"Shale Revolution": saboteurs, crazy and contused maniacs according to Mikhail Leontyev
Head of Gazprom Alexey Miller in the program “Vesti” on Saturday with Sergey Brilev ” saidthat mining shale gas in the United States does not make a profit. “We are not aware of any project at the present time, where the profitability of shale gas production wells would be about a positive value. Absolutely all wells have a negative value. There is an opinion that it is generally a soap bubble that will burst very soon, ”he noted. He further said that the United States is not a competitor to Russia and expressed skepticism about shale. Among the arguments, Miller cited the fact that the United States is a gas-deficient country, while consuming the gas “most”. Experts believe that the volume of shale gas production in the United States corresponds to the reduction in natural gas production there. “Therefore,” Miller believes, “it seems that the production of shale gas in the United States is due to some other reasons. It can be assumed that these are the reasons for US energy security. ” As for production technologies, the head of Gazprom recalled: “We have long had exactly the same technology. Gazprom, for example, produces gas from coal in Kuzbass. ”
All these statements did not go unnoticed by the well-known analyst, host of the television program “However,” and the editor-in-chief of the eponymous weekly Mikhail Leontyev. In expressions, the chief editor was not shy. Here you and the similarity with the "wounded maniac", and "madness", and "direct lies", and "full fly" and "semi-criminal character", and, finally, "aberration of consciousness." The expressive attacks of comrade Leontyev ended with a philippic about the act of “brazenly sabotaging the instructions of the president”, which logically led to the council: “Mr. Miller ... to hospitalize”.
But who is it that appointed Miller to the post? Who is called “Putin’s man” at all, if not Miller? How can the left hand sabotage the action of the right?
In 1991-1996 Comrade Miller, an economist by training, worked at the External Relations Committee of the St. Petersburg City Hall and made a bad career there: he went through the steps of the department head and deputy head of the department and got to the deputy chairman of the committee. And the chairman of the committee was Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin. In Gazprom in 2001, Miller got not as a man from the internal forge of personnel, but from the outside - was put by the president. In 2011, V. Putin awarded Miller a government award in the field of science and technology for the development of production technology for high-strength pipes for strategic gas transmission projects (another winner in the same year was Valentina Matvienko), and in 2012 he was awarded Certificate of Honor of the President of the Russian Federation for merits in the development of the gas complex and many years of diligent work.
There is such an opinion about Miller on the net: “Alexey is very executive and obedient. What they say to him, he does. Nothing bad can be said about him, but good too. He does not have his own opinion and is very convenient to deal with some kind of “Media Bridge”. And to steal from Miller's hand will not rise. Unless for myself. ”
Miller does not seem to be spoiled and needs treatment. At least, the president does not notice this. Here is comrade. Leontyev and decided to tell him. You have, they say, Vladimir Vladimirovich, a contused maniac at his side. Halfhead But this is now “halfway”, and when it does it ... “The aberration of consciousness” is no joke.
Not a joke. Even not April Fools' - although the material of M. Leontiev was published on the website "But" 1 April.
Meanwhile, it should be noted that shale reserves of energy resources in the United States, which were actively developed there, turned out to be much less than expected. Agency "Bloomberg" even wroteThat estimates of shale gas reserves in the US for 2012 a year represent a “shocking step backwards for a rapidly growing industry.”
According to a recent estimate by the US Department of Energy, there are approximately 482 trillion cubic feet of natural gas from shale basins in the country. The latest data suggests an 42-percent reduction in inventory estimates from the 2011 year: the corresponding value was within 827 trillion. cc feet The downgrade was due to more detailed information that became available due to the increase in the exploitation of shale gas deposits over the 2012 year. This information is open, is translated into Russian and Comrade. Leontyev could spend three or four minutes searching through Google. Well, or "Yandex".
