| Submit your comments on this article | |
| Home Front: Economy | |
| Small oil firm may have struck it rich in Utah | |
| 2005-05-05 | |
| A tiny oil company has snapped up leasing rights to a half-million acres in central Utah that it says could yield a billion barrels or more of oil. Geologists are calling it a spectacular find — the largest onshore discovery in at least 30 years, located in a region of complex geology long abandoned for exploration by major oil companies. It's turning out to contain high-quality oil already commanding a premium at Salt Lake refineries. With the secret out, industry players expect a bidding war to break out at the next Utah leasing auction, set for May 17 in Salt Lake City. "This is huge for the state of Utah," said Larry Nation of the American Association of Petroleum Geologists. "The budget for the entire state of Oklahoma is virtually built on oil revenues. I could see that happening in Utah in the future." At today's prices the oil reserve could bring Utah $5.6 billion in royalties, state auditors conservatively estimate. Although the discovery is still playing out, the oil will take years to recover, and some skeptics question the company's projections for a region yet to be fully surveyed. "It's just very highly unlikely because the U.S. onshore has been picked clean, if you will," said Fadel Gheit, senior oil analyst at Oppenheimer & Co. in New York. "That's like finding a wallet in the subway after all the cleaners went through it. It's possible, but very highly unlikely," he said. Gov. Jon Huntsman said he was aware of the discovery, "and we are tracking the progress with great interest. If the prospects prove to be true, it will be important that the resources are developed responsibly." Nation said the discovery is "very real" and signals a new beginning for oil production in Utah. "We're talking about a very large oil deposit in Utah," Nation said. "It was a very big risk on their part, and it looks very very very promising."
Wolverine and government geologists said the company is looking at a total of 25 deposits that could contain 1 billion barrels of oil. Those underground deposits are widely scattered over a crescent-shaped belt 100 miles long and up to 50 miles wide that contains all the geologic "right stuff" for oil pockets in folds of Jurassic Navajo sandstone, said Tom Chidsey, petroleum section chief for the Utah Geological Survey. If Wolverine could produce 1 billion barrels at once, it could satisfy the nation's demand for about 45 days — less than the reserve that Congress may open at the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, which by equally speculative estimates may contain 10 billion barrels of oil. Chidsey said Wolverine's discovery could dwarf Utah's last major find, the still-producing Pineview field overlapping the Wyoming border. That field, tapped in 1975, has produced 31 million barrels and may contain another 100 million barrels, he said. Oil companies began exploring central Utah more than 50 years ago without success, even though it's part of an oil-producing belt thrust ranging from Mexico to Alaska. The complex geology of central Utah produced only dry wells — 58 of them in the past 25 years. In 1999, Wolverine bought Chevron's leasing rights and seismic data and started poking around itself, bouncing seismic waves more than 5,000 feet deep. With just two wells operating at full capacity now, Wolverine is pumping 1,500 barrels of oil a day from the ground and trucking it to Salt Lake refineries. "The secret's out and we will face competition" at the next BLM auction, said Doug Strickland, a geologist for Wolverine. "We had a year and three months to ourselves." The BLM will auction 300,000 acres throughout Utah. Acres that Wolverine once picked up for $10 are now being valued at $1,200 in central Utah. Leasing rights are good for five years and as long as a well is producing. Oil companies pay 12.5 percent of the value of oil taken from federal lands — and half of that comes back to Utah, which shares some of it with local governments, said Steve Schneider, audit manager for the Utah Division of Oil, Gas & Mining. | |
| Posted by:Steve |
| #18 Geologists are calling it a spectacular find — the largest onshore discovery in at least 30 years,.. ''Come and listen to the story 'bout a man named Jed, a poor mountaineer, barely kept his family fed....'' |
| Posted by: Bomb-a-rama 2005-05-05 23:37 |
| #17 --Any word on whether there will be any increase in refinery capacity in the near future? Am I right in understanding that to be the primary bottleneck in supply to the gas pump?-- Of course, not requiring 95 different summer blends would also help. GM and Ford might have some property available. Cheap. |
| Posted by: anonymous2u 2005-05-05 22:37 |
| #16 The issue of refining capacity is a mixed bag. There must be major backlogs, tank farms full waiting their turn, at the mega-refinieries that can handle the sour stuff. There is probably some light-medium grade refining capacity to spare. We had some pretty good grades of native crude (e.g. West Texas Intermediate was, indeed, a medium -to- light medium grade), so the first refineries were simple smaller affaris. As we began importing crude, while we were still building refineries, we geared up for the nastier stuff coming from Venezuela (which I understand is actually a poort grade), Africa, etc. After West Texas ran dry, I'd wager that some refineries, at great expense, were redesigned to handle the heavy stuff. Likely there is some spare in lighter grades, and a backlog in heavier grades. |
| Posted by: .com 2005-05-05 12:55 |
| #15 Maximizing one product type will, of course, lessen the other product types you get per barrel - but it's not necessarily a one-for-one thing. Deciding to work toward getting 10% more gasoline from a particular crude, at the expense of, say, kerosene, may reduce the kerosene amt by more than 10%. Looks like I've found hell's library. |
| Posted by: Shipman 2005-05-05 12:47 |
| #14 Sheesh, typo city when in a hurry. Sorry. |
| Posted by: .com 2005-05-05 12:43 |
| #13 Damn, hit submit too fats. I meant to add that almost any refinery can handle the good sweet crudes, only the monsters can handle the nsaty stuff. Indeed, there could be a shuffling of who refines what to maximize on a national level - but keep in mind it's private enterprise and there are standing contracts and commitments throughout the process, from crude suppliers to gasoline, heating oil, etc. retailers. You can't just rearrange everything to fit your agenda. You'd never get out of court unless you're the Pres & Congress declaring a National Emergency. |
| Posted by: .com 2005-05-05 12:42 |
| #12 Spot on, as I understand how they plan 'em, tt. |
| Posted by: .com 2005-05-05 12:37 |
| #11 Okay, so if this is a light sweet crude it could in theory at least substitute for imported crude at some number of refineries. Then if you're running a linear optimization you can modify it to note the difference in $/bbl between the two crudes and pick the refinery whose setup will yield the best mix of products given the characteristics of this new source. Is that about it .com? |
| Posted by: too true 2005-05-05 12:35 |
| #10 I don't see how this find will help, anyway. I am positive that it's right in the fragile ecosystem of some endangered species. If it isn't, someone will plant the evidence (like the lynx hairs). Green lawsuit to stop all drilling 5..3..2..(4)..1.. |
| Posted by: Jackal 2005-05-05 12:33 |
| #9 I've mainly modeled this stuff on puters, not turned wrenches or planned it, but here's what I think is the situation... The article doesn't give enough specifics, though it almost implies something akin to the light sweet grade Libya is known for. Very very low sulfer content, reducing refining / cracking steps and thus reducing the power inputs req'd - a non-trivial cost in refining. You are not specifying what product mix you want. Gasoline, kerosene, etc. Maximizing one product type will, of course, lessen the other product types you get per barrel - but it's not necessarily a one-for-one thing. Deciding to work toward getting 10% more gasoline from a particular crude, at the expense of, say, kerosene, may reduce the kerosene amt by more than 10%. So you have to calculate your best mix: least steps, least energy expended, etc. for max profit. As I said, every single crude in the world has an ideal refining process - custom to that variety of crude because they're all unique in component levels. Best mix is the goal. Normally you customize the refinery to match the crude type and grade for best product mix. Existing refineries can bypass sections which perform additional cracking steps if the crude is low in impurities - but that doesn't increase the output, just puts section of a refinery capable of refining the nastier grades out of the loop - idle. |
| Posted by: .com 2005-05-05 12:31 |
| #8 What about the first question - i.e. can this substitute for some oil we're importing, given the existing refinery configurations? |
| Posted by: too true 2005-05-05 12:27 |
| #7 what would be involved in modifying or using other refineries for this high grade crude? There isn't enough oil to make this a relevant question. Even if they were producing 10 times the 1.5k bpd they are currently producing it still wouldn't exceed what a medium sized refinery could process. |
| Posted by: phil_b 2005-05-05 12:26 |
| #6 It's turning out to contain high-quality oil already commanding a premium at Salt Lake refineries. Question for our RB'ers with experience in the industry: do we currently import a lot of the grade/type oil being refined at Salt Lake refineries? And if so, what would be involved in modifying or using other refineries for this high grade crude? |
| Posted by: too true 2005-05-05 12:12 |
| #5 ExMo - That is correct - and one reason why no one can do much to actually increase supply. The Saudis can pump a little more crude, but there is little or no spare refining capacity in the world, and none in the US. Demand exceeds refining capacity... and refinery construction is a 10-15 yr cycle. 20 if you do the full range of petrochemicals. I have heard that if you use a cookie-cutter approach, you can shave about 2-3 yrs off that in planning and development time, but then you are likely wasting some of the product range for a given grade. Each crude has an ideal refining process that yields the max amts of the range of products based upon the different levels of components, i.e. sulfur, etc. |
| Posted by: .com 2005-05-05 12:04 |
| #4 They're whale watching platforms, not oil production platforms. |
| Posted by: Navel Gazer Tours, a Subsidiary of Conoco 2005-05-05 11:55 |
| #3 Any word on whether there will be any increase in refinery capacity in the near future? Am I right in understanding that to be the primary bottleneck in supply to the gas pump? |
| Posted by: ExtremeModerate 2005-05-05 11:52 |
| #2 Drilling off the US coastline would decimate the whale watching industry. It would put 10s of people out of work |
| Posted by: BrerRabbit 2005-05-05 11:49 |
| #1 And Houston's sitting a lot of natural gas. Oil above US, below US, off both coasts, in the Gulf and in IL. We have it, we just can't get it. |
| Posted by: anonymous2u 2005-05-05 11:34 |