Monday, October 22, 2018

Short-Duration Spike To Nearly $500/MWH In New England Early This Morning -- October 22, 2018


October 23, 2018: things look a bit better in New England today. Spike in prices a bit lower this morning. But note the reliance on natural gas. What a huge shift from just a few years ago.

Original Post

Last December 27, 2017, electricity prices spiked to $500/MWH -- see this link.

I see that early this morning, ISO New England had a short-in-duration spike to nearly $500/MWH; appears to have lasted about an hour or so.

Will Wonders Never Cease? -- Mexico To Import Bakken Oil -- October 22, 2018; Chinese Crude Oil Demand Insatiable


Later 5:11 p.m. CDT: this story is now being reported at Platts.
Pemex's buying of four US Bakken crude cargoes should help it maximize the efficiency of its 330,000 b/d Salina Cruz refinery, although future imports are no sure thing as they are opposed by Mexico's incoming administration, an S&P Global Platts analysis showed Tuesday.
Original Post 

Of course, this will only continue if the DAPL continues to flow, and, as noted, the DAPl is now the subject of lawsuits in two different courts, one appellate and one state supreme court. At least that's my understanding. Could be wrong. But I digress.

Argusmedia is reporting:
Mexico's state-owned Pemex has awarded a tender to import four 350,000 bl cargoes of US Bakken light crude, the first such crude import in around a decade.
The cargoes will be delivered in November and will mainly serve the Salina Cruz refinery in Oaxaca state, Pemex said today.
Traditionally a crude exporter, Pemex announced earlier this year that its downstream company, Pemex Transformacion Industrial, would start importing up to 100,000 b/d of light crude in an effort to boost flagging refining rates at its six refineries, particularly at its Salina Cruz refinery.
More at the link.

China's Crude Oil Demand

This article has some interesting data points. From
  • crude oil
    • 2017: Chinese oil demand grew 5.5% to 11.77 million bopd (in other words, Chinese crude oil demand = US total crude oil production
      • reminder: more and more of Saudi's crude oil production is used by Saudis themselves
    • September, 2018, China: 12.49 million bopd, despite economic slowdown due to trade wars with US --  so, 12.49 million bopd exceeds total US crude oil production
    • and this, despite the fact that economic growth in China slowed in the third quarter to its weakest since the global financial crisis
    • and then look at this: greater reliance on sweet crude imports from the US shale producers once ongoing trade tensions recede
  • natural gas: 
    • 2017: China's consumption soared to new record highs, reaching 235.2 billion cubic meters
    • 2017: natural gas consumption increased 17% or 34 bcm from 2016
  • the really big story: China's LNG demand spikes
    • China bypassed South Korea last year to become the world's second largest LNG importer after Japan, while China's LNG demand increased by more than 50% in 2017 compared with 2016
    • LNG demand in 2017: 38 million tonnes
    • 2019: China projected to become the world's top importer of LNG
  • 2023: 
    • natural gas demand will rise by 60% from 2017, to 376 BCM
    • LNG imports will rise to 93BCM by 2023 from 51 bcm in 2017
    • China already accounts for 50%  of overall growth in global LNG demand
    • RD Shell: world's largest LNG-producing company; going long on LNG; will see a record number of final investment decisions on new NG projects in Russia, the US, qatar, and Mozambique
Renewables? not even mentioned.

Discussion With Arianna
The Questions Are Endless


Later, 11:05 p.m. CDT: a reader answered (and provided the reference) my question, where C-14 was coming from -- the answer:  
The primary natural source of carbon-14 on Earth is cosmic ray action on nitrogen in the atmosphere, and it is therefore a cosmogenic nuclide. However, open-air nuclear testing between 1955–1980 contributed to this pool.
Comment: that is so cool. I never would have thought the answer was so easily found; and, it's cool that there's an explanation for a question, that apparently, was not a dumb question.
Original Post

Protons: uud (quarks)
Neutrons: udd (quarks)
Protons have never, ever, even been observed to decay. There are theories that "demand" protons decay and it would be odd for a 3-quark particle NOT to decay (since it appears all such particles decay -- except the proton)

Neutrons: "decay all the time" -- lifetime of a "free" neutron -- 886 seconds (thank goodness, it isn't 666 seconds)

Atoms come in various flavors or forms, called isotopes.

"Stable" atoms make up the vast bulk of isotopes of any given atom.

