Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.

Between the Front & Back: Grundle’s Book Club

1356

Comments

  • GrundleStiltzkinGrundleStiltzkin Member Posts: 61,499 Standard Supporter

    My hardback copy for $28.99 arrives tomorrow. Thanks a lot Grumble for picking the non paperback book.

    Ha, whoops.

    OK, we'll push it another week. Of the handful of people doing this, most haven't finished the book.
  • YellowSnowYellowSnow Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 35,438 Founders Club
    spuden said:

    My hardback copy for $28.99 arrives tomorrow. Thanks a lot Grumble for picking the non paperback book.

    Lol...Amazon just dropped my hardback off a couple hours ago. I’ve got some catching up to do.
    I just got mine off the front porch.
  • GrundleStiltzkinGrundleStiltzkin Member Posts: 61,499 Standard Supporter

    spuden said:

    My hardback copy for $28.99 arrives tomorrow. Thanks a lot Grumble for picking the non paperback book.

    Lol...Amazon just dropped my hardback off a couple hours ago. I’ve got some catching up to do.
    I just got mine off the front porch.
    Who's porch?
  • 1to392831weretaken1to392831weretaken Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 7,630 Swaye's Wigwam
    edited March 2021

    I'm gonna skip this one and hop on for next month's book:

    One of my beard's beast friends has colon cancer, and she ordered this masterpiece for her as a gag gift. Remember, this is "The Trilogy," so it's three books bound into one.

    It's like 40 pages. Total. I've seen bigger instruction manuals for computer motherboards.

    I'll cut to the chase: If this isn't next month's HCH book club book, I'm gone, just gone.


  • pawzpawz Member, Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 20,969 Founders Club

    I'm gonna skip this one and hop on for next month's book:

    One of my beard's beast friends has colon cancer, and she ordered this masterpiece for her as a gag gift. Remember, this is "The Trilogy," so it's three books bound into one.

    It's like 40 pages. Total. I've seen bigger instruction manuals for computer motherboards.

    I'll cut to the chase: If this isn't next month's HCH book club book, I'm gone, just gone.



  • pawzpawz Member, Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 20,969 Founders Club
    Book delivered. Gonna need a week or two to get through it.
  • GrundleStiltzkinGrundleStiltzkin Member Posts: 61,499 Standard Supporter
    Alright, tim has come to kvetch about this book. I'll be poasting some thoughts a little later this morning. I'm genuinely curious to hear what other's got out of this book.
  • GrundleStiltzkinGrundleStiltzkin Member Posts: 61,499 Standard Supporter
    1. The US shale gas & oil revolution.

    Obviously this one of main thrusts of the book, and one of my big takeaways. I consider myself decently well-read about US news at the topline. I cannot recall reading much if anything about this separate from a partisan view. Plenty of "shale gas will poison water" or "greens are trying to kill jobs." Not much about how impactful this was domestically and internationally. This was a huge eye-opener.

    A close corollary to this point, eye-opening reading just how good the US economy was pre-Vid. Wow, just wow.

    Question for my oil & gas guysm: The book makes mention of the short-cycle nature of fracking wells, versus the long-cycle of conventional wells like in Middle East or South America. Out of the scope of the book is the pros and cons of that. Anyone care to expound?

    Another related anecdote from the: In 2015 (I think? maybe earlier), Venezuela proposed in an OPEC meeting to push propaganda in the US about the environmental horrors of fracking. Fuck those guys.
  • GrundleStiltzkinGrundleStiltzkin Member Posts: 61,499 Standard Supporter
    2. Maps

    Literally, maps. The book has a section early on about China laying claims to expanded areas of the South China Sea, using historical maps as a validation of the claims. Like really old maps. Then Vietnam counters with their own old maps.

    Queery for my international law guysm: Do those kind of documents have standing?
  • YellowSnowYellowSnow Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 35,438 Founders Club
    I'm about half way through. Done with the US and Ruskie maps and almost completed with the Chinese one. @PurpleBaze map is next.

    Our? journey with China has been such a clusterfuck. First, we "open" China further the Cold War wedge between the Soviets and the PRC. This begins the process of the China becoming a major economic power over the coming decades and thus a massive consumer of energy. And now we are back to square one with the Chinese and Russians thick as thieves yet again, albeit for different reasons than the early 1950s.




  • GrundleStiltzkinGrundleStiltzkin Member Posts: 61,499 Standard Supporter
    4. Shoutout to the Container Guy

    "No engine, no wheels, no sails." Not much to say here other than big ups to the guy from Virginia (I think) how invented containerized shipping.

  • 1to392831weretaken1to392831weretaken Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 7,630 Swaye's Wigwam
    Refining guy, so oil and gas adjacent, I guess. My insight into your question comes from both what we see coming into our plant, the difficulties in running it, and also anecdotal insight from my brother in law.

    1.) You are correct that the Dakota shale gas is way too light to run at a high percentage of crude diet. We call it "black IPA" because it's basically naphtha with some black dye added. The "environmentalists" are not wrong in that shipping that shit by rail across the country with our current rail infrastructure (a lot of single-wall cars, for example) is incredibly irresponsible and dangerous. We're rolling giant bombs around the country on old, rickety rail infrastructure. The only other crude I've seen that's in the same ballpark as bakken shale is that Russian Vityaz shit. In both cases, it's basically crude in, naphtha out.

    Interestingly, though, refineries all over are reconfiguring to handle lighter crude diets. We did so in 2017, with a pretty massive capital project. We can run WAY lighter than we used to be able to. Mostly, though, this is to be able to run lighter Canadian pipeline crudes that we get on the relative cheap. Huge moneymaker. We only run domestic shale if it's at a price we can't refuse, as it's still pretty difficult to run. Which leads to...

    2.) Yes, I can totally see that fracking wells are more susceptible to price fluctuations than traditional, large wells. For starters, they're just more expensive to operate. I mentioned ERoEI in another thread. Fracking wells are much lower ERoEI than traditional wells. When margins are lower, it's really boom or bust. Another example of this that I've experienced is Alberta tar sands crude (wanna talk about an ecological disaster...). When oil peaked at over $140 per barrel in 2008 or so, tar sands crude was all the rage, and we were running (PAINFULLY) as much of it as we could. Again, though, I believe this peaked at our plant at something like 17% of diet, as this shit gave us trouble in exactly the opposite direction: all bottoms. When crude is $140 per, and you can get tar sand crude for $90, it's a no-brainer. Then oil drops to normal price. Funny, we don't see much Albian heavy in the diet anymore. I've often wondered how they're doing up there.

    3.) The second anecdotal evidence I have to support the boom or bust theory for fracking wells is the actual boom and bust that my brother in law experienced in North Dakota. He followed the black gold rush over there, worked a pressure testing rig for a while, then borrowed some money and started his own pressure testing business. At his peak, he was rolling five rigs and was killing it, then the Saudis opened the faucet and his business went TU. After selling all of his equipment at a decent discount, he was able to pay off all of his creditors and get out with low six figures to show for his five years over there. Sad story.

    At this point, I can't even remember what question I'm supposed to be answering here, so I'm just going to leave it at this.
  • GrundleStiltzkinGrundleStiltzkin Member Posts: 61,499 Standard Supporter

    Refining guy, so oil and gas adjacent, I guess. My insight into your question comes from both what we see coming into our plant, the difficulties in running it, and also anecdotal insight from my brother in law.

    1.) You are correct that the Dakota shale gas is way too light to run at a high percentage of crude diet. We call it "black IPA" because it's basically naphtha with some black dye added. The "environmentalists" are not wrong in that shipping that shit by rail across the country with our current rail infrastructure (a lot of single-wall cars, for example) is incredibly irresponsible and dangerous. We're rolling giant bombs around the country on old, rickety rail infrastructure. The only other crude I've seen that's in the same ballpark as bakken shale is that Russian Vityaz shit. In both cases, it's basically crude in, naphtha out.

    Interestingly, though, refineries all over are reconfiguring to handle lighter crude diets. We did so in 2017, with a pretty massive capital project. We can run WAY lighter than we used to be able to. Mostly, though, this is to be able to run lighter Canadian pipeline crudes that we get on the relative cheap. Huge moneymaker. We only run domestic shale if it's at a price we can't refuse, as it's still pretty difficult to run. Which leads to...

    2.) Yes, I can totally see that fracking wells are more susceptible to price fluctuations than traditional, large wells. For starters, they're just more expensive to operate. I mentioned ERoEI in another thread. Fracking wells are much lower ERoEI than traditional wells. When margins are lower, it's really boom or bust. Another example of this that I've experienced is Alberta tar sands crude (wanna talk about an ecological disaster...). When oil peaked at over $140 per barrel in 2008 or so, tar sands crude was all the rage, and we were running (PAINFULLY) as much of it as we could. Again, though, I believe this peaked at our plant at something like 17% of diet, as this shit gave us trouble in exactly the opposite direction: all bottoms. When crude is $140 per, and you can get tar sand crude for $90, it's a no-brainer. Then oil drops to normal price. Funny, we don't see much Albian heavy in the diet anymore. I've often wondered how they're doing up there.

    3.) The second anecdotal evidence I have to support the boom or bust theory for fracking wells is the actual boom and bust that my brother in law experienced in North Dakota. He followed the black gold rush over there, worked a pressure testing rig for a while, then borrowed some money and started his own pressure testing business. At his peak, he was rolling five rigs and was killing it, then the Saudis opened the faucet and his business went TU. After selling all of his equipment at a decent discount, he was able to pay off all of his creditors and get out with low six figures to show for his five years over there. Sad story.

    At this point, I can't even remember what question I'm supposed to be answering here, so I'm just going to leave it at this.

    I understood some of that on first pass, will read again. Thanks.
  • 1to392831weretaken1to392831weretaken Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 7,630 Swaye's Wigwam
    edited March 2021

    Refining guy, so oil and gas adjacent, I guess. My insight into your question comes from both what we see coming into our plant, the difficulties in running it, and also anecdotal insight from my brother in law.

    1.) You are correct that the Dakota shale gas is way too light to run at a high percentage of crude diet. We call it "black IPA" because it's basically naphtha with some black dye added. The "environmentalists" are not wrong in that shipping that shit by rail across the country with our current rail infrastructure (a lot of single-wall cars, for example) is incredibly irresponsible and dangerous. We're rolling giant bombs around the country on old, rickety rail infrastructure. The only other crude I've seen that's in the same ballpark as bakken shale is that Russian Vityaz shit. In both cases, it's basically crude in, naphtha out.

    Interestingly, though, refineries all over are reconfiguring to handle lighter crude diets. We did so in 2017, with a pretty massive capital project. We can run WAY lighter than we used to be able to. Mostly, though, this is to be able to run lighter Canadian pipeline crudes that we get on the relative cheap. Huge moneymaker. We only run domestic shale if it's at a price we can't refuse, as it's still pretty difficult to run. Which leads to...

    2.) Yes, I can totally see that fracking wells are more susceptible to price fluctuations than traditional, large wells. For starters, they're just more expensive to operate. I mentioned ERoEI in another thread. Fracking wells are much lower ERoEI than traditional wells. When margins are lower, it's really boom or bust. Another example of this that I've experienced is Alberta tar sands crude (wanna talk about an ecological disaster...). When oil peaked at over $140 per barrel in 2008 or so, tar sands crude was all the rage, and we were running (PAINFULLY) as much of it as we could. Again, though, I believe this peaked at our plant at something like 17% of diet, as this shit gave us trouble in exactly the opposite direction: all bottoms. When crude is $140 per, and you can get tar sand crude for $90, it's a no-brainer. Then oil drops to normal price. Funny, we don't see much Albian heavy in the diet anymore. I've often wondered how they're doing up there.

    3.) The second anecdotal evidence I have to support the boom or bust theory for fracking wells is the actual boom and bust that my brother in law experienced in North Dakota. He followed the black gold rush over there, worked a pressure testing rig for a while, then borrowed some money and started his own pressure testing business. At his peak, he was rolling five rigs and was killing it, then the Saudis opened the faucet and his business went TU. After selling all of his equipment at a decent discount, he was able to pay off all of his creditors and get out with low six figures to show for his five years over there. Sad story.

    At this point, I can't even remember what question I'm supposed to be answering here, so I'm just going to leave it at this.

    I understood some of that on first pass, will read again. Thanks.
    Short glossary:

    1.) ERoEI: Energy Returned on Energy Invested. It's basically a measure of a well's cost efficiency/profitability. How much energy do you have to expend to extract x amount of energy. When you couldn't swing a pickaxe without creating an oil geyser, ERoEI on many wells was well over 100. That's a pretty good return on investment. Many fracking wells are single digit. In other words, they're working with razor thin margins, making them more susceptible to price fluctuations.

    2.) Heavy, light, bottoms, etc.: There are a lot of really good YouTube videos that will give you a basic understanding of how crude distillation works in about 10 minutes. I actually just played hung-over-middle-school-teacher and dialed one up for my trainees last week. To sum it up, raw crude is a mixture of various length hydrocarbon chains with some other crap (sulfur, heavy metals, cancer, etc.) mixed in. You heat it up, pump it to a tall tower with trays at various levels, and chains of similar length tend to settle together on each tray, with the chains getting shorter (lighter material) as you climb the tower. Bottom of your distillation tower will be basically bunker oil (>C40), above that gas oils (C21-C40), diesel (C16-C20), kerosene (C9-C16), then naphtha vapor (C5-C8) mixed with butane/propane/ethane/methane (C4/C3/C2/C1) out the top. These feed stocks are then sent to other units that use catalysts to raise octane or fracture molecules into shorter ones, etc. The main takeaway here is that a refinery is somewhat sensitive to the proportions of these hydrocarbon fractions in the raw crude (the "diet"). Too heavy (high proportion of long-chain hydrocarbons), and you'll overwhelm downstream units like cokers or asphalt plants. Too light, and you'll struggle with, say, tower pressure, furnace duty, and an inability to keep downstream heavy units running. You can't just turn refinery units on and off with a switch based off demand. I'm about to take a unit down for maintenance, for instance, and it'll take two full days to shut down and partially decon.

    Therefore, the most valuable crude to a particular refiner is one that perfectly matches the profile of their refinery. It'll have a Goldilocks ratio of light hydrocarbons and enough bottoms to keep the heavy units running, and what's in the middle happens to perfectly match the pricing structure de jour for finished fuels. Usually, this is accomplished by mixing several cheaper crudes together to hit the sweet spot. Point is, these domestic fracked crudes ain't that. They're too light to be a primary feed source--at least for any of the plants that I'm aware of. This makes them only desirable if they're priced right on the market. And you can find some heavier crude to blend with them at a decent price.


    Edit: Don't take the fractions listed above as gospel. You'll get slightly different numbers thrown at you depending on the source. Particularly as you get heavier (I mean, propane is propane, but things get a little more nebulous when trying to define something like "bunker fuel"). Besides, it's always a blend at every level in the tower, as some lighter and some heavier molecules are mixed in with the target feed stock.
Sign In or Register to comment.