As the world wakes up to the fact that unconventional liquid energy sources will not be able to offset the ongoing depletion of conventional crude production, the world will have to survive on less in the coming years;  and that means less gold and silver.

The popping of the SHALE GAS MIRACLE just erased any remaining doubts that the world will be able to continue its delusion of maintaining business as usual… forever.


For many years, the oil and gas industry has been hyping their new miracle baby called “SHALE ENERGY”.  Through new advances in technology such as fracking, the U.S. Government first estimated the total shale gas reserves in the country at a staggering 827 trillion cubic feet.  Furthermore, BP stated that shale gas and oil will make the United States self-sufficient by 2030.

However, cracks began to appear in the GREAT SHALE GAS MIRACLE when in January of this year, the U.S. Dept of Energy released new projections which cut the reserves to nearly half to only 482 trillion cubic feet.  Even though this was a 42% decline in reserves… it is still a great deal of natural gas that the country can depend on.  Or is it?

On Sept. 2nd, 2012, something very startling occurred.  The USGS – United States Geological Society, came out with revisions to the shale gas fields’ reserves… and it wasn’t pretty.  Before we get into the details of the data, let me give you some background information.

I have been reading TOD – for years.  I wrote a two part series called THE GREAT SHALE GAS SCAM on TFMetalsReport which you can find at these links (PART 1, PART 2).  The series was based on work at TOD by Art Berman.  Since 2009, Art has been skeptical of the hype put forth by the shale gas industry.

The EID – Energy In Depth (a public relations firm started and funded by the oil & gas industry) had to say this about Art last year:

“We think he’s wrong about shale.  But the good news is:  we won’t have to wait two or three years to find out who’s right.”

Well, it looks as if the folks at the Energy In Depth got their answer a hell of a lot quicker than they expected.

According to an article by Deborah Rogers, “USGS Releases Damning EUR’s for Shale”:

Chesapeake Energy (CHK) claims average EUR’s for the Marcellus at 4.2 Bcf. Range Resources (RRC) has claimed average EUR’s as high as 5.7 Bcf in investor presentations. According to the USGS, however, the average EUR for the Marcellus turns out to be about 1.1 Bcf.

(EUR stands for Estimated Ultimate Recovery)

Folks, this is quite alarming.  Chesapeake had stated that the average estimated ultimate recovery of an average shale gas well in the Marcellus field was 4.2 Bcf (billion cubic feet).  The USGS just cut that estimate nearly 4-fold to only 1.1 Bcf.  In addition, investors with dollar signs in their eyes who purchased stock in Range Resources … now get to experience how a 5-fold decline in reserves will impact their share price.  I imagine SHALE ENEMAS are in store.

The USGS shale gas downgrades do not pertain to only a few areas, they reach across the whole country.  Chesapeake Energy also claimed the average EUR in the Fayetteville was between 2.4-2.6 Bcf.    But, according to the Powers Energy Investor, an industry publication stated:

 “To put into perspective how ridiculous Chesapeake’s claims of 2.6 Bcf is, consider the following: of the company’s 742 operated wells completed on the Fayetteville, only 66 have produced more than one Bcf and none have produced more than 1.7 Bcf. Chesapeake’s average Fayetteville well has produced only 541 Mcf.”

Only 9% of Chesapeake’s shale gas wells in the Fayetteville have produced more than 1 Bcf.  I would gather Chesapeake probably doesn’t believe the average figures it puts out in its propaganda pieces, but can you really blame them when they have to keep running the investor treadmill slaughterhouse?  The USGS also confirmed this by stating the average EUR of the Fayetteville was only 1.1 Bcf.

One of the important factors not to overlook in estimating the ultimate recoveries of a shale gas field, is the realization that the sweet spots are drilled first, saving the mediocre and dead-beats for later.  Thus, as the field ages with shale gas wells depleting exponentially by second year, it’s nice to know the industry has decided to save the best for last.

Once you understand the insanity coming from the bowels of the Shale Gas Industry & Lobby, it becomes easier to pick out the LOSERS promoting the business in newsletters and commercials.  One name sticks out like a sore thumb… and that is Porter Stansberry.

Porter made a name for himself when he had Alex Jones narrate his END OF THE DOLLAR commercials that aired on MSM.  He got a lot of exposure from these commercials that warned Americans of the upcoming collapse of the U.S. Dollar.  He advised his subscribers and readers to buy gold and silver to protect themselves when the dollar finally died.

Everything was going fine for Porter until he decided that he could make more money getting people to believe in the Great Shale Oil & Gas Scam.  This is how Porter describes Peak Oil:

OVER the past decade I have written many times that I consider Peak Oil to be one of the greatest intellectual frauds ever perpetrated.

