| 9/16/2014 | 09/16/2013 | 09/16/2012 | 09/16/2011 | 09/16/2010 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Active Rigs | 198 | 178 | 193 | 199 | 145 |
Wells coming off the confidential list Wednesday:
- 23481, 1,399, WPX, Ruby 31-30HA, Antelope, t8/14; cum --
- 25944, 2,346, QEP, Poncho 1-3-10BH, Grail, t4/14; cum 73K 7/14;
- 25945, 2,656, QEP, Poncho 1-3-10TH, Grail, t4/14; cum 41K 7/14;
- 25946, 2,907, QEP, Poncho 2-3-10BH, Grail, 31 stages; 3.3 million lbs sand, t4/14; cum 55K 7/14;
- 25947, 2,701, QEP, Poncho, 2-3-10TH, Grail, t12/13; cum 87K 7/14;
- 26329, 3,180, QEP, Poncho 5-3-10BH, Grail, t4/14; cum 61K 7/14;
- 26682, drl, Zavanna, Angus 3-10 1H, Long Creek, no production data,
- 26687, drl, Zavanna, Angus 3-10 7H, Long Creek, no production data,
- 26828, drl, XTO, Rolfson 14X-34F, Siverston, no production data,
- 27495, drl, Hess, EN-L Cvancara-155-93-2627H-3, Robinson Lake, no production data,
- 27583, 297, CLR, Dunkirk 1-8AH1, St Demetrius, t7/14; cum 7K 7/14;
- 27663, drl, CLR, Mercer 1-13H, Ellisville, no production data,
Fourteen (14) producing wells completed:
- 23015, 894, CLR, Sacramento Federal 6-10H, Brooklyn; t9/14; cum --
- 26333, 559, Hess, GN-margaret-158-97-1522H-1, New Home; t8/14; cum --
- 26789, 1,014, Hess, BB-Belquist-150-95-1110H-3, Blue Buttes, t8/14; cum --
- 26790, 1,145, Hess, BB-Belquist-150-95-1110H-4, Blue Buttes, t8/14; cum --
- 26858, 561, Hess, EN-State D-154-93-2635H-8, Robinson Lake; t9/14; cum --
- 26987, 826, Hess, EN-Dobrovolny-155-93-2128H-7, Alger, t8/14; cum --
- 27021, 1,107, Hess, HA-Nelson A-152-95-3427H-6, Hawkeye, t8/14; cum --
- 27088, 600, Hess, GN-Wendell-158-96-1819H-1, South Meadow, t8/14; cum --
- 27314, 349, Hess, EN-Joyce-2560-156-94-1720-1621H-1, Manitou, 4 sections, t9/14; cum --
- 27586, 190, CLR, Melgaard 5-14H1, Sadler, t9/14; cum --
- 28206, 549, Triangle, Nygaard 150-101-28-33-3H, Pronghorn, t8/14; cum --
- 28221, 3,347, Whiting, Brehm 13-7H, Sanish, t8/14; cum --
- 28222, 1,434, Whiting, Brehm 13-7TFH, Sanish, t9/14; cum --
- 28305, 1,441, Whiting, Lee Federal 12-27TFH, Sanish, t9/14; cum --
Eighteen (18) new permits --
- Operators: BR (12), XTO (3), Murex (2), Slawson
- Fields: Camel Butte McKenzie), Siverston (McKenzie), Temple (Williams), Big Bend (Mountrail)
- Comments: BR's 12 permits are for the following sections -- 34-151-96 (4); 10-150-96 (4); 27-151-96 (4)
- 28162, dry, OXY USA, Evelyn Stroh 4-20-17H-143-96, Fayette, from the sundry form received August 14, 2014: "The surface hole was drilled, cased, and cemented on 6/5/14 using a spudder rig. A suspension of drilling was approved for this well and the other two wells on this pad. Propose to plug and abandon the surface hole and reenter at a later date. .... cement ... Shut in well head equipment. There are other wells on this pad and the location will not be reclaimed. Secure well head with a blind flange."
- The other two wells on this pad:
- 28163, drl, renamed Federal Bud 3-29-32H-143-96,
- 28164, drl, renamed Federal Bud 4-29-32H-143-96,
****************************
For The Archives
This Is 21st Century Science
Breitbart is reporting:
Environmental scientists at the University of Nottingham have made a shocking and expensive discovery: eco-friendly buildings made of "sustainable" wood burn much more easily than eco-unfriendly ones made of stone, concrete, steel or glass.
They made their surprise discovery over the weekend when their new Carbon Neutral Laboratory for Sustainable Chemistry burned to the ground in what local firemen claimed was the biggest blaze in over a decade.
The £15 million building had been erected according to the most rigorous environmental principles, made with a wooden frame and other "sustainable" materials, and powered with "renewable" energy, so that the structure could remain "carbon neutral" throughout its lifetime.
According to Nottingham's registrar Dr Paul Greatrix this demonstrated the university's "commitment to sustainability in all its forms."
Unfortunately, the fire appears to have remained unmoved by the building's eco-friendly credentials and razed it to the ground in much the same way one of its ancestors did to a third of the City of London in the Great Fire of 1666.
After the Great Fire - and the rebuilding of London by Sir Christopher Wren - an act was passed in 1667 making it illegal to erect buildings using wooden frames.I wonder how much CO2 was released into the atmosphere fighting this fire.
The rest of the story gets better. I wish I could post all of it. Go to the linked article to get the rest of the story.
It appears the original study -- which turned out to be flawed about the safety of wood-timber-framed buildings -- might have been authored by the same folks who did the original "hockey stick" study suggesting global warming.
So did Oxy frack those wells? How could they not get oil from those wells if fracked?
ReplyDeleteNo, the wells are not fracked as far as I know (based on documentation on file). The other two wells (#28163 and #28164) are both on DRL status. Paperwork lags events; IPs must be reported the first month following the month that the well is completed/tested (for example, if the well is completed/fracked/tested 16 June 14, the operator has until 30 July 14/1August14 to report, so we wouldn't see the results until the August report (I could be wrong but that's about right).
DeleteCurrently, operators do not frack wells on a pad until they have all been drilled to total depth (vertical plus the horizontal). Once all wells have reached total depth (vertical plus horizontal), the frack team is called in and all wells on the pad are fracked at the same time, or sequentially one after the other.
[Obviously, if there is an existing producing well on the pad, that is not part of this discussion. Another point: if there is an existing producing well on the pad when additional wells are drilled and fracked, the existing well is generally taken off-line (no production) while the new well(s) is/are being completed/fracked.]
It is possible the other two wells are fracked by now and we are simply waiting for the paperwork to show up.
But if everything is "current," the third well was abandoned for some reason. The first two wells had already been drilled to total depth (vertical plus horizontal) and were waiting for the third well to be drilled to total depth before they were completed/fracked.
Note: when I write these long notes, I don't always proofread them. There may be factual errors and/or typographical errors. I do not have formal training or experience in the oil and gas industry. This reply and everything in this blog should be taken in that context. No one should make any decisions based on anything in this blog. It is purely to help me understand the Bakken. I share it for various reasons.