"Unstable" isotopes are, I guess, by definition, unstable because they decay.

Take C-12, C-13, and C-14. If these isotopes were all equally stable, there would be no "radioactivity" involving carbon and none of the isotopes would be considered unstable. But the earth's atmosphere comes with three isotopes of carbon.
  • C-12: 6 protons, 6 neutrons
  • C-12: 99% of all carbon on earth
  • C-13: 1% of all carbon on earth
Both C-12 and C-13 are considered stable, and not "radioactive."

But, interestingly enough, C-14 is unstable --
  • C-14: 1 or 1.5 atoms per 1012 atoms of carbon in the atmosphere; that's not very much, one out of one trillion carbon atoms in the atmosphere is C-14 and unstable (000 - thousand; 000,000 - million; 000,000,000 billion; 000,000,000,000 (12) = trillion)
  • C-14 is unstable: lives for "only" 5,730 +/- 40 years
  • C-14: one of the neutrons decays; in the process, one of the neutrons changes to a proton -- C-14 becomes an atom with 7 protons instead of 6 protons -- and by losing a neutron, it has 7 protons and 7 neutrons or at atomic weight of 14. I hope I have that right. I don't want to confuse anyone.
Beta decay ("weak force") can proceed two different ways ---
  • in
     decay: electron emission; atomic increased by one
  • in β+ decay: positron emission; atomic decreased by one
The questions become:
  • why are there isotopes in the first place? especially when many are "unstable" in the first place? is "unstable" a relative concept?
  • if there is so little C-14 in the earth's atmosphere to begin with, and the half-life is relatively short, 5,000 years, why is there any C-14 left at all
I'm sure there are easy answers to these questions, and that's fine. But asking the questions helps one remember the concepts.

Nine New Permits; Active Rigs Hold Steady At 71 -- October 22, 2018

Active rigs:

Active Rigs71543469192

Nine new permits:
  • Operators: Oasis (7); Whiting (2)
  • Fields: Banks (McKenzie), Sanish (Mountrail)
  • Comments: Whiting has two more Fladeland permits in SESE 9-154-92; and Oasis has permits for a 7-well A. Johnson / Nikloai Federal pad in SWSE 33-153-97;
Four permits canceled:
  • XTO (2): two Rough Federal permits, in McKenzie County
  • EOG (2): two Hawkey permits, in McKenzie County
Sixteen permits renewed:
  • EOG (10) five Hawkeye permits in McKenzie County; four Burke permits in Mountrail County; one Ross permit in Mountrail County
  • Zavanna (4): four Galloway permits in Williams County
  • Enerplus (2): one Giraffe permit and one Walleye permit, both in Dunn County
One dry hole:
  • 34057, dry, BR, Rink 8-1-5MBH; 
Four producing wells (DUCs) reported as completed (all four of these from the same pad; watch the following when they come back on line:27092, 27093, 17539):
  • 31043, 1,197, EOG Austin 92-1807H, Parshall, t9/18; cum --
  • 30901, 1,256, EOG, Austin 84-1807H, Parshall, t9/18; cum --
  • 30902, 1,162, EOG, Austin 73-1807H, Parshall, t9/18; cum --
  • 30903, 614, EOG, Austin 72-1807H, Parshall, t9/18; cum --

The Answer

A huge "thank you" to Don for sending me the link to the map. We had a lot of fun with this.

The map below came from this site with honey bee farms in North Dakota. At the site, it is interactive. Drag your arrow over each blue circle to see its location:

From worldatlas, data from 2014:

It's interesting to note where there are absolutely no blue circles in North Dakota. 

My little bottle of honey here in our little hovel:

Very, Very Dangerous Intersection Nine (9) Miles West Of Williston On US Highway 2 -- October 22, 2018

