Updates
September 15, 2018: checked FracFocus again; no data to suggest this well was re-fracked; see this post.
March 26, 2018: production data updated --
Pool | Date | Days | BBLS Oil | Runs | BBLS Water | MCF Prod | MCF Sold | Vent/Flare |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BAKKEN | 1-2018 | 31 | 20892 | 21118 | 15042 | 38788 | 36902 | 1638 |
BAKKEN | 12-2017 | 31 | 26355 | 26214 | 23359 | 46285 | 44411 | 1627 |
BAKKEN | 11-2017 | 3 | 2548 | 1923 | 1433 | 3207 | 2656 | 534 |
BAKKEN | 10-2017 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
BAKKEN | 9-2017 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
BAKKEN | 8-2017 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Original Post
Wow, wow, wow, take a look at this post and then the production update below.
FracFocus has no data that this well has been re-fracked.
From the linked post above: "So, now, pick another horizontal. Let's pick #19397."
- 19397, 417, CLR, Buelingo 1-20H, Elm Tree, t3/11; cum 309K 7/18; (note, it's even started flaring again):
Pool | Date | Days | BBLS Oil | Runs | BBLS Water | MCF Prod | MCF Sold | Vent/Flare |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BAKKEN | 11-2017 | 3 | 2548 | 1923 | 1433 | 3207 | 2656 | 534 |
BAKKEN | 10-2017 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
BAKKEN | 9-2017 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
BAKKEN | 8-2017 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
BAKKEN | 7-2017 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
BAKKEN | 6-2017 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
BAKKEN | 5-2017 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
BAKKEN | 4-2017 | 0 | 0 | 210 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
BAKKEN | 3-2017 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
BAKKEN | 2-2017 | 22 | 724 | 713 | 180 | 1470 | 1226 | 70 |
BAKKEN | 1-2017 | 31 | 1129 | 1202 | 445 | 2163 | 1822 | 93 |
BAKKEN | 12-2016 | 30 | 1440 | 1213 | 441 | 2228 | 1946 | 51 |
BAKKEN | 11-2016 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
BAKKEN | 10-2016 | 26 | 1884 | 2069 | 363 | 3539 | 3261 | 78 |
I selected that well simply because of its location near wells that had been recently fracked (see its location at the graphic at the linked post above).
As of November, 2017, it was too early to say what would happen but considering that the well produced more oil in 3 days than it had produced in 30 days prior to being taken off-line was quite interesting.
So, here we go. We now have another month of data:
Pool | Date | Days | BBLS Oil | Runs | BBLS Water | MCF Prod | MCF Sold | Vent/Flare |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BAKKEN | 12-2017 | 31 | 26355 | 26214 | 23359 | 46285 | 44411 | 1627 |
BAKKEN | 11-2017 | 3 | 2548 | 1923 | 1433 | 3207 | 2656 | 534 |
BAKKEN | 10-2017 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
BAKKEN | 9-2017 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
When I see a production number like this (26,355 bbls in one month) I can only assume the well was fracked or re-fracked. In this case, FracFocus has no data that this well was fracked; there are no sundry forms in the file report suggesting this well has been re-fracked.
Interestingly enough, this well didn't even produce this much oil when it was initially fracked:
BAKKEN | 9-2011 | 21 | 4451 | 4515 | 812 | 4875 | 4875 | 0 |
BAKKEN | 8-2011 | 31 | 5873 | 5770 | 1030 | 8056 | 8056 | 0 |
BAKKEN | 7-2011 | 31 | 6288 | 6396 | 1185 | 8219 | 7569 | 650 |
BAKKEN | 6-2011 | 30 | 6665 | 6910 | 1228 | 8587 | 4717 | 3870 |
BAKKEN | 5-2011 | 31 | 7441 | 7656 | 1395 | 10249 | 9524 | 725 |
BAKKEN | 4-2011 | 30 | 8927 | 8747 | 1997 | 11586 | 8049 | 3537 |
BAKKEN | 3-2011 | 30 | 14026 | 13414 | 4701 | 17110 | 0 | 17110 |
I'm not saying this well was not refracked but I haven't seen any sundry form or FracFocus data to suggest it wasn't. But if it wasn't, this is quite stunning. The next question, of course, is how sharp the decline will be.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.