Porter has no idea of the falling EROI – Energy Returned on Invested or the declining Net Oil Exports that peaked in 2005.  I wonder if he is paying any attention to the recent USGS shale gas down-grades.

Another interesting trend is taking place in Texas.  In the past several years, shale gas from Barnett field has gone up in an exponential fashion.  If we look at the chart below, we can see just how much shale gas the Barnett field is supplying to the market:

In the past three years, shale gas production rose 20%.  You would think this huge increase would greatly impact the overall supply.  However, if we look at the NAT GAS production coming out of Texas, we find that total supply has actually declined since 2008:

In 2011, the Barnett Shale produced 1.936 Bcf or 25% of the total 7.6 Bcf that came out of Texas.  For the Barnett Shale to be able to make the U.S. self-sufficient by 2030, it will have to produce a great deal more shale gas than it is today.

Unfortunately, this may not be possible as it looks as if the Barnett may be reaching peak production currently:


The only way shale gas production can increase to this level, is by the rapid rate of continued drilling.  We must ask ourselves this question.  How will the Barnett Shale increase future production if the industry practice is to drill the sweet spots first?  Furthermore, shale gas wells depletion rates are running at 70-80% after two years of production.


Once we add up all the negatives such as, the recent USGS downgrades, the high depletion rates and the industry practice of exploiting the best areas first in the field… how in the living hell is shale gas going to make the U.S. energy independent?


This brings us to the next supposed SHALE MIRACLE.. and that is SHALE OIL.


Basically, what is taking place in shale gas industry, is also taking place in shale oil.  I could get into a lot more detail, but this article would become too long and too boring.  Instead, I have chosen a few charts done by Rune Likvern to give the reader an idea of what is taking place.


The shale oil players are doing the exact same thing as their shale gas counterparts by manufacturing, packaging and selling SHALE SNAKE OIL.  These companies have overestimated their recoverable reserves as well as hyped how much their new technology will be able to extract more oil from future wells.

If we take a look at the first chart, we can see that there is an accelerated addition of wells just to sustain a specific well production in the North Dakota Bakken.  The hamsters are running faster in the wheel — getting nowhere:

In this next chart, the shale oil production that started in the summer of 2011, is much lower in its peak than the wells started a year prior.  In 2010, peak production from these group of wells was nearly 130,000 BBL’s ( barrels a day).  But in 2011, the next group didn’t quite reach 100,000 BBL’s.

What we have taking place in the Bakken Field in North Dakota is a severe downturn in oil production per well as the best advanced technology is helpless in stopping it.

Rune made this comment on TheOildDrum about his findings:

For the studied wells in Sanish the decline in well productivity was around 40% over a year. Brigham’s wells (all of them which are spread over a huge area) showed a decline of around 10% in well productivity over a year.
Marathon’s wells show some gain in well productivity.
Overall the decline in well productivity was around 25% in one year.

So in light of this it becomes interesting to read that Marathon has decided to cut down on their activities in Bakken.

So did Occidental

Marathon & Occidental are cutting back their activities in the Bakken while oil prices are upwards of $100 a barrel?  Do you see what is happening here?

As nitwits like Porter Stansberry continue to berate Peak Oil while pushing the SHALE MIRACLE, the data coming from the field provides a very sobering reality soon to knock on the door of the American Public.  And that is, Shale Oil & Gas is not our future energy  savior, but rather a overblown scam.

This is indeed the problem.  The world has been closely watching the United States and its supposed new SHALE ENERGY PARADIGM.  Countries throughout the world have been banking on our recent success so they can reproduce the same technology in their own supposed shale gas fields.  However, we are finding out that our own experiment in this new energy field has proven quite disappointing.

The world will not be able to count on Shale gas or oil to supply a large percentage of its needs for a long period.  In the end, shale energy will just give us a little more time before we have to realize that we as a species are going to have to survive on a lot less.


I have been writing about energy and its impact on the mining industry for a few years.  The U.S. and world has been counting on advanced technology and unconventional oil sources such as shale oil & gas to allow us to keep running our car dependent lifestyles for at least another 3 or 4 more decades.  I think we will run into trouble within the next several years… and this is without any black swan events occurring in the Middle-east.

As you know, I have been writing articles showing the declining gold and silver ore grades in the industry and how more energy is needed to mine the same or less metal each following year.  I have finally updated the top 5 gold miners average annual gold yields, reserve head grades as well as their diesel consumption.

The first chart shows the growth (or lack of thereof) gold supply from the top 5 gold producers:

In six years, the total gold production from Barrick, Newmont, AngloGold, Gold Fields and GoldCorp has fallen 5% or 1.3 million ounces.  As you can see from the chart Barrick and GoldCorp are the only two companies that have increased their production since 2005.  Here are the details:

Change from 2005-2011

BARRICK = +2,216,000 oz

GOLDCORP = +1,378,000 oz

GOLD FIELDS = -734,000 oz

ANGLOGOLD = -1,835,000 oz

NEWMONT = -2,300,000 oz


If we start the data from 2006, even Barrick has less production by nearly 1 million oz.  Furthermore, if I had chosen Harmony Gold instead of GoldCorp in the top 5 group, the overall declines would have been much worse.  For instance, Harmony Gold produced 2.9 million oz in 2005, but only 1.3 mil oz in 2011.  The reason why I selected GoldCorp over Harmony was due to two reasons.  GoldCorp will be the larger producer in the future, and due to the fact that I was unable to obtain diesel consumption data from Harmony’s website or through several email attempts to their management.

In researching the gold and silver mining industry there are a few terms that needs to be explained.  There are average reserve ore grades (head grades), average processed (or milled) ore grade, and average yield.  In the past, I may have misused these terms.  I will clarify this in the material below.

Every year a gold or silver company lists their annual reserves  and resources.  I will only focus on reserves at this time.  As the company mines their reserves and replaces it with new reserves (proven & probable), they state the new amount each year along with an average ore grade or head grade.  Below are the top 4 gold producer’s head grade based on year-end reserves:

If we calculate a simple average, we get a decline in overall head grade in the top 4 producers at 4% per year.  I did not include GoldCorp in this chart because they do not list an average head grade in their annual reports.  I decided to do a weighted average of reserves in from their 2006 annual report and found it to be 1.05 grams per tonne.  For the life of me, I don’t know why GoldCorp does not show their average annual head grade for their proven and probable reserves.  They do list each of their mines’ reserves and respective average head grade (and even a total amount of gold reserves at the bottom), but no overall annual average head grade.

So, all we need to take away from this chart is that the average head grades in their reserves are continuing to fall at the top gold producers in the world.

The next chart reveals the relationship between head grades and diesel consumption in the these gold producers.  Here we can see that the lower the head grade in the mining companies reserves, the higher the amount of diesel is consumed.  Newmont (shown in red in both charts) has the lowest head grade of the bunch, and it consumes the highest amount of diesel.

On the other hand, Gold Fields (purple) has the highest average head grade and consumes the least amount of diesel.  If we assume that GoldCorp’s reserve head grade is similar to Newmonts, and it was producing the same amount of gold as Newmont, its overall diesel consumption would be more than twice of what it is currently.

According to their 2011 Annual Report, GoldCorp forecasts a 70% increase in gold production (1.75 million oz)  in the next five years.  If they are successful in bringing on this new production, I would imagine they would have to increase their diesel consumption from 58 million gallons in 2011, to nearly 100 million gallons by 2016.

As I have mentioned before, as ore grades decline more diesel is consumed is the mining process.  Furthermore as open-pit mines age, it takes more energy (diesel) to extract the same or even less metal.  In the past five years, the top 5 gold companies have increased their diesel consumption 72% per ounce of gold produced.

In 2005, the top 5 only consumed 12.7 gallons of diesel to produce an ounce of gold, but by 2011 it took 21. 8 gallons to produce that same ounce.  Here are the individual results:

Diesel Consumption from 2005-2011

GOLDCORP 2005/2011 = 8.5 gal oz / 23.2 gal oz

GOLD FIELDS 2005/2011 = 4.9 gal oz / 10.6 gal oz

ANGLOGOLD 2005/2011 = 8.1 gal oz / 15.2 gal oz (2005 estimated)

NEWMONT 2005/ 2011 = 18.9 gal oz / 28.7 gal oz

BARRICK 2005/ 2011 = 15.4 gal oz / 24.6 gal oz


We can definitely see the distinction between the five companies’ diesel consumption.  The South African miners Gold Fields and AngloGold consume the least because they are predominantly underground mines with higher average ore grades.   However, this trend is changing due to the fact that good quality underground gold resources are becoming increasingly scarce.

I would like to clarify one aspect that is not represented in the charts.  The total diesel consumption from Barrick includes the energy it uses in mining its copper projects.  This is also true to a lesser extent for Newmont.  Instead of going through the time and effort to try and figure out what amount of diesel is consumed at just its gold operations, I have lumped it all together.  I believe if a primary gold mining company is going to dilute its primary status by getting into the mining of base metals such as copper, they deserve to have it impact their gold to diesel production ratio.  We must remember, where there is copper, there is gold.  So, I look at their copper mining projects as very low quality gold deposits.

The next chart shows the change in average gold yield in the top 5 producers.  These miners list the average ore grade of the total processed ore (milled) in their annual reports, but this is does not reveal their true gold yield as they lose a certain amount of gold in the leaching and refining process.  To get this average yield, we have to take their gold production and divide it by the total amount of processed ore (in tonnes).

In the past six years, the average yield in these top producers has declined 23% or 3.8% per year.  Thus, in order for these top miners to keep production flat, they have to add nearly 1 million ounces of gold production (3.8% = 900,000 oz based on 2011 figures) each year to offset these loses.  They can do this by adding new mines or ramping up the total amount of processed ore.  Either way, it takes more diesel to do so.


Let me tell you, the information on diesel consumption in primary silver mining is little to non-existent.  I have just started to research this data and have only found sustainability reports for Pan American Silver and Hochschild Mining.  There simply isn’t that much data from these primary silver companies as they don’t consume a great deal of energy or impact the environment as much as the larger gold and base metal counterparts.

Hochschild does not list their diesel consumption in a single amount, they list it in a ratio to their processed ore.  Without a great deal of time and math calculations, I have decided to just list Pan American Silver’s diesel consumption.  Here it is:

Pan American Silver Diesel Consumption

2010 = 5.8 million gallons

2011 = 8.5 million gallons


Pan American produced 24.3 million ounces of silver in 2010 and 21. 8 million ounces of silver in 2011.  Thus, we have a ratio of 0.25 gal. of diesel per ounce of silver in 2010 and 0.40 gal per oz of silver in 2011.  Even though this figure is increasing we can see that mining silver from primary mines takes a hell of a lot less diesel than mining gold.

Pan American Silver had an average yield of silver in 2011 at 4.7 ounces a tonne, or 146 g/t (grams per tonne).  To get an idea of how diesel consumption in primary silver mines compares with primary gold mining, below are the following figures:

TOP 5 GOLD MINERS 2011 AVG YIELD = 1.3 g/t




RATIO of AVG YIELD PER GRAM = 146 / 1.3 = 112

RATIO of DIESEL CONSUMPTION = 21.8 / 0.4 = 54.5


Even though Pan American Silver uses less diesel per ounce in its silver production compared to the top gold producers ratio, Pan American uses more diesel per gram by a factor of two.  How?  If we divide the average yield between the two we find that Pan American’s silver yield is 112 times greater than the top 5 gold producers.  However, if we divide the ratio of diesel consumption per ounce between the two, it is only 54.5 times greater.  Thus, Pan American uses double the amount of diesel to produce a gram of silver than the top five gold companies when producing a gram of gold.

That was something that came as a surprise to me.  All of this detailed data just goes to show you that it is taking an increasing amount of diesel each passing year to produce both gold and silver for the market.

Lastly, there is a reason why the market price of diesel is more than gasoline.  In the refining of a barrel of oil, on average it produces 19.2 gallons of gasoline and 9.2 gallons of distillate fuel oil.  Of that 9.2 gallons of distillate fuel oil, it consists of a portion of diesel fuel as well as heating oil.  The world’s demand for diesel continues to increase, but the supply has been nearly flat over the past several years.

There has been some advances in refining technology to produce more diesel from a barrel of oil, but this is not a huge amount.  I still run across people who tell me that the price of diesel is manipulated because it is just a waste product from the refining of a barrel of oil.  That may have been true back in the 1930’s, but it is not true today… I can assure you of that.


As I mentioned, the world has been closely watching the United States and its supposed success in its new SHALE ENERGY PARADIGM.  According to the facts and data provided in the energy portion of this article, it looks as if shale gas & oil will not be able to supply our increasing demands for liquid energy in the future.  Moreover, it may be difficult to just keep shale gas & oil production from falling in the next several years.

With the pathetically low price of Nat Gas (at least $4-5 below breakeven prices for the shale gas players), drilling rig numbers in this sector have been dropping like a rock over the past several years.  The hype coming from the Shale Oil & Gas companies will come back to bite them very hard when the public and the world realizes they have been sold an horizontal pipe dream just to keep the HAMSTER SHALE ENERGY WHEEL TURNING.

As the world wakes up to the fact that these unconventional liquid energy sources will not be able to offset the ongoing depletion of conventional crude production, the world will have to survive on less in the coming years.  And, that means less gold and silver.

So, the popping of the SHALE GAS MIRACLE just erased any remaining doubts that the world will be able to continue its delusion of maintaining business as usual… forever.