These wells are tracked elsewhere.
Original CLR Boulder well with ten-fold jump in production.
CLR has another great Boulder Federal well in Banks oil field:
- 32109, 3,350, CLR, Boulder Federal 8-4H, 43 stages; 13.2 million lbs; Banks, t9/19; cum 138K 11/19; a 64K month, followed by a 47K month;
| Pool | Date | Days | BBLS Oil | Runs | BBLS Water | MCF Prod | MCF Sold | Vent/Flare |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BAKKEN | 11-2019 | 30 | 47374 | 47052 | 37182 | 77668 | 77433 | 235 |
| BAKKEN | 10-2019 | 31 | 63784 | 63191 | 50600 | 92934 | 87167 | 5767 |
| BAKKEN | 9-2019 | 12 | 25275 | 25202 | 19903 | 34789 | 28710 | 6079 |
| BAKKEN | 8-2019 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| BAKKEN | 7-2019 | 4 | 1297 | 1297 | 48 | 1296 | 0 | 1296 |
Do you report every well? Or preferentially the big ones? Not having a run at you, honest question.
ReplyDeleteI get an impression of every well being a brick ....house, when I read here. But then when I went and looked at average (median even worse) wells, they were much smaller.
It's like someone telling me about all the hotties at Miramar O'club. And then you get there and it's the usual snake ranch, with limited high value targets.
I report every well that comes off the confidential list. I have not missed any.
DeleteI used to think that every Bakken well eventually ended up on the confidential list -- if so, I've reported every Bakken well -- but some readers tell me that not all Bakken wells end up on the confidential list.
I don't know. If all Bakken wells don't end up on the confidential list, it's a small number. Compare number of permits issued every year and number of wells I've reported -- all from the confidential list -- and the numbers are pretty close.
I report every well that comes off the confidential list; the NDIC releases a daily report every business day except for state and federal holidays (and perhaps opening day for hunting season).
DeleteI have no biases when reporting the wells coming off confidential list - I couldn't possibly.
However, after that, I do focus on the better wells, of course. There are exceptions: early on in the boom I focused on OXY wells because they were so incredibly bad compared to others.
The purpose of the blog is not to capture every possible well. I couldn't possibly do that. I track what I track to get a feeling for what's going on in the Bakken. And I think I have a pretty good idea.
DeleteThere is little, if any, correlation between how an investor will do with regard to investing in shares in publicly held companies and how well operators seem to be doing in the Bakken based on production data from their wells. That's why this is not an investment site. I would never, never recommend anyone investing in oil and natural gas; the purpose of the blog is to better understand the science and the politics of the Bakken.
DeleteWith regard to the Miramar O'Club analogy: you are exactly correct. That has to do with the well-known Bakken decline rate. That's a well known story; I no longer worry about it. I'm looking at so much other stuff. Much more interesting than the decline rate: how much work there is yet to do in the Bakken; and the EURs which are being revised upward for new wells and old wells, alike. Much more important than decline rates, are payback time and EURs. The best wells are those that pay for themselves in six months, and then go on to produce for 35 more years.
DeleteBack to the Miramar O'Club analogy: I would never complain about nine mediocre wells, and one monster well.
By the way, a lot of mediocre wells turn out to be very, very interesting.
ReplyDelete