(By the way, it’s the same with oil. story. Against the background of recent revaluations of shale reserves at the end of 2012, the United States did not at all reduce, but increased the volume of oil purchases from Saudi Arabia and other countries of the Persian Gulf. According to “Financial Times”, in the structure of American oil imports, the share, for example, of Saudi Arabia overcame the mark in 15% (the maximum figure since 2003 of the year). The total share of the Gulf countries in the import of “black gold” in the United States exceeded 25% (the highest figure for the same 9 years). Shale mining is unlikely to help the United States quickly achieve "energy independence" and be by 2017, as promised by propagandists, the world's largest oil producer - “Saudi America”).
So, it’s at least premature to talk about total “ousting” of Gazprom’s gas in the world (except for the noble purposes of gosdepovskoy propaganda, that comrade Leontyev, of course, is not typical). Another thing is when exploration, development and mining provide us with new information. Maybe something will be clarified by the year that way 2020-th. Miller and Putin do not look so far in our time. It’s not even the fact that the current president will run for election in 2018.
Leontyev says:
Stop, stop, stop. Someday shale gas will give the US a chance to become one of the leading exporters of raw materials, but so far there is more noise and propaganda than truth. The market, of course, also responds to propaganda and analytical noise, but to a lesser extent than to the facts. Miller seems to know a lot more Leontiev.
The shale revolution in the United States could lead to an industrial revolution. This is exactly what experts of the Cambridge expert group IHS CERA say, Ekaterina Kravchenko reports in an almost recent issue. "Sheets". Yes, own production will gradually replace gas imports to the United States, IHS Vice President John Larson believes, but the main question here is how soon this revolution will reach the rest of the world.
Indeed, natural gas in the USA is 3-4 times cheaper than in European and Asian markets (3,5 $ for 1 million British thermal units - against 20 dollars in Asia). But Michael Stoppard, IHS CERA Managing Director, is sure that market rebalancing is about to begin, and prices will gradually come closer. American gas will gradually become more expensive - its price will rise to 5 $ already by 2014. Mr. Stoppard explains: cheap American gas will not soon change the structure of global trade. The first liquefied gas export terminal will appear in the United States at the end of 2015 or the beginning of 2016. By 2020, the United States will export 6 million cubic meters. feet per day. The impact of US exports will not be felt in the global market until 2020, Stoppard is convinced. With regard to the export of natural gas, the Obama administration has so far approved only one relevant application.
Here we are talking again about the future. "Cheniere Energy" concluded a contract with the British company Centrica for the supply of 1,75 million tons of shale gas annually, starting with 2018. And what about Gazprom? And in the 2011 year, Gazprom exported 8,16 billion cubic meters of gas to the UK; in 2012 - 8,11 billion. In September last year, the Russian monopolist entered into a new agreement with the mentioned “Centrica” to supply 2,4 billion cubic meters of gas for 2014-2016. The volume of Russian gas supplies will only grow, experts say. No recession.
So, we see: we are talking about times quite distant - 2018 year, 2020 year. Moreover, the Americans after revaluations of deposits are generally satisfied with caution in their statements.
By the way, it’s also interesting that, according to the same Vedomosti, adviser to the US energy administration, Heather Zichel, notes that petrochemical concerns led by Dow Chemical oppose increasing gas exports: this can lead to higher prices for gas. domestic market and weaken the competitive advantages of American companies.
Thus, the Americans have a dilemma: on the one hand, cheap gas is good inside the country, on the other hand, the companies producing it are not eager to sell gas cheaply and are aimed at export, which, being sane, is resisted by Obama, who needs more a healthy economy than foreign trade in raw materials. The strategy, frankly, is not at all Russian.
Now - a few necessary paragraphs about 10000 dollars to truck drivers. Obama is known to be back in 2011 She urged Americans "to change" on gas, but the gas topic has not yet gained popularity. To stimulate the gas engine in the United States previously allocated funds (up to 2010). Resource pro-gas.ru, referring to the magazine “Oil of Russia”, cites data that 15 billion dollars a year went to such stimulation in the USA. In particular, 2,5 billion was directed to development programs and demonstration of achievements; 300 million went to the federal government to purchase gas-powered vehicles for official use; 300 million - to replace diesel school buses with environmentally friendly cars powered by gas and other alternative fuels; 300 million - for grants for pilot projects under the Clean City program; 8,4 billion - for the purchase of new municipal buses and 3,2 billion - for energy saving grants.
