McKinsey, Averting the Next Energy Crisis.

Let me make it clear. The reason that I have pursued this issue over the past five years is due to the extensive nature of the threat. Our energy supply and demand balance is in serious jeopardy of becoming the biggest issue man has ever faced. When I look around I see a handfull of people at People, Ideas & Objects and McKinsey working on this problem. We have received no support and have consistently been kicked to the curb as a lunatic Cassandra, Chicken Little, Boy who cried Wolf or what have you. Now our lone voice is joined by a chorus of people calling for action.

First up is McKinsey, (Click on the title of this entry to be taken to the report.) At 150 pages this article deals with tthe demand side of the equation. This should be mandatory reading for the many reasons captured in this quotation.

It would be all too easy to respond with complacency to a short-term easing back of energy-demand growth. Once the global economy begins to recover, energy demand will bounce back too, imposing costs on consumers and businesses and on the climate in the form of CO2 emissions. There is even potential for oil market demand to grow more quickly than supply, risking another oil market shock. In these circumstances, losing the momentum on action to rein back energy demand could turn out to be a high-risk strategy -- particularly given early evidence that policy to boost the economy's energy productivity is already having an impact. p. 18

Fair comment from a demand point of view. For an understanding of the supply side concerns, the pre-eminent authority on that topic is Matthew Simmons of Simmons Consulting. He has a 49 page slide presentation that reflects the appropriate concern. On slide 45 he calls for the need to go to an "immediate war footing" with the following actions. 

• Step one: Enact genuine "data reform" on all key producing oil and gas fields. 
• Step two: Begin blue prints for rebuilding our energy infrastructure. (Where I think the Draft Specification fits in.)
• Step three: Get oil and gas prices high and create a floor. 
• Step four: Adopt global Plan B to reduce our oil and gas use ASAP. 

Here we have the number one consulting group in McKinsey, and arguably the number one oil and gas consulting group in Simmons both warning in the most dire terms regarding the situation that we find ourselves in. 

Who else is warning us about the concern for the energy industry? Bloomberg reports that oil executives tell the Obama administration "to get real on energy independence". Rigzone quotes the CEO of Chesapeake that we are;

Current low natural gas prices are setting the stage for a dramatic price rebound that should begin this fall or winter, Chesapeake Energy Corp.'s chief executive officer told analysts Tuesday. 

I hold the CEO of Chesapeake in high esteem. Recall he is the individual who,in three days last September, lost his $2 billion fortune in a cascading series of margin calls. An individual driven by more then just the financial rewards of the business. 

The prices of oil and gas have only recently collapsed, however, we see the long term damage this has done. Many projects are cancelled and will return slowly. Here Reuters reports that Shell has shelved their Beaufort exploration program. As I have mentioned before, I'm a Shell brat, and I recall when my dad was seconded to an industry joint venture to build a pipeline to bring this gas to market. This was during the mid seventies, and we're replaying this history again. 

Where is this all leading? To a very dire situation with tragic consequences for society. Those are my words and the motivation that has fueled this desire to reorganize the industry around the Joint Operating Committee. As the chicken little who has been squawking about this issue for over five years, I am pleased to see the quality and quantity of similar calls to act on this critical issue. I'll leave you with one more voice that should be considered. This one is from The Rand Corporation. Yes, that Corporation. Which is described as the "original non-profit think tank helping to improve policy and decision making through objective research and analysis." On Monday they released a report regarding the scope of the energy issue. Here's what they have to say. (From Reuters).

HOUSTON (Reuters) - The greatest threat to the United States from crude oil imports is a long-term disruption of world supply and the higher costs associated with that loss of imports, according to a RAND Corp study issued Monday.

"The fact that the United States imports nearly three-fifths of its oil does not pose a national security threat," said Keith Crane, the study's lead author and senior economist at RAND, a nonprofit research organization.

"There is an integrated world oil market, and embargoes do not work. But a large, extended drop in the global supply of oil would trigger a sharp rise in oil prices and significantly affect the United States, no matter how much or how little oil the United States imports," Crane said in a statement.

If we believe that the same ideas and approach that brought us to this point is the solution to this problem, then I leave you with that task. If however, you agree that this is an issue that can be solved by first re-organizing our approach to the business of energy, then please join us here.

