FracTech is still highly thought of to the engineers I've talked with. Deep pocket backing does help. I was thinking CalFrac may close up and head back north, but there is not much up there to do as well. I have some friends at CalFrac, so I'm glad to see them alive and still kicking...if only for today.

US shale is not only undercutting OPEC pricing, but the longer the OPEC production limits stay in place, the more market share the US is poaching, as well--which is great for US producer's profitability, even at the current low prices. I love it.

Sic 'Em!

I expect ProFrac to put the hurtin on FracTech before long.

http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN18E2Q4

Service prices on the rise?

No question they are.

Volvo is on the move and sounds like Ford could be as well after letting their CEO go.

https://www.greenbiz.com/article/electric-city-volvo-unveils-vision-clean-cars-buses-and-more

https://futurism.com/volvo-says-that-they-will-stop-making-diesel-engines-thanks-to-tesla/

Comeby! said:

---

Correct.I just out of a meeting with a major PE company where they showed a slide that had a base production decline of 20% in 2005 vs 2016 of 34%. They also mentioned than US oil demand is only increasing 1% per year. While 20% to 34% decline is significant, we arent talking about the same well count or total production. When looking at the shale oil production data, it's hard to argue that something has to give. Looking at the shale vs legacy (base) production, the base decline has been offset by the shale oil however it doesnt take too many more shale oil rigs to make the total oil production jump.

---

I found this interesting and thought you might too...

Quote:

---

I would emphasize a major factor that is often overlooked. Decline Curve Analysis (DCA) was premised on steady-state (or pseudo-) flow, and boundry-dominated (radial or pseuod-radial) flow. In the words of the Petrowiki:
"The basic assumption in this procedure is that whatever [factors] controlled the trend of a curve in the past will continue to govern its trend in the future in a uniform manner."
The problem you will have with tight reservoirs is that they are not in steady-state boundary-dominated flow for a very long time. Instead, they are in transient flow. When you try to perform DCA for wells that are in transient flow you are taking a risk, because your analysis is fundamentally flawed. Their behavior is heavily influenced by non-Darcy flow, and they are definitely not draining an "unchanging area." Their drainage pattern is expanding and reshaping itself (bi-linear, linear, elliptical, then pseudo-radial).
Tight reservoirs can take two years to reach conditions that are conducive to DCA. If you perform DCA during the transient flow period and it turns out to be accurate, you were just lucky. Many companies went bust because wells didn't "break-over" (or end their steep early decline) when they forecast them to.

---

Offshore O&G is still falling - no bottom yet.

Two vessel providers - GulfMark and Tidewater - filed Chapter 11 last week.

Yep, but unconventional reservoirs are a whole other animal from a DCA perspective. In my plots I'm just looking at the supply glut trend and alarmingly unmoved oil price. I expect a correction soon.

Aggiesincebirth said:

---

Volvo is on the move and sounds like Ford could be as well after letting their CEO go.

https://www.greenbiz.com/article/electric-city-volvo-unveils-vision-clean-cars-buses-and-more

https://futurism.com/volvo-says-that-they-will-stop-making-diesel-engines-thanks-to-tesla/

---

When will we hit peak lithium?

An interesting take I read the other day:

Zinc battery change

Using Zinc and changing the way it is structured in the battery can get the battery to equal most LiON batteries. They tested their battery and could use in a car for 6.8 years, everyday.

Another look is that you could make cheap/easy storage of electrical power. Another plus of Zinc is that you use aqueous solutions for the electrolyte solution, not flammable ones like LiON. So the fire risk goes away.

All this is just a 'simple' change to the structure of zinc, leaving the rest as we normally manufacture it today.

