Fracked with a system of 24 sliding sleeves and 9 plug and perf stages; combination of sand and ceramics. This was not an inexpensive well.
Drilled down to Nisku at 10,072; Three Forks at 9,890 feet.
It was spud August 26; reached total depth on October 15 (most wells now reach total depth in less than 30 days).
*******************
From the geologist's report (paraphrased; not quoted):
Upper Bakken reached at 9,721 feet; no mention of a Middle Bakken formation.
Three Forks formation reached at 9,830 feet total vertical depth. Gas ranged from 3.1 to 68 units.
Once rat hole completed and wire line e-logs were conducted (Sept 19 - Sept 21), re-entry was made from the kick-off point on September 24. Encountered some problems with motor (x2) and computer software glitch during early horizontal drilling.
A gas spike of 103 units coincided with oil shows shortly after entering the Three Forks formation.
Another tool failure while drilling laterally on October 11.
While drilling within the Three Forks, total gas levels remained relatively low, ranging from 0.1 to as high as 234 units, averaging 13.8 units. There was no flare. "Gamma reading remained fairly consistent: from as low as 28 API to as high as 141 API."
"Oil shows were somewhat consistent throughout the lateral and were exceptional during the concluding portion of the wellbore."
I'm out of my depth here (no pun intended), but it appears the top of the Three Forks was 9,890 feet, and the bottom of the Three Forks was 10,010. If that is accurate, the thickness of the Three Forks at this point is 120 feet. But again, I could be misinterpreting the data. (The depth numbers vary at different parts of the report.)
Note: this was transcribed/paraphrased/typed in haste. There may be typos. There are omissions.
***********************
NDIC File No: 21143 API No: 33-089-00647-00-00
Well Type: OG Well Status: A Status Date: 12/13/2011 Wellbore type: Horizontal
Location: SESE 21-137-97 Footages: 350 FSL 1250 FEL Latitude: 46.660005 Longitude: -102.920071
Current Operator: CHESAPEAKE OPERATING, INC.
Current Well Name: SCHOCH 21-137-97 A 1H
Elevation(s): 2734 KB 2712 GR 2716 GL Total Depth: 20269 Field: WILDCAT
Spud Date(s): 8/27/2011
Casing String(s): 9.625" 2215' 7" 10105'
Completion Data
Pool: BAKKEN/THREE FORKS Perfs: 10105-20269 Comp: 12/13/2011 Status: AL Date: 1/14/2012
Cumulative Production Data
Pool: BAKKEN/THREE FORKS Cum Oil: 0 Cum MCF Gas: 0 Cum Water: 43267
Production Test Data
IP Test Date: 12/16/2011 Pool: BAKKEN/THREE FORKS IP Oil: 0 IP MCF: 0 IP Water: 597
Monthly Production DataWell Type: OG Well Status: A Status Date: 12/13/2011 Wellbore type: Horizontal
Location: SESE 21-137-97 Footages: 350 FSL 1250 FEL Latitude: 46.660005 Longitude: -102.920071
Current Operator: CHESAPEAKE OPERATING, INC.
Current Well Name: SCHOCH 21-137-97 A 1H
Elevation(s): 2734 KB 2712 GR 2716 GL Total Depth: 20269 Field: WILDCAT
Spud Date(s): 8/27/2011
Casing String(s): 9.625" 2215' 7" 10105'
Completion Data
Pool: BAKKEN/THREE FORKS Perfs: 10105-20269 Comp: 12/13/2011 Status: AL Date: 1/14/2012
Cumulative Production Data
Pool: BAKKEN/THREE FORKS Cum Oil: 0 Cum MCF Gas: 0 Cum Water: 43267
Production Test Data
IP Test Date: 12/16/2011 Pool: BAKKEN/THREE FORKS IP Oil: 0 IP MCF: 0 IP Water: 597
| Pool | Date | Days | BBLS Oil | Runs | BBLS Water | MCF Prod | MCF Sold | Vent/Flare |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BAKKEN/THREE FORKS | 3-2012 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1813 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| BAKKEN/THREE FORKS | 2-2012 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 20018 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| BAKKEN/THREE FORKS | 1-2012 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 10982 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| BAKKEN/THREE FORKS | 12-2011 | 31 | 0 | 0 | 10454 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
31 days in Dec?
ReplyDelete.......
All CHK ND wells are high science and time wells. At least some are full cores. Slow, costly, educational.
CHK has learned ... something. Probably many things.
But, what?
