Shale-Gas Skeptic’s Supply Doubts Draw Wrath of Devon (Update2) Share Business ExchangeTwitterFacebook| Email | Print | A A A
By Edward Klump and Jim Polson

Nov. 17 (Bloomberg) -- Arthur Berman runs a one-man energy consulting firm out of his home near Houston, producing research that says forecasts for natural-gas production in the U.S. are flawed. He’s won the industry’s attention and its anger.

Since last month, Chesapeake Energy Corp. and Devon Energy Corp., two of the five largest gas producers in the U.S., attacked Berman’s claims. Berman, 59, had his monthly column pulled from the November issue of World Oil after gas companies complained, prompting him to quit the trade journal.

Oil geologist Berman, who worked two decades for Amoco Corp., says company production projections for so-called shale gas in the U.S. are at least double what drill results justify. At issue are the rates of production decline in shale wells, where water, sand and other materials are injected to fracture rock and make gas flow.

“I think that the wells decline at a much higher rate than the operators think they do,” Berman said in an interview in Houston. “They’re being overly optimistic.”

Companies such as Chesapeake, which had climbed 55 percent this year before today in New York stock trading, say their shale wells will produce for four or more decades. In an Oct. 12 speech at a conference in Denver, Berman said data he’s seen filed with the Texas Railroad Commission suggests the life of shale-gas wells is 10 to 20 years.

Credentials Challenged

“There’s a huge vested interest in the status quo because if these wells do not work, there’s going to be hell to pay,” said John E. Olson, who manages $50 million at Houston Energy Partners. Olson left his analyst job at Merrill Lynch & Co. in 1998, after being told he was too critical of Enron Corp., which collapsed in 2001.

Chesapeake fell 84 cents, or 3.3 percent, to $24.30 today on the New York Stock Exchange. Devon dropped 37 cents to $70.62.

Questions about Berman’s research were so frequent that investment bank Tudor Pickering Holt & Co. in Houston put out an e-mail to clients rejecting claims by shale skeptics, said Dave Pursell, a managing director at the firm.

“If you read his stuff, he’s basically said there’s fraud being committed by Wall Street, E&P companies and reserve engineers all in collusion,” Pursell said. “When you start calling companies out by name and you start insinuating and implying very strongly that there’s a degree of fraud going on, you get our attention.”

Berman said he’s not alleging fraud; rather, he disagrees with how producers are interpreting well data.

‘Game Changer’

Berman doesn’t have the experience in unconventional gas projects to validate his assertions, Pursell said. U.S. shale- gas output will climb to about 22 billion cubic feet a day at the end of 2013 from 8 billion at the end of last year, Tudor Pickering said in August.

If exploited properly, shale formations will be a “game changer” to boost U.S. energy supplies and help cut carbon emissions, said Porter Bennett, chief executive officer at consulting firm Bentek Energy LLC near Denver.

“There’s a preponderance of evidence that suggests that those shale plays are very real,” Bennett said in an interview.

David Hager, exploration chief at Oklahoma City-based Devon, took on Berman’s claims with an Oct. 19 op-ed piece in the Oklahoman newspaper. Hager likened shale-gas development to a home run to win the World Series and said Berman “is in the stands speculating on whether the slugger is on steroids.”

Chesapeake, also based in Oklahoma City, ignored Berman’s arguments until it learned of speeches the geologist gave calling shale production a speculative bubble, Chief Operating Officer Steve Dixon said in a telephone interview.

Chesapeake Responds

“He called us out,” said Dixon, who devoted part of Chesapeake’s analyst and investor meeting in New York on Oct. 14 to rebutting Berman. “He left me no choice.”

Berman, who looked at data for thousands of wells, projects average output at less than 1 billion cubic feet per horizontal well in the Barnett Shale of Texas. Chesapeake, XTO Energy Inc., Devon and Quicksilver Resources Inc. have estimates more than double that, such as XTO’s 3.3 billion.

Berman said his interest in geology started in his hometown of Cincinnati, “where you can’t hardly kick a rock without finding fossils.”

After getting a history degree at Amherst College in Massachusetts, Berman moved to Colorado and found work in land surveying before enrolling in 1974 at the Colorado School of Mines, where he received a master’s degree in geology.

He joined Amoco in 1978 and traveled the world for the company until 1999, when it was acquired by BP Plc.

Amoco Geologist

He was “one of the up-and-coming stars” at Amoco, said Vince Matthews, who worked with Berman at the company in the early 1980s as a division exploration manager. Matthews, now the state geologist in Colorado, called Berman a “good scientist.”

