Random Look At Production Of An Older Well When A New Bakken Well Is Completed

From a reader, sent in as a comment in response to my post on 1.5 million-barrel-EUR milestone:

Speaking of milestones, an additional data point that I heard earlier this week was with respect to two Newfield wells, located on the east side of Watford City. Those wells are both middle Bakken wells, and are located only ~600 feet apart. The first well actually started producing more once the second well was fracked. Both appear to be good wells.

It will be fun to watch and see how the Continental Resources experiment turns out where they are going to put 4 wells in a single layer spaced at ~600 feet.

Most likely the reader is talking about these two wells, sited about 265 feet from each other; the horizontals are 105 feet from each other laterally and, from what I can tell, pretty much at the same depth (the horizontal laterals):

• 19112, 2,526, Newfield, Charlotte 150-98-17-20-1H, Siverston, t11/10; cum 161K 10/12;
• 21401,1,968, Newfield, Charlotte 150-98-17-20-2H, Siverston, t3/12; cum 84K 10/12;

Vertical depth, but of course, the laterals may be separated vertically more than this, but the vertical depth for the two wells were essentially the same (note: I do not have formal training in reading file reports; these numbers could be off, way off, but this is what I saw).

• 19112: 11,086 feet
• 21401: 11,099 feet

If, in fact, the first well started producing more after the second well was fracked, that certainly seems to make sense. I've opined that fracturing is effective 500-feet radially ... and well, you can connect the dots.

So, let's look at the production of #19112 between the months of 10/11 and 10/12 (before and after #21401) was fracked. Now, again, this is the production from the old well.

Read from the bottom up. I assume the well was taken off line 1/12 - 3/12 while the other well was being completed.

19112, 2,526, Newfield, Charlotte 150-98-17-20-1H:

Pool	Date	Days	BBLS Oil	Runs	BBLS Water	MCF Prod	MCF Sold	Vent/Flare
BAKKEN	10-2012	28	5687	5616	2382	11696	11497	199
BAKKEN	9-2012	30	6916	6792	2718	13730	13329	402
BAKKEN	8-2012	31	7089	7258	2815	13153	12936	218
BAKKEN	7-2012	31	7823	8006	3213	14502	13567	936
BAKKEN	6-2012	30	9891	9646	4017	18226	17711	516
BAKKEN	5-2012	30	16675	16620	6975	33883	28352	5531
BAKKEN	4-2012	23	3120	3097	0	5127	1759	3368
BAKKEN	3-2012	4	1039	990	1212	1653	11	1642
BAKKEN	2-2012	0	0	0	fracking	first well	0	0
BAKKEN	1-2012	6	1083	1082	217	571	571	0
BAKKEN	12-2011	17	1565	1689	540	3136	3136	0
BAKKEN	11-2011	30	4877	5469	1658	9146	9122	24
BAKKEN	10-2011	26	4483	3792	1838	7242

Again, I did not know what the production numbers were going to be until I copied and pasted, seeing them in real time, just as you are.

The results are interesting.

I remember folks elsewhere wringing their hands over additional wells being drilled into sections where "their" one well was already producing. Such wringing of hands suggests "we" don't know all there is to know about tight oil/unconventional shale. I certainly don't. But some of this seems to make sense.

******************

In light of the original comment and the stand-alone post, reading through this discussion is entertaining. It is amazing how far we have come. As just one example:  "My belief is that a good separation for laterals is ~ 4,000 feet and a good lateral length should be based on economics." -- posted March 4, 2012.