Results 1 to 61 of 61

Thread: What will we do when natural gas prices soar?

  1. #1

    Default What will we do when natural gas prices soar?

    It's funny, when I came to Alberta, it wasn't oil that was funding the province, it was natural gas.

    People talk about lack of diversification, but it seems to me we have just survived a disastrous natural gas price plummet through diversification into oil.

    Now, I seem to remember from economics at university years ago, that commodities follow cycles.

    The most famous contra investor in Alberta is CNRL. They invest when others sell, and they sell when others invest. Earlier this year they purchased in a massive transaction, much of Devons gas assets.

    We see right now a huge environmental shift from coal power to gas in the US.

    When fracking exploded recently, it started with gas then shifted to oil. Now, if many of those companies fail, what will that mean for gas supply?

    What do you think? Are we on the verge of another gas boom that will offset the loss of these oil revenues for Alberta?

  2. #2
    Becoming a C2E Power Poster
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    295

    Default

    Basic economics of supply and demand. Demand for gas is about to jump as coal-fired power plants are phased out and converted to gas, including in Alberta by 2020.

    Max Keiser says the economics on fracking are unsustainable:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fP8XklfMqHk

    So indeed, what does CNRL know that the others don't?

  3. #3
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    2,443

    Default

    As recently as fiscal year 2005/06, the Alberta government received $8.4 billion in natural gas royalties. In the past several years, it's been around $1 billion.

    Natural gas demand is steadily increasing in North America. Prices have already recovered from their 2012 lows. Mitigating against soaring prices (except for spikes during cold snaps or heat waves) is the sheer abundance of natural gas in North America that is recoverable with current (let alone future) technologies at existing price levels.

  4. #4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by David Jackson View Post
    Max Keiser says the economics on fracking are unsustainable:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fP8XklfMqHk
    Wow, he was totally wrong, the price of energy went down, massively, due to that additional 9 million barrels of frack oil on world markets.

  5. #5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    It's funny, when I came to Alberta, it wasn't oil that was funding the province, it was natural gas.

    People talk about lack of diversification, but it seems to me we have just survived a disastrous natural gas price plummet through diversification into oil.

    Now, I seem to remember from economics at university years ago, that commodities follow cycles.

    The most famous contra investor in Alberta is CNRL. They invest when others sell, and they sell when others invest. Earlier this year they purchased in a massive transaction, much of Devons gas assets.

    We see right now a huge environmental shift from coal power to gas in the US.

    When fracking exploded recently, it started with gas then shifted to oil. Now, if many of those companies fail, what will that mean for gas supply?

    What do you think? Are we on the verge of another gas boom that will offset the loss of these oil revenues for Alberta?
    What will WE do? If natural gas prices soar, be assured we will ramp up government spending as fast as we can. I doubt we'd save much if anything for long-term income diversification, economic stabilization purposes.

  6. #6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by David Jackson View Post
    Basic economics of supply and demand. Demand for gas is about to jump as coal-fired power plants are phased out and converted to gas, including in Alberta by 2020.

    Max Keiser says the economics on fracking are unsustainable:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fP8XklfMqHk

    So indeed, what does CNRL know that the others don't?
    The economics of anything pretty much are dependent on the demand and the price. Gold s a great example: They say gold is a rare commodity but if the price rose high enough supply would flood the market as currently uneconomic sources of gold become "economic" at high enough prices. Rising profits on the older now-high-margin mines entice investors to invest en masse. Old previously un-economic mines that were written off for dead suddenly become money makers and bankers and lenders rush in to finance expansion. After a bit of time, academics write papers about how the trend is forever upward and how any intelligent capital allocation plan in say pensions, endowments, etc. must clearly have an allocation to gold. The investments spike in value and everyone ignores the massive spike in supply (which is increasingly taken up by speculators and horders).


    On shale:

    U.S. Shale-Oil Boom May Not Last as Fracking Wells Lack Staying Power
    By Asjylyn Loder October 10, 2013
    excerpts:

    "Chesapeake Energy’s (CHK) Serenity 1-3H well near Oklahoma City came in as a gusher in 2009, pumping more than 1,200 barrels of oil a day and kicking off a rush to drill that extended into Kansas. Now the well produces less than 100 barrels a day, state records show.
    ...
    “The Red Queen syndrome just gets worse and worse and worse,” he says. “The higher production goes, the more wells you need to offset the decline.”

    http://www.businessweek.com/articles...-staying-power



    The problem is now that our upper price expectations have to face the likelihood that whenever the price increases for any sustained time, horizontal drilling and massive shale reserves can knock the price right back down again.


    ~

  7. #7
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    2,443

    Default

    ^More rapid depletion rates of fracked wells compared to conventional is hardly a secret. Off-setting this is the sheer volume of gas and oil locked in shale or sandstone formations. Orders of magnitude larger than conventional reserves. Similar to the ratio of oil in the Alberta oil sands compared to conventional oil.

    The other off-set is that technology to extract the oil and gas keeps improving. Multi-directional drilling from a single platform has been around for decades being first developed for off-shore oil platforms.

    A newer wrinkle is drilling at multiple angles from a single platform and then when you hit the pay zone going horizontal through the richest formations for hundred of metres. My son (who is a geophysicist) is currently working on such a natural gas and liquids well. Though it's not really a well. More like a platform.

    These technologies also makes it possible to "accidentally" remove gas (or oil) from a neighbouring lease which is one of the factors driving well completion. It's fascinating stuff.

  8. #8

    Default

    In old conventional wells, the upfront capital outlay was followed by decades of minimal additional investment. The upfront risk was substantial but to the winners the returns were very favourable. Today, with shale , I imagine financing for known formations is probably much easier to obtain but the rapid deletion means continuous reinvestment and operational efforts are required. Fracing seems to be more like running a retail business like a restaurant in that it seems to be a much more complicated business with much more time spent living on the edge with the economics being exposed to far more cost and revenue uncertainties.


    I have read, only once however, that the fracked wells suffer rapid initial decline but then produce at a low rate for a long time. I'd like to know what the typical scenario really is: Rapid decline to zero or initial blowoff followed by years of modest production.
    Last edited by KC; 30-11-2014 at 03:20 PM.

  9. #9
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton (Norwood)
    Posts
    4,394

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    The problem is now that our upper price expectations have to face the likelihood that whenever the price increases for any sustained time, horizontal drilling and massive shale reserves can knock the price right back down again.
    ~
    The flipside of the problem is that more rapid depletion will cause faster supply reduction in response to lower prices. This could result in a more stable price over the long term, which would be better for Alberta than the boom and bust cycles of the last 50 years.

  10. #10

    Default

    Massive Natural Gas Inventory Drawdown: And The Price Falls
    Dec. 1, 2014

    excerpt:

    "The bottom line...

    "A big inventory drawdown last week, a downside break in the crude oil-natural gas spread and the beginning of winter all add up to a wild ride for natural gas. We are going into winter with inventories that are lower than last year, when natural gas peaked at almost $6.50 per mmbtu. Inventories are lower than the average of the last five years. Although natural gas hit..."

    http://seekingalpha.com/article/2718...he-price-falls

  11. #11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Titanium48 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    The problem is now that our upper price expectations have to face the likelihood that whenever the price increases for any sustained time, horizontal drilling and massive shale reserves can knock the price right back down again.
    ~
    The flipside of the problem is that more rapid depletion will cause faster supply reduction in response to lower prices. This could result in a more stable price over the long term, which would be better for Alberta than the boom and bust cycles of the last 50 years.
    Yes, very perceptive! I'll have to rethink my view that big new finds and big depletions will cause more and greater volatility.

    I think, maybe, the tech crash of 1999/01 offers some, though poor insight. In the tech crash, a bunch of games makers went bust. Like gas which is burned, tech and games products weren't very long lived either, so the problem was on the supply side and not the demand side. Demand didn't wane much. However on the supply side, the production side, issues of high costs, financing flooding in and a massive bubble in the industry set them up for a fall. The ability to pump out new supply to meet any new demand has kept prices down.

  12. #12
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    2,443

    Default

    For those thinking (hoping?) natural gas prices are set to soar, this report out today is a reality check. Note how proved reserves are defined:

    "U.S. total natural gas proved reserves increased 10% (31 trillion cubic feet (Tcf)) in 2013 and reached a new U.S. record of 354 Tcf, according to newly published data in EIA's U.S. Crude Oil and Natural Gas Proved Reserves, 2013.

    Proved reserves are those volumes of oil and natural gas that geological and engineering data demonstrate with reasonable certainty to be recoverable in future years from known reservoirs under existing economic and operating conditions.

    At the state level, Pennsylvania and West Virginia reported the largest increases in natural gas proved reserves in 2013, driven by continued development of the Marcellus Shale gas play in the Appalachian Basin. Pennsylvania added 13.5 Tcf of proved natural gas reserves, an increase of 37% in 2013. West Virginia had the second-largest increase, an addition of 8.3 Tcf (56%) of natural gas proved reserves. Combined, these two states had 70% of the net increase in U.S. natural gas proved reserves in 2013.

    Texas, which benefits from having the Barnett and Eagle Ford Shale plays within its borders, had the third-largest increase in 2013—a 5% gain (4.4 Tcf of proved reserves). Proved reserves of natural gas in shale gas plays accounted for 45% (159.1 Tcf) of all U.S. natural gas reserves in 2013."

