Hi Geoff of Perth,

<< you can add 'Shale Oil' to the known's now:>>

I might just extend to your comment by suggesting that you can indeed add Shale Oil, but you can also add any fossil fuel that is, has or will become commercially viable.

Meaning commercially viable due to technological advances, geopolitical shifts, economic growth, debt reduction, shifting industrial geographic locations, new competition from developing nations and most significant of all, the global collapse of the green energy infrastructure.

I stand by my assessment that “until such time as the market determines just who is going to do what with whom, the energy market will remain chaotic”.

And predominantly fossil fuel based. That’s easy to predict because it has already happened.

Getting back to shale gas & oil.
An interesting statistic, the drilling rig count for the US is down
11.4% in last year.
It does not suggest a healthy shale industry.

"It does not suggest a healthy shale industry."

Maybe a more efficient one with development overtaking drilling.

Sorry Cohenite,

"Maybe a more efficient one with development overtaking drilling."

If you look at the data you will see that the rig count is down because it is uneconomic and has been identified by those in the know as a ponzi scheme, which was identified early on and despite this, investors poured money in for the quick buck return it did (DID) provide, with depletion rates running at 50 to 90 odd percent it is pretty obvious why the rig count is down.

Simple physics not economics.

Geoff

No, unfortunately it means that they are having difficulty raising
funds as most of them are having trouble making money, only partly
because of the low gas price.
BHP Billiton lost $2.5 billion and got out and Chesapeake got itself
and its CEO into trouble with the SEC.

They are getting decline rates up to 80% a year.
THey just cannot increase the rate of drilling fast enough to stand still.
Its the old Red Queen problem.