Fatal corner: nine miles west of Williston, ND, on US -2. From the Williston Herald:
Williams County has drafted a letter urging the North Dakota Department of Transportation to add a turn lane in Judson Township at an intersection where multiple fatality accidents have occurred this year, and the area is going to be studied, an official with the department confirmed.
The letter, approved unanimously by the Williams County Commission, expresses concern for traffic safety on Highway 2 near mile marker 9, which is located near 146th Drive NW in Williams County. There is heavy commercial traffic on the route that heads west to the Montana border, yet the road narrows from four lanes to two before reaching the border, the county’s letter points out.
Two fatal accidents have occurred near mile marker 9 this year within two days of each other, which has intensified existing concerns about the location, commissioners added.
The first accident, on September 21, 2018, killed 15-year-old Kennedy Hansen, a Fairview student who was a passenger in a car that was struck from behind while waiting to make a left turn off the highway.
Two days later, Gilberto Gomez Jr., 24, of Texas, and Rosa Aguayo, 45, of California were killed in a collision at nearly the same location. Police said that the vehicle Gomez was driving crossed over the centerline, into oncoming traffic.
Until they get the turn lane built, perhaps some warning lights, several warning signs might be helpful. A very localized lowered speed limit is probably not indicated (counter-intuitive).

Note: I've always considered it 18 miles from Williston to the state line, so I assume the 9-mile marker is about 9 miles west of Williston / 9 miles east of the state line. Could be wrong. 

The Crafts Page

From our younger daughter today who makes greeting cards using "stamps" as well as other media:
One of the stamp sets I [recently received] is one to make Awareness Ribbon cards (i.e. a pink ribbon for breast cancer).  So I looked up other colors... and let me tell you, I feel like there is a ribbon for EVERYTHING.  Kinda like a participation trophy!  Only, now you get a ribbon for everything in your life. So, if you ever need a ribbon for something, here is a website to help you out:
At the linked site, scroll down to see all the ribbons that are available.
I saw on the front cover of one of the supermarket tabloids today is that George Clooney is being dumped. I assume if one is "feeling the pain" for George, one will wear a black ribbon.
And who started all this?
Tie A Yellow Ribbon Around The Old Oak Tree, Dawn

Now, back to that George Clooney story? Any truth to it, Snopes? Apparently bogus. See this link.

Legacy Fund Deposits Decline Slightly Month-Over-Month -- October, 2018, Deposits Posted

Link here.



Washing my bike two years ago.


Hearing Dockets For November, 2018, Posted

NDIC posts the hearing dockets here.

Dockets are tracked here

The usual disclaimer applies. As usual this is done very quickly and using shorthand for my benefit. There will be factual and typographical errors on this page. Do not quote me on any of this. It's for my personal use to help me better understand the Bakken. Do not read it. If you do happen to read it, do not make any investment, financial, job, relationship, or travel plans based on anything you read here or think you may have read here. If this stuff is important to you, and I doubt that it is, but if it is, go to the source.

Highlights in bold.

