Shale Gas production

[gordon2007]

Shale Gas production seems to be in the news a lot lately. I recently read in the US they are mining with the potential to give enough gas to the entire east coast for 50 years. Believe they were mining in the Ohio and Pennsylvania areas.

Here on our shores I haven't heard much about it. I haven't done any research on this but will be over the next few weeks.

Just wondering if anyone here knows anything about it. A few quick links provided below.

http://www.abc.net.au/rural/resource/stories/s2846061.htm
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...next-energy-boom/story-e6frg9ef-1225858745153

 

[So_Cynical]

Aussie shale gas has been, and still is a total sleeper...Australia has some of the largest shale reserves in the world and the potential has been almost totally over looked, even though there are some Aussie listed stocks doing very well in the US shale industry.

BPT - Beach energy has a drilling program under way in the cooper basin targeting very deep, very large shale deposits under Australia's largest onshore oil and gas production field, due to hit shale next week!...seems a total no brainier to me.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...hale-gas-project/story-e6frg8zx-1225888698750

http://member.afraccess.com/media?id=CMN://5A179251&filename=20100825/BPT_01091286.pdf

 

[Chief Wigam]

One stock that has large shale gas reserves is OEX, it's reserves are in India.

 

[So_Cynical]

One stock that has large shale gas reserves is OEX, it's reserves are in India.

First thought that comes to mind...do you think there may be some issues with fracking and the 1,139,964,932 Indians living in India and drinking ground water?

 

[roland]

AWE's SP jumped on it's shale gas announcement:

AWE announces 13-20 Tcf Gas in Place in its Perth Basin Shale Gas acreage
AWE Limited is pleased to report on the significant progress made in assessing the potential of the Perth Basin Shale Gas play. The assessment has now identified a very large potential gas resource in one of three key shale sequences in AWE’s acreage holding in close proximity to one of Australia’s key domestic gas markets.
In particular, following the analysis of the Woodada Deep-1 core results, AWE estimates that the middle interval of one of these shale intervals (the Carynginia Shale) alone holds a gross Gas in Place of 13-20 trillion cubic feet (Tcf).

 

[Julia]

I know nothing about this topic, but would be interested to know if the concerns raised in the 7.30 Report a few nights ago are at all relevant:

http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2010/s3061803.htm

I do know farmers in Qld have demonstrated much concern about potential damage done to their environment.

 

[So_Cynical]

I know nothing about this topic, but would be interested to know if the concerns raised in the 7.30 Report a few nights ago are at all relevant:

http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2010/s3061803.htm

I do know farmers in Qld have demonstrated much concern about potential damage done to their environment.

Yes very relevant to the industry's development, particularly i would think in areas where ground water is used for agriculture or human use...that's one of the main reasons i was so keen on the Beach Energy shale project in the Cooper Basin, as its in the middle of nowhere and in a region that has the largest concentration of onshore gas and oil production in Australia..so its already industry friendly.

Perth Basin, Coastal QLD, Northern NSW all very iffy in my opinion.

There is a Doco called Gasland'' that covers the green issues well. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gasland
~

 

[roland]

I know nothing about this topic, but would be interested to know if the concerns raised in the 7.30 Report a few nights ago are at all relevant:

http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2010/s3061803.htm

I do know farmers in Qld have demonstrated much concern about potential damage done to their environment.

The obvious answer is, if you drill a hole through the shale, then fracture the structure underground with explosives, then pump the voids with something harmful that could get into the water table - then, yes there are going to be concerns.

The make up of the stuff you pump into the ground will determine the contamination level and of course if you are in fact anywhere near a water table will add to the equation.

From what I read about the make up of the post fracture pump in, it didn't seem to be overly noxious. Mainly saline with very small percentages of silica and other flow enhancers.

It's probably a whole lot better for the environment than coal gassification through underground burning.

The ABC report did highlight the fact that the Australian regulatory process is whole lot more strict and open.

 

[Whiskers]

First thought that comes to mind...do you think there may be some issues with fracking and the 1,139,964,932 Indians living in India and drinking ground water?

Well, fracking wasn't my first thought about this industry as I knew nothing about it apart from what was excitedely released to the media by the Qld Gov to lead to heaps of jobs and income.

But, since learning about the problems left behind from fracking in the USA and seeing 4 Corners tonight, I see another monumental half baked Labor blunder in the haste for political salvation... jobs and royalty income.

Fracking by definition is a very dangerous practice to the well being of good water supplies aside from the toxity of some of the chemicals used.

 

[gordon2007]

But, since learning about the problems left behind from fracking in the USA and seeing 4 Corners tonight,

I watched this show tonight too. I have a qandary. At what point does one invest\trade (in any given stock or industry) and realise profit against climate, ecology and just plain effects on other peoples lives. Is money in your pocket more important than disturbing others? If so, how much? IE, does a quick $20,000 profit erase any guilt or concerns that it could affect others livelihood?

 

[So_Cynical]

I watched this show tonight too. I have a qandary. At what point does one invest\trade (in any given stock or industry) and realise profit against climate, ecology and just plain effects on other peoples lives. Is money in your pocket more important than disturbing others? If so, how much? IE, does a quick $20,000 profit erase any guilt or concerns that it could affect others livelihood?

Other people make the big decisions...we profit from it or we don't, that's the choice we have.

 

[gordon2007]

Other people make the big decisions...we profit from it or we don't, that's the choice we have.

In principal I agree. I do have more to say on this subject though, but a very heavy bottle of red is affecting my thought processes and typing skills tonight.