Since 2011, when the crisis began to be felt more and more, the projects, apparently, were curtailed. In the same 2011 year, in October, the Congress rejected the project of the so-called 1380 act (The Natural Gas Act, HR 1380, or New Alternative Transportation to Give), promoted by a well-known businessman and benefactor Thomas BP Pickens. Americans Solutions, NAT GAS, - otherwise simply referred to as The Pickens Bill).
The goal of the Bill Pickens was a total transfer of US vehicles to gas fuel: either compressed gas or liquefied gas. The old resource producer and trader Pickens very much wanted domestic gas prices to rise (they would have increased if the demand curve went up). The act was served under a delicious sauce to reduce the dependence of the great capitalist homeland on oil, which so far has to be imported and for which you have to pay dearly. The Pickens Bill provided, among other things, tax credits (not subsidies at all, as some media say) to those who: a) buy a gas-powered vehicle; b) who is refitting gasoline or diesel cars under compressed or liquefied natural gas. To the Bill Pickens project, to the 104 section, were laid such loans in the amount of 7500 dollars (mass of a car no more than 8500 pounds) and up to 64000 dollars for a car with a mass of more than 26000 pounds.
However the project was rejected October 4 2011 of the year with the wording that can be summarized in a nutshell: let the demand for natural gas stimulates the market, not Congress. Information about the negative decision of congressmen laid out in open access on the Industrial Energy Consumers of America (IECA) website. On server Govtrack.us You can find the text of this document submitted to the 6 Congress on April 2011. It also states that HR 1380 was not accepted.
Mr Pickens still promotes his own autogasification plan, and he succeeds in some things, but not the subsidies that Comrade Leontyev was talking about. No, for 10000 dollars, truck owners are not yet given. It is rumored that the US government pays awards to companies using “gas” trucks, but, alas, there was no confirmation of these rumors. In addition, the main obstacle to the transition of freight to natural gas are significant costs for the conversion of cars. Therefore, analysts of the magazine “Fleet Owner” believe that the number of trucks on natural gas in the segment of medium and large carrying capacity in the United States will grow slowly. An increase in the production of "clean" trucks from 1950 units to 29483 units in 2017 is projected. This is just 8% of total truck production in the US of 6-8 environmental class over the coming years. As a result, carriers consider natural gas as an alternative fuel only in the distant future.
В "Forbes" you can read a note by Peter Kelly-Detweiler on how the gas direction is developing in the States. To save on fuel, the US Waste Administration recently announced that it plans to have 80% of new CNG trucks. They cost about $ 30.000 more, but each will then save about $ 27.000 a year. Another gas success: AT & T's acquisition of 1.200 gas vans from GM. Major engine manufacturers (Cummins, Peterbilt, Caterpillar and Navistar) are looking to build LNG engines. Navistar predicts that 1 in 3 of its new engines will run on natural gas. This will happen over the next few years. LNG infrastructure is also being developed along the highway, near existing pipelines.
All this also speaks about the development of not today, but at best, tomorrow or the day after tomorrow.
According to the magazine "Behind the wheel", around the world, about 10 of millions of cars work on natural gas, and only 200 of thousands of them drive to the USA.
Andrey Kuznetsov, Citigroup strategist in Russia and the CIS, expresses "Vedomosti" The following assumption: "Cars on natural gas - not news, but they still have not become a mass mode of transport in most countries due to the lack of sufficient infrastructure. However, the fivefold gap in prices between oil and gas becomes a sufficient incentive for switching to gas and building infrastructure — first of all in terms of heavy transport, which requires a less extensive network of gas stations and has large runs. So, according to our analysts, 30% of the truck fleet in the United States will switch to gas for 2020 g. This will reduce the demand for oil by 0,6 million barrels per day, which roughly corresponds to 0,7% of current demand. The same savings will be provided by the transfer to gas of the part of the sea transport. At the same time, we must realize that this process will be rather long and will become noticeable only by the end of the decade. We believe that by that time oil could fall to $ 85 per barrel. ”
Thus, again - 2020 year. And then at the end of the decade is scheduled only the beginning of the process. By this time, Gazprom, it must be assumed, will have an appropriate strategy. Or an unprofitable "bubble" in the American shale will burst. That is, it's too early to talk about “contused maniacs”.
“What does the global gas revolution mean for Russia? - A. Kuznetsov asks. - Oddly enough, the impact of the situation on the gas market on the Russian macroeconomy is not so great. Gas accounts for only 12% of exports and if, as we expect, the price in Europe falls by a quarter, Russia may lose 3% of export earnings. Bad, but not a disaster. ”
However, Comrade Leontyev continues to scare the fear:
In the informatorium of Gazprom there is an article called "How can I extract natural gas from coal seams". It says by the way: “It is not possible to extract it from all types of layers; Coals that are intermediate between brown and anthracite are the most promising for mining. Such coal is rich, for example, Kuzbass. The most common options are the injection of water or gel for hydraulic fracturing, injection of air or air-air mixture through the well, and the impact on the formation of a current. "
Conducting the world's first hydraulic fracturing attributed Halliburton (USA, 1947). Later, hydraulic fracturing operations were carried out in the USSR, and the developers of the theoretical basis were Soviet scientists S. S. A., Zheltov Yu. P. (1953), who also had a significant influence on the development of hydraulic fracturing in the world. Hydraulic fracturing is also used to extract methane from coal beds, compressed sandstone gas, and shale gas. For the first time the coal seam was fractured at 1954 in the Donbas.
Comrade Leontyev goes on to say that A. Miller’s interest in shale oil instead of gas is “semi-criminal”. Gazprom, the analyst says, does not need shale gas, “it needs a price.” The task of Miller, as Leontyev sees it, is “to nightmare the state, to justify the inhuman costs of mining”.
And what kind of aberration, if oil, as opposed to not so significant gas, gives in Russia about 30% of export earnings? Gas - 12%, petroleum products - 28%, and the total export of fuel and energy products of Russia was at the end of last year 69,8%? It is not difficult to count. The budget is filled with oil and petroleum products, and in a clear understanding of this, it seems, and reveals the "semi-criminal nature" of Miller. As for Leontyev’s expressive arguments, it’s ridiculous to even try to justify the profitability of gas production by the profitability of oil production. Hurry up, as they say, make people laugh.
Let's not take it on our own, and even more so to guess. Listen to the experts. how warned Raiffeisenbank analyst Andrei Polishchuk, given the decline in gas prices in the United States, investments in the extraction of shale gas there may be of low profitability. Prices in 3,5 $ per 1 million British thermal units, or 122,5 $ per 1000 cube. m, barely cover the cost of production. Many investors today are cutting investments, says Tatyana Mitrova, an expert at the Energy Center of the Skolkovo Business School. And, curiously, according to both experts, more attractive will be investment in the United States in the production of shale oil.
Approximately the same, with some amendments, can probably be projected onto Russia. Only low-margin production of shale gas here will turn into generally unprofitable - if only because of climatic conditions.
However, what is happening to Comrade Leontiev seems to be "an act of brazenly sabotage the instructions of the president." The analyst proposes a solution: Miller to “hospitalize”, and Gazprom to “sell to the Americans.” The last, of course, April Fool's joke.
All these statements did not go unnoticed by the well-known analyst, host of the television program “However,” and the editor-in-chief of the eponymous weekly Mikhail Leontyev. In expressions, the chief editor was not shy. Here you and the similarity with the "wounded maniac", and "madness", and "direct lies", and "full fly" and "semi-criminal character", and, finally, "aberration of consciousness." The expressive attacks of comrade Leontyev ended with a philippic about the act of “brazenly sabotaging the instructions of the president”, which logically led to the council: “Mr. Miller ... to hospitalize”.
But who is it that appointed Miller to the post? Who is called “Putin’s man” at all, if not Miller? How can the left hand sabotage the action of the right?