~egon

like Rearden Metal

I recently attended an Exxon outloook for the next 25 years. Keep in mind they are diversified and would quickly move to whatever energy source showed a future promise. Their stance is that there is currently no comparison from the energy combustibility of hydrocarbons at current price levels and even at significantly higher price levels. They had wind/solar/battery slowly advancing but due mostly to government subsidies which could soon be null and void. They do foresee a big role for natural gas to play in the next 25-50 years.

ranchag04 said:

---

I recently attended an Exxon outloook for the next 25 years. Keep in mind they are diversified and would quickly move to whatever energy source showed a future promise. Their stance is that there is currently no comparison from the energy combustibility of hydrocarbons at current price levels and even at significantly higher price levels. They had wind/solar/battery slowly advancing but due mostly to government subsidies which could soon be null and void. They do foresee a big role for natural gas to play in the next 25-50 years.

---

If only they would make that information available to the public..

http://cdn.exxonmobil.com/~/media/global/files/outlook-for-energy/2017/2017-outlook-for-energy.pdf

I was about to say, I thought I remembered Exxon saying that solar/wind had closed a lot of the gap even in a non-subsidized environment.

The numbers in the presentation look like an optimistic best case to me, but a normal technology improvement curve would probably show cost parity occurring within the next few years. Resource limitations especially on hydro/wind and logistical concerns on all the still a factor compared to the supply and reliability of hydrocarbons.

I suspect that natgas is about to get hit hard by solar in much of the country. Distributed power collection with home/business panels supplemented by associated gas supply could kill gas drilling in many basins.

compare the residential commercial maintenance hassles associated with the existing infrastructure to installing brand new panels for the purpose of what exactly?

peak shaving?

I mean sounds good on paper but the reliable practical tech has got to be more than a few years out

We aren't even seeing yuppie money to burn early adopters

cone said:

---

and i'm just a moron working in LNG (so of course this is viewed as self-serving, and i guess it is)

but electric cars are a thing (and that i'm convinced of as compared to the efficacy of renewable tech), so, projecting that out, you're going to need something substantive to meet the skyrocketing electrical power demand

and since we have no political appetite to go for nuclear infrastructure and coal is seen as too dirty for polite company (pfft), natural gas is the only real practical bridge fuel.

it checks all the boxes. infrastructure, supply, perception, reliability, energy density, mature tech

---

.....and NG is comparatively clean, too.

Renewables can be regionally useful in the US depending on the reliability of whichever natural energy source they exploit, but can't make a serious commercial dent in carbon-based energy until large-scale storage and national transmission infrastructure issues are resolved.

It's coming, but no time soon, and traditional energy's recent return to its historical price band and its seemingly ever-increasing abundance will further impede renewables' rise.

Any idea how much increase in electrical generation capacity is needed for a % replacement of vehicles with EV?

i don't know but i do know that joules are joules are joules

I think (in my mind) a great solution is running NG pipes to every house.

In your backyard, you have a fuel cell that converts NG to power, on demand. There is no real worry of "power outages", since you generate what you need. Also allows for using NG for cooking/cleaning/heating/etc.

Or have distributed fuel cell/generators in neighborhoods. Remove high tension power lines. Not because they are ugly or anything; improves efficiency if you make them local. NG pipelines tend not to lose pressure and are up during inclement weather.



Another thought on car batteries:
Instead of needing to install a bunch of batteries to stabilize the grid, by putting them in cars, you hit 2 birds with 1 stone. During the work-day, cars sitting downtown in a garage, hooked up to chargers, are your peak-power dampeners. When the car gets home and plugged back in, once again you have the use of your storage devices.


Yes, HC have some of the best energy density outside fusion/fission. That's why you have fat in your body. But part of the search of battery research is to close the gap. I would like to see a really cool big capacitor. Mostly because I want to see it shorted and drained quickly in a controlled environment.

~egon

BiochemAg97 said:

---

Any idea how much increase in electrical generation capacity is needed for a % replacement of vehicles with EV?

---

Let's give it a go.
263.6 million registered passenger vehicles in the U.S.
Toyota Prius - 133 MPGe = 45 miles / 100 kWh
Equivalent size Honda Civic = 32 miles / gallon
->71.1 kWh/gal

678 average total gallons per vehicle in 2010
178,721,000,000 total gallons by passenger vehicles

->12,709,000,000,000 kWh needed

This will not be delivered uniformly. When will people be charging their vehicles? Probably most at once after work so it the grid has to support a spike during those times. Like "tea time" in the U.K.

