Absolutely Nothing To Do With The Bakken -- Archival -- Bragging Rights

Updates

May 27, 2021:from wiki:

Stellantis N.V. is a Dutch-domiciled multinational automotive manufacturer, formed in 2021 on the basis of a 50-50 cross-border merger between the Italian Fiat Chrysler Automobiles and the French PSA Group, and headquartered in Amsterdam, Netherlands. 

On 15 May 2021, Stellantis is the eighth-largest automaker worldwide (behind Volkswagen Group, Toyota, Daimler AG, Ford, Honda, General Motors and BMW).[ 

The principal activity of Stellantis is the design, development, manufacture and sale of automobiles bearing the Abarth, Alfa Romeo, Chrysler, Citroën, Dodge, DS, Fiat, Fiat Professional, Jeep, Lancia, Maserati, Mopar, Opel, Peugeot, Ram and Vauxhall brands. 

It is one of the largest automakers in the world and has 400,000 employees, a presence in more than 130 countries with manufacturing facilities in 30 countries.

March 26, 2017: from The [London] Guardian:

The owner of Peugeot and Citroën is close to completing a deal with General Motors to buy its European car brands Vauxhall and Opel.

Groupe PSA and GM could announce a deal as early as Monday morning after successful talks between the carmakers.

Negotiations about a potential acquisition were revealed last month and the board of PSA is now understood to have approved the deal.

The announcement of a deal will kickstart an brutal political battle between the governments of France, the home of PSA, Germany, the home of Opel, and Britain, the home of Vauxhall, to protect jobs and plants in their countries.

 Original Post

A reader alerted me to this item:

General Motors Co is in advanced discussions to buy a small stake in French automaker PSA Peugeot Citroen as part of their proposed strategic alliance in Europe, sources familiar with the situation said on Monday.

Under the terms being discussed, GM would likely buy a stake of less than 5 percent in Peugeot, the sources said. A deal could be announced in the next few days, although sources warned that no deal has been reached and talks could still fall apart.

On first blush, this makes absolutely no sense. An investment of 5 percent in Peugeot is "peanuts" for Government Motors. The article provides a boiler plate explanation why Peugeot is involved. So one has to ask, why would GM even be exploring such an investment. Perhaps these two paragraphs help explain:

Analysts said an alliance with Peugeot would allow the companies to pool together resources to develop vehicles. But they added that it could take a decade to fully realize the benefits of the pact and more steps would be needed to overcome the core problem for both automakers in Europe: overcapacity.

"Frankly we believe it will introduce complications at a very delicate time in its own restructuring," Guggenheim analyst Matthew Stover said last week. "In the grand scheme of things, GM has much more to offer PSA than the other way around."

First of all, take the "GM has much more to offer PSA (Peugeot) than the other way around" statement with a grain of salt. These guys don't do business deals out of the goodness of their hearts. GM has an idea; they're thinking outside the box. Remember, their shareholder-in-chief is a Harvard grad.

When I was stationed in Europe back in the 80's, the Citroen caught my eye for two reasons: a) it was downright ugly; and b) it was downright ugly. No actually, the second reason was that it was very small.

I don't know what the Citroen looks like now, and it doesn't matter because "it could take a decade to fully realize the benefits" and over a decade the style could change significantly.

But, if you start with an ugly car, and you start with a small car, what's the first thing that comes to mind? Yup, you got it.

For those who haven't got it yet, think where Government Motors (and all automakers) want to be a decade from now.

The last hint: Peugeot would make a great laboratory outside the eyes of the American press.

The only reason I'm posting this is for bragging rights for the person who alerted me to the article. It's his hunch that the whole thing has to do with using Peugeot has a laboratory for developing a new electric vehicle.

Archival purposes only. Now, how to tag it?

Housekeeping: Blurb on CLR Acquisition -- 35,000 More Acres -- The Bakken, North Dakota, USA

This is an old story; just some housekeeping for archival purposes. [Update, November 18, 2012 -- was the Newfield's Big Valley prospect?]

From a CLR press release:

Continental Resources announced the acquisition of 23,161 net acres in Williams County, North Dakota , associated production of approximately 1,000 net Boepd, and eight wells that are drilled but not yet completed. The transaction was completed in February 2012 for $276 million . Continental will act as operator on 89 percent of the newly acquired acreage, most of which is already held by production. In total, the new acreage represents 29 operated spacing units for Continental.

The Company also announced the acquisition of leases covering an additional 12,017 net acres in February 2012 .

"These acquisitions are a great fit with our current Bakken position and are 100 percent ready to drill," Mr. Hamm said. 

"Our goal is to add to and high-grade our strategic leasehold, concentrating on Bakken acreage where we will have a dominant working interest and operating control.

I assume I blogged about this earlier, but can't remember, and I know there is a lot of interest regarding CLR's new acreage. The 23,161-acre block came from Newfield.

Fracking Backlog Update: Fifty Percent of Recently Drilled Wells Not Completed

Of the ten most recently reporting wells in the Bakken, all ten came off the confidential list over the weekend, only five were fracked/completed, i.e., 50 percent. Part of the reason may be the winter. But we are well into the second or third year of the boom and well past the point where operators said they would be caught up by now.

Reminder: Daytona 500 on Fox Right Now

Seven (7) New Permits -- The Williston Basin, North Dakota, USA -- Clarks Creek

Graphics

March 1, 2020:

January 29, 2020: see this note for an update of this area. 

  
October 22, 2019:

Updates

March 8, 2020: huge, huge wells being reported by EOG.

August 9, 2015: Mike Filloon's incredible article on EOG's Hawkeye wells in Clarks Creek oil field. Highly recommend you read.

June 19, 2013: two more spectacular EOG Hawkeye wells. 

March 29, 2013: April, 2013, dockets -- EOG will put 22 wells on one 2560-acre spacing unit: sections 6, 7, 18, and 19 - 151-94.

December 15, 2012: update on EOG's Clarks Creek wells.

November 4, 2012: EOG's plans for 6 wells on a 320-acre spacing unit in this area, in Antelope field;


August 8, 2012: to the five wells mentioned below (20329 - 20334, inclusive) add two more wells in that same section. There are now seven wells being drilled in this one section. Add these two:

• 22962, 1,093, EOG, West Clark 5-2425H, Clarks Creek, t12/12; cum 289K 8/16;
• 22963, 1,908, EOG, West Clark 1-2-2413H, Clarks Creek, t10/12; cum 164K 8/16; off-line much of 2016

August 8, 2012:

• 20888, 3,415, EOG, Clarks Creek 14-1819H, Clarks Creek, t4/12; cum 246K 8/16; 21 stages; 4.1 million lbs; all sand; 4-section spacing (2560-acre); 

Original Post 

Daily activity report, February 27, 2011 --

Operators: EOG (4), MRO, BR, Samson Resources

Fields: Ambrose, Clarks Creek, Camel Butte, Deep water Creek Bay

The four EOG wells will be on one pad, or two neighboring pads.

It looks like it's time for a stand-alone post on Clarks Creek. This is a 12-section field (2x6) lying on the western boundary of the reservation. EOG already has a similar configuration in this field, except three wells each pad, both pads very near each other:

• 20329, 1,203, EOG, West Clark 4-2425H, Clarks Creek, Bakken, running south; middle Bakken, t5/13; cum 290K 8/16;
• 20330, 142, EOG, West Clark 3-2413H, Clarks Creek, Bakken, running south; middle Bakken; t6/13; cum 251K 8/16;
• 20331, 1,251, EOG, West Clark 101-2425H, Clarks Creek, Bakken, running north; Three Forks Samson "E" marker, 30 feet into the Three Forks; gas up to 6,329 units; t4/13; cum 241K 8/16;
• 20332, 647, EOG, West Clark 100-2413H, Clarks Creek, Bakken, running north; middle Bakken; (permit app said Three Forks; geology report said it targeted the middle Bakken but the conclusion said it was in the Three Forks);  25 stages; 2.8 million lbs; s January 12, 2012; reached total depth on February 1, 2012 (23 days); max gas 1,438 units; t9/12; cum 210K 8/16;
• 20333, 449, EOG, West Clark 2-2425H, Clarks Creek, t9/12; cum 227K 8/16; running south; Three Forks, 30 feet into the Three Forks; the permit app said Bakken, but the geology report was very clear that they were targeting and in the Three Forks;
• 20334, 1,324, EOG, West Clark 1-2413H, Clarks Creek, t10/12; cum 199K 8/16;; running north; Three Forks, 30 feet into the Three Forks; the permit app said Bakken but the geology report clearly states Three Forks

And, of course, this renews the discussion on the nomenclature of EOG wells ("100" vs "101") -- which I won't get into, but was huge discussion thread elsewhere two to three years ago. (I think I got the "north" and "south" on the wells correct.)