Technorati Tags: People's Call-to-Action Energy Leadership McKinsey Simmons

Energies difficulties

There are a number of articles pointing to what I feel is the big problem that we face. The energy problems that we were dealing with last year seem somewhat distant. It appears there is a general consensus that the high energy prices were a result of market manipulation. Nothing could be further from the truth. Energy issues are being forgotten and obscured by our current economic condition.

It's therefore pleasing to see that many organizations are discussing what I feel is the big problem that we face. McKinsey Global Institute have published a series of articles about energy and do a good job in laying down the basics of the problems. Their articles are part of a series "Averting the next energy crisis: the demand challenge".

The same message is being articulated by Daniel Yergin and his Cambridge Energy Research Associates. Suggesting there is a destruction in our capabilities in terms of energy production. Although I consider CERA's projections to be far too optimistic. Even they are suggesting a loss of up to 7.6 million barrels of oil per day will be lost as a result of the decline in capital spending. Matthew Simmons of Simmons Consulting captures the point in the following article .

The global financial crisis and collapse in the oil market have stalled vital investment in oil exploration and production and are likely soon to lead to a sharp spike in prices, an energy consultant and financier says.

The economic conditions continue to deteriorate and will do so for some time. The Economist is stating that "Trade is Collapsing Everywhere" showing the unique size and scope of the problem. Expecting that the economy will be able to be stimulated back to its previously un-sustainable level, is wrong. We need to be focused on the issues that we can solve. The energy problem being the most important.

We need to start the process of building this software to support the Joint Operating Committee. Without first organizing ourselves to take on the challenge of supplying the market demand for energy, we will fail. Our organizations have proven beyond reason to be incapable of meeting the challenge we face. Does anyone believe SAP and the bureaucracy will enable our organizations to do the job? When we look at this situation form a long term perspective we see what our priorities are. Please join me here.

Technorati Tags: People's Economics Developments Yergin Simmons

Tanks half full.

I have written about Matthew Simmons before. He is the most vocal of all the peak oil theorists and the one that makes the most sense. He recently made a presentation talking about the future of the industry, and like me he sees a very rosy picture for those that work in the industry. (Rosy = lots of work to do.)

Stating "Winners Win Big!" p.23

• Implementation of massive "efficiency plans"
• The oil service and equipment industry
• The world's engineering and construction companies
• Companies that can adapt to high energy costs fast
• All consumer goods who win market share in building prosperity among oil producing world

I have to agree with all these points. Imagine what someone who is actively employed in the oil and gas industry will be doing. Think of the software tools they will need to make this future a reality. A software application that meets their needs because they were one of the fundamental elements of the development, the user. Join me here.

Technorati Tags: People's, Simmons, Peak-Oil, Organization,

Matthew Simmons on Peak Oil.

Matthew Simmons has written about the difficulties of the energy industry. In the early years his ideas were jeered by the industry, and as a result, he sharpened his pencil and double-checked his facts. Today I see him as being the foremost authority on the peak oil situation. Simmons presentation "Gauging the Risks of Peak Oil; will we face the limits to growth?" has been published on his website. I highly recommend downloading the slides and review the situation that he is talking about. His archives provide excellent resource material to the scope and scale of the peak oil issue.

Two questions that bring the immediacy of the problem we face in peak oil are asked on p. 37

• How ample are winter inventories? p. 37
• How fast can stocks drop before we breach minimum operating levels? p. 37

Suggesting that this winter may be the time where the inventories of crude and gasoline are dangerously close to a critical point where they are inadequate to meet consumers demand. This type of event, Simmons suggests, may start a "run on the bank" type of scenario where consumers will top up their tanks, and lead to the point where the distribution network is permanently damaged and unable to recover.

Simmons also makes the point that the makeup of the industries physical assets are in advanced states of age. Requiring an increase in the pace of asset replacement. With pipeline failures and refinery fires requiring more active budget and time requirements then in the past. This leads him to comment that something has to be done about the declining numbers of talent in the industry. I think we have to stop building individual silos of capability to "x" level and begin to think how it is we can expand the overall industry talent pool. I have suggested here, a pooling of industry resources in a market and firm definition that has each participant in the Joint Operating Committee's contributing available resources to the property. These pooled human resources adopting a military styled command and control governance model. This eliminates the redundancy of each producer having the capabilities on hand to complete the work that may be required, and relying on the market for those needs.

