Saturday, January 20, 2018

Random Update Of A BR Copper Draw Well In Blue Buttes -- January 20, 2018

Summary: this is a long note. I'm not sure about this, but it appears that #17271, a middle Bakken well was re-fracked in late 2014, about the same time a neighboring Three Forks well was fracked for the first time. I may have it wrong, but I think that's correct. It was interesting to note that throughout the file report, from the original permit through the original frack, #17271 was referred to as a middle Bakken well, but at the time of the workover/re-frack, the sundry forms called it Bakken/Three Forks. I do not know what the significance of that, if any. Probably no significance.

Disclaimer: in a long note like this there will be factual and typographical errors. If this is important to you go to the source.

There is nothing new to learn about the Bakken in this note; there is nothing new here. I was struck by the jump in production of #17271 and was interested in why that occurred.

**********************************
Background

This is pretty cool. Note the production profile of this well during this period of time, back in early 2015:
  • 17271, 312, BR, Copper Draw 34-34H, t6/08, middle Bakken; cum 422K 11/17; original frack in June, 2008, open hole, 1 million lbs of sand; re-frack  7/13 - 11/22/2014; Bakken/Three Forks, 30 stage frack; slickwater, about 4 - 5 million lbs proppant,
BAKKEN1-20162472957811352615364153050
BAKKEN12-2015311042910008217421181211040
BAKKEN11-2015301006310315203017052169780
BAKKEN10-2015311208712169241723390233130
BAKKEN9-2015301249312284250113239131640
BAKKEN8-2015301242312428238313595117421779
BAKKEN7-201531138381407223551244398122554
BAKKEN6-2015301854818302268614753146780
BAKKEN5-2015312338723333338918147154882582
BAKKEN4-2015301981119790308723925160897762
BAKKEN3-20153121210213615133979397160
BAKKEN2-2015282100721024710610359102890
BAKKEN1-201516118401144247794000
BAKKEN12-20140000000
BAKKEN11-2014353415341444368194496363
BAKKEN10-20140000000
BAKKEN9-20140000000
BAKKEN8-20140000000
BAKKEN7-20140000000
BAKKEN6-20142282855184354300
BAKKEN5-20143129362678644408040030
BAKKEN4-201481378123918286476976

The jump in production was due to a re-frack.

Looking at the graphic:



#23646 was fracked in early-to-mid 2013 so was not a factor. [However, #23646 might have showed a small bump in production in this same time period, but certainly not as significant:
  • 23646, 2,325, BR, Copper Draw 24-22TFH 2SH, Johnson Corner, t7/13; cum 257K 11/17;
BAKKEN10-201531469947611625661665960
BAKKEN9-20153050084935151361495153978
BAKKEN8-201531532151421969693318925021
BAKKEN7-201525903852024652427523752
BAKKEN6-20153065906569287196202359361
BAKKEN5-201530748574723485799642893683
BAKKEN4-2015309277949153831096294321509
BAKKEN3-201513645759762119670406695
BAKKEN2-20150000000
BAKKEN1-20150070000
BAKKEN12-201412317113011
BAKKEN11-20140000000
BAKKEN10-20140000000
BAKKEN9-2014101290000
BAKKEN8-20148204020822061647231624
BAKKEN7-201426650165351134755107551
BAKKEN6-201430747575750433064

But then we look at #28348. See production profile below. It was clearly fracked about that time frame under discussion. It had to have been fracked before 3/15. It turns out that #28348 was fracked 11/14 - 1/15.
  • 28348, 1,920, BR, Copper Draw 41-27TFH, Johnson Corner, Three Forks, 35 stages, 4.1 million lbs, t3/15; cum 234K 11/17;
BAKKEN7-2015312583125868558032864345029395
BAKKEN6-2015955615423244181714737692
BAKKEN5-20150000000
BAKKEN4-20150000000
BAKKEN3-20152214393143931048603506035

I initially thought #17271 jump in production was due to a neighboring well being fracked. But I was wrong. FracFocus showed that it had been fracked and sundry forms also confirmed it has been re-fracked.

Bottom line: not much to see here. Nothing new. Simply, it appears, an older well re-worked/re-fracked about the same time a neighboring well was fracked for the first time.

No big deal.

No comments:

Post a Comment

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