Tuesday, March 22, 2011

Murex Has Another Great Well -- Interesting Production History

Rewritten Post

I really blew it on this one. See "original post" below. Then read the comments at the bottom of the post. I have updated the post as it should have been written:

NDIC report here.

19196, 2,395, Murex, Ventura 11-2H, West Bank, Bakken; spudded 8/10; tested 11/10; 45K in first four months.

Here's the production history:

  • 10/10, 31 days of production: 472 bbls produced; 0 "runs"
  • Fracked 10/29/10
  • 11/10, 30 days of production: 27,215 bbls produced; 26899 bbls run
  • 12/10, 31 days of production: 10,427 bbls produced; 10,479 bbls run
  • 1/11, 31 days of production: 7,331 bbls produced; 7,169 bbls run
  • 2/11, 28 days of production: 10, 915 bbls produced; 10,763 bbls run
What does one notice?
  • First the decline rate is typical of a Bakken well, but one always wonders if to some degree it is intentional.
  • Second: the well was fracked on October 29, 2010 -- look at that huge bump. It is truly incredible. At one time there was thinking that horizontal wells would eliminate the need for fracking which was used in vertical wells.
  • It's possible that the production was slightly affected by weather in January. 
Miscellaneous comments regarding fracking this well:
  • Based on number of ports, this looks like a 19- or 20-stage frack stimulation
  • This was a sand frack; no mention of Slick Water or gel, although I don't know if they necessarily post that
  • No acid was used; some folks feel strongly that acid improves a frack
*******


Original Post (for archival purposes only; please disregard)
NDIC report here.

19196, 2,395, Murex, Ventura 11-2H, West Bank, Bakken; spudded 8/10; tested 11/10; 45K in first four months. This well has an interesting production history.

Here's the production history:
  • 10/10, 31 days of production: 472 bbls produced; 0 "runs"
  • 11/10, 30 days of production: 27,215 bbls produced; 26899 bbls run
  • 12/10, 31 days of production: 10,427 bbls produced; 10,479 bbls run
  • 1/11, 31 days of production: 7,331 bbls produced; 7,169 bbls run
What does one notice?
  • First the decline rate is typical of a Bakken well, but one always wonders if to some degree it is intentional.
  • Second thing I noticed: either it's a typographical error, or something very, very strange. The report says that October, 2010, was a full month (31 days) of production and yet the total produced was less than 500 bbls. If accurate, this tells me that initial reports of how a well is doing have to be taken with caution especially if the number is low. If there was a not a typographical error, this well was having difficulty in October, but the driller sorted it out, and by the end of the second month had a great well. The well is still listed as "flowing." No pump has been put on the well.

2 comments:

  1. The obvious question is when was the well frac'ed?

    ReplyDelete
  2. The well was fracked October 29, 2010.

    Thank you so much for taking time to comment. I post quickly. If no one comments, it either means, the data is correct, or correct or not, it is of minimal interest to readers.

    When I got your note, I agreed with you -- what a stupid post -- the obvious question was: when was it fracked? and I didn't answer that.

    In addition to knowing the frack date, we now have another month of production which I will add to the original post.

    In February, a 28-day month, the well outproduced the two previous months, both 31 day-months. And in one case, by a significant amount -- perhaps weather related.

    In addition, with regard to fracking. Based on the number of ports, it looks like a 19- or 20-stage frac. No acid was used. Interesting. Some folks say acid improves a frac. Maybe, maybe not.

    It was a "sand frac." The phrase "Slick Water" was not seen.

    I will update post and incorporate your comments. I blew it on this one.

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.