Link here.
I couldn't resist. Three months ago I knew no Spanish. I'm now taking Spanish with Sophia on Duolingo.
LOL.
Whatever.
In response to the linked post above, a reader wrote:
Although I now seldom keep up with the goings on in the Argentinian shale, a few years back I followed it very closely.
Ultra
summary ... a productive area the size of North Dakota and South Dakota
combined, estimated to contain recoverable oil more than twice the
Bakken/Three Forks (>16 Billion bbl), Marcellus-sized recoverable
gas.
Long history of conventional hydrocarbon production ... ~100 years.
Essentially, the components exist for a multi generational development by which virtually all Argentinians would benefit.
The production profiles of the 2017 gas wells exceeded the Ohio Utica wells which were the best American gas wells at that time.
Tragically,
in an orgy of "what's in it for me?" atmosphere, players ranging from
national and local governments, labor unions, powerful, near-oligarchal
agrarian interests all conspired to hobble this burgeoning
unconventional industry.
The high integrity Argentinian industry operatives never stood a chance.
Foreign
unconventional players - this includes the WIDE expanse of American Oil
Field Services companies - will probably shun this region for decades
as the risk is simply too high.
Somewhat
similar circumstances have hobbled the Sichuan Basin development in
China, arguably the world's largest shale gas resource.
If
the "Story" of the Shale Revolution is ever adequately recounted, the
political machinations of players worldwide should rank as at LEAST in
importance as the gritty, remamarkable tenacity and incredible
technological advances embraced by American companies.
At
the end of the day, the capitalist, free enterprise system -
so powerfully displayed by North Dakota decision makers -
has provided the world with abundant energy resources for decades to
come.
I replied with the following, not-ready-for-prime-time with minimal editing:
A long time ago, when I first started blogging about the Bakken, I said that "the Bakken" was made up of three components:a) the geography, the geology, the science;
b) the relationship between mineral owners, land owners, the industry;
c) the political arena, particularly local politics, and the regulators;
One needed all three.
1.
It goes without saying that the oil had to be there and it had to be
recoverable. The operators did a great job cracking the fracking
component.
2. Fortunately, the land owners -- who
probably had it the toughest -- agreed to let the industry do what was
needed -- build roads, build pipelines, use a huge amount of fresh
water, work with industry to dispose of the produced water, etc. One of
the largest obstacles was the "DAPL protest" and that was mostly
facilitated by outside agitators. Had that been the "norm" in North
Dakota, the Bakken revolution would not have occurred.
3.
And finally, the politicians and regulators had to work with the
industry -- regulations on flaring, taxes, etc., had to be reasonable.
I
find it astonishing that from Mexico, to Venezuela, to Argentina, it
seems, the politicians simply can't get it right. I don't know enough
about Ecuador but it's possible the oil industry did not treat Ecuador
fairly. I don't know. Brazil seems to have come the closest but the
tourist industry -- and I don't blame that industry -- is very concerned
about their shores. But again, it seems there's a lot of offshore
drilling and states like Florida and Texas and California have adjusted.
But,
Argentina losing the Vaca Muerta is truly astonishing. I didn't follow
it closely but for as "big" as it was said to be, one never heard any
really good stories coming out of Argentina over the years.