  13. #13

    Default

    ^it is not proved reserves that matters though, we know for example that Venezuela has massive resources of oil, but they have little impact on world prices because they can't produce economically.

    More and more, different places are opposing fracing / technologies needed to get at the reserves, yet demand is shifting towards gas more and more. I heard a discussion this morning about an Oregon LNG terminal proposal for example (wouldn't surprise me, if they get LNG up and running before BC).
    Last edited by moahunter; 04-12-2014 at 02:37 PM.

  14. #14
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    2,443

    Default

    ^As the definition above says proven reserves are those than can be produced "under existing economic and operating conditions."

    To your other point, it just as likely (maybe more so) that jurisdictions currently banning fracking (e.g. New York State, Quebec, New Brunswick) will start allowing it as they realize that many of the risks have been exaggerated or are downright bogus.

    Large scale LNG exports could potentially change the picture but are still years away.

  15. #15
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Sherwood park
    Posts
    2,293

    Default

    I only wish that definition was for "proven reserves". Proved reserves just sounds so wrong.

  16. #16
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    2,443

    Default

    ^Good catch. Proved and proven reserves are the same thing. Like you, I prefer proven but the EIA uses proved.

  17. #17
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Sherwood park
    Posts
    2,293

    Default

    Doubbuya most have come up with that.

  18. #18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by East McCauley View Post
    ^Good catch. Proved and proven reserves are the same thing. Like you, I prefer proven but the EIA uses proved.
    Better read the article below.

    Peak oil, peak gas theories make sense. Yes, higher prices bring on new supply but how much, at what cost, and for how long? Then new supply depresses prices, usage goes up, new supplies dwindle. Only more conservation, technology or the widespread adoption of reasonably priced alternative energy form(s) can change the equation.


    Natural gas: The fracking fallacy
    The United States is banking on decades of abundant natural gas to power its economic resurgence. That may be wishful thinking.
    Mason Inman, 03 December 2014

    excerpt:
    "...a careful examination of the assumptions behind such bullish forecasts suggests that they may be overly optimistic, in part because the government's predictions rely on coarse-grained studies of major shale formations, or plays. Now, researchers are analysing those formations in much greater detail and are issuing more-conservative forecasts. They calculate that such formations have relatively small 'sweet spots' where it will be profitable to extract gas.

    The results are “bad news”, says Tad Patzek, head of the University of Texas at Austin's department of petroleum and geosystems engineering, and a member of the team that is conducting the in-depth analyses. With companies trying to..."


    http://www.nature.com/news/natural-g...allacy-1.16430






    Energy wells can ‘communicate’ and ‘sterilize’ the landscape
    Part 3: Trouble Beneath Our Feet

    http://o.canada.com/news/national/en...-the-landscape

  19. #19

    Default

    Well, this is news to me. I didn't see much future potential and had assumed most switching had already occurred. However...

    More, More, More (US Gas Demand)—How Do You Like The EPA’s Clean Power Plan?
    Thursday, 12/04/2014
    Published by: Housley Carr

    excerpt:

    "The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) June 2014 Clean Power Plan (CPP) proposal to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from the power sector 30% from 2005 levels by 2030 would result in a sharp increase in natural gas consumption and potentially major changes in infrastructure to deliver more gas to power plants. The proposal would radically increase the pace at which coal-fired power plants are replaced by gas-fired generation. Today, we consider the proposal and its likely impact on gas demand and the industry.

    Just a few years ago, US natural gas production was on the decline, gas prices were spiking, and dozens of new coal plants were being planned. Now, gas production from US shale plays is soaring, gas prices are relatively low and steady, and not a single conventional coal plant is under construction in the Lower 48 (or in Alaska or Hawaii, for that matter). Coal-..."


    https://rbnenergy.com/more-more-more...ean-power-plan

  20. #20

    Default

    Here's the current figures for Alberta's power generation maximum capacity, by source:

    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  21. #21

    Default

    An extensive look at natural gas...

    "Natural Gas: An Energy Game Changer

    Posted on June 7, 2015
    In this country, a quarter of our natural gas production is used by industry, a quarter is used to generate electricity, and half is used for home heating. As investors, we learned a long time ago that if a product or service makes sense to the consumer it probably will last a long time.

    Download the booklet here > Natural Gas: An Energy Game Changer"


    http://library.muhlenkamp.com/wp-con...me_Changer.pdf

  22. #22

    Default Titan has more oil than earth

    I think commodities always have, and always will be, driven more by demand issues than supply issues, at least in the longer term. For example, lets say clean technologies don't work out (so demand doesn't change), then, in 300 or 400 years time when every conceivable reserve has been exploited, we can always look further afield to places like Titan:

    http://www.space.com/4968-titan-oil-earth.html

  23. #23

    Default

    Anyone watching natural gas prices? Any thoughts on longer term trends from here?

