Friday, March 30, 2018

Hands Down, The Bakken Beats All Other Oily Plays -- Production / Rig -- But On BOE/Rig? The Eagle Ford

Updates

April 3, 2018: see this post for an update on this subject.  

Original Post 

From a May 17, 2014, post, production per rig:
It's been a long time since I've looked at this metric.

A huge thanks to a reader for a note that made me think of doing this.

So, in January, 2014, productivity per rig, based on the chart above:
  • the Bakken: around 500 bbls/rig
  • the Eagle Ford: about 475 bbls/rig
  • the Niobrara: about 350 bbls/rig
  • the Permian: not even 150 bbls/rig
So, how have things changed in four year? From the EIA (a dynamic link), the Bakken still leads all four major oily plays:
  • the Bakken: around 1,450 bbls/rig -- almost 3x greater than 4 years ago
  • the Eagle Ford: about 1,400 bbls/rig -- ditto, and very close to the Bakken (on a "boe" basis, the Eagle Ford would probably beat the Bakken -- but it would be close and might vary month-to-month)
  • the Niobrara: about 1,200 bbls/rig -- about 3.5x better than 4 years ago
  • the Permian: about 600 bbls/rig -- 4x better than 4 years ago -- but the Bakken is about 2.5x better than the Permian

Tesla Watch -- March 30, 2018 -- When It Rains, It Pours

Updates

March 31, 2018:


Later, 9:15 p.m. Central Time:


Later, 8:54 p.m. Central Time: it's being reported Friday night, just before a 3-day holiday weekend that:
Later, 8:27 p.m. Central Time: from ZeroHedge --


Original Post

Based on open sources from across the net, but mostly from "@TeslaCharts" over at twitter, this is my 30-second, elevator speech on Tesla's first quarter, 2018:
The "final" numbers are in because it's Easter Friday and no more deliveries for the month (March) will be made by Tesla.

Based on VIN registration numbers, Bloomberg and "Tesla Charts" (twitter) has the estimates for 1Q18.

It appears that Tesla "smashed" records for delivery in the last two weeks of the quarter, which will result in total numbers for first quarter 2018 being "respectable."  Those who love Tesla will say this proves Tesla is doing very, very well; those who hate Tesla will have the numbers to prove their point. The SEC filing only said they would "reach" 2,500/week by the end of the quarter, not "sustain 2,500" week after week after week. So, technically, it's possible Tesla will have reached 2,500/week by the end of the quarter because of the last two weeks of delivery but averaging over the entire 12 weeks, it will be far less.

This explains (at least for me) why Musk waited to announce a capital raise. If the numbers are as good as the estimates suggest, he will have more fire power going to the banks and the venture capitalists to get more cash or a better deal.

All eyes will be on deliveries to Norway.
From "@TeslaCharts," this chart is going to blow away Tesla bulls (and the rest of us). Nissan Leaf is clearly the global winner:
But there's an even bigger story here, actually two bigger stories here:
  • Tesla does not have a moat when it comes to EVs; lots and lots of competition
  • Nissan Leaf might not be seen as a Tesla competitor, but certainly VW and BMW are 
And see below, BMW has no plans to even ramp up until 2020 -- and they are still out-selling Tesla in Norway.  

BMW will not mass produce electric cars until 2020 because its current technology is not profitable enough to scale up for volume production, the chief executive said on Thursday.  
It's hard for me to believe that a car company like BMW feels their EVs won't be profitable until 2020 and the impression I get from Elon Musk is that he feels his cars already are profitable (I'm probably wrong on that).
With regard to Model 3, from twitter:
Wasn't Model 3 the Tesla for the rest of us?

US Crude Oil Production -- Hubbert Peak Oil Theory Revisited -- March 30, 2018

US crude oil production. 

Link here.


I find it incredible such "authoritative" sources as Wikipedia have not updated their "Hubbert Peak Theory" post. Hubbert Peak Theory describes a bell-shaped curve, not "twin peaks."

US Saudi Crude Oil Imports Hit 32-Year Low For Month Of January -- Have To Go All The Way Back To 1986 -- March 30, 2018

Link here. And the difference between January, 2017, and January, 2018, is not subtle. Ouch.


Meanwhile, US crude oil exports hit an all-time high for the month of January, going back to when records were first kept. Link here.


"Drill, baby, drill." Making American great again.

Spot price of WTI (at Cushing), rounded, link here:
  • end of March, 2018: a "solid" $65
  • end of March, 2017 (one year ago): a "less than solid" $50; closer to $47 - $49 
That's really quite remarkable. 15/50 = a 30% jump. And many operators have been able to cut costs over the past year. If oil companies were "evaluated" like analysts "evaluate" Tesla, we would all be gazillionaires.

Random Update Of An Old EOG Short Lateral In Parshall Oil Field -- March 30, 2018

For newbies: Some folks keep talking about newer wells in the Bakken affecting older wells in a negative manner. That's possible. I don't know. I just see a lot of these examples, where there is a jump in production in an older well when neighboring wells are fracked.

In the production profile below, between early 2015 and early 2013, just two years:
  • a jump in production from 2,000 bbls/month to 7,000 bbls/month, November, 2013
  • a jump in production from 5,000 bbls/month to 8,000 bbls/month in October, 2014
Not only is there a jump in production for a month or two, but the affect lasts several months, extending the period in which there is higher production, affecting a) the decline rate; and, b) the EUR.

Note: prior to neighboring wells being fracked, this well (#16543) was down to 2,000 bbls/month, arguably a very mediocre well. That was back in March, 2013. After neighboring wells were completed, not only was there a significant jump in production on two occasions, but the baseline production was up to 4,000 bbls/month.

A Bakken trope/meme (I don't know if it's a myth): new wells will result in less production from older wells. Example after example proves this is not the case.

The well, a single section EOG well in Parshall oil field:
  • 16543, 1,015, EOG, Florence 1-04H, Parshall, t7/07; cum 511K 1/18;
Earlier production:
BAKKEN2-20152837543763693126601038
BAKKEN1-20153146894700814157901327
BAKKEN12-201431566356861287183001586
BAKKEN11-20143070257046169722022591699
BAKKEN10-201431806280612313253502283
BAKKEN9-201430778977692719247502231
BAKKEN8-2014429018472051035
BAKKEN7-201415023300
BAKKEN6-20140000000
BAKKEN5-20140000000
BAKKEN4-20140000000
BAKKEN3-201413228722973527350670
BAKKEN2-2014284986498613931666121514
BAKKEN1-20143065016538144821041176778
BAKKEN12-20132359725955101919181502306
BAKKEN11-201330723274802177357834280
BAKKEN10-201344922346502312110
BAKKEN9-20130000000
BAKKEN8-201319153215064708707780
BAKKEN7-20132822602270572138712470
BAKKEN6-2013261608173548410419160
BAKKEN5-20133121802046456122110660
BAKKEN4-20133019971997503000
BAKKEN3-20133120812081484120910540
BAKKEN2-20132817691849439119410540

The neighboring wells and the test dates of those wells:
  • 25254, EOG, t11/13;
  • 27042, EOG, t8/14
Remember, the index well is a short lateral. Had this been a long lateral, one can argue that total production would have been double what we see here.