Some data points rounded; all information below pertains to the Williston Basin Bakken; the data from SCOOP is not included except in two early bullets.
Still the #1 producer in the Rockies
- Bakken: 1.2 million acres leased
- SCOOP: 460,000 acres leased
- 168K boepd
- up 24% over 2013
- Bakken: 109K boepd
- SCOOP: 34K boepd
- 1.2 billion boe
- up 31% yoy
- 1320 feet and 660 feet
- middle Bakken: 4
- TF1: 4
- TF2: 4
- TF3: 4
- Hawkinson, Tangsrud, Rollefstad
- middle Bakken: 8
- TF1: 8
- TF2: 8
- TF3: 8
- Wahpeton, Lawrence, Mack, Hartman
- standard frack design: 100,000 proppant per stage
- 30 total stages
- does not say if Slick Water used for these (I don't think so); SW used elsewhere with success
- validates full-field development
- demonstrates vast resource potential
- micro-seismic study
- the Hawkinson density test is the most extensive down-hole micro-seismic study completed in the world
- most feet tractored on a single job: 59 miles
- 63-day, 24/7 operation
- 165 monitoring days
- longest laterals monitored/tractored: 21,120 feet
- large proppant volume: EURs trend 39% higher than CLR's average
- large proppant volume: EURs trend 30% higher than neighboring wells
- slick water: EURs trend 35% higher than CLR's average
- slick water: EURs trend 25% higher than neighboring wells
- incremental costs of large proppant volume or slick water: $2 million
- coming due, 2019, $0; credit facility of $1.75 billion
- callable, 2020: $200 million at 7.4%
- callable, 2021: $400 million at 7.1%
- callable, 2022: $2 billion at 5%
- callable, 2023: $1.5 billion at 4.5%
- callable, 2024: $1 billion at 3.8%
- 2009: $54
- 2010: $71
- 2011: $88
- 2012: 84
- 2013: $90
- 2Q14: $92
- 1H14: $$91
- 2009: $14
- 2010: $16
- 2011: $18
- 2012: $17
- 2013: $19
- 2Q14: $19
- 1H14: $19
- OOI: 903 billion bbls (the slide: "903 BBo")
- at 3.5%: 32 billion bbls ("32 BBo recoverable at 3.5%)
- at 4%: 36 billion bbls
- at 5%: 45 billion bbls
Thanks Bruce great information does anybody know why continental withdrew most of there August dockets. Divorce related??
ReplyDeleteSomeone else noted that, also; asked the same question. I have no idea why CLR withdrew those cases, but that happens often. My hunch it had nothing to do with the divorce.
DeleteSlide 9 was interesting. If I am reading the graphic correctly it appears the distance traveled by the frac solution is very irregular. Also appeared in some places where right adjacent to the well bore no fracing took place?
ReplyDeleteYes, that is accurate. Not all stages are successful.
DeleteRegarding CLR withdrawing requests for August hearings. I looked back on case #20678 / order #22983 which gave them the OK to drill the Hartman increased density wells in Chimney Butte Field. The original request was for 14 wells in a 1280 unit but Burlington Resources and Marathon did not realize that those wells were targeting only a portion of the 1280 unit until they reviewed the (attachments) not correct description) to the file which was not available until only a short time before the hearing. They opposed CLR spacing plans arguing that wells that close together may not be economic. As it turns out they did not drill an additional 10 wells as originally planned but drilled only 6 additional wells. So rather than 3 wells in each horizon in that cluster there are only 2. I wonder if that was a compromise to keep peace with their opposition allowing the science to move forward with the test.
ReplyDeleteWith the recent attempt to add increased density on a wide scale I wonder if they did that to gauge the opposition to their plans and see if they could find pockets that the opposition was low so maybe they will come back with more specific plans for those smaller less resistant areas?
Excellent comment. I have had similar thoughts with regard to cases being brought to the commission. The best example might have been QEP withdrawing a request to unitize the Grail "without prejudice."
Delete