  24. #24

    Default

    Depends on how far everyone goes into NG to replace coal and oil fueled thermal plants. I still say nuke is one of the better options and Solar and wind will be pushed heavily as battery tech evolves.

    I think short term there will be a big spike in NG usage, but there are huge fields ready in waiting to ramp up and plenty of offshore fields as well. Plenty of large turbine engines that can be refurbed for power plant use and swapped into current thermal plants as a retrofit.

    I have the feeling the price will spike, new production will ramp up quickly to compensate, price will level/drop, then stricter emissions regs will get dropped in and usage will curtail. I feel like microgen may take off in certain parts of the world, but adoption will be slow and not replace the market pull from large users like big industry, power plants and area/district co-gen.

    Who knows at this point, because I highly doubt there is really any reasonably accurate predictions that can be made given the goofiness in the M.E. and the recent paris climate talks. More fall out from both events has to transpire before a clearer picture will likely emerge and power companies and countries figure out how they want to approach things.

  25. #25
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    2,443

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    Anyone watching natural gas prices? Any thoughts on longer term trends from here?
    Depends on what you mean by longer term? 10 years or more out, I think natural gas prospects are bright.

    Natural gas is far and away the cleanest burning fossil fuel. And much cleaner than some renewable sources like biomass.

    Realistically, natural gas will likely have to replace coal for electricity generation to a greater extent than current thinking suggests. Some of the renewable targets don't seem achievable unless there are major breakthroughs in being able to store wind or solar energy.

    Short term is a different story. I follow natural gas prices almost daily. Natural gas is currently trading at 20-year lows which is only adding to the economic misery of energy producing jurisdictions.

  26. #26

    Default

    Some of the first big exports of LNG from the states are due to start soon... but as for pricing who knows...

    Natural Gas Bloodbath Accelerates Amid LNG Glut Worse Than Oil
    December 14th, 2015

    But the LNG market, with a much smaller demand base around the world, has much bigger problems. New regasification terminals will add new demand for LNG over the next few years, and demand is expected to jump by 50 mtpa by 2020. That is a substantial increase in expected consumption. The problem? New supplies will add 120 mtpa in LNG export capacity over the same timeframe, dwarfing even the most bullish cases for demand.

    The excess supplies are beginning to change the LNG trade. ..."


    http://etfdailynews.com/2015/12/14/n...se-than-oil/2/

  27. #27
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Sherwood park
    Posts
    2,293

    Default

    So don't lock into those gas plans they sell at your doorstep?

  28. #28

    Default

    There some commentary in the article about the estimated impact on natural gas prices that the LNG exports will create. Regarding the global warming issues note the comments about Asia.


    World Benefits From U.S. Liquefied Natural Gas Exports
    in Freight News 12/01/2016

    "After Qatar and Australia, the U.S. could easily become the world’s third-largest LNG supplier by 2020. We have a great advantage over other LNG exporters because ..."
    ...

    But, Asia overall seems even more distant today for U.S. LNG because gas prices worldwide have plummeted. This is especially true in Asia because prices are more heavily linked to crude oil than in Europe, and oil prices collapsed to 11-year lows to end 2015. “JKM prices, a maker for delivery in Asia, have fallen by two-thirds since the 2014 peak. February 2016 delivery cargoes are going for $7 per million Btu.” ...

    While there is a global LNG (and fossil energy overall) glut, this will surely be eroded over time. Gas is becoming even more crucial in our post COP21 world (see here). The U.S. stands in a very wonderful and unique position: we can help supply natural gas to the world, which legendary energy thinker Vaclav Smil calls “Fuel for the 21st Century.” It’s very telling that the industrialized nations seeking to cut GHG emissions most are continually turning to gas. The coal-based developing world is sure to follow suit. Replacing coal with gas reduces CO2 emissions by 40-50%.
    ...

    "...Australia and Canada, the other emerging free market LNG exporters that are highly valued by importers, will also face problems with their more expensive Greenfield projects. Australian LNG confronts cost overruns that have surpassed $30 billion. Projects off the BC coast in Western Canada are facing long delays amid rising global competition, environmental pushback, and potential rising carbon taxes, possibly missing out on $23 billion by 2020."

    Sources: Forbes

    http://www.hellenicshippingnews.com/...l-gas-exports/

  29. #29

    Default

    La Niña

    Cool winter coming?

    As El Nino exits, La Nina looms and promises her style of mayhem

    http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/201.../#.V0Tj_pDOeK1

  30. #30

    Default

    Interesting about the early shut down...


    The Real Cause of Coal's Collapse
    Natural gas has surpassed the once-dominant fuel source – and it's here to stay.
    By Mark Perry | Contributor
    March 9, 2017
    Despite President Donald Trump's pledge to revive the struggling U.S. coal industry, coal plants continue to close. And there's really nothing he can or should do about it.