Needing these items is one thing, organizing where and how is another. If we approach this problem with a $ first attitude, we'll be revisiting the same, or even more dire consequences in 2 years from now. The point of this blog and its associated proposed software development is to establish the organizational means for the energy industry to mitigate peak oil and undertake these tasks that Simmons so effectively communicates.

As an optimist I find these challenges stimulating. As with all large challenges, human nature will surprise us with the solutions. I wrote recently about the 1700's and how Ludwig von Mises noted that the industrial revolution was the solution to population explosion. I think peak oil and its associated issues will challenge us to move to a higher level of civilization. And here, Simmon's reflects the sense of urgency that we begin this process.

It behooves all of us to take the risk of Peak Oil seriously, clamor for better energy transparency and take part in solving the 21st centuries greatest threat. p. 52

Technorati Tags: Genesys, Simmons, Research, Organization, Peak-Oil

All the Canaries have stopped singing. (Click here)

I have followed Matthew Simmons for over 10 years and his message has been constant throughout. The need for the industry to move forward to meet the demands for energy in the future is a necessity for our way of life. Simmons has weathered the storm of criticism by focusing his message and double-checking the facts. I would suggest that he might have the most accurate read of the pulse of the peak oil situation. Defining in many practical ways what the effect will be to the energy industry and society as a whole. I have always considered Simmons the anti-Yergin, honest, factual and with no apparent agenda other then sustaining our way of life. Apparently in his spare time, Simmons has also closed over $50 billion in industry investments.

I ran across this recent podcast that captures and summarizes his ideas in a concise manner. Simmons' suggests three important points;

1. Producing countries will soon learn it is in their interests to choke back production, increasing prices and extending the life of their reserves.
   
2. Consuming countries need to take some sort of coordinated effort.
   
3. This is an energy industry related leadership failure.
   

A few select quotes from the podcast.

@ 21:45 - The urgency of this could not be any higher, and yet the complacency among our energy leaders is just astonishing.
@ 30:45 - (Peakoil) is a religious debate.
@ 38:45 - (Talking about solutions to peakoil) Throwing billions of dollars at a problem is the easiest way in the world to waste money.

The time to organize ourselves and deal with these challenges is now. Going in with the classic bureaucratic command and control is the most illogical choice. To a large extent, it is the inability of the bureaucracy to keep up, and understand the energy business that has brought us to this point. The Joint Operating Committee (JOC) is the natural form of organization of the industry, first and foremost we need to build the software to identify and support the JOC. Unleashing the brain trust of the industry to mitigate peak oil impacts and realize the full potential of the globalized economy. Contact me here if you also believe we need to start these developments, and lets get started.

Technorati Tags: Genesys, Call-to-action, Peak-Oil

The Facts of the Case.

The graph presented above has been prepared by both the International Energy Agency and The National Petroleum Council. And both are listed as the source. This graphic spells out what has to be said about the energy industry. We are in deep difficulty.

The existing reserves seem to reflect the current production profile of the global oil industry. And this will achieve a significant decline in the next three years. From providing what appears to be 73 million barrels per day (mmb/d) currently. The decline in the latter part of 2007 until 2010 will drop over 25 mmb/d to approximately 48 mmb/d.

I don't dispute the sources of additional deliverability in "Known Reserves", "Enhanced Oil Recovery", "Unconventional" and "Exploration Potential" exist, they are just not in any condition to be able to start pulling such weight as what is expected / demanded in this graph. More or less the cupboards are bare.

Yesterday I made the comment that the exploration costs may total $12 trillion. This was on top of the National Petroleum Councils mention of $20 trillion in infrastructure. My $12 trillion comes about as a result of some analysis that was done in the late 1990's. Someone had allocated the industries costs of exploration over the various years increase in production. They came up with the figure of $300,000 in capital costs for each incremental barrel of oil. Not a replacement for depletion, but a certifiable increase in the global oil production capacity. Since it is 40 mmb/d in incremental production that we need by 2010, these values are accurate in my opinion.

