Is anyone seeing Apache selling gas for basically $0 MCF and/or completely deducting gas value in recent statements? Reeves County, Block 56, T3S
Yes. Happens to many folks when the price of NG goes negative. More than Reeves County. Welcome to the roller coaster.
Thanks for the info. I was wondering why my royalties had declined in the last 2 months.
Plant products were the only things generating value on my last check. There were deductions from that for negative value natural gas. It was my lowest royalty check ever.
This might be behind a paywall, but essentially outlines some of reasons. One of them is a major pipeline maintenance issue in the area.
2 Likes
Your current check should be April 24 actuals (prod vols/sales). Waha gas pricing (gas hub near Coyanosa) was negative for about half of March and all of April. That’s how it is, any disruption and Waha will crater, and it doesn’t take much to crater to negative when HHub was running sub $2
Waha is going to be living on the edge until Matterhorn PL comes on 3-4Q24, then it will be ok for a year or so with the added capacity, then that will fill up, then it will be on the edge, then there will be more pipe added, etc etc.
1 Like
Our checks were $0 two months in a row. Need more pipelines out of the Permian! I have also wondered why they don’t do targeted tax abatements and grants to gas producing areas to encourage more adoption on CNG by truck, bus, and car fleets. Another short sighted impact of anti-pipeline and leave it in the ground mentality that actually puts more pressure on operators to flare and waste gas.
T Boone tried and tried…need someone to pick up the legacy. In Thailand right now, where most taxis and long haul trucks run on CNG. Even some tuk-tuks run CNG.
So did Aubrey McClendon. The tree huggers don’t get it and neither do the clowns in the current administration.
Yes, the Permian definitely needs more pipelines. But the Feds aren’t doing anything to stop these intrastate pipelines from being built. The anti-pipeline efforts have greater impacts on the interstate pipelines where the Feds have more power.
I blame the Railroad Commission (RRC) and its unwillingness to actually regulate the industry. They approve every flaring permit. If the RRC would tell the operators that they can’t flare from a new well at all - or for no more than a month or two after it begins producing - then you better believe these operators and pipeline companies would build out this additional pipeline infrastructure needed to get the gas out. But instead of doing that, the RRC just keeps granting every single flaring permit that the operators apply for. When it is cheaper for them to flare than build out the infrastructure to transport it out, then they flare.
2 Likes
Eric- Agree that the economics of building pipelines need some help from the RRC. They need to deny permits for new oil wells unless they have dedicated pipeline capacity for the gas because it is the associated gas with oil wells that is flooding the capacity.
1 Like
Leases could require the mineral owner to be paid at a certain price all gas "flaired’ by a certified meter at the location on the drill site where the gas is flaired from
This topic was automatically closed after 90 days. New replies are no longer allowed.