april 2014 ceri commodity report — natural gas · (aeo 2014)1 suggests that the shale gas...
TRANSCRIPT
Relevant • Independent • Objective
In the meantime the industry has made considerable strides in developing techniques to reduce the enormous amount of water used in hydraulic fracturing, partly due to environmental concerns and as a cost-reducing measure. Recycling, using less water per fracture, or even getting away from water altogether by using hydrocarbons instead are all approaches now routinely used by the industry. With some wells requiring as much as 5 million gallons of water to frack,2 measures to cut water use can mean big savings for drillers. The extent of those savings varies with location and depends partly on the cost of acquiring water, so producers in the Marcellus shale of Pennsylvania, where surface water is abundant, will generally pay less to bring in water than those in the drier parts of the Eagle Ford in Texas, where local supply is restricted to groundwater and fracking water may need to be transported some distance to the well. Acquiring fresh water is however, only one piece of the water puzzle. Wastewater recovery from fracking is also expensive. This wastewater includes flowback water from initial intensive fracking – usually no more than 20 percent of the total water used – and produced water, which flows to the surface with the gas during the rest of the well's life. A Marcellus well might generate 1 million gallons (24,000 42-gallon barrels) of water as flowback and perhaps 100 gallons a week of produced water through the rest of the well's life.3 Recycling the water by running it through a simple filtration system to remove coarser sediments can cost less than $1 per barrel (bbl) of water. More thorough methods of recycling cost a lot more, anywhere from $5-$8/bbl for intermediate levels of treatment to $10-$12/bbl if the company decided to perform high end treatment and desalination. It is up to individual companies to choose on the method of recycling, if any. Usually, as long as it is cheaper than putting water in disposal wells that are further away from production wells, it makes sense to recycle. In Texas, an abundance of suitable wells (estimated 10,000) in which to store wastewater makes disposal costs cheap, at around $2/bbl of water, whereas in the Marcellus water has to be trucked to the nearest suitable storage sites in Ohio at a cost of up to $15/bbl.4 Such logistics lead to counter-intuitive results, in which producers in water-rich Pennsylvania recycle around 90
April 2014
CERI Commodity Report — Natural Gas
Waterless Fracking Dinara Millington It is a well-known fact that the US is experiencing record gas production levels from their unconventional gas plays with an advent of directional drilling in combination with hydraulic fracturing (or fracking). The US Energy Information Agency in their recent Annual Energy Outlook (AEO 2014)1 suggests that the shale gas production is the largest contributor to the total US gas production, growing by more than 10 trillion cubic feet (Tcf), from 9.7 Tcf in 2012 to 19.8 Tcf in 2040 (see Figure 1). The shale gas share of total US natural gas production would increase from 40 percent in 2012 to 53 percent in 2040. Figure 1: US Natural Gas Production (Reference case), 1990-2040 (trillion cubic feet)
Source: History: US Energy Information Administration, Natural Gas Annual 2012, DOE/EIA-0131(2012) (Washington, DC, December 2013). Projections: AEO2014 National Energy Modeling System, run REF2014.D102413A.