At $300,000 for each incremental barrel, imputing a return on investment of 10% would create a financing cost of $30,000 / year. Take the financing costs and divide it by the 365 daily barrels of incremental oil production for the year. And you need $82.19 / barrel just to finance the necessary investment.

Until the market response to these values is reflected in the current commodity prices, we are in for a heap of difficulty. Based on the amount of press coverage received by the NPC's press release, I think we will need to realize this disaster before any action is taken. Was Dr. Daniel Yergin cowering during that presentation, I think he was, which I guess means that his 16 mmb/d in incremental production is not going to materialize. One should go back and read the excellent paper that Major Daniel Davis wrote. This information is not foreign to Dr. Yergin, he has access to maybe the best data available. I wonder why he said those stupid things back two years ago until yesterday? He should be embarrassed and looked at as the reason that the world waisted two critical years in attempting to avoid this disaster. Despicable.

Technorati Tags: Genesys, Yergin, Peak-Oil, Simmons, Call-to-action

The peaking of Offshore Oil and Gas:

Is the party over?
Or just Beginning to get exciting?

April 30, 2007

Matthew R. Simmons

Although the majority of this information is sourced from this Simmons presentation, little specifically is referenced. I felt that most of the information was factual and therefore not subject to Mr. Simmons copyright. (You can't copyright a fact.) I highlighted only what I thought was Mr. Simmons opinions in the noted references below.

Simmons noted the significance of the earlier period of the years 1859 to the 1930's where "no one had any idea what to do with so much oil"! The 148th year of the oil era is marked this year. 70 Years ago drilling teams began hunting for oil in the Middle East. Scouting for oil in Kuwait, Iraq, Iran and Saudi Arabia. Many of the large commercial fields that still produce in that region where found. Ghawar, the biggest was discovered in 1948, Safaniyah in 1951, up to 1967 with the last great super giant onshore Middle East find being Shaybah.

During 1947 Kerr-McGee moved offshore beyond piers and brings in the era of offshore oil and gas. These initial wells reached as deep as 150' feet of water. 150 feet being the limit of human endurance and safety due to the "bends". 1967 saw the Siberian Samoltar region develop, ARCO discovered the North Slopes Prudhoe Bay in 1968, Phillips found Ekofisk in 1969 and in 1975 Pemex found Cantarell. These regions and discoveries were the last 3 great oil frontiers.

With the development of mixed gas for diving, hyperbaric chambers, and the "Jim Suit" c/w GE's robotic arm. Led to testing and drilling into 1,000 feet of water in the early 1970's. Commensurate with this deeper diving capability Drill-ships and Semi-Submersible were able to conduct drilling into 150 to 400 - 450 feet of water. Further development of sub-sea production systems led to offshore satellite fields. During the 1980's the offshore drilling industry was faced with declining returns due to the costs of these technologies and the relative decline in demand for offshore drilling due to the delcine in the price of oil. As I recall it went to $10 / barrel in 1985 or 86. The pricing problem led to what was believed as the overbuilding of the offshore drilling fleet. This lack of offshre drilling demand dropped the capacity utilization rates to 43% overall. However when 1993 saw new offshore drilling technologies being introduced, the associated declines in costs and the producers earning reasonable returns on moderate oil prices of around $18 - 21 / barrel. This led to the real deep-water / ultra deep-water opportunities. This lead to a rebound or recovery of offshore drilling when in May 1997 Sonat Offshore announced the building of a deep-water rig with a 5 year contract at $200,000 / day day-rates.

"After 1980: all growth in oil output came from offshore oil". In his presentation Matthew Simmons shows the volume of oil production increases since 1980 are attributable to the offshore drilling discoveries. 120% of the 1980 to 2007 increase in the global oil production has come from offshore exploration and production. This is significant in showing the way in which the industry should turn. If the industry was able to make these discoveries with immature technologies and imploding commodity prices, I think the answer as to where the oil and gas industry needs to turn is evident.

