Shale Oil Fiasco

[ceo_energemsier + 1,818]

 

 

_____________

2020 WTI prices may leave companies unable to cover costs: Dallas Fed survey

 

 

WTI price forecasts vary from $48/b to $75/b

Limited access to capital repeatedly cited

Operator bankruptcies a major worry

 

 

US oil and gas executives expect WTI prices to average $58.54/b by the end of 2020, but most are also basing their capital spending on 2020 prices trading roughly 8% lower throughout next year with many planning for significant spending cuts, according to a Dallas Federal Reserve survey released Friday.

 

The quarterly survey, which polled executives at 111 exploration and production companies and 59 oilfield services companies, reveals a domestic industry concerned about increasingly limited access to capital, stagnant prices and looming bankruptcies in the Permian and other US shale plays.

"The outlook for North American onshore seismic has worsened significantly," an executive at one oilfield services company said in the survey. "Our customers are only interested in spending dollars where absolutely necessary and only when that investment will produce a return in the very short term."

The survey said that contraction in the US oil sector may have lessened in Q4 2019, when compared with Q3, but about one-quarter of respondents forecast they will be unable to cover planned capital expenditures in 2020 if prices do not rise above $60/b.

"Continued weak oil prices and high costs are squeezing my margins," one E&P executive told the survey. "It is very difficult to find any projects that make sense economically."

In fact, only 8% of respondents to the survey said they expect to increase capital spending significantly in 2020, with 21% saying they plan to decrease spending significantly next year and 20% saying they will decrease spending slightly.

"We are having to divest properties in order to keep from dropping employees," one E&P executive said.

"We will be acquiring existing production, drilling only lease-required development wells, and will not be drilling any exploratory wells," another E&P executive said.

Operator bankruptcies have become a "major" worry in the sector, another E&P executive added.

"Many non-operated working interest owners are going non-consent, which is a sign of low oil and gas prices and/or lack of available capital," the executive said. "Oil and gas purchasers are generally non-responsive to questions; we can't reach them by phone, and automated web-based question input screens go many days before a response [comes], if any."

WEAK PRICES EXPECTED

On average, executives polled forecast WTI prices to be at $58.54/b by the end of 2020, but estimates varied from $48/b to $75/b. The executives were surveyed December 11-19, when WTI prices averaged $60.19/b.

In its latest Short-Term Energy Outlook, EIA forecast WTI to average $55.01/b in 2020, down from $56.74/b in 2019.

Executives in the Dallas Fed survey also forecast Henry Hub natural gas prices to average $2.51/MMBtu by the end of 2020, with forecasts ranging from $1.35/MMBtu to $4/MMBtu. Henry Hub prices averaged $2.28/MMBtu when the survey was conducted.

On average, executives were planning for an even lower WTI price in 2020. Most respondents said their companies were planning for WTI to average $54/b in 2020 as the basis for their capital spending plans next year.

According to the survey, 40% of executives said they would need WTI prices to average $55/b or more in 2020 in order for cash flow from operations to cover capital expenditures.

The most common complaint was limited access to capital.

"The risk appetites of the banks for energy lending are much lower," one E&P executive said.

Another compared Wall Street's interest in Permian production to an investment fad on par with savings and loans of the 1980s or subprime housing loans of 2005 through 2008.

"Now it is this total infatuation with shale at the exclusion of real money-making investments in conventional projects," the executive said. "The shortsightedness is destroying real value and makes this industry appear to be a bad investment."

 

_________________________________________________________________

 

 

[James Gautreau + 86]

56 minutes ago, ceo_energemsier said:

 

 

_____________

2020 WTI prices may leave companies unable to cover costs: Dallas Fed survey

 

 

WTI price forecasts vary from $48/b to $75/b

Limited access to capital repeatedly cited

Operator bankruptcies a major worry

 

 

US oil and gas executives expect WTI prices to average $58.54/b by the end of 2020, but most are also basing their capital spending on 2020 prices trading roughly 8% lower throughout next year with many planning for significant spending cuts, according to a Dallas Federal Reserve survey released Friday.

