Military Review

Shale

80
The other day, OPEC Secretary General Abdullah al-Badri gave an interview to German journalists and said that the American shale revolution will be completed in five years, or even four years. He said that up to 2018, oil production in shale in the United States is likely to increase, but then a decline will begin. As for the OPEC countries, they, on the contrary, will begin to increase production - and by the 2035 year they promise to bring it to 47 million barrels per day. Earlier in the OPEC report, it was reported that the global demand for the cartel’s oil by 2018 would drop by a million barrels per day due to increased supplies of “black gold” from Canada and the United States.


Shale


Quote from the OPEC report in November: “Additional oil supplies from Canada and the United States will reach 4,9 a million barrels per day over the next five years. This is twice the figure that was projected last year - an increase in supply on 1,7 by one million barrels per day to 2018. ”

Due to the use of hydraulic fracturing, which allows to extract oil from hard-to-reach formations, only in 2013 year the volume of shale oil production in the USA and Canada is expected to jump to 3,3 million barrels per day (almost by one third).

Recently, OPEC Secretary General Abdullah al-Badri said in an interview with German journalists that the shale boom in the United States in four or five years will decline. “In many (oil) fields, production is already rapidly declining, in some cases by 60% over the course of a year,” he noted.

According to the forecasts of the Secretary General, up to 2018, oil production by unconventional methods in the USA will increase to 5 million barrels per day, but then it will decline. In OPEC countries, everything will be the opposite: by 2035, production will increase to 47 million barrels (i.e. by 10 million barrels).

The prediction of the International Energy Agency (IEA) has also appeared in the media. IEA chief economist Fatih Birol said: “Expecting a rapid growth in shale oil production in the United States, the OPEC countries took a pause in their investment activity and took a wait-and-see attitude. I am truly concerned about the conclusions about the forthcoming abundance of American shale oil, and about the fact that we are giving erroneous signals to OPEC countries, since such a situation can lead to their refusal to implement investment programs. ” In addition, the expert made it clear that the IEA revised its assessment of the "American shale energy revolution." “It would be more correct to say an oil surge than a revolution,” he said.

Alexander Razuvaev, director of the analytical department of the Russian company Alpari, agrees with shale skeptics. By his wordsAmericans at the beginning "will have a maximum in terms of production, and then a landslide in terms of volumes." In the USA, technologies were tested, and it turned out that “they are not so profitable”.

Moreover, American environmentalists are sounding the alarm: drilling of rocks will lead to contamination of underground sources of drinking water. Plus, the threat of earthquakes in seismically active regions of the United States is increasing.

And recently, B. L. Weinstein published an article in The Hill entitled How to dethrone King Vladimir (How to overthrow Tsar Vladimir). Expert offered different ways to get Putin off the “throne” —in the first place, by exporting liquefied natural gas produced in shale to Europe. The gas will be followed by the oil extracted by the method of hydraulic fracturing.

Here is a brief of his theses.

In 2011, the United States overtook Russia and became the number one producer of natural gas on the planet. Thanks to shale boom, America should become the largest oil-producing power.

By exporting liquefied natural gas from the United States to Europe and Asia, Weinstein writes, the US will crush Gazprom, which reigns in these markets. In parallel with the export, shale extraction technologies should be transferred to China, Poland and other countries that have significant shale resources: this will reduce their dependence on Russian gas. At the same time, all this will give impetus to the development of the energy sector of America.

Whole enemy geostrategy. Where did so much noise around the "shale project"?

Browser Ivan Zatsarin ("But") calls the slate project anti-union.

“... Currently, Ukraine is carrying out geological exploration on three hydrocarbon areas: Yuzovsky (the territory of Donetsk and Kharkiv regions), Oleskaya (the territories of Ivano-Frankivsk and Lviv regions) and Scythian (deep-water shelf in the north-western part of the Black Sea). To conduct work on the premises, companies were created in which the Ukrainian side owns 50% of shares (mainly the state-owned company Nadra Ukraine). The second half of the mining operator: Shell (Yuzovskaya Square), Chevron (Oleskaya Square), a consortium of companies led by ExxonMobil (Skifskaya Square).

About the prospects of production is difficult to judge. And the estimated gas reserves in shale and hard sandstones, and the volume of the estimated production, and the time during which these volumes will be reached, and, finally, its price - everything is extremely unsteady. Optimists like Minister Edward Stavitsky - the main lobbyist of joint projects - insist on a total level of production from three areas of the order of 30 billion cubic meters. m already after 5-7 years. At the same time, its cost will supposedly be three times lower than the actual price of Russian gas. However, before the end of exploration, forecasts can be made by anyone, even such bold ones. The main thing is to understand that they remain the skin of an undead bear. ”


Here, let's add, they also want to kill the bear.

The analyst recalls that, while Ukraine is looking for gas in shale and pretends to be its cost, Europe is getting cold to shale. The “Shale Revolution” has already been canceled in France and Bulgaria (a ban has been imposed on the use of hydraulic fracturing technology), the Czech Republic (moratorium); Hungary (where the project was closed by ExxonMobil); Sweden (“Shell” recognized the search for deposits unpromising).

To this we must add a few words about the protests over shale mining that took place recently in Romania, as well as in the UK.

In Romania, the police broke up people gathered at the place where Chevron decided to start test drilling. The protesters were “just furious that, according to them, the authorities sold them to the British Energy Corporation. At the same time, people were not told about the possible consequences and were not given any guarantees. Many locals are farmers. They are very proud of their clean air, their fruits and vegetables ", - says the correspondent "RT" Polina Boyko.

The same report also speaks about protests against hydraulic fracturing in Greater Manchester in the north of England: there people are protesting against the exploratory drilling of iGas. Protests against gas production by hydraulic fracturing are also held in Sussex.

Speaking about the expansion of Western corporations to Ukraine, the columnist “However” Ivan Zatsarin points out: any economic integration is the first step towards political integration. Therefore, joint projects of the Ukrainian government with oil and gas TNCs are a vector of Kiev’s geopolitical aspirations. According to the analyst, Ukrainian elites are ready for environmental risks, ready to ignore the dangers of fracturing technology, and even agree on “predatory” production sharing agreements. The main thing for them, the author of the material considers, is to ensure the gas balance, to keep the country under control, and also to keep the export margin, even if minimal.

The Ukrainian authorities are advised to recall Lenin to the Ukrainian authorities: “We make sacrifices by giving millions of valuable materials to foreign capital ... but at the same time we should receive the benefits we need, that is, increasing the number of products and, if possible, improving the situation of our workers as employed in concession enterprises that are not engaged ”(complete collection of works, 5 ed., vol. 43, p. 190).

Meanwhile, Ukraine is turning to Russia. This is evidenced by both the non-signing of the association agreement with the EU and the recent statement by Viktor Yanukovich about Kiev’s readiness to resume the purchase of Russian gas while lowering its price. Ukrainian president stressedthat both sides suffer from the current situation: having lost the Ukrainian market, Russia also suffers losses.

