Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

The effect of oil and gas price and price volatility on rig activity in tight formations and OPEC strategy


Exploration of tight oil and gas formations has significantly increased US oil and gas production in recent years. However, detailed economic analysis of this production, including identification of the break-even price (BEP), the measure of price used to plan exploration and development, a synergy between price volatility and the BEP, and a feedback effect of tight oil production on oil prices, has yet to be carried out. Here we show that the BEP for rigs used to drill oil wells is $20 (~$50 nominal), the effect of price volatility on rig activity declines as the price for crude oil or natural gas moves above or below this BEP, firms use futures prices (not spot prices) to plan exploration and development, and new rig productivity affects both drilling activity and oil prices. The latter indicates that increases in new rig productivity can account for much of the 2014 oil price decline.

This is a preview of subscription content

Access options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.


All prices are NET prices.

Fig. 1: Oil price volatility.
Fig. 2: Natural gas price volatility.
Fig. 3: Determinants of active oil rigs.
Fig. 4: Determinants of active natural gas rigs.
Fig. 5: NRP and prices.

Data availability

The data and computer code are available on request from the authors.


  1. 1.

    Ansari, D. OPEC, Saudi Arabia, and the shale revolution: insights from equilibrium modelling and oil politics. Energy Policy 111, 166–178 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Behar, A. & Ritz, R. A. OPEC vs. US shale: analyzing the shift to a market-share strategy. Energy Econ. 63, 185–198 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Manescu, C. B. & Nuno, G. Quantitative effects of the shale oil revolution. Energy Policy 86, 866–866 (2015). 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Drilling Productivity Report (EIA, December 2017);

  5. 5.

    Kleinberg, R. L., Paltsev, S., Ebinger, C. K. E., Hobbs, D. A. & Boersma, T. Tight oil market dynamics: benchmarks, breakeven points, and inelasticities. Energy Econ. 70, 70–83 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Watchmeister, H., Lund, L., Aleklett, K. & Hook, M. Production decline curves of tight oil in Eagle Ford shale. Nat. Resour. Res. 26, 365–377 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Likvern, R. Is shale production from the Bakken headed for a run with “The Red Queen”? The Oil Drum (2012).

  8. 8.

    Boyce, J. R. & Nøstbakken, L. Exploration and development of US oil and gas fields, 1955–2002. J. Econ. Dyn. Control 35, 891–908 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Khalifa, A., Caporin, M. & Hammoudeh, S. The relationship between oil prices and rig counts: the importance of lags. Energy Econ. 6, 213–226 (2012).

    Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Henriques, I. & Sandorsky, P. The effect of oil price volatility on strategic investment. Energy Econ. 33, 79–87 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Kellogg, R. The effect of uncertainty on investment, evidence from Texas oil drilling. Am. Econ. Rev. 104, 1698–1744 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Compernolle, T., Welkenhuysen, K., Huisman, K., Piessens, K. & Kort, P. M. Offshore enhanced oil recovery in the North Sea: the impact of price uncertainty on the investment decisions. Energy Policy 101, 123–137 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Guedes, J. & Santos, P. Valuating an offshore oil exploration and production project through real options analysis. Energy Econ. 60, 377–386 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Trends in U.S. Oil and Gas Upstream Costs (EIA, 2015);

  15. 15.

    Juselius, K. The Cointegrated VAR Model: Methodology and Applications (Advanced Texts in Econometrics) (Oxford Univ. Press, 2006).

  16. 16.

    Ederington, L. & Lee, J. H. Who trades futures and how: evidence from the heating oil futures markets. J. Bus. 75, 353–373 (2002).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Buhami-Oskoopee, M. & Aftab, M. Malaysia–EU trade at the industry level: is there an asymmetric response to exchange rate volatility? Empirica 45, 425–455 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Granger, C. W. J. & Lee, T. H. Investigation of production, sales and inventory relationships using multicointegration and nonsymmetric error correction models. J. Appl. Econ. 4, S145–S159 (1989).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Bataa, E. & Park, C. Is the recent low oil price attributable to the shale revolution? Energy Econ. 67, 72–82 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Tokic, D. The 2014 oil bust: causes and consequences. Energy Policy 85, 162–169 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Baumeister, C. & Kilian, L. Understanding the decline in the price of oil since June 2014. J. Assoc. Environ. Res. Econ. 3, 131–158 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Akins, J. E. The oil crisis: this time the wolf is here. Foreign Aff. 51, 463–490 (1973).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Kaufmann, R. K., Dees, S., Karadeloglou, P. & Sanchez, M. Does OPEC matter? An econometric analysis of oil prices. Energy J. 25, 67–90 (2004).

    Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Kaufmann, R. K., Dees, S., Gasteuil, A. & Mann, M. Oil prices, the role of refinery utilization, futures markets, and non-linearities. Energy Econ. 30, 2609–2622 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    Chevillon, G. & Rifflart, C. Physical market determinants of the price of crude oil and the market premium. Energy Econ. 31, 537–549 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    Sheiks vs shale. The Economist (6 December 2014).

  27. 27.

    The new winners and loser in America’s oil shale boom. Wall Street Journal (21 April 2014).

  28. 28.

    Sandrea, I. US Shale Gas and Tight Oil Industry Performance: Challenges and Opportunities Oxford Energy Comment (Oxford Institute for Energy Studies, 2014).

  29. 29.

    Domanski, D. & Kearns, J. & Lombardi, M. & Shin, H. S. Oil and debt. BIS Q. Rev. 55–65 (March 2015).

  30. 30.

    US oil companies closer to balancing capital investment with operating cash flow. EIA Today in Energy (2016).

  31. 31.

    Bureau of Labor Statistics (December 2017);

  32. 32.

    Enders, W. Applied Time Series Econometrics (Wiley, 1995).

  33. 33.

    Juselius, K. The cointegrated VAR methodology. In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Economics and Finance (Oxford Univ. Press, 2017).

  34. 34.

    Johansen, S. Likelihood-Based Inference in Cointegrated Vector Autoregressive Models (Advanced Texts in Econometrics) (Oxford Univ. Press, 1996).

  35. 35.

    Hendry, D. F. &. Doornik, J. A. Empirical Model Discovery and Theory Evaluation: Automatic Selection Methods in Econometrics (MIT Press, 2014).

  36. 36.

    Castle, J. L., Doornik, J. A., Hendry, D. F. & Pretis, F. Detecting location shifts during model selection by step-indicator saturation. Econometrics 3, 240–264 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. 37.

    Doornik, J. A. in The Methodology and Practice of Econometrics: A Festschrift In Honour of David F. Hendry (eds Castle, J. & Shephard, N.) Ch. 4 (Oxford Univ. Press, 2009).

Download references


We thank A. Berman, A. Behar, C. A. S. Hall, L. Nogueira Hallack, M. Kah, A. Ali Khalifa, R. Kleinberg and R. Ritz for comments on preliminary versions of this work and J. Lieskovsky and F. Pretis for assistance in accessing data. Any errors that remain are our responsibility.

Author information




Both authors played a role in collecting the data, estimating statistical models, analysing the results and writing the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Robert. K. Kaufmann.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Figures and Text

Supplementary Notes 1–6, Supplementary Figures 1–6, Supplementary Tables 1–4, Supplementary references.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ansari, E., Kaufmann, R.K. The effect of oil and gas price and price volatility on rig activity in tight formations and OPEC strategy. Nat Energy 4, 321–328 (2019).

Download citation

Further reading


Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing