Mark McClure

The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)'s original proposal included reliance on "low-GHG" hydrogen, which was removed from the final rule, EPA has shifted its focus to prioritize Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) over hydrogen co-firing in Power plants due to concerns about the Hydrogen technologies cost-effectiveness and commercial readiness by 2030. For CCS, enhanced tax incentives from legislation like the Inflation Reduction Act (i.e 45Q tax credit) have made CCS more financially viable.   In areas unsuitable for on-site CO2 sequestration, alternative strategies include transporting CO2 to regions with suitable geological formations for CO2 storage. Please see reference modeled by Great Plains Institute about CO2 transportation modeled infrastructure. The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has announced $500 million in grants for CO2 transport infrastructure, a crucial step in scaling carbon dioxide removal (CDR). The US currently has 5,000 miles of CO2 pipelines but will need around 96,000 miles. for full report:https://lnkd.in/ea7Uj_r4   #CDR #CCS #ClimateAction #Sustainability #Infrastructure

7

Looks like even with the Matterhorn open, the pipeline we were told would fix the pricing problem at Waha, the pricing problem remains. There are a few points in this article I also disagree with. "Now, what this will likely do is spur on more natural gas production in the Permian – potentially oil production, too, because oil has also been under the effects of this excess natural gas in the region, because there’s a limit to how much natural gas can be flared." Ha! A limit to how much natural gas can be flared? In Texas. I don't think so. About those Permian gas prices: "With the production, the price in Permian – the Waha – there is negative. And so we are going to see a gradual increase, but nothing too crazy, because it’s just really relieving this bottleneck more than anything else." A gradual increase from negative pricing means they will still vent and flare the methane instead of paying to have it taken away. And the last point is if someone says this, when they are talking about energy markets in TX, they clearly don't understand the current energy market or are lying. "So going forward, demand continues to grow in Texas. There’s a lot of solar capacity being added, but to meet this higher demand, you’re going to need natural gas to continue to be that base load fuel – the most reliable one, whether the sun may not be shining or the wind isn’t blowing." Solar, wind plus storage is a money maker in TX. Storage is the fossil fuel killer. Now if we want to talk about energy being unreliable due to weather, have you heard about how nat gas does in extreme heat or cold? Not great. In summary, there is a new pipeline in TX. It will not make gas production profitable. So they will continue to dump that gas (methane) into the atmosphere. https://lnkd.in/e5ayEMEd

4

I wrote about a recent study that found alarming levels of hydrogen sulfide and methane venting from oil and gas wells in TX. The study highlighted a core issue with controlling methane emissions (and related air pollution) with oil and associated gas production in TX which is the underlying economics. "There were many alarming facts in the recent study 'High rates of hydrogen sulfide emissions measured from marginal oil wells near Austin and San Antonio, Texas,' published in Environmental Research Communications. However, all of the problems can be linked back to a fact stated in the study." “We did not see any gas gathering pipelines at these sites, only oil pipelines.” https://lnkd.in/enqSw8DC

12

1 Comment

Hot News Tuesday: The Department of Defense (DoD) has added 3 more geothermal prototype projects to their portfolio through the Defense Innovation Unit (DIU). - Fervo Energy, a leader in EGS development. - GreenFire Energy, one of the first to develop and deploy down borehole heat exchanger technology. - Sage Geosystems, a company working to develop geopressured geothermal systems (GGS). Adding these 3 projects makes a total of 7 projects with 6 different companies now being prototyped through the DIU. What's special about this and why should we all be excited? One answer may be obvious, and the other, you may not realize. 1) The DoD is now testing: EGS, single well closed-loop geothermal using a down-borehole exchanger, long-lateral closed-loop geothermal, GGS, AI exploration workflows, and novel full cycle development workflows. The DoD is testing all opportunities, not just swinging for the fences with one idea. This is exciting stuff! 2) Fervo developing their project at Fallon. If you joined geothermal within the past 5 years, you may not recognize the significance of this. Fallon was one of the proposed FORGE sites, which was not chosen for the drilling phase of the FORGE project. While Fallon was a highly prospective site, the Milford, Utah location ultimately won out. So, now, through the DoD, this site that was flagged as highly prospective will get to be tested with a likely end goal of development. It's helpful to know your geothermal history, to get context of existing projects and also find potential "diamonds in the rough", primed for development, especially when paired with all of the new technology being developed. To see the announcement for the other projects, I suggest you check out ThinkGeoEnergy (you can follow the link), which were announced around October 2023. If you're curious about the TEVERRA project, feel free to reach out directly. #geothermal #news #oilandgas #energy #sustainability #resiliency

50

4 Comments

Interesting new working paper from Ben Gilbert and co-authors, along the lines of the New York Times article today on ng pipeline constraints and negative gas prices in the Permian.