However, Ukraine owed Russia a huge amount. The media write about the transfer of payments. Gazprom does not confirm this information, but does not refute it either. Earlier, this information appeared in the Russian and Ukrainian media with reference to Evgeny Bakulin, Chairman of the Board of Naftogaz of Ukraine. It was reported that the company agreed with Gazprom on the transfer of payments for gas supplies in October-December to the spring of 2014.

“As for payment, we agreed to shift payments from October, November and December to spring,” said Bakulin.

He further stressed that Naftogaz will not be able to repay the debt to Gazprom for the August gas supplies until December 7: the work of the Ukrainian government has been blocked due to mass protests about the failure of the association agreement with the EU.

And the deputy chairman of the board of Gazprom, Andrei Kruglov, recalled that Ukraine’s debt for gas already amounted to more than 1,3 billion dollars.

Western shale industrialists, who decide to run their shale projects on foreign territory and do not forget to get tax breaks, play on the weak solvency of Ukraine. The geopolitical vector, which Kiev will adhere to in the near future, largely depends on the outcome of the negotiations, which are conducted by Russia and Ukraine on the gas line, and on Ukraine’s debt settlement. After all, the “overthrow” of Putin, about which Mr. Weinstein wrote, can begin with the destruction of allied Ukraine. And for this there are two ways at the same time: continue to turn Kiev to the West and turn the country into an environmental garbage dump. The western bourgeoisie is quite capable of such a dirty deed: even Thomas Dunning, quoted by Marx, wrote:

“... Capital is afraid of no profit or too little profit, as nature is afraid of emptiness. But once sufficient profit is available, capital becomes bold. Provide 10 percent, and the capital agrees to any use, with 20 percent it becomes lively, with 50 percent positively ready to break its head, with 100 percent it tramples all human laws, with 300 percent there is no crime for which he would not risk, at least under the gallows fear. If noise and abuse bring profit, capital will contribute to both. "


In the 21st century, “noise and swearing” just make a profit: after all, the hype raised around the so-called shale revolution is not only a blow to the allied relations of Ukraine and Russia, but also an attempt by the US to establish itself again in world hegemony and even to overthrow Putin . The aggravation of the gas issue between Kiev and Moscow is partly the goal of the very anti-union geopolitical project associated with shale hysteria, which is aimed at strengthening the West and weakening the Kremlin.

Observed and commented on Oleg Chuvakin
- especially for topwar.ru
80 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. makarov
    makarov 6 December 2013 08: 09
    12
    Yes. It remains only to fantasize, and if to each inhabitant, yes, to feed cabbage, and to give an individual goose collector, then all Europe would be inundated with gas !!!
    1. 528Obrp
      528Obrp 6 December 2013 08: 24
      10
      Quote: makarov
      , and if each resident

      I would edit your phrase like this: if every resident of Europe, they are also supporters of "green" technologies, so let them turn green near своих gas sampling points. And we somehow in the "old fashioned way"
      1. 528Obrp
        528Obrp 6 December 2013 08: 38
        +9
        What is it like? laughing
        According to Gazprom Export, during the first three trimesters of 2013, the Russian Federation increased the export of natural gas and liquefied natural gas to Europe by 15,6% (it is estimated that the volume of exported gas should reach about 160 billion cubic meters by the end of the year). At the same time, Norway reduced its supplies to Europe by 7%, Algeria - by 16%, Qatar - by 19,2%, Libya - by 3%, and Nigeria - by 42%.
        http://www.inosmi.ru/russia/20131206/215445369.html
        Americans put pressure on traditional suppliers, protecting their shale, and Gazprom to a damn.
        1. shtanko.49
          shtanko.49 6 December 2013 13: 10
          +2
          Why is everything we have put on gas and oil? Why not do global wheat production, raise agricultural regions from your knees, it’s hundreds of thousands of jobs, you need fertilizers, machinery, etc. Food is not enough, but you always want to, this is a win-win option, despite the risky agriculture, militia and good equipment will help here, and this will raise the industrial industry.
          1. 31231
            31231 6 December 2013 13: 39
            +3
            Agricultural policy will raise the industrial industry ?!
            I probably misunderstand something, but when did this production of combines and agricultural implements raise the industrial industry?
            The more we produce wheat, the less it will have a price in the global market. Do you want the state to endlessly subsidize farmers and sell their crops for nothing?
            1. Sour
              Sour 6 December 2013 17: 30
              +7
              All right solvent demand for cereals in the world is small.
              Grain is good in the form of economic assistance, but not very good as a commodity. In those countries where it is not enough, there is no money for its purchase (Africa, for example). There are few solvent importers of grain. And the Chinese market has already been staked out, and dumping prices are needed to conquer it. And who will finance it? Many users can only minus, but clearly there is not enough reason or knowledge to object.
            2. kaktus
              kaktus 7 December 2013 15: 36
              +1
              Any normal state supports its agrarians. Nefig sell oil and gas in exchange for "plastic" vegetables stop With the development of agriculture, solvent demand for all goods, from building materials to households, was provided. little things.
              1. Setrac
                Setrac 8 December 2013 11: 09
                0
                Quote: kaktus
                Any normal state supports its farmers.

                "Any normal" state supports its agricultural sector to ensure food security. If agrarians want to export and earn money, then they do it on their own.
                Quote: kaktus
                With the development of agriculture, solvent demand for all goods, from building materials to households, was provided. little things.

                Tell us about agriculture in the northernmost country in the world! How is the climate, will not interfere?
          2. 528Obrp
            528Obrp 6 December 2013 13: 41
            +4
            Quote: shtanko.49
            Why not tackle global wheat production


            Russia before the export ban (drought) was one of the leading exporters of wheat
            1. Akuzenka
              Akuzenka 7 December 2013 16: 19
              +1
              And it remains. Only first you need to ensure the food security of the country, and then export.
          3. Egen
            Egen 6 December 2013 15: 44
            +1
            Quote: shtanko.49
            Why not tackle global wheat production

            By the way, in our Kuzbass, farmers are developing a project for the integrated provision of LNG from local methane of coal seams of all the components of the village - from refueling agricultural machinery to generating electricity and heat. True, not everything is so fast :(
          4. Gluxar_
            Gluxar_ 6 December 2013 20: 54
            +5
            Quote: shtanko.49
            Why is everything we have put on gas and oil? Why not do global wheat production, raise agricultural regions from your knees, it’s hundreds of thousands of jobs, you need fertilizers, machinery, etc. Food is not enough, but you always want to, this is a win-win option, despite the risky agriculture, militia and good equipment will help here, and this will raise the industrial industry.

