Eagle Ford Shale Providing Oil Production Boost

Michael Giberson

Much of the talk about hydraulic fracturing of shale has been about natural gas, but the method is being used to develop oil shale as well. The New York Times is bringing the news to the east coast, “Shale Boom in Texas Could Increase U.S. Oil Output,” and Texas newspapers have been covering the story too, “Drilling, hydraulic fracturing used in Eagle Ford shale.”

The Texas oil and gas regulator hopes to stay on top of developing issues in the Eagle Ford by forming a task force with producers, oil field services firms, landowners, environmental groups and area politicians. (I guess this is tacit admission that they were surprised by some of the backlash and other developments in the Barnett Shale area in north Texas. The Eagle Ford is much less densely populated, which will reduce some potential conflicts, though water issues will be big in the arid region.)

2 thoughts on “Eagle Ford Shale Providing Oil Production Boost

  1. “As evidence mounts that fracking poses risks to water supplies, the federal government and regulators in various states are considering tighter regulations on it.”

    I really admire the objectivity of the NYT’s news reporting. (sarc off)

  2. The Texas paper article (online at Chron.com) focuses on new jobs and tax revenues, but the story is the new oil expected to flow over the next 20-30 years across some six million acres. The article quotes sources expecting 20,000-30,000 wells to be drilled, ultimately producing up to ten billion barrels of oil.

    The Railroad Commission of Texas maintains a webpage on Eagle Ford (http://www.rrc.state.tx.us/eagleford/index.php). Oil production jumped from 308 thousand barrels in 2009 to over 3 million barrels in 2010. January and February combined production is 614 thousand barrels. This map shows the Eagle Ford Shale Play size, and current producing oil and gas wells: http://www.eia.gov/oil_gas/rpd/shaleusa9.pdf (Natural gas production quadrupled from 2009 to 2010 to nearly 80 billion cubic feet.)

Comments are closed.