Martin Q. Blank said:

---

BiochemAg97 said:

---

Any idea how much increase in electrical generation capacity is needed for a % replacement of vehicles with EV?

---

Let's give it a go.
263.6 million registered passenger vehicles in the U.S.
Toyota Prius - 133 MPGe = 45 miles / 100 kWh
Equivalent size Honda Civic = 32 miles / gallon
->71.1 kWh/gal

678 average total gallons per vehicle in 2010
178,721,000,000 total gallons by passenger vehicles

->12,709,000,000,000 kWh needed

This will not be delivered uniformly. When will people be charging their vehicles? Probably most at once after work so it the grid has to support a spike during those times. Like "tea time" in the U.K.

---

So 12000 TWh to replace all vehicles.

Total US electricity consumption in 2014 was about 4000 TWh.

Somehow I don't see the need for HC going away anytime soon.

Dr. Doctor said:

---

Another thought on car batteries:
Instead of needing to install a bunch of batteries to stabilize the grid, by putting them in cars, you hit 2 birds with 1 stone. During the work-day, cars sitting downtown in a garage, hooked up to chargers, are your peak-power dampeners. When the car gets home and plugged back in, once again you have the use of your storage devices.

---

What's the theory here. Steal a few percent of the battery capacity back, or a deeper drawdown? Not going to be super happy if I can't make it home because the power grid drew down my battery and didn't have time to charge it before I left early from the office.

honest query

is streaming video more or less power efficient than cable?

cuz think of everyone getting home from work, plugging in their car to charge for four hours, and turning on netflix

all within a 6 hour window nationwide

cone said:

---

honest query

is streaming video more or less power efficient than cable?

cuz think of everyone getting home from work, plugging in their car to charge for four hours, and turning on netflix

all within a 6 hour window nationwide

---

the data has to be stored somewhere and transmitted somehow.

cone said:

---

honest query

is streaming video more or less power efficient than cable?

cuz think of everyone getting home from work, plugging in their car to charge for four hours, and turning on netflix

all within a 6 hour window nationwide

---

Not sure but the much bigger concern is people turning on their A/C and major appliances when they get home. This is why it all comes down to energy storage. Renewable energy (especially behind the meter) just exacerbates the huge swings in energy demand that strain our infrastructure and blow up consumer prices. There are some interesting long term ideas, like the EV batteries as a buffer idea mentioned above, but in the short term these energy sources are actually going to cause more strain to our energy infrastructure and make inefficiency worse. The technology will come around, but at this point it's more about finding solutions that are sustainable in the looooong long term.

cone said:

---

honest query

is streaming video more or less power efficient than cable?

cuz think of everyone getting home from work, plugging in their car to charge for four hours, and turning on netflix

all within a 6 hour window nationwide

---

Cable (cox, time warner, suddenlink, whatever) is a big pipe where every channel is sent into your home simultaneously. Cable may have adopted IPTV tech (see below) to expand capacity beyond what your coax can handle.

Satellite works on the same principle with everything beamed at your house and you select what you want to watch.

IPTV (Uverse and FIOS) sends only the channels you are watching to your house. Your set top box joins a broadcast IP stream and an upstream switch knows what traffic should be going to your house.

Streaming TV (DIRECTV now, etc) are similar to IPTV with join getting a common stream. Or they can just send an individual stream to each customer (doesn't scale as well).

Video on demand (Netflix/amazon/YouTube) requires a storage somewhere and then you select what you want to watch and when, so the server may be sending multiple streams of the same show.


There are a lot of ways you can improve the efficiency if you control the STB and the network that may not work for an on demand provider like Netflix or amazon.

If you are thinking

cone said:

---

compare the residential commercial maintenance hassles associated with the existing infrastructure to installing brand new panels for the purpose of what exactly?

peak shaving?