            How did you come to such conclusions? Russia is betting on a balanced eeonomy and even the oil industry does not show such growth as in agriculture. It's just that Russophobes don't see this, and the media are working against Russia. There is a Russophobic dream that Russia will collapse without oil and gas, and they pedal and scare us with this. But Russia produces all and non-energy sectors of our economy are growing, but they do not want to notice it. Otherwise, the entire ideology of the Russophobic "oil needle" will simply collapse.
            Russia is creating a "grain OPEC", and it is for this project that the Russian Federation needs Ukraine. Recently, "Russian iPhones" - Yotaphones - went on sale. The number one car market in Europe. And the same is true for all other industries. However, this does not negate the fact that we are the number one energy power and will remain so. This is just the pros. Let them be afraid of our pipes, while we will sow the fields and build factories. Then maybe in 5 years the world will be frightened by the fact that Russia will start waging "food wars" and threaten the food security of the EU. They will accept some kind of "food declaration" against imperial loaves of bread ...
          5. maxvet
            maxvet 6 December 2013 21: 27
            +1
            Quote: shtanko.49
            Why not get involved in global wheat production,

            Take an interest - Russia and so the leader in wheat sales
            http://agroobzor.ru/article/a-250.html
          6. Akuzenka
            Akuzenka 7 December 2013 16: 17
            +1
            Not all, you just do not follow the news. Last year, Russia exported a record amount of wheat over the past 15 years. And factories are slowly being built and schools are starting to re-create. Only few write about this; they prefer to pour dirt.
      2. AVV
        AVV 7 December 2013 01: 37
        +1
        Europe and America wants to turn Ukraine into an ecological trash !!! This is the main prize for Euro-integrators !!! First they will start producing gas, using hydraulic fracturing, pumping underground, all kinds of chemical rubbish, and along the way under the guise of chemicals and nuclear liquid waste will be buried there and cheap and cheerful !!! The fields will all stink, the water from the faucets will flow, and then they will fill up with the same vegetables grown in Poland, Bulgaria, Germany, France !!! Well, who broke the most copies for integration with Europe ??? Still the desire did not fall ???
    2. datur
      datur 6 December 2013 15: 06
      0
      [quote = makarov] Yes. It remains only to fantasize, and if to each inhabitant, yes, to feed cabbage, and to give according to an individual goose collector, then all Europe would be inundated with gas !!! --- YES personally I am not ready to pay you !!! Yes, and you asshole! you just got it !!!!! work is necessary !!!! drinks
    3. datur
      datur 6 December 2013 15: 06
      -1
      [quote = makarov] Yes. It remains only to fantasize, and if to each inhabitant, yes, to feed cabbage, and to give according to an individual goose collector, then all Europe would be inundated with gas !!! --- YES personally I am not ready to pay you !!!
    4. Mature naturalist
      Mature naturalist 6 December 2013 20: 45
      +3
      Quote: makarov
      give on individual guznom gas collector, then all Europe would fill up with gas !!!

      By the way, one of the sources of greenhouse gases is cattle gases.
      In the world there are about 1,3 billion heads of cattle.
      How much do they produce methane?
      1. Setrac
        Setrac 8 December 2013 11: 14
        0
        Quote: Mature Naturalist
        How much do they produce methane?

        It is more expensive to collect this methane than to produce shale gas.
    5. The comment was deleted.
    6. Gluxar_
      Gluxar_ 6 December 2013 20: 46
      +2
      In the 21st century, “noise and swearing” just make a profit: after all, the hype raised around the so-called shale revolution is not only a blow to the allied relations of Ukraine and Russia, but also an attempt by the US to establish itself again in world hegemony and even to overthrow Putin . The aggravation of the gas issue between Kiev and Moscow is partly the goal of the very anti-union geopolitical project associated with shale hysteria, which is aimed at strengthening the West and weakening the Kremlin.

      Article minus. Some kind of blurred swamp with conflicting conclusions. What does the end of the article mean? How is the shale revolution hitting relations between Ukraine and Russia? What nonsense. What aggravation of the gas issue? The aggravation began in 2004 with the arrival of the Orange. Ukraine was an anti-Russian state for the entire period of "Yushchenkoism". Their weapons were firing at our soldiers.

      Why sorrow analysts always want to tie some events of today to the game of decades, passing them off as key events, and not showing that they are consequences of the authorities' policies of previous periods.
      There is no connection with the "shale scam" of the events taking place today. The fact that some provocateurs, although presenting today's riots as a FAILURE of Russia, is the height of idiocy. Think for yourself. Ukraine was supposed to sign an association agreement with the EU, it has been talking about this for several years. The papers have been preparing for years. Ukraine has stated more than once that it will refuse Russian gas and will buy it from the EU, and has even begun to do so. This has been the case for the past years. And everyone looked at it normally, the Kremlin was calm about this, creating the enterprises it needed on the territory of the Russian Federation, foreseeing that cooperation with Kiev would decline due to its course. That is, Russia was okay with the choice of Kiev, the only thing it stopped sponsoring it on this path. Hence the rise in gas prices.
      But as soon as Ukraine itself CHANGEED to follow the road on which it has been for the last 10 years, then all sorts of European upstarts begin to hysteria that Ukraine has made a wrong move, that it is the Communists or the Russians to blame. And they begin to invent all sorts of nonsense like "gas wars", etc.

      Look at what really happened. Europe has compromised itself, Ukrainian traitors have exposed themselves and outlawed. On the European choice of Ukraine, Russia has earned "extra billions" over the past few years and now it can easily get the entire economy of Ukraine with this money. Russia is the main creditor of Ukraine and debts are only growing, with the bankruptcy of many Ukrainian enterprises, Russian business will receive them for next to nothing.
      What does the shale scam have to do with all these processes? Rosneft and Lukoil themselves carry out hydraulic fracturing at their sites. This is just a business. If someone is willing to bear environmental risks, then this is their business. This will not fundamentally affect the energy market. So you don’t need to draw absurd conclusions from your finger and draw today's events by your ears to the foreign policy background.
  2. lotar
    lotar 6 December 2013 08: 23
    +5
    But Americans don’t give a damn about ecology and other relatively peaceful disciplines. The most important law for them: this is all that can bring income, it will bring it regardless of its potential danger. Well, it’s not easy because oil costs such money now, that means extracting shale oil and gas at least a third of the present value pays for itself at least. Here, of course, there are political, social, military and other factors, but nevertheless, the main god for them is $.
    1. Egen
      Egen 6 December 2013 15: 48
      0
      Quote: lotar
      Yes, Americans do not care about the environment and other relatively peaceful disciplines. The most important law for them: this is all that can bring income, it will bring it, regardless of its potential danger

      Not really :) Just the Americans do not care about their ecology. The United States has the most stringent environmental laws and fines for mining. Therefore, hydraulic fracturing is also forbidden there - even the one who is on the water and without proppant, the townsfolk do not care for the difference, all under one comb. But in other countries there are no such prohibitions, because Chevron and others are happy to use the chemistry that is cheaper :)
  3. FC SKIF
    FC SKIF 6 December 2013 08: 33
    +6
    At a world court against capitalism, a shale episode cannot be justified by any lawyers when vast territories turn into desert
    1. Asgard
      Asgard 6 December 2013 10: 21
      +6
      FC Skiff
      At a world court against capitalism, a shale episode will not be able to justify any lawyers
      GOLD WORDS.
      The first gas that was produced in the world was just Shale .., but it quickly ended))))
      Hydraulic fracturing - it’s barbarism and murder of the Planet and can slightly continue the agony of the well + severe poisoning of the underground pantries with RIGID COCKTAIL chemical substances that are not found anywhere in nature, at such concentrations)))
      Nature will take revenge, it will not necessarily understand who IT did-Americans, English, Russians, reptilians))))
      Little will not seem to anyone ....
      Therefore it is necessary to STOP this business ....
      IN UKRAINE, in America, in the minds of People of foggy media (false)) about prospects and Stocks)))

      Do you know how to count stocks ?????
      They drill a well, measure the gas output per unit of time (hour, day, month, year))) These are different numbers))))
      And they take the largest one, for example, the third day after hydraulic fracturing — the maximum return and gas output))) then the production drops, but the figure is, it is multiplied by the number of territories and the maximum well operating time ...
      That's fantastic stocks about which writes Aron Zavi,
      BUT I am a geologist, I will not deceive you (let them cut me to pieces))) and I will orient myself in these matters ....