CHK listed several potential horizons. CHK has said they are now testing another horizon.
Anon 1
In this area, only the Tyler makes sense (to me).
ReplyDeleteThey did not drill down to the Red River.
"Oil shows were somewhat consistent throughout the lateral and were exceptional during the concluding portion of the wellbore."
DeleteI don't understand. What does this mean if IP was 0? I will be the first to admit, I lack an understanding of the whole procedure, but doesn't seem logicial to drill 6 (or more) wells with no success if they were very expensive. I would think with no production they would just plug and abandon. Little confused, but maybe time will tell what is going on.
The operator would have to provide an explanation for the seeming discrepancy.
DeleteThere was no indication that the stimulation failed according to the file report, but let's say the fractures failed. The seam/shale would be oily, but it wouldn't be getting to the wellbore.
That's the challenge with tight shale, and why they call it "tight." The facture has to work for oil to be produced: either natural fractures, man-made fractures, or a combination of both.
Plugging and abandoning a well requires permission from the NDIC, I believe. Who knows what a workover rig could do. I don't think there's any need to rush into plugging a well. My hunch is that if given their choice, operators would not plug a well ever -- it's another expense. I believe it's the state that requires them to plug a well if there is no production after a given period of time, certainly at least a year. But again, I don't know the specifics.
Thanks for all your insight. I find this all very interesting, more so I suppose because my family has some interest in it. I appreciate your blog!!
DeleteDon't take me too seriously. I am a layman with no experience in oil industry. I imagine the professionals, the rough necks, the real oil folks (men and women) get a daily laugh from my site. Smile.
Delete"Doesn't seem logical to drill 6 (or more) wells with no success". This is true. Yet CHK's wells are not all drilled in the same small area.
DeleteI'm too lazy to check the specifics, but I believe they've spread them from 139-95, to 138-96, to 137-97 (all the way to G.V. Co in 139-104?). Whether those twps are correct or not, in essence Chesapeake has run a line of wells across a broad swath of the southern end of the play hoping to find a sweet spot somewhere along the line. At least that is the way it appears to me.
You are correct. They are spread out over quite an area (good) and they are testing a "new" formation according to the transcript.
DeleteSo, that's the good news.
This is the bad news. There are "no" dry wells in the Bakken, so when an operator hits two dry wells, or almost dry wells, consecutively, it gets attention. In previous booms, dry wells were common in what I call the "legacy" formations. But one of the unique things about the Bakken is how few dry wells there are; perhaps many non-economical wells, but not dry. In the previous booms, the cost of a dry well could be offset by the good wells.
The Bakken wells are very, very expensive, and CHK went all out on these two most recent wells; they called them exploratory wells, but when you throw 30+ stages and 4 million pounds of proppant at them, the company expects to have a nice well. (At least I would think.)
In the previous booms, a dry well was taken in stride. These days, losing $10 million on a single well is tough to take. It's particularly tough to take when the company is stressed.
If the "new" target provides better results, then we have new data points to consider.
I fully expect the Decker well that comes off the list on Thursday to show the same results as the well that came off today.
DeleteThis well is in the same township as the Zent well, I believe 4 sections to the east. Thats a hard hit if all 3 of those end up as nonproducing.
Something still does not feel right that a company already stressed financially would drill not one, not two, but three and possibly more wells that didn't produce. I've got to think there are things that we don't know yet. As always...time will tell.
You are correct.
DeleteSeveral disconnected dots that might eventually connect.
1. Companies have budgets and plans. These wells were already budgeted and planned. A certain amount of money has already been sunk into developing these wells (planning, leases, pads, contracts).
2. Everyone agrees that the Bakken is tough; all operators entering the Bakken are on a learning curve. CHK is new to the Bakken (and relatively new to oil; they were primarily natural gas) and it would be expected that they need a few wells to gain experience.
3. However, in the latest transcript, the CHK CEO himself said that the Bakken/Three Forks appears not to be working for CHK and they are now testing another formation.
4. From the transcript, CHK says they will stay in the 11 prospects in which they are either the #1 or the #2 producer. The Bakken is not one of those eleven. In the transcript, the CEO says they will sell their interests in the Permian and their Joint Venture in the Mississippi Lime (if I recall correctly). The Williston Basin is not mentioned in the first group of eleven; and it is not mentioned in the group of two to be sold. Thus, the Williston Basin is in a grey zone. My hunch is that CHK is having a very hard time deciding what to do with the Bakken.
They had at least 300,000 acres and were planning for 400,000 acres at one time (before they got into trouble). That amount of acreage puts them into the top tier in the Bakken.
So my hunch is that there is a division inside CHK on the Bakken. Some want to sell it ("it's not working out"); and others know the potential (and are arguing to "give us a chance -- let us drill the wells that are already permitted/leased to see if we can make this work").
Remember, this all comes with recent findings that there are additional benches, maybe as many as four, in the lower Three Forks. The Pronghorn Sand is another formation peculiar to southwest North Dakota where CHK is.
And then this: I've posted this a couple of times, but I don't think folks are grabbing the magnitude of this. Leigh Price suggested that there was 250 to 500 billion bbls original oil in place (rounding numbers); the USGS, I think says maybe 150 billion bbls (I forget). For quite some time CLR has said they've been working with 300 billion bbls OOIP. Now, CLR has moved to 900 billion bbls. If this is public information now, you know that the oil companies knew of this number a long time ago.
So, if you are CHK, you may have acreage that has much more oil than you ever imagined but your experience has not been enough to figure out how to reach it. It would be hard to leave this much oil behind. Remember, CHK was in North Dakota a long time ago, and then left. I believe it was the CEO who said he had no desire to repeat that error.
Six $10 million wells sounds expensive. CHK just took out a $4 billion loan. I can't deal with billions. So, let's do it this way. CHK just took out a $4,000 loan. They will now spend $60 to see if they can make their 400,000 Williston Basin acres work.
If I had $4,000 in my billfold, and was wondering whether to spend $60 on six wells in the biggest continuous oil basin in the continental US, ....
Oilmen are gamblers. It would be very hard for a gambler not to spend $60 when one has a new wad of $4,000. Even if they eventually sell their Williston Basin property, they will get a better deal if they can prove there is recoverable oil there.
Having said all that, you can read my other comments at other posts arguing just the opposite.
Bruce, I agree with most of your comments yet I don't think the "$4,000" is in the wallet. If I remember correctly this loan was secured primarily to cover another short term loan which is about to come due.
DeleteI fear CHK's troubles are very deep. Unless they sell their Permian basin properties soon they're facing a staggering cash crunch. It will take everything just to keep on top of their 11 prized prospects. As much as anything, I suspect their efforts to prove another formation in the Williston Basin is an attempt to make it a more attractive property to sell. As is being on the fringe of the play, and with their well results to date, it wouldn't bring much if they sold out. I'm afraid their current financial dilemma outweighs any amount of potential original oil in place.
Very good point. I guess they "feel" they have $4,000 in their wallet for a few moments before it will be removed to pay that loan. I can't keep track of all this.
DeleteI can "argue" both sides of this, since I have no dog in this fight.
At the end of the day, if I had to paint the big picture, this is what I would say:
a) they are in deep, deep financial trouble as you say (that's the reality)
b) they are hoping for a miracle, that somehow this will all work out (and that's the oilman's gambling personality).
I do think the Bakken represents the biggest piece of the puzzle that the board can't decide what to do. McLendon wants to keep it at all costs; the board (or someone) wants to sell it for the cash.
The Kostenko well is to be released from "tight hole" status May 29th. To this day they have done nothing to my knowledge to get any oil from this well; will be curious to see what the last 4 months looks like on this well. I am wondering if they have run any production tests.
DeleteThis is file # 21681, Kostenko 30-138-97 A 1H, southwest of Dickinson.
DeleteAs you noted, it is on "tight hole" status and if they have produced any oil from that well that information has not been publicly disseminated.
They need to partner up with a proven driller like Whiting who knows what it takes to drill successfully, they have the science further evolved than others or maybe they just work with better engineers/scientists who can better interpret data. Not sure if it's faulty data interpretation or faulty action based on correct interpretation.
DeleteNow you know why NOG's unique business plan is such a successful plan.
DeleteI have family that checks Kostenko reglarly: there are tanks, 4 valves and a gauge on well head and dirt berm in front of tanks where trucks would load if there was any activity. The well has been fracked but that is it.
DeleteExcellent. Thank you for taking time to comment. It will be interesting to see how this one plays out. I really do hope CHK has some successful wells. Some of their wildcat wells are truly out in the middle of nowhere, and if they are successful, it could really open up some new areas.
DeleteNOG actually shows that it has a 6.23% working interest in this well and as far as I can tell it's the only one of CHK wells they are involved in. It also shows on NOG map.
DeleteThank goodness -- for NOG -- only 6.23% interest. Smile.
Delete