Will shale gas fulfill future U.S. natural gas demand?
Larry Persily |
Oct 24, 2011
Editor's note: Larry Persily, the author of this article, heads the Office of the Federal Coordinator for Alaska Natural Gas Transportation Projects, an agency promoting development of an Alaska natural gas project. His opinions are his own. ExxonMobil expects natural gas demand to grow faster than any other fuel over the next 20 years, with power generation's appetite almost doubling worldwide by 2030. ConocoPhillips sees more than 7 billion cubic feet a day of additional U.S. gas demand "on the bubble" as the oldest coal-fired power plants grow even older and are less able to meet new air quality standards. And even at the low side of its demand projections, Societe Generale, an international corporate and investment banking firm, believes U.S. demand for natural gas could climb 8 billion cubic feet a day by 2020, 12 percent over today's demand. At the high end, Societe Generale sees a potential for U.S. demand to grow by as much as 31 bcf a day by 2020, or almost 50 percent.
Speakers at the Oct. 11-12 conference talked of growing demand worldwide for natural gas, especially to replace aging and polluting coal-fired power plants in industrialized nations. They also talked of shale-gas production and how the numbers will keep climbing higher each year, more than offsetting the decline in conventional gas production. The Rockies & West conference is one of five regional events presented each year by LDC Gas Forums. Price projections, factorsSpeakers talked about the price for natural gas, and how eventually, probably, it will rise out of its deep doldrums - but how much and how soon? Today's sub-$4-per-thousand-cubic-feet U.S. gas price can be blamed on a surplus of supply, said Jim Duncan, director of market analysis at ConocoPhillips Gas & Power. He estimated that the U.S. market, as of October, is oversupplied by about 2.7 billion cubic feet per day. But, in a market that consumes about 66 bcf a day, it will not take much of a jump in demand to eat up the cushion and send prices higher, Duncan said.
Exporting some of North America's surplus gas would have a more immediate effect on domestic prices, said Jeremy Swancoat, head of North American natural gas analysis at Deutsche Bank Global Commodities. Sending just 2 bcf a day to overseas markets could drive up U.S. prices by as much as $2 per thousand cubic feet, Swancoat said. Producers and terminal operators have proposed more than 7 bcf a day in North America LNG export projects. It's all about supply and demand, the presenters said. Too much North America supply chasing too little demand keeps prices down. But if demand grows, prices could rise. Demand will grow, they said, that's the easy part of the prediction. The hard part is knowing how much. The 7 bcf a day that power generators would need for gas turbines to replace their retired coal-fired power plants "could happen within the next five years," Duncan said. Those retirements would equal about 10 percent of the nation's coal-fired power plants. Close to 20 percent of the nation's coal-fired plants are more than 45 years old. Shale gas will meet much of that need, but production from the typical shale well declines quickly, which creates an unknown for future supply. Meanwhile, a lot of drillers are moving their rigs from gas plays to higher-value shale-oil prospects. "The shift to oil drilling will start to show up at some point" in gas production numbers, Duncan said. It would not take much of a shift in natural gas supply or demand "to throw us out of balance," he said. One of his slides showed the range of analyst projections for natural gas prices in the 2020s, between $4.75 and $8 per mcf. ConocoPhillips markets about 15 percent of the gas sold in North America. Several speakers referred to the production decline from conventional gas fields in North America. Even after tapping large new shale gas plays in Alberta and British Columbia, Western Canada production will only equal - maybe - its 2001 peak gas flow of 17 bcf a day, said Todd Johnson, director of marketing, U.S. Pipelines West, at TransCanada. But there will be a significant cost to getting back closer to that 2001 number. TransCanada plans to spend as much as $1.6 billion on new pipelines by 2014 to bring that shale gas and coal-bed methane to market, Johnson said. Deutsche Bank's Swancoat expects shale gas production to slow down Canada's production decline, maybe even level it off, but not send the number higher. Potential demand growth
In the most optimistic forecast of the two-day conference, Harrison said U.S. power plant conversions from coal to gas and oil to gas could add from 6 bcf a day to 14 bcf a day of new gas demand by 2020. Industrial growth could grow as much as 5 bcf in that same period, as could exports of liquefied natural gas from U.S. terminals. Gas-to-liquids production and compressed natural gas vehicles could add to the demand growth, he said. "A myriad of arbitrage forces are working to the EVENTUAL benefit of U.S. natural gas demand," his slide said. "Each of these have different levels of uncertainties," he added. Jack Weixel of Bentek Energy listed the same demand growth prospects, forecasting that coal-to-gas switching at power plants would add 6 bcf a day to demand by 2016, about half of the U.S. demand growth Bentek sees in the next five years. The consulting firm sees prices in the $5.50 to $6 range by 2016. Whether shale gas will meet that 100 percent of that future demand is as uncertain as the demand itself. "Will shale gas be there for the long term?" asked Greenwood, of ExxonMobil. "What are the safety implications of these shale gas resources?" He called on the attendees to go forth and explain hydraulic fracturing for shale gas to their friends, families, neighbors and business associates. "As we move closer to population centers, people ask more questions," Greenwood said. "It's up to us to educate the public" about the safety of shale drilling. "By 2020, unconventional will be the new conventional," he said, with shale gas at 40 percent of U.S. supply, coal-bed methane and tight gas at 40 percent, and old-fashioned conventional production at the back of the pack with 20 percent. Larry Persily heads the Office of the Federal Coordinator for Alaska Natural Gas Transportation Projects, an office established by the U.S. Congress in 2004 "to expedite and coordinate federal permitting and construction of a pipeline to deliver natural gas from the Arctic to North American markets, and to enhance transparency and predictability of the federal regulatory system for the project." This article first appeared on the Federal Coordinator's website. The views expressed here are the writer's own and are not necessarily endorsed by Alaska Dispatch. Alaska Dispatch welcomes a broad range of viewpoints. To submit a piece for consideration, e-mail commentary(at)alaskadispatch.com
by jmacinak | October 25, 2011 - 11:13pm
The gist that this old Alaskan gets from all this posited speculation is that gas, and gas liquids, are going to rise in value relative to coal and oil distillates, all over the world. That benefits Alaska greatly with the current ACES (Alaska`s Clear and Equitable Share) production tax regime. Like Mr Duncan of great bear said; "Alaska has the rocks". We don`t need to change a thing. ACES is working great. Thirty four (a new record) exploration wells into known reservoirs are going to be "completed" by the end of 2012 on the slope and other places. Unfortunately for AGIA and Parnell and Persily, all that lower 48 gas also means Alaska gas will not economically compete in a market that has enough gas, that is close to delivery infrastructure, to last the USA for over a hundred years, and probably longer. Alaska`s future is tied to an in-state gasline to Valdez, with a spur to Anchorage and the Kenai as well, serving those deserving communities and the businesses in them. The good LONG TERM JOBS in Alaska are the frosting on the cake, if we have the courage of our convictions to get our gas, finally off the slope, and sending surplus gas to a hungry, higher paying, and growing, world market (as we fulfill Alaska`s gas needs concurrently).
by jmacinak | October 25, 2011 - 9:54pm
"They also talked of shale-gas production and how the numbers will keep climbing higher each year, more than offsetting the decline in conventional gas production". This is why the lower 48 price will remain low for a decade, and probably longer by most fair measures of investment directions. That is no longer Alaska`s gas market. Things have changed due to fracking, horizontal drilling, and shale oil and gas extraction technology increasing in efficiencies. Alaska needs to be selling it`s gas sooner than waiting for the lower 48 market to run short of supply, if it is not to head into a slower economy without affordable heat and power for it`s people, and right now we have a far more profitable market inside the state with an anchor LNG customer from Valdez. We have time, a market "window", but we need to fish or cut bait. Study hall is over.
by jmacinak | October 25, 2011 - 8:59pm
Apparently Exxon thinks shale gas is profitable enough to snap up "XTO Energy" (the second largest shale gas leaseholder and producer in the lower 48 states) long ago for 40 billion bucks! Money talks Mr Persily. So did the Japanese Tsunami tragedy and it`s 180 degree turn away from nuclear power in Japan. The money says the long term best project is LNG from Valdez to an anchor customer like Japan. That will keep the jobs and the value in Alaska and not Canada. What is your problem with Alaska doing what is best for Alaska Larry? It`s time you found a new job.
by Frumious | October 25, 2011 - 1:02pm
Thanks for the informative article. It will take North American natural gas prices over $8 per thousand cubic feet to pay anything back to the State of Alaska for its gas. If Alaska sends its share of North Slope gas south on the AGIA gas line at prices less than $8/mcf, Alaska will essentially be giving its gas away - getting nothing for it. This will be good for the North American resellers and for TransCanada, but not for the State of Alaska. Last month Japan was paying $16/mcf for LNG.
by jmacinak | October 25, 2011 - 9:23pm
Great points. It`s hard to argue with facts and reality. One cannot blame Persily for soaking his handlers for as much as he can. His role as an official "FEDERAL" AGIA "convincer" needs to end. It makes the feds look dumb too by continuing to pay him when the market has changed so drastically. Cheer-leading AGIA support and PR releases from him are becoming an embarrassment to Persily, as well as the Feds. Even Begich is lost when it comes to the newest events that have changed the world natural gas markets. Little mark needs a talk with Bill Walker. And Mr Persily needs to move on and quit wasting taxpayer money.
by 21stCentury | October 24, 2011 - 7:50pm
Larry Persily probably thinks it's really funny that 35% of the oil associated rich-gas in L48 shale-gasoil plays is being flared off.. Larry should go apply his brilliant genius to helping to clean up Fukushima and Chernobyl. |
















Comments