RE:RE:Nat gas as a transition fuelsome here may like this post from the village,
"Natural Gas being "green" is gaining steam again.
And I'll post this for Naamkat: Got your TOU? :)"
Indeed I do, but proportionately less TOU currently than Crew only because of higher leverage to the NEBC lands, which are preeminent.
I guess this is as good a time as any to provide some of the geological information I've been alluding to about the NEBC Montney.
The Montney is over 30,000 mi2 (I think I wrongly wrote over 10,000 mi2 a couple days ago) and with current estimates has almost 450 trillion ft3 of recoverable natural gas (that's almost double the potential reserves of Qatar's North Dome field, the world's largest conventional, liquids-rich NG field, but it will ultimately be much more as technology improves EUR from OGIP in the 3-5,400 TCF range, recovery currently being assumed as only approx. 11%) plus approx. 14.5 bbl NG liquids. Evidently due to a generous impulse from God, condensate constitutes an unusually high proportion of liquids (which is fortuitous for Canajun NG producers because, unlike the US where condie usually suffers from a substantial discount to WTI and Brent, in Canada it occasionally trades at a premium to WTI/Edmonton).
Just to illustrate the benefit, from 2018 to 2020 when NEBC producers laboured under unusually low NG prices (often below $1.50/mcf CDN for long stretches outside winter) Crew Energy gained in the range of $.40-50/mcf (depending on product pricing which has improved dramatically, well above the increase in oil pricing thanks to two new export terminals targeting Asia which were commissioned on tidewater (in Prince Rupert, BC) in the last 3 years) from high heat value NG (a.k.a. high-liquids, C2-C5+) which frankly kept the lights on during this uncomfortable period. (Others like Storm, Kelt and Painted Pony suffered and benefited from the same phenomena).
Some of the basic geology reports are getting a bit long in the tooth (the depicted drilling activity and land accumulation are woefully out of date) but some of you may find this information interesting. The important takeaway is that Montney formation thickness and pressure increase as you drill from the northeast edge to the southwest. As does depth, so wells are more expensive to the west and liquids saturation falls off as the kitchen heats up.
But the combination of increased formation thickness (200-300m being common in western NEBC, 100-150m being more prevalent in the AB Deep Basin and eastwards) and pressure (there is a meandering overpressure line running from just east of Fort St. John northwest to Conroy where formation pressure exceeds the natural pressure gradient cased by the weight of rock above) lead to much greater NG resources.
In fact, on the Western margin, the Montney can reach thicknesses as high as 500m (almost 1600') that has a commensurate impact on OGIP. So much so that the OGIP per section is startlingly immense as you approach the Rockies just east of where the Montney outcrops (shown on many of the maps). Unfortunately, I couldn't find the 10+ year old report I remember well that showed resources of 250-300 bcf/section in this area near where Crew has some of its dry-NG lands (one of these days I'll find it and post as a follow-up).
Anyhow, Crew has the largest remaining Montney land block not held by an intermediate (e.g.: CNQ, OVV or TOU) or a major (e.g.: Shell or Petronas). It is developing significant scarcity value with Canada LNG just over the horizon, and the declaration (creeping or overt, it makes no difference) of NG as a "green" or "green transition" energy is going to make it much easier for the craven cowards at companies like Shell to increase the admittedly slow pace of development (had common sense and economics been the only factors in play, Canada LNG would have been starting up just about now, but of course, they weren't).
Regards,
Naamkat