Part I here.
Part II here.
The wells under discussion:
- 19207, 613, Slawson, Vagabond 1-27H, Van Hook, t4/11; cum 358K 1/18;
- 19208, 800, Slawson, Water Moccasin 4-34-TFH, Van Hook, t4/11; cum 324K 1/18;
Comments:
- the two wells under discussion would be very inexpensive to drill / complete today (using same amount of sand)
- they were short laterals
- they used small amounts of sand
- the two wells were mediocre at best when originally drilled
- neighboring wells drilled / completed -- these wells went from mediocre to pretty good wells
- data suggests these wells are great candidates for mini-re-fracks and full re-fracks at a later date
- it's impossible to say whether new wells are "compromising" production from older wells, but in this case, it certainly appears the newer wells had a positive effect on the older, shorter laterals; whether or not new wells are "compromising" older wells across the Bakken is hard to tell; analysts much smarter than I suggest that this is happening
- there are 7 horizontal wells in this 1280-acre unit (technically 7.5) and only the middle Bakken and the upper bench of the Three Forks have been targeted
- it's not a stretch to suggest:
- six middle Bakken horizontals
- six TF 1 horizontals
- four TF 2 horizontals
- four TF 3 horizontals
- two TF 4 horizontals
- total: 22 horizontals
- 32-well arrays have been discussed before (see tag at bottom of blog)
- some suggest we could see eight middle Bakken and eight TF 1 and eight TF 3 horizontals in the same spacing, or 24 wells, which does not include TF 2 or TF 4 horizontals
- new wells in spacing units (held by production) require no new leasing; most infrastructure is already in place; geologists can practically forecast likely production for new wells
- two Bakken wells
- 58,998 more Bakken wells before it's all over
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.