Saturday, June 23, 2018

Names In The Permian -- June 23, 2018


Later, 3:07 p.m. CDT: a reader talked about the Avalon / Bone Spring; in his/her comment to me:
On the Permian, watch out for same target layer under different names (e.g., EOG and a few others calls "Avalon" what a lot of the rest of the industry calls "Bone Spring").  Same can occur in other basins (e.g. "Utica" versus "Huron/Point Pleasant").
 From DI Blog:
For example, when querying horizontal Bone Spring wells in the Delaware Basin, a few of the most common reported reservoir naming conventions are some iteration of the spelling of Bone Spring, Trend Area and Wolfbone Trend (yes even for horizontals). This may very well be sufficient for some analytical workflows; however, it is not a true apples to apples comparison.

The Delaware Basin Play Assessment divides the Avalon/Bone Spring formations into eight interpreted zones.
For the scope of this post, I have limited the zones down to four: the Avalon and the First, Second, and Third Bone Spring intervals.
Lithological properties vary within each respective zone and can therefore offer differing approaches to completion design and ultimately oil and gas production volumes. The cross section below showing gamma ray and deep resistivity logs indicates the varying stratigraphic sequences picked on changing geologic events in the Leonardian-aged section.

The entire Avalon/Bone Springs has a thickness that ranges from roughly 2,000 to 4,000 feet, depending on the portion of the basin under observation. The isopach map below gives a spatial representation of the gross thickness of the entire Avalon/Bone Springs section throughout the Delaware Basin. This may even shed a bit more light on the range in possibilities of where a lateral wellbore can be strategically placed.

Original Post 

Wow, I'm in a good mood. The "comments app" seems to be working again, albeit a bit squirrelly.

But what really puts me into a good mood is the fact that the USGS is reporting new assessments, updated assessments, and first-time assessments for oil and gas plays across the US. I have posted several of them in the past twelve hours. Some of the posts still need some cleaning up. I haven't linked all the posts yet, but for now, simply scroll down. I think there are about three USGS assessments regarding the Permian Province -- that's the official name, I guess.

The Permian Province is made up of three basins: the Midland to the east; the Central Basin; and, the Delaware Basin to the west.

In the Permian Province there are several plays. Right now it appears the USGS has only recently assessed or re-assessed the Spraberry (conventional and unconventional) in the Midland and the Wolfcamp in the Midland. Apparently the Spraberry is only under the Midland whereas the Wolfcamp underlies the entire Permian Province (east to west, if not north to south).

In addition to these two, Mike Filloon lists a few others, in his October 16, 2015, posting. Some of them he mentions:
  • Avalon shale
  • Bone Spring, 1st, 2nd, and 3rd
  • Wolfcamp, upper and lower
The Midland is an old, old field; the Delaware is much more recent. That's why we don't hear as much about the Delaware or know as much about it. I believe this is where the recent boom has been focused -- in the sense that new operators coming in have looked to the Delaware. Obviously there is a boom going on in the Midland, also.

The "Wolfberry" is an old term: it encompasses the Wolfcamp and the Spraberry in the Midland Basin.

Blogging Will Be Intermittent Today 
Due To Family Commitments

I'm with Sophia this morning: gymnastics and swimming lessons.

Then we head over to a water polo tournament with the oldest granddaughter, Arianna.

My wife and Olivia are at an all-day art/painting workshop.

We have the granddaughters all week, through tomorrow, Sunday. Their parents are out-of-town, on business/pleasure.

Serious Doubts

I have serious doubts about the "expertise" of Art Berman and all the "Peak Oil" folks after seeing the USGS assessments of the Permian.

Their new, and, in some cases, first ever, assessments show incredible numbers for the Permian. The recent assessments include only part of the entire Permian and from well data using Permian shale 1.0 technology. The Bakken is clearly into Bakken 2.0 and, in some cases, Bakken 2.5.

Maybe more on this later. But clearly, Art Berman and the "Peak Oil" folks have seriously underestimated the fossil resources in the US. 

USGS Assessment Of The Spraberry Formation, Midland Basin, 2017

The abstract from the USGS:
Using a geology-based assessment methodology, the U.S. Geological Survey estimated mean resources of 4.2 billion barrels of oil and 3.1 trillion cubic feet of gas in the Spraberry Formation of the Midland Basin, Permian Basin Province, Texas.
The Spraberry is both a conventional (vertical wells) and an unconventional (continuous; horizontal wells) play. The Spraberry is only under the Midland division of the Permian.

The Permian is divided into three divisions -- the Midland (east), Central Basin, and the Delaware (west).

Other than the Wolfcamp and the Spraberry I am not aware of a recent USGS assessment of other formations or plays in the Permian.

The USGS recently posted its assessment of the Eagle Ford in Texas.

The USGS is currently assessing the Bakken/Three Forks in the Williston Basin, which will update the 2013 assessment.


The Ride, Hank, Sr, song by David Allan Coe

USGS Assessment Of The Wolfcamp Formation, Midland Basin, Permian Province, 2016

The abstract from the USGS:
The U.S. Geological Survey completed a geology-based assessment of undiscovered, technically recoverable continuous petroleum resources in the Wolfcamp shale in the Midland Basin part of the Permian Basin Province of west Texas.
This is the first U.S. Geological Survey evaluation of continuous resources in the Wolfcamp shale in the Midland Basin.
Since the 1980s, the Wolfcamp shale in the Midland Basin has been part of the “Wolfberry” play. This play has traditionally been developed using vertical wells that are completed and stimulated in multiple productive stratigraphic intervals that include the Wolfcamp shale and overlying Spraberry Formation.
Since the shift to horizontal wells targeting the organic-rich shale of the Wolfcamp, more than 3,000 horizontal wells have been drilled and completed in the Midland Basin Wolfcamp section.
The U.S. Geological Survey assessed technically recoverable mean resources of 20 billion barrels of oil and 16 trillion cubic feet of associated gas in the Wolfcamp shale in the Midland Basin.
So, note: this is the Wolfcamp shale in the Midland Basin. The Wolfcamp underlies the entire Permian, all three divisions of the Permian -- the Midland (east), Central Basin, and the Delaware (west).

I am not yet aware of a recent USGS assessment of the Wolfcamp in the Delaware.

Other than the Wolfcamp and the Spraberry I am not aware of a recent USGS assessment of other formations or plays in the Permian.

The USGS recently posted its assessment of the Eagle Ford in Texas.

The USGS is currently assessing the Bakken/Three Forks in the Williston Basin, which will update the 2013 assessment.

The Permian Midland USGS Assessment -- An Oil & Gas Journal Update -- June 23, 2018


June 24, 2018: the graphic below is already out of date. Look at the "Western Gulf Province": 1.73 billion bbls. The USGS just released the 2018 assessment of the Eagle Ford, which came in at 8.5 billion bbls of crude oil. For an overview of the USGS Western Gulf Province, see this site (conventional gas). It's possible the updated graphic will include two areas: the Western Gulf Province (conventional) and the Eagle Ford (unconventional).

Original Post

Wow, I'm in a good mood. So much great stuff being reported. I can't keep up but that's good news.

This article needs to be archived. I finally understand the Permian a bit better. Mike Filloon had the Permian figured out many years ago, but, for me, it never sunk in. Re-reading Filloon's articles on the Permian and now this article in the OGJ, I finally have a better understanding of the Permian. The OGJ article was published June 4, 2018, but other sites suggest the USGS Permian assessment was done during 2016, and first reported in 2017, with some additional articles on the same subject after. For now, I guess we will refer to this as the USGS Permian Assessment, 2017.

Unfortunately, it may be behind a paywall. Here are the high points.

The Permian, there are three sub-basins:
  • the Midland, to the east (this is the area assessed in this article; two plays in this basin assessed: the Wolfcamp and the Spraberry)
  • the Central Basin Platorm
  • the Delaware
The formations, many, but these are the most important right now:
  • Pennsylvanian-Permian Wolfcamp shale: underlies both the Midland and the Delaware, and extends across the Central (in other words, underlies the entire Permian Basin)
  • Bone Spring formation: the lateral and time-equivalent of the Spraberry in the Delaware
  • Spraberry: see above
Intro: the USGS recently assessed the Wolfcamp shale in the Midland basin portion of the Permian basin for continuous (unconventional) oil and gas resources, and completed a reassessment of the Spraberry formation for both continuous and conventional oil and gas. Combined, the assessments of the Spraberry formation and the underlying Wolfcamp shale in Midland basin comprise the largest domestic continuous oil assessment in the contiguous US (including Alaska).

Great graphic with all (?) US producing areas assessed by USGS and undiscovered, technically recoverable resources:
  • Permian Basin: 24.19 (this is a little confusing, because the Midland was assessed at 24.2 and yet the Midland is only one of the three basins in the Permian -- the Midland, the Delaware, and the Central basin -- see very last line in this post -- that explains it)
  • Williston Basin: 7.62
  • Western Gulf: 1.73
  • Appalachian basin: 1.4
  • Alaska North Slope: 0.94
  • North Central Montana: 0.64
  • Paradox basin: 0.47
  • Cherokee platform (eastern OK): 0.46
  • Powder River basin: 0.42
  • Anadarko basin: 0.39 
  • Bend Arch Fort Worth basin: 0.17
  • Southwestern Wyoming: 0.10
  • Denver basin: 0.04
  • Uinta-Piceance basin: 0.03
  • Montana thrust belt (western MT along Idaho border): 0.03
  • San Joaquin basin: 0.02
  • Los Angeles basin: 0.01
  • Bighorn basin: 0.01 
  • Mean total: 39 BBO (note: mean)
  • most areas were assessed between 2001 - 2018
Here's the graphic:
Spraberry formation:
  • upper, middle, and lower
  • operators mostly interested in middle and lower Spraberry
  • informally, the lower Spraberry is further sub-divided into the lower Spraberry shale and the lower Spraberry (similar to the Bakken; more on this later)
  • the industry also refers to a "Jo-Mill" play in the upper section of the lower Spraberry, a silt-rich interval
  • recently assessed, 2017
Wolfcamp shale: divided into a total of six AUs
  • Midland Basin Wolfcamp A Continuous Oil AU
  • Midland Basin Wolfcamp B Upper Continuous Oil AU
  • Midland Basin Wolfcamp B Lower Continuous Oil AU
  • Midland Basin Wolfcamp C Continuous Oil AU
  • Midland Basin Wolfcamp D Continuous Oil AU
  • Midland Basin Northern Wolfcamp Continuous Oil AU
  • assessment based on limited well data with 0.10 - 0.14 MMBO, with the highest EURS estimated within the Wolfcamp A and B horizons
Total oil resource, Spraberry:
  • 4.2 billion bbls of oil
  • 3.1 tcf of gas
  • majority of this assessment is attributed to the two Spraberry continuous AUs (the Middle and the Lower)
  • a mean of 5 million bbls was assessed for the Northern Spraberry Conventional AU
  • in comparison, the mean total assessed in 2007 for continuous and conventional resources of the Spraberry formation (based on vertical wells) was 530 million bbls of oil 
Total oil resource, Wolfcamp:
  • assessed for the first time in 2016
  • 20 billion bbls of oil
  • 16 tcf of gas within six continuous AUs
Total oil resource, Wolfcamp + Spraberry:
  • 24.2 billion bbls in the Midland Basin
The report references the 2013 Bakken assessment:
  • 7.4 billion bbls (Bakken + Three Forks)
  • at the time, this was the largest domestic oil assessment conducted by the USGS
  • the addition of the Heath (Tyler) formation, assessed in 2016, raises the total assessed continuous oil resources in Williston basin to 7.6 billion bbls of oils
  • the recent assessments of the Spraberry and Woflcamp formations in the Midland basin nearly tripled the Bakken, Three Forks, and Heath formations
  • the Bakken is currently being re-assessed by the USGS; at the time of the last USGS assessment of the Bakken, CLR's EUR type curves were 400 - 500 million bbls; CLR's EUR type curves now exceed 1 million bbls;
  • the Midland basin contains the largest estimated continuous oil resource by the USGS.
  • additional assessments are underway in neighboring Delaware basin that will ultimately alter the total mean resources projected by the USS for the the greater Permian basin

Sometime It's Not Fake News, It's No News -- June 23, 2018


Later, 12:25 p.m. CDT: same thing, several hours later.

Original Post
Four screenshots because I couldn't get them in just two screenshots.

This is a google search: the first two pages.

The search: North Korea coffins US remains

See if you can find the glaring omission in the results. Hint: Google ranks the order of results on two major data points:
  • first, obviously, a publication has to carry the story
  • second, the more "hits/views" a publication gets, the higher that publication is placed among the results
Here are the screenshots:

Great News! "Comments" App Now Works -- June 23, 2018


Later, 6:46 a.m. CDT: a reader sent in a comment overnight. The comments section works again! Whoo-hoo!.

Original Post 

The comments app now works -- at least as far as I can tell. It worked this evening when I was testing it. I should know more as the week(s) go by.

The problem had nothing to do with EU regulations but the problem may have begun when the "blogger app" made some changes to comply with EU regulations. I don't know, but it no longer matters if the comments app actually works. 

Thank you, everyone, for your patience.

I did find all the "old" comments that folks sent in that did not get posted. I spent most of the evening posting/replying to them.

I missed a few, I'm sure, and I haven't gone all the way back -- just too many comments. Much appreciated.

My biggest surprise: how closely folks read my notes. Wow, folks catch a lot of trivia I thought no one would notice. I don't know if that's good or bad. LOL.