 

The quarterly survey, which polled executives at 111 exploration and production companies and 59 oilfield services companies, reveals a domestic industry concerned about increasingly limited access to capital, stagnant prices and looming bankruptcies in the Permian and other US shale plays.

"The outlook for North American onshore seismic has worsened significantly," an executive at one oilfield services company said in the survey. "Our customers are only interested in spending dollars where absolutely necessary and only when that investment will produce a return in the very short term."

The survey said that contraction in the US oil sector may have lessened in Q4 2019, when compared with Q3, but about one-quarter of respondents forecast they will be unable to cover planned capital expenditures in 2020 if prices do not rise above $60/b.

"Continued weak oil prices and high costs are squeezing my margins," one E&P executive told the survey. "It is very difficult to find any projects that make sense economically."

In fact, only 8% of respondents to the survey said they expect to increase capital spending significantly in 2020, with 21% saying they plan to decrease spending significantly next year and 20% saying they will decrease spending slightly.

"We are having to divest properties in order to keep from dropping employees," one E&P executive said.

"We will be acquiring existing production, drilling only lease-required development wells, and will not be drilling any exploratory wells," another E&P executive said.

Operator bankruptcies have become a "major" worry in the sector, another E&P executive added.

"Many non-operated working interest owners are going non-consent, which is a sign of low oil and gas prices and/or lack of available capital," the executive said. "Oil and gas purchasers are generally non-responsive to questions; we can't reach them by phone, and automated web-based question input screens go many days before a response [comes], if any."

WEAK PRICES EXPECTED

On average, executives polled forecast WTI prices to be at $58.54/b by the end of 2020, but estimates varied from $48/b to $75/b. The executives were surveyed December 11-19, when WTI prices averaged $60.19/b.

In its latest Short-Term Energy Outlook, EIA forecast WTI to average $55.01/b in 2020, down from $56.74/b in 2019.

Executives in the Dallas Fed survey also forecast Henry Hub natural gas prices to average $2.51/MMBtu by the end of 2020, with forecasts ranging from $1.35/MMBtu to $4/MMBtu. Henry Hub prices averaged $2.28/MMBtu when the survey was conducted.

On average, executives were planning for an even lower WTI price in 2020. Most respondents said their companies were planning for WTI to average $54/b in 2020 as the basis for their capital spending plans next year.

According to the survey, 40% of executives said they would need WTI prices to average $55/b or more in 2020 in order for cash flow from operations to cover capital expenditures.

The most common complaint was limited access to capital.

"The risk appetites of the banks for energy lending are much lower," one E&P executive said.

Another compared Wall Street's interest in Permian production to an investment fad on par with savings and loans of the 1980s or subprime housing loans of 2005 through 2008.

"Now it is this total infatuation with shale at the exclusion of real money-making investments in conventional projects," the executive said. "The shortsightedness is destroying real value and makes this industry appear to be a bad investment."

 

_________________________________________________________________

 

 

"Life goes on, until it doesn't. But you know that." Eyes Wide Shut

[D Coyne + 305]

5 hours ago, Mike Shellman said:

Another observation from planet earth: in its first outing this well did not pay out drilling and completion costs; NDS is typically $8-10 a barrel less than WTI and the Williston has its own ugly flaring problems. The re-frac described likely cost $4-4.5MM over and above the original D&C costs; its now below 90 BOPD and on the express elevator down. In its entirety this well is unlikely to pay out. Refracs, re-injecting gas, vibrating the well, sending sound waves down it and/or sacrificing dead chickens and performing ritualistic dances dancing around the well head... all cost more money. Productivity is NOT the same as profitability. 

Thanks Mike.  The refracks might work on a few wells, but probably only about  2 to 4% of the wells already completed (as of Dec 2019) are likely to be successful, perhaps less, your guess would undoubtedly be better than mine. 

[Gerry Maddoux + 3,627]

1 minute ago, D Coyne said:

The refracks might work on a few wells, but probably only about  2 to 4% of the wells already completed (as of Dec 2019) are likely to be successful, perhaps less, your guess would undoubtedly be better than mine. 

