Thursday, June 14, 2018

Random Example Of Jump In Production In Two Older Slawson Wells -- June 14, 2018

Disclaimer: I do these rather quickly and I may be misreading something or have some data incorrect, but I believe the information is correct. The wells are a bit difficult to sort out on the NDIC map, but I believe they are correct. I post this disclaimer because generally wells this close together have the same "alpha" names -- these vary quite a bit: Jeriyote, Jericho, Coyote -- although it appears the "Jeriyote" is a combination of Jericho and Coyote.

Anyway, pressing on. Another case study for newbies to help understand the potential of the Bakken.

This post concerns four wells: #21595, #21596, #24919, and #24921. I happened to run across them while randomly updating wells that came off the confidential list in 1Q13 and noted that #21595 was a particularly good well. 

Wells #21595 and #21596 were older wells, short laterals, on the same pad, one horizontal went south, one horizontal went north.

A couple of years later, two long lateral wells were drilled parallel to these older (#21595 and #21596) wells. The new wells, #24919 and #24921, were long laterals drilled from the south, going north, and because they were long laterals, paralleled the entire length of the older, short laterals.

Hopefully that makes sense.

Here are the graphics:








Look at the cumulative production of the older wells; these turned out to be very nice wells:
  • 21595, 1,351, Jericho 3-5H, Big Bend, t9/12; cum 318K 4/18;  
  • 21596, 703, Coyote 2-32H, big Bend, t1/13; cum 301K 4/18;
Look at their production profiles back in 2014; they both showed a similar jump in production.

21595:
BAKKEN12-20143150195301145442533630468
BAKKEN11-20143059606558176251834475558
BAKKEN10-20143177527620370665375897485
BAKKEN9-201430818781613671631061600
BAKKEN8-201431919789193662732471690
BAKKEN7-20143111249111626085873985840
BAKKEN6-2014301282012777901911143109930
BAKKEN5-20143013414130051089811514113640
BAKKEN4-20147288229822008184818130
BAKKEN3-20141718852342415220821230
BAKKEN2-20142834003739773775476140
BAKKEN1-201431388632869121014799920
BAKKEN12-20133140594902138611052108970

21596:
BAKKEN12-20143158196079145451304309666
BAKKEN11-20143063456493185951174663304
BAKKEN10-20143186768715370670966722219
BAKKEN9-201429840087794152655764120
BAKKEN8-201431975692985411797578200
BAKKEN7-20143112109121256185938392280
BAKKEN6-2014301578315745901914281141310
BAKKEN5-20143016483159991117814338141880
BAKKEN4-20146322633222008188318530
BAKKEN3-20141317562516333249124260
BAKKEN2-20142839643843773460244620
BAKKEN1-20143147514397912429241370
BAKKEN12-201331413348771261341032550

Jumps in production like that should suggest the wells were re-fracked. They may have been but FracFocus does not have any data to suggest they were re-fracked and there are no sundry forms to suggest they were re-fracked (I only checked on well). In addition, they were both originally fracked in late 2012 and it's not likely they would be re-fracked as soon as 2014.

So, when I saw that jump in production, I immediately went to look at the NDIC maps to see if any neighboring wells were fracked in mid-2014. Yup. These two wells were fracked in mid-2014:
  • 24919, 660, Slawson, Jeriyote 7-5-32TFH, Big Bend, t7/14; cum 158K 4/18;
  • 24921, 88, Slawson, Jeriyote 6-5-32TFH, Big Bend, t6/14; cum 242K 4/18;
There's one more interesting thing to note that those familiar with the Bakken might notice, but I won't talk about that for now.

No comments:

Post a Comment

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