http://www.wyomingpublicmedia.org/post/wyomings-largest-gas-producer-files-bankruptcy
Oct 29, 2018 at 2:26 PM | Entropic man

Did your reading ever include the words from this link?
If they did, did your reading ever extend to basic supply and demand economics?

"The company is Wyoming's largest gas producer, by volume, but has struggled with high debt loads and low natural gas prices in recent months. In April, Wyoming's benchmark natural gas price was just $1.71 per thousand cubic feet, compared to $2.32 at the same time last year"

If only people who demand unreliable energy could be supplied with nothing else, and pay for it, everyone else would be better off.

Going up. A 1.1 magnitude tremor stops Quadrilla. When am I at liberty to call future seismic events "earthquakes"?

According to the accounts, the Cuadrilla Group benefitted during 2017 from contributions from Centrica totalling $16.9m."

Oct 29, 2018 at 2:34 PM | Entropic man

Have you got the Ecotricity Accounts to hand, showing the amount of "Income" from Taxpayer subsidies? What about all those offshore windfarms?

etc etc

Not arrogant, just better read than you.

Oct 29, 2018 at 2:26 PM | Entropic man

It is arrogant for you to claim you are better read than anyone, especially as you have such a poor ability to judge fact from propaganda and preselect your reading accordingly.

You are simply making the case for removing taxpayer subsidies from unreliable energy, and no modelling is required to work out the consequences, reliable and cheaper power for everyone.

But EM you calculated the entire land that might be required to drill all the wells that might be required over the entire lifetime of a Lancashire gasfield. I merely pointed out that only a fraction of these total wells need be put into production at any one time. Meaning that at any one time only a fraction of the land you calculated need be used for production. Once wells deplete below viable levels of production they can be retired and the land returned to their former usage.
But now you're blathering on about the life history of individual gas wells and the necessity of a production company to keep drilling in order to keep profitable. All of which I know already, and all of which is utterly immaterial to the argument I made against the large area you calculated.
If indeed you had done your research adequately you would have known that each shale gas basin in the USA is different and you cannot use the experience of developing the Marcellus Shale play as a guide to other shale gas plays in other basins. If you had read Gregory Zuckerman's "The Frackers" you would have known this. As each basin was explored, new techniques had to be developed and the different plays behaved quite differently.
It is still possible that the Lancashire play will be a total bust, with zero production. Where will your calculation of land area requirements be then? Not worth taking to the toilet.

Supertroll, golf charlie

This rather demonstrates my point.

https://drillordrop.com/2018/06/04/centrica-payment-puts-cuadrilla-in-profit/

"The shale gas company, Cuadrilla, has recorded an annual profit for the first time following a multi-million dollar payment from partner, Centrica.

Annual accounts showed Cuadrilla Resources Holdings Ltd made a profit of $5.457m for the year ending 31 December 2017. This compared with a loss of $11.5m for the same period in 2016.

According to the accounts, the Cuadrilla Group benefitted during 2017 from contributions from Centrica totalling $16.9m."

Golf charlie

And this is how it ends.

http://www.wyomingpublicmedia.org/post/wyomings-largest-gas-producer-files-bankruptcy

Michael hart

Not arrogant, just better read than you.

Supertroll, you forget that Entropic Man is expert in every field, so petroleum geology and mining should be no exception. His talents are so diverse he could almost be a climate scientist.

Certainly his arrogance is up there. I sometimes play a little game with myself when reading an article at BH. Without knowing either the topic or the author, I often read less than the whole first sentence and think "I bet this is an EM comment." It's a game I usually win.

Golf charlie

Not models, but observation of American practice. The real money in the induatry was made by exploration companies like Chesapeake , who drilled enough wells to show that gas was there. They then sold production rights and walked away. (Cuadrilla is following a similar business model.)

The production companies borrowed money to buy the rights and to drill their first wells. They then got caught in a red queen trap. The income from the first wells has to be spent on debt repayment and new wells, with no profit left over.for shareholders or to restore the landscape after they go broke.