CERI Commodity Report – Natural Gas Editor-in-Chief: Dinara Millington ([email protected]) Contents Featured Article ................................................................................. 1 Natural Gas Prices.............................................................................. 4 Weather ............................................................................................ 6 Consumption and Production............................................................. 8 Transportation................................................................................... 10 Storage .............................................................................................. 12 Liquefied Natural Gas ........................................................................ 15 Drilling Activity .................................................................................. 17
Relevant • Independent • Objective
Page 2
percent of their flowback and produced water, while those in arid Texas generally do not recycle more than 20 percent. Efforts to cut the cost of recycling and general water use have led to a number of technological advances in recent years including the adoption of brine-tolerant friction reducers.5 These enable flowback brine to be used in fracking mixtures without the need for desalination, which was previously required to avoid performance loss during fracking. Field data collected from case studies in Montney and Horn River show the ability of the high brine tolerant reducers to perform at a level consistent with traditional products used in fresh water.6 Other methods include the use of gels in fracking fluids, thus increasing the effectiveness of the proppants in opening up cracks for shale gas to flow and minimizing the water use. In the Eagle Ford, Marathon Oil switched from slick-water fracking, a traditional water-based method developed by Mitchell Energy in Texas' Barnett Shale several years ago, to so-called cross-link, using a gel derived from guar beans to thicken the fracking liquid, as a result this had cut the water used in some of its wells by approximately 40 percent.7 While the use of gels in fracking fluids is sometimes referred to as waterless fracking, completely waterless fracking is possible by using hydrocarbons themselves to open up cracks in shale seams. The first shale wells drilled in the mid-20th century used hydrocarbons such as propane, butane or pentane for fracking, before producers replaced them with cheaper water. But the technique is now making a comeback. Canadian company Gasfrac has performed around 2,100 fracking operations using liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) as the fracking agent in 900 locations in Canada (since 2007) and the US (since 2011).8 Gasfrac has developed an innovative closed stimulation process and injection method, utilizing gelled LPG rather than conventional frac fluids. This involves pumping an LPG-based gel containing primarily propane, sand or other proppants into the shale, creating enough pressure to widen cracks and allow gas to flow. Their LPG gel properties include low surface tension, low viscosity, low density, along with solubility within naturally occurring reservoir hydrocarbons – all of which when added together, create more effective fracture lengths, enabling higher initial and long term production of the well. Another added advantage facilitated through the
LPG process, is the ability to evenly distribute proppant with the gelled slurry during pumping, thereby decreasing the chance of proppant settling in the formations (see Figure 2). The gel can generate a higher pay zone height throughout pumping and subsequent long-term production. Heat and pressure then vaporize the gel, allowing it to flow back up to the surface with the shale gas enabling to recover 100 percent of the fracturing fluids within days of stimulation. Figure 2: LPG vs. Conventional Fracking Fluids
Source: Gasfrac website
The technique is particularly suited to shallower wells, where pressure is relatively low. For deeper wells, water may be more effective as it compresses much less than LPG under pressure. One barrier for some users is that the upfront costs are higher than using water. However, the recovery rates can also be higher, as water itself can act as a barrier to gas flow, while it is easier to recycle LPG than water. While the technique will not be suitable for every well, it could come into its own as water conservation becomes a more pressing issue. Whether such efforts to reduce water usage will have a material effect on prospects for shale drilling in other potentially gas-rich but arid parts of the world, such as Mexico or South Africa's Karoo Basin, remains to be seen.
Relevant • Independent • Objective
Page 3
Endnotes 1Energy Information Agency (EIA). “Annual Energy Outlook 2014”, May 7, 2014. http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/aeo/MT_naturalgas.cfm#shale_gas. Accessed on May 13, 2014. 2The Energy Collective, “Energy Facts: How Much Water Does Fracking for Shale Gas Consume?” April 6, 2013. http://theenergycollective.com/jessejenkins/205481/friday-energy-facts-how-much-water-does-fracking-shale-gas-consume. Accessed on May 12, 2014. 3Petroleum Economist. “The water conundrum”. December 2013-January 2014 issue. 4Environmental Science and Technology, “Water Use for Shale-Gas Production in Texas, U.S.”. http://www.beg.utexas.edu/staffinfo/Scanlon_pdf/Nicot+Scanlon_ES&T_12_Water%20Use%20Fracking.pdf. Accessed on May 13, 2014. 5Multistage fracking of horizontal wells have increased frac fluid requirements per well to a point where regulatory agencies are concerned. On top of that, restrictions limiting fresh water use and environmental concerns around flowback fluids created a demand for chemicals that can be used in high concentration brines. Several water treatment techniques are
being used to remove impurities from flowbacks for re-use as frac water. However most treatments do not remove dissolved salts, requiring either development of a brine tolerant friction reducer or distillation to maintain high well performance. Javad Paktinat, Bill James O'Neil, Michael Giovanni, et al, “Case Studies: Impact of High Salt Tolerant Friction Reducers on Freshwater Conversation in Canadian Shale Fracturing Treatments”. 2011. 6Ibid. 7Marathon is a leader in many technical fields, notably cross-linked polymer gels. Marathon gels afford better production control by invading rock pore spaces to reduce permeability. Companies all over the world license Marathon technology. Marathon Oil, “Living Our Values: 2012 Corporate Social Responsibility Report”, 2013. http://www.marathonoil.com/lov2012/addressing_challenges_in_the_eagle_ford_shale.shtml. Accessed on May 13, 2014. 8GasFrac. http://www.gasfrac.com/proven-proprietary-process.html. Accessed on May 12, 2014.
CERI Commodity Report - Natural Gas
Page 4
SOU
RC
E: C
ERI,
Pla
tts
Gas
Dai
ly P
rice
Gu
ide.
SO
UR
CE:
CER
I, P
latt
s G
as D
aily
Pri
ce G
uid
e.
SOU
RC
E: C
ERI,
Pla
tts
Gas
Dai
ly P
rice
Gu
ide.
SO
UR
CE:
CER
I, P
latt
s G
as D
aily
Pri
ce G
uid
e.
-113579
11
13
15 Jan
-05
Jan
-06
Jan
-07
Jan
-08
Jan
-09
Jan
-10
Jan
-11
Jan
-12
Jan
-13
Jan
-14
Dif
fere
nti
al
He
nry
Hu
bR
oc
kie
s
He
nry H
ub
/R
oc
kie
s
Be
gin
nin
g o
f N
ex
t M
on
th
S
po
t P
ric
e (U
S$
/M
MB
tu
)
-113579
11
13
15 Jan
-05
Jan
-06
Jan
-07
Jan
-08
Jan
-09
Jan
-10
Jan
-11
Jan
-12
Jan
-13
Jan
-14
Dif
fere
nti
al
He
nry
Hu
bS
ou
thern
Ca
lifo
rnia
He
nry H
ub
/S
ou
th
ern
C
alifo
rn
ia
Be
gin
nin
g o
f N
ex
t M
on
th
S
po
t P
ric
e (U
S$
/M
MB
tu
)
-202468
10
12
14
Ja
n-
05
Ja
n-
06
Ja
n-
07
Ja
n-
08
Jan
-09
Jan
-10
Ja
n-
11
Ja
n-
12
Ja
n-
13
Ja
n-
14
Dif
fere
nti
al
He
nry
Hu
bA
EC
O-C
He
nry H
ub
/A
EC
O-C
Beginning of N
ext M
onth S
pot P
rice (U
S$/M
MB
tu)
-7-5-3-113579
11
13
15 Jan
-05
Ja
n-0
6J
an
-07
Ja
n-0
8J
an
-09
Jan
-10
Ja
n-1
1J
an
-12
Ja
n-1
3J
an
-14
Dif
fere
nti
al
He
nry
Hu
bC
hic
ag
o
He
nry H
ub
/C
hic
ag
o
Be
gin
nin
g o
f N
ex
t M
on
th
S
po
t P
ric
e (U
S$
/M
MB
tu
)
Relevant • Independent • Objective
Page 5
SOU
RC
E: C
anad
ian
Gas
Ass
oci
atio
n.
SOU
RC
E: C
ERI,
Can
adia
n G
as A
sso
ciati
on
, Sta
tisti
cs C
anad
a.
SOU
RC
E: N
OA
A.
SOU
RC
E: C
ERI,
NO
AA
, EIA
.
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
JF
MA
MJ
JA
SO
ND
5-Y
ear
Av
g.
201
32
01
4
Ca
na
dia
n H
ea
tin
g D
eg
re
e D
ays
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1,0
00
JF
MA
MJ
JA
SO
ND
5-Y
ear
Av
g.
201
32
01
4
US
H
ea
tin
g D
eg
re
e D
ays
01234567
0
200
400
600
800
1,0
00
1,2
00 J
an
-09
Jan
-10
Jan
-11
Jan
-12
Jan
-13
Jan
-14
De
gre
e D
ay
sC
on
su
mp
tio
n
Canadian H
eating D
egree D
ays vs R
esidential and
Com
mercial C
onsum
ption
Deg
ree D
ays
BC
FP
D 010
20
30
40
50
60
0
200
400
600
800
1,0
00
1,2
00 J
an
-09
Jan
-10
Jan
-11
Jan
-12
Jan
-13
Jan
-14
De
gre
e D
ay
sC
on
su
mp
tio
n
US
H
eating D
egree D
ays vs
Residential and C
om
mercial C
onsum
ption
Deg
ree D
ays
BC
FP
D
CERI Commodity Report - Natural Gas
Page 6
SOU
RC
E: E
nvi
ron
men
t C
anad
a.
SOU
RC
E: E
nvi
ron
men
t C
anad
a.
SOU
RC
E: N
OA
A.
SOU
RC
E: N
OA
A.
Relevant • Independent • Objective
Page 7
SOU
RC
E: N
OA
A.
SOU
RC
E: E
nvi
ron
men
t C
anad
a.
SOU
RC
E: N
OA
A.
CERI Commodity Report - Natural Gas
Page 8
SOU
RC
E: S
tati
stics
Can
ada.
SO
UR
CE:
Sta
tisti
cs C
anad
a, N
EB.
SOU
RC
E: E
IA.
SOU
RC
E: E
IA.
02468
10
12
14
16 J
an
-09
Ja
n-1
0J
an
-11
Ja
n-1
2J
an
-13
Jan
-14
Ind
us
tria
l &
Po
we
rC
om
me
rcia
lR
esid
en
tia
l
Ca
na
dia
n C
on
su
mp
tio
n
By S
ecto
r (B
cfp
d)
02468
10
12
14
16
18
20 J
an
-09
Jan
-10
Jan
-11
Jan
-12
Jan
-13
Jan
-14
BC
, Y
uko
n, N
WT
AB
SK
E.
Co
as
t
Ca
na
dia
n M
ark
eta
ble
P
ro
du
ctio
n
By P
ro
vin
ce
/R
eg
io
n (B
cfp
d)
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140 J
an
-09
Ja
n-1
0J
an
-11
Ja
n-1
2J
an
-13
Ja
n-1
4
Ind
us
tria
lE
lectr
ic P
ow
er
Co
mm
erc
ial
Re
sid
en
tia
l
US
C
on
su
mp
tio
n
By S
ec
to
r (B
cfp
d)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80 J
an
-09
Jan
-10
Jan
-11
Jan
-12
Jan
-13
Jan
-14
US
To
tal
Lo
uis
ian
aG
OM
Fed
era
l W
ate
rsT
ex
as
US
M
ark
eta
ble
P
ro
du
ctio
n (B
cfp
d)
Relevant • Independent • Objective
Page 9
SOU
RC
E: S
tati
stics
Can
ada,
NEB
. SO
UR
CE:
Sta
tisti
cs C
anad
a, N
EB.
SOU
RC
E: S
tati
stics
Can
ada,
NEB
. SO
UR
CE:
Sta
tisti
cs C
anad
a, N
EB.
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
JF
MA
MJ
JA
SO
ND
201
22
01
32
01
4
BC
, Y
uk
on
, N
WT
M
ark
eta
ble
Pro
du
ctio
n
(B
cfp
d)
02468
10
12
14
16
JF
MA
MJ
JA
SO
ND
201
22
01
32
01
4
Alb
erta
M
ark
eta
ble
P
ro
du
ctio
n (B
cfp
d)
0.0
0.5
1.0
JF
MA
MJ
JA
SO
ND
201
22
01
32
01
4
Sa
sk
atc
he
wa
n M
ark
eta
ble
P
ro
du
ctio
n (B
cfp
d)
0.0
0
0.2
5
0.5
0
JF
MA
MJ
JA
SO
ND
201
22
01
32
01
4
Ea
st C
oa
st M
ark
eta
ble
P
ro
du
ctio
n (B
cfp
d)
CERI Commodity Report - Natural Gas
Page 10
SOU
RC
E: C
ERI.
SO
UR
CE:
CER
I.
SOU
RC
E: N
EB.
SOU
RC
E: N
EB.
02468
10
12
14
16
JF
MA
MJ
JA
SO
ND
201
22
01
32
01
4
Syste
m F
ie
ld
R
ec
eip
ts
02468
10
12
14
16
Ap
r-1
3J
un
-13
Au
g-1
3O
ct-
13
De
c-1
3F
eb
-14
Ap
r-1
4
Em
pre
ss
McN
eil
lA
B-B
CA
llia
nc
e
Alb
erta
S
yste
m D
elive
rie
s (B
cfp
d)
0123456789
10
Mar-
13
May-1
3Ju
l-13
Sep
-13
No
v-1
3Jan
-14
Mar-
14
Kin
gs
ga
teM
on
ch
yE
lmo
reH
un
tin
gd
on
Ca
na
dia
n G
as E
xp
orts to
th
e U
S
By E
xp
ort P
oin
t -W
est (B
cfp
d)
0123456789
10
Ma
r-1
3M
ay-1
3J
ul-
13
Se
p-1
3N
ov-1
3J
an
-14
Ma
r-1
4
Em
ers
on
Iro
qu
ois
Oth
ers
Nia
gara
Ca
na
dia
n G
as E
xp
orts to
th
e U
S
By E
xpo
rt P
oin
t -E
ast (B
cfp
d)
Relevant • Independent • Objective
Page 11
SOU
RC
E: N
EB.
SOU
RC
E: N
EB.
SOU
RC
E: N
EB, E
IA.
SOU
RC
E: N
EB.
02468
10
12
Mar-
13
May-1
3Ju
l-13
Sep
-13
No
v-1
3Jan
-14
Mar-
14
We
st
Mid
Wes
tE
ast
US
Im
po
rts o
f C
an
ad
ia
n G
as
By U
S R
eg
io
n (B
cfp
d)
02468
10
12
14
16
Mar-
13
May-1
3Ju
l-13
Sep
-13
No
v-1
3Jan
-14
Mar-
14
We
st
Mid
Wes
tE
ast
Ave
ra
ge
C
an
ad
ia
n E
xp
ort P
ric
e
By U
S R
eg
io
n (C
$/G
J)
02468
10
12
14 Feb
-13
Ap
r-13
Ju
n-1
3A
ug
-13
Oct-
13
Dec-1
3F
eb
-14
Ca
nad
aM
ex
ico
To
ta
l U
S P
ip
elin
e G
as Im
po
rts (B
cfp
d)
01234
Jan
-13
Mar-
13
May-1
3Ju
l-13
Sep
-13
No
v-1
3Jan
-14
Co
urt
rig
ht
Sa
rnia
St.
Cla
irO
ther
Ca
na
dia
n G
as Im
po
rts
By Im
po
rt P
oin
t (B
cfp
d)
CERI Commodity Report - Natural Gas
Page 12
SOU
RC
E: C
ERI,
Pla
tts
Gas
Dai
ly.
SOU
RC
E: C
ERI,
Pla
tts
Gas
Dai
ly.
SOU
RC
E: C
ERI,
Pla
tts
Gas
Dai
ly.
SOU
RC
E: C
ERI,
Pla
tts
Gas
Dai
ly.
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
JF
MA
MJ
JA
SO
ND
5-Y
ear
Av
g.
201
32
01
4
Canadian W
orking G
as S
torage
(B
cf, M
onth-end)
0
500
1,0
00
1,5
00
2,0
00
2,5
00
3,0
00
3,5
00
4,0
00
4,5
00
Ap
r-13
Ju
n-1
3A
ug
-13
Oct-
13
Dec-1
3F
eb
-14
Ap
r-14
Ea
st
We
st
Pro
du
cin
g R
eg
ion
US
S
torage by R
egion (B
cf, M
onth
-end)
0
500
1,0
00
1,5
00
2,0
00
2,5
00
3,0
00
3,5
00
4,0
00
4,5
00
JF
MA
MJ
JA
SO
ND
5-Y
ear
Av
g.
201
32
01
4
US
Low
er-48 W
orking G
as S
torage
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
Ap
r-13
Ju
n-1
3A
ug
-13
Oct-
13
Dec-1
3F
eb
-14
Ap
r-14
We
st
Ea
st
Canadian S
torage by R
egion (B
cf, M
onth-end)
Relevant • Independent • Objective
Page 13
SOU
RC
E: C
ERI,
Pla
tts
Gas
Dai
ly.
SOU
RC
E: C
ERI,
Pla
tts
Gas
Dai
ly.
SOU
RC
E: C
ERI,
Pla
tts
Gas
Dai
ly.
-140
-120
-100
-80
-60
-40
-200
20
40
60
JF
MA
MJ
JA
SO
ND
WC
_IJ
_W
D
5-Y
ear
Av
g.
201
32
01
4
We
ste
rn
C
an
ad
a S
to
ra
ge
In
je
ctio
ns/W
ith
dra
wa
ls (B
cf, M
on
th
-e
nd
)
-250
-200
-150
-100
-500
50
100
150
JF
MA
MJ
JA
SO
ND
5-Y
ear
Av
g.
201
32
01
4
Canadian S
torage
Injections/W
ithdraw
als (B
cf, M
onth
-end)
-100
-80
-60
-40
-200
20
40
60
80
JF
MA
MJ
JA
SO
ND
5-Y
ear
Av
g.
201
32
01
4
Eastern C
anadian S
torage
Injections/W
ithdraw
als (B
cf, M
onth-end)
CERI Commodity Report - Natural Gas
Page 14
SOU
RC
E: C
ERI,
Pla
tts
Gas
Dai
ly.
SOU
RC
E: C
ERI,
Pla
tts
Gas
Dai
ly.
SOU
RC
E: C
ERI,
Pla
tts
Gas
Dai
ly.
SOU
RC
E: C
ERI,
Pla
tts
Gas
Dai
ly.
-150
-100
-500
50
100
JF
MA
MJ
JA
SO
ND
5-Y
ear
Av
g.
201
32
01
4
US
W
estern C
onsum
ing R
egion S
torage
Injections/W
ithdraw
als (B
cf, M
onth-end)
-700
-500
-300
-100
100
300
500
JF
MA
MJ
JA
SO
ND
5-Y
ear
Av
g.
201
32
01
4
US
E
astern S
torage
Injections/W
ithdraw
als (B
cf, M
onth-end)
-400
-300
-200
-1000
100
200
JF
MA
MJ
JA
SO
ND
5-Y
ear
Av
g.
201
32
01
4
US
P
roducing R
egion S
torage
Injections/W
ithdraw
als (B
cf, M
onth-end)
-1200
-1000
-800
-600
-400
-2000
200
400
600
800
JF
MA
MJ
JA
SO
ND
5-Y
ear
Av
g.
201
32
01
4
US
S
torage
Injections/W
ithdraw
als (B
cf, M
onth
-end)
Relevant • Independent • Objective
Page 15
SOU
RC
E: U
S D
OE.
SO
UR
CE:
US
DO
E.
SOU
RC
E: U
S D
OE.
SO
UR
CE:
US
DO
E.
05
10
15
20
Mar-
13
May-1
3Ju
l-13
Sep
-13
No
v-1
3Jan
-14
Mar-
14
Eg
yp
tN
ige
ria
Tri
nid
ad
No
rwa
yQ
ata
rY
em
en
Peru
US
L
NG
Im
po
rts B
y O
rig
in
(B
cf)
02468
10
12
JF
MA
MJ
JA
SO
ND
201
22
01
32
01
4
Vo
lu
me
-W
eig
hte
d A
vera
ge
L
NG
P
ric
e
02468
10
12
14
16
Ma
r-1
3M
ay
-13
Ju
l-1
3S
ep
-13
No
v-1
3J
an
-14
Ma
r-1
4
Co
ve P
oin
tE
lba Isla
nd
Ev
ere
ttN
E G
ate
way
Nep
tun
e
Ea
ste
rn
U
S L
NG
Im
po
rts B
y F
ac
ility (B
cf)
02468
10
12
14
16
Ma
r-1
3M
ay
-13
Ju
l-1
3S
ep
-13
No
v-1
3J
an
-14
Ma
r-1
4
Fre
ep
ort
La
ke
Ch
arl
es
Sa
bin
e P
as
sC
am
ero
nG
old
en
Pas
sG
ulf
LN
G
US
G
OM
L
NG
Im
po
rts B
y F
ac
ility (B
cf)
CERI Commodity Report - Natural Gas
Page 16
SOU
RC
E: U
S D
OE,
NEB
. SO
UR
CE:
US
DO
E.
SOU
RC
E: E
IA, U
S D
OE.
SO
UR
CE:
US
DO
E.
01234567 Mar-
12
Ju
n-1
2S
ep
-12
Dec-1
2M
ar-
13
Ju
n-1
3S
ep
-13
Dec-1
3M
ar-
14
Japan
US
L
NG
E
xp
orts to
J
ap
an
(B
cf)
01234567 Mar-
12
Ju
n-1
2S
ep
-12
Dec-1
2M
ar-
13
Ju
n-1
3S
ep
-13
Dec-1
3M
ar-
14
Mex
ico
Bra
zil
So
uth
Ko
rea
Jap
an
US
L
NG
R
e-E
xp
orts
By D
estin
atio
n (B
cf)
Relevant • Independent • Objective
Page 17
SOU
RC
E: C
ERI,
CA
OD
C, B
aker
Hu
ghes
, Div
estc
o.
SOU
RC
E: C
ERI,
CA
OD
C, D
ive
stco
.
SOU
RC
E: C
ERI,
CA
OD
C, D
ive
stco
. SO
UR
CE:
CER
I, C
AO
DC
, Div
est
co.
0
500
1,0
00
1,5
00
2,0
00
2,5
00
3,0
00 Ja
n-0
5J
an
-06
Ja
n-0
7J
an
-08
Ja
n-0
9J
an
-10
Jan
-11
Jan
-12
Ja
n-1
3J
an
-14
US
WC
SB
North A
merican A
ctive R
igs
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1,0
00 Jan
-05
Jan
-06
Jan
-07
Jan
-08
Jan
-09
Jan
-10
Jan
-11
Jan
-12
Jan
-13
Jan
-14
Acti
ve R
igs
To
tal R
ig D
rillin
g F
leet
Ca
na
dia
n R
ig
F
le
et U
tiliza
tio
n
We
ek
ly A
ve
ra
ge
A
ctive
R
ig
s
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700 Ja
n-0
9J
ul-
09
Ja
n-1
0J
ul-
10
Jan
-11J
ul-
11
Ja
n-1
2J
ul-
12
Ja
n-1
3J
ul-
13
Jan
-14
SK
AB
BC
WC
SB
A
ctive
R
ig
s b
y P
ro
vin
ce
We
ek
ly A
ve
ra
ge
-
10
0
20
0
30
0
400
50
0
60
0
70
0
800
15
913
17
21
25
29
33
37
41
45
49
5-Y
ea
r A
vg
.2013
2014
We
ste
rn
C
an
ad
a A
ctive
R
ig
s
We
ek
ly A
ve
ra
ge
We
ek
Nu
mb
er
CERI Commodity Report - Natural Gas
Page 18
SOU
RC
E: C
ERI,
Bak
er H
ugh
es.
SO
UR
CE:
CER
I, B
aker
Hu
ghe
s.
SOU
RC
E: C
ERI,
Bak
er H
ugh
es.
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80
%
90%
100%
0
200
400
600
800
1,0
00
1,2
00
1,4
00
1,6
00
1,8
00
2,0
00
2,2
00
2,4
00 Ja
n-0
5J
an
-06
Jan
-07
Ja
n-0
8J
an
-09
Ja
n-1
0J
an
-11
Ja
n-1
2J
an
-13
Jan
-14
Oil-d
irec
ted
Ga
s-d
ire
cte
dG
as-d
ire
cte
d %
US
T
ota
l A
ctive
R
ig
s
0
500
1,0
00
1,5
00
2,0
00
2,5
00 Jan
-05
Ja
n-0
6J
an
-07
Ja
n-0
8J
an
-09
Ja
n-1
0J
an
-11
Ja
n-1
2J
an
-13
Jan
-14
To
tal O
il-d
irec
ted
Go
M G
as
-dir
ec
ted
On
sh
ore
Gas-d
ire
cte
d
US
T
ota
l A
ctive
R
ig
s
0
20
40
60
80
10
0
12
0 Jan
-05
Ja
n-0
6J
an
-07
Jan
-08
Jan
-09
Ja
n-1
0J
an
-11
Jan
-12
Ja
n-1
3J
an
-14
Oil-d
irec
ted
Ga
s-d
ire
cte
d
US
G
ulf o
f M
ex
ic
o A
ctive
R
ig
s