      TNCs do not pay me, and I won’t take it (no matter how much they offer)) WITH CONSCIENCE you have to live in Lada (THIS IS MOST IMPORTANT)) and when the Planet will punish YOU))))
      ME Conscience will allow me to survive, and with people like I will continue to coexist))) because without PEOPLE, IT CANNOT also ,,,,,, .....
      But Wait WE betray her ((((((((
      1. Egen
        Egen 6 December 2013 15: 56
        -1
        Quote: Asgard
        Hydraulic fracturing is barbarism and killing of the Planet

        Well, comrade geologist, what is the poison of the surface during hydraulic fracturing at a depth of 1000 with an aqueous solution of potassium-chlorine with ceramic sand instead of proppant? wink
        It contains below all sorts of zinc at times more than the unfortunate chlorine :)
        Quote: Asgard
        Drill a well, measure the gas output per unit time (hour, day, month, year)))

        Well, yes, but there’s more than one well, but a system by layers, who will make a debit based on one well :) And the methods are different, for example, VNIIGAZ considers one digit, and Promgaz - the difference is an order of magnitude :)
        Vladimir, where are you in the North? Do you have oil emissions, etc.? Have you seen our dumps of coal mines? Agree, hands and a head are needed, then there will be no harm to nature.
        1. Asgard
          Asgard 6 December 2013 17: 01
          +2
          About the techniques you wrote the truth, does not contradict my statements)))
          I am a little exaggerated (maybe)))) but you can catch the essence ..... where do the forecasts for fantastic reserves come from)))

          Well, for the fracturing mixture !!! ???
          There are not only the ingredients you listed, in general firms use their "recipes" of cocktails to cheer up Zemelka .... And there is such disgusting !!! Mom do not cry)))
          Fracturing itself not at all useful to the layers, erosion begins, karst faults, groundwater begin to flow differently, which with a 90% probability will change the landscape at the top ....
          It is extremely imprudent, but someone cannot give forecasts ....
          Everything is somehow irresponsible ... Our children will inherit, with tactics scorched (by acids) of the Earth ....
      2. maxvet
        maxvet 6 December 2013 21: 33
        +2
        Quote: Asgard
        BUT I am a geologist

        You, as a geologist, have a question: Have you heard about nickel in the Voronezh region? How real is the danger to the environment in case of development of the deposit?
        1. 31231
          31231 6 December 2013 22: 09
          +2
          As a miner who worked with UMMC, I will tell you. It all depends on the field. Of course, there will be harm, but much depends on the water cut of the field and the flora and fauna surrounding it. In the Northern Urals, copper-zinc deposits are being developed with very dirty emissions in effluents. So, only the grayling left the river into which the discharge is going, the rest of the fish species remained. The field is "phonite" quite strongly, but again it is local and at the field. Your nickel is probably less dirty there, so there are fewer problems.
          The only plus is jobs with earnings of 40-50 thousand rubles for 15 days of work.
        2. Asgard
          Asgard 6 December 2013 23: 10
          0
          Nickel mining is certainly harmful, metal is extremely useful to metallurgy, causes cancer for those who mine and process it ... Then for the local population it is important how it will be mined
          * open pit(it will fonit and the wind will stretch sand for 300 kilometers according to rose of the winds and accompanying nickel ores with uranium, mercury, sulfur..You can say goodbye to Agriculture in the designated area, AND THIS IS BLACK)))))
          ** mine is an expensive way, the depth of the rock starts from 300 meters and below, the yield is less, since it eliminates the continuous processing of the rock)), but it will also reach the surface -where enrichment will take place, and empty heap (sulphurous rock) will be poured heaps that must be constantly watered with bitumen, but will still infect the surrounding area))))
          There is time, come to the Murmansk region of Monchegorsk (Olenegorsk)) there is a similar plant 300 km from my place of residence - Scorched earth, dead lakes with acidic water (it decomposes all biology)) IT IS NECESSARY FOR THE TECHNOLOGICAL PROCESS, but there is no steam-black soil DRAIN ON THE EARTH .... people having worked at the plant go to Voronezh for Pension living in the middle lane ..... Where will you go ???

          By the way, we have a large percentage of cancer cases, and recently it has been growing ....And this is 300 km from the mine ...
          For prevention, or rather the impossibility of the occurrence of Cancer, I recommend you drink sodium bicarbonate (baking soda) in the morning), just extinguish it with hot water, a teaspoon without top for 200 g of water, in the morning and evening guarantee you a long life, without blood clots, fungi and most diseases)))) including Cancer will be impossible))))

          It is possible to fight in every way so that the mine is forgotten ....
          Power will change when it is truly PEOPLE, it will be possible to take up the extraction of this extremely necessary and useful metal))) and in modern conditions this is the destruction of the region and the killing of the population .....
          And profit, profit, mani $ (but not in your pocket))))
  4. Aaron Zawi
    Aaron Zawi 6 December 2013 09: 19
    -1
    There is other information. For me personally, this is all a Chinese letter, I can only build my opinion on links from the Internet. I am very far from this topic. For example.
    The explored reserves of shale gas in the United States amount to 24 trillion cubic meters. m (in 2007, according to the US Energy Information Administration, technically recoverable - 3,6 trillion cubic meters. [23]) or more than 10% of the world. The leading US shale gas corporation is Chesapeake Energy. [24]
    In 2009, shale gas production in the United States accounted for 14% of all combustible gas; its share is increasing [25], which in 2009 led to significant changes in the distribution of the world market for combustible gas between countries [26] [27] and the formation of excess supply in the market by the beginning of 2010 [28]. As a result of the growth in shale gas production, the liquefied gas import terminals built in the United States remained inactive. At the present time [when?] They are being converted to export gas [source?] (See shale revolution). [29]
    In November 2009, a White House spokeswoman said that “the use of shale gas is expected to significantly increase US energy security and help reduce greenhouse gas pollution.” [30]
    By 2010, shale gas production in the United States reached 51 billion cubic meters per year. [31] In early April 2010, it was reported that the US Department of Energy found that statistics on natural gas production in the country were overstated, and therefore it intends to adjust the totals downward. [32]
    East European Gas Analysis predicts that shale gas production in the United States will amount to more than 2015 billion cubic meters per year by 180. According to the main forecast of the International Energy Agency, shale gas production in the United States by 2030 will not exceed 150 billion cubic meters per year.
    1. 31231
      31231 6 December 2013 13: 44
      +1
      And why did you keep silent about the further fate of ChisapikEnergy?
      A Jew is visible in you. He said "a", but didn't say anything about "bh".
      So tell us what is happening with ChisapikEnergy now?
      1. Aaron Zawi
        Aaron Zawi 6 December 2013 16: 29
        +2
        Quote: 31231
        And why did you keep silent about the further fate of ChisapikEnergy?
        A Jew is visible in you. He said "a", but didn't say anything about "bh".
        So tell us what is happening with ChisapikEnergy now?

