Welcome, Guest | Register or Login
Jim on Facebook Jim on Twitter Jim's YouTube Channel Jim on Google+

Important Stuff

Archives

Stuff Jim Reads

There’s a U.S. oil boom–in North Dakota–and here’s how to invest in it

posted on October 8, 2010 at 8:30 am
Print This Post
Nat_gas

It looks like the biggest winner from the boon in natural gas production from shale formations in the United States will be the U.S. onshore oil industry.

Thanks to new techniques pioneered in the late 1970s to extract natural gas from tight shale formations from Wyoming to Texas to Arkansas and then east to New York and Pennsylvania, onshore U.S. natural gas production has soared. From 2007 to 2008, a period when production from shales took off, natural gas production from these formations increased by 71%, according to the Energy Information Administration.

Thanks to that booming U.S. supply—and an abundance of cheap natural gas on international markets– and a deep economic recession that surge in natural gas production hasn’t resulted in huge profits for natural gas producers. The price of natural gas trading on the NYMEX (New York Mercantile Exchange) has plunged to $3.87 per million BTUs (British Thermal Units). That’s down from a high of almost $14 in late 2005 and from $9 as recently as recently as August 2008. Producers such as Chesapeake Energy (CHK) and Ultra Petroleum (UPL) fell into the red in 209.

But the same production techniques developed to release natural gas from shale formations are producing what promises to be a very profitable boom in U.S. onshore oil production. And one that’s just getting started in places such as the Bakken share formation in the Williston Basin of North Dakota, Montana, and Saskatchewan. A 2008 U.S. Geologic Survey report put the amount of recoverable oil within the Bakken shale formation at 3 to 4.3 billion barrels. That’s roughly 15% to 20% of total U.S. proved reserves. Production from the Bakken share has gained North Dakota a slot as the fourth largest oil producing state.

That’s a lot of oil in terms of U.S. production, but it’s not enough to drop the global price of oil. At $70 a barrel producers in the Williston Basin are quite profitable, thank you.

Let me dig a little deeper into the oil shale story and then suggest some ways to invest in it.

The oil industry discovered oil in the Bakken formation way back in 1951. But until the natural gas industry pioneered technology to tap natural gas trapped in dense shale formations, oil companies couldn’t get at the oil.

The Bakken formation consists of two layers of shale with a middle layer of dolomite, another sedimentary rock. The shale has natural vertical fractures and early drilling try to run conventional vertical wells into these fractures. That didn’t turn out to be very effective in extracting oil since the shale swells when exposed to drilling fluids, sealing the fractures, and iron pyrite in the shales produced irreparable well damage in some cases.

New technologies borrowed from natural gas wells in other shale formations use horizontal drilling to tap into oil. Horizontal wells can reach thousands of feet of oil reservoir rock that may be in a layer no more than 140 feet thick. Using hydraulic fracturing technology can increase the flow by creating factures that let the oil seep toward the well.

All this certainly seems to work. For example, on October 4 Brigham Exploration (BEXP) announced the completion of its Rough Rider Three Forks well with an early 24-peak flow rate of about 2,356 barrels of oil equivalent. The company has now completed 36 Bakken and Three Fork wells in North Dakota with an average 24-hour peak flow rate of about 2,684 barrels of oil equivalent.

This isn’t to say that everything is going to be smooth sailing in the Williston Basin for oil producers. The big problem is water—or actually the lack of it. Producing oil from shale requires about four barrels of fresh water versus the one barrel of water required to produce a barrel of oil from conventional sources. That requires oil producers in the Williston Basin to employ a constant caravan of trucks to supply millions of gallons to each well site where it is then pumped down the well bore at pressures high enough to fracture the shale. The Bismarck Tribune estimates that producing oil and gas from the Bakken shales will use up to 5.5 billion gallons of water a year.

North Dakota isn’t exactly swimming in water. Average annual rainfall in the state ranges from 13 to 20 inches a year. That’s a lot in comparison to the 5 inches that fall in the Mojave Desert each year. It’s roughly equal to the 15 inches that fall on Los Angeles in a year. New York City gets an average of 43 inches.

Interested in buying into the Bakken boom anyway? There are two different ways to go.

First, you can buy shares of a relatively small, relatively pure play oil exploration and production company in the Williston Basin.