In 1991-1996 Comrade Miller, an economist by training, worked at the External Relations Committee of the St. Petersburg City Hall and made a bad career there: he went through the steps of the department head and deputy head of the department and got to the deputy chairman of the committee. And the chairman of the committee was Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin. In Gazprom in 2001, Miller got not as a man from the internal forge of personnel, but from the outside - was put by the president. In 2011, V. Putin awarded Miller a government award in the field of science and technology for the development of production technology for high-strength pipes for strategic gas transmission projects (another winner in the same year was Valentina Matvienko), and in 2012 he was awarded Certificate of Honor of the President of the Russian Federation for merits in the development of the gas complex and many years of diligent work.
There is such an opinion about Miller on the net: “Alexey is very executive and obedient. What they say to him, he does. Nothing bad can be said about him, but good too. He does not have his own opinion and is very convenient to deal with some kind of “Media Bridge”. And to steal from Miller's hand will not rise. Unless for myself. ”
Miller does not seem to be spoiled and needs treatment. At least, the president does not notice this. Here is comrade. Leontyev and decided to tell him. You have, they say, Vladimir Vladimirovich, a contused maniac at his side. Halfhead But this is now “halfway”, and when it does it ... “The aberration of consciousness” is no joke.
Not a joke. Even not April Fools' - although the material of M. Leontiev was published on the website "But" 1 April.
“... It looks like a contused maniac. The president instructed them to develop a response strategy for the shale revolution, the president spoke about the dangers of the shale revolution. No, says Miller, there is nothing that the president is talking about.
The United States is producing what Putin said about 214 billion cubic meters of shale gas. But Miller is implacable: “We don’t know any example of shale gas production, where profitability would be about a positive value. Absolutely all wells have a negative value. ” ... It's just some kind of madness. How do the US deal with it? In this case there is a direct lie. The United States does not import gas. All of this gas, destined for the United States, now goes to the European market, where it displaces Gazprom's gas and lowers the price. ”
The United States is producing what Putin said about 214 billion cubic meters of shale gas. But Miller is implacable: “We don’t know any example of shale gas production, where profitability would be about a positive value. Absolutely all wells have a negative value. ” ... It's just some kind of madness. How do the US deal with it? In this case there is a direct lie. The United States does not import gas. All of this gas, destined for the United States, now goes to the European market, where it displaces Gazprom's gas and lowers the price. ”
Meanwhile, it should be noted that shale reserves of energy resources in the United States, which were actively developed there, turned out to be much less than expected. Agency "Bloomberg" even wroteThat estimates of shale gas reserves in the US for 2012 a year represent a “shocking step backwards for a rapidly growing industry.”
According to a recent estimate by the US Department of Energy, there are approximately 482 trillion cubic feet of natural gas from shale basins in the country. The latest data suggests an 42-percent reduction in inventory estimates from the 2011 year: the corresponding value was within 827 trillion. cc feet The downgrade was due to more detailed information that became available due to the increase in the exploitation of shale gas deposits over the 2012 year. This information is open, is translated into Russian and Comrade. Leontyev could spend three or four minutes searching through Google. Well, or "Yandex".
(By the way, it’s the same with oil. story. Against the background of recent revaluations of shale reserves at the end of 2012, the United States did not at all reduce, but increased the volume of oil purchases from Saudi Arabia and other countries of the Persian Gulf. According to “Financial Times”, in the structure of American oil imports, the share, for example, of Saudi Arabia overcame the mark in 15% (the maximum figure since 2003 of the year). The total share of the Gulf countries in the import of “black gold” in the United States exceeded 25% (the highest figure for the same 9 years). Shale mining is unlikely to help the United States quickly achieve "energy independence" and be by 2017, as promised by propagandists, the world's largest oil producer - “Saudi America”).
So, it’s at least premature to talk about total “ousting” of Gazprom’s gas in the world (except for the noble purposes of gosdepovskoy propaganda, that comrade Leontyev, of course, is not typical). Another thing is when exploration, development and mining provide us with new information. Maybe something will be clarified by the year that way 2020-th. Miller and Putin do not look so far in our time. It’s not even the fact that the current president will run for election in 2018.
Leontyev says:
“The US has already begun to export gas at the preliminary stage, including with the aim of stopping the fall in domestic prices for it. Now gas prices in the US domestic market are significantly lower than ours, and it is unprofitable for companies producing it. The United States has received a huge advantage in the form of cheap energy, which they are now trying to use. Americans give $ 10000 to heavy truck drivers for converting them from diesel to gas - despite the fact that gas is cheaper. That is, they accelerate this shale revolution. Only Miller is not clear.
Stop, stop, stop. Someday shale gas will give the US a chance to become one of the leading exporters of raw materials, but so far there is more noise and propaganda than truth. The market, of course, also responds to propaganda and analytical noise, but to a lesser extent than to the facts. Miller seems to know a lot more Leontiev.
The shale revolution in the United States could lead to an industrial revolution. This is exactly what experts of the Cambridge expert group IHS CERA say, Ekaterina Kravchenko reports in an almost recent issue. "Sheets". Yes, own production will gradually replace gas imports to the United States, IHS Vice President John Larson believes, but the main question here is how soon this revolution will reach the rest of the world.
Indeed, natural gas in the USA is 3-4 times cheaper than in European and Asian markets (3,5 $ for 1 million British thermal units - against 20 dollars in Asia). But Michael Stoppard, IHS CERA Managing Director, is sure that market rebalancing is about to begin, and prices will gradually come closer. American gas will gradually become more expensive - its price will rise to 5 $ already by 2014. Mr. Stoppard explains: cheap American gas will not soon change the structure of global trade. The first liquefied gas export terminal will appear in the United States at the end of 2015 or the beginning of 2016. By 2020, the United States will export 6 million cubic meters. feet per day. The impact of US exports will not be felt in the global market until 2020, Stoppard is convinced. With regard to the export of natural gas, the Obama administration has so far approved only one relevant application.
Here we are talking again about the future. "Cheniere Energy" concluded a contract with the British company Centrica for the supply of 1,75 million tons of shale gas annually, starting with 2018. And what about Gazprom? And in the 2011 year, Gazprom exported 8,16 billion cubic meters of gas to the UK; in 2012 - 8,11 billion. In September last year, the Russian monopolist entered into a new agreement with the mentioned “Centrica” to supply 2,4 billion cubic meters of gas for 2014-2016. The volume of Russian gas supplies will only grow, experts say. No recession.
So, we see: we are talking about times quite distant - 2018 year, 2020 year. Moreover, the Americans after revaluations of deposits are generally satisfied with caution in their statements.
By the way, it’s also interesting that, according to the same Vedomosti, adviser to the US energy administration, Heather Zichel, notes that petrochemical concerns led by Dow Chemical oppose increasing gas exports: this can lead to higher prices for gas. domestic market and weaken the competitive advantages of American companies.
Thus, the Americans have a dilemma: on the one hand, cheap gas is good inside the country, on the other hand, the companies producing it are not eager to sell gas cheaply and are aimed at export, which, being sane, is resisted by Obama, who needs more a healthy economy than foreign trade in raw materials. The strategy, frankly, is not at all Russian.
Now - a few necessary paragraphs about 10000 dollars to truck drivers. Obama is known to be back in 2011 She urged Americans "to change" on gas, but the gas topic has not yet gained popularity. To stimulate the gas engine in the United States previously allocated funds (up to 2010). Resource pro-gas.ru, referring to the magazine “Oil of Russia”, cites data that 15 billion dollars a year went to such stimulation in the USA. In particular, 2,5 billion was directed to development programs and demonstration of achievements; 300 million went to the federal government to purchase gas-powered vehicles for official use; 300 million - to replace diesel school buses with environmentally friendly cars powered by gas and other alternative fuels; 300 million - for grants for pilot projects under the Clean City program; 8,4 billion - for the purchase of new municipal buses and 3,2 billion - for energy saving grants.
