Home Mobile Archives Reader Blogs Register Login

Monday, May 01, 2006

North Dakota’s Oil Boom Isn’t Going Away

An estimate of the amount of easily-exploitable oil in North Dakota has been upgraded by several hundred million barrels.

BISMARCK, N.D. -- North Dakota's easily recoverable oil reserves have jumped 41 percent, which state regulators hope will strengthen the case for long-term industry investment in the state's oil patch.

A new analysis by the state Industrial Commission's oil and gas division estimated the state's proven reserves at 550 million barrels. Geologists say there is a 90 percent probability that amount of oil can be pumped from western North Dakota, given current economic conditions.

The division's director, Lynn Helms, said the agency continuing to work on other estimates of probable oil reserves that are less likely to be produced.


The U.S. Department of Energy, acting through its Energy Information Administration, had the amount of proven reserves in ND at 389 million barrels, so this is a significant increase over that. The Department of Energy number was for 2004, but a spokesmen for the group said that their estimate for reserves in North Dakota is likely to come up in their 2005 assessment as well.

Gary Long, a petroleum engineer in the Energy Information Administration's division office in Dallas, said the federal agency's numbers are updated annually. Its report on 2005 reserves is to be published this fall, and he expects its North Dakota estimate on proven reserves will rise.


State Democrats, always eager to find a way around the economic boom North Dakota has enjoyed under the leadership of Gov. John Hoeven and other Republicans, have said that high gas prices have propped up the state economy and that the boom will only last as long as the high prices do. They have used this as an excuse to avoid tax cuts in the face of high state tax receipts and massive budget surplus. Unfortunately for them (but good for North Dakota as a whole), it appears as though gas prices will have little impact on the exploitability of North Dakota oil reserves.

Helms said the reserve estimate was nudged upward by rising oil prices. But even if prices crash, he does not expect the 550-million-barrel proven reserve estimate to drop more than 5 to 10 percent, he said.


Going forward North Dakota should have a policy of being highly cooperative with the oil industry. Increased domestic production of oil in places like North Dakota will help make this country less reliant upon foreign oil, not to mention the economic benefits North Dakota communities will enjoy as a consequence.

Comments

Avatar for The Whistler

So what you’re saying that because of higher oil prices that it’s more economical to develop North Dakota’s oil assets?

The amount of proven reserves in North Dakota would be 272 years worth of production from the Velva biodiesel plant. 

The Whistler on May 1, 2006 at 07:36 am
Avatar for Bat One

Not only has the price of crude escalated, but the tecnology for recovery of that oil is significantly better today than when those first estimates of recoverable reserves were first offered.

Besides all that, when was the last time we heard from an authoritative, reputable source say that the crude oil reserves at a particular site were actually less than what had been first estimated?  I can’t think of a single such instance.  We are awash in oil reserves.  And at $3.00 per barrel, we are presented with the opportunity to develop both the laternative enegery sources we will need down the road, and the substantial oil reserves still available to us.  All we have to do is recognize and accpet the price we will have to pay to do so.

Bat One on May 1, 2006 at 08:53 am
Avatar for Blake

Apparently reserves are so high that all of the oil in ND cannot get to market and the big operators are paying their royalty owners (state and federal governments) and interest partners only $ 40 per barrel.  We are awash in oil. If the NYMEX price is $ 70 per barrel, what accounts for the thirty dollar differential? Where and to whom does that go? I think the State of ND  and the federal Minerals Service is being taken for a ride on that one.

Blake on May 8, 2006 at 09:00 am
Avatar for The Whistler

If the NYMEX price is $ 70 per barrel, what accounts for the thirty dollar differential?

I don’t know but extraction, trucking, profit, extraction taxes all spring to mind as expenses that also have to be paid. 

The Whistler on May 8, 2006 at 09:05 am
Page 1 of 1        

Post a Comment


Before commenting, please recite:

Grant me the serenity to ignore the trolls,
the courage to debate with honest opponents,
and the wisdom to know the difference.

Name   
Email   
URL   
Human?
  
 

Upload Image    

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Note: Notifications will only be sent to confirmed email addresses.

    

By submitting your comment you agree to our terms of service.