Sunday, February 21, 2010

Sidonia Township (T158N-90W) May Be the Most Active Township Right Now

This will change in a month, but right now, I would be hard pressed to find a more active township than T158N-90W, in the Clear Water field.

Of the 36 sections in this township, there is a permit or a well in all but 9 sections. There are 16 sections with new permits. There are five rigs on site, and there are two wells almost completed (rigs off site); and there are two wells producing, both short laterals; one with an IP of 626 bopd, and one with an IP of 1,131 bopd.

Anyone want to guess which producer "owns" this township? Yup, it's EOG. Again.

The Clear Water field is about five (5) miles northeast of Stanley. It is north of the very prolific Parshall field. One township sits between the Parshall and the Clear Water, and it is the Ross field between the Parshall field and the Clear Water field.

2 comments:

  1. What is going on in T157N-90W of this feild? Is it as active as the one posted above. Hess has a rig drilling there. Do you think it will be a producer like the Jan. well? Also in the NW corner a permit has been cancelled. What does that usually mean?

    ReplyDelete
  2. At the time I posted "Sidonia Most Active" it had to do with the flurry of permits and rigs moving into an area that was previously quiet. Of course, now things have reached a steady state, and other areas are more active.

    With regard to T157N-90W, the township you asked about (Clear Water): yes, two permits have been canceled. #17855, operator Duncan and a very old permit; I wouldn't make anything of it.

    I'm not sure what to make of the other cancellation: it's EOG, #18512, section 6. It's possible EOG wants to change that to a long lateral (sections 06-07, and would cancel permit #18596. The trend is for long laterals and NDIC has a proposal to have all horizontals in the Bakken pool go to 1280-acre units spacing.

    There are two rigs on site in this township, both Hess rigs, #18524 and #18526, long laterals each, sections 17-08 and sections 21-28, respectively.

    #18526 is sited just across the section line from #18096, which had an IP of 210.

    The other Hess well reporting was #18046, sections 20-29, with an IP of 555.

    The two EOG wells reporting so far had IPs of 322 and 312.

    From those numbers, one can pretty much surmise, all things being equal, how the next wells will do.

    I have opined that Hess wells have IPs that are less than stellar but IPs mean relatively little if the wells have similar overall production results at the end of several years. It just means the payout comes over a longer period of time. That opens another whole area of discussion and I prefer not to go there in a short space.

    I hope this helps. I typed a lot of numbers and I could have made a mistake; you can verify everything at the NDIC website relatively easily, except perhaps the IPs which would take a lot of "daily activity report" searching.

    ReplyDelete