Since 2011, when the crisis began to be felt more and more, the projects, apparently, were curtailed. In the same 2011 year, in October, the Congress rejected the project of the so-called 1380 act (The Natural Gas Act, HR 1380, or New Alternative Transportation to Give), promoted by a well-known businessman and benefactor Thomas BP Pickens. Americans Solutions, NAT GAS, - otherwise simply referred to as The Pickens Bill).
The goal of the Bill Pickens was a total transfer of US vehicles to gas fuel: either compressed gas or liquefied gas. The old resource producer and trader Pickens very much wanted domestic gas prices to rise (they would have increased if the demand curve went up). The act was served under a delicious sauce to reduce the dependence of the great capitalist homeland on oil, which so far has to be imported and for which you have to pay dearly. The Pickens Bill provided, among other things, tax credits (not subsidies at all, as some media say) to those who: a) buy a gas-powered vehicle; b) who is refitting gasoline or diesel cars under compressed or liquefied natural gas. To the Bill Pickens project, to the 104 section, were laid such loans in the amount of 7500 dollars (mass of a car no more than 8500 pounds) and up to 64000 dollars for a car with a mass of more than 26000 pounds.
However the project was rejected October 4 2011 of the year with the wording that can be summarized in a nutshell: let the demand for natural gas stimulates the market, not Congress. Information about the negative decision of congressmen laid out in open access on the Industrial Energy Consumers of America (IECA) website. On server Govtrack.us You can find the text of this document submitted to the 6 Congress on April 2011. It also states that HR 1380 was not accepted.
Mr Pickens still promotes his own autogasification plan, and he succeeds in some things, but not the subsidies that Comrade Leontyev was talking about. No, for 10000 dollars, truck owners are not yet given. It is rumored that the US government pays awards to companies using “gas” trucks, but, alas, there was no confirmation of these rumors. In addition, the main obstacle to the transition of freight to natural gas are significant costs for the conversion of cars. Therefore, analysts of the magazine “Fleet Owner” believe that the number of trucks on natural gas in the segment of medium and large carrying capacity in the United States will grow slowly. An increase in the production of "clean" trucks from 1950 units to 29483 units in 2017 is projected. This is just 8% of total truck production in the US of 6-8 environmental class over the coming years. As a result, carriers consider natural gas as an alternative fuel only in the distant future.
В "Forbes" you can read a note by Peter Kelly-Detweiler on how the gas direction is developing in the States. To save on fuel, the US Waste Administration recently announced that it plans to have 80% of new CNG trucks. They cost about $ 30.000 more, but each will then save about $ 27.000 a year. Another gas success: AT & T's acquisition of 1.200 gas vans from GM. Major engine manufacturers (Cummins, Peterbilt, Caterpillar and Navistar) are looking to build LNG engines. Navistar predicts that 1 in 3 of its new engines will run on natural gas. This will happen over the next few years. LNG infrastructure is also being developed along the highway, near existing pipelines.
All this also speaks about the development of not today, but at best, tomorrow or the day after tomorrow.
According to the magazine "Behind the wheel", around the world, about 10 of millions of cars work on natural gas, and only 200 of thousands of them drive to the USA.
Andrey Kuznetsov, Citigroup strategist in Russia and the CIS, expresses "Vedomosti" The following assumption: "Cars on natural gas - not news, but they still have not become a mass mode of transport in most countries due to the lack of sufficient infrastructure. However, the fivefold gap in prices between oil and gas becomes a sufficient incentive for switching to gas and building infrastructure — first of all in terms of heavy transport, which requires a less extensive network of gas stations and has large runs. So, according to our analysts, 30% of the truck fleet in the United States will switch to gas for 2020 g. This will reduce the demand for oil by 0,6 million barrels per day, which roughly corresponds to 0,7% of current demand. The same savings will be provided by the transfer to gas of the part of the sea transport. At the same time, we must realize that this process will be rather long and will become noticeable only by the end of the decade. We believe that by that time oil could fall to $ 85 per barrel. ”
Thus, again - 2020 year. And then at the end of the decade is scheduled only the beginning of the process. By this time, Gazprom, it must be assumed, will have an appropriate strategy. Or an unprofitable "bubble" in the American shale will burst. That is, it's too early to talk about “contused maniacs”.
