Seeking Alpha
View as an RSS Feed

Carl Martin  

View Carl Martin's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • Encana: Vast Asset Portfolio Is A Source Of Funds, But Divestiture Proceeds May Disappoint [View article]
    "Moreover, the correct way to look at the price received is in the context of Encana's Athlon and Eagle Ford acquisitions which are effectively being funded via this and potential additional asset sales."

    Very well said, Richard. This deal just needs to be seen in it's proper context.
    Aug 27, 2015. 01:23 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Crude Oil - Are Shut-Ins Ahead? [View article]
    Very good article, Casey. I couldn't agree more. I think you nailed it perfectly. Something has to give,.... someday.
    Aug 11, 2015. 10:46 AM | 5 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Pioneer Resources Has Great Hedges And A Great Balance Sheet - Why The Rush To Drill? [View article]
    Author needs to do considerable more research on shale oil.

    The decline chart above seems to be showing decline over years, not months. No other shale oil company is posting decline rates anything like these. Besides, it is a decline chart for STO, not PXD, and it is from the Bakken, not the Permian, which is where PXD mostly operates. In an article about PXD, why not use actual decline charts from PXD, in the areas they actually operate in?
    Aug 10, 2015. 03:06 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • How Soon Does Northern Oil & Gas Need An Oil Recovery? [View article]
    Jacob,

    Surely, you must mean that EOG is an operator, not a non-operator.

    "Whereas I noted that EOG, perhaps the best non-operator,....."
    Aug 10, 2015. 02:52 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Bakken Update: Answers To Why U.S. Oil Production Remains High While Prices Tank [View article]
    2whiteroses,

    You already have received a lot of answers, but I believe what you want to know is if a company has good hedges in a low price environment, like now, do they then produce more oil than they otherwise would, if they had no hedges at all. The simple answer is generally, yes, in order to quickly and easily shovel in some "free" money. They will be inclined to produce as much as the hedges cover, but not more. So, in that sense, the limits of the hedging, or a lack of hedges altogether, also limits production in this low price environment.

    It is a very important matter to consider, and it is very relevant right now, as it is widely believed that many hedges ran out on June 30th, so we are expecting to see that reflected in lower production....eventually. But, the hedging shit doesn't really hit the fan until Dec.31st. That's when last years hedges, often as high as $90, officially run out. Very few companies are well hedged into 2016. So what happens to 2016 production if the oil price is still sub $60, $55, or $50? My guess is that it ain't likely to be a-going up.
    Aug 10, 2015. 02:23 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Bakken Update: Answers To Why U.S. Oil Production Remains High While Prices Tank [View article]
    Michael,

    Just curious, but have you been following some of the shale gas wells production in the Marcellus and Utica? Some of the companies there are reporting high gas production in a straight horizontal line for an entire year before starting to decline. Apparently, if enough pressure is there, they can choke it down and hold production steady for that long, and still at a high rate of production. Isn't that where shale oil production is heading? Craig?
    Aug 10, 2015. 01:58 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Bakken Update: Answers To Why U.S. Oil Production Remains High While Prices Tank [View article]
    Petro,

    What company do you work for?
    Aug 10, 2015. 01:50 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Bakken Update: Answers To Why U.S. Oil Production Remains High While Prices Tank [View article]
    Interesting, Craig.

    I clearly remember you telling me this YEARS ago, when I incorrectly thought the industry was trying, and succeeding, in not only preventing ALL well communication between different zones, but also within the same zone. You said back then it would likely occur in almost all cases in the same zone, but only after an undetermined time frame much further along, which probably wouldn't be in the first 5-6 year heavy decline period. Odd, that the CEO of EOG would seemingly state otherwise. I wonder what he is up to?
    Aug 10, 2015. 01:44 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Bakken Update: Answers To Why U.S. Oil Production Remains High While Prices Tank [View article]
    Petro,

    I think the industry has made a huge mistake by posting so many decline charts in their investor presentations. First of all, they are usually very difficult to interpret, because they are not all using the same format, time scale, etc. They also only give a very general impression of what is really happening, and that impression is ultimately rather dismal. There is no way ordinary people, or even mainstream analysts can understand them correctly.

    It would all be much better if they only posted actual production charts over various time periods, 3,6,9,12 months, and by the year to about year five, and from then on at five year intervals. It might also be a good idea to draw a vertical line between actual production to date, and future expected production, which in some cases is based upon computer models rather than actual experience. One thing Michael's presentations correctly show is how irregular production actually is month to month.
    Aug 10, 2015. 01:27 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Bakken Update: Answers To Why U.S. Oil Production Remains High While Prices Tank [View article]
    I know you love writing all the articles, and answering all the questions, Michael, but I also know that you are a very busy boy. So, if I come across an easy question, especially one you have already answered in another article, then I can just paraphrase your words, throw in a little bit of Craig's teachings, and word it in my own style, then hope everyone will be able to understand it.
    Aug 10, 2015. 01:12 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Bakken Update: Answers To Why U.S. Oil Production Remains High While Prices Tank [View article]
    John,

    Oil rigs are not the same as oil wells. Oil rigs are the rigs doing the drilling of oil wells. Only oil wells produce oil, and there are thousands of them in operation, but many of these are only "stripper wells" producing less than 10 barrels per day. The "average" well in the general area that this article covers is producing at about 118 bpd, but that number is not especially significant, as it changes each month both to the upside and downside.
    Aug 9, 2015. 02:02 PM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Bakken Update: Answers To Why U.S. Oil Production Remains High While Prices Tank [View article]
    It's a game changer!
    Aug 9, 2015. 01:53 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Bakken Update: Answers To Why U.S. Oil Production Remains High While Prices Tank [View article]
    James,

    Yes, shale wells decline "rapidly", but that does not mean that they also decline to zero rapidly. They decline "rapidly" for only the first 5-6 years (on average) as all the easy to get oil around the well bore and within and close to the newly opened fracked fissures, as well as any other oil located right in, or very close to any intersected natural fissures, gets pumped out first.

