Dedicated To The Smallest Of Skiffs banner

1 - 12 of 12 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
929 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
The Corpus Christi Port Authority has made official request to dredge the CC Ship Channel from 56 to 80', and more importantly, to install a tank farm with oil loading dock right at Harbor Island. There has not been an environmental impact statement yet and the Port Authority is requesting to do this sans that impact statement. This makes the proposed desal plant look like not much at all. Port Aransas has some of the most ecologically pristine habit on the TX coast. Marine scientists, numerous fishing guides and most of the citizens of Port A are not in favor of this. We have other areas where we can transport, off-load and otherwise process oil. Port A is a booming ecotourism location and more oil industry, essentially in Port Aransas is not advisable for many reasons.


Action link:

https://portaransasconservancy.com/75-dredging

Best,
Matt
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
929 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
Don’t worry. There’s a group of adolescents with a law suit against the USA regarding fossil fuels that will fix that.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juliana_v._United_States
Well that should suffice. Oil is good, oil is bad. Hopefully they can find some balance. The ICW and CC Ship Channel already retire constant maintenance dredging and there already was a tank farm on Harbor Island. The question is whether or not is wise to expand that type of heavy industrial development so close to the sensitive mangrove estuaries and well used ecotourism areas or should it be moved elsewhere. I surely don’t want to see the Middle Coast look like the Upper Coast. Galveston Bay once had grass flats and clear water.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JDRProductions

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
828 Posts
There was a technically viable proposal from a Dutch company to load the VLCCs at anchorage through pipes and a flange. For some reason it was rejected.... maybe all the construction dollars for the port/ dredging?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
929 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
There was a technically viable proposal from a Dutch company to load the VLCCs at anchorage through pipes and a flange. For some reason it was rejected.... maybe all the construction dollars for the port/ dredging?
I did see mention of a proposal for an offshore loading facility but not sure if we speak of the same?
Cheers,
Matt
 

·
I Love microskiff.com!
Joined
·
4,578 Posts
Matts - hope you do not mind but I fwd this to my favorite conventional vertical drilling and tree hugging oil exec/- he loves it and " Ed just tweeted it to the entire shale oil industry and it will stir a lot of people’s oatmeal up this morning." HA.

There is a correlation between the 4 or 5 proposed desal plants and this first tank farm/ lto export / US asset stripping business. There will be more such facilities as the industry attempts to service their lenders.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
828 Posts
Matts - hope you do not mind but I fwd this to my favorite conventional vertical drilling and tree hugging oil exec/- he loves it and " Ed just tweeted it to the entire shale oil industry and it will stir a lot of people’s oatmeal up this morning." HA.

There is a correlation between the 4 or 5 proposed desal plants and this first tank farm/ lto export / US asset stripping business. There will be more such facilities as the industry attempts to service their lenders.
Once pipelines are in place to CC for delivery to refining, and exports, the West TX shale producers will be very competitive. Of course there will be overproduction and the price may drop below the $45 per barrel viability threshold.

@Matts , yes, I was referring to the offshore loading proposal, which really is what should happen.
 

·
I Love microskiff.com!
Joined
·
4,578 Posts
Once pipelines are in place to CC for delivery to refining, and exports, the West TX shale producers will be very competitive. Of course there will be overproduction and the price may drop below the $45 per barrel viability threshold.

@Matts , yes, I was referring to the offshore loading proposal, which really is what should happen.
Agree. They are putting a lot of "faith" in west Texas potential. Maybe?

From my friend:

There are Tens of thousands of oil and natural gas wells producing in Texas (shaleprofile.com), most of the oil wells are now on rod lift and are facing horrendous terminal decline rates and many (as in thousands and thousands) are significantly short of paying back land acquisition, drilling and completion costs. Eagleford

"Whiskey is for drinking and water is to fight over," so said Mark Twain.

Folks in West Texas think they have enough water to frac all those shale oil wells but man-o-man, that's a lot of water. 350 wells per month X 550,000 BW per well = 8.1 billion, with a big 'ol B, gallons per month, coming from... somewhere. That's enough water for 95,000,000 human beings to consume. And that's just one month. Some of this frac source water is recycled produced water, how much NOBODY knows; got it. But produced water can't be recycled over and over again because at some point TDS content becomes too high to remove.

The fresh water use for frac'ing in West Texas is alarming. So is the associated gas that is flared and forever wasted. Rystad recently suggested that light tight oil production will grow another 12MM BOPD by the year 2025; the EIA, in fact, says 75% of all future shale oil growth in America will come from the Permian. Most of that LTO growth will be exported. Then, in the next eight years, the shale oil phenomena will on the downhill slide and we'll be back to buying OPEC oil, for three times more the price than we're exporting it now. https://shaleprofile.com/2019/02/06/permian-update-through-october-2018/

And West Texas will be a dust bowl...

Me: Is he right. Maybe. 50+ years in the business makes his insight worthy of consideration. About them Desal plants...
 

·
Zephyr Cove is on FIRE!
Joined
·
10,394 Posts
And just think, all the beautiful oil we produce goes to the ragheads and we import their black oatmeal.
I wonder how many of you realize this...
I operate over 80 wells in the Eagleford and see what comes out of the ground. The oil is so clean and high gravity that the water looks dirty compared to it. I have a sample I got from a wellhead two years ago that looks like acetone it is so pure. Most of the rest looks like transparent chartreuse highlighter fluid. This oil is hauled or pipelined to the port and hauled offshore to sit in storage barges while we import the shitty black crude from overseas and put it through the refineries to try to clean it up. Politics are a bitch.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
225 Posts
I read an interesting book the other day called "Saudi America: The Truth About Fracking and How It's Changing the World". The author is Bethany McLean, co-author of "The Smartest Guys in the Room", about Enron. She discusses the steep decline curves and the possible unsustainability of fracking from a purely capital/investment standpoint, and doesn't get into the environmental issues at all. It's an interesting quick read if you've got the time.

But she makes one very interesting observation about exporting, and it goes something like this: If you have an extremely valuable, critically important, and irreplaceable resource in your country, should you ever export it, or should you import all you can and save yours for when every other country has depleted theirs?
 

·
I Love microskiff.com!
Joined
·
2,301 Posts
Crude oil processing/refining is not simple and the best option is distribute/export some of the light shale crudes to the world refining market. Refining and market efficiency is the goal, not political considerations.
 
1 - 12 of 12 Posts
Top