Category Archives: fossil fuels

Strike Two For Cuba And Gulf Of Mexico Oil


The latest deep-water drilling operation off the West Coast of Cuba has been called off. The exploratory well by PC Gulf, a subsidiary of Malaysia’ Petronas and Gazpomneft of Russia, has been declared not commercially viable.  In May, Repsol’s said their drilling in this field was a failure.

Cuba, as noted in the previous report about this potential oil field, badly needs the money that they hope to obtain from this drilling.  They are also worried about the fate of Hugo Chavez of Venezuela, as he has been supplying Cuba with below market priced crude.  If he dies or is deposed, it could be a real problem for Cuba.

Some estimates of the crude in the field being explored are as high as 9 billion barrels. The field is in ultra deepwater.  Ultra deepwater is defined as where the seafloor at the drilling site is 5000 ft (1524 m) or more below the sea surface. The PC Gulf well was drilled to 15,300 feet below the seafloor.  The lease cost for a platform to accomplish the drilling is about $500,000 per day according to a report by the Associated Press.  There is only one such unit now available for the Cuban drilling and it will be used by the next company to try their luck—-the Venezuelan state oil company PDVSA.

cbdakota

Gasoline Price and Vehicle Fuel Economy Correlate


The WardsAuto Fuel Economy Index compares the cost of gasoline opposite the average fuel-economy (miles per gallon—mpg) of new vehicles sold each month.   The new vehicle fuel economy peaked in March at 24.1mpg.  It fell to 23.6 mpg in June, the last data point available.  This drop corresponds to the drop in gasoline prices over the past three months.  The chart shown below shows a strong correlation of fuel price and t the fuel economy the car buyers are settling for.

Wards cautions to not assume that the car buyer’s are fickle but it is hard not to draw that conclusion.  Wards cites fleet purchases of Toyota vehicles in March as Toyota was trying to catch up on the losses they encountered in 2011 when the tsunami shutdown a lot of Japanese industry.

Wards notes that the vehicles fuel economy by region looked this way in June: Overall, Asian auto makers combined for a 26 mpg (9.0 L/100 km) rating, followed by the European brands’ 22.8 mpg (10.3 L/100 km) and the Detroit Three’s 21.2 mpg (11.1 L/100 km).

The Detroit Big Three do move a lot of pickup trucks so that may explain the differences in fuel economy.

To read more click here.

cbdakota

Volt And Leaf July Sales And How Hybrids Are Outselling EVs


Nissan Leaf July sales fell to 395 from 535 in the previous month.   The Volt sales were up slightly in July at 1849 against the 1760 in the previous month.  According to Edmunds.com, plug-in hybrids are outselling EVs by 3 to 1.   The public’s choice of hybrids has not gone unnoticed by the automobile manufacturers.  From thedailygreen.com the following are the 2012 offerings of hybrids:

2012 HYBRIDS BY MANUFACTURER-PRICE AND ECONOMY

MODEL PRICE $ CITY ECONO MPG HIGHWAY ECONO MPG
Toyota Prius 23,520 51 48
Toyota Prius V 27,160 42 38
Chevy Volt 40,280 95 90
Ford Fusion Hybrid 28,600 41 36
Hyundai Sonata Hybrid 25,795 35 40
Infiniti M35h 50,000-55,000 27 32
Toyota Camry Hybrid 27,050 31 35
Honda Civic Hybrid 24,050 44 44
Honda Insight 19,000 40 43
Chevrolet Tahoe Hybrid 51,665 20 23
Volkswagen Touareg Supercharged Hybrid 61,110 20 24
Toyota Highlander Hybrid 38,140 28 28
Ford Escape Hybrid 32,320 34 31
Porsche Cayenne Hybrid 67,700 20 24
Porsche Panamera S Hybrid 95,000 18 27
Lexus CT 200h 29,120 43 40
Lexus GS 450h 58,950 22 25
Lexus HS 250h 36,330 35 34
Mercedes-Benz S400 Hybrid 91,000 19 26
Mercedes-Benz ML450 Hybrid 55,790 16 20
Lincoln MKZ Hybrid 34,645 41 36
BMW ActiveHybrid7 97,000-101,000 17 24

About this chart, things change.  Prices and EPA miles per gallon (MPG) may be different, as time has passed since the chart data was assembled.

