and the state should put a lien on every barrel of oil these companies are selling. That will hit them directly in their pockets and will elicit an action that will have a positive result. All the solutions are there and have been there.

NO EXCUSE TO FLARE!!!

 

____________________________

On 5/29/2019 at 10:36 AM, ceo_energemsier said:

I have said this before under different topics on this forum about flaring and also about the indiscriminate waste of precious water resources used in drilling and hydraulic fracturing operations, both of which are being addressed but not fast enough. This is one area where I do support Federal/State intervention in passing science based, technology driven , sensible and meaningful regulation to put an end to environmental quality degradation, waste of natural resources, reuse and recycling of natural resources, proper management of natural resources and timely approval of permits for sound and safe build out of needed infrastructure such as storage tanks, feeder and trunk lines, processing and gathering facilities etc.

On the subject of exports, I do not believe that there should be a ban on exports unless it is defined and classified as a nationals security matter. It would boil down to the aspect of putting a ban on exports of any goods or services produced or grown in the US based on an industry's or a specific group's interest. We could just go on and start demanding to ban the export of US beef, poultry, soybeans, cotton, corn, beets, sunflower oil, canola oil , ethanol, US steel, US pharmaceutical products and the list goes on.

 

 

I have mentioned some where else on this forum recently and last year about the various options for produced gas before pipelines and processing/gathering facilities are in place to prevent the flaring.

These options below can be deployed rapidly in comparison to large scale facilities and can be dismantled and relocated to a new location/new production  basin as needed in the future.

One has to understand that when E&P companies go into an area to explore and drill, the midstream companies (pipelines, oil and gas separation and processing plants, storage and other related infrastructure and services companies) do not go before the E&P companies to lay the pipe and develop the infrastructure, until such time the basin/region proves out to be containing substantial resources (oil gas etc) for years to come and can be sustainable for the long term. Once that is established , they rush in to provide the services and develop the infrastructure. Federal, State and Local permitting is also a major factor how fast these facilities are developed and put into operations.

This, however does not preclude the E&P companies nor the services companies to sit idle and just flare the gas. Can you imagine if E&P companies just let the oil flow out of the wells into the fields and ditches and waterways? Why spew the gas then into the air?!!!

The industry needs to cooperate and collaborate with each other and out of industry players with the right techs and concepts to develop meaningful, sustainable, cost effective, environmentally safe methodologies, technologies and applications and implementation of all these to maximize the use of the resources available and being developed.

1) Produced gas re-injection into the formation or into another zone for later use and or increasing liquid hydrocarbons production volume sa an EOR for liquids recovery.. We tried that in several different parts of the country and different countries and it worked well. Saved a valuable resource for future use and also prevented the air quality issues etc.

2) Compact (and or small scale) GTL plants that would convert the gas to liquids fuels . There are several companies that offered the solution in the oil and gas fields and provided it as a service. Some companies provide tech services that will convert the natgas to high quality methanol, ethanol, formalin/formaldehyde and other petrochem feedstocks and liquid fuels  and further use of inhouse tech to components of cleaner burning fuels. This adds value to the end product compared to just the lower value of the gas and these liquids can be transported off site by tanker trucks with ease or stored at a nearby storage facility for further transportation via rail or connect to a products pipeline if feasible.

3) Compact LNG plants , offering the same as 2) for easy onsite or near site within a play /field region for gas to LNG and further transport by LNG trucks to points of storage/transport or re-gasification

4) On or near sites of production and or production basin based compact NG- LPG plants

5) Portable/mobile natgas power plants that can provide electric power to the operators on site and also can connect that generated electric power into the grid

6) Develop regional gas storage hub as the E&P companies ramp up exploration and production in the basin or region. It could be in salt caverns or man made storage facilities as the production is ramping up. It will require shorter pipeline distances or temporary pipeline setup that are safe and reliable to move the produced gas to the nearby basin /regional storage hub. Collaboration would be required with the permitting and approval process for these as well. Once the trunk pipelines are in place, the companies can move the stored gas to areas where the demand is.. power plants, main gas storage hubs, LNG plants etc.

7) Portable temporary pipeline and related equipment infrastructure that can be relocated within the basin as and when needed .

Just some thoughts, some of which have been executed and implemented with success! Rampant, illogical, willful , negligent flaring for ease and convenience should end!

However, perhaps, probably, some folks who do not like the shale industry, would go on to demand , and actually have demanded the shut down of the shale industry, without any scientific merit to ban hydraulic fracturing. CO is on such a path.

