Reason #24,999 Why I Love To Blog -- Reader's Input -- December 8, 2014

Last night I updated the Whitman wells. (For newbies, note one of the wells has already produced in excess of 1.1 million bbls of oil). I didn't bother to note that I had updated the wells; I am always updating earlier posts and updated production numbers.

But I was tempted to note the update when I saw the production of those wells.

This morning, coincidentally, I received this note from a reader:

Speaking of big wells for CLR. Remember the Whitman in the Oakdale field? Part of the Hawkinson Whitman Eco pad a few years ago. 

Looks like CLR got approval to either extend or replace the Whitman TF1 well that was part of the 2560-acre spacing unit. 

Looks like future plans include drilling the Whitman 1280 out to 14 wells including the eco pad wells. See order #24085 and case #21756. 

Note the updated layout for the 14 wells on the new plan. Do you suppose this is one of those areas I have heard mentioned that could be profitable at $25.00 oil?

I am always busy first thing in the morning. I will come back to this one later.

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

In a long note like this, there may be factual and typographical errors; in addition, I often misinterpret file reports due to lack of formal training and/or education. If this information is important to you, go to the source. I was also in a rush to complete this, increasing the likelihood of errors. 

I don't have "Premium Services" so I don't have access to NDIC orders. But with Basic Services, I do have access to file reports.

Case 21756: Application of Continental Resources, Inc. for an order to establish appropriate spacing for the Whitman #3-34H well, (Well File No. 20212), located in the NWNE of Section 34, T.147N., R.96W., Oakdale- 

The 1280-acre unit: sections 34/3. [34-147-97 and 3-146-97 but this well is spaced for 2560-acres according to the scout ticket. The GIS map server also shows 2560-acre spacing; I can't tell for sure, but I believe this particular 2560-acre unit would be 34/35-147-96 and 3/2-146-96.

CLR provided a graphic of its drilling plans for the Hawkinson pad back in November, 2013. A lot has been posted over the past two years about the Hawkinson wells; a "Hawkinson" search on the blog will take you to any number of interesting posts on the Hawkinson.

Someone will  have to help me out on this one, note this about #20212: the horizontal never reached planned TD; the file report suggests the reason. So, now look at the length of the lateral: only about 2,000 feet. A typical short lateral in the Bakken is about 4,500 feet; the typical long lateral in the Bakken is about 9,000 feet. According to the well file:

Overall, the majority of the well was drilled in the target zone. Samples were mostly composed of a clean dolomite. 5% oil shows were observed until 12,500' MD. Oil shows then quickly rose to 30% and remained for the rest of the lateral. Gas shows ranged from 1500 - 3000 units from casing unitl 11,800' MD. Gas rose and was observed to be between 4,000 - 5,500 units, sometimes reaching 7,000 units. The well was TD at MD of 13,548' and a TVD of 11,427' after attempts to control and kill the flow and pressure failed.

So, here we have a well that is an incredibly short lateral, that has produced almost 100,000 bbls:

• 20212, 482, CLR, Whitman 3-34H, 34-147-96, Oakdale, F, t9/11; cum 98K 10/14; the scout ticket says it is still flowing without a pump, and there are no sundry forms to suggest otherwise; in addition, there is no frack data, suggesting this well was not fracked? Also the permit application stated the target was the Three Forks but an early sundry form (dated 2010) made a pen/ink change, lining out Three Forks and writing in "Bakken." The geologist's report said the target was the "middle Bakken."

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

Production Profile

It's hard to believe this well was not fracked but I don't see the frack report. But remember, they had to "TD" the well when they could not control the pressure and the flow. Here's the production profile for first few months:

BAKKEN	4-2012	30	3343	3463	115	3174	3174	0
BAKKEN	3-2012	31	3801	3633	137	3329	3329	0
BAKKEN	2-2012	22	2784	2769	405	1783	1783	0
BAKKEN	1-2012	30	5309	5711	228	2479	2479	0
BAKKEN	12-2011	31	7250	7143	2	6138	6138	0
BAKKEN	11-2011	30	8941	8990	17	7587	7587	0
BAKKEN	10-2011	31	11860	11669	43	10285	10285	0
BAKKEN	9-2011	25	11220	10943	40	9426	2619	6807

The production profile for the most recent months is also very interesting:

Pool	Date	Days	BBLS Oil	Runs	BBLS Water	MCF Prod	MCF Sold	Vent/Flare
BAKKEN	10-2014	31	420	326	8	529	282	0
BAKKEN	9-2014	30	522	632	22	649	342	74
BAKKEN	8-2014	31	633	596	23	721	472	7
BAKKEN	7-2014	31	774	592	75	638	638	0
BAKKEN	6-2014	30	1006	1130	62	923	865	58
BAKKEN	5-2014	29	1293	1200	517	1133	1133	0
BAKKEN	4-2014	30	1178	1463	153	1064	1058	6
BAKKEN	3-2014	31	1201	1136	113	992	962	30

With the slump in the price of oil, I don't think we can make comments about potential production as of October 1, 2014. (I'm not saying that correctly, but hopefully you know what I'm trying to say.)