“What does the global gas revolution mean for Russia? - A. Kuznetsov asks. - Oddly enough, the impact of the situation on the gas market on the Russian macroeconomy is not so great. Gas accounts for only 12% of exports and if, as we expect, the price in Europe falls by a quarter, Russia may lose 3% of export earnings. Bad, but not a disaster. ”
However, Comrade Leontyev continues to scare the fear:
"And finally - a completely psychedelic statement, right Kudrin gas of some kind:" Gazprom has exactly the same technology, gas is extracted from coal in Kuzbass. " This is a full fly away. ... It is necessary to do something with this - a doctor, maybe, call? If a person thinks that we, extracting gas from coal mines, “own the technology of shale gas extraction” - that is, stepped hydraulic fracturing - then the person should be urgently treated ... ”
In the informatorium of Gazprom there is an article called "How can I extract natural gas from coal seams". It says by the way: “It is not possible to extract it from all types of layers; Coals that are intermediate between brown and anthracite are the most promising for mining. Such coal is rich, for example, Kuzbass. The most common options are the injection of water or gel for hydraulic fracturing, injection of air or air-air mixture through the well, and the impact on the formation of a current. "
Conducting the world's first hydraulic fracturing attributed Halliburton (USA, 1947). Later, hydraulic fracturing operations were carried out in the USSR, and the developers of the theoretical basis were Soviet scientists S. S. A., Zheltov Yu. P. (1953), who also had a significant influence on the development of hydraulic fracturing in the world. Hydraulic fracturing is also used to extract methane from coal beds, compressed sandstone gas, and shale gas. For the first time the coal seam was fractured at 1954 in the Donbas.
Comrade Leontyev goes on to say that A. Miller’s interest in shale oil instead of gas is “semi-criminal”. Gazprom, the analyst says, does not need shale gas, “it needs a price.” The task of Miller, as Leontyev sees it, is “to nightmare the state, to justify the inhuman costs of mining”.
“And here's another interesting one: shale gas is unprofitable. And shale oil, in Miller's version, means profitable. This is generally some kind of aberration of consciousness. Psychosis".
And what kind of aberration, if oil, as opposed to not so significant gas, gives in Russia about 30% of export earnings? Gas - 12%, petroleum products - 28%, and the total export of fuel and energy products of Russia was at the end of last year 69,8%? It is not difficult to count. The budget is filled with oil and petroleum products, and in a clear understanding of this, it seems, and reveals the "semi-criminal nature" of Miller. As for Leontyev’s expressive arguments, it’s ridiculous to even try to justify the profitability of gas production by the profitability of oil production. Hurry up, as they say, make people laugh.
Let's not take it on our own, and even more so to guess. Listen to the experts. how warned Raiffeisenbank analyst Andrei Polishchuk, given the decline in gas prices in the United States, investments in the extraction of shale gas there may be of low profitability. Prices in 3,5 $ per 1 million British thermal units, or 122,5 $ per 1000 cube. m, barely cover the cost of production. Many investors today are cutting investments, says Tatyana Mitrova, an expert at the Energy Center of the Skolkovo Business School. And, curiously, according to both experts, more attractive will be investment in the United States in the production of shale oil.
Approximately the same, with some amendments, can probably be projected onto Russia. Only low-margin production of shale gas here will turn into generally unprofitable - if only because of climatic conditions.
However, what is happening to Comrade Leontiev seems to be "an act of brazenly sabotage the instructions of the president." The analyst proposes a solution: Miller to “hospitalize”, and Gazprom to “sell to the Americans.” The last, of course, April Fool's joke.
Russia overslept "shale revolution"
Mikhail Leontyev on the unprecedented statement by the head of Gazprom, Alexey Miller, regarding the production of shale gas in the United States.
Mikhail Leontyev on the unprecedented statement by the head of Gazprom, Alexey Miller, regarding the production of shale gas in the United States.
Information