I'm curious, Dennis, on what are you basing your 2-4% guestimate?

Most of the successful refracks have been done on wells pre-2010, those without horizontal liners. QEP and Conoco are just now launching a major refrack study performed on wells circa 2010-2014, with sliding sleeve horizontal liners. 

If that is successful, then this is a major development. They have a bit of preliminary success, but the rest of us don't know about it. I can only surmise that it looked promising or they wouldn't be going into a fairly substantial refrack phase. 

Much of this stuff is being done in the Bakken--well out of the eyes and ears of the majority of people. Maybe the Bakken doesn't matter, in the grand scheme of things. But it's also being done in the Eagle Ford too. It may or not work. 

Is the sentiment so dismal out there that we've taken to dismissing potential game-changers out of hand, before they've really been tested?

[D Coyne + 305]

2 minutes ago, Gerry Maddoux said:

I'm curious, Dennis, on what are you basing your 2-4% guestimate?

Most of the successful refracks have been done on wells pre-2010, those without horizontal liners. QEP and Conoco are just now launching a major refrack study performed on wells circa 2010-2014, with sliding sleeve horizontal liners. 

If that is successful, then this is a major development. They have a bit of preliminary success, but the rest of us don't know about it. I can only surmise that it looked promising or they wouldn't be going into a fairly substantial refrack phase. 

Much of this stuff is being done in the Bakken--well out of the eyes and ears of the majority of people. Maybe the Bakken doesn't matter, in the grand scheme of things. But it's also being done in the Eagle Ford too. It may or not work. 

Is the sentiment so dismal out there that we've taken to dismissing potential game-changers out of hand, before they've really been tested?

Gerry,

Simply a guess, I expect it is only likely to be profitable on about half of the top 5% of wells in terms of productivity that have been completed to date.  Based in part on impressions from comments made by those in the business.  I would pay attention to comments by people like Mike Shellman and others that are in the oil production business and not so much to my guesses.

[0R0 + 6,251]

9 hours ago, D Coyne said:

Less demand would result in lower oil prices and lower oil prices would result in lower output of unconventional oil than I have projected, thus a lower and earlier peak for World C+C output.

Cheaper costs for producing tight oil (and extra heavy) would have the reverse effect, meaning higher output of inconventional due to higher profitability ceteris paribus, this might offset lower prices due to low demand to some degree.

On balance the two effects might offset each other, impossible to predict.  The scenarios I have presented takes all of this into account and is my best guess as to how it will play out.  About a 50/50 chance output will be higher or lower than what I have presented.  Odds the scenarios will be exactly correct is about zero.  If a 10% window (+/-10%) around the scenario is created odds of being within that window are perhaps 40%, with a 30% chance output would be above or below the window.

Thanks for your view.

I was looking at recent vessels by shipping fuel looking for NG fueled ships and see that there are 120 odd ships out already, and 136 in orders. So the thinking is that there is going to be a conversion to NG engines (are there dual fuel marine engines like for generators?) for large vessels because it would cost so much less as there is a 3-5 fold difference in energy content cost based on spot prices the last half decade, and  LNG terminals are being built everywhere. Europe in particular. So looking forward a decade, I would expect most new ships to be NG fueled. If economical conversions are possible, then I would expect many of the younger existing ships would be converted. The EC is actually pushing the move to NG marine fuel for European fleets. As the economics should work favorably even if the energy content cost ratio goes to something more rational like 1.5-2 oil to NG.

https://www.eia.gov/electricity/monthly/update/resource_use.php#tabs_con-2

So my thinking is that shipping is going to go to LNG over time, for trains as well, Trucks? I don't know what prevented it from penetrating that market further than it has. That would push the energy content pricing further towards parity with oil - though considering that there is so much more gassy shale than oily shale, it should never actually reach parity.  What does the production trajectory look like with say a 3:1 ratio in 2025 going to a 2:1 in say 2035? Meaning that much more of the Permian revenue would be coming from the NG, as opposed to the 5:1 current ratio on the market and 10:1 at the well? 

[Gerry Maddoux + 3,627]

In a recent post, Day Trader pointed out how much thought and arguing has gone into taking sides on the shale issue. Something like this--a gentlemanly argument that heaves to one side, then lists to the other--usually occurs when the issue being discussed is either inflammatory, unduly subject to speculation, or both. I was struck by an excerpt from a piece that just minutes ago made its way as a headliner on oilprice.com:

The WSJ pointed to the example of Whiting Petroleum, which told investors that each of its wells drilled in North Dakota in 2015 would produce a cumulative 700,000 barrels of oil and gas over their full lifetimes. In early 2019, using data from Rystad, the WSJ found that the real figure might be more like 590,000 barrels. As 2019 comes to a close, the WSJ found that the most up-to-date data now pegs that estimate at 540,000 barrels. In other words, Whiting’s wells are on track to produce nearly a quarter less than previously thought.

I enjoy reading this particular author, but really, this is kind of silly. As Whiting told their original story of what they thought was forthcoming, if you consider the price of oil to be $50/bll, then a well with an EUR of 700,000 bll would make a total of $35M. But take the horrible devolvement of such a well all the way down to 540,000 blls; it still produces a paltry $27M. 

If you consider that 80% of that EUR occurred during the first year of life, that's a one-year payout of $21.6M. I'd be pleased to participate in as many of those as you can find. 

The simple truth is that we have all been dismayed by the poor production records of a certain subset of infill wells, in regard to their parent well production. The high prices paid for a lot of that property have caused wealth destruction that is staggering. Whiting was guilty of the same sort of greed: only theirs was paying an enormous price for Kodiac at the height of the frenzy. 

Folks, color me naive (and I may be), but I think there are going to be many good wells in the shale basins--the Permian, Eagle Ford, Bakken. There are going to be a few bad ones and most will be--like people--middle of the road. We have gone to the extremes in hubris, which almost always brings us back down to earth. I think 2020 is going to be a year of consolidation: many people are going to be hurt financially and many are going to be helped; lots of companies are going to fold and many new ones will rise to take their place. The price of oil will be set by supply/demand--always dancing on the knife edge of that 25-30 day inventory fluctuation. But it's just so silly to argue over whether a well is great or mediocre based on whether it produces an income of $27M vs $35M. 

[Old-Ruffneck + 1,242]

47 minutes ago, 0R0 said:

So my thinking is that shipping is going to go to LNG over time, for trains as well, Trucks? I don't know what prevented it from penetrating that market further than it has.

There is 1 (one) LNG terminal where I could fill my 5 truck at 30 miles away. So me thinks infrastructure best hurry up or diesel will still be king.

[D Coyne + 305]

32 minutes ago, Gerry Maddoux said:

In a recent post, Day Trader pointed out how much thought and arguing has gone into taking sides on the shale issue. Something like this--a gentlemanly argument that heaves to one side, then lists to the other--usually occurs when the issue being discussed is either inflammatory, unduly subject to speculation, or both. I was struck by an excerpt from a piece that just minutes ago made its way as a headliner on oilprice.com:

The WSJ pointed to the example of Whiting Petroleum, which told investors that each of its wells drilled in North Dakota in 2015 would produce a cumulative 700,000 barrels of oil and gas over their full lifetimes. In early 2019, using data from Rystad, the WSJ found that the real figure might be more like 590,000 barrels. As 2019 comes to a close, the WSJ found that the most up-to-date data now pegs that estimate at 540,000 barrels. In other words, Whiting’s wells are on track to produce nearly a quarter less than previously thought.

I enjoy reading this particular author, but really, this is kind of silly. As Whiting told their original story of what they thought was forthcoming, if you consider the price of oil to be $50/bll, then a well with an EUR of 700,000 bll would make a total of $35M. But take the horrible devolvement of such a well all the way down to 540,000 blls; it still produces a paltry $27M. 

If you consider that 80% of that EUR occurred during the first year of life, that's a one-year payout of $21.6M. I'd be pleased to participate in as many of those as you can find. 

The simple truth is that we have all been dismayed by the poor production records of a certain subset of infill wells, in regard to their parent well production. The high prices paid for a lot of that property have caused wealth destruction that is staggering. Whiting was guilty of the same sort of greed: only theirs was paying an enormous price for Kodiac at the height of the frenzy. 

Folks, color me naive (and I may be), but I think there are going to be many good wells in the shale basins--the Permian, Eagle Ford, Bakken. There are going to be a few bad ones and most will be--like people--middle of the road. We have gone to the extremes in hubris, which almost always brings us back down to earth. I think 2020 is going to be a year of consolidation: many people are going to be hurt financially and many are going to be helped; lots of companies are going to fold and many new ones will rise to take their place. The price of oil will be set by supply/demand--always dancing on the knife edge of that 25-30 day inventory fluctuation. But it's just so silly to argue over whether a well is great or mediocre based on whether it produces an income of $27M vs $35M. 

Gerry,

The net on 50/bo is perhaps 25 per barrel.  On natural gas it is perhaps $14/boe.

So you need to recalculate and keep in mind the time value of money, it takes 20 to 25 years to recover that 540 kboe. For a profitable well it should pay out in a minimum of 60 months.

For the average Permian basin 2017 well this requires 52/bo at wellhead and $1.50/MCF at wellhead for the well to just meet a DCF with annual discount rate of 10%.

Barely profitable when risk premium is considered.

[Gerry Maddoux + 3,627]

7 minutes ago, D Coyne said:

Barely profitable when risk premium is considered.

So after 34 pages, we're back to where Douglas Buckland began: "House of Cards."

Well, it may be barely profitable to them but it has been pretty good to me. Cheers, y'all. 

I've had all the fun I can stand in one year!

[D Coyne + 305]

9 hours ago, James Gautreau said:

I think it will happen this year. I think once the Permian decline manifests itself, the entire Permian infinite resource thing will evaporate and we will once again be in an era of scarcity. IMO 2020 will put pressure on the system. Iran will launch attacks against Saudi infrastructure, making its crude indispensable to world markets, and Trump will be forced to lift sanctions or risk oil prices going much higher. There is a confluence of events that will play out. EV's are coming on, but they're still round off error. When oil settles back down to between $100-200, EV sales will pick up considerably. 

James

Permian may continue to increase through at least 2025, more likely 2028.

World output will peak in 2026 or 2026 at that point oil prices will rise to perhaps 150 per barrel in 2018$.

That is my guess just one of an infinite number of possibilities. 

[Guest]

21 minutes ago, Gerry Maddoux said:

So after 34 pages, we're back to where Douglas Buckland began: "House of Cards."

DING, gold star for Gerry please.

Thankyou for strengthening my point Gerry! 

Happy New Year buddy  x  ❤️

Read this instead, it will save you some time ...

 

Shale is great

No it isn't

Yeah it is, look at the stats

I don't agree with those stats

No it's great, I'm under 40

Well I'm over 40 and disagree

There are new technologies

What are they?

Did I mention shale is great?

No seriously what are they?

These ones ...

They aren't new technologies!

No they are, trust me

They are just renamed but pretty much the same technologies

But look at the stats

Those stats are nonsense

What about this presentation from shale people?

That's rubbish too

Shale is great

Nah it isn't

Yeah it is, look at the stats

This thread is ridiculous

Then why are you here DT?

It's comical seeing the circles you are all in, and how no one has changed their mind one bit. Why are you here?

I like circles ... and shale, did I mention it's great?

Do you have stats?

Yes, here you go

I don't agree with those

ZZZZZZZZZZZ

 

55,000 views. F**king incredible. 

Edited December 31, 2019 by Guest

[Rob Kramer + 696]

When WTI 5yr is selected in oil price page 15' to Oct 17' wti was low 40- low 50 and not everyone gets full wti so at a 40$ average there is very little room for error. Your looking at 21M if it's all oil. 10M for drilling and completion so 11M left. 540,000x2$ pipeline fee. 1M so 10M left say 5% interest on the 10M loan to drill that doesn't get paid (I dont see and debt free companies) so -500k leaving 9.5 M royalty (10$/bbl?) 5.5M rounded   so 4M left the  tax and administrative pay.... I would have to guess 1M for those so mabey 3 mill profit ? One bad hole and your 3.3 holes to break even. Is this close ? I'm probably on the low side of costs. 