    Recently, the Najavo Generating Station in Arizona, the largest coal plant west of the Mississippi River, announced that it will close in 2019, a decade earlier than originally planned. The plant is just the latest coal facility facing premature retirement as part of a shift away from coal that now seems irreversible.

    Even as legacies of the Obama administration's environmental policy – most notably the Clean Power Plan and the Stream Protection Rule, both thorns in the side of the coal industry – are rolled back, coal's future still looks bleak. Although coal accounted for 30 percent of U.S. electricity production last year and is the preferred fuel of some heavy industries, the number of coal plants is shrinking and coal's contribution to generating electric power has been in steady decline for years. Utilities are shuttering older coal plants, and there are no plans to build new units.

    To grasp just how much has changed, consider this historic energy milestone: Just a decade ago, coal provided roughly 50 percent of the fuel used to generate the nation's electric power while natural gas accounted for less than 20 percent -- and those shares had been pretty stable since the early 1970s (see nearby chart). But thanks to the shale revolution and a bonanza of cheap natural gas, the share of electricity generated from natural gas rose above 20 percent in 2007 and has climbed steadily since then. It reached an all-time high of nearly 34 percent last year and surpassed coal's share (30.4 percent) for the first time ever.
    ...

    In fact, even as cheap natural gas is powering our economy, carbon emissions from electricity production are at their lowest level since the early 1990s. Simply put, the carbon intensity of the electricity sector has dropped dramatically.

    As U.S. natural gas output surged ...
    What's remarkable is that, despite growing demand for natural gas – from the power sector, from manufacturers and now from exports – natural gas prices are falling. Natural gas delivered to generators averaged...


    https://www.usnews.com/opinion/econo...demise-of-coal

  31. #31
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Strathearn, Edmonton
    Posts
    4,118

    Default

    Coal is basically a dead commodity.
    Technology unleased natural gas and drove the price into the ground. There is more than enough natural gas until we humankind perfect then technological advance in energy.
    Plus modern combined cycle plants can be designed to come online for peaking load unlike a old coal burning steam plant.

    Other benefit local to alberta of the early phase out of coal...keeps the construction industry going.

  32. #32

    Default

    More supply on the horizon:

    Massive Natural Gas Deposit Discovered In The Gulf Coast Basin | OilPrice.com


    The agency reportedthat two formations in the Gulf Coast Basin may contain as much as 304.4 trillion cubic feet of natural gas plus 1.9 billion barrels of natural gas liquids, making the area the largest untapped continuous gas deposit in the country.

    http://oilprice.com/Energy/Natural-G...ast-Basin.html



  33. #33

    Default

    Shutting down coal plants years earlier than originally planned.


    TransAlta Corp. fast-tracks transition to greener power | Calgary Herald
    Excerpt:

    TransAlta Corp. is accelerating its strategy to become a source of greener power as it shuts down two coal plants and converts six others to natural gas generation ahead of schedule.

    http://calgaryherald.com/business/en...-greener-power

  34. #34
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    2,443

    Default

    Read it and weep:

    In August 2017, total U.S. natural gas liquefaction capacity in the Lower 48 states increased to 2.8 billion cubic feet per day (Bcf/d) following the completion of the fourth liquefaction unit at the Sabine Pass liquefied natural gas (LNG) terminal in Louisiana. With increasing liquefaction capacity and utilization, U.S. LNG exports averaged 1.9 Bcf/d, and capacity utilization averaged 80% this year, based on data through November.

    Sabine Pass, located on the U.S. Gulf Coast near the Louisiana-Texas border, consists of four existing natural gas liquefaction units, or trains, with a fifth train currently under construction. When complete, Sabine Pass will have a total liquefaction capacity of 3.5 Bcf/d. Five additional LNG projects are currently under construction in the United States, and they are expected to increase total U.S. liquefaction capacity to 9.6 Bcf/d by the end of 2019.
    https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=34032

    The US is well on its way to becoming a natural gas exporting superpower. So is Australia. Meanwhile, Canada has been unable to get even one commercial LNG facility at tidewater off the ground, not one.

  35. #35
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,720

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    Shutting down coal plants years earlier than originally planned.


    TransAlta Corp. fast-tracks transition to greener power | Calgary Herald
    Excerpt:

    TransAlta Corp. is accelerating its strategy to become a source of greener power as it shuts down two coal plants and converts six others to natural gas generation ahead of schedule.

    http://calgaryherald.com/business/en...-greener-power
    Watch energy prices soar when this happens.

  36. #36

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by H.L. View Post
    Watch energy prices soar when this happens.
    Why?
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  37. #37
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,720

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by noodle View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by H.L. View Post
    Watch energy prices soar when this happens.
    Why?
    I'snt this what happened in Ontario?

  38. #38

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by H.L. View Post
    I'snt this what happened in Ontario?
    And what would lead you to believe it would occur the same way in a jurisdiction with different regulations, different marketplaces, different generation sources?
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  39. #39
    C2E Posting Power
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Beaumont, ab
    Posts
    621

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by East McCauley View Post
    Read it and weep:

    In August 2017, total U.S. natural gas liquefaction capacity in the Lower 48 states increased to 2.8 billion cubic feet per day (Bcf/d) following the completion of the fourth liquefaction unit at the Sabine Pass liquefied natural gas (LNG) terminal in Louisiana. With increasing liquefaction capacity and utilization, U.S. LNG exports averaged 1.9 Bcf/d, and capacity utilization averaged 80% this year, based on data through November.

    Sabine Pass, located on the U.S. Gulf Coast near the Louisiana-Texas border, consists of four existing natural gas liquefaction units, or trains, with a fifth train currently under construction. When complete, Sabine Pass will have a total liquefaction capacity of 3.5 Bcf/d. Five additional LNG projects are currently under construction in the United States, and they are expected to increase total U.S. liquefaction capacity to 9.6 Bcf/d by the end of 2019.
    https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=34032

    The US is well on its way to becoming a natural gas exporting superpower. So is Australia. Meanwhile, Canada has been unable to get even one commercial LNG facility at tidewater off the ground, not one.
    Yup! We sssoooo missed the boat on this one. I doubt if any will get built other then Woodfibre....almost done .....but that's just a small one. Our only hope in hell is if the Shell one gets off the ground. Expect an announcement in the new year if it's a nay or yay. Yay means at least 20 more billion in construction, in BC....but it's better than nothing

  40. #40
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Where ever the pilot takes me
    Posts
    2,074

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by H.L. View Post
    I'snt this what happened in Ontario?
    The Ontario Liberals screwed up their electrical power capacity assessment and ordered too many natural gas electrical generation plants from private operators. The contracts with the operators guarantee them a minimum revenue amount.
    Did my dog just fall into a pothole???

  41. #41
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    3,720

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by norwoodguy View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by H.L. View Post
    I'snt this what happened in Ontario?
    The Ontario Liberals screwed up their electrical power capacity assessment and ordered too many natural gas electrical generation plants from private operators. The contracts with the operators guarantee them a minimum revenue amount.
    Okay, thanks...

  42. #42

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by norwoodguy View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by H.L. View Post
    I'snt this what happened in Ontario?
    The Ontario Liberals screwed up their electrical power capacity assessment and ordered too many natural gas electrical generation plants from private operators. The contracts with the operators guarantee them a minimum revenue amount.
    That doesn’t mean we can’t have the same outcome created by a different set of factors.

    Spiking natural gas prices screwed electricity costs back in the early 1990s. It just took a tight supply market with the utilities buying their gas in the spot market - which had been a successful strategy for years - to screw them all. Like everything else, stupid good luck repeatedly rewarded a behaviour until that stupid luck ran out and suddenly overnight suddenly all the geniuses were seen as morons.

    The decisions made in Ontario very likely seemed reasonable and doable when viewed individually and/or given the information the decision-makers has to go on. The assumptions about the future would also have seemed reasonable - they always do because they are just averaged, trended, regressions without showing interim volatility. (Booms, busts, crashes and bubbles never occur in the world of long-term planning - they only occur in the real world.) So those with dissenting prudent or cautious opinions either wouldn’t have spoken up for lack of a strong case or the proponents would have just pointed to the known and usually ‘recent’ facts (aka ‘trends’) to quash challenging opinions. Then there's what Warren Zbuffett calls the “Institutional Imperative” - where analysis always happens to come out in agreement with the CEOs expected result.

  43. #43
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    1,050

    Default

    Why this country doesn't expand our gas mainlines East and invest in LNG plants in Nova Scotia to be shipped to Europe is beyond me. Our own customer is saturated in Natural gas themselves and I'm certain Europe would love to diversify from Russia.
    There was no need to change that plaque. We are the City of Champions.

  44. #44
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    2,443

    Default

    ^Europe is likely best served by US natural gas from LNG facilities on the Gulf Coast and East Coast. At least until such time as Quebec and the Maritime Provinces lift their silly fracking bans.

    The vast majority of Canadian natural gas reserves are in Alberta and BC and they are best served by facilities built on the BC Coast. Longer-term, the Asia Pacific is even a higher growth market than Europe. Right now, the Australians are eating our lunch when it comes to supplying natural gas to the Asia Pacific.

  45. #45

    Default

    People on C2E have some very creative notions of how the electricity market works in Alberta as it was laid out by the PCs & even more creative notions about how the upcoming changes from the NDP will impact it.
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  46. #46
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Where ever the pilot takes me
    Posts
    2,074

    Default

    Coal-fired plants closing all over the US

    If there’s a sliver of hope for the industry, it may lie in a burgeoning debate among regulators and grid operators about the need to preserve fuel diversity.