Wednesday, November 14, 2018 -- 11 pages
  • 27028, NDIC, Eigthmile-Bakken; appropriate spacing for wells completed in this pool in a 2560-acre unit; McKenzie; Williams
  • 27029, Oasis, Middle Creek-Bakken, spacing, McKenzie
  • 27030, Hess, Big Butte-Bakken establish an overlapping 2560-acre unit; 1 well; Mountrail
  • 27031, Lime Rock, Dimond-Bakken; establish eight (8) overlapping 2560-acre units; three wells on each; Burke County;
  • 27032, Lime Rock, Dimond-Bakken; establish two overlapping 1920-acre units; 4 wells each; Burke County
  • 27033, Lime Rock, Dimond and/or Vanville-Bakken; establish two overlapping 1920-acreunits; 3 wells each; Burke
  • 27034, MRO, Reunion Bay-Bakken, establish an overlapping 2560-acre unit; 1 well; Mountrail
  • 27035, MRO, Antelope-Sanish and/or Reunion Bay-Bakken; establish an overlapping 1280-acre unit; 2 wells; Mountrail
  • 27036, MRO Bailey-Bakkey, establish an overlapping 2560-acre unit; 1 well; Dunn
  • 27037, MRO, Bailey and/or Killdeer-Bakken; establish an overlapping 2560-acre unit; 1 well; Dunn
  • 27038, MRO, Killdeer and/or Murphy Creek-Bakken; establish an overlapping 2560-acre unit; 2 wells; Dunn
  • 27039, MRO, Killdeer-Bakken; establish two overlapping 2560-acre units; 1 well each; Dunn
  • 27040, MRO, Killdeer-Bakken; setback rules; Dunn
  • 27041, MRO, wants relief from flaring rules in "certain wells" in Bailey-Bakken, Dunn County
  • 27042, MRO, ditto, Chimney Butte-Bakken, Dunn County
  • 27043, MRO, ditto, Killdeer-Bakken, Dunn County
  • 27044, Whiting, Sanish-Bakken, establish two overlapping 2560-acre unit; 4 wells each; Mountrail
  • 27045, Whiting, Sanish-Bakken, establish an overlapping 1920-acre unit; 2 wells; Mountrail
  • 27046, Whiting, Dutch Henry Butte-Bakken; establish six 2560-acre units; one well each; Stark County
  • 27047, Whiting, Dutch Henry Butte-Bakken and Dickinson-Bakken, establish two 2560-acre units; 1 well each; Stark County
  • 27048, Whiting, Dicksinon-Bakken establish a 2560-acre unit; 1 well; Stark County
  • 27049, Whiting, Zenith and Green River-Bakken pools; establish a 2560-acre unit; 1 well; Stark
  • 27050, Whiting, Glass Bluff-Bakken, establish an overlapping 2560-acre unit; 1 well; McKenzie
  • 27051, Whiting, Dore-Bakken, establish an overlapping 2560-acre unit; 1 well; McKenzie 
  • 27052, Denbury, commingling a gazillion wells; in Bowman County (see bottom of this post)  
  • 27053, MRO, Reunion Bay-Bakken, 2 wells on each of two 2560-acreu units; Dunn, Mountrail
  • 27054, MRO, Reunion Bay-Bakken; 8 wells on each of two 1280-acre units; 9 wells on a 1280-acre unit; Dunn, Mountrail Counties
  • 27055, MRO, commingling
  • 27056, Whiting, pooling
  • 27057, Whiting, pooling
  • 27058, Whiting, pooling
  • 27059, Whiting, pooling
  • 27060, Whiting, pooling
  • 27061, Whiting, Glass Bluff-Bakken, 3 wells on each of two 1280-acre units; Williams
  • 27062, Whiting, Dore-Bakken, 3 wells on a 1280-acre unit; McKenzie
  • 27063, Whiting, commingling 
  • 27064, Whiting, commingling 
  • 27065,Whiting, commingling 
  • 27066, Whiting, commingling 
  • 27067, Whiting, commingling 
  • 27068, Whiting, commingling 
  • 27069, Whiting, commingling 
  • 27070, Whiting, commingling 
  • 27071, Whiting, commingling 
  • 27072, BR, commingling
  • 27073, BR, pooling
  • 27074, BR, Haystack Butte-Bakken; 9 wells on a 1280-acre unit; McKenzie County
  • 27075, Petro-Hunt, pooling
  • 27076: Hess, pooling
  • 27077, Lime Rock, pooling
  • 27078, Lime Rock, pooling
  • 27079, Lime Rock, pooling
  • 27080, Lime Rock, pooling
  • 27081, Hydra Services, SWD
Thursday, November 15, 2018 -- 10 pages
  • 27082, Eagle Operating, temporary spacing for Miller 2-29, #34459, Renville
  • 27083, Eagle Operating, temporary spacing for Popinga 32-16, #34645, Renvilel
  • 27084, Slawson, i) establish an overlapping 2560-acre unit; 2 wells; ii) establish an overlapping 3200-acre unit, 2 wells; ; iii) establish an overlapping 3840-acre unit, 1 well; iv) misc termination of previous units, Mountrail
  • 27085, WPX, Heart Butte-Bakken, establish a 1920-acre unit; 10 wells; Dunn County
  • 27086, CLR, Cabernet-Bakken, establish an overlapping 2560-acre unit, 2 wells; Dunn
  • 27087, CLR, Little Knife-Bakken, establish two overlapping 2560-acre units; 2 wells each; Dunn
  • 27088, XTO, Alkali Creek-Bakken; reduce number of wells required on an existing overlapping 3840-acre unit, Williams
  • 27089, Kraken Oil & Gas, Sanish-Bakken; establish four overlapping 1280-acre units; 14 wells on each unit; establish two overlapping 1920-acre units; 14 wells on each; Mountrail; the 1280-acre unit: section 21/28; sections 29/30; sections 3132; sections 33/34 in T154N-R92W; and the 1920-acrue units, sections 15/22/27-154-92; and setons 3/4/5-153-92; 
  • 27090, Southwestern Production, Tracy Mountain-Tyler; amend; establish a 320-acre unit; S/2 section 22-138-102, Billings County
  • 27091, EOG, Spotted Horn-Bakken; establish two 640-acre units; "multiple wells" on each 640-acre unit; the units: W/2 of sections 30/31 and E/2 of section s30/31-150-94; McKenzie
  • 27092, Prudent Resources, LLC, Kittleson Slough-Bakken; one well on 320-acre unit spacing; E/2E/2 of section 8 and E/2E/2 of section 17; Mountrail County
  • 27093, Slawson, pooling 
  • 27094, Slawson, pooling 
  • 27095, Slawson, pooling 
  • 27096, Slawson, pooling 
  • 27097, CLR, pooling, 
  • 27098, CLR, pooling, 
  • 27099, CLR, pooling,
  • 27100, CLR, Little Knife-Bakken; 10 wells on an existing 1280-acre unit; Dunn County; the unit: sections 2/11-146-97;
  • 27101, Zavanna, pooling 
  • 27102, Zavanna, pooling 
  • 27103,  XTO, pooling
  • 27104, XTO, risk penalty legalese
  • 27105, Hunt, pooling
  • 27106, Hunt, pooling
  • 27107, Hunt, pooling
  • 27108, Hunt, pooling
  • 27109, Hunt, pooling
  • 27110, Hunt, pooling
  • 27111, Hunt, pooling
  • 27112, Hunt, pooling
  • 27113, Hunt, pooling
  • 27114, Hunt, pooling
  • 27115, Hunt, pooling
  • 27116, Hunt, pooling
  • 27117, Hunt, pooling
  • 27118, Hunt, pooling
  • 27119, Hunt, pooling
  • 27120, WPX, commingling
  • 27121, White Owl, SWD
  • 27122, Arrow, SWD
  • 27123, NP Resources, Cinnamon Creek-Bakken; 4 wells on an existing 1280-acre unit; McKenzie
The Denbury case in Bowman County:
Case No. 27052: Application of Denbury Onshore, LLC, pursuant to NDAC § 43-02-03-88.1 for an order allowing oil and gas produced from the USA 14-26-61 well
(File No. 10444), SWSW of Section 26, T.131N., R.107W.; the Cedar Cr
MC22-17SH well, Lot 5 and SWSESE of Section 3, Lots 1, 2 and E/2 of
Lot 3, and E/2 E/2 of Section 10, W/2 W/2 of Section 11, T.130N.,
R.107W., Bowman County, ND, and Lots 2 and 3 of Section 17, T.4N.,
R.62E., Fallon County, MT; and the Little Beaver East MC22-17NH well,
Lots 2, 3, and 4 of Section 3, T.130N., R.107W., Bowman County, ND,
and Lots 3 and 4 (W/2 SE/4) and SW/4 of Section 8, and Lots 1 and 2,
NENW, NENWNW, NESENW of Section 17, T.4N., R.62E., Fallon
County, MT; and the following wells located within the Cedar Cr Anticline
No. 8-B Federal Exploratory Unit: Cedar Cr Unit 8B 43X-10A-4 (File No.
), Cedar Cr Unit 8B 32X-03A-7 (File No. 2942), Cedar Cr Unit 8B
14X-2A-8 (File No. 2949), Cedar Cr Unit 8B 14-11A-10 (File No. 2962),
Cedar Cr Unit 8B 21-14A-12 (File No. 3035), Cedar Cr Unit 8B 41-14A-
22 (File No. 3153), Cedar Cr Unit 8B 41-11A-23 (File No. 3155), Cedar Cr
Unit 8B 43-11A-27 (File No. 3224), Cedar Cr Unit 8B 12-2A-28 (File No.
), Cedar Cr Unit 8B 34-02A-31 (File No. 3264), Cedar Cr Unit 8B
34X-14A-33 (File No. 3283), Cedar Cr Unit 8B 43-13A-34 (File No.
), Cedar Cr Unit 8B 43-12A-37 (File No. 3362), Cedar Cr Unit 8B
31X-02A-47 (File No. 3739), Cedar Cr Unit 8B 13X-7C-48 (File No.
), Cedar Cr Unit 8B 31X-34B45RH (File No. 3820), Cedar Cr Unit 8B
21-18C-50 (File No. 4001), Cedar Cr Unit 8B 41X-18C-52 (File No. 4033),
Cedar Cr Unit 8B 23-13A-38R (File No. 8217), Cedar Cr Unit 8B 34X-3A-
2R (File No. 8519), Cedar Cr Unit 8B 31X-3A-56 (File No. 9699), USA 22-
24-58 (File No. 10445), Cedar Cr Unit 8B 23-13A-38RR (File No. 11638),
Cedar Cr Unit 8B 12-12A-63 (File No. 12103), Cedar Cr Unit 8B 14-12A-
62 (File No. 12104), Cedar Cr Unit 8B 34-12A-65H (File No. 12171),
Cedar Cr 11X-24H-66 (File No. 13780), Cedar Cr 14X-36BH-70 (File No.
), Cedar Cr 32X-13A-71 (File No. 15070), Cedar Cr 43X-24-76 (File
No. 15384
), Cedar Cr 11X-12A-81H (File No. 15475), Cedar Cr 34X-02A-
82H (File No. 15476), Cedar Cr 42X-24-84H (File No. 15478), Cedar Cr
31X-30-85H (File No. 15479), Cedar Cr 43X-30-86H (File No. 15528),
Cedar Cr 24X-29-91H (File No. 15627), Cedar Cr 12-35-97H (File No.
15697), Cedar Cr 13X-23-96H (File No. 15782) wells, the Cedar Cr
Anticline No. 8-B Federal Exploratory Unit consisting of Sections 34, 35
and 36, T.131N., R.107W., all or portions of Sections 2, 3, 10, 11, 12, 13,
14, 15, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27 and 36, T.130N., R.107W., and all or portions
of Sections 6, 7, 8, 18, 19, 29, 30, 31 and 32, T.130N., R.106W., Bowman
County, ND, to be commingled in a central production facility located in
the NENE of Section 10, T.130N., R.107W., as an exception to NDAC §
43-02-03-48.1 and/or applicable policies of the Commission, and such
other relief as is appropriate.

Poll: Kevin Cramer (R) - 56%; Heidi Heitkamp (D - Incumbent) - 40%; The Latter With A 52% Unfavorable Rating -- October 22, 2018

Back on October 18, 2018, I said I was eager to see the first poll after the last debate between Kevin Cramer and Heidi Heitkamp, North Dakota, US Senate. This was the last poll before the last debate:
It will be interesting to see the overnight polling.

Most recent poll at this link:

It may be hard to read but prior to their last debate, on October 3, 2018, the poll showed:
  • Cramer: 50%
  • Heitkamp: 41%
  • Cramer: 56%
  • Heitkamp: 40%
It looks like the undecideds have decided. The Heitkamp "%" pretty much stayed the same.

But, even more interesting. Look at the "unfavorable" rating for Heitkamp: 52%. 

From the linked article:
Heitkamp is viewed favorably by 37 percent of North Dakota voters and unfavorably by 52 percent, with 7 percent holding a neutral opinion and 4 percent unfamiliar. That unfavorable number represents a significant increase since September, when only 41 percent held an unfavorable view of her. Her challenger is viewed favorably by 53 percent of likely voters (a 7-point increase over September) and unfavorably by 38 percent, with 5 percent holding a neutral opinion and 4 percent unfamiliar with him.
I found it interesting that KFYR didn't post the "16% gap" in the headline.

Call me crazy, but one wonders if something similar might be happening in Texas?

Petroshale/Oasis Jorgenson Federal Wells


January 1, 2019: some great wells in this area were noted to be off line in late 2019. What's going on? Let's update the graphic, lots of activity:

Looks like Petroshale is getting ready to complete some/all of the following wells:
  • 36664, SI/NC, Petroshale, Jorgenson Federal 2MBH, Bear Den, t--; cum 73K 3/20;
  • 36665, SI/NC, Petroshale, Jorgenson Federal 3MBH, Bear Den, t--; cum 58K 3/20; intermittent production starting 2/20;
  • 36666 conf, Petroshale, Jorgenson Federal 2TFH,

  • 36903, drl/drl, Petroshale, Hickok Federal 1MBH,
  • 36904, loc/drl, Petroshale, Bridger Federal 1TFH,

  • 36894, conf, Petroshale, Boone Federal 1MBH,
  • 36893, conf, Petroshale, Crockett Federal 1TFH,
  • 36892, conf, Petroshale, Bowie Federal 2MBH,
  • 36891, conf, Petroshale, Carson Federal 1TFH,
  • 36890, conf, Petroshale, Lewis Federal 3MBH,
  • 36889, conf, Petroshale, Clark Federal 2TFH,

Original Post

Note two wells: #18579 and #33547.