2

1 Comment

Nice summary, Michael! For those concerned about pricing, welcome to emerging sectors within emerging markets. New types of credits, in particular those tied to oil and gas, need time to be understood and markets need better transparency. Support from the global marketplace and governments like that announced last week by the Biden administration go along way in establishing credibility and transparency but it takes time. Consider it took 4 + years of work by Maris/ ACR at Winrock International and others just to have the first credits hit the market- in 2024! We’re just beginning to build awareness as an industry sector and demand is coming, it just takes patience and a lot of education.

5

TGIF and after yet another prolonged power outage following a storm news-maker, today's debunking query: How did "electrify everything" as an idea ever happen? Synopsis - I led a research team that worked on electric power here and broad for about 30 years. We collaborated with the PUCT on public outreach for market restructuring in Texas. At the Baker Institute Center for Energy Studies (CES) we engage on electric power and colleagues have put out an excellent piece - Figures 6-9 say it all (the rest of the report is worth a read): https://lnkd.in/gBprksdV. And so, here's a TGIF non-exclusive list of debunking questions. I expect feedback will be vigorous. * Even west of the Mississippi, U.S. electric power systems in older urban neighborhoods mean lots of expensive upkeep around easements (land is money, easements tend not to be very generous). That's in a context of higher costs for M&O overall, much higher costs to bury lines, and so on and on. Curiosity - why do homeowners prefer lush landscaping in their backyards? To diminish the unsightly view of power lines. In honor of FERC's new order 1920, that alone should give anyone, anywhere pause regarding the wisdom, or not, of sinking all energy eggs into the #electricity basket (and there are those Figures 6-9 I mentioned). * How do #utilities pay for all of that upkeep and M&O? Our fees, of course, to what remain local franchise wire (and a few wires+gen) monopolies. A good way to learn about U.S. economic history, and not just electric power, is to read up on why we have franchise monopoly utilities in the first place. You can go here, https://lnkd.in/g_YK2G4e, where the original Guide to Electric Power in Texas remains or here, https://lnkd.in/gNngBQrM for a take by my colleague Julie Cohn. Curiosity - are utilities parking sufficient funds for M&O, much less upgrades, in an age in which everyone wants wires access but no one wants to pay? That would be our "net back" debates in a nutshell, mainly around roof top solar. * What if we all want to exit utility systems and just do it with micro grids and distributed energy resources (DER)? Conversations about DER are nothing if not emotional. Natural gas pipes already are safely buried (call before you dig!). The property owner strategy of choice in Houston, elsewhere in TX and the U.S. is self generation from natural gas service. Didn't we have natural gas delivery problems in February '21? We did indeed but the story was more complicated than just non-interruptible gas service to consumers. * To my post this week on "minerals wars", these issues are connected. "Spreadsheet decarb" (kudos to whoever invented that phrase) is driving metals-centric "electrify everything" to the exclusion of clear thinking on much else. The end result is unreliability, which no one values.

27

1 Comment

🛢 Permian pipeline bottlenecks cause GHG spikes   In a new working paper, experts use satellite data to quantify how midstream congestion in the Permian Basin drives up flaring and methane emissions. The project involved a team of experts across four academic institutions: Mark Agerton of the University of California, Davis and Rice University's Baker Institute for Public Policy Center for Energy Studies, Wesley Blundell of Washington State University, Ben Gilbert of the Colorado School of Mines, and Gregory Upton of Louisiana State University. The working paper is available on SSRN and is currently under peer review. Read now: https://lnkd.in/eJrq_RZk #flaring #methane #pipelines #Permian #GHG

