formatting link
times-and-natural-gas-dont-facts-matter-any-more/
>
> You really have to wonder why the New York Times is campaigning
> against cleaner-burning, domestically produced natural gas.
>
> In the latest installment (stories published yesterday and
> today), the Times questions the value of our =A0country=92s vast
> shale gas resources with little more than anonymous sourcing,
> two-year-old emails and analysis unsupported by fact.
> Ironically, author Ian Urbina did not call ExxonMobil, the
> largest natural gas producer in the United States, for comment.
> You would think an investigative journalist for one of the
> world=92s great newspapers would have been curious to know why the
> world=92s largest publicly traded energy company has invested
> billions of dollars in a so-called =93Ponzi scheme.=94 Of course
> we=92re doing no such thing, no matter how hard the article works > to imply otherwise.
>
> What does the Times have against an industry that supports more
> than 2.8 million American jobs and contributes $385 billion
> annually to the U.S. economy? In Pennsylvania alone, more than
> 48,000 jobs were created in 2010 because of the development of
> the Marcellus Shale resources there. U.S. natural gas production
> in 2010 was at its highest level since 1973 thanks to industry
> breakthroughs in shale gas production =96 facts which the Times
> fails to mention.
>
> Though he did not bother talking to us, the writer did seem to
> put a lot of weight on the word of a retired geologist who just
> two years ago wrote that it was =93difficult to imagine=94 that the
> =93Haynesville Shale can become commercial.=94 Ironically, the
> Haynesville Shale is now the largest gas producer in the United
> States.
>
> The writer also invokes the Federal Reserve to try to lend
> credibility to his premise that the shale gas revolution is a
> flash in the pan like the dot-com bubble and built upon
> misleading or even illegal accounting practices =96 in this case
> reserves reporting =96 like the Enron scandal.
>
> A closer read and a quick Google search shows that the person he
> is quoting from the Fed was appointed to the Dallas Fed=92s
> advisory committee and is a long-time shale gas opponent. The
> writer conveniently omits a report issued last year by
> economists who actually work for the Dallas Fed that notes that
> =93the Texas experiment in the Barnett Shale proved the technical
> feasibility of shale gas development and brought costs within
> bounds that promise to give shale gas an important role in
> global energy supplies for decades to come.=94
>
> The current low price of natural gas, which may indeed make
> certain wells for some companies uneconomic to drill at this
> time, is in part a result of increased supply on the market. And
> that=92s a function of the industry=92s ingenuity in applying
> technology to tap resources that had been uneconomic to develop
> before. These increased supplies of domestic natural gas enhance
> U.S. energy security and economic competitiveness.
>
> Risks are inherent in the oil and natural gas business. There is
> no guarantee that oil and gas will be found in quantities that
> will make it economic to produce. There is always uncertainty in
> predicting ultimate recoveries, particularly in the early stages
> of development. The U.S. oil and gas industry is experienced in
> reducing this uncertainty through studies and the integration of
> production histories and other data. For example, in the Bakken
> Formation of North Dakota and Montana, the U.S. Geological
> Survey now says 3 billion to 4 billion barrels of undiscovered
> oil are available =96 25 times more than the original estimate
> made in 1995.
>
> If the writer had bothered to call us, we would have told him
> that ExxonMobil=92s investment approach is disciplined and based
> on a long-term view of global market conditions. We invest
> through market cycles and are not driven to hasty decisions
> because of day-to-day commodity market volatility. It was this
> long-term vision that led to the acquisition of XTO and
> subsequent shale gas ventures. Today, we are the largest
> producer of natural gas in the United States, and we are
> positioned to double our U.S. unconventional production over the
> next decade with an inventory of approximately 50,000 drillable
> well locations. We have strong positions in the Barnett, the
> Woodford, the Haynesville, the Fayetteville, the Eagle Ford,
> Marcellus and the Bakken Shales.
>
> Technology development and application are and will remain key
> elements in maximizing the full value of these large, long-life
> resources. Here are some examples: Unconventional production
> from Haynesville increased four-fold in 2010, while production
> in Fayetteville doubled in 2010. The Barnett Shale, where we
> currently have gross production of approximately 900 million
> cubic feet per day of gas, is another good example of value
> creation through technology. We have been able to maximize long-
> term ultimate recovery with longer lateral lengths and improved
> drilling and completion efficiency. And our net unit development
> cost in this shale play is about $1 per thousand cubic feet
> equivalent, a 50 percent improvement in the last five years,
> which is yielding attractive drilling program returns. =A0Our
> confidence in per-well recoveries in the Barnett is underpinned
> by a decade of production history of early vertical wells
> drilled in the play =96 hardly a flash in the pan.
>
> On the Enron allegation, reserve filings with the Securities and
> Exchange Commission are taken very seriously by the oil and gas
> industry and come with serious consequences for misreporting.
> ExxonMobil takes a rigorous and methodical approach to booking
> proved reserves. =A0All reserve additions are subject to a long-
> standing, thorough management review process regarding the
> reasonable certainty of recovery, which is the standard set by
> the SEC.
>
> It is unfortunate that the words =93rigorous=94 and =93methodical=94
> can=92t be applied to the New York Times=92 recent articles.
> Understanding the facts surrounding the potential for
> development of our nation=92s energy resources is every American=92s
> business. =A0Our economic recovery, environmental progress and
> energy security depends in part on a sound, stable and sensible
> policy and regulatory framework informed by honest, fact-filled
> debate. =A0The Times=92 current campaign undermines this debate and
> is a disservice to its readers.
a statement to stockholders?