From the May, 2012, NDIC hearing dockets:
17789, Oasis, Sorkness-Bakken, 6 wells on 4 existing 1280-acre units; 24 wells; Mountrail County
17790, Oasis, Bonetrail-Bakken, 6 wells on 5 existing 1280-acre units; 30 wells; Williams County
17791, Oasis, Sanish-Bakken, 6 wells on an existing 640-acre unit; Mountrail County
17792, Oasis, Camp-Bakken, 6 wells on 3 existing 1280-acre units; 18 wells; McKenzie County
17793, Oasis, Willow Creek-Bakken; 6 wells on an existing 1280-acre unit, McKenzie/Wms
I did this quickly; didn't double-check for accuracy, and may be misreading the dockets. But this is my initial take.
I am not concerned with "absolute accuracy" -- whether I'm off by a few wells or not. It's the general picture I'm interested in. In this case, 6 wells on a 640-acre spacing unit; six wells on 1280-acre spacing units. Compare with 8 wells on 1280-acre spacing units that Zenergy is looking at.
Saturday, May 5, 2012
Zenergy Anticipating 456 Wells in McKenzie and Williams Counties, North Dakota, USA -- The Bakken
From the May, 2012, NDIC hearing dockets:
17861, Zenergy, Painted Woods-Bakken; 8 wells on 4 existing 1280-acre units; 32 wells; Williams
17862, Zenergy, Painted Woods-Bakken; 8 wells on an existing 960-acre unit; Williams County; from what I can tell, there is only one 960-acre unit in Painted Woods; Zenergy has a producing area in the immediate area, as well as a rig-on-site (Rosebud oil field, just to the south of Painted Woods)
17863, Zenergy, Banks-Bakken, 8 wells, each 11 existing 1280-acre units; 88 wells; McKenzie
17864, Zenergy, Elidah-Bakken, 8 wells on an existing 1280-acre unit; McKenzie County
17865, Zenergy, Siverston-Bakken, 8 wells, each 5 existing 1280-acre units; 40 wells; McKenzie
17866, Zenergy, Foreman Butte-Bakken, 8 wells on an existing 1280-acre unit; McKenzie County
17867, Zenergy, Eightmile-Bakken, 8 wells, each 3 existing 1280-acre units; 24 wells; McKenz/Wms
17868, Zenergy, Marmon-Bakken, 8 wells, each 3 existing 1280-acre units; 24 wells; William
17869, Zenergy, Assiniboine-Bakken, 8 wells, eac 3 exisitng 1280-acre units; 24 wells; McKenzie
17870, Zenergy, Cow Creek-Bakken, 8 wells on an existing 1280-acre unit; Williams County
17871, Zenergy, Elk-Bakken, 8 wells, each 2 existing 1280-acre units; 16 wells, McKenzie
17872, Zenergy, Nohly Lake-Bakken, 8 wells, each 2 existing 1280-acre units; 16 wells, McKenzie
17873, Zenergy, Lake Trenton-Bakken, 8 wells, each 3 existing 1280-acre units; 24 wells; Williams
17874, Zenergy, Indian Hill-Bakken, 8 wells, each 2 existing 1280-acre units; 16 wells; McKenzie
17875, Zenergy, Glass Bluff-Bakken, 8 wells on 2 existing 1280-acre units; 16 wells; McKenzie
17876, Zenergy, Ft Buford-Bakken, 8 wells on 2 existing 1280-acre units; 16 wells; Williams
17877, Zenergy, Dore-Bakken, 8 wells on 3 existing 1280-acre units; 24 wells; McKenzie
17878, Zenergy, Todd-Bakken, 8 wells on 2 existing 1280-acre units; 16 wells; Williams, McKenzie
17879, Zenergy, Squires-Bakken, 8 wells on an existing 1280-acre unit; Williams
17880, Zenergy, Dublin-Bakken, 8 wells on an existing 1280-acre unit; Williams
17881, Zenergy, Rosebud-Bakken, a) 8 wells on an existing 960-acre unit; 8 wells on 3 existing 1280-acre units; 32 wells; Williams; from what I can tell, there is only one 960-acre unit in Rosebud; Zenergy has a producing area in the immediate area, as well as a rig-on-site; the rig-on-site is Ledahl 28-33H
I did this quickly; didn't double-check for accuracy, and may be misreading the dockets. But this is my initial take.
17861, Zenergy, Painted Woods-Bakken; 8 wells on 4 existing 1280-acre units; 32 wells; Williams
17862, Zenergy, Painted Woods-Bakken; 8 wells on an existing 960-acre unit; Williams County; from what I can tell, there is only one 960-acre unit in Painted Woods; Zenergy has a producing area in the immediate area, as well as a rig-on-site (Rosebud oil field, just to the south of Painted Woods)
17863, Zenergy, Banks-Bakken, 8 wells, each 11 existing 1280-acre units; 88 wells; McKenzie
17864, Zenergy, Elidah-Bakken, 8 wells on an existing 1280-acre unit; McKenzie County
17865, Zenergy, Siverston-Bakken, 8 wells, each 5 existing 1280-acre units; 40 wells; McKenzie
17866, Zenergy, Foreman Butte-Bakken, 8 wells on an existing 1280-acre unit; McKenzie County
17867, Zenergy, Eightmile-Bakken, 8 wells, each 3 existing 1280-acre units; 24 wells; McKenz/Wms
17868, Zenergy, Marmon-Bakken, 8 wells, each 3 existing 1280-acre units; 24 wells; William
17869, Zenergy, Assiniboine-Bakken, 8 wells, eac 3 exisitng 1280-acre units; 24 wells; McKenzie
17870, Zenergy, Cow Creek-Bakken, 8 wells on an existing 1280-acre unit; Williams County
17871, Zenergy, Elk-Bakken, 8 wells, each 2 existing 1280-acre units; 16 wells, McKenzie
17872, Zenergy, Nohly Lake-Bakken, 8 wells, each 2 existing 1280-acre units; 16 wells, McKenzie
17873, Zenergy, Lake Trenton-Bakken, 8 wells, each 3 existing 1280-acre units; 24 wells; Williams
17874, Zenergy, Indian Hill-Bakken, 8 wells, each 2 existing 1280-acre units; 16 wells; McKenzie
17875, Zenergy, Glass Bluff-Bakken, 8 wells on 2 existing 1280-acre units; 16 wells; McKenzie
17876, Zenergy, Ft Buford-Bakken, 8 wells on 2 existing 1280-acre units; 16 wells; Williams
17877, Zenergy, Dore-Bakken, 8 wells on 3 existing 1280-acre units; 24 wells; McKenzie
17878, Zenergy, Todd-Bakken, 8 wells on 2 existing 1280-acre units; 16 wells; Williams, McKenzie
17879, Zenergy, Squires-Bakken, 8 wells on an existing 1280-acre unit; Williams
17880, Zenergy, Dublin-Bakken, 8 wells on an existing 1280-acre unit; Williams
17881, Zenergy, Rosebud-Bakken, a) 8 wells on an existing 960-acre unit; 8 wells on 3 existing 1280-acre units; 32 wells; Williams; from what I can tell, there is only one 960-acre unit in Rosebud; Zenergy has a producing area in the immediate area, as well as a rig-on-site; the rig-on-site is Ledahl 28-33H
I did this quickly; didn't double-check for accuracy, and may be misreading the dockets. But this is my initial take.
Bakken Laboratory -- New Opportunity: Turning Oily Waste Water into Potable Water
A huge "thank you" to Don for alerting me to this story.
If this works, and is economical, this could be huge. If it works, this could be one of the biggest stories of the year.
Link here.
If this works, and is economical, this could be huge. If it works, this could be one of the biggest stories of the year.
Link here.
A team of scientists and oil business executives from Canada and New Mexico have performed a West Texas miracle.As mentioned in an earlier post, a recurring story/theme this year in the Bakken boom will be waste management.
Instead of turning water into wine, these four men have turned an oil field waste by-product into fresh, potable water at a dusty oil lease south of Clyde Lake in Callahan County.
The newly formed Texas Sands Resources partnership — made up of Chris Tesarski, the CEO of Canadian oil company Sandbox Energy which owns the oil lease; Paul Fairchild of Nu-H20 from Socorro, N.M.; and J.C. and Ian Ireland of Erin Consulting of Saskatchewan — have developed a process for turning that expensive waste product into useful, clean water.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)