[jdc88 + 2]

In the article it mentioned barrels i take it they were using BOE rather than barrels of oil which could change the numbers considerably .....

[remake it + 288]

4 hours ago, Gerry Maddoux said:

So after 34 pages, we're back to where Douglas Buckland began: "House of Cards."

Well, it may be barely profitable to them but it has been pretty good to me. Cheers, y'all. 

I've had all the fun I can stand in one year!

This must be one of the best threads on oil & gas anywhere and your comments - along with a good many others - have provided those of us that play with the numbers insights that are rare so it would be good for at least this reader to see a new year resolution that had you return in 2020 and maybe see if Mr Buckman folds his hand once the 52 card deck has been played.

[PE Scott + 563]

4 hours ago, DayTrader said:

55,000 views. F**king incredible. 

To be fair, it's a pretty hot topic in these parts. 

Also, there is some useful information if you filter through enough.

Overall, though...entertainment value for the win. 

Cheers, DT! I hope you and everyone else makes many many monies in 2020! 

 

 

[PE Scott + 563]

19 minutes ago, remake it said:

Well, it may be barely profitable to them but it has been pretty good to me. Cheers, y'all. 

It's all a matter if perspective I guess. The shale patch has treated me well and challenged me along the way. I've enjoyed cutting budgets and trying to increase margins in a tight market. Many of the operators I've worked with have done quite well. The competition has been good, I think. But that microscopic view isnt indicative of the entire industry, I'll admit.

[Coffeeguyzz + 454]

Jdc

If by 'the article' you were referring to the chart from Bruce Oksol that Mr. Maddoux posted, those are barrels of oil, not boe.

Looking at the chart, left to right, you have days online that month's production, oil produced, oil sold, produced water, gas produced, gas sold, and gas flared.

In 4 1/2 months following refrac, this well produced ~182k oil, 190 MM cf gas, sold ~180 MM cf gas, flared balance. Last Director's Cut - October - gas price received at Northern Border was $1.73/mmbtu ... down from previous month's $2.28.

There is an EXTREMELY important data point revealed here that gets NO attention whasoever in the media ... the astonishing ~230,000 barrels of water coming up over this extended period of time.

There was another high producing Bakken well that Mr. Oksol posted a few weeks back that showed way over 400,000 barrels produced water in about 14 months ... along with VERY high oil production.

What is taking place, seemingly under the radar, is that operators have been holding the formation under elevated pressures via frac fluid (400k/600k barrels) and slowly turning inline with enormous pressure driving the hydrocarbons to the wellbore.

Possibly the use of non damaging HVFR is allowing this to happen.

I don't know and there is virtually no discussion in these matters.

For years, operators would enable flowback in the 7 to 12 days after completion to remove the bulk of the frac fluid.

In the Bakken, it don't work thatta way anymore.

[AcK + 50]

On 12/30/2019 at 6:33 AM, Anthony Okrongly said:

Let's see... 

#1 - World fertility is dropping- even in emerging markets such as Brazil and India.  There is a great book on the subject called "Empty Planet." Very well researched and documented. However people dying has more impact on oil and natural gas than people being born, particularly for the next 20 years.  And people are dying at a much slower rate as well. No impact for 15 years at least.

 

World population growth - when did that matter.

For obvious reasons stated above, world population growth has whittled down to just about 1-1.2% per annum the decade gone up. How much did Crude oil consumption increase - just about 15mbd, faster than world population growth. Why? In a word China, which saw likely the largest expansion in Middle Class population in a decade ever.

Yeah population growth matters - of Middle Class population. Given vast swathes of Africa and India/South Asia are yet nowhere near a true Middle Class population (despite the best efforts of consultants to fudge the #s), the future could be interesting...