To find out how well these vehicles are selling, would require more time than I want to put in.  A reasonable guess is that not a big volume for most of them.  But on the upside, Edmunds reports that Toyota is on track to sell 200,000 Prius sub-brand cars in the US this year.  That is impressive.

cbdakota

 

Chicago Heat Wave–Wind Farms Fail To Provide Power


Chicago, Illinois and the surrounding areas of Central and Northern Illinois experienced very high temperatures in the first and second weeks of July.   One day topped out at 104 F with air conditioners going full out. It is at times like these that electrical utilities experience their highest demand.   They were up to the task although one segment of those utilities that was not.  The segment that flunked the test was the wind farms.  High temperatures and low temperatures most often are accompanied by near zero wind.   Wind farms are most likely to be unproductive at the times when they are most needed.

(picture byYellow Dandelions © 2009)   

Lets look at what happened during the heat wave based on the research by Jonathan Lesser

“Illinois wind generated less than five percent of its capacity during the record breaking heat last week, producing only an average of 120 MW of electricity from the over 2,700 MW installed.  On July 6th, when the demand for electricity in northern Illinois and Chicago averaged 22,000 MW, the average amount of wind power available during the day was a virtually nonexistent four MW, less than the output of two large wind turbines, or about and enough power to operate 4,000 blow dryers. In fact, the most electricity wind produced on any day during last week’s heat wave was an average of 320 MW on July 3rd, or about 10 percent of the capacity of the wind turbines built in Illinois, when temperatures soared to 103 degrees. Wind power’s failure during last week’s extended heat wave is no fluke. When I performed a similar analysis last summer, the results were the same: the hotter the weather and greater customers’ demand for electricity, the less electricity produced from wind.”  To read all of Lesser’s report click here.

The Department of Energy’s Energy Information Administration (EIA) calls wind farm-produced energy “non-dispatchable” which means it is too unreliable to be scheduled for use as a supply to the gird that distributes electricity to the many users.  State laws often require the grid to use this alternative form of energy.  So in order assure the capability of the gird to supply electricity to their customers, they require backup power supply for every MW of installed wind farm power. This backup is typically provided by natural gas turbine power generating facilities.  These natural gas turbines are kept hot ––ready to turn on quickly.  When the wind quits blowing, the lost wind farm produced electricity must be matched by a new supply.  The natural gas turbines are quickly put into service.  This means that wind farms capacity must be matched through the expenditure of additional monies for natural gas power generation facilities.  Thus the wind farm generated power is not a primary source of power. It is supplemental form of supply.  Think about that.  Installation of wind farms (and for that matter the even more expensive solar power) are not primary sources but rather supplementary.  In plain English, electricity generated by fossil fuel and nuclear power are the primary sources and the expensive, unreliable, non-dispatchable wind farms are supplemental.  Every day you are paying for the installation of more wind farms, which are never likely to be the primary.   Time you made the politician and their cronies answer why they are foisting this on you.

cbdakota

 

Volt: Refund Policy Allows For Tax Credit Abuse and Other Issues


General Motors (GM) provides a 60-day money back policy for all Chevy models.   So if you buy a Volt you can claim a $7500 federal tax credit.  Then 59 days later, return it and get your money back.  But, you may get to keep the tax credit.  According to a posting by Mark Modica, the IRS tax form for plug-in vehicle credit does not have a minimum time requirement for the buyer to own their qualified vehicle.   Ok, so it is doubtful that anyone will buy a series of Volts in order to accumulate tax credits.  But this is just another glitch in the Volt epic.

So how is the Volt doing now as opposed to how GM felt about the Volt in the days before the first sales?  In a November, 2010 posting in WardsAuto the following was reported:

In 2012, the automaker plans to reach production capacity for the Volt at its Detroit-Hamtramck, MI, assembly plant here with about 45,000 units annually for U.S. consumption. Including export to markets such as Canada and China, capacity could reach 60,000 cars annually.

Well, they are missing the 2012 sales forecast by a wide margin.  Sales were not too good even when gasoline prices approached $4 per gallon earlier this year (2012). Will it get any better if the price of gasoline continues it’s current decline?

And in that same WardsAuto posting the following was reported:

General Motors Co. executives call the new-for-’11 Chevrolet Volt a key first step in the electrification of all its products, while also confirming long-held assumptions the car will not make money in the first years of production. However, the typical all-new vehicle program for an automaker averages $1 billion. Given its sophisticated technology, the Volt likely will cost much more to develop, build and sell.

It can’t be making money now if 45,000 units are just breakeven.  Somehow a lot of cars will have to be sold to amortize the $1 billion cost of development.

cbdakota

 

Why Does The US Have The Lead On Shale Gas?


The United States (US) is now ranked as the world’s leading producer of natural gas.  The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) says that this lead is partly due to the abundant shale resources we have—though many other countries have those too.   Partly due to our technological leadership in developing hydraulic fracturing (fracking)—but these techniques are known all over the world now.  The edge is really a result of private ownership of subsurface mineral resources.   Almost no major country recognizes full subsurface private property rights, except the US.  Quoting from the WJS: “….this blessing of American jurisprudence helps explain one of the few bright patches in the Obama economy—the booming production of shale gas and increasingly, oil.”

There is a profit motive driving the property owner as well as the driller. Typically the property owners get a royalty checks from the driller representing a percentage of the worth of the value of oil produced. Often the royalty percentage is 12.5%.  (My home in Texas was built well after the East Texas oil boom.  By then all the subsurface mineral rights had been sold/leased and my deed spelled out that I had no ownership. There were number of wells back in the woods behind my house. Someone was getting royalty checks, but alas, it was not I.)

But many people in North Dakota (Bakken Shale) and Pennsylvania (Marcellus Shale), for example, have leased their mineral rights and natural gas is being produced.  And the landowners are getting royalty checks!

France and Bulgaria have banned fracking. Because these governments own the subsurface property rights, there has been no pushback from the landowners.   In other countries where fracking has not been banned, the governments are moving at a glacial pace.

Quoting the WSJ: “ ….the deeper lesson is that this is a revolution that came about not through government planning or foresight, but through a combination of individual risk-taking and private property. “

Thank heavens for these privately owned resources.  Unfortunately, favorable outcomes are not happening where the US government has control of natural gas and oil.  The Obama Administration puts up road blocks in the way of the exploitation of resources found in places like  Off-Shore, Federal lands, and the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve.

cbdakota

OPEC Provides Low Priced Fuel Internally


The price of crude for the residents within OPEC states is lower than the export price.  As these states are mostly dictatorships, it is one way to placate the ruled.  But it seems that the low prices provides the residents no incentive to be frugal.  In the last decade, Saudi Arabia internal use has nearly doubled.  According to Reuters:

”Consumption has trebled in Angola, doubled in Ecuador and climbed 55 percent in Venezuela. OPEC members also seem to be becoming less efficient. Oil usage per head is up 24 percent since 2000, Deutsche (Bank) says, while it is flat for the globe as a whole.

For importers, the uneven treatment is costly. The wasteful consumption in exporting countries reduces the supply available for the global market, presumably pushing up the price. It also cuts into the potential reserve capacity, making the price more volatile.

But OPEC members don’t really gain, either. Governments lose potential export revenue and state-owned oil producers lose potential income. In 2010, the opportunity cost of discount domestic pricing was roughly 15 percent of OPEC’s total oil export revenue of $770 billion, according to International Energy Agency calculations. Such largesse adds to the fiscal strain on many of these nations – contributing to the exporters’ hunger for ever higher global oil prices.”

I am not sure that this analysis as it is presented is consistent.  First it says that the practice of diverting some fuel to internal use reduces the available supply and results in “pushing up oil prices”.  Ok, that makes some sense.  However the next paragraph seems to say that the practice causes them strain contributing to the exporters hunger for ever higher global oil prices.

What does that mean?  If they had more crude to export they would have more revenue?  But the artificial shortage that OPEC creates is done to get as high global oil prices as they can.  Maybe the author of this analysis saying that OPEC would get all the revenue it wants if it could export more by using less at home. This presumably would allow the exporters to lower the price because they would not need the revenue.  I doubt that.

Well, I probably have spent far too much time on this.   Especially, since OPEC will continue to lower the price of crude.  OPEC knows that there is a lot of untapped crude out there in the world.  Much of it becomes economic to produce as the price of OPEC crude goes up.   I have heard that North Dakota Bakken tight oil needs a price of around $75 per barrel to justify production.  OPEC has lowered world crude prices before to slow down/stop bringing in new supplies of crude.  They will do it again.  They dread the slogan  “drill baby drill” about as much as the liberal Democrats do.

To read more of the Reuter’s posting, click here.

cbdakota

Russia’s Oil Potential In Siberia


You may not have known this but Russia vies with Saudi Arabia for the title of biggest crude oil producer.  According to a June Bloomberg posting, oil and gas provided half of Russia’s income in 2011.  So Putin is pushing for more oil discoveries to keep his government afloat. Exxon has been invited to help drill oil fields in Siberia.  These Siberian oil fields are estimated to hold something like half the proven reserves of the US.  Exxon will joint venture with the Russian government run oil company, OAO Rosneft.  Exxon’s fracking technology is to be used on the Bazhenov shale formation in west Siberia.  Rosneft said these deposits might hold 13.2 billion barrels of oil. As part of the alliance with Exxon, Moscow-based Rosneft in April said it acquired a 30 percent stake in a Texas tight oil¹  project to gain experience with the technology. Exxon will be able to book reserves in a mature oil province without taking on the exploration or environment risk it faces in its offshore projects with Rosneft, which will require an initial $3.2 billion investment to explore in the Arctic Kara Sea and the Black Sea. Exxon is also working with Romania’s Petrom in the Black Sea where they have discovered a major gas find.

But Exxon is not the only player.  According to Bloomberg:

Non-state Russian oil companies, including its second-largest producer OAO Lukoil and fourth-biggest OAO Surgutneftegas, also have resources in the billions of barrels in the Bazhenov formation.

Ronald Paul Smith a Moscow-based oil and gas analyst at Citigroup Inc said: “Lukoil is already using horizontal wells and multistage fracking to support its West Siberian production, and therefore may be the earliest, clearest beneficiary” of the tax breaks.  Lukoil subsidiary Ritek produces about 2,000 barrels a day from the Bazhenov formation……”

“Another competitor, Gazprom Neft, together with Royal Dutch Shell Plc plan to drill an extended reach horizontal well with multistage hydrofractures next year to tap tight oil at their Siberian Salym Petroleum Development venture, Gazprom Neft Deputy Chief Executive Vadim Yakovlev told journalists at June 8 press conference.”

As noted in earlier postings, Exxon has other  fracking joint ventures besides these in Russia and Romania.  They are active in China and have projects in Argentina’s Vaca Muerta formation.  It is my understanding that they have backed out of ventures in Poland saying that there are too many governmental hurdles.

To read more click here,

¹ I am seeing the words “tight oil” being used frequently.  Here is a definition of those words. Tight oil is a play that consists of light crude oil contained in petroleum bearing formations of relatively low porosity and permeability (shales).  It uses the same horizontal well and hydraulic fracturing technology used in recent boom in production of shale gas.  The North Dakota’s Bakken field is a tight oil play.

cbdakota

 

 

 

 

Volt And Leaf June Sales


The good news is that Chevrolet Volt sales for June were 1,760 versus the previous month’s Volt sales of 1,680.  The bad news is that at the end of June there were 5,300 Volts in stock, an 82 day-supply.  The Volt production line has been idled twice so far this year because of low demand.

Meanwhile the news is not particularly good for the Nissan Leaf because June sales were only 535 and that brings the year-to-date total sales to 3,418.  Nissan still insists that they will sell 20,000 Leafs this year.

cbdakota

 

Another Solar Energy Company To File For Bankruptcy


Abound Solar, one of four solar energy companies provided loans by the Department of Energy is expected to file for bankruptcy protection the first week in July.  The company received $70 million in federal loans.  The company employs 125.  Solyndra was one of the four receiving loans, and as you probably know, it has gone bankrupt, too.

Slate.com posts “Why No One Should Be Surprised That Another Obama-Backed Solar Startup Is Going Bust.”  The tone of their posting is that Conservatives will be gleeful about this company going bust.  Conservatives do not get off on failures of companies and lost jobs.  In fact the people planning on causing people to loose jobs are those in the current administration doing their best to put all the people employed in the coal industry out of jobs.  If that objective is realized, as directed by President Obama,  it will make 125 jobs lost look insignificant.

Conservatives want R&D monies to be expended on solar cell research.  Not for the government to be picking and choosing businesses for which their record in one of failure.  The Administrations efforts to strong-arm wind and solar has so far yielded little to be proud of.  These operations are only valuable to their cronies that take little to no risk all at the expense of the taxpayer and specifically the ratepayers that have to absorb the vastly overpriced product .  The Energy Information Agency of the US Department of Energy categorizes wind and solar as Non-Dispatchable TechnologiesThat means their delivery is too unreliable for the grids to be useable.   These technologies are not ready for PRIME TIME.   Wind and Solar will remain non-viable until such time that low cost,  large-scale energy storage is developed.

Yes, we know as Slate tells us,  the Chinese have dropped the prices of solar cells to a point where our domestic companies can not compete.  But even the cheaper solar cells don’t make solar farms viable.

cbdakota