So Oil and Gas is booming now.

[Gymmeh]

I have been applying for a lot of jobs in Texas in the oil and gas industry. Living in the rust belt is getting old.

I wanted to see if there is any doubt about the future of Oil and Gas. Especially in Texas or is there another area of the USA that is up and coming?

What are some new or future technologies in O&G that would be good to get into?

Is it better to be in tool design, production, or drilling? Which skills have the best future?

 

[TomDOT]

FERC did approve a new 48" CNG export pipeline to Mexico late last year, 2.1Bcf/d. It will tie into the hub near Corpus Christi.

 

[zdas04]

Yeah, and there are a couple of big lines into Canada as well. The NAFTA agreement allows an exception to the no-export law for NAFTA countries. I've heard unsubstantiated rumors that there were LNG facilities under construction on both coasts to take US gas to Europe and Asia using the NAFTA loopholes, but I've been unable to verify their veracity. If true, it would be good for the industry, but not nearly as good for the US economy (very few new US jobs, but with upward pressure on natural gas prices, I don't mind the price pressure, but the no jobs isn't so good).

It looks like Sasol's big Gas to Liquids plant in Louisiana has started letting bids for manufactured components. That will convert US natural gas into diesel to be consumed on the US highways. Good for the economy, good for the industry, good for the consumer, and (in spite of the e-NGO claims to the contrary) good for the environment. This diesel will be zero sulfur so the SOx issues go away. Enviro-wackos are claiming that the CO emissions from the plant are too high. In fact, the EPA has very strict CO emissions limits and the proposed plant has scrubbers and catalysts to get the number below the threshold. This plant has been in the permitting phase for nearly a decade, and it is good to see that they finally have enough confidence that a permit will eventually be granted to start spending money on steel.

David Simpson, PE
MuleShoe Engineering

Law is the common force organized to act as an obstacle of injustice Frédéric Bastiat

 

[moltenmetal]

F-T is very energy inefficient but generates beautiful, zero sulphur fuel and base oil stock. It also makes a lot of relatively useless NGLs though. CO2 emissions from the fuel well to wheels are higher than that for liquid fuels produced from light sweet crude but probably not too much worse than for fuels generated from bitumen or shale oil.

LNG isn't going to be a highway vehicle transportation fuel, ever. Yes the railways are experimenting with LNG fueling, but one accident with one of those huge LNG tanks will kill the idea for ever- the BLEVE from one of those giant dewar tankers when it derails and catches fire would be unbelievably devastating.

CNG definitely has a future as a road transport fuel if nat gas prices stay low for protracted periods. But I do worry about the compressors, and what happens when they aren't properly maintained...

 

[TomDOT]

moltenmetal,

As of 2013, UPS already had 112 LNG tractors on the highway. Their plan is for 900+ LNG tractors on the road by August 2014.

http://www.fleetsandfuels.com/fuels/ngvs/2014/01/ups-plans-for-900-plus-lng-trucks/

http://www.pressroom.ups.com/Fact+Sheets/LNG+Fact+Sheet

 

[cranky108]

Do you mean like the accidents with the oil tankers? Or with NH4?
As was stated above, those may well be CNG tankers.

So with fracking there may be use in those narrow coal seems.

 

[zdas04]

Moltenmetal,
We don't often agree, but I do agree with almost all of your post. Shale Oil is the point where we diverge. Mostly what we're getting from Shale oil is barely oil at (API Gravity around 35 and it looks like water in a glass). When you blend it with the tar sands (mostly Bitumen, API Gravity closer to 10 than 30), then you get a mix with a good fit for the Gulf Coast refineries. Either one by itself creates problems in refineries designed for normal crude. The hydrocarbons we are getting from the shale has been fairly amazing stuff (and the stock I have in NGL processors/transporters has been doing pretty well for NGL being worthless, especially since we can export NGL but not natural gas or oil)

David Simpson, PE
MuleShoe Engineering

Law is the common force organized to act as an obstacle of injustice Frédéric Bastiat

 

[moltenmetal]

TomDOT: well, I stand corrected! Wow...I'm dumbfounded. Cryo LNG as a road fuel scares the hell out of me. There was a large propane tank failure in north Toronto about five years ago, and it was devastating- and propane is way, way safer and easier to handle than LNG. Then there's the bulk transport of the LNG itself- most of which will be by road or rail...If your handle means you work for DOT, I trust you guys to do your job of protecting the public, as your rules become Canadian rules too. Make sure it's safe...

 

[weldstan]

LNG has been transported by truck in the USA for decades. It was, and I believe still is being, transported through the most populous areas in California for decades.

 

[TomDOT]

I work for DOT, but don't have anything to do with load permitting.

 

[moltenmetal]

zdas04: the NGLs are "worthless" relative to the real F-T target products, not in the broader sense, especially when they come out of the ground more or less "for free". In an F-T context, you try to minimize your yield to NGLs, balancing against making waxes you need to spend more energy and money to crack into useable molecules.

I've seen NGL tankers on the road and I've seen pictures of the massive rail tankers that are intended for locomotive fueling too. My point is simply that when you start using it as a transport fuel, you're going to see a hell of lot more of them, and if and when any of them make an earth-shattering kaboom in a densely populated area, the sparks will fly a lot further than you might expect. Frankly I'm less worried about the big tankers than I am about thousands of transport trucks on the road, each with a big LNG tanker of a capacity to replace say 100 gallons of diesel that these trucks usually carry- unless these are all for short-hop routes. Hell, you can't even keep wheels on those suckers here- it's tough to imagine how good a job they'd do of maintaining a cryogenic fuel system...

 

[zdas04]

Where the first F-T plant has been permitted there is excellent access to NGL pipelines. Unlikely that any of it will be on the road.

I read an article yesterday that said that the railroads were evaluating LNG fuel not CNG. Initial trials were looking excellent. The LNG fuel tank will be a lot smaller than a tanker car which can carry things a lot worse than LNG.

David Simpson, PE
MuleShoe Engineering

Law is the common force organized to act as an obstacle of injustice Frédéric Bastiat

 

[moltenmetal]

Sorry: mis-spoke- I've seen LNG tankers on the road- seen plenty of NGL tankers too. The rail tanker I saw a picture of was a prototype LNG tanker for fueling the locomotive. Can't recall where I saw the pic, but the rail tanker pictured was larger than the one in the image below, which appears to be a full-sized rail tanker.

http://www.cowcatchermagazine.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/BNSF-Natural-Gas-Loco.jpg

 

[swall]

One obstacle to railroads using LNG fuel is that each locomotive requires a fuel tender. There is the problem of having a mismatch of locomotives and tenders. Have an engine failure on the road and you have a spare tender with nothing to do. Have a mechanical problem with a tender and you have a locomotive that can't be utilized.

 

[Gymmeh]

Found this.

http://www.canadianrailwayobservations.com/croarchives/2013/junecro/cn.htm30.jpg

 

[swall]

Gymmeh--sounds like this scheme is one where diesel fuel starts the ignition cycle and NG gets metered in for the rest of the burn?

 

[cranky108]

Gee railroal locomotive with a tender. Where have I heard that before (There was once one in the middle of town). It should not be a show stopper. Empty train cars travel the rail all the time (and empty seats in Amtrack).

Just because a tender is broken, if teathered to a locomotive it should recieve the same priorty as the locomotive does.

 

[Gymmeh]

Swall,

I was trying to find more good info on how they work. Seems they are trying to figure out what works best.

"It is expected that the first trains will use a combined fuel of 80% LNG and 20% diesel, which would require few engine modifications, and allow for the motor to be reverted to full diesel if any problems arose with the LNG supply. The share of LNG could be boosted to 95% mixed with just 5% diesel, but this would require much heavier modification to the engine, and prove much more difficult and expensive to switch back to pure diesel."
(

http://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-N...omotives-to-be-Common-in-the-US-by-2016.html)

 

[weldstan]

Besides LNG production facilities, the major chemical and petrochemical companies are spending billions on olefins production for plastics manufacture and export due to the high volume of NGLs in the Eagle Ford and other shale formations.