Well, This Is Interesting -- Riersgard Well -- Hess -- $100 Million -- 12-Well Pad -- The Bakken, North Dakota, USA

Updates

July 5, 2016: this is now a 15-well pad. In addition to the six wells noted below, here are nine more; the first three on a 3-well pad to the west, and the second six, on a 6-well pad to the east:

• 25574, 333, Hess, EN-Riersgard 156-93-1718H-4, Alger, 4 sections, t12/13; cum 59K 5/16;
• 25575, 493, Hess, EN-Riersgard 156-93-1718H-5, Alger, 4 sections, t11/13; cum 69K 5/16;
• 25576, 447, Hess, EN-Riersgard 156-93-1718H-6, Alger, 4 sections, t12/13; cum 116K 5/16;

• 26718, 648, Hess, EN-State C-156-93-1615H-4, Alger, 4 sections, t5/14; cum 103K 5/16;
• 26719, 777, Hess, EN-State C-156-93-1615H-5, Alger, 4 sections, t6/14; cum 119K 5/16;
• 26720, 660, Hess, EN-State C-156-93-1615H-6, Alger, 4 sections, t6/14; cum 123K 5/16;
• 28065, 597, Hess, EN-State C-156-93-1615H-7, Alger, 4 sections, t10/14; cum 96K 5/16;
• 28066, 850, Hess, EN-State C-156-93-1615H-8, Alger, 4 sections, t11/14; cum 82K 5/16;
• 28067, 669, Hess, EN-State C-156-93-1615H-9, Alger, 4 sections, t11/14; cum 104K 5/16;

Original Post

Well, this is very, very interesting.

Regular readers know that I try to post 5 to 10 new stand-alone posts per day (as well as updating countless number of older posts).

With so much posting, I often forget what I've posted. Only by going back through earlier posts do I sometimes catch things. I just noted this, and no one sent in a comment yet which suggests a) no one else noticed; or, more likely, b) no one cares. Smile.

Anyway, earlier today I posted that mineral owners would not be happy to see a Hess well on a 2,560-acre spacing unit come in with an IP of 777.  (On the other hand, it could have come in at 666, even worse, I suppose.)

Later this evening,  I posted a Filloon story suggesting Hess may have in mind a 12-well pad. Someone noted that the pad currently has six confidential wells on site, with one showing a rig on site, according to the NDIC map. Generally I don't expect to see an IP reported for any well on the pad when the map still shows a ROS at the pad.

So, I wasn't expecting this, but there it is. One of the wells on that pad reported an IP.

• 21129, 777, Hess, EN-Riersgard-156-93-1718H-1 (this link is broken; Teegue could not stand all the nonsense on flaring). Alger, Bakken, s9/11; t2/12; F; cum 65K 8/12; 4 section spacing; a Three Forks well; frack data to be provided later, according to Hess. Trivia: boy, these guys are good: they reached total depth in 20 days. At total depth, the bit was 1.7 feet below the ideal target total vertical depth (TVD) of 10,305.65 feet, according to the file report.

Chronologically, this is the lowest numbered well of the six wells. Geographically it is the northernmost of the six wells. The six wells:

• 21129, 777, Hess, EN-Riersgard-156-93-1718H-1 (this link is broken; Teegue could not stand all the nonsene on flaring). Alger, Bakken, s9/11; t2/12; F; cum 71K 9/12; 
• 21130, 739, Hess, EN-State C-156-93-1615H-1; t2/12; cum 53K 9/12; 
• 21131, 705, Hess, EN-Riersgard-156-93-1718H-2, t4/12; cum 86K 9/12;
• 21132, 372, Hess, EN-State C-156-93-1615H-2; t4/12; cum 38K 9/12; 
• 21133, 540, Hess, EN-Riersgard-156-93-1718H-3; t4/12; cum 61K 9/12;  
• 21134, 456, EN-State C-156-93-1615H-3; t4/12; cum 40K 9/12; 

Cool. So, are these the first six of a 12-well pad? A $100 million pad? On 2,560-acre spacing one would expect more than six wells. The four sections (15, 17, 17, and 18) run west-east. The wells are typical long laterals. The spacing means that an individual owning mineral rights in section 15 will participate in royalties from the horizontal running through sections 17 and 18 even though he/she will hold no acres in either of those two sections.

Now, go back to the March, 2012, dockets:

• Case 16885, cont'd, Hess, 12 wells on a 2560-acre unit, Banks-Bakken, Williams, McKenzie

Is it possible that in an earlier docket Hess had another 12-well, 2,560-acre spacing case? Or maybe yet to come. Regardless, we now see that Hess does plan 12 well, 2,560-acre spacing pads.

Here we go.

Idle rambling follows; recommendation: ignore it. 

By the way, I was following one of the longest threads ever on another site regarding spacing of Bakken wells (this link is broken; Teegue could not stand all the nonsense on flaring).  I thought one or two of the folks talking about this issue would understand the concept of unconventional/tight shale based on their expertise of the Bakken in general, but the one or two whom I thought understood things, said things about spacing that completely amazed me. I didn't post anything at the time for a number of reasons, but now with this 2,560-acre spacing pad and the first of six wells reporting an IP, it confirms what I thought all along. There are very, very few folks that really understand the concept of unconventional/tight oil and the reasoning for the spacing.

Also, a second note, same subject (2,560-acre spacing) but a different issue. I remember when 2,560-acre spacing was first being considered. Folks said that it would be impossible for rigs to push a horizontal wells across four sections (four miles of horizontal boring), much less keep the rig in the 10-foot seam of the formation (in some places). Now we see how they are going to exploit a 2,560-acre unit: with standard "long" laterals. So a mineral owner with one acre in the far northwest corner of the 2,560-acre unit, will participate in any oil taken from the far southeast corner in an east-west oriented four-section spacing unit, even though the horizontal is two miles away.