 

[Wysiwyg]

I watched this show tonight too. I have a qandary. At what point does one invest\trade (in any given stock or industry) and realise profit against climate, ecology and just plain effects on other peoples lives.

Very interesting point. The consumers of raw materials, being most of the human population, are also guilty (if accusation abounds) by continuing to buy the stuff that fills the voids in their houses and lives. The news is that consumption isn't declining soon. The more more more *meme.

But directly (as opposed to indirectly) poisoning people by contaminating one of life's essentials is wrong.

* "Meme is a relatively newly coined term, identifies ideas or beliefs that are transmitted from one person or group of people to another"

 

[Smurf1976]

40 years ago nuclear was the power source attracting protests.

30 years ago it was the massive protests, both for and against, hydro-electric dams in Tasmania.

20 years ago people would have pointed to the Exxon Valdez and the evils of oil.

In more recent times it's been all about CO2 and climate change.

Now it's about gas.

Bottom line is that ALL power pollutes in some way. If you are sitting at home with the lights and computer on then in some way you are polluting. Personally I'd take wind and hydro over nuclear or fossil fuels any day on the basis that the damage is far more easily reversed. But I won't deny that wind turbines kill the birds, and those hydro lakes don't look so pretty when the water levels drop.

If we keep having more people and growing GDP then we'll keep using more energy and creating more pollution. Stopping a gas field, uranium mine or a dam doesn't change that, all it does is shift the pollution to another form and/or location.

Not wanting to revive a very old debate here, but the reality that Tasmania imports brown coal-fired power from Victoria as a "greener" alternative to increasing local hydro output is a classic case in point. Some will argue that's a good thing on the basis of wilderness and wild rivers. Others will argue that they'd rather dam the lot than use coal. I'm not wanting to revive that debate here, but it's a classic and extremely well documented example. The solution to one environmental problem is the direct cause of another and it is the same globally where energy is concerned.

Other than the development of combined cycle gas turbines and closing old power stations that didn't have filters or precipitators, we haven't really achieved much at all so far as power and the environment is concerned over the past 40 years. Modest gains in efficiency have little impact in the face of constantly rising demand. All we've really done is swap one problem for another. Worrying about gas is in the same category - many would argue that increasing gas production is part of the solution to other environmental problems whilst others will point to the downsides of gas production itself.

Coal, oil, gas, wind farms, lots of hydro schemes. Been there, seen plenty of power stations. Seeing all that, it's hard not to become somewhat conscious of reducing consumption. I'm no hard line green, but if I walk out the front door and then realise that I've left the computer turned on at the wall then yes, I'll go back into the house and turn it off. Likewise anything else. No point wasting the planet.

 

[Whiskers]

I still don't know a lot about the legal aspects of the development of this industry in Qld (or anywhere for that matter) but on face value it seems indigenous people have more say in mining matters than the average Aussie. In traditional aboriginal areas there are all sorts of surveys and agreements to be made with the indigenous people before any dirt can be moved or sampled and determining what ares are 'sacred' and off limits.

Some of these properties were only 30 acre rural residental homesites and other wells were proposed within a couple hundred meters of homesteads and in the middle of existing feedlots for example.

I'd like to know what is sacred land for the average Aussie... surely your family home and gardens or busines premises are sacred sites, and exempt from intrusion by mining companies.

To what extent can these companies impose their wells on your home or business under Qld law (or lack of)? Is rolling up and planting a well in and cordoning off your existing feed-lot or planting a well under your window sill acceptable behaviour?

I can see this in conjunction with fluoridation being a major water quality issue in the near future.

Whereas most mining activities are in remote and not much good for any thing else areas, this industry probably needs some urgent new legislation to take account of the higher human density and earning ability of the land.

On second thoughts, Stephen Robertson (Mines Minister) said there was plenty of new legislation to protect the water and rural land owners... BUT, I get the distinct impression that he doesn't really care about those rural folk in non labor seats and will leave the regulatory authorities so under resourced that they have no hope of keeping up with policing the gas well sites. As the Qld retired state hydrologist on 4 corners said, a few years ago every hole in the Artesian Basin was inspected, now hardly any of these gas holes are inspected.

 

[mr. jeff]

Opinion only but a good way to get it layed out. AUT is not as speculative as is shown.

Don't know a lot about many of the smaller company's speculativity (my word) so let me know opinions and we'll have a map for getting rich if we get the right information.

Cheers and have a good weekend.

 

[notting]

It's been quite an amazing technical rally that all these gas companies have had and seem to be still having. It just doesn't make much sense given how much gas there is all over the place.

 

[Smurf1976]

It's been quite an amazing technical rally that all these gas companies have had and seem to be still having. It just doesn't make much sense given how much gas there is all over the place.

Most gas in the world is controlled by Russia or OPEC.

With oil production near peak (well past peak on a per capita basis) and concerns about the impacts of coal and nuclear, demand for gas is booming and likely to continue to do so.

The only real issue I see is that in the short term, the most profitable thing to do with gas is likely to leave it in the ground until prices rise. Not many companies choose that option however, preferring to sell now at a low price rather than wait for higher prices. BHP has long been an exception, they adopted a sensible approach decades ago, but gas has never been a major part of their overall operations.

 

[tinhat]

There are incredible amounts of natural gas, shale gas within the earth. Exploiting them is just a matter of cost.

 

[DB008]

Foreign Correspondant had a really good story on this recently.


'Meet the Frackers'

http://www.abc.net.au/foreign/content/2012/s3441606.htm