"Damn The Torpedoes, Full Speed Ahead" -- Daughter Wells Don't Produce As Well As Parent Cells -- Another Meme -- March 16, 2021

This page will not be updated.

The CLR Gordon Federal wells are tracked here.

The wells:

• 36098, F/A, CLR, Gordon Federal 10-5H1, Haystack Butte, first production, 11/20; t--; cum 89K 1/21;
• 36097, F/A, CLR, Gordon Federal 11-5H, Haystack Butte, first production, 11/20; t--; cum 84K 1/21;
  

Compare the parent well with the daughter wells.

By the way, it's one parent well; 23 daughter wells.  

So far, the four completed/reported daughter wells have each produced significantly more oil in three months than the parent well produced in thirteen years.

Parent well:

• 16683, IA/224, CLR, Federal Jorgenson 14-5H, Haystack Butte, t12/07; cum 71K 2/20; inactive since 2/20; remains off line 1/21;

So, the parent well has produced all of 71,000 bbls of crude oil since being drilled in early 2007. 

Compare that with the daughter wells reporting today, posted above:

• 36098: 89K in three months;
• 36097: 84K in three months;
• 36054: 106K in less than three months;
• 36099: 106K in three months; 
  

36098:

Pool	Date	Days	BBLS Oil	Runs	BBLS Water	MCF Prod	MCF Sold	Vent/Flare
BAKKEN	1-2021	31	19510	19601	16993	34008	31472	2536
BAKKEN	12-2020	31	28764	28752	24460	44845	39387	5458
BAKKEN	11-2020	29	40686	40435	35638	57022	49499	7523

36097:

Pool	Date	Days	BBLS Oil	Runs	BBLS Water	MCF Prod	MCF Sold	Vent/Flare
BAKKEN	1-2021	31	29553	29464	23782	49680	45978	3702
BAKKEN	12-2020	31	18820	18868	17008	31396	27570	3826
BAKKEN	11-2020	29	35692	35472	34173	55106	47829	7277

36054: note -- 32K over 19 days extrapolates to 51K over 30 days.

Pool	Date	Days	BBLS Oil	Runs	BBLS Water	MCF Prod	MCF Sold	Vent/Flare
BAKKEN	1-2021	31	27913	28080	21022	51596	47745	3851
BAKKEN	12-2020	31	45113	44898	41478	75946	66689	9257
BAKKEN	11-2020	19	32068	31870	27030	52973	45974	6999

36099:

Pool	Date	Days	BBLS Oil	Runs	BBLS Water	MCF Prod	MCF Sold	Vent/Flare
BAKKEN	1-2021	31	28426	28496	20329	49354	45674	3680
BAKKEN	12-2020	31	35089	35017	26852	54886	48205	6681
BAKKEN	11-2020	29	40484	40235	35517	63859	54912	8947

By the way, since most folks won't click on the "Gordon Federal" link above, here are the twenty-three Gordon Federal "daughter" wells:

• 36107, loc-->EXP-->renewed, CLR, Gordon Federal 1-5H, Haystack Butte, 2560-acre; 4/5/8/9-148-87; middle Bakken; renewed February 22, 2021;
  
• 36106, loc-->EXP-->renewed, CLR, Gordon Federal 2-5H1, Haystack Butte, 2560-acre; 4/5/8/9-148-87; Three Forks B1; enewed February 22, 2021;
• 36105, loc-->EXP, CLR, Gordon Federal 3-5H, Haystack Butte, 2560-acre; 4/5/8/9-148-87; middle Bakken;
• 36104, loc-->EXP-->renewed, CLR, Gordon Federal 4-5H1, Haystack Butte, 2560-acre; 4/5/8/9-148-87; Three Forks B1; renewed February 22, 2021;
• 36103, loc-->EXP-->renewed, CLR, Gordon Federal 5-5H, Haystack Butte, 2560-acre; 4/5/8/9-148-87; middle Bakken; renewed February 22, 2021;
• 36102, loc-->EXP, CLR, Gordon Federal 6-5H1, Haystack Butte, 2560-acre; 4/5/8/9-148-87; Three Forks B1;
• 36101, loc-->EXP, CLR, Gordon Federal 7-5H, Haystack Butte, 2560-acre; 4/5/8/9-148-87; middle Bakken; bottom hole, 4-148-97;
• 36100, loc-->EXP, CLR, Gordon Federal 8-5H1, Haystack Butte, 2560-acre; 4/5/8/9-148-87; Three Forks B1;
• 36099, loc-->F/A, CLR, Gordon Federal 9-5H, Haystack Butte, 2560-acre; 4/5/8/9-148-87; middle Bakken; first production, 11/20; t--; cum 77K 12/20;
  
• 36098, loc-->conf, CLR, Gordon Federal 10-5H1, Haystack Butte, 2560-acre; 4/5/8/9-148-87; Three Forks B1; producing; big well;
  