4

Importance of Skilled Labor to Critical Minerals Establishing a robust domestic midstream for critical minerals is important, and something I'm often asked about. Recently, I published a paper on the topic for the Bipartisan Policy Center (linked below). A key factor to overcome, and one of the most cited by project owners, is the significant recruiting and retaining challenges due to severe labor shortages and intense competition for skilled workers. The U.S. industrial manufacturing sector, which had a shortfall of over 600,000 workers in 2023, is expected to see this gap widen to 2.1 million positions by 2030. This shortage directly impacts critical minerals projects that rely on similar skill sets, exacerbating the pressure on the industry. Critical minerals projects compete with semiconductor and battery manufacturing companies for skilled positions such as machinists, electricians, maintenance staff, equipment operators, and construction workers. Additionally, there is a notable shortage of individuals qualified for specialized roles essential for operational efficiency and quality control, including chemists, quality control analysts, and laboratory technicians. The talent pool is further strained by a 39% decline in mining engineering graduates since 2016, limiting the availability of essential professionals like mining engineers, metallurgists, and geologists. The construction sector, vital for building and maintaining critical minerals processing facilities, is also experiencing a severe labor shortage, with a deficit of 650,000 workers as of July 2023. This shortage impacts infrastructure development in regions where midstream operations are necessary, often requiring significant relocation efforts. To address these challenges, strategic investments in training programs, relocation incentives, supportive immigration policies, and advanced manufacturing technologies are essential. By establishing industry-specific training initiatives and partnering with educational institutions, the sector can develop a pipeline of skilled labor but it will take time a forward-thinking. We must grow the potential pool of interested professionals, with efforts like Project MFG. The topic of skilled labor is one I intend to evaluate deeper to consider what must be done to establish these projects successfully while growing the quality of life for American workers. Link to my recent report: https://lnkd.in/gSy7WSau

56

5 Comments

𝗛𝘆𝗱𝗿𝗼𝗰𝗮𝗿𝗯𝗼𝗻 𝗧𝗿𝗮𝗽𝘀 Petroleum traps are geological formations that contain accumulations of oil and gas, making them essential targets for hydrocarbon exploration. Understanding the different types of petroleum traps is crucial for identifying potential reservoirs and optimizing exploration strategies. In this article, we will discuss the main types of petroleum traps, their characteristics, and their significance in the search for oil and gas reserves. *1. Structural Traps* Structural traps are formed by deformation of the Earth's crust, resulting in folds, faults, and other structural features that trap hydrocarbons. The most common types of structural traps include: - **Anticline Traps:** These traps form in areas where rock layers have been folded into an upward arch-like structure called an anticline. Hydrocarbons migrate upwards through permeable reservoir rocks and become trapped beneath impermeable cap rocks. - **Fault Traps:** Faults are fractures in the Earth's crust where movement has occurred. Fault traps occur when hydrocarbons are displaced along fault lines and become trapped against impermeable barriers. *2. Stratigraphic Traps* Stratigraphic traps are formed by variations in the sedimentary rock layers that make up the Earth's crust. These traps are less dependent on structural deformation and more on the characteristics of the sedimentary sequence. Common types of stratigraphic traps include: - **Lenticular Sands:** These traps occur when permeable sandstone layers "pinch out" or terminate abruptly, creating a localized accumulation of hydrocarbons. - **Carbonate Buildups:** In carbonate reservoirs, hydrocarbons can accumulate in porous structures such as reefs, shoals, and buildups formed by the accumulation of calcium carbonate. *3. Combination Traps* Combination traps are traps that exhibit characteristics of both structural and stratigraphic traps. They often result from a combination of structural deformation and variations in sedimentary deposition. Combination traps can be particularly complex and may require sophisticated exploration techniques to identify and assess. *4. Unconventional Traps* Unconventional traps refer to reservoirs that do not fit neatly into the categories of structural or stratigraphic traps. These include unconventional hydrocarbon resources such as shale gas, tight gas, and coalbed methane. The trapping mechanisms in unconventional reservoirs often involve factors such as organic richness, natural fractures, and matrix porosity. Photo refrence, credit : https://lnkd.in/dH9FXumM

289

3 Comments

Some positive thoughts on the near term future for the industry.

14