Berman, who has advised clients such as Exxon Mobil Corp. and Total SA, said he became interested in shale gas after researching the Barnett Shale for a 2007 speech.

Output from a typical shale well drops sharply in the first two years, then falls so slowly that Chesapeake estimates economic production will last 65 years, Dixon said.

James Halloran, a consultant with Financial America Securities in Cleveland, said Berman’s research made him “more guarded” about producers involved in shale formations. “I’m a lot less sanguine toward that area longer term as an investment,” he said.

Column Canceled

John Royall, chief executive officer of Gulf Publishing Co., pulled Berman’s November column from World Oil because of producer complaints, said Perry Fischer, who was fired as the trade journal’s editor on Nov. 5. Fischer said he believes Berman’s column contributed to his firing. Royall didn’t respond to messages seeking comment.

Oklahoma City-based Devon declined to comment on Berman beyond Hager’s article in the Oklahoman. The company said yesterday that it will sell all of its Gulf of Mexico and overseas assets to focus on onshore fields in the U.S. and Canada, including shale formations.

XTO spokesman Tom Covington declined to comment.

“We’re ignoring Mr. Berman,” said Brad Sylvester, a spokesman for Southwestern Energy Co., the Houston-based company that pioneered development of the Fayetteville Shale in Arkansas. Southwestern was he only oil and gas producer in the Standard & Poor’s 500 that rose last year.

Rick Buterbaugh, a spokesman for Quicksilver of Fort Worth, Texas, said Berman underestimates the company’s Barnett Shale production by using figures from the Railroad Commission that don’t include natural-gas liquids.

Berman said he’s glad companies and analysts are starting to discuss his shale research. “I think it’s very encouraging that people are disagreeing with me because what that suggests is that we’re going to get to an answer eventually,” he said.

To contact the reporters on this story: Edward Klump in Houston at eklump@bloomberg.net; Jim Polson in New York at jpolson@bloomberg.net.

Last Updated: November 17, 2009 16:06 EST

Views: 47

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

i saw this and chuckled. i'd put my money with devon all day before i'd give berman a nickel
Royall didn’t respond to messages seeking comment.

Oklahoma City-based Devon declined to comment on Berman beyond Hager’s article in the Oklahoman.

XTO spokesman Tom Covington declined to comment.

“We’re ignoring Mr. Berman,” said Brad Sylvester, a spokesman for Southwestern Energy Co.,

Good examples to follow, IMO (but I laughed too).
The Barnett has been going for several years. Shouldn't the industry have production figures that would easily discredit Bermans theories? Just wondering why it seems to be more of an attack on his qualifications than a rebuttal with the facts in a lot of these articles. Obviously, hoping the guy is way wrong but....
There have been other discussions on this board that have addressed the accuracy of his methods including distinct faults in his data gathering from the Barnett. I too would prefer that people simply refute his claims with evidence of faulty data, methods, or assumptions.
What is it you don't like about the decline rates? And, what do you think can be done about it? At the end of the day, its all about economics. Would you like to get 8 BCF spread out over 50 years or would you like to get 6 BCF spread out over 5 years?

The decline is mostly driven by mother nature. There are studies on whether rate has an impact on recovery. Theoretically, I'll venture an educated guess that says yes, there is an impact on recovery associated with the production rate. But again, economically, it may make perfect sense to get less over the long term in return for getting more over the medium term. This isn't a business driven by eeking out every molecule. Its about getting out the optimum amounts based on science and economics.
Here's to more devil's advocates - at least effective ones. Give me the best information and the best reasoning. Unfortunately there are strong indications that Mr. Berman's facts and assumptions have significant flaws. No, we do not need more Bermans either pro or con. We need more folks who can effectively argue - on both sides of the argument.
Lethal, you just need DA's that know what they are talking about - not someone that doesn't have a clue and doesn't take the time to properly research the information. It is clear that Mr Berman is just trying to stir up publicity for himself.
Bacon, reservoir engineers look at Berman's articles and realize he does not have one inkling of how to analyze unconventional gas production (or conventional production for that much). That is the same reason I left formation mapping to my good geologist buddies when I worked for a major oil & gas company and they left the reservoir engineering to me.
Has anyone done any PVT (pressure) analysis vs. cumulative reserves yet and seen what happens when pressure declines to normal pressure?
RBH, I assume you are wondering if the Haynesville Shale would be at risk for retrogade condensate formation. This is highly unlikely given the very lean nature of the Haynesville Shale reservoir gas.

RSS

Support GoHaynesvilleShale.com

Not a member? Get our email.

Groups



© 2024   Created by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher).   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service