        In the link that I cited there, it seems, nothing is written about this fate. But if You it’s interesting, then the Internet to help.
        PS And yes, I am a Jew, and not a bullshit, but quite an Israeli Jew. But who You I do not understand. Neither by nick nor by flag. Why are you shy?
    2. Egen
      Egen 6 December 2013 16: 00
      +1
      Quote: Aron Zaavi
      In the United States, proven shale gas reserves amount to 24 trillion cubic meters. m

      There is the concept of "explored reserves", and there is - "recoverable", for example, in category C1. Recently I just wrote an example about coal bed methane:
      UK coal seam methane reserves are estimated at 2,9 trillion m3, but only 10% of them are theoretically recoverable due to low reservoir permeability and low coal gas content.
      The peak of coal seam methane production was in 2008, when 55,67 billion m3 was extracted (7,3% of the total consumption in the country). Then, with the introduction of new technologies, a shale boom began, and now coal and shale gas together provide more than 20% of the US needs.
      In China, 2023 plans to produce 400 billion m. 3 CBM
      The total reserves of coalbed methane in Russia are estimated at 82trln.m3 - more than in the United States and China combined.
      1. Aaron Zawi
        Aaron Zawi 6 December 2013 16: 25
        +1
        Quote: Egen
        Quote: Aron Zaavi
        In the United States, proven shale gas reserves amount to 24 trillion cubic meters. m

        There is the concept of "explored reserves", and there is - "recoverable", for example, in category C1. Recently I just wrote an example about coalbed methane.

        I’m saying that for me it’s hieroglyphs. what Well, of course I climbed into the Internet, what did I read, but what did I understand? request In general, if the United States, with the help of its gas production, can reduce the cost of electricity for the producer, for the private consumer and industry, as well as minimize or completely eliminate gas imports, then the sheepskin is worth the effort even if they sting they do not export a ton.
        1. 528Obrp
          528Obrp 6 December 2013 16: 35
          0
          Quote: Aron Zaavi
          then the game is worth the candle even stings they do not export a single ton.

          And if the "X" country offers 10-15% cheaper, what will happen to oil shale in the states?
        2. Egen
          Egen 6 December 2013 16: 48
          +3
          Quote: Aron Zaavi
          In general, if the United States using its gas production can reduce the cost of electricity for the producer

          But this is just the key question :) Usually, gas power plants that generate electricity are immediately put on the extracted gas. What of the poor mine gas in Germany and Poland, what of the same shale. Even here in Kuzbass in mines and on poor coals in the Donbass. In Germany and neighboring countries there is a whole industry of producers of gas turbine power plants, and mines, which themselves provide electricity and heat. But this is all local, liquefying and transporting gas far is not profitable for now, just like transmitting electric power. In Germany, there is simply a law 2000. which specifically raised the price of electricity generated from such sources.
          So far, only in Australia they are building 3 LNG plants for export to Japan and China, especially from wells - but there coalbed methane, it is "fatter", and then they need 40 thousand wells - this is more than in the USA!
          In general, wait and see :)
  5. Enot-poloskun
    Enot-poloskun 6 December 2013 09: 20
    +1
    Question: How much does it cost to produce 1 barrel of shale oil?

    In my opinion, the cost is more expensive than the usual price on the world market.

    And the United States compensates for the difference in price with subsidies from dollar wrappers.
    1. 31231
      31231 6 December 2013 13: 47
      +3
      It is assumed that the cost price is practically equal to the price, with the tax "green" light traffic.
      But mining companies do not release this information. The fact is that there was a sharp outflow of capital from this "revolution.
  6. Keeper
    Keeper 6 December 2013 09: 26
    +3
    Mdya ... And about the smelly and poisonous lands unsuitable for living after shale explorations - NOT A WORD !!!
    Nu-nu ... Wait and see ...
  7. aud13
    aud13 6 December 2013 09: 38
    +4
    In any scenario, relying on only one gas and oil for Russia is extremely unreasonable.
    Not whining so skating will get Gazprom. So today the information has already passed that the European Commission again has some complaints about the South Stream. And in the future they will manifest themselves and again will put sticks in the wheels of Gazprom.
    It is necessary to shift the emphasis on our own production, on the development of transport highways - this is our geographical plus.
    Another question is that it may not be worth so sharply increasing the volume of gas supplies to Europe. Maybe let it be smaller - higher prices, and buyers will not be so picky?
  8. saps
    saps 6 December 2013 10: 27
    0
    Yes, we have more shale gas in Russia than in the USA .. how
    1. fisherman
      fisherman 6 December 2013 14: 20
      0
      Now this slate does not solve anything, they will need to use it as a last resort, for example, to buy provisions when scurvy begins laughing
  9. Volodya Sibiryak
    Volodya Sibiryak 6 December 2013 10: 43
    +3
    The presence of shale is not a guarantee of energy independence, the whole question is profitability. Maybe in a hundred years this question will be relevant, but not now, while there are conventional deposits.
  10. brainkiller
    brainkiller 6 December 2013 10: 44
    +5
    I am not opposed to the United States producing shale gas. If in our tundra it has broken through permafrost, a pipe is stuck and gas presses with a pressure of 90kg, and all the costs go to cleaning and transportation, then to get the same amount of shale, you need a dough ten times more and hemorrhoids are generally unmeasured. Let grandmas spend on the useless competition they need only. The national debt resource is not infinite, someday they will not be able to service it.
  11. Sergey Sitnikov
    Sergey Sitnikov 6 December 2013 10: 45
    0
    and don’t forget about such a factor in oil pricing as a chemical. composition! Why is our URLS cheap in relation to Brent and others. There is a lot of sulfur in ours, and as many fraud agents know, it is probably logical that cleaning them increases the cost of production, as well as sulfur, etc. Why there is no information on refining shale oil, someone tried to clean it (American), maybe the gas from it is generally fonit))), well, I don’t know, for example, formaldehyde or unsaturated U.?
    1. 31231
      31231 6 December 2013 14: 00
      0
      In general, oil is estimated by the presence of heavy hydrocarbons. URALS in this is just the same heavy oil, like Brent. But DoubleTiAi is considered light oil and its price is lower.
    2. Egen
      Egen 6 December 2013 16: 04
      0
      Quote: Sergey Sitnikov
      Why there is no information on refining shale oil