• 36097, loc-->conf, CLR, Gordon Federal 11-5H, Haystack Butte, 2560-acre; 4/5/8/9-148-87; middle Bakken; producing; nice well;
  
• 36096, loc-->conf, CLR, Gordon Federal 12-5H1, Haystack Butte, 2560-acre; 4/5/8/9-148-87; Three Forks B1; producing nice well;
  

• 36054, dr-->F/A, CLR, Gordon Federal 13-8H, Haystack Butte, 2560-acre; 4/5/8/9-148-87; middle Bakken; spud, July 30, 2019; cease drilling, October 16, 2019; bottom hole, 9-148-97; first production, 11/20; t--; cum 78K 12/20;
  
• 36055, drl-->conf, CLR, Gordon Federal 14-5H1, Haystack Butte, producing, nice well;
  
• 36056, drl-->conf, CLR, Gordon Federal 15-8H, Haystack Butte, producing, nice well;
  
• 36057, loc, CLR, Gordon Federal 16-5H1, Haystack Butte,
• 36058, loc, CLR, Gordon Federal 17-8H, Haystack Butte,
• 36059, loc, CLR, Gordon Federal 18-5H1, Haystack Butte,
• 36060, loc, CLR, Gordon Federal 19-8H, Haystack Butte,
• 36061, loc, CLR, Gordon Federal 20-5H1, Haystack Butte,
• 36062, loc, CLR, Gordon Federal 21-8H, Haystack Butte,
• 36063, loc, CLR, Gordon Federal 22-5H1, Haystack Butte,
• 36064, loc, CLR, Gordon Federal 23-8H, Haystack Butte, 

Damn The Torpedoes, Full Speed Ahead -- CLR -- February 5, 2020

Updates

April 11, 2022: production updates. 

March 17, 2021: the Gordon Federal pad, "today":

February 22, 2021: yesterday I noted a number of Gordon Federal permits "expired." Tonight I noted on the daily activity report that four of those "expired" permits were renewed.

Original Post

CLR has just renewed twelve Gordon Federal permits.

Some observations.

First: note all the "white space." Lots and lots of work that needs to be done in the Bakken. In addition, most of those horizontals in the graphics below were completed using "old" completion strategies. These wells will all be re-fracked and/or re-drilled/re-fracked.

Certainly the interest for twelve more Gordon Federal wells is not in one tiny sweet spot surrounded by a dearth of oil in neighboring sections.

I don't follow the Permian, but what little I read suggests operators are still being challenged by the size of drilling units in the Permian, and are still flummoxed by the optimum spacing. From what I see, and I follow it pretty closely, it appears operators in the Bakken have solved one of the issues; and, having little trouble with the other issue.

Again: the ovals highlight all the "white space." Lots of work yet to be done in the Bakken. In most of the Bakken, the minimum number of wells in any 1280-acre drilling unit: eighteen wells. But it may be decades before we get to that density. Eighteen wells: middle Bakken; Three Forks, 1st bench; Three Forks; deeper benches; Sanish in some areas. When I first started blogging, I said that if a mineral owner had one well, that mineral owner would eventually have four wells, probably eight wells; possible twelve wells, and maybe many, many more than that.

Currently: seven horizontals shown. Two huge pads being developed. Only two formations are being targeted, right now.

12-well pad:

11-well pad:

The wells:

• 16683, 224, CLR, Federal Jorgenson 14-5H, Haystack Butte, t12/07; cum 70K 11/19;

• 36107, loc-->EXP-->renewed, CLR, Gordon Federal 1-5H, Haystack Butte, 2560-acre; 4/5/8/9-148-87; middle Bakken; renewed February 22, 2021; see this note;
• 36106, loc-->EXP-->renewed, , CLR, Gordon Federal 2-5H1, Haystack Butte, 2560-acre; 4/5/8/9-148-87; Three Forks B1; enewed February 22, 2021; see this note;
• 36105, loc-->EXP, CLR, Gordon Federal 3-5H, Haystack Butte, 2560-acre; 4/5/8/9-148-87; middle Bakken; see this note;
• 36104, loc-->EXP-->renewed, CLR, Gordon Federal 4-5H1, Haystack Butte, 2560-acre; 4/5/8/9-148-87; Three Forks B1; renewed February 22, 2021; see this note;
• 36103, loc-->EXP-->renewed, CLR, Gordon Federal 5-5H, Haystack Butte, 2560-acre; 4/5/8/9-148-87; middle Bakken; renewed February 22, 2021; see this note;
• 36102, loc-->EXP, CLR, Gordon Federal 6-5H1, Haystack Butte, 2560-acre; 4/5/8/9-148-87; Three Forks B1; first production, 10/21; t--; cum 112K 2/22; see this note;
• 36101, loc-->EXP-->loc, CLR, Gordon Federal 7-5H, Haystack Butte, 2560-acre; 4/5/8/9-148-87; middle Bakken; bottom hole, 4-148-97; see this note;
• 36100, loc-->EXP-->PNC, CLR, Gordon Federal 8-5H1, Haystack Butte, 2560-acre; 4/5/8/9-148-87; Three Forks B1; first production, 10/21; t--; cum 63K 2/22; see this note;
  
