Sand -- October 13, 2019

Source: frack sand, North Dakota, will download as a pdf.

From that source:

Crush resistance, of concern: in the 2011 study linked above, site #1 (north of the highway) did not meet "crush resistance criteria -- and it was a big miss) where site #7 did meet crush resistance criteria. Across such a wide area, quality of sand will likely vary. Sames from locations 2, 3, 5, 7, and 8 met criteria back in 2011. Sites 1, 3, and 7 are in the McHenry area.

Updates

Later, 9:44 p.m. CT: a reader wonders if DrillingInfo might be willing to help us sort out a cost/benefit analysis of brown vs white sand; and, of course, later, ceramic -- comment being brought up for here to make it easier to google --

I'm too lazy to Google for it right now, but I'm intrigued by the difference between white sand (Wisconsin, more expensive, more globular) and brown sand (Texas, less expensive at least down there, and more plate-y). In theory, globular should give better well performance initially and hold more of the fracture open longer. However, in the Permian, operators have decided that the cost difference is worth the performance drop (and can be made up by stuffing more cheap sand in).

But there is also an interesting example in the Deep Utica, where they tried "backing off" even more expensive ceramic proppant (to sand). [But they] found that the wells were so deep and prone to frac closure, that they needed the high strength (but unfortunately high cost) ceramic.

I would love to see a good statistical study (are you reading this comment, DrillingInfo?) that compares white and brown sand performance. Of course there have been many other confounding changes over time in well design and crew practice (and geology), but you could control for that with proper statistical analysis.

Right now, it sort of feels very seat of the pants, rather than statistically validated. Like if brown is fine, why didn't they test it earlier (what took them so long)? Also, have they really proved that the brown is the better choice in terms of NPV?

Later, 7:14 p.m. CT: see first comment -- this is really quite fascinating --

A truck every 10 minutes has been rolling out of the frac sand pit in McHenry County for the last two weeks. The plant appears to be running 24 hours a day for the last month.

The site is one mile east of the town of Denbigh, ND and 1/4 mile south of US Highway 2. Sounds like another plant is going to go up 1/2 mile north of US Highway 2 straight north of the current site. No end to the sand at these two locations. 

Original Post

Well costs in the Bakken once infrastructure, leasing in place:

• drilling to depth
• fracking

The two -- drilling, fracking -- use to be about 5050 for a $8 million well. Over time, drilling costs have come way down. Drilling is now about 1/3; completion about 2/3rds of the complete cost to bring a Bakken well to production.

Drilling costs have come way down in the Bakken, due to two reasons:

• day rates down significantly
• significantly less time to drill to depth

Fracking costs:

• fracking spread contracts
• sand/water

I don't know the relative cost of fracking spread contracts vs sand/water but if costs can come down on either sand or water there will be a savings.

Sand: today it is being reported there may be source for fracking sand in North Dakota. From The Grand Forks Herald:

A deposit of sand in north-central North Dakota could be a boon to the state's oil industry.

The sand – a variety specifically needed in the process of hydraulic fracturing – has been found in McHenry County, roughly 160 miles west of Grand Forks between the towns of Rugby and Minot.

Another has been found in Mercer County, northwest of Bismarck.

Fred Anderson, a North Dakota Geological Survey geologist, said the sand could be a "game-changer" for the state.

“The reduction in cost would be high,” Anderson said. “It’s a huge deal for the state of North Dakota."

Asgard Resources, of Williston, has received a permit to dig sand in McHenry County.