[Update, March 29, 2013: the nomenclature is very simple. The wells are numbered chronologically or sequentially. Wells 100 and above are Three Forks wells; wells numbered 1 - 99 are middle Bakken wells]

Speaking of nomenclature, here are the new wells:

• 22484, 2,946, EOG, Hawkeye 102-2501H, Clarks Creek, Bakken, Three Forks; producing, first short month at 17,147 bbls, January, 2013; t1/13; cum 532K 8/16;
• 22485, 1,926, EOG, Hawkeye 01-2501H, Clarks Creek, Bakken, middle Bakken; producing, first short month at 17,721 bbls, January, 2013; t1/13; cum 590K 8/16;
• 22486, 2,421, EOG, Hawkeye 100-2501H, Clarks Creek, Bakken, Three Forks, t9/12; cum 709K 8/16;
• 22487, 67, EOG, Hawkeye 02-2501H, Clarks Creek, Bakken, middle Bakken, t12/13; cum 634K 8/16;

And now for a teaser: wow, there are some good old Madison wells in the immediate area. I will get back to them later.

No IPs reported on today's daily activity report.



Permits

2019
36416, 2,859, EOG, Clarks Creek 105-0719H, t9/19; cum 233K 1/29;
36415, 3,519, EOG, Clarks Creek 18-0719H, t9/19; cum 282K 1/29;
36414, loc, EOG, ....17-0718H,
36413, 2,058, EOG, Clarks Creek 106-0719H, t9/19; cum 291K 1/29;
36412, conf, EOG, Clarks Creek 47-0706H, t--; cum 100K in less than four months;
36411, conf, EOG, Clarks Creek 46-0706H, t--; cum almost 200K in less than four months;
36410, conf, EOG, Clarks Creek 45-0705H, t--; cum 100K in less than four months;
36409, loc, EOG, ....44-0718H,

2018 (yes, only one Clarks Creek permit in 2018)

34448, 1,380, EOG, Clarks Creek 108-0706H, Clarks Creek, t6/18; cum 202K 1/20;

2017
34395, conf, White Butte Oil Operations, LLC, 
34394, PNC, White Butte Oil Operations, LLC,
34393, conf, White Butte Oil Operations, LLC,
34392, drl, White Butte Oil Operations, LLC, 
34391, PNC, White Butte Oil Operations, LLC,
34390, PNC, White Butte Oil Operations, LLC,
34389, PNC, White Butte Oil Operations, LLC,
34388, PNC, White Butte Oil Operations, LLC,
34387, PNC, White Butte Oil Operations, LLC,
34386, PNC, White Butte Oil Operations, LLC,
34379, conf, White Butte Oil Operations, LLC,
34378, conf, White Butte Oil Operations, LLC,
34377, conf, White Butte Oil Operations, LLC,
34376, conf, White Butte Oil Operations, LLC,
34375, conf, White Butte Oil Operations, LLC,
34374, conf, White Butte Oil Operations, LLC,
34373, conf, White Butte Oil Operations, LLC,
34372, conf, White Butte Oil Operations, LLC,


2016
33050, 1,703, EOG, Clarks Creek 75-0719HX, Clarks Creek, t6/17; cu 459K 1/20; off line 9/19; back online 1/20;
32800, 2,615, EOG, Clarks Creek 155-0706H, Clarks Creek, t6/18; cum 321K 1/20;
32799, 1,873, EOG, Clarks Creek 24-0706H, Clarks Creek; t6/18; cum 340K 1/20;
32798, 1,744, EOG, Clarks Creek 107-0706H, Clarks Creek; t7/18; cum 274K 1/20;
32797, 2,172, EOG, Clarks Creek 72-0706H, Clarks Creek; t7/18; cum 275K 1/20;
32796, 2,518, EOG, Clarks Creek 73-0719H, Clarks Creek, t6/17; cum 336K 1/20;
32795, 2,204, EOG, Clarks Creek 110-0719H, Clarks Creek, t6/17; cum 342K 1/20;
32794, 2,382, EOG, Clarks Creek 74-0719H, Clarks Creek, t6/17; cum 366K 1/20;
32793, PNC, EOG, Clarks Creek 75-0719H,
32647, PNC, EOG, Riverview 19-3130H,
32646, PNC, EOG, Riverview 18 ...
32645, PNC, EOG, Riverview 17 ...
32644, PNC, EOG, Riverview 16 ...
32643, PNC, EOG, Riverview 15 ...
32642, PNC, EOG, Riverview 14 ...
32641, PNC, EOG, Riverview 13 ...
32640, PNC, EOG, Riverview 125 ...
32639, PNC, EOG, Riverview 124 ...
32638, PNC, EOG, Riverview 123 ...
32637, PNC, EOG, Riverview 122 ...
32636, PNC, EOG, Riverview 121 ...
32491, PNC, EOG, Riverview 133 ...
32490, conf, EOG, Hawkeye 132-2536H,
32489, conf, EOG, Hawkeye 131-2536H,
32488, conf, EOG, Hawkeye 123-2536H,


2015  (complete)
32222, conf, EOG, Hawkeye 145-2536H,
32199,
32198,
32197, conf, EOG, Hawkeye 106-2536H,
32186,
32285, conf, EOG, Hawkeye 137-2536H,
32184
32183,
32182,
32181,
32180
32179,
32178, PNC, EOG, Hawkeye 119-2536H,
32162,
32161,
32160, conf, EOG, Hawkeye 105-2536H,,
32147, conf, EOG, Hawkeye 148-2536H,
32146,
32145,
32144,
32143,
32142, PNC, EOG, Hawkeye 141-2536H,
31815, PNC, EOG, Riverview 101-3031H,
31814,
31813,
31812,
31811,
31810, PNC, EOG, Riverview 128 ...
31809, 2,581, EOG, Riverview 21-3031H, Clarks Creek, t8/19; cum 187K 1/20;
31808, 1,981, EOG, Riverview 22-3031H, Clarks Creek, t8/19; cum 182K 1/20;
31807, 2,222, EOG, Riverview 23-3031H, Clarks Creek, t8/19; cum 167K 1/20;
31806, 1,316, EOG, Riverview 24-3031H, Clarks Creek, t8/19; cum 174K 1/20;
31805, 2,073, EOG, Riverview 25-3031H, Clarks Creek, t8/19; cum 229K 1/20;
31804, 2,596, EOG, Riverview 26-3031H, Clarks Creek, t8/19; cum 276K 1/20;
31403, conf, EOG, West Clark 117-0136H, producing, a nice well,
31388, conf, EOG, West Clark 115-0136PNC,
31387,
31386,
31385,
31384,
31383,
31382
31381,
31380,
31379,
31378,
31377,
31376,
31375, PNC, EOG, West Clark 132-0136H,
31374, PNC, EOG, West Clark 122-0136H,
31257, loc, EOG, West Clark 129-0136H,
31256, loc, EOG, West Clark 128-0136H,
31255, loc, EOG, West Clark 134-0136H,
31254, loc, EOG, West Clark 127-0136H,
31253, loc, EOG, West Clark 126-0136H,
31252, PNC, EOG, West Clark 116-0136H,
31251, PNC, EOG, West Clark 107-0136H,
31250, PNC, EOG, West Clark 106-0136H,
31249, TA/127 (no typo), EOG, West Clark 105-0136H/West Clark 201-01SWD,
31248, 1,272, EOG, West Clark 104-0136H, Clarks Creek, t5/16; cum 199K 1/20;
31247, 1,613 EOG, West Clark 103-0136H, Clarks Creek, t5/16; cum 189K 11/18;
31246, PNC, EOG, West Clark 8-0136H,
31194, 2,390, Slawson, Jore Federal 1-12H, Clarks Creek, t2/19; cum 132K 1/20;
31193, 1,455, Slawson, Jore Federal 13-12TF2H, Clarks Creek, t2/19; cum 41K 1/20;
31192, 1,017, Slawson, Jore Federal 12-12TFH, Clarks Creek, t2/19; cum72K 1/20;
31191, conf, Slawson, Jore Federal 15-12TF3H,
31190, conf, Slawson, Jore Federal 13-12TF2H,

2014 (complete)
29964, 713, SHD Oil & Gas, Magnum 36-13-TF2, Clarks Creek, t12/15; cum 65K 11/18; offline much of 2016;
29963, 1,231, SHD Oil & Gas, Magnum 36-12-MB2, Clarks Creek, t12/15; cum 116K 11/18;
29962, 142, SHD Oil & Gas, Magnum 36-11-TF2, Clarks Creek, t12/15; cum 38K 8/16; offline much of 2016;
29755, 1,096, SHD Oil & Gas, Avalanche 36-14-MB2, Clarks Creek, t12/15; cum 49K 8/16; offline much of 2016;
29754, 1,111, SHD Oil & Gas, Avalanche 36-15-TF1, Clarks Creek, t12/15; cum 45K 8/16; offline much of 2016;
29753, 1,082, SHvD Oil & Gas, Avalanche 36-16-MB2, Clarks Creek, t12/15; cum 312K 8/16; offline much of 2016;
29752, 233, SHD Oil & Gas, Avalanche 36-17-TF2, Clarks Creek, t12/15; cum 8K 8/16; offline much of 2016;
29679, loc, EOG, West Clark 06-01M, (the "M" indicates a monitoring well)
28747, 2,592, Slawson, Jore Federal 2-12H, one section, 21 stages, 4.8 million lbs; t9/4; cum 253K 1/20;

2013 (complete)

27041, 1,905, SHD Oil & Gas, Bullet 12-36H, Clarks Creek, t6/14; cum 205K 11/18;
27040, 2,082, SHD Oil & Gas, Thud 12-36H, Clarks Creek, t6/14; cum 184K 11/18;
27039, 1,759, SHD Oil & Gas, Hammer 12-36H, Clarks Creek, t10/15; cum 121K 11/18;
27038, 1,980, SHD Oil & Gas, Canon 12-36H, Clarks Creek, t10/15; cum 110K 11/18;
26811, 1,888, SHD Oil & Gas, Luke 13-36H, Clarks Creek, 11/14; cum 115K 11/18;
26810, 1,274, SHD Oil & Gas, Marc 13-36H, Clarks Creek, t11/14; cum 131K 11/18;
26809, 1,753, SHD Oil & Gas, Mattie 13-36H, Clarks Creek, t11/14; cum 226K 11/18;
26808, 1,636, SHD Oil & Gas, Bucky 13-36H, Clarks Creek, t11/14; cum 176K 11/18;

2012 (not including ones listed before March 29, 2013, below)

• 22943, PNC, EOG, Riverview 103-3130H, Clarks Creek,
• 22200, 528, EOG, Riverview 4-3031H, Clarks Creek, t7/12; cum 457K 11/18;
• 22199, 1,088, EOG, Riverview 100-3031H, Clarks Creek, 2 sections, Three Forks, 39 stages, 5.8 million lbs, t6/12; cum 478K 11/18;

Prior to 2012
20513, 2,365, EOG, Riverview 3-3130H, Clarks Creek, t3/13; cum 716K 11/18;

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

Clarksville...Clarks Creek...close enough:

Last Train to Clarksville, The Monkees

Proppants for Sale

This came to me as a comment; in case folks missed it:

Northern White sand, Southern White, ceramic sand, resin coat, guar products and fracking chemicals. Available for Bakken, and beyond. While I don't produce ceramic proppant in North Dakota, I do stock and sell it there.

ryan@mkttradeincorporated.com

Again, I have not verified the site, and have no connection to it.

The Discussion Begins Regarding Water Flooding in the Bakken

Updates

February 5, 2015: see updates for these wells at this post. 
 

Original Post

Link here.

Bakken wells permitted for water injection (I will only post the first 100):

• 16986, A/PWI/1,347, EOG, Parshall 20-03H, s1/08; t 5/08; AL; cum 258K 9/16; short horizontal. See update here; request to convert from water injection to gas injection.
• 17170, A/PWI/667, EOG, Wayzeta 4-16H, Parshall, Bakken, s4/08; t7/08; cum 461K 9/16; -- pretty impressive -- update here (same link as above) no pump; >300K after 3 years; a short lateral; 6 frack stages (?);

By the way, this should spawn some other discussion. the Parshall 20-03H well was a short horizontal and yet it is 1280-acre spacing.

White House Approves TransCanada's Plan for Keystone Lite -- Literally Praising the Canadian Proposal

The president literally praises TransCanada's proposal to pump $2.3 billion into a shovel-ready job that will put thousands of Americans to work in the southern states going into the 2012 election. Literally praising TransCanada.

President Barack Obama "welcomes" TransCanada's decision to build a pipeline to bring crude oil from Cushing, Oklahoma, to the Gulf of Mexico. "As the President made clear in January, we support the company's interest in proceeding with this project, which will help address the bottleneck of oil in Cushing that has resulted in large part from increased domestic oil production, currently at an eight year high. Moving oil from the Midwest to the world-class, state-of-the-art refineries on the Gulf Coast will modernize our infrastructure, create jobs, and encourage American energy production," the White House said in a statement.

Wow, just think: this pipeline will modernize our infrastructure, create jobs, and encourage American energy production. Wow. Just think what Keystone XL would have done.

Note: this is just the pipeline from Cushing, OK, to the Gulf.

One has to ask why TransCanada didn't do this all along. Once the Canadian-Montana leg is approved after the election, the next fight will be in Texas. My understanding is that the Texas ranches, the Sierra Club and other faux-environmentalists will do what they can to stop the pipeline going through Texas. I believe the proposed pipeline runs perilously close to the Edwards Aquifer underlying the second-largest city in Texas, San Antonio. TransCanada is smart to get this southern route completed.

CNBC Talking Head: Iranian Embargo Does Not Go Into Effect for a Couple of Months

Operation Incredibly Loud and Extremely Close

Updates

May 3, 2012: so where do "we"stand with regard to India and Iran? India says it will cut  back on Iranian oil imports by 15% this financial year. Whoop-de-do. Iran is now exporting at the lowest level since 1990, following the Iran-Iraq war, down 150,000 bbls (in two months) to 3.2 million bbls/day. (At same link.) Is it just me, or does 150,000 bopd out of 3.3 million not seem like such a big deal with Brent oil priced where it is?

May 3, 2012: So much for global sanctions on Iran. India continues to flip-flop. First said it would ignore sanctions; then said it would abide by them; now insuring the Iranian tankers when others won't.

The Indian government has offered to insure as much as $50 million for any "Indian flag carriers" traveling to Iran. This amount falls well short of the actual liability incurred by oil tankers on any given trip, but it comes to more than six times as much as the Japanese government has offered its companies, illustrating India's interest in continuing the flow of Iranian oil.

April 17, 2012: does anyone really think Iran is selling less oil? At PennEnergy:

In the wake of the recent failed missile test in North Korea, cracks are also forming in U.S. and European efforts to contain access to nuclear technology on the other side of the continent.

Reuters reports that Iranian oil tankers have been circumventing sanctions against the country by operating without the normal electronic tracking and identification equipment, allowing them to transport oil to clients secretly.

Of the 39 oil ships that make up Iran's tanker fleet, only nine are currently operating with their black boxes active, allowing the AIS Live tracking system to monitor them.

One hour later after original post: a reader (Don) wrote to tell me that the embargo goes into effect July 1, 2012. I responded:

Three confounding factors July 1:

1) it's always possible, compromises will be worked out that will allow Iran to sell its oil on the open market

2) buyers will have found alternate sources and will have adapted to 3.5 million bbl/day shortfall

3) peak driving season, making it difficult to adapt to the 3.5 million bbl deficit

Oh, yes, one other factor:

4) Operation Incredibly Loud and Extremely Close --- this would be the Israeli attack on Iran. 

Original Post

I missed it, but I think he said the Iranian oil embargo will go into effect in June, 2012.

SeekingAlpha: Six Value Energy Stocks

Link here.

Companies mentioned: Tesoro, EOG, BHI, Nabors, Denbury, Peabody Energy (BTU).

Note disclaimer at sidebar at the right; this is not an investment blog.

Active Rigs Back to 205: Ties Record

Link here. A dynamic link; numbers will change over time.