First, 18579, neighboring well was fracked by Newfield on/about 8/17; look how long the increased production is holding; This well, less than ten years old, has produced in excess of one-half million bbls, and production is increasing, not decreasing:
  • 18579, 2,006, Petroshale/Oasis, Jorgenson Federal 1-30H, Bear Den, t12/10; cum 580K 3/20; off line as of 10/19; back on line, 2/20;
PoolDateDaysBBLS OilRunsBBLS WaterMCF ProdMCF SoldVent/Flare

Now, #33547 -- tested 8/17; still producing 6,000 bbls/month in 8/18; a huge well:
  • 33547, 1,120, Newfield, Moberg Federal 149-95-29-32-30HLW, Bear Den, t8/17; cum 166K 3/20; offline for a few days in 10/19; no2 off line as of 11/19; back on line 3/20; recent production --
PoolDateDaysBBLS OilRunsBBLS WaterMCF ProdMCF SoldVent/Flare

The graphic, note proximity of #33547 and #18579:

Other wells in this graphic:
  • 18248, 644, Petroshale, Bear Den Federal 4Z-30H, Bear Den, t1/10; cum 224K 3/20; off line as of 10/19; back on line 12/19;
  • 17662, 903, Petroshale, Bear DenFederal 4Y-30H, Bear Den, t1/10; cum321K 3/20; off line as of 10/19; back on line 12/19;
  • 24191, 946, Petroshale, Jorgenson Federal 14X-19H, Bear Dean, t7/13; cum 310K 3/20; off line since 6/19; back on line 3/20;
  • 24190, 1,028, Petroshale, Jorgenson Federal 14-19H, t7/13; cum 380K 3/20; off line since 6/19; back on line 3/20;
  • 19049, 1,099, Petroshale, Jorgenson Federal 1X-30H, Bear Den, t/11; cum 437K 3/20; off line as of 10/19; back on line as of 3/20;
  • 32058, 1,898, Newfield, Moberg Federal 149-95-29-32-14HLW, Bear Den, t8/17; cum 280K 3/20; off line as of 11/19; back online 12/19;

XTO's TAT State Federal Wells In SWSW 36-148-96

The well, no evidence that is has been refracked:
  • 18797, 1,743, XTO, TAT State Federal 14X-36F, Bear Creek, t3/12; cum 390K 9/19;
Production interval of interest:

The graphic:

The other wells in the graphic:
  • 30835, 408, XTO, TAT State Federal 14X-36H, Bear Creek, t10/16; cum 287K 9/19; off line 4/19; came back into production 9/19;
  • 30834, 326, XTO, TAT State Federal 14X-36D, Bear Creek, t12/16; cum 204K 9/19;
  • 30833, 630, XTO, TAT State Federal 14X-36G, Bear Creek, t6/17; cum 203K 6/19; was this one of the reasons for recent surge in other well? came off line 6/19; remains off line 9/19;
  • 30832, 245, XTO, TAT State Federal 14X-36C, Bear Creek, t7/17; cum 266K 9/19; was this one of the reasons for recent surge in other well?
  • 30831, 963, XTO, TAT State Federal 14X-36B, Bear Creek, t7/17; cum 361K 9/19; was this one of the reasons for recent surge in other well?
  • 30830, 485, XTO, TAT State Federal 14X-36E, Bear Creek, t7/17; cum 161K 9/19; was this one of the reasons for recent surge in other well?
  • 30829, 1,221, XTO, TAT State Federal 14X-36A, Bear Creek, t7/17; cum 406K 9/19; was this one of the reasons for recent surge in other well?
Look at this incredible production:
PoolDateDaysBBLS OilRunsBBLS WaterMCF ProdMCF SoldVent/Flare

Look at this incredible production:
PoolDateDaysBBLS OilRunsBBLS WaterMCF ProdMCF SoldVent/Flare

Look at this lousy well that now has a surge in 8/18:
30834, originally tested at the end of 2016; a lousy well; look at production now:
PoolDateDaysBBLS OilRunsBBLS WaterMCF ProdMCF SoldVent/Flare

Look at this incredible recent production:
30835, originally tested in late 2016; look at re-surgence in 2018:
PoolDateDaysBBLS OilRunsBBLS WaterMCF ProdMCF SoldVent/Flare

Distractions -- Nothing About The Bakken -- October 22, 2018

Distractions. LOL.