Brigham Exploration (BEXP) is an example of the kind of company I mean. As of December 31, 2009, the company had 282,584 net leasehold acres in the Williston Basin. Shifting the majority of its drilling operations from the Anadarko Basin, West Texas, and the onshore Gulf Coast to Williston beginning in 2007, the company drilled 53 wells in Williston in 2008 and 54 in 2009. Total investment in drilling, leases, and seismic exploration came to $220 million through the end of 2009.

The company has only 117 million shares outstanding and a market capitalization of just $2.3 billion. Revenue came to $70 million in 2009 and is projected to hit $778 million in 2010. Projected earnings per share for 2010 are 45 cents and 80 cents for 2011. The Wall Street consensus alls for 47% average annual earnings growth over the next five years.

Other similar pure plays in oil production from the Bakken shales include Whiting Petroleum (WLL) with 88,000 acres in the Williston Basin and a market cap of $5.1 billion, Continental Resources (CLR) with leases in both the Three Forks and Middle Bakken formations and a market cap of $8.3 billion, and Oasis Petroleum (OAS) with a market cap of $1.94 billion. Oasis Petroleum has only been public since June 2010 but it does hold 292,000 net leasehold acres in the Williston Basin.

Second, you can buy pick and shovel companies—that is shares of the companies that are leasing rigs and providing services to these producers.

The last year has seen an amazing resurgence of land-based drilling in the United States. As of the end of September 2010, the number of drilling rigs working on land in the United States and Canada had climbed by 641 to 1,625 from the end of September in 2009, according to Baker Hughes (BHI). The largest number of those rigs, 718, are working in Texas, home of the Ford, Barnett and Haynesville natural gas shales. That’s up from just 328 rigs a year ago.

Louisiana is next with 178 rigs.

And North Dakota is third with 135 rigs.

Contrast to the trend in the offshore Gulf of Mexico where there were 32 rigs working before the BP disaster and 19 working now.

Drilling and oil service companies with good exposure to land-based U.S. drilling include Weatherford International (WFT), Basic Energy Services (BAS), and Lufkin Industries (LUFK).

Many of these stocks trade near 52-week highs, but that’s what happens when a boom psychology is in the saddle. Current Congressional investigation into high-pressure hydraulic fracturing in the natural gas shales and its effect on water supplies could put a dent in some of these stocks—if investors ever come to believe that Congressional Democrats have the votes to enact new regulations on onshore drilling.

That might give you a chance to get in at a lower price. So might a rally in the U.S. dollar. Is that on your list of likely events in 2010 or 2011?

Full disclosure: I don’t own shares in any company mentioned in this post in my personal portfolio.

Related Posts

No related posts.

12 comments

  • rolfer1 on 8 October 2010

    Jim, and exactly why do we want to invest in nat gas when the tremendous supply will keep prices low for years to come? (Not to mention the potentially devastating effect on potable water supply aquifers and irresponsible use of, as you say, billions of gallons of water to extract the gas.)

    I certainly do agree with your implication that while Democrats may regulate an industry for the public good, Republicans will not.

  • surfsnowtrail on 8 October 2010

    Jim,
    It isn’t just congress that is investigating high pressure fracturing. This is an issue being forced on EPA to review. There is a great article on this issue at this link:

    http://www.martenlaw.com/newsletter/20100917-new-epa-fracking-study

    With expansion in Marcellus using fracking, one incident in that densly populated area will put the skids on fracking and drop these driller share prices like bricks.

  • ifxeyes on 8 October 2010

    rolfer1, Jim wasn’t touting the nat gas production from these wells, but the oil. And, as far as regulation goes…you can be assured that if the Democrats have their way in regulating and harming ANY and ALL aspects of oil production in this country, they will! It’s their clear record of doing so.

  • surfsnowtrail on 8 October 2010

    ifxeyes,
    If there is an incident in Pennsylvania, you can bet that the Republicans will be right on the regulation bandwagon. They are not going to give up that swing state for future elections.

    Also, do you really believe that the Dems aren’t in the pocket of big oil? Interesting to see that the propaganda is working…

  • ruters78 on 8 October 2010

    sursnowtrail,

    There have been incidents in PA. Do a google search on Dimock, Pa. Not sure if it’s altered the republican mindset, but it was republicans who pushed through regulatory exemptions for oil & gas companies in the Safe Water Drinking Act and the Energy Policy Act.

  • Cheap South on 8 October 2010

    If the GOP (Gas Oil Prostitutes) make gains in Congress next month, we’ll frack all the way to the bank. Who needs fresh water after all??

  • zagfan on 8 October 2010

    RE: Jim’s comment that “North Dakota isn’t exactly swimming in water”: I wouldn’t judge ND’s water availability by its annual rainfall. The reservoir of water backed up by the Garrison Dam (north of Bismarck) is huge and not that far from the Bakken gas and oilfields. The source of this water is the Missouri River headwaters in Montana. Whether or not permitting is feasible (or allready in place?), I would welcome comments from others. If the oil is needed bad enough, the water should not be a stumbling block. ND’s government has generally been pro-development for decades. They are working to diversify their historically heavy reliance on agriculture. I would watch the stocks mentioned in Jim’s article for a better entry point though.

  • Run26.2 on 11 October 2010

    @zagfan… just b/c there is a lot of water in the Garrison Dam does not mean that it is available to anyone, including oil exploration. I’m not familiar with ND water law, but in MT you must have a water right to use water. The water that is in Garrison may already be “taken” by those downstream with more senior rights or even those further down the Missouri River in other states. The Missouri River basin is not as ugly as the Colorado, but there is tension in low water years to keep barges flowing in the Missouri before it dumps into the Missiissippi. Which means that dams in MT and ND are forced to increase flows when it may not be in their interest to do so (they are managed by Bureau of Reclamation).

  • svennader on 11 October 2010

    The water availability issue is a challenge that is being worked out. There currently is a pipeline to service the prodigious fracturing water needs of western North Dakota (ND) from the Lake Sakakawea (garrison reservoir) being built. A bigger problem has been the ability to get the oil out of the state. North Dakota does not have the pipeline capability to transport the oil but that is being worked out as well. Another large field that is completely untapped is located in Bottineau County. ND does not have the electrical power and other infrastructure to tap the Borrineau area yet. ND is working their way up the list of oil producing states – California here we come. ND will ultimately become the third largest oil producing state after Alaska and Texas provided regulations don’t prevent the further development of the frac-fields. IN ND fracturing has been very-very safe with very few problems. With the changes to climate ND is wetter than 50 years ago-the averages are closer to 20 inches – not 13. The frac process does also take alot a special sand – another challenge.

    All in all the process is very safe and the companies involved have been very consciencious about reclamation. For the sake of the US, lets hope that Washington does not over-regulate the development of our resources. I have seen the movie Gasland which paints a very negative picture of fracturing. It does not present a fair or balanced look. Cheap South – you are wrong. Western ND has very little groundwater and the little that is there is very poor and sometimes contaminated with natural occuring arsenic. The risk of ruined wells is possible but minimal-it just hasn’t been as issue.

    I am not certian which companies are making the grade. Haliburton is investing heavily in the state with a new large development within Minot. Baker Hughes, FMC tech, Nabors, Oneok Schlumberger, Marathon – there all here. I am hopeful that MDU (one of my holdings) will be able to improve their production within the state.

  • Run26.2 on 11 October 2010

    svennader… you are exactly right on the lack of facilities to get the oil out of this region. The proposed Keystone XL pipleline by TransCanada may help if the “onramps” are constructed for Bakken crude. This is a huge constraint since this causes this oil, at least in Montana, to be heavily discounted, I believe they were only getting +/-$40/barrell.

    Here is more on the Keystone XL:http://billingsgazette.com/news/state-and-regional/montana/article_8127fcaa-2707-11df-a368-001cc4c03286.html

  • JerseyJack on 11 October 2010

    Jim,

    Acreage in the Williston Basin for WLL is almost 880,000 acres, not the 88,000 you mention … assume it was a typo.

  • powjak on 1 November 2010

    Jim, what is your take on NOG. On the 3 Mo chart, it is doing better than any of the Cos you list.

Post a comment

You need to login in order to post a comment.
 

Comments that include profanity, or personal attacks, or antisocial behavior such as "spamming" or "trolling," or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. We will take steps to block users who violate any of our terms of use. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.



Jubak in your Inbox

Get Email Alerts

Sign up now and download Jim's latest Special Report

Get the RSS feed

Quick Quote

Quotes provided by Yahoo! Finance and are delayed up to 20 minutes.