Wednesday, September 26, 2012

Cost of Proppant

I cannot vouch for the veracity of the following but it was taken from a comment at The Oil Drum regarding the cost of various proppants:

Types of proppant and their crush strength (I assume psi)
  • Pure silica sand --> 5,000 to 8,000 psi
  • Resin coated silica sand ---> regular sand and multiply by 1.5x to 2x crush strength
  • Ceramic proppant ---> 8,000 to 16,000 psi
  • Resin coated ceramic proppant ---> Takes regular Ceramic and multiply by 1.5x to 2x crush strength
Prices for these sands range as follows (note spelling of "tone"; not sure if US dollar or other):
  • Pure silica sand --- $50/tonne at mine (add in another $50 for transport)
  • Resin coated silica sand --- $400 - $500 / tonne at plant (add in another $50 for transport)
  • Ceramic proppant --- $500 - $800+ / tonne at ceramic factory. (add in another $50 for transport)
  • Resin coated ceramic proppant --- Not entirely sure. Guessing $1,000 + / tonne
**********************

On another note, I only looked at one of the well files of the four QEP MHA wells reporting IPs yesterday (the 2,000-bbl IPs in Heart Butte). The sundry form for that one well regarding completing/fracking the well was not yet scanned in. I didn't check the others; if I remember, I will check them later.

The reason this is important: if I call recall correctly, QEP stated at the time they bought Helis acreage: QEP does not use ceramic proppant; they use all sand whereas Helis uses a lot of ceramic proppant. If I recall correctly, QEP stated that there was no difference in initial production whether one used sand or ceramic. Long-term differences are not yet known, of course.

4 comments:

  1. This is a question. Not a comment. Carbo Ceramics has a recent investor presentation out where it shows that its higher strenght ceramic proppant results in significantly higher EURs, as sand and lower strength propant wells have a much higher decline rate.

    Can a well fracked with sand be refracked in four pr fiver years with ceramics? Seems like the cash flow might actually be best with that type plan. (Limit initialcash outflow, while rejuvenating flows after first few years of major decreases.)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Maybe some readers will provide some insight. I know I can't.

      I'm hoping conference calls with operators drilling in the Bakken will shed some light on this.

      Delete
  2. So imagine this. A glass of water 2 miles up and two miles distant. A driller in essence hits that glass of water expect that it is two miles down and two miles distance with a right or left turn. Oh by the way, the line isn't straight as the drilling process oscillates to hit the maximum paydirt as they dirt.

    So with that type of precision in the drilling process, just stop and think about the thought that is going into the extraction process. It will become no different than a car manufacture. Go from 5 cars and hour to 6 utilizing the same fixed overhead. Oil production will become that sophisicated. With the bakken being the lab. It may take years to refine the process, but the refining is going on.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Wow, I've made the same point many times. There are two broad stories: 1) the Bakken story itself; and, 2) the Bakken as a laboratory.

      Delete

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