First Ford. From CNBC. Ford starts US production of the Ranger pickup for the first time in years. Why is this noteworthy?

When I saw that, I replied to the read (not-ready-for prime-time):
It looks like Ford's strategy is to really, really capture the pick-up market. Laser-like focus on this segment of auto industry.

When I look around DFW and look at the business articles, it really looks like Nissan, Toyota, Honda are going to be the big 3 going forward, along with VW which I always forget. For being the biggest automobile company in the world, I certainly don't see much VW that excites me. But everywhere, here in the DFW area, the Nissan is incredible -- seems to have monster vehicles in every category: Altima, Rogue, and then all the huge monster pick-up trucks.

Large and mid-size.

In absolute numbers, Nissan a "no-show" compared to GM and Ford.

In large size: Nissan: 149% increase in sales year-over-year. 149% increase. -- We're seeing that in Texas.

I would have to look but I think Ford runs the risk of pricing themselves out of the market; Nissan bang for buck is compelling.

In mid-size, Ford did not make the top 5 (at that link) unless I missed it.

That may explain why getting back into Ranger (mid-size or small-size?).
So, is the Ranger small-size or mid-size.

Wow, I love connecting the dots. Ford must have looked at the same 2017 numbers and noted they -- the company noted for pickups -- did not even show up on the top five list for mid-size pickups.

The Ranger: midsize, according to the linked article


The evolution of birds is very, very confusing to me. 

It's pretty much a given that modern birds evolved from therapods, dinosaurs.

But there were other flying chordata during the Mesozoic period that confuse the picture. Notworthy are the pterodactyls, which were flying reptiles, but not flying dinosaurs. They had their fifteen minutes of fame and died out.
It is the "Hesperornies" that confuse me. From wiki:
Hesperornis (meaning "western bird") is a genus of flightless aquatic birds that spanned the first half of the Campanian age of the Late Cretaceous period (83.5–78 mya).  
One of the lesser-known discoveries of the paleontologist O. C. Marsh in the late 19th century Bone Wars, it was an early find in the history of avian paleontology. Locations for Hesperornis fossils include the Late Cretaceous marine limestones from Kansas and the marine shales from Canada. Nine species are recognised, eight of which have been recovered from rocks in North America and one from Russia.  
Like many other Mesozoic birds such as Ichthyornis, Hesperornis had teeth as well as a beak, which were used to hold prey. In the hesperornithiform lineage they were of a different arrangement than in any other known bird (or in non-avian theropod dinosaurs), with the teeth sitting in a longitudinal groove rather than in individual sockets, in a notable case of convergent evolution with mosasaurs
The teeth of Hesperornis were present along nearly the entire lower jaw (dentary) and the back of the upper jaw (maxilla). The front portion of the upper jaw (premaxilla) and tip of the lower jaw (predentary) lacked teeth and were probably covered in a beak. Studies of the bone surface show that at least the tips of the jaws supported a hard, keratinous beak similar to that found in modern birds.

CLR Reports Another Huge Mountain Gap Well In Rattlesnake Point -- October 22, 2018

CLR's Mountain Gap wells are tracked here.

CLR reports another huge Mountain Gap well:
  • 33557, 2,103, CLR, Mountain Gap 3-10H, Rattlesnake Point, 64 stages; 15.3 million lbs, t7/18; cum 79K in two months;
PoolDateDaysBBLS OilRunsBBLS WaterMCF ProdMCF SoldVent/Flare

Sonic Shake Break

Midnight at the oasis. LOL. Following the Halloween party. Sophia was wearing her "Incredibles" costume.

I have suggested to Sophia's grandmother and Sophia's mother that we need to start a new family tradition: every Friday night, midnight at the oasis, during the summer (or when it is warm enough in spring/fall) in Texas: a midnight stop at Sonic every Friday. LOL.

By the way, there is a cultural difference, I am told, between Hispanics and Scandinavians. (My wife is half-Hispanic genealogically but 99% Hispanic culturally, most days.) The cultural difference between Hispanics and Scandinavians when it comes to "bedtime."

Scandinavians: children have set bedtimes. Generally starting at 7:00 p.m. and trending toward 10:30 as the children reach high school.

Hispanics: there is no bedtime. Trending toward midnight is the norm for all ages.

When it comes to bedtime, I am Hispanic.