Crawford: Brownwood Preparing for Oil Boom Benefits

People are asking when "it" is going to "hit," but based on oilfield activity to the west, it appears "it" has already "hit" — and Brownwood, while not in the middle of the current oil boom, is preparing for the results.

That was the message of Brownwood Economic Development Director Emily Crawford, who gave a brief report to city council members Tuesday about the city's presence at last week's Southwest Energy Summit in Sweetwater.

Crawford and Brownwood Area Chamber of Commerce Marketing Manager Ray Tipton manned a booth at the two-day summit on behalf of Brownwood. The summit included sessions on oil and natural gas, wind energy, nuclear energy, workforce and regional infrastructure, transportation and coal.

Brownwood's message at the summit: the city has land available for development, it is centrally located to most active oil and gas fields in the state and it has existing industries in the energy sectors.

"We recognize although we don't have a lot of wells being drilled or explored, we are actually geographically in the center of the state and we are able to reach most of the active oil and gas fields from about a three- hour proximity," Crawford told council members.

"We want to let suppliers and service companies that would like to service more than one of the clay shales or oil fields that they can do that from Brownwood and be geographically in the center."

Crawford said it was "very good for us to hear fact versus fiction of what's really happening in the Permian Basin and the Cline Shale."

Snyder and Sweetwater have developed new industrial parks within the past year, and Sweetwater is getting a rail extension, Crawford said; Snyder is getting five new hotels and has broken ground on a workforce housing project for 1,000 workers.

"So there really is a tremendous amount of activity happening just to the west of us," Crawford said. "People continue to ask when is 'it' going to 'hit' and I would say that 'it' has already 'hit' because of this activity that's already going on.

"However, we don't know how big it will get and how far it will reach. So we will continue to poise Brownwood for our existing businesses and for new businesses to relocate."

Mayor Stephen Haynes asked if it is believed the Cline Shale will extend into Brown County.

Runnels County has seen some drilling permits, but because the Cline Shale is large and has not been fully explored, "we really don't know how far east it will go," Crawford said.

She said she's been told the shale is not likely to extend to Brown County, but the activity in Runnels County "brings it even closer to Brown County."

There could be an influx of oilfield workers who are looking for housing in Brownwood, Crawford said. "A person driving 90 miles a day to commute is not unheard of," she said. "We are looking at attempting to get more of a housing inventory so that we can be ready if indeed that does happen."

Crawford said a group had done a study on the impact of wages and jobs created in the Eagle Ford Shale, and it is hoped the group will do a similar study on the Cline Shale. 

Copyright 2013 Brownwood Bulletin, American Consolidated Media Distributed by Newsbank, Inc. All Rights Reserved

Generated by readers, the comments included herein do not reflect the views and opinions of Rigzone. All comments are subject to editorial review. Off-topic, inappropriate or insulting comments will be removed.

View the original article here

Crawford: Brownwood Preparing for Oil Boom Benefits

People are asking when "it" is going to "hit," but based on oilfield activity to the west, it appears "it" has already "hit" — and Brownwood, while not in the middle of the current oil boom, is preparing for the results.

That was the message of Brownwood Economic Development Director Emily Crawford, who gave a brief report to city council members Tuesday about the city's presence at last week's Southwest Energy Summit in Sweetwater.

Crawford and Brownwood Area Chamber of Commerce Marketing Manager Ray Tipton manned a booth at the two-day summit on behalf of Brownwood. The summit included sessions on oil and natural gas, wind energy, nuclear energy, workforce and regional infrastructure, transportation and coal.

Brownwood's message at the summit: the city has land available for development, it is centrally located to most active oil and gas fields in the state and it has existing industries in the energy sectors.

"We recognize although we don't have a lot of wells being drilled or explored, we are actually geographically in the center of the state and we are able to reach most of the active oil and gas fields from about a three- hour proximity," Crawford told council members.

"We want to let suppliers and service companies that would like to service more than one of the clay shales or oil fields that they can do that from Brownwood and be geographically in the center."

Crawford said it was "very good for us to hear fact versus fiction of what's really happening in the Permian Basin and the Cline Shale."

Snyder and Sweetwater have developed new industrial parks within the past year, and Sweetwater is getting a rail extension, Crawford said; Snyder is getting five new hotels and has broken ground on a workforce housing project for 1,000 workers.

"So there really is a tremendous amount of activity happening just to the west of us," Crawford said. "People continue to ask when is 'it' going to 'hit' and I would say that 'it' has already 'hit' because of this activity that's already going on.

"However, we don't know how big it will get and how far it will reach. So we will continue to poise Brownwood for our existing businesses and for new businesses to relocate."

Mayor Stephen Haynes asked if it is believed the Cline Shale will extend into Brown County.

Runnels County has seen some drilling permits, but because the Cline Shale is large and has not been fully explored, "we really don't know how far east it will go," Crawford said.

She said she's been told the shale is not likely to extend to Brown County, but the activity in Runnels County "brings it even closer to Brown County."

There could be an influx of oilfield workers who are looking for housing in Brownwood, Crawford said. "A person driving 90 miles a day to commute is not unheard of," she said. "We are looking at attempting to get more of a housing inventory so that we can be ready if indeed that does happen."

Crawford said a group had done a study on the impact of wages and jobs created in the Eagle Ford Shale, and it is hoped the group will do a similar study on the Cline Shale. 

Copyright 2013 Brownwood Bulletin, American Consolidated Media Distributed by Newsbank, Inc. All Rights Reserved

Generated by readers, the comments included herein do not reflect the views and opinions of Rigzone. All comments are subject to editorial review. Off-topic, inappropriate or insulting comments will be removed.

View the original article here

Industry Groups Refute Concerns Over US LNG Export Benefits

Industry associations American Petroleum Institute (API) and the Western Energy Alliance (WEA) jointly called for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) to approve applications for U.S. liquefied natural gas (LNG) export terminals beyond the one application that has been approved so far.

In a conference call with reporters Monday, API and WEA officials countered comments by proponents of LNG export restrictions that exporting natural gas would drive up domestic gas prices and put U.S. manufacturers at a disadvantage, arguing that the United States was capable of expanding gas production to meet demand.

The call came as the public comment period ended for DOE's 2012 Liquefied Natural Gas export Cumulative Impact Study, conducted by NERA Economic Consulting for the U.S. Energy Information Administration. Both groups decided to take the opportunity to reply to comments received so far on the study.

"In analyzing the comments, we found none that provided sufficient credible information to undermine the study's basic premise that the overall U.S .economy would greatly benefit from LNG exports, nor any that convincingly make the case for DOE to deny export terminal licenses," WEA said in a Feb. 22 letter to DOE.

Officials noted that expanding U.S. production would benefit consumers by creating new jobs and economic growth for the United States Recent data shows an average 213,000 new jobs per year could be created from 2015 to 2035 and $700 billion in growth could be created in the chemicals and manufacturing industries due to increased natural gas production, Erik Milito, director of upstream and industry operations with API, said.

The increase in U.S. natural gas supply thanks to the shale boom undercuts the main argument of proponents for restricting exports, which is that DOE used outdated supply data in its analysis that said allowing exports would be beneficial, Milito noted.

"The most recent data from DOE confirms that supplies will be very robust. This implies that there is more than sufficient natural gas to meet domestic and export needs with little adverse impact on prices – and that the net economic benefits of allowing exports are even greater than earlier though," Milito added. "The critics simply didn't acknowledge what an energy juggernaut the shale gas revolution has become and that it is still growing.

Further, the DOE study focuses rigidly on production and price increases, with not enough study into the ability of producers to increase capacity. While gas activity has fallen off in certain dry gas basins such as the San Juan, Powder and Green River basins, more associated gas is being produced with oil in the Bakken and Permian plays, meaning that gas production can be increased in response to demand and keep gas prices down, said Kathleen Sgamma, vice president of government and public affairs with WEA, a group that represents over 400 exploration and production companies, mostly smaller producers with less than 15 employees.

Nineteen projects have either been approved or proposed for U.S. public lands that could create jobs and drilling activity if they are allowed to move forward. These projects also could substantially add natural gas production in the western United States, said Sgamma, who pointed out that the most recent study used data that underestimated U.S. gas production.

However, United States should take advantage of its "first-mover" advantage with the abundant shale gas supplies now available and move forward with LNG exports before the window of opportunity runs out, Sgamma commented.

"Other nations are starting to invest in American-developed horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing technology to develop their own reserves. Now is the time for the Obama administration to approve LNG export terminal licenses, rather than continuing to delay job creation and economic growth."

To date, DOE has approved one LNG export application for the Sabine Pass project in Louisiana. The facility is scheduled to begin exporting LNG in 2015. Milito said he believes that the United States won't see "unlimited and unfettered" exports, noting that the market will impose natural gas limitations on which projects moved forward following approval by DOE.

Last week, a group of U.S. senators including Jim Inhofe (R-Oklahoma), Mary Landrieu (D-La.) and Mark Begich (D-Alaska) urged DOE Secretary Steven Chu to support the NERA Economic Consulting Report on U.S. LNG exports, rebutting comments filed that expressed concerns over whether U.S. LNG exports would be in the U.S. public interest.

"For the United States to be a hub of cheap energy, it is imperative to pursue government policies that allow the private sector to make every energy resource as abundant, accessible and as versatile in its consumption as possible," the senators wrote in a Feb. 21 letter. "Achieving this objective requires that producers be allowed access to markets, and that consumers be allowed access to resources.

"Providing this access without bias for one source over another will encourage more widespread production of all energy resources. This will benefit the economy, as it will be accompanied by increased economic activity, job creation, and more widespread energy choices," the senators commented in the letter.

Proponents of restricting U.S. LNG exports include some U.S. manufacturing and petrochemical companies who argue that exporting gas would raise U.S. domestic prices, putting these companies at a competitive disadvantage versus companies from other countries. Some environmental groups who are opposed to hydraulic fracturing also have expressed opposition to U.S. LNG exports, saying that exporting gas would result in increased hydraulic fracturing activity and that NERA did not factor in environmental damage into the costs of allowing LNG exports.

