The Croff oil field caught my attention with the Kummer well being reported today:
- 22193, drl, QEP, Kummer 1-6/7H, Croff, a Three Forks well:
| Pool | Date | Days | BBLS Oil | Runs | BBLS Water | MCF Prod | MCF Sold | Vent/Flare |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BAKKEN | 11-2012 | 30 | 34418 | 34098 | 5689 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| BAKKEN | 10-2012 | 31 | 48373 | 47905 | 15916 | 39474 | 39474 | 0 |
For newbies: this is huge. Almost 100,000 bbls in the first two months. I have some reviewing to do: to see how common it is for a well of this magnitude to show absolutely no natural gas by the second month. [See comment below: oil and gas production figures arrive at different times, and most likely the natural gas production numbers have simply not been updated.]
Another note: this well is important for another reason. This field, the Croff field, sits right in the middle of a huge sweet spot in the Bakken, more specifically the middle Bakken. Now, we have a huge Three Forks well. Harold Hamm opines that the Three Forks could be much thicker than the middle Bakken, and that in places, the Three Forks could have four benches (four payzones) vs just one payzone in the generally thin middle Bakken.
IIRC: At the time QEP acquired Helis acreage, QEP stated that Helis used ceramics in completing/fracking a well; and that QEP did not use ceramics. QEP planned to not use ceramics in the Helis acreage. I do not see the completion / fracking report yet in the file for this well at the NDIC site, and I don't find the well at the national database but I could have missed it.
The file report said that the middle Bakken showed promise as a secondary site to explore in the future, and although the report said the same for the Tyler, it seemed not quite as enthusiastic. Other formations were said to be poor candidates for future exploration.