Okay, very good.
But you have to understand the numbers.
74,000 barrels/day is pretty much nothing. It generates a “boom” but the boom is measured in dollars to pay truck drivers and drillers. And it gets taxed, yes. That’s revenue. Good.
But 74,000 bpd is pretty much nothing. The Permian in Texas and New Mexico is doing 6.5 million bpd. There are very few, if any, people who think the Permian will grow production next year. And if it’s down just 5%, that’s 325,000 bpd. It erases any new flow from Montana entirely.
It is the nature of oil discussions that people go looking for new fields being announced to generate new barrels/day. But people have to learn to go looking for fields that are decreasing. Not just the ones increasing.
Here’s a quick list of dying locales:
Alaska is losing about 2.8% per year of production since 2020 (somewhat shocking because that means no bounce since Covid disappeared)
California down 7% per year since 2020, and no, not politics. It has been dying for decades, including the years of GOP rule. (this is 130,000 bpd decline, 2X Montana’s add)
Louisiana -30% 2020 to now. -6%/yr. Onshore.
Anyway, good going to find the Montana add, but it tells you nothing without the broader look.
I fully understand that, however, it was you pointed to the the drying of the Permian basin hitting peak as the cause. Now you are arguing that it’s the price. I’ll agree with that argument, to a degree, because there are other factors at play also.