[AcK + 50]

20 hours ago, Mike Shellman said:

Another observation from planet earth: in its first outing this well did not pay out drilling and completion costs; NDS is typically $8-10 a barrel less than WTI and the Williston has its own ugly flaring problems. The re-frac described likely cost $4-4.5MM over and above the original D&C costs; its now below 90 BOPD and on the express elevator down. In its entirety this well is unlikely to pay out. Refracs, re-injecting gas, vibrating the well, sending sound waves down it and/or sacrificing dead chickens and performing ritualistic dances dancing around the well head... all cost more money. Productivity is NOT the same as profitability. 

Hey Mike,

You are right "in the entirety the well did not pay out".

We have a concept in finance cost called sunk cost. The initial well was drilled >10years old when the entire fracking game was in its infancy. That P&L is a lost cause anyway.

The question we fin types ask is whether the incremental capex is worth it. US$4-5mn for US$10-12.5mn revenue (250K production, still continuing... US$40-50 realization) seems to hit the hurdle rate!

[AcK + 50]

20 hours ago, Gerry Maddoux said:

So are the 14 blocks off Guyana. They're coming soon.

Guyana is certainly coming, but not soon. Liza Project 1 is operational (120Kbd).

Project 2 is coming mid-2022 - that is yet long way away (220Kbd)...

https://corporate.exxonmobil.com/locations/guyana/guyana-project-overview#lizaPhase2ProjectDescription

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

17 hours ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

The only time anyone changes their mind is if they have been drug through the mud screaming, get tired of eating mud down their pie hole and decide to close their yapper.  Open their eyes and notice they are laying in a mud puddle 1 inch deep. 

 

Nope, around 2015, I was horrified at the thought of Trump being U.S. President.  I started a thread on the now defunct Oilpro forum, roughly titled "How would the global oil & gas industry react if Trump is elected President" and I railed pretty hard against Trump.

Clearly, I have changed my mind since then.

I would happily post the thread, but the legal mess from Rigzone required that the Oilpro server be disconnected, and all articles, threads, comments, photos etc on the Oilpro forum be removed from the internet.

Apparently the judge blocked the attempts by a few of us old timers from Oilpro to restart with an Oilpro redux.  Judge ruled it was verboten.

Anyone here that was also on Oilpro around 2015 could probably confirm my scathing comments about Trump and his views on oil & gas back then.

Also, back then, I was gung ho on fracking.  These days, not so much, thanks mostly to hard facts and info from @Mike Shellman Rune Likvern, and Enno Peters aka @shaleprofile .

 

tl;dr, people can be persuaded to change their minds when presented with new information.

 

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

20 hours ago, Mike Shellman said:

Another observation from planet earth: in its first outing this well did not pay out drilling and completion costs; NDS is typically $8-10 a barrel less than WTI and the Williston has its own ugly flaring problems. The re-frac described likely cost $4-4.5MM over and above the original D&C costs; its now below 90 BOPD and on the express elevator down. In its entirety this well is unlikely to pay out. Refracs, re-injecting gas, vibrating the well, sending sound waves down it and/or sacrificing dead chickens and performing ritualistic dances dancing around the well head... all cost more money. Productivity is NOT the same as profitability. 

Hey Mike, never under estimate the power of ritual dancing and dead chickens on the drill floor!

Probably as effective as some of this ‘new technology’ we keep hearing about, yet never see.

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

The birthrates are not even considering declining in most of Africa, Asia, South America and the Middle East. These are the regions that really don’t give a damn about any climate nonsense and just want to increase their standards of living. This is what will drive demand for oil in the long term.

[James Gautreau + 86]

The fuse has been lit in Iraq. There's a slow burn that's going to explode. Trump will be faced with the ultimate irony-invade a Middle East country and start a useless war that he always rails against or watch oil prices skyrocket and his presidency go down in flames. If America does invade Iraq again I think Iran will join the battle, just to send oil prices higher. That's what Trump does not understand, nor does his base. When it comes time to get re-elected, you need friends and allies, and not just Russia. Practically the whole world wants Trump gone. All of Nato. Most of the Middle East. China. All of them will play their geopolitical cards to knock Trump from power.