• 36099, 2,022, CLR, Gordon Federal 9-5H, Haystack Butte, 2560-acre; 4/5/8/9-148-87; middle Bakken; 9.94 million lbs proppant, 37 stages; first production, 11/20; t--; cum 106K 1/21; cum 187K 2/22;
  
• 36098, 2,055, CLR, Gordon Federal 10-5H1, Haystack Butte, 2560-acre; 4/5/8/9-148-87; Three Forks B1; producing; big well; 9.97 million lbs proppant; 37 stages; first production, 11/20; t--; cum 89K 1/21; cum 200K 2/22;
  
• 36097, l,502, CLR, Gordon Federal 11-5H, Haystack Butte, 2560-acre; 4/5/8/9-148-87; middle Bakken; producing; nice well; 9.98 million lbs proppant; 37 stages; first production, 11/20; t--; cum 84K 1/21; cum 199K 2/22;
  
• 36096, 2,117/F/A, CLR, Gordon Federal 12-5H1, Haystack Butte, first production, 11/20; t--; cum 76K 1/21; fracked, 3/1/20 - 3/9/20; 8.4 million gallons of water; 87.4% water by mass; 37 stages; target: Three Forks first bench; within CLR's Rocket prospect; cum 241K 2/22;
  

• 36054, 2,419/F/A, CLR, Gordon Federal 13-8H, Haystack Butte, 2560-acre; 4/5/8/9-148-87; middle Bakken; spud, July 30, 2019; cease drilling, October 16, 2019; bottom hole, 9-148-97; 9.7 million lbs proppants; 36 stages; first production, 11/20; t--; cum 78K 12/20; cum 235K 2/22;
  
• 36055, 1,893/F/A, CLR, Gordon Federal 14-8H1, 33-025-03678, Haystack Butte, first production, 11/20; t--; cum 51K 1/21; 9.99 million lbs proppant; 37 stages; thirteen hours to build the curve; four days to drill the lateral; Three Forks B1 at 11,626' MD; cum 181K 2/22;
  
• 36056, 1,907/F/A, CLR, Gordon Federal 15-8H, 33-025-03679, Haystack Butte, first production, 11/20; t--; cum 100 1/21; 10.07 million lbs proppant; 37 stages; fifteen hours to drill the curve; three days to drill the lateral; cum 269K 2/22;
  
• 36057, loc, CLR, Gordon Federal 16-5H1, Haystack Butte,
• 36058, loc, CLR, Gordon Federal 17-8H, Haystack Butte,
• 36059, loc, CLR, Gordon Federal 18-5H1, Haystack Butte,
• 36060, loc, CLR, Gordon Federal 19-8H, Haystack Butte,
• 36061, loc, CLR, Gordon Federal 20-5H1, Haystack Butte,
• 36062, loc, CLR, Gordon Federal 21-8H, Haystack Butte,
• 36063, loc, CLR, Gordon Federal 22-5H1, Haystack Butte,
• 36064, loc, CLR, Gordon Federal 23-8H, Haystack Butte, 

CLR Does It Again -- Looking To Place 22 Wells In One 2560-Acre Unit -- September 27, 2019

Updates

Later, 9:22 a.m. CT:  I made way too many errors in original post. I've left the comments in place, but have removed my terrible arithmetic. No excuses for all my errors. Thank you to all for pointing them out.

Original Post

Disclaimer: I often make typographical and/or factual errors. If this is important to you go to the source. 

From the October, 2019, hearing dockets:

Case (not permit) 28056, CLR, Cedar Coulee-Bakken, on an existing 2560-acre unit, section 20/29/32-147-96; and, section 5-146-96; 22 wells; Dunn County

The graphics:

The existing wells:

• 22433, 667, CLR, Rodney 2-29H, Cedar Coulee, t1/13; cum 168K 7/19;
• 22435, 648, CLR, Rodney 3-29H, Cedar Coulee, t12/12; cum 151K 7/19;
• 22434, 738, CLR, Gale 2-32H, Cedar Coulee, t12/12; cum 263K 7/19;
• 22436, 1,070, CLR, Gale 3-32H, Cedar Coulee, t1/13; cum 223K 7/19;
• 17159, 811, CLR, Rodney 1-29H, Cedar Coulee, t8/08; cum 162K 7/19;
• 17211, 240, CLR, Gale 1-32H, Rattlesnake Point, t8/09; cum 146K 7/19;

CLR Does It Again -- Upwards Of 30 Wells In 2560-Acre Unit -- September 27, 2019

Updates

Later, 9:22 a.m. CT:  I made way too many errors in original post. I've left the comments in place, but have removed my terrible arithmetic. No excuses for all my errors. Thank you to all for pointing them out.

Original Post

Disclaimer: I often make typographical and/or factual errors. If this is important to you go to the source. 

From the October, 2019, hearