shale | Northwest Coast Energy News

Chevron sells 30% of Canadian Duvernay shale gas assets to Kuwait

Chevron Corporation says its wholly-owned subsidiary, Chevron Canada Limited, has reached agreement to sell a 30 per cent interest in its Duvernay shale gas play to Kuwait Foreign Petroleum Exploration Company’s wholly-owned subsidiary, KUFPEC Canada Inc., for $1.5 billion.

The total purchase price includes cash paid at closing as well as a carry of a portion of Chevron Canada’s share of the joint venture’s future capital costs. The Duvernay is located in west-central Alberta, and is believed to be among the most promising shale opportunities in North America.

The agreement creates a partnership for appraisal and development of liquids-rich shale resources in approximately 330,000 net acres in the Kaybob area of the Duvernay.

“This sale demonstrates our focus on strategically managing our portfolio to maximize the value of our global upstream businesses and is consistent with our partnership strategy,” said Jay Johnson, senior vice president, Upstream, Chevron Corporation. “The transaction provides us an expanded relationship with a valued partner. It also recognizes the outstanding asset base we have assembled.”

Following the closing of the transaction, Chevron Canada will hold a 70 percent interest in the joint venture Duvernay acreage and will remain the operator. The transaction is expected to close in November 2014.

“We remain encouraged by the early results of our exploration program and view the Kaybob Duvernay as an exciting growth opportunity for the company,” said Jeff Shellebarger, president of Chevron North America Exploration and Production Company.

Chevron Canada has drilled 16 wells since beginning its exploration program, with initial well production rates of up to 7.5 million cubic feet of natural gas and 1,300 barrels of condensate per day. A pad drilling program recently commenced which is intended to further evaluate and optimize reservoir performance as well as reduce execution costs and cycle time.

Chevron is developing the liquified natural gas facility at Bish Cove, south of Kitimat. Chevron’s partner in the venture, Apache, is looking to sell its stake in Kitimat LNG after a hedge fund with significant Apache stock holdings decided to change the company’s focus to U.S. operations.

US study finds shale development generally helps local government coffers with revenue gains offsetting costs

A study by Duke University of the US shale gas boom has found that oil and gas development from shale fields has generally helped the public finances of local communities, providing new revenues and resources that usually — but not always — outweigh the increased demand for public services and other costs.

It found that many local governments in western North Dakota and eastern Montana, near the Bakken shale formation, have thus far experienced net negative fiscal effects. Also, some municipalities in rural parts of Colorado and Wyoming struggled to manage rapid population growth as natural gas production accelerated in the mid-to-late 2000s.

The research is a snapshot of the fiscal impact to date in the eight states and does not examine the long-term economic impact to governments and the communities they serve, a question the authors say is important and needs additional study.

Daniel Raimi and Richard Newell gathered data from communities surrounding ten oil and gas “plays” from September 2013 through February 2014, traveling to Arkansas, Colorado, Louisiana, Montana, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, Texas and Wyoming to interview local officials and collect information firsthand.

The report describes major revenue sources for local governments, which can include property taxes, sales taxes and state-collected severance taxes or fees that are sent back to the local level. Some local governments also partner with oil and gas companies to help maintain roads, an approach that helped reduce expenses associated with heavy truck traffic in states including Arkansas, Colorado and Pennsylvania.

New costs for local governments associated with oil and gas development, include damage to roads from heavy truck traffic, water and sewer service expansion, government staffing and other needs brought on by rapid population growth.

The researchers found that the net impact of recent oil and gas development has generally been positive for local public finances.

“The fiscal effects for local governments tend to vary from state to state, but we found that for most of them new revenues were outweighing new demand for services,” said Newell, director of the Duke University Energy Initiative and Gendell Professor of Energy and Environmental Economics at Duke’s Nicholas School of the Environment.

Newell and Raimi found net positive fiscal effects in regions where oil and gas booms were ongoing or had slowed in recent years, as well as in regions that experienced different scales of activity. This includes local governments in diverse regions where population density and government capacity vary substantially.

“One of the key questions is how these fiscal effects change over time,” said Raimi, an associate in research with Duke’s Energy Initiative. “In very rural areas, some local governments have faced challenges when development first surges. In many cases, those challenges faded over time. In most other areas, we found net positive or at least roughly neutral financial effects on local government.”

“In some parts of North Dakota, populations have doubled, tripled or even quadrupled just in the past few years,” Raimi said. “For local governments in these areas, it’s hard to keep up with the demand for services, especially costly infrastructure projects such as sewer and water treatment plants.”

The study was financed with the support of the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation. The Shale Public Finance project will continue to produce a series of publications that describes local experiences from a variety of U.S. local governments and identifies key findings.

Duke Energy Initiative finance page

includes interactive map and downloadable report in PDF.

Long term sustainability of shale energy in doubt, scientists tell geology conference

Shale oil and gas may not be the economic “panacea” that some believe, a panel of scientists told a geology conference today. New studies point to higher than expected field decline rates and increasing costs to extract the energy, meaning the long-term sustainability of shale gas production is questionable.

The findings confirm what sources in the energy industry have been telling Northwest Coast Energy News for the past few months, that the output from hydraulic fracturing decreases much more quickly than conventional extraction.

The panel of three scientists released their findings at the annual convention of the Geological Society of America this morning in Boulder, Colorado.

The studies concentrate on the United States where fracking for “tight oil” and natural gas is more advanced than in Canada.

The panel says that while the use of hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling for “tight oil” is an important contributor to Amercian energy supply, fracking will not result in long-term sustainable production or allow the U.S. to become a net oil exporter.

Charles A.S. Hall, professor emeritus at the College of Environmental Science and Forestry, State University of New York, Syracuse, presented two studies: one of the global patterns of fossil-fuel production in the past decade, and the other of oil production patterns from the Bakken Field (the giant expanse of oil-bearing shale rock underneath North Dakota and Montana that is being produced using hydraulic fracturing).

According to a news release from the GSA, both studies show that despite a tripling of prices and of expenditures for oil exploration and development, the production of nearly all countries has been stagnant at best and more commonly is declining — and that prices do not allow for any growth in most economies.

“The many trends of declining EROIs suggest that depletion and increased exploitation rates are trumping new technological developments,” Hall said.

The second studies are from J. David Hughes, president of Vancouver-based Global Sustainability Research Inc. Hughes studied the Bakken Field and the Eagle Ford Field of Texas, which together comprise more than half of U.S. tight oil production. The results show that drilling must continue at high levels, to overcome field decline rates of 40 percent per year.

Drilling rates of more than 3,000 wells annually in the Eagle Ford, and more than 1,800 wells annually in the Bakken, are sufficient to offset field decline and grow production — for now. If drilling at these high rates is maintained, production will continue to grow in both fields for a few more years until field decline balances new production. At that point drilling rates will have to increase as “sweet spots” (relatively small high-productivity portions of the total play area) are exhausted and drilling moves into lower-productivity regions, in order to further grow or even maintain production.

The onset of production decline will likely begin before the end of the decade, Hughes said.

“These sweet spots yield the high early production observed in these plays, but the steep decline rates inevitably take their toll. ”

Arthur E. Berman, a geological consultant for Labyrinth Consulting Services, Inc., of Sugar Land, Texas, deems the U.S. 10-year history of shale-gas extraction “a commercial failure. ” However, he says, this will not be the case forever. “Prices will increase to, at least, meet the marginal cost of production. More responsible companies will dominate and prosper as the U.S. gas market re-balances and weaker players disappear.”

Hughes sums up: “Tight oil is an important contributor to the U.S. energy supply, but its long-term sustainability is questionable. It should be not be viewed as a panacea for business as usual in future U.S. energy security planning.”

Three new powerful players said to join the BC West Coast LNG export rush

The race to ship liquified natural gas to Asia is getting hotter with three new powerhouses joining the scramble for west coast export terminals.

The Prince Rupert Port Authority announced Tuesday, Feb. 7, that it is working with an energy powerhouse BG Group, on a feasibiity study for an LNG terminal at Ridley Island.

At the same time The Globe and Mail reports that there are rumours that Exxon Mobile is “examining LNG options” in the northwest. The paper also quotes sources as saying the Japanese firm Itochu is looking to export gas via Kitsault, where there is an abandoned molybdenum mine, town and port.

British Gas was once the retail domestic supplier of natural gas to the UK market. The company split in two in 1997, with BG Group becoming an international exploration and energy production company.

Itochu is a 150-year old Japanese company which began as Chibou Itoh’s one man linen trading company, later adding drapery shops and over more than a century expanding operations to become a major international conglomerate with strong interests in the energy sector. According to the company website, Itochu is also a player in the solar energy and bio-ethanol fields.

“The Prince Rupert Port Authority has engaged with the BG Group to consider Prince Rupert for a potential LNG export facility. The BG Group is number two in the world in LNG, next to Shell and they are number two depending on what measurements you look at, so they are already a big player in that industry” according to Shaun Stevenson, vice-president of Marketing and Business Development for the Prince Rupert Port Authority.

“We have an agreement signed to provide them a site and to secure that site to examine the suitability of it and the feasibility of the facility…We have given them a period of time to conduct the feasibility and suitability study, and if it is determined to be viable from the preliminary work that is done then we will look at further development,” he said.

David Byford, spokesman for the BG Group in Houston, confirmed the deal has been signed but cautioned “Prince Rupert is one of the areas we are looking at, and we are in the very early feasibility study stage.”

“The west coast of Canada is certainly advantageous for LNG export, and there is a lot of natural gas in BC as well.”

Prince Rupert port spokesperson Michael Gurney says it will be 12 to 24 months before there’s a clear commitment on the project.

A spokesman with Itochu declined comment when contacted by The Globe and Mail. Kitsault, near Alice Arm, in the traditional territory of the Nisga’a nation, was the site of a short lived molybedenum venture by the Phelps Dodge company. After the mine was abandoned, the town was bought by Indo-American businessman Krishnan Suthanthiran and is now promoted as a nature and wilderness retreat, called Heaven on Earth.

The Globe and Mail also quotes sources as saying that Exxon Mobil Corp., which has substantial natural gas reserves in northeastern B.C., has also been examining LNG options. Pius Rolheiser, a spokesman with Canada’s Imperial Oil Ltd., which is majority-owned by Exxon, said in a statement to the Globe and Mail: “Imperial continuously reviews a variety of opportunities to increase value to our shareholders. As a matter of practice, and for competitive reasons, we do not discuss specific strategies.”

Louisiana governor announces LNG project; size, cost would rival Kitimat

Energy

The governor of Louisiana, Bobby Jindal today announced that the state could be the site of what he calls the “one of the first natural gas liquefaction
facilities in North America.”

The facility will be built by Cheniere Energy which already has a terminal at Sabine Pass in Cameron Parish in the state.

Cheniere says it will spend $6 billion to
expand its existing facility, which will be one of the largest capital
investments in Louisiana history.

That means the Louisiana terminal could rival Kitimat in size and potential. The projected timeline for both shows construction and operational startup would happen at the same time.

A news release from the governor’s office says

The new project will create 148 new jobs and retain 77 existing jobs,
with a total compensation and benefits package that will exceed an
average of $100,000 a year. The new jobs will support another 589
indirect jobs in the area and 3,000 construction jobs will be created by
the project at the peak of construction activity. Cheniere will build
its new facility near the Louisiana-Texas border in Cameron Parish to
handle the shipment of liquefied natural gas (LNG) from the company’s
international LNG terminal.

Gov. Jindal said, “Cheniere Energy’s
construction of one the country’s first liquefaction facilities at the
Sabine Pass terminal in Cameron Parish is a huge win for our state. This
multi-billion dollar investment will be one of the largest capital
investments in the history of Louisiana, and build on our incredible
record of job creation projects all across the state. Cheniere’s
facility will grow our economy, increase natural gas production and
become a major exchange in continuing to meet the demand for energy
around the world.”

“The construction of Cheniere’s Liquefaction
Project in Cameron Parish will provide key support to Louisiana’s
economy and natural gas industry, which has been transformed by the
development of the Haynesville Shale,” said Charif Souki, Chairman and
CEO of Cheniere. “In only two years, Louisiana’s natural gas production
has doubled as the Haynesville has grown into one of the most prolific
shale plays in the world. Our Liquefaction Project will provide
thousands of jobs in Southwest Louisiana while connecting the state’s
natural gas industry to global markets, making Louisiana the world’s
first dual importer and supplier of LNG. We greatly appreciate the
support that Cheniere has received from the State of Louisiana and the
people of Cameron Parish, who have demonstrated a strong commitment to
our Sabine Pass LNG terminal.”

Cheniere Energy anticipates beginning
construction of the facility in early 2012. Hiring of the new permanent
jobs will begin in 2014 and the facility will commence operations in
2015. The final phase of the project is expected by the end of
2018.Adding liquefaction capabilities will transform the Sabine Pass
terminal into a bi-directional facility capable of exporting LNG in
addition to receiving LNG for regasification.

The Louisiana facility would use gas from the Haynesville Shale which is a Jurassic formation on the Texas-Louisiana border. Shale gas that would come through Kitimat comes largely from northeast British Columbia, especially the Horn River Basin.

Both the Kitimat and Louisiana projects are scheduled to begin main construction in 2012 with operations starting in 2015.

The KM LNG facility would have an initial plant capacity of 5 million metric tons per annum (mmtpa) with potential to expand to 10 mmtpa or more. The Louisiana release does not give a figure for the capacity of the plant.

During the recent National Energy Board hearings on KM LNG’s application for an export licence, witnesses repeatedly stressed there could be potential rival export ports for northeast BC shale gas in the United States, mainly in Oregon or Washington states, if the licence was not approved or the conditions were too restrictive. The Louisiana terminal would not likely be a rival for Kitimat for northern shale gas, although as the witnesses at the NEB hearings always stressed there is no way of tracking the origin of the “molecules” in the integrated North American pipeline network.

Governor Bobby Jindal’s news release

Encana, PetroChina shale gas deal collapses

A $5.4 billion deal between Canadian exploration giant Encana, one of the partners in the KM LNG project, and PetroChina collapsed Tuesday, sending shocks through both the financial markets and the energy exploration and production sector.

International analysts are already saying that China may be pulling back in its strategy to get a foothold in key resource areas and perhaps the Canadian energy sector was too optimistic. Perhaps.

If the analysts are correct, that means that some of the grand plans to export natural gas, at least to China, may still go ahead, but won’t immediately turn British Columbia back into the fabled Golden Mountain that brought the labourers from China more than a century ago to build the railways. Nor does this mean a major threat, at this point, to plans to export gas through Kitimat as there are plenty of buyers in Japan, Taiwan, South Korea and Malaysia looking at northeast BC shale gas.

The Wall Street Journal Heard on the Street blog says

E&P executives across North America should also be nervous. While some speculate Canadian-resource nationalism has spread from potash to energy, there is little evidence of this, given other similar deals haven’t been blocked. The alternative explanation is that foreign buyers of North American gas assets may actually care about such quaint notions as return on investment.

That isn’t good news for an E&P sector that consistently lives beyond its means.

London’s Financial Times says

Although China has gained a reputation for buying up resources around the world at any cost, a string of recent failed deals suggests the country’s resources companies are starting to drive harder bargains and are becoming more selective. In April, China’s Minmetals withdrew a $6.5bn offer for Equinox, an Australian-Canadian copper miner, rather than raise its bid after a higher offer emerged from Barrick Gold.

Chinese oil companies have also recently walked away from, or missed out on, prized oil and gas assets in Brazil …

The failure of the Encana-PetroChina deal is a surprise to the industry because Chinese companies have recently been investing aggressively in shale gas assets to gain the expertise needed to develop China’s own reserves.

Reuters reported from Edmonton that it was Encana who walked away from the deal:

Encana, Canada’s No. 1 natural gas producer, said the two companies could not find common ground, despite a year of negotiations, and walked away from a deal that would have seen PetroChina take a one-half stake in Encana’s massive Cutbank Ridge field in northern British Columbia.

“We just reached the point where we determined we just couldn’t go forward” said Alan Boras, a spokesman for Encana.

The deal would have been the largest in a string of investments by Asian companies in North America’s prolific shale gas discoveries, while Encana investors were counting on the cash to shore up a balance sheet battered by more than two years of weak natural gas prices…

The CBC report had analysts disagreeing on Encana’s role:

John Stephenson, portfolio manager with First Asset Investment Management in Toronto, called the scuttled deal “a complete and utter failure.”

“I think they just couldn’t agree on anything and I think they were premature maybe in announcing this before they had an operating agreement in place,” he said….

But Lanny Pendill, an energy analyst with Edward Jones in St. Louis, commended Encana for its discipline….Its willingness to walk away from a deal after a year of work shows “if push comes to shove, they’re going to make the decision that’s in the best interest of Encana and Encana shareholders.

The Globe and Mail says Encana has plenty of assets in shale gas, especially the Horn River developments which were often mentioned as the main source for shale based natural gas that could be shipped through Kitimat:

With the PetroChina joint venture out of the picture, Encana still has lots of potential. For starters, back in April, the company said it was looking to start discussions on joint venture proposals for its Horn River and Greater Sierra assets. On the heels of Tuesday’s announcement, Encana said that the prospects for these projects are looking up, and raised its 2011 expected proceeds from them to between $1-billion and $2-billion, up from $500-million and $1-billion

Encana news release (on Encana site)

Encana news release 0621-petrochina-jv-negoiations-end.pdf

Latest entrant in LNG scramble wants NEB, BC to consolidate approvals: Reports

LNG World News

Progress Energy wants consolidated process for LNG projects in Canada

Progress Energy Resources Corp, which signed a C$1.07 billion ($1.09 billion) shale gas alliance with Malaysia’s state oil company, is pushing for a consolidated regulatory process for pipelines and liquefied gas export plants, its chief said on Monday.

A big driver for Progress’s deal with Petronas is a plan to build an multibillion-dollar LNG plant on the West Coast to take all of the shale gas production from the partner’s lands in the North Montney region of British Columbia….

Progress Chief Executive Michael Culbert said federal and provincial authorities should consider combining regulatory proceedings for multiple plants and pipelines, with so many proposals now in the works.

The current pipeline capacity to British Columbia’s Kitimat region is about 100 million cubic feet a day, far below what will be required to support an export industry, he told reporters after a speech to the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers investment symposium.

Canadian Press

LNG terminals planned for West Coast have enough gas to go around: executives

Northeastern British Columbia’s shale fields contain more than enough natural gas to feed a myriad of West Coast export terminals in the works, energy executives said at an industry conference Monday.

But some say collaboration may be necessary to ensure the gas makes its way across the Pacific in the most cost-effective way possible.

Penn West president Murray Nunns …said he sees the various LNG proposals joining forces at some point.

“The scale of the initial projects at a (billion cubic feet) or two probably isn’t suitable relative to the size of the resource in Western Canada,” he told reporters.

“I think in the end, it may only end up as one or two facilities but I think they’ll be substantially larger than what’s been considered.”

National Energy Board hearings on Kitimat LNG begin, expected to go rest of the week

National Energy Board hearings on the Kitimat LNG project opened Tuesday morning at the Riverlodge Community Centre with the usual legal introductions.

Lawyers for KM LNG asked the panel to postpone some more controversial issues until Friday, as one of the lawyers said, “parties were still in discussion” about certain matters.

The panel ruled that they would hear the contentious issues beginning Thursday morning.

Kitimat residents are complaining that the formal panel is “mystifying,” compared to the more open and public friendly joint review panel on the Enbridge Northern Gateway proposal last fall.

The current hearings are much more limited than the Enbridge Northern Gateway joint review. That’s because these hearings are for an export licence only. The Enbridge hearings are a facility hearing covering the whole project, because the oil sands are in Alberta and that pipeline would cross provincial boundaries. At the moment, the KM LNG project is entirely within the province of BC and so the only matter under consideration is the export of natural gas.

Lawyers representing one of the KM LNG rivals tried to widen issues in the morning session, but the NEB panel ruled while there would be some flexibility in questions about the project’s ownership and facilities, those questions had to be specific and narrow and relevant to the export licence.

Like theatregoers fleeing a bad play at the first interval, many of the Kitimat residents who had shown up left at the first break, leaving the room to the lawyers and executives.

Time for Alaska, Big Oil to lay gas line cards on the table : Anchorage Daily News

Anchorage Daily News

Column by Paul Jenkins

Time for Alaska, Big Oil to lay gas line cards on the table

It is time for TransCanada, Exxon and the state to lay their cards on the table; time to tell Alaskans whether their natural gas pipeline project is deader than Donald Trump’s presidential campaign.

To almost nobody’s surprise, BP and Conoco Phillips yanked the plug on their Denali gas line project, an effort to build a $35 billion, large-diameter natural gas pipeline from Alaska’s North Slope to points south. Who could blame them? The companies said that after more than three years and $165 million they could not drum up enough binding “ship-or-pay” agreements to secure financing.

LNG exports on the cards from Canadian shale gas: Reports

(Map by Mitsubishi)

LNG Unlimited

LNG exports on the cards from Canadian shale gas

A consortium of five Japanese energy outfits are set to consider LNG exports from a planned shale gas project in northeastern British Columbia, Canada.

Japan Oil, Gas and Metals National Corporation, Chubu Electric Power, Tokyo Gas and Osaka Gas will collaborate with Mitsubishi on the Cordova Embayment Project, which will mark the first shale gas project executed by Japanese utilities and gas companies…

Half of the production will be for the Canadian market.

Natural Gas for America

Japanese Utilities Joins Cordova Shale Project

A group of Japanese utilities will join Mitsubishi Corp. in a shale gas project led by Penn West Exploration.

Tokyo Gas Co., Osaka Gas Co., Chubu Electric Power Co. and Japan Oil, Gas and Metals National Corp. have each agreed to take a 7.5% stake in Cordoba Gas Resources, a subsidiary of Mitsubishi.

Through the formation of the consortium, all the companies expect to obtain beneficial knowledge about shale gas developments. The consortium plans to discuss studying the possibility of exporting the shale gas to Japan as LNG which will contribute to diversify energy import and to secure stable energy supply to Japan, Mitsubishi Corp. said in a statement.

Mitsubishi news release

Editor’s note:
Mitsubishi’s interest in the Cordova project was under negotiation last year, long before the earthquake which knocked out much of Japan’s energy generating capacity, especially the hard hit Fukishima nuclear reactor complex. Now, with Japanese companies and the government looking to replace nuclear with natural gas, this is likely the first of a number of deals that will be announced in the coming months. That natural gas has to get to Japan somehow, and that likely means more announcements regarding the port of Kitimat.