Commodities Obey Supply and Demand (It’s a Law)

As I have traveled to AAPG conferences during the past year-and-a-half I have been impressed by the number of symposia on shale gas.

I am not struck by the fact that they are held, but rather by the fact that they have all drawn capacity crowds. It is as if 80 percent of our members are working in shale plays or, at the very least, expect to be working in shale plays in the near future.

The most recent of the conferences to feature a session on shale gas was the recent European Region conference in Kiev, Ukraine (see related story, page 39). The interest in shale gas plays is certainly high in Europe, but since the surface owners typically do not own the minerals in Europe, the sight of a drilling rig is much less appealing to the farmers.

As strange as it may seem, I also have been struck by the similarity of the shale gas play to dairy farming. I will stipulate that I personally have not been involved in dairy farming since my youth, but the basic technology and the economics have not changed much in the last 40 years.

Both industries require a substantial capital investment, are labor intensive and are seven-day-a-week operations. The products of both industries are sold at posted prices, and the laws of supply and demand govern the magnitude of the posted price. Therefore, in both markets, there is a penalty for success. The greater your success, the more product you make available to the market – and the lower the price is likely to be.

Both industries are dominated by large corporations, but there is still room in each of them for the small independent.

Depletion is a significant factor in both industries. As the means of production age, the volumes decline.

While dairy farmers do not have the luxury of shutting in production until the price improves, they do not face the need to invest additional capital with the inevitable result of increasing supply in order to maintain their acreage position.

There is nothing unique about milk. Any natural resource is subject to the laws of supply and demand. The exception to that rule may be diamonds, where the supply and price seem to be fairly well controlled.

Before you fire up the computer to send me an e-mail noting that prior to 1973 there was a limited natural gas market and the market price of oil was essentially controlled by the Texas Railroad Commission, I will grant that, at the very least, crude oil market forces were substantially constrained prior to 1973. The entire energy industry experienced a major change in 1973. Texas was able to influence crude oil price prior to 1973 because approximately 38 percent of the U.S. oil production from 1935 through 1970 came from Texas.

For those of you outside of Texas who wonder what a Railroad Commission has to do with oil and gas production, the Texas Railroad Commission was established in 1891 to regulate – as the name implies – railroads. However, in 1917 they were given jurisdiction over oil and gas pipelines, and in 1919, they were given jurisdiction over “the conservation of oil and gas, forbidding waste.”

In 1920, the production and sale of natural gas in Texas was deemed to be a public utility – and the Railroad Commission was given jurisdiction.

As they say, the rest is history.

Comments (0)


President's Column - David G. Rensink

David G. Rensink, AAPG President (2010-11), is a consultant out of Houston. He retired from Apache Corp in 2009.

President's Column

AAPG Presidents offer thoughts and information about their experiences for the Association. 


See Also: Book

Desktop /Portals/0/images/_site/AAPG-newlogo-vertical-morepadding.jpg?width=50&h=50&mode=crop&anchor=middlecenter&quality=90amp;encoder=freeimage&progressive=true 4588 Book
Desktop /Portals/0/images/_site/AAPG-newlogo-vertical-morepadding.jpg?width=50&h=50&mode=crop&anchor=middlecenter&quality=90amp;encoder=freeimage&progressive=true 4090 Book

See Also: Bulletin Article

Jurassic deposition in the Maghrebian tethys was governed by eustasy and rifting. Two periods were delineated: (1) a carbonate shelf (Rhaetian–early Pliensbachian) and (2) a platform-basin complex (early Pliensbachian–Callovian). The carbonate shelf evolved in four stages, generating three sedimentary sequences, J1 to J3, separated by boundary sea level falls, drawdown, exposure, and local erosion. Sediment facies bear evidence of sea level rises and falls. Lateral changes in lithofacies indicate shoaling and deepening upward during the Sinemurian. A major pulse of rifting with an abrupt transition from carbonate shelf to pelagic basin environments of deposition marks the upper boundary of the lower Pliensbachian carbonate shelf deposits. This rifting episode with brittle fractures broke up the Rhaetian–early Pliensbachian carbonate shelf and has created a network of grabens, half grabens, horsts, and stacked ramps. Following this episode, a relative sea level rise led to pelagic sedimentation in the rift basins with local anoxic environments that also received debris shed from uplifted ramp crests. Another major episode spanning the whole early Pliensbachian–Bajocian is suggested by early brecciation, mass flows, slumps, olistolites, erosion, pinch-outs, and sedimentary prisms. A later increase in the rates of drifting marked a progress toward rift cessation during the Late Jurassic. These Jurassic carbonates with detrital deposits and black shales as the source rocks in northeastern Tunisia may define interesting petroleum plays (pinch-out flanking ramps, onlaps, and structurally upraised blocks sealed inside grabens). Source rock maturation and hydrocarbon migration began early in the Cretaceous and reached a maximum during the late Tortonian–Pliocene Atlassic orogeny.
Desktop /Portals/0/PackFlashItemImages/WebReady/a-transition-from-carbonate-shelf-to-pelagic.jpg?width=50&h=50&mode=crop&anchor=middlecenter&quality=90amp;encoder=freeimage&progressive=true 3766 Bulletin Article

See Also: DL Abstract

The Gulf of Mexico (GOM) is the 9th largest body of water on earth, covering an area of approximately 1.6 million km2 with water depths reaching 4,400 m (14,300’). The basin formed as a result of crustal extension during the early Mesozoic breakup of Pangaea. Rifting occurred from the Late Triassic to early Middle Jurassic. Continued extension through the Middle Jurassic combined with counter-clockwise rotation of crustal blocks away from North America produced highly extended continental crust in the subsiding basin center. Subsidence eventually allowed oceanic water to enter from the west leading to thick, widespread, evaporite deposition. Seafloor spreading initiated in the Late Jurassic eventually splitting the evaporite deposits into northern (USA) and southern (Mexican) basins. Recent work suggests that this may have been accomplished by asymmetric extension, crustal delamination, and exposure of the lower crust or upper mantle rather than true sea floor spreading (or it could be some combination of the two).
Desktop /Portals/0/images/_site/AAPG-newlogo-vertical-morepadding.jpg?width=50&h=50&mode=crop&anchor=middlecenter&quality=90amp;encoder=freeimage&progressive=true 844 DL Abstract

See Also: Learn! Blog

Engineers and geologists can learn from each other to optimize drilling, completions, and operations. Join us on September 23 in OKC for a truly astounding line-up of presentations, posters, and cores that will help you increase production and reduce costs.
Desktop /Portals/0/PackFlashItemImages/WebReady/work-smarter-learn-how-hero.jpg?width=50&h=50&mode=crop&anchor=middlecenter&quality=90amp;encoder=freeimage&progressive=true 22627 Learn! Blog