      An interesting point, I also don’t know, coal methane consists of 99,9% of methane, sulfur in general is 0, and only clean up moisture from purification. The octane number 110 is 118, the heat 33MJ is more than GOST.
      1. 528Obrp
        528Obrp 6 December 2013 16: 26
        0
        Quote: Egen
        Octane number 110 - 118,

        As far as I know from natural and associated gas - methane number
        1. Egen
          Egen 6 December 2013 16: 40
          0
          Quote: 528Obrp
          As far as I know, natural and associated gas has a methane number

          Not in the know, not a miner :)
          In my passports, it’s exactly octane that is written on methane :) The study is based on the automotive motor method. As far as I remember the 2 course of oil, the engines have octane and cetane numbers and that’s all ... we can be taught something not everything :) On Wiki, yes, I read it, but alas, I never heard :(
          1. 528Obrp
            528Obrp 6 December 2013 16: 48
            +2
            When it comes to the use of associated or natural gas in a gas turbine or gas turbine, it is always a methane number.

            GPA - gas piston unit
            GTA - gas turbine
            1. Egen
              Egen 6 December 2013 16: 51
              +2
              Quote: 528Obrp
              When it comes to the use of associated or natural gas in a gas turbine or gas turbine it is always a methane number

              Sorry again - and not an energy engineer :)) We use methane in gas power plants and in cars :) Although research and certification were done by a certified laboratory in Kuzna :). By the way, they are also scientific works about our methane as fuel write ... however, I did not read :(
              1. 528Obrp
                528Obrp 6 December 2013 16: 56
                +1
                Quote: Egen
                By the way, they are also scientific works about our methane as fuel write ... however, I did not read

                The whole joke in the difference in properties of associated and natural gas. Here, as it were, the question is clear. But shale is it closer to what?
  12. sxn278619
    sxn278619 6 December 2013 11: 49
    0
    http://www.odnako.org/blogs/show_33791/
    In this material, attention is focused exclusively on production volumes, which can be analyzed using the described extrapolations. Production will grow, and arguing with this is difficult. At the same time, we are far from considering the shale revolution a “panacea” for future energy hunger. Questions remain. Firstly, ecology. Secondly, only Marcellus deposits for gas and Eagle Ford and Bakken for oil show such attractive dynamics. In many other fields, there is virtually no growth, and in some, there is a decline, that is, the field is a field of discord. Finally, questions remain on energy profitability and cost. The question of shale mining is multifaceted, and it would be wrong to reduce everything to simple answers - in one direction or another. However, while production will increase. In oil geopolitics, this means that the United States will reduce its dependence on oil imports with all the ensuing consequences. In the field of gas geopolitics, a fairly large-scale export of LNG from the United States is quite likely. What the United States is undoubtedly using to lower the level of partnership between Russia, China and Europe, and to close Japan to a greater extent. It will not cause any critical consequences for Russia. But the collisions will turn out to be more confusing, and this must be taken into account when developing strategies. By hiding your head in the sand and declaring the shale revolution a myth, you can lose more as a result.
    1. 31231
      31231 6 December 2013 14: 04
      +2
      There will not be any large-scale export of LNG from the USA to Europe.
      You go tell these American tales in American and Svidomo forums.
      1. 528Obrp
        528Obrp 6 December 2013 14: 46
        0
        Quote: 31231
        There will not be any large-scale export of LNG from the USA to Europe

        If this is not a commercial project, it can and will be, But! It is necessary to have consistently high oil prices. A level of 90-100 is critical for their shale budget. 100-110 acceptable. And this is without profit. Just to spoil us. Only here to lower this price really! Up to 80-90! It’s hard for us, but it’s worse!
        1. 31231
          31231 6 December 2013 16: 49
          +2
          Do not omit anything. America bluffs itself down. At one time, the country positioned itself as the forerunner of economic decisions. Now it is slipping into politics.
          And yet, yes, talking about large-scale export of LNG from America, not a trial one.
          This is precisely what the US economy will not pull. It is one thing to produce gas on the spot at 100-150 bucks per thousand cubic meters, it is another thing to transport, to liquefy, to transport again.
          The game is not worth the candle. But I will only be glad if the Americans get involved in this adventure.
      2. Egen
        Egen 6 December 2013 16: 07
        0
        Quote: 31231
        There will not be any large-scale export of LNG from the USA to Europe. You go tell these American tales on American and Svidomo forums

        Today it is of course a fairy tale. But over the past 10 years, technology has reduced the cost of liquefaction by 35%. 10 years ago, technologies did not even allow us to imagine that oil shale would not be 100% unprofitable to develop :) Let's see in another 10 years :)
        1. Sour
          Sour 6 December 2013 17: 35
          +1
          Quote: Egen
          But over the past 10 years, technology has reduced the cost of liquefaction by 35%.

          And this applies only to American gas?
          That is, the competitors' cost of liquefaction remained the same?
          1. Egen
            Egen 8 December 2013 08: 37
            0
            Quote: Sour
            And this applies only to American gas? That is, competitors the cost of liquefaction remained the same?