 

There is no need to flare the gas in the Bakken or in the Permian, solutions and technologies exist to stop the flaring. I have done that in our operations from the start of any project development. States should start imposing strict and high value fines that will definitely impact the companies doing it and will make them stop. They should get fined certain $/boe gas flared.

 

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Great Response! 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, ceo_energemsier said:

Solutions not just whining!!!

You should get someone to explain to you, with crayons,  the difference in whining and advocacy. In the case of associated gas flaring from shale oil in the United States, flaring has increased, steadily, the past four to five years; please see the World Bank article you yourself referenced. The US has been hanging in there at around 4th in the entire world for total volumes of gas flared. Imagine that! The greatest industrialized nation in the world is pissing off almost as much natural gas as Nigeria, and Siberia. Now THATS something to cheerlead for. I mean, just think, 6-8 years ago the price of natural gas was $12 per MMBTU in America and now its worth nothing. That's some good planning there! 

As to flaring, nothing, I repeat nothing has improved and nothing will improve. The US shale oil industry is not going to do a damn thing about flaring until it is forced to, till flaring is regulated into the dirt, to the point of shutting those wells in. Why? Because it costs too much money, that's why. Shale basins are being over-drilled, GOR is going thru the roof, and the price of associated gas sucks. It cannot compete with APP Basin natural gas and it sure cannot compete with Qatar and West Australia and East Africa to make LNG, that's another piece of stinky shale oil BS. Associated gas is essentially worth nothing, the shale oil industry could not make any money 1Q19 with prices above $60, now those prices are going down to $40. Again. 

The American shale oil industry has already shot both its feet off with leveraged oversupply, now its going to shoot its left knee off... essentially because it can't keep its credit cards in its purse. It could care less about flaring. Same as fresh water. It could care less.  But you keep those shale oil induced links a commin.' We need to know that somebody out there in the world is not just whining, but actually DOING something to solve the problem. They sure are making me feel better. 

 

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 6/11/2019 at 5:44 PM, Wastral said:

Here is another bit of your education: IF 1/3 of all the NG being flared was not being burned, you better not be a smoker in the fields as the entire area would blow up... 

Oddly enough, due to copious amounts of methane floating around spontaneous explosions in oil fields does not make the headlines.  Who knew

Methane rapidly floats upward. If it is released it can only catch on fire at the point of release. Don't release it, use it. 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's an article relevant to this thread.  Maddeningly prickly; obviously I do not agree with all of the scattershot / buckshot that the author blasts at using both barrels.

But worth reading. 

Various points in this article to make dang near every commentor in this thread uncomfortable, no matter where you are on the Shale and / or Political spectrum.

Trump Thinks US Oil Is His Strength When It’s His Achilles’ Heel

Headlines abound about the massive surge in US shale oil production. The energy independence-cheering punditocracy hail this as a great victory. This includes President Trump.

And it would be if this surge in production was built on financially stable ground. But it isn’t. The fracking industry continues to bleed massive amounts of cash. As I pointed out in an article earlier this week, when accounting for this inconvenient truth much of the U.S’s return to dominance in the energy space is a lot of hot air.

Nick Cunningham’s article at Oilprice.com tells the tale.  ...

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Tom Kirkman said:

But worth reading. 

Yes, worth reading. Our current hydrocarbon policy in America is based on the false narrative of shale oil abundance.  Shale oil as a foreign policy tool requires low interest rates for deferred debt, and new debt, and I suspect the FED is being manipulated by the Administration accordingly. Texas is, thankfully, very Republican, its Governor and all three TRR Commissioners, Republican. I suspect too they have been manipulated to over look flaring and told that if the shale oil industry wants to drill $9MM HZ wells on 40 acre spacing, let them do.

This policy is unsustainable and will have very serious ramifications for our country in years to come. https://www.oilystuffblog.com/single-post/2019/03/18/Shale-Oil-and-US-Foreign-Policy

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Burning off Natural Gas in order to use the oil is like the buffalo hunters who killed all the buffalo to get the hides and let all the meat rot. Just like the buffalo hunters, today's "flarers" will become to be seen as vile and self-centered people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Michael Sanches said:

Burning off Natural Gas in order to use the oil is like the buffalo hunters who killed all the buffalo to get the hides and let all the meat rot. Just like the buffalo hunters, today's "flarers" will become to be seen as vile and self-centered people.

Utter and complete nonsense from someone with no clue. In the Permian there isn't the possibility of getting all the gas to market so it's flared while the infrastructure is built.  If there is no flaring, no infrastructure gets built.  So I guess what you want is no production at all, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites