A question we get asked all the time these days is whether or not U.S. crude output has begun to decline yet and if so by how much? We don’t actually think the answer makes a lot of difference to the market - especially when you consider changing imports and inventory. But ever since the OPEC meeting last November (2014) failed to take action to reduce output to support oil prices - market watchers have placed a lot of emphasis on when U.S. shale producers would respond by cutting production. So regardless of the merits of the question we are all living in a marketplace where knowing the “real” state of U.S. production – and whether it is up or down – has become a big deal. To that end today we look at crude production data from the Energy Information Administration (EIA).
The EIA makes a number of estimates of crude oil production for its various weekly, monthly, quarterly and annual publications. We will take a look at three of them today. The first of these is likely the most reliable – namely the EIA monthly crude balance production data. That monthly data is reliable in part because it is published at least three months in arrears (the latest report is for June 2015). And the monthly data just got a little more reliable this summer when EIA changed their collection approach to gather more data direct from producers rather than relying on data published by State agencies and to include more individual states into their data breakdown. The better quality of data in the monthly numbers will certainly help EIA improve their reporting of crude oil production. The big disadvantage of the monthly EIA data for the market is that 3-month lag – which no one used to care about when production just went up every month - but is now a big deal with the eyes of the market looking for turning points. For the record EIA monthly data shows total U.S. crude domestic production topping out in April 2015 at 9.6 MMb/d and then declining by 200 Mb/d in May and a further 100 Mb/d in June 2015.
A second source of production data and one that is potentially more valuable for market watchers looking for signs of lower crude output from shale producers – is the monthly EIA Drilling Productivity Report (DPR – see Every Rig You Take). The latest DPR for September 2015 indicates that overall crude production from 7 major domestic shale basins has been declining since reaching a peak of about 5.6 MMb/d in April 2015 (see blue bars in Figure #1 against the left axis). The DPR says that overall crude production in the 7 basins (Bakken, Permian, Eagle Ford, Niobrara, Utica, Marcellus and Haynesville) fell by 190 Mb/d between April and August 2015 and predicts a further 160 Mb/d decline through October 2015 (pink bars in Figure #1). As we discussed in “Every Rig You Take” the DPR uses drilling activity (number of wells drilled) and historic well decline rates to predict future shale production. Since we know that productivity in these basins is generally improving all the time – this approach (if not adjusted accurately) is likely to be inaccurate because it assumes new wells will only be as good as historic wells. The reality is that “actual declines may be smaller than they appear in the rearview mirror” – in other words actual production is likely to be higher than the DPR predicts. However, the backward looking bias is only going to impact the predictive data in the DPR – the further back you go, the EIA “actual” data (as used in the monthly reports we just discussed) replaces the predictive. Andin this case the DPR does accurately reflect the April 2015 turning point in crude production reported in the EIA monthly report.
About the song
“What Goes Up” by the Alan Parsons Project (Eric Woolfson and Alan Parsons) is a track on the influential concept album “Pyramid” released by this progressive rock band in 1978.
Comments
Thanks so much for this blog. It's understood that you don't think the question about shale productivity trends, particularly in relation to the EIA numbers, is all that important, but "enquiring minds want to know." Thanks for indulging our curiosity.
The EIA weekly energy report is not adjusted in the past. It's just the best guess of the EIA on what is happening right now. But they won't ever go back and adjust their past weekly guesses. In contrast, their other metrics are adjusted in the past. The weekly is nice in that it gives you most recent info (spot the turn when it happens). But it's really hard to look at it as a time series since substantial revisions are normal, but are not shown. Is the second hump a result of oil production going back up or of an adjustment up of Texas production which would also raise the old numbers?
Personally, I think this is the best EIA product for looking at US production:
http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/pet_crd_crpdn_adc_mbblpd_m.htm
(Next release is 30SEP, tomorrow.)
Following comment is from Grant Nülle,
Oil and Gas Economist, U.S. Energy Information Administration, Office of Petroleum, Natural Gas & Biofuels Analysis
I appreciated your article regarding U.S. crude oil production statistics from the EIA. I think you represented the sources, purposes, and characteristics of each quite well. The only thing I want to point out is that, unlike the monthly production numbers, DPR, or Short-term Outlook, the Weekly estimate is not revised retroactively as new/better data becomes available. The weekly data is a snapshot in time of the best available information for a given week- hence why one sees “the hump” you rightly point out. The inter-relationships between the different EIA reports was something addressed by EIA a few months ago as well: http://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.cfm?id=22292