            I apologize, I didn’t put it exactly to the end. Infa generally in Australia, recently wrote that now the Australians are setting fashion, and after three or five years, the Chinese will come forward. Many Chinese people teach at Australian universities and do scientific work, and because of the highest taxes in Australia they are implementing it all, including at home in China. I don’t understand where the Australian government is looking, probably they have such a policy of attracting minds. But that is another question.
            US field development companies are now increasingly attracting Australian contracting companies for both drilling and development - as they have advanced technologies and lower cost of work. And they pay in the USA more than in China and India, because the Australians rushed to work more for the Americans. True, many Australians, like their rabbits, divorced :), we also had in Kuzbass (where infa comes from) and now even advanced wells are being drilled in Zimbabwe :)
            As for LNG in the USA, they go the right way :) a long way - they give benefits, for example, almost half of the cost of a main truck for LNG is compensated, as well as for gas station builders and so on. We do not have such laws :( Well, demand generates an investment in R&D ...
            LNG competition is different - because different types of plants: there are giants like Sakhalin that have been under construction for years and cost billions, there are plants at 1,5t / h (enough for a small city) - here progress is faster and there are more varieties. In the Urals, there is already an experimental prefix for CNG filling stations which, due to the pressure of CNG filling stations, liquefies gas - 200-400 kg / h - is even more universal (this is generally a considerable amount for local refueling). In Canada, they say a cool thing has appeared - at every well in the garden there is a micro-factory that liquefies gas here, and once a week a barrel comes to pick it up. That's all, I don’t need any power lines or gas pipelines, just a hole in the ground and a small container next to it ... But I haven’t seen it myself and can’t find it on the Internet :( (
      3. Vasyan1971
        Vasyan1971 6 December 2013 23: 28
        +1
        Do you remember the blabblah about "Star Wars" and others like them? Is the current aria from the same opera?
  13. Goldmitro
    Goldmitro 6 December 2013 11: 58
    +3
    <<< The expert proposed various options for how to throw Putin off the throne, primarily by exporting liquefied natural gas extracted from shale to Europe. The gas will be followed by oil produced by hydraulic fracturing. >>>
    Once, the United States managed to destroy the USSR by devaluing oil with the help of Saudi Arabia, which threw a large amount of oil onto the world market, which was the USSR's main source of income! The same trick, only with the aim of destroying Russia, eliminating the hated Putin, they seem to want to do today! For this, the "shale revolution" was invented, which should flood the world market with gas and oil, bring down their prices, deprive Gazprom and other Russian companies of gas and oil supplies to the world market and, thereby, bring down the Russian economy and thereby cause a collapse authorities! The same plan also includes an aggression inspired by the West against Syria in order to change the government there to a regime controlled by the West, which will allow laying a gas pipeline to supply Qatari gas to Europe, again to oust Gazprom from there! It seems that all this anti-Russian plans GOMADYO CRASHES: instead of the "shale revolution" "shale zilch", instead of regime change in Syria, a complete fiasco! So the West will look for other ways of solving the "Russian question"!
    1. kaktus
      kaktus 7 December 2013 15: 44
      0
      <<< The expert proposed various options for how to throw Putin off the throne, primarily by exporting liquefied natural gas extracted from shale to Europe. The gas will be followed by oil produced by hydraulic fracturing. >>>
      ??? will drag a suitcase with gas and explode in the square ??? wassat
  14. The comment was deleted.
  15. USNik
    USNik 6 December 2013 12: 53
    +3
    geological exploration is currently underway in Ukraine in three hydrocarbon areas: Yuzovskaya (territories of Donetsk and Kharkov regions), Oleskaya (territories of Ivano-Frankivsk and Lviv regions)
    Congratulations to the inhabitants of the designated areas with the upcoming earthquakes, landslides and the general excellent ecological situation. All hope is for Ukrainian officials and that they are stealing all the money allocated for oil production.
    1. Vasyan1971
      Vasyan1971 6 December 2013 23: 33
      0
      Last line of defense lol
  16. bubla5
    bubla5 6 December 2013 13: 48
    +1
    Shale gas at this stage is an expensive utopia, the Americans are quietly compensating for production costs and stupid advertising about increasing production and cheap replacement of natural gas soon. All this is a bluff
  17. Enot-poloskun
    Enot-poloskun 6 December 2013 14: 12
    +3
    I wonder why Greenpeace is silent?

    After all, the production of petroleum products using hydraulic fracturing causes enormous environmental damage!

    Where are all these European ecologists? Was everyone tied up at Prirazlomnaya?
    1. Egen
      Egen 6 December 2013 16: 09
      +2
      Quote: Enot-poloskun
      I wonder why Greenpeace is silent, as the extraction of oil products by hydraulic fracturing is causing enormous damage to the environment! Where are all these European ecologists? Was everyone tied up at Prirazlomnaya?

      Duck, dear, on the platform there are border guards, the sea, seagulls, in general, all the scenery for the show, and the well is an inconspicuous fool in the field; there they are not interested in making a movie :(
  18. shtanko.49
    shtanko.49 6 December 2013 14: 54
    +1
    Quote: 31231
    Agricultural policy will raise the industrial industry ?!
    I probably misunderstand something, but when did this production of combines and agricultural implements raise the industrial industry?
    The more we produce wheat, the less it will have a price in the global market. Do you want the state to endlessly subsidize farmers and sell their crops for nothing?

    By the way, there is a catastrophic shortage of food on the world market, and if the state really takes up this topic, Russia will only win. And doesn’t industry produce agricultural machines? And as for the price, the intermediaries regulate it more, obviously in their favor, it's time to get rid of them overwork to speculate.
    1. 31231
      31231 6 December 2013 16: 52
      +1
      The price of goods is regulated by the market. The more product offers, the lower the price.
      Some combine harvesters will not lift the industry, as well as one aircraft industry.
      1. kaktus
        kaktus 7 December 2013 15: 46
        0
        One workplace in the aviation industry - 10 workplaces for subcontractors.
  19. Not served
    Not served 6 December 2013 15: 03
    +2
    Stocks are counted in this way. The boundaries of the trap, the capacity (height) of the reservoir are determined, and the recoverable reserves are determined by the oil recovery factor (oil recovery coefficient). For gas, oil recovery factor for traditional reservoirs (sandstone, fractured limestone) is assumed to be equal to unity. A drilled well simply confirms this fact, plus reservoir analysis and reserves are moving from one category to another.
    Slates are essentially clay and their collection properties are very poor, so they are trying to improve them with an acid cocktail with other active substances. The ambush is that it’s not all that deep. A horizontal well is drilled with a decent horizontal section (1000-1500 meters) and a cocktail is pumped under great pressure, where you can guess it yourself. The well dies pretty quickly, about a year. Repeat operation or drilling a new trunk.
    In ecology, the big question is precisely in the characteristics of the section; it can be overlapped or permeable. Overlapping is usually just clay layers. For example, we have regions where in the context of fresh water there is no fresh water at all, only very mineralized. In fact, this is almost the entire Volga region. There, water is collected in reservoirs. But they want to mine them just in areas where the layers are permeable and these are zones favorable for agriculture as a rule.
    With large volumes, this is quite beneficial, given that their gas is expensive. If we translate it into the oil equivalent and compare it with the price of oil, then gas is 30-40% cheaper, we have 4 times.
    It is not profitable to produce gas in small volumes at all. Infrastructure is 2 times more expensive, and the price is 4 times lower, plus there’s also a big problem getting into the pipe.
    Regarding to raise agricultural production. Here, if we focus on import substitution and production of a "clean" product, then the effect will be. Such products will always be in price and will seep into any market, no matter how protected it is.
    1. Egen
      Egen 6 December 2013 16: 15
      0
      Quote: Didn't serve
      A horizontal well is being drilled with a decent horizontal section (1000-1500 meters)

      Dear Nazar hi , you are really a professional, but if it were really so, and at a depth of 1000 - 1500m, it would be just great :) - economically advantageous and environmentally not so bad - it's under water horizons. But for the time being, vertical lines are mostly stupidly drilled and hydraulic fracturing is done almost at 300m :(
      As much as possible if memory serves, Lucas makes a chevron at 2300m in the reservoir, and the maximum debit from a chevron in China to Kenshi is 63tysm3 / day against 2тм3 / day at a nearby vertical :) - but this is on SVM ...
  20. Deniska
    Deniska 6 December 2013 15: 30
    0
    Thomas Thomas Dunning, who was quoted by K. Marx, wrote:
    And ????? There seems to be a sequel .... Although everything is clear
  21. Kolyan 2
    Kolyan 2 6 December 2013 15: 53
    +2
    Quote: Enot-poloskun
    I wonder why Greenpeace is silent?

    After all, the production of petroleum products using hydraulic fracturing causes enormous environmental damage!

    Where are all these European ecologists? Was everyone tied up at Prirazlomnaya?

    They guys bought and where they say blather then there and blather.
  22. Ivan Pomidorov
    Ivan Pomidorov 6 December 2013 16: 01
    +2
    Cheap shale gas is pushing for US nuclear power.
    Against the background of gas power plants operating on cheap gas, nuclear power plants are not being built and are not planned for construction.
    Cheap nuclear fuel will be gone.
    Nothing personal - just business. True, the gas is about to end, coal is not so good and also ends.
    And the experts are also ending. In England, a French-Chinese consortium will build a nuclear power plant. smile

    The same goes for pen-dosia. NPPs are closing down, specialists are quitting, they are not building new stations.
    They will heat wood ... lol
  23. brainkiller
    brainkiller 6 December 2013 17: 05
    0
    Quote: Ivan Pomidorov
    Cheap shale gas is pushing for US nuclear power.
    Zhvanetsky need to tweet, appreciate =)
  24. EdwardTich68
    EdwardTich68 6 December 2013 17: 10
    0
    What concerns me most is the environmental issue in this method of mining. Pumping chemicals into groundwater is very bold, and it will result in death inevitably for those lands. But as usual
    all act on the principle "after us, even a flood."
    1. Egen
      Egen 6 December 2013 17: 15
      0
      Quote: EdwardTich68
      Pump chemicals into groundwater

      The water horizons are usually 100-200 meters, the weathering zone is 300-400m, and the strata are usually at 600 + m, even up to 3 km.
      1. EdwardTich68
        EdwardTich68 6 December 2013 17: 34
        0
        Well, if it’s absolutely safe, then with you, I am for it.
      2. 31231
        31231 6 December 2013 18: 30
        +1
        Have you been to the mines ?! When the layers and bedding is disturbed, groundwater will mix with the cocktail. Plus, they probably have enough areas with groundwater, and there nothing will help, pollution can not be avoided.
        1. Egen
          Egen 8 December 2013 08: 16
          0
          Quote: 31231
          Have you been to the mines ?!

          We have half of Kuzbass mines :) Again, I will not say for shale, but I suspect that it is the same: the water horizons serve as a section preventing the weathering of methane from the layers. Up to 200-300 meters, in fact, are installed by conductors, and the casing is even lower, up to 1000m, depending on. If the tightness is not broken, then everything goes from the layers only through the pipe. Well, the products of hydraulic fracturing are also pumped out through the same pipe with water. A rarefaction is also created there, all of it is not "pushed" into the layers, but quite the opposite. Once again, in our experience, above 400m, it is useless to stimulate layers, usually from + -600m, and our water horizons are much higher. I don’t know about other fields: (The only thing I know is that at one of the fields in Australia, uncased wells are completely done, but no hydraulic fracturing is done at all. And in Canada, because of dry formations, hydraulic fracturing is done with nitrogen.
  25. saag
    saag 6 December 2013 18: 03
    -1
    Quote: Goldmitro
    Once, the United States managed to destroy the USSR by devaluing oil with the help of Saudi Arabia, which threw a large amount of oil onto the world market, which was the USSR's main source of income! The same trick, only with the aim of destroying Russia, removing the hated Putin, they seem to want to do today! For this, the "shale revolution" was invented, which should flood the world market with gas and oil, bring down their prices, deprive Gazprom and other Russian companies of gas and oil supplies to the world market

    No, there is another way, Iran wants to increase oil production to 6 million barrels per day in 4 months, dropping prices of almost $ 20 per barrel, and this is quite realistic
    1. EdwardTich68
      EdwardTich68 6 December 2013 18: 10
      0
      And how Israel will look at it. The nuclear sword continues to be forged. smile
    2. 31231
      31231 6 December 2013 18: 33
      0
      Did Rowhani tell you that ?!
      In Iran, no fools rule and such nonsense will not speak. News from the category of ducks.
  26. saag
    saag 6 December 2013 18: 53
    -1
    Quote: 31231
    Did Rowhani tell you that ?!
    In Iran, no fools rule and such nonsense will not speak. News from the category of ducks.

    "The head of the Center for Petroleum Research, Ilham Shaban, commented on the statement of Iranian Oil Minister Bizhan Zangane that Iran is ready to reduce oil prices in the world market to $ 20 per barrel ..." http://politobzor.net/show-9176-iran- ubivaet-azerbaydzhanskuyu-neft.html

    Not really Rowhani, but with his knowledge
    1. Sour
      Sour 6 December 2013 20: 14
      +3
      A very rotten source ...
      To collapse the price of oil by 5 times, it is necessary to increase its world production by approximately the same amount of time, and this is beyond Iran’s strength. It is unlikely that anyone out there said this if he is in his mind.
      Not too lazy, counted. If Iran, as said, will increase exports from 2,5 to 4 million barrels per day, then global oil exports in this case will grow by 4,5-5,5%, something like that. This will not lead to a serious drop in prices, even if OPEC does not respond by reducing production.
    2. 31231
      31231 6 December 2013 22: 21
      +2
      Some site Political Review from the words of a certain Ilham Shaban, who comments on the Iranian Oil Minister ?!
      Is the chatting chain too long?
      Why would Iran sell oil more and cheaper when less and more expensive ?! The money is the same.
      The Saudis and oil-producing companies do not want to do this dumping anymore, because they felt the "smell of money" from expensive oil.
  27. VADEL
    VADEL 6 December 2013 21: 00
    +2
    This is not a shale FBI, this is an American shale BLUFF. And they know how to bluff. The ozone hole bluff is one of them. You can continue yourself.
  28. mountain
    mountain 6 December 2013 22: 29
    +1
    Quote: Mature Naturalist
    Quote: makarov
    give on individual guznom gas collector, then all Europe would fill up with gas !!!

    By the way, one of the sources of greenhouse gases is cattle gases.
    In the world there are about 1,3 billion heads of cattle.
    How much do they produce methane?

    I put a plus, I know such farms, they save a lot on this.
  29. mountain
    mountain 6 December 2013 22: 43
    +1
    I will say for sure, THANKS TO YOU OF GREATING, GRANDFATES AND CURRENT FAMILIES for saving and preserving all the riches of Russia for us that are not good for us. And today, taking advantage of your fame and courage, this is how we manage your achievements, God forbid, and we will glorify Russia.
  30. Arkan
    Arkan 7 December 2013 00: 21
    +3
    Let the land of their fathers be mutilated, since it means nothing to them.
  31. Platov
    Platov 7 December 2013 10: 17
    0
    Star Wars, shale gas and oil are a bluff? or brainstorm in favor of the United States.
  32. saag
    saag 7 December 2013 10: 29
    +1
    Quote: 31231
    Why would Iran sell oil more and cheaper when less and more expensive ?! The money is the same.
    The Saudis and oil-producing companies do not want to do this dumping anymore, because they felt the "smell of money" from expensive oil.

    Well, we can assume that the Saudis can do something, and secondly, if the ban is lifted, then I want to take the opportunity as much as possible, just the news of the entry of another oil trader on the exchange may affect prices towards lowering