IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v64y2014icp134-140.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Production costs of global conventional and unconventional petroleum

Author

Listed:
  • Aguilera, Roberto F.

Abstract

Concerns about the costs of developing oil and gas from conventional and unconventional formations have led many commentators to assume that increasing prices are in the offing and may be a limiting factor for economic growth. Historically, production costs have fluctuated as influenced by the cost-increasing effects of depletion versus the cost-reducing effects of technological progress. This paper aims to review several methods for assessing current and long-term costs. Despite the uncertainty of such estimation, evidence shows that production costs in the foreseeable future might not increase dramatically and actually could decrease as petroleum development methods improve and additional supplies come online. Recent examples include the commercially viable production of unconventional oil and gas resources that has kept energy prices contained.

Suggested Citation

  • Aguilera, Roberto F., 2014. "Production costs of global conventional and unconventional petroleum," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 134-140.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:64:y:2014:i:c:p:134-140
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2013.07.118
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421513007763
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Aguilera, Roberto F. & Ripple, Ronald D., 2012. "Technological progress and the availability of European oil and gas resources," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 387-392.
    2. Rubin, Edward S. & Yeh, Sonia & Antes, Matt & Berkenpas, Michael & Davison, John, 2007. "Use of experience curves to estimate the future cost of power plants with CO2 capture," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt46x6h0n0, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    3. William D. Nordhaus, 2014. "The Perils of the Learning Model for Modeling Endogenous Technological Change," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 1).
    4. Yeh, Sonia & Rubin, Edward S., 2012. "A review of uncertainties in technology experience curves," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 762-771.
    5. Roberto F. Aguilera & Roderick G. Eggert & Gustavo Lagos C.C. & John E. Tilton, 2009. "Depletion and the Future Availability of Petroleum Resources," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 1), pages 141-174.
    6. Nico Bauer & Ottmar Edenhofer & Socrates Kypreos, 2008. "Linking energy system and macroeconomic growth models," Computational Management Science, Springer, vol. 5(1), pages 95-117, February.
    7. Roberto F. Aguilera, 2012. "The economics of oil and gas supply in the Former Soviet Union," International Journal of Global Energy Issues, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 35(6), pages 480-493.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Afees Adebare Salisu & Idris A. Adediran, 2018. "The U.S. Shale Oil Revolution and the Behavior of Commodity Prices," Econometric Research in Finance, SGH Warsaw School of Economics, Collegium of Economic Analysis, vol. 3(1), pages 27-53, September.
    2. Wei, Max & Smith, Sarah J. & Sohn, Michael D., 2017. "Experience curve development and cost reduction disaggregation for fuel cell markets in Japan and the US," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 191(C), pages 346-357.
    3. Ansari, Dawud & Holz, Franziska, 2019. "Anticipating global energy, climate and policy in 2055: Constructing qualitative and quantitative narratives," EconStor Open Access Articles, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, pages 1-23.
    4. Danny Harvey, L.D., 2017. "Implications for the floor price of oil of aggressive climate policies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 143-153.
    5. Sun, Yongling & Delucchi, Mark A. & Lawell, C.-Y. Cynthia L. & Ogden, Joan M., 2019. "The Producer Surplus Associated with Gasolne Fuel Use in the United States," Institute of Transportation Studies, Research Reports, Working Papers, Proceedings qt0591r5x3, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Berkeley.
    6. Acquah-Andoh, Elijah & Putra, Herdi A. & Ifelebuegu, Augustine O. & Owusu, Andrews, 2019. "Coalbed methane development in Indonesia: Design and economic analysis of upstream petroleum fiscal policy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 155-167.
    7. Do, Truong Xuan & Lim, Young-il, 2016. "Techno-economic comparison of three energy conversion pathways from empty fruit bunches," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 307-318.
    8. Emilio Castillo & Roderick Eggert, 2019. "Reconciling Diverging Views on Mineral Depletion: A Modified Cumulative Availability Curve Applied to Copper Resources," Working Papers 2019-02, Colorado School of Mines, Division of Economics and Business.
    9. Ansari, Dawud, 2017. "OPEC, Saudi Arabia, and the shale revolution: Insights from equilibrium modelling and oil politics," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 166-178.
    10. Langer, Lissy & Huppmann, Daniel & Holz, Franziska, 2016. "Lifting the US crude oil export ban: A numerical partial equilibrium analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 258-266.
    11. Mark Jaccard & James Hoffele & Torsten Jaccard, 2018. "Global carbon budgets and the viability of new fossil fuel projects," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 150(1), pages 15-28, September.
    12. Ansari, Dawud, 2017. "OPEC, Saudi Arabia, and the shale revolution: Insights from equilibrium modelling and oil politics," EconStor Open Access Articles, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, pages 166-178.
    13. Ritchie, Justin & Dowlatabadi, Hadi, 2017. "Why do climate change scenarios return to coal?," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 140(P1), pages 1276-1291.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:64:y:2014:i:c:p:134-140. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.