Karen Boman has more than 10 years of experience covering the upstream oil and gas sector. Email Karen at kboman@rigzone.com.

Generated by readers, the comments included herein do not reflect the views and opinions of Rigzone. All comments are subject to editorial review. Off-topic, inappropriate or insulting comments will be removed.

View the original article here

Industry Groups Refute Concerns Over US LNG Export Benefits

Industry associations American Petroleum Institute (API) and the Western Energy Alliance (WEA) jointly called for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) to approve applications for U.S. liquefied natural gas (LNG) export terminals beyond the one application that has been approved so far.

In a conference call with reporters Monday, API and WEA officials countered comments by proponents of LNG export restrictions that exporting natural gas would drive up domestic gas prices and put U.S. manufacturers at a disadvantage, arguing that the United States was capable of expanding gas production to meet demand.

The call came as the public comment period ended for DOE's 2012 Liquefied Natural Gas export Cumulative Impact Study, conducted by NERA Economic Consulting for the U.S. Energy Information Administration. Both groups decided to take the opportunity to reply to comments received so far on the study.

"In analyzing the comments, we found none that provided sufficient credible information to undermine the study's basic premise that the overall U.S .economy would greatly benefit from LNG exports, nor any that convincingly make the case for DOE to deny export terminal licenses," WEA said in a Feb. 22 letter to DOE.

Officials noted that expanding U.S. production would benefit consumers by creating new jobs and economic growth for the United States Recent data shows an average 213,000 new jobs per year could be created from 2015 to 2035 and $700 billion in growth could be created in the chemicals and manufacturing industries due to increased natural gas production, Erik Milito, director of upstream and industry operations with API, said.

The increase in U.S. natural gas supply thanks to the shale boom undercuts the main argument of proponents for restricting exports, which is that DOE used outdated supply data in its analysis that said allowing exports would be beneficial, Milito noted.

"The most recent data from DOE confirms that supplies will be very robust. This implies that there is more than sufficient natural gas to meet domestic and export needs with little adverse impact on prices – and that the net economic benefits of allowing exports are even greater than earlier though," Milito added. "The critics simply didn't acknowledge what an energy juggernaut the shale gas revolution has become and that it is still growing.

Further, the DOE study focuses rigidly on production and price increases, with not enough study into the ability of producers to increase capacity. While gas activity has fallen off in certain dry gas basins such as the San Juan, Powder and Green River basins, more associated gas is being produced with oil in the Bakken and Permian plays, meaning that gas production can be increased in response to demand and keep gas prices down, said Kathleen Sgamma, vice president of government and public affairs with WEA, a group that represents over 400 exploration and production companies, mostly smaller producers with less than 15 employees.

Nineteen projects have either been approved or proposed for U.S. public lands that could create jobs and drilling activity if they are allowed to move forward. These projects also could substantially add natural gas production in the western United States, said Sgamma, who pointed out that the most recent study used data that underestimated U.S. gas production.

However, United States should take advantage of its "first-mover" advantage with the abundant shale gas supplies now available and move forward with LNG exports before the window of opportunity runs out, Sgamma commented.

"Other nations are starting to invest in American-developed horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing technology to develop their own reserves. Now is the time for the Obama administration to approve LNG export terminal licenses, rather than continuing to delay job creation and economic growth."

To date, DOE has approved one LNG export application for the Sabine Pass project in Louisiana. The facility is scheduled to begin exporting LNG in 2015. Milito said he believes that the United States won't see "unlimited and unfettered" exports, noting that the market will impose natural gas limitations on which projects moved forward following approval by DOE.

Last week, a group of U.S. senators including Jim Inhofe (R-Oklahoma), Mary Landrieu (D-La.) and Mark Begich (D-Alaska) urged DOE Secretary Steven Chu to support the NERA Economic Consulting Report on U.S. LNG exports, rebutting comments filed that expressed concerns over whether U.S. LNG exports would be in the U.S. public interest.

"For the United States to be a hub of cheap energy, it is imperative to pursue government policies that allow the private sector to make every energy resource as abundant, accessible and as versatile in its consumption as possible," the senators wrote in a Feb. 21 letter. "Achieving this objective requires that producers be allowed access to markets, and that consumers be allowed access to resources.

"Providing this access without bias for one source over another will encourage more widespread production of all energy resources. This will benefit the economy, as it will be accompanied by increased economic activity, job creation, and more widespread energy choices," the senators commented in the letter.

Proponents of restricting U.S. LNG exports include some U.S. manufacturing and petrochemical companies who argue that exporting gas would raise U.S. domestic prices, putting these companies at a competitive disadvantage versus companies from other countries. Some environmental groups who are opposed to hydraulic fracturing also have expressed opposition to U.S. LNG exports, saying that exporting gas would result in increased hydraulic fracturing activity and that NERA did not factor in environmental damage into the costs of allowing LNG exports.

Karen Boman has more than 10 years of experience covering the upstream oil and gas sector. Email Karen at kboman@rigzone.com.

Generated by readers, the comments included herein do not reflect the views and opinions of Rigzone. All comments are subject to editorial review. Off-topic, inappropriate or insulting comments will be removed.

View the original article here