I mean sounds good on paper but the reliable practical tech has got to be more than a few years out

We aren't even seeing yuppie money to burn early adopters

---

Solar panels on residential and commercial (especially warehouse) roofs aren't that rare anymore in some parts of the country. There are a few in my Texas neighborhood, and I see a lot more in places like Los Angeles. The bottom falling out of natgas took the steam out of the adoption rate, but the panels are also improving in reliability, efficiency, and price as subsidies decline.

Mostly though, I think associated gas is going to keep natgas so low that it's barely worth drilling for on its own in most basics, so any marginal reduction in demand hurts pretty badly. Gotta be a wet barrel.

As for the economic case, as more warm regions go to demand-based pricing, the peak shaving you mention makes more sense. Higher rates when it's hot, which is when you need more power for ac. Better financing plans, basically paying a subscription fee for maintenance and repair/replacement, will likely become more widespread over time. Improved battery tech and integrated gadgetry means you will be able to automatically store power you generate when it's sunny but $ rates are relatively low. No transmission loss.

I'm in O&G, none of this is good for me, but ultimately I think distributed "smart" solar is going to take a big bite out of power generation. However, if something like Dr. Doctor's distributed fuel cell generation takes off, that could be very good for natgas.

Ag2012 said:

---

cone said:

---

honest query

is streaming video more or less power efficient than cable?

cuz think of everyone getting home from work, plugging in their car to charge for four hours, and turning on netflix

all within a 6 hour window nationwide

---

Not sure but the much bigger concern is people turning on their A/C and major appliances when they get home. This is why it all comes down to energy storage. Renewable energy (especially behind the meter) just exacerbates the huge swings in energy demand that strain our infrastructure and blow up consumer prices. There are some interesting long term ideas, like the EV batteries as a buffer idea mentioned above, but in the short term these energy sources are actually going to cause more strain to our energy infrastructure and make inefficiency worse. The technology will come around, but at this point it's more about finding solutions that are sustainable in the looooong long term.

---

Interesting graph. Looks to me like the smart thermostats are creating bigger swings in demand. Reduce AC usage while everyone is away, and they all kick back on as people come home.

As a side, this is also an issue with the adoption of smart appliances (HVAC included) that the power company can reach in an turn down/off during peak demand or that adjust usage based on demand pricing. Right when I want my AC to be cooling my house for when I get back home, the power grid wants me to lower the usage and is raising the set point so it doesn't cool my house down.

BiochemAg97 said:

---

Ag2012 said:

---

cone said:

---

honest query

is streaming video more or less power efficient than cable?

cuz think of everyone getting home from work, plugging in their car to charge for four hours, and turning on netflix

all within a 6 hour window nationwide

---

Not sure but the much bigger concern is people turning on their A/C and major appliances when they get home. This is why it all comes down to energy storage. Renewable energy (especially behind the meter) just exacerbates the huge swings in energy demand that strain our infrastructure and blow up consumer prices. There are some interesting long term ideas, like the EV batteries as a buffer idea mentioned above, but in the short term these energy sources are actually going to cause more strain to our energy infrastructure and make inefficiency worse. The technology will come around, but at this point it's more about finding solutions that are sustainable in the looooong long term.

---

Interesting graph. Looks to me like the smart thermostats are creating bigger swings in demand. Reduce AC usage while everyone is away, and they all kick back on as people come home.

As a side, this is also an issue with the adoption of smart appliances (HVAC included) that the power company can reach in an turn down/off during peak demand or that adjust usage based on demand pricing. Right when I want my AC to be cooling my house for when I get back home, the power grid wants me to lower the usage and is raising the set point so it doesn't cool my house down.

---

This chart is from the California grid operator and represents net load served by the grid. Midday loads have dropped dramatically due to behind-the-meter solar which displaces grid resources; on-system generation exceeds on-system load in some hours. Real time power for those hours goes negative, meaning that resources that can't ramp down -- wind, baseload fossil, Diablo Canyon, hydro -- pays to inject energy into the grid. Dispatchable gas fired generation gets called on to ramp hard as the sun sets. It's not a sustainable situation.

I work in midstream natural gas, so I'm familiar with gas injection, but how does injecting into the power grid work? How is power stored? A quick google search only yielded 'energy storage facilities'.