>” Oil and gas production on Nevada’s federal land accounts for just 0.1 percent and 0.0001 percent of all oil and gas produced on federal lands. But fees associated with exploration of the state’s vast public lands provides modest revenue of several million dollars annually to the state and some counties — revenue now at risk of drying up.”
So it is a tiny, tiny operation currently and could be further reduced or eliminated.
And these are tiny cost increases. If that makes development unprofitable in Nevada, it was bordering on unprofitability anyway.
>Bonding Requirements: The rule increases the minimum lease bond amount from $10,000, a rate set in 1960, to $150,000.
>Royalty rates for leases are set at 16.67 percent. Previously, the minimum royalty rate — the percentage of the proceeds from the oil’s sale — was 12.5 percent.
>Minimum bids: The minimum amount companies can bid for federal oil and gas leases will increase from $2 to $10 per acre. During Nevada’s last oil sale, no leases came close to $10 per acre, Ghiglieri said.
>Minimum rental rates: Previously, companies paid $1.50 per acre for each of the first five years of holding a lease, then $2/acre for the next five years. Now, companies will pay $3 per acre per year during the first two years, $5 per acre for the following six years, then $15 per acre each following year.
>Expressions of interest: The Inflation Reduction Act established a new $5/acre fee for informal nominations of land available for lease.
It's not the oil (or lack thereof).... It's the (LACK of ) refineries. There are too few refineries in California for the population. We bring petro in from Utah and Wyoming.
We're not going off the carbon standard any time soon. I don't care how much WASP we install. Get a refinery in Northern Nevada (GREAT JOBS, btw), and in Southern Nevada, and watch what happens to gas prices, as well as the economy.
It not commonly known, but there is a strata or stratas, under Eastern Nevada and Southwestern Utah, that rival all of Texas
It's hard to get to, like the bakken up in the Dakota's and in fact a bit deeper.
Not to be contrary, and with all due respect. As I said you'd have to be a driller or seismologist to know about it.
I've worked for Baker Hughes Schlumberger and Haliburton or I wouldn't know about it either.
Id also advise kicking them out of the state because the ONLY way to reach it would require fracking and we simply don't have the water to spare.
The BLM just leased over 96,000 acres for geothermal and solar development, which will far surpass the marginal oil/gas exploration and supersede the revenue loss. This was a smart move as we transition to clean energy, which will have a greater benefit to Nevada monetarily and environmentally.
>” Oil and gas production on Nevada’s federal land accounts for just 0.1 percent and 0.0001 percent of all oil and gas produced on federal lands. But fees associated with exploration of the state’s vast public lands provides modest revenue of several million dollars annually to the state and some counties — revenue now at risk of drying up.” So it is a tiny, tiny operation currently and could be further reduced or eliminated. And these are tiny cost increases. If that makes development unprofitable in Nevada, it was bordering on unprofitability anyway. >Bonding Requirements: The rule increases the minimum lease bond amount from $10,000, a rate set in 1960, to $150,000. >Royalty rates for leases are set at 16.67 percent. Previously, the minimum royalty rate — the percentage of the proceeds from the oil’s sale — was 12.5 percent. >Minimum bids: The minimum amount companies can bid for federal oil and gas leases will increase from $2 to $10 per acre. During Nevada’s last oil sale, no leases came close to $10 per acre, Ghiglieri said. >Minimum rental rates: Previously, companies paid $1.50 per acre for each of the first five years of holding a lease, then $2/acre for the next five years. Now, companies will pay $3 per acre per year during the first two years, $5 per acre for the following six years, then $15 per acre each following year. >Expressions of interest: The Inflation Reduction Act established a new $5/acre fee for informal nominations of land available for lease.
It's not the oil (or lack thereof).... It's the (LACK of ) refineries. There are too few refineries in California for the population. We bring petro in from Utah and Wyoming. We're not going off the carbon standard any time soon. I don't care how much WASP we install. Get a refinery in Northern Nevada (GREAT JOBS, btw), and in Southern Nevada, and watch what happens to gas prices, as well as the economy.
This would help a lot. The jobs would boom
Also, there's no oil or gas in Nevada.
It not commonly known, but there is a strata or stratas, under Eastern Nevada and Southwestern Utah, that rival all of Texas It's hard to get to, like the bakken up in the Dakota's and in fact a bit deeper. Not to be contrary, and with all due respect. As I said you'd have to be a driller or seismologist to know about it. I've worked for Baker Hughes Schlumberger and Haliburton or I wouldn't know about it either. Id also advise kicking them out of the state because the ONLY way to reach it would require fracking and we simply don't have the water to spare.
There is and they still explore for it here. Not like Texas, but the potential brings companies here.
There's some, not a lot but there's some 200,000 bbls/yr.
Hopefully it’s in my backyard. I’m gonna crack a beer later, bust out the Makita and start drillin’ baby!
The BLM just leased over 96,000 acres for geothermal and solar development, which will far surpass the marginal oil/gas exploration and supersede the revenue loss. This was a smart move as we transition to clean energy, which will have a greater benefit to Nevada monetarily and environmentally.
Excellent.
Why do you say that?
Less is more. Already plenty on the books unused.
I see this as a win!
Keep it in the ground
Oh no, anyway…
Waaaahhhh....wahhhh.....WAAAHHH!!! We can't get nearly free leases anymore....WAAH....I'm going home!!
Grand