Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Big Dog's Boom Boom Room -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: cyesp who wrote (123360)	8/17/2009 12:19:32 AM
From: Salt'n'Peppa	2 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 206325

cyesp, the article addresses hyperbolic decline and his premise is that decline is catastrophic, not hyperbolic. "The reason is clear: most wells do not maintain the hyperbolic decline projection indicated from their first months or years of production. Production rates commonly exhibit abrupt, catastrophic departures from hyperbolic decline as early as 12-18 months into the production cycle..." Thus, the reason for his 30% lower estimated EUR. I have a very good friend who spends his career looking at exactly this stuff. He is in agreement with the article and has been saying, ever since the media frenzy over shale gas began, that they are over-estimating shale gas potential. There is definitely a lot of gas. Nobody can dispute that. The economics of the situation are what is in question. Cheers, S&P