Pages

Tuesday, December 26, 2017

Random Update Of MRO's Kukla Well, #16422 -- December 26, 2017

Updates

March 20, 2018: see long note below. Production has been updated for #16422:

PoolDateDaysBBLS OilRunsBBLS WaterMCF ProdMCF SoldVent/Flare
BAKKEN1-2018311351513443190661323211279158
BAKKEN12-20173115498157562357614411124180
BAKKEN11-2017281782617771308271339675523770
BAKKEN10-2017269433939022877667440641461
BAKKEN9-201719107971018282291280631078468
BAKKEN8-20170000000
BAKKEN7-20170000000
BAKKEN6-20170000000

Original Post
 
Disclaimer: in a long note like this there will be typographical and factual errors. It is difficult to separate opinion from facts. I may be seeing things that do not exist, and I certainly see things differently that a lot of analysts. 

Case study: as you go through this case study, think about this. Some folks are suggesting that operators are running out of new drilling locations in the "sweet spots" in the Bakken. I don't buy that. To some extent, "sweet spots" are defined by the price of WTI. Whatever.

The bigger story is continued management of existing wells. Somewhere else one can find the exact number of Bakken wells that have been drilled and are still being "managed." I come up with about 10,500 Bakken wells. The vast majority of those wells have not been re-fracked, either with a mini-re-frack, a modest re-frack, or a full-fledged re-frack.

If one considers an existing Bakken well as a well that could be re-fracked, one could argue it's a "new" drilling location. That may not make sense, but think about it as you go through this case study. This makes unconventional (tight oil) very different from conventional oil.

The well:
  • 16422, 293, MRO, Kukla 34-34H, Murphy Creek, F; t12/07; cum 141K 10/17;
Recent production profile:

PoolDateDaysBBLS OilRunsBBLS WaterMCF ProdMCF SoldVent/Flare
BAKKEN10-2017269433939022877667440641461
BAKKEN9-201719107971018282291280631078468
BAKKEN8-20170000000
BAKKEN7-20170000000
BAKKEN6-20170000000
BAKKEN5-20170000000
BAKKEN4-20170000000
BAKKEN3-2017134437473264350336
BAKKEN2-20172815021873462146101132
BAKKEN1-20173122212101705209801674
BAKKEN12-20161247806602400120
BAKKEN11-20160000000
BAKKEN10-20160000000

It has been off-line since 1/15:

BAKKEN12-201431954926315809360161
BAKKEN11-201430976939361759360115
BAKKEN10-2014311001114034367028394
BAKKEN9-201430994906347630244100
BAKKEN8-20143110731129372884432151
BAKKEN7-2014311139111842274234886
BAKKEN6-20143011621122443685233148
BAKKEN5-20143113381611570747232186

Initial production after original frac:

BAKKEN9-20083024502433707154615460
BAKKEN8-20083129183008838195819580
BAKKEN7-200831318431241043200420040
BAKKEN6-200830411342791197274927490
BAKKEN5-200831462743711523254325430
BAKKEN4-200818177418218629319310
BAKKEN3-20083131973218808159015900
BAKKEN2-20082937553766914177017700
BAKKEN1-200829503051761307230923090
BAKKEN12-200731580052192915228022800

FracFocus:
  • Re-fracked 7/24/2017 - 8/10/2017; 6,706,365 gallons of water; water, 91% by mass; 
  • a gallon of water weighs: 8.345404 pounds
  • 6,706,365 gallons x 8.345404 pounds = 56 million pounds
  • 91% of what = 56 pounds
  • 61.5 million pounds - 56 million pounds = 5.5 million pounds proppant max
  • let's see if there's sundry form over at NDIC
  • wow, there is
  • the new IP: 1,742 (crude oil)
  • 45 stages
  • and, the amount of proppant? 5.3 million lbs (whoo-hoo, the math above was right on target)
The other two wells in the drilling unit unremarkable at this point: #25761 and #25760, although the latter was off-line 10/17; it's not a great well, and wonders if this one might be a candidate for a re-frack?

The graphic:


Comments:
  • this well was, in the big scheme of things, a pretty lousy well from the beginning; the IP and total production the first couple of years was not all that great
  • it was shut in for almost two  years
  • it was then re-fracked, and by "modern" standards, it was re-fracked with a small amount of proppant, 5.3 million pounds
  • the modest re-frack resulted in an IP and a first two-month production well above what the well produced when it was first drilled/fracked back in 2007
  • the operator had almost no risk re-fracking this well
  • the well was already drilled; no new infrastructure costs were incurred; no new lease money; no new nothing as far as costs, except the costs associated with a modest re-frack
  • my hunch is that the geologist/company could almost "guess" what new production would be based on their knowledge of the Bakken
  • finally, note that this well is almost ten years old, and is still flowing, without a pump, at least according to the scout ticket; sometimes the scout tickets are wrong
  • could one consider this a "new" drilling location? Just saying
  • one more thing: note that is an MRO well; it's my feeling that MRO is taking the lead on re-fracks

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.