    The International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers has been pushing that case in Washington, according to Donnie Colston, director of its utilities department. A much-cited example is the polar vortex that froze the U.S. in early 2014. Gas prices surged to record highs in New York, and the PJM Interconnection grid — serving a fifth of the country’s population, from the Midwest to the mid-Atlantic — lost 22 percent of its generation assets. Keeping some coal capacity can mitigate such risks.


    Coal plants are “life-limited over time, but for the present, coal plants will continue to be needed for reliability and fuel diversity,” David Gaier, a spokesman for NRG, said by email.
    Did my dog just fall into a pothole???

  47. #47

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by noodle View Post
    People on C2E have some very creative notions of how the electricity market works in Alberta as it was laid out by the PCs & even more creative notions about how the upcoming changes from the NDP will impact it.
    How so?

  48. #48
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    1,050

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by noodle View Post
    People on C2E have some very creative notions of how the electricity market works in Alberta as it was laid out by the PCs & even more creative notions about how the upcoming changes from the NDP will impact it.
    Every one of those changes to things such as leasing and licensing should be laid out in your statement. We're assumingly on the same page as every move that was made was considerably a lateral move in the bottom line figures. But most people aren't privy to these things as it's not their expertise.
    There was no need to change that plaque. We are the City of Champions.

  49. #49

    Default

    I assume noodle hasn’t revisited this thread yet.

  50. #50

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    I assume noodle hasn’t revisited this thread yet.
    Nope.

    Assumption incorrect.
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  51. #51

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Stevey_G View Post
    Every one of those changes to things such as leasing and licensing should be laid out in your statement. We're assumingly on the same page as every move that was made was considerably a lateral move in the bottom line figures. But most people aren't privy to these things as it's not their expertise.
    I've already spoken at length in other threads about how the electricity marketplace works & how the NDP are moving us to a capacity-based market. Also, I've provided links & information to the RFP process for the new renewable generation that the NDP has put in place.

    Something something horse something something something drink.
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  52. #52

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by noodle View Post
    Also, I've provided links & information to the RFP process for the new renewable generation that the NDP has put in place.
    How is that process going? Since we all know that the UCP will be the next government of Alberta in 18 months time, I wonder if any of the promised government hand outs to try and make renewables economic in Alberta will ever transpire. Hopefully not.

  53. #53

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by noodle View Post
    Also, I've provided links & information to the RFP process for the new renewable generation that the NDP has put in place.
    How is that process going?
    It's going according to the schedule they laid out at the start of the process. We should see movement on the first round in the next little while (this week I think? Maybe next?)


    https://www.aeso.ca/market/capacity-...s-and-updates/ <- Information on the capacity market transition.
    https://www.aeso.ca/market/renewable...icity-program/ <- Main page for the REP.

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    Since we all know that the UCP will be the next government of Alberta in 18 months time, I wonder if any of the promised government hand outs to try and make renewables economic in Alberta will ever transpire. Hopefully not.
    Given the fact that the PCs are responsible for literally cut & pasting Enron contract language into the PPAs, the price of electricity skyrocketing to all-time highs & major corporate welfare for the generation providers I would think you'd not be so bullish on having their newer & more conservative (and regressive) iteration getting their hands back on the marketplace.

    But then again you think trickle-down economics are a real thing & not the conservative equivalent of the tooth fairy, so no wonder you want the status quo where we're subsidizing big corporations to burn coal while we pick up the tab for their choice of location & the vast majority of their environmental costs.
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  54. #54

    Default

    ^well if we are forced into paying through it through our electricity prices (assuming the government stops bailing out the equalization fund at some point to the tune of billions of public debt), ahead of clean natural gas which is fully economic today, lets hope its lasts longer than 23 years like our last windfarms (hardly environmental when you consider how much resources went into building these towers, and how many birds they killed):

    http://calgaryherald.com/business/en...after-23-years

    The oldest commercial wind power facility in Canada has been shut down and faces demolition after 23 years of transforming brisk southern Alberta breezes into electricity — and its owner says building a replacement depends on the next moves of the provincial NDP government.

    TransAlta Corp. said Tuesday the blades on 57 turbines at its Cowley Ridge facility near Pincher Creek have already been halted and the towers are to be toppled and recycled for scrap metal this spring. The company inherited the now-obsolete facility, built between 1993 and 1994, as part of its $1.6-billion hostile takeover of Calgary-based Canadian Hydro Developers Inc. in 2009.

    “TransAlta is very interested in repowering this site. Unfortunately, right now, it’s not economically feasible,” Wayne Oliver, operations supervisor for TransAlta’s wind operations in Pincher Creek and Fort Macleod, said in an interview.

