Top 100 Oil Fields, 2009 - 2013, EIA; A Look At The Truax Field

EIA pdf document.

Previously discussed.

This is a document to keep.

A few days ago a reader sent me a note suggesting how stunning the Bakken really is. The reader has interests in the Truax oil field. Here is part of that note:

But now when I look at the article more, and look at the Top 10, I am so confused. Are we really comparing a small field (Truax, basically a 6 mile by 6 mile township) to a huge field like Eagleville or Spraberry in TX or Prudhoe Bay in Alaska? I read in the article where it labeled a "field" based on a single reservoir, but it seems strange that tiny Truax would be compared to fields that encompass many counties (I believe it said either Eagleville or Spraberry in Texas covers 14 counties).

It said fields are defined differently by the states, but I have to assume I am not understanding this correctly as it makes about as much sense as comparing the number of fish in, for example, Spring Lake in Williston to number of fish in Lake Superior.

Yes, they are both lakes, but... unfair to compare unless size is factored in. But if there is no factoring in size, and we are really comparing huge areas of land to tiny Truax (or any of the other ND fields I would guess), it makes the list of Top 100 even more stunning for us!

It's possible that I'm mis-reading the EIA report at the link but I don't think so.

The most frustrating thing about the report is that it provides estimated production for the year 2013, but does not provide estimated proved reserves, and that is how the 100 top oil fields are ranked -- by estimated proved reserves, not by production (which, of course, makes sense, but begs the question why the EIA did not include EPR).

Having said that, if I'm reading the data correctly, the EIA report suggests just how incredible the Bakken really is.

The EIA report was based on data through 2013. In that report, the EIA reported that the estimated production from Truax oil field for the entire year was 4,011,000 bbls.

So, let's see what production was for 2014:

• January: 456,703
  February: 437,447
• March: 445,838
• April: 463,018
• May: 489,026
• June: 412,166
• July: 385,748
• August: 404,418
• September: 497,791
• October: 497,244
• November: 723,244 (no typo)
• December: 602,736

Total: 5,815,379 bbls (a 45% increase year-over-year)

If the field would have produced at 700,000 bbls/month (see November, 2014): > 8 million bbls.

The Truax field was ranked #41 of the top 100. There were many fields in the top 100 from Alaska and California. Many of those fields were legacy fields and one can assume production in those fields are declining whereas the Bakken is relatively new and one can only expect production to increase. Technically, the rankings should not change much because the rankings are based on estimated proved reserves. However, it is very possible the estimates for the fields in the Bakken will be revised upward.

Disclaimer: I often make factual or typographical errors on posts with lots of data. I often make simple arithmetic errors. I did not double-check the data above. If this information is important to you, go to the source.