    After that most of the oil pumped has to get moved through the original rock matrix to the nearest available fissure, which by now is quite compacted by sand, and is getting more and more compacted almost to powder by the sheer weight of the overlying rocks over time. This results in a much lower rate of decline which lasts throughout the rest of the well's lifetime, which is expected to be about 35-40 years, as Michael has mentioned.

    Most of the decline misunderstandings and subsequent nonsense about such are coming from the Peak Oil crowd, and just need to be ignored. They are for the most part referring to the first poorly done shale gas wells, some of which only managed to live about five years. PO believers think that this then applies to all shale wells from all shale plays over all time, as that is what fits their agenda best.

    High decline rates merely means that the payoff time for shale wells is very much front loaded. Now, what could be better than that? If decline rates are still a problem for anyone, just turn the decline charts upside down, and you then get the accumulation rates instead. I suppose it all comes down to whether your life revolves around doughnuts, or doughnut holes. If your life is more like a doughnut hole, than a doughnut, then decline rates will likely be a problem for you. Otherwise, not. I have no problem with them.
    Aug 9, 2015. 01:48 PM | 5 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Why Oil Production Can Decline Through Future Months [View article]
    I never claimed any expertise in this field, but YOU did! I just happen to notice when other people don't know what they are talking about. So, if that shoe doesn't fit you, then don't wear it. End of story.

    Peakoilbarrel.com is the main site I use to monitor the PO movement ever since TOD shut down, so I am well informed about what is said there.

    Since when are we talking about completions?

    You are basically saying that production MUST go down, just because rig counts and permits are going down. I'm calling you on the MUST part, because so far it isn't really happening. You just don't seem to realize, that the completions that are presently getting held back, can be used to balance out any eventual fall in production caused by lower rig counts and/or fewer permits, when the held back completions are eventually completed. I'm not saying they must, or even will. I'm just saying they CAN. That fact totally undermines your MUST assertion, which is apparently based upon where you work, and nothing else.

    Filloon's article discusses, among other things, (indirect) re-fracking occurring on neighboring wells, when "new" enhanced fracking methods are used. This is not technically zipper fracking. It is being referred to as (indirect) re-fracking of neighboring wells. That input most likely comes from Craig Cooper, the geologist, as his name is acknowledged in the article. Michael would not likely stick his neck out so far on his own.

    Like Michael, much of my understanding of these items also comes from Craig, as he has long ago agreed to be my "geology teacher" on a somewhat sporadic basis. Try reading some (ALL) of his comments here at SA on the oil patch. He is one of the very few people in this space that REALLY knows what is going on, and also why. Therefore, neither Michael, nor I usually say anything in a public forum, that he does not generally agree with.

    The industry used to try to avoid this type of well communication, as they felt it was counter productive. Now, apparently they find it to be very useful in increasing EUR's of all the neighboring wells. That is the explanation Filloon is giving you to explain away the present conundrum you are trapped in. But, you don't believe him, as his facts do not support your agenda. You obviously NEED production to decline. That is why you say it MUST. And, that is where you have gone wrong.

    "Since it is also a fact that most horizontal shale wells get close to 70% of their EUR during the first year of their existence,"

    Wow! That's quite a FACT!

    That is to say that a shale well with an EUR of 521,430 boe would produce 365,000 boe in it's first year, which is 70%, which equates to an average of 1000 boe/d for the entire first year. That's quite a well, I must say!

    Imagine what it would be like if that well could produce 100%, or 521,430 boe/d in it's first year. That would just be terrible, wouldn't it? Terrible for Peak Oil in any case. As, that is the gist of your present public position, why don't you just let go of it? PO is for losers. Don't you even know that?
    Aug 7, 2015. 02:59 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Why Oil Production Can Decline Through Future Months [View article]
    Working in an oil and gas field does not automatically make one an expert in such matters. As, I have not questioned your information on permits, there is no need to repeat or explain anything about them to me.

    Care to provide some proof for this statement?

    "Since it is also a fact that most horizontal shale wells get close to 70% of their EUR during the first year of their existence,"

    You are assuming that all production from shale oil wells is equal. It is not. The following is also just another forward looking statement from you, which I have no interest in reading, until and unless, you acknowledge the PRESENT (and past) state of shale oil production, which is that shale oil production has increased, even though rig counts and permits are in general decline.

    "it ventures to say that since operators are permitting far fewer wells, that the steep production declines will come, even if the EIA doesn't yet have its act together on the numbers."

    I noticed you didn't answer my two simple straight forward questions, yet you find time to mock what I stand for. This does not result in any credibility on your part. I, therefore feel the need to repeat my two questions, and you can kindly put up (your answers) or simply shut up.

    "50% of what? Why do you think production isn't resulting in a dramatic drop, despite fewer wells being drilled?"

    Did you read Filloon's article? And, your comments on it?

    And, there is another recent educational article for you to read on Hess by Callum Turcan. That explains what is generally going on in the industry right now, although the article is only about Hess.

    I noticed that you are not company focused. That's why you don't know what is going on in this industry.
    Aug 6, 2015. 02:20 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
COMMENTS STATS
1,346 Comments
1,774 Likes