Today after 38 years, the contractors for offshore drilling are financially healthy and prosperous. Only the number of rigs has not changed in the last 20 years. And the vintage of that fleet is quickly realizing its useful life. Recall that rust never sleeps and the useful life issue becomes more focused. Only 15% of the total fleet is new, with the majority being 25 years or more in age. It is unknown how quickly the fleet can be refurbished and how fast the fleet could be rebuilt. Simmons asks what does 500 offshore rigs cost. With 126 rigs on order, the delivery dates being from 2008 to 2011 it would seem the drilling platforms are very limited in their opportunities for the energy industries redevelopment capabilities. Time seems to be the greater cost in rebuilding the fleet. One must recall the effort of the United States during WWII, mixed in with some modern day innovation and science in seeing how the number of platforms could be built in time. With all of the oil found from offshore wells since the early 1980's, what is the prospect of the industries productive capacity and uptake?

One of the reasons that I follow Simmons is his analysis is usually unimpeachable. He is / has been a lightning rod for the wrath of the industry soothsayers that state all is well. Dr. Daniel Yergin seems to have sampled some magic cool-aid when it comes to predicting the supply possibilities, and hence his popularity. Simmons on the other hand has consistently put quality analysis that has proven correct over time. I have been following him since 1997 and his comments are stark, to the point and not something that Yergin appears to want to wake up to. For example, in this article Simmons notes the following prospective changes with respect to the supply that Yergin thinks is going to explode in the next 10 years.

• USA's onshore oil totals approximately 4.5 MB/D with an associated produced water of 128 MB/D. A 96.6% overall average water cut.
• Middle Easts giant oilfield now in decline. (Based on reserve analysis and decline in production from the region.)
  
• Mexico's Cantarell complex is beginning its steep decline.
• Lake Maracaibo is a "mess".
• Niger Delta is a rust belt of decay.
• The North Sea is in steep decline.
  

In light of this and the fact that 120% of the increase in oil and gas production in the past 27 years is from offshore oil exploration and production. How is it that Yergin believes the onshore oil and gas industry can respond to today's demand challenge. If it didn't contribute in the past 27 years to the global capacity of production, what is it that Yergin believes will solve this problem? More and more each day I think that Yergin is actively attempting to impeach his history and contribution to the oil and gas industry. As time passes he will become known for getting it all wrong.

Simmons falls definitively in the category of Peak Oil Theorists. He asks if the January 2007 production profile is 1 MB/D lower then May 2005's 74,151,000 B/D. This decline may show that May 2005 was the point of no return from a Peak Oil theory point of view. Unless the number of wells that can be drilled increases size-ably, then Peak Oil starts it's otherwise impossible decline. With the associated growth in the global fleet of offshore drilling capability, production decline will accelerate.

Its at this time that Simmons puts across one of the other phenomenon he has asserted many times before. The ability to accelerate the decline by aggressive exploitation is the only thing that the industry has really done in all of the onshore and offshore fields. This has raised the deliver-ability of oil and gas from known reserves to its absolute optimum, and cleaned out what was producible form the formations quicker then what has been found to replace it. In some companies in Canada this replacement rate is consistently 15% of the production! If you see a hamster in the wheel running at full speed your correct, however, this last point demands a doubling in the speed from the hamster. Our current consumption of energy is enabled by the aggressive and highly technical exploitation of known reserves over the past 25 years. This deliver-ability rate is therefore not sustainable. And if the peak oil theory is proven right, since May 2005 a very large clock has been ticking for the energy consumer who is unawares and unprepared. Thank you Dr. Yergin.

The dire nature of Simmons facts are captured in his 27th slide. Asking "Can the industry survive post peak oil?

• Will the global economy survive post-peak oil world?
• How high could oil prices go?
• When demand outstrips supply are shortages inevitable?
• Will the Offshore Technology Conference (OTC) survive Post Peak Oil? (The OTC is the group Simmons made this presentation too.)
  

How this gets done, and I cannot imagine anyone arguing for the bureaucracy to lead this charge. We need to organize our efforts to scale to this level. The industry is significantly bound by constraints and needs to reorganize around this proposed software development. How much longer will we face an angry consumer regarding the alleged gouging at the pump? How much longer will the bureaucracy feel complacent and wealthy in their deliberate inaction? How much longer will Yergin continue to belittle the Peak Oil theories and Simmons, and tell his customers, the consumers and bureaucracies, things are not as rosy as he has stated?

Technorati Tags: Genesys, Peak-Oil, Simmons, Yergin, Offshore, Engineering