  55. #55

    Default

    Why would TransAlta rebuild the windfarm entirely on their own dime in 2016 when they can do it as part of the 30 by 30 plan with assistance from the Carbon Tax funds?

    E: Sweet jesus, the uncertainty about the REP which was in a nascent state when the article was written is literally cited as part of the reason TransAlta has been holding off on renewables in Alberta. Waaaaaaay to bury the lede, moa, you disingenuous douchebag.

    In February, TransAlta president and chief executive Dawn Farrell said the company’s plans to invest in hydroelectric, wind, solar and natural gas cogeneration facilities in Alberta were on hold until the details of the province’s climate-change plans are known.“We cannot make any major investment decisions in this market until we have more clarity around the policy environment and the policy recommendations turn into actual law and we know what the market is actually going to be like,” she said.
    Last edited by noodle; Yesterday at 09:18 AM.
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  56. #56

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by noodle View Post
    Why would TransAlta rebuild the windfarm entirely on their own dime in 2016 when they can do it as part of the 30 by 30 plan with assistance from the Carbon Tax funds?
    Nobody was building windfarms or solar without subsidies, they were building natural gas plants. But yeah, if government (via carbon tax funds) was going to give me a hand out to make technology that will last only 23 years be efficient / make me profits / kill more birds and create more noise than any tailing pond, sure, I'd take it too.

  57. #57

    Default

    I can't take someone who thinks tailing ponds & massive open surface mining is more environmentally friendly than wind farms seriously. Try and dial back the ignorant hyperconservative "private profits over everything/the only good welfare is corporate welfare/trickle down economics are a thing" schtick a little bit & you might not come off as a ranting joke of a lunatic. While you're doing that, take a look & educate yourself about the utility industry from somewhere other than Postmedia for a change.
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  58. #58

    Default

    And we all know that the REP means there's no way that the NDP would subsidize the petrochemical industry, whatsoever. Out with the dirty carbon & all in on the granola, right?

    http://edmontonjournal.com/business/...usands-of-jobs

    The Alberta government will hand out $500 million worth of royalty credits to two pipeline companies if they build propane-processing plants in the Edmonton region.
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  59. #59

    Default

    ^I'd rather our taxes got spent on providing social services / health care / education, than on pie in the sky green plans, or industry plans - government is the last group I would trust to try and pick winners / make uneconomic projects economic (at the expense of taxes from businesses that can make it on their own).

  60. #60

    Default

    Aren't you the guy who wants us to hack the heck outta our social services/health care/education for Albertans to get the budget down so we can stop taxing those poor giant multinational billion dollar oil companies for the consequences of their actions?

    Wait, I forgot. You think tax cuts pay for themselves. That's another good conservative bedtime story. "King Ralph & The Cursed Can He Kicked Down the Road."
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  61. #61

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    ^I'd rather our taxes got spent on providing social services / health care / education, than on pie in the sky green plans, or industry plans - government is the last group I would trust to try and pick winners / make uneconomic projects economic (at the expense of taxes from businesses that can make it on their own).
    Except deregulating way back when, essentially was a step in the direction of having the government exit the business of as you say: to "pick winners / make uneconomic projects economic (at the expense of taxes from businesses that can make it on their own)". Except in the past, instead of taxes, the uneconomic project costs were either assigned to the utility(s) and/or assigned to the ratepayers. The market now may be imperfect but it has taken huge leaps out of the regulated board decision process to one of responding to short-term market pressures.

    In the old system a couple iterations back the, the 'uneconomic' AFUDC just piled up and was then rate based when the timing finally panned out, and everyone paid quite well if the APUB approved the costs for the ratebase. No market influences there. Forecasts followed by adjustments for actuals played an operational role but cost allocation methodologies like mid-year asset allocation ratios, 3w/9nw (3 winter, 9 non-winter plus residential, commercial, industrial cost allocations and approved interruptible rates and even voltage levels were used to assign some costs like property taxes. All this was simply a case of the marketing agency (EEMA) making what otherwise would be largely market decisions. (Mostly reasonable, rational, science and engineering based decisions but NOT market based.) as such, buying natural gas on the spot market was rewarded but hedging risk wasn't. Any suggestions towards using defeasance as a financial hedge were non-starters. Moreover, like the 3w/9nw methodology, and utility rate of return calculations, errors once built in tended to persist even after discovered.

    So today the system is light years ahead of the old system in terms of factoring in market mechanisms. (This has pros and cons to it but the decision makers followed true to their ideological bent.) So the inevitable processes for grandfathering the old commitments etc. is now naturally is coming home to haunt some of today's players but that was always predictable. By deregulating they traded price stability and predictability and dispute resolution for for price volatility, some added unpredictability some added consumer choice and dispute resolution via the market and the courts.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •