But I was tempted to note the update when I saw the production of those wells.
This morning, coincidentally, I received this note from a reader:
Speaking of big wells for CLR. Remember the Whitman in the Oakdale field? Part of the Hawkinson Whitman Eco pad a few years ago.
Looks like CLR got approval to either extend or replace the Whitman TF1 well that was part of the 2560-acre spacing unit.
Looks like future plans include drilling the Whitman 1280 out to 14 wells including the eco pad wells. See order #24085 and case #21756.
Note the updated layout for the 14 wells on the new plan. Do you suppose this is one of those areas I have heard mentioned that could be profitable at $25.00 oil?I am always busy first thing in the morning. I will come back to this one later.
*****************************
In a long note like this, there may be factual and typographical errors; in addition, I often misinterpret file reports due to lack of formal training and/or education. If this information is important to you, go to the source. I was also in a rush to complete this, increasing the likelihood of errors.
I don't have "Premium Services" so I don't have access to NDIC orders. But with Basic Services, I do have access to file reports.
I don't have "Premium Services" so I don't have access to NDIC orders. But with Basic Services, I do have access to file reports.
Case 21756: Application of Continental Resources, Inc. for an order to establish appropriate spacing for the Whitman #3-34H well, (Well File No. 20212), located in the NWNE of Section 34, T.147N., R.96W., Oakdale-The 1280-acre unit: sections 34/3. [34-147-97 and 3-146-97 but this well is spaced for 2560-acres according to the scout ticket. The GIS map server also shows 2560-acre spacing; I can't tell for sure, but I believe this particular 2560-acre unit would be 34/35-147-96 and 3/2-146-96.
CLR provided a graphic of its drilling plans for the Hawkinson pad back in November, 2013. A lot has been posted over the past two years about the Hawkinson wells; a "Hawkinson" search on the blog will take you to any number of interesting posts on the Hawkinson.
Someone will have to help me out on this one, note this about #20212: the horizontal never reached planned TD; the file report suggests the reason. So, now look at the length of the lateral: only about 2,000 feet. A typical short lateral in the Bakken is about 4,500 feet; the typical long lateral in the Bakken is about 9,000 feet. According to the well file:
Overall, the majority of the well was drilled in the target zone. Samples were mostly composed of a clean dolomite. 5% oil shows were observed until 12,500' MD. Oil shows then quickly rose to 30% and remained for the rest of the lateral. Gas shows ranged from 1500 - 3000 units from casing unitl 11,800' MD. Gas rose and was observed to be between 4,000 - 5,500 units, sometimes reaching 7,000 units. The well was TD at MD of 13,548' and a TVD of 11,427' after attempts to control and kill the flow and pressure failed.So, here we have a well that is an incredibly short lateral, that has produced almost 100,000 bbls:
- 20212, 482, CLR, Whitman 3-34H, 34-147-96, Oakdale, F, t9/11; cum 98K 10/14; the scout ticket says it is still flowing without a pump, and there are no sundry forms to suggest otherwise; in addition, there is no frack data, suggesting this well was not fracked? Also the permit application stated the target was the Three Forks but an early sundry form (dated 2010) made a pen/ink change, lining out Three Forks and writing in "Bakken." The geologist's report said the target was the "middle Bakken."
*********************************
Production Profile
It's hard to believe this well was not fracked but I don't see the frack report. But remember, they had to "TD" the well when they could not control the pressure and the flow. Here's the production profile for first few months:
BAKKEN | 4-2012 | 30 | 3343 | 3463 | 115 | 3174 | 3174 | 0 |
BAKKEN | 3-2012 | 31 | 3801 | 3633 | 137 | 3329 | 3329 | 0 |
BAKKEN | 2-2012 | 22 | 2784 | 2769 | 405 | 1783 | 1783 | 0 |
BAKKEN | 1-2012 | 30 | 5309 | 5711 | 228 | 2479 | 2479 | 0 |
BAKKEN | 12-2011 | 31 | 7250 | 7143 | 2 | 6138 | 6138 | 0 |
BAKKEN | 11-2011 | 30 | 8941 | 8990 | 17 | 7587 | 7587 | 0 |
BAKKEN | 10-2011 | 31 | 11860 | 11669 | 43 | 10285 | 10285 | 0 |
BAKKEN | 9-2011 | 25 | 11220 | 10943 | 40 | 9426 | 2619 | 6807 |
The production profile for the most recent months is also very interesting:
Pool | Date | Days | BBLS Oil | Runs | BBLS Water | MCF Prod | MCF Sold | Vent/Flare |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BAKKEN | 10-2014 | 31 | 420 | 326 | 8 | 529 | 282 | 0 |
BAKKEN | 9-2014 | 30 | 522 | 632 | 22 | 649 | 342 | 74 |
BAKKEN | 8-2014 | 31 | 633 | 596 | 23 | 721 | 472 | 7 |
BAKKEN | 7-2014 | 31 | 774 | 592 | 75 | 638 | 638 | 0 |
BAKKEN | 6-2014 | 30 | 1006 | 1130 | 62 | 923 | 865 | 58 |
BAKKEN | 5-2014 | 29 | 1293 | 1200 | 517 | 1133 | 1133 | 0 |
BAKKEN | 4-2014 | 30 | 1178 | 1463 | 153 | 1064 | 1058 | 6 |
BAKKEN | 3-2014 | 31 | 1201 | 1136 | 113 | 992 | 962 | 30 |
With the slump in the price of oil, I don't think we can make comments about potential production as of October 1, 2014. (I'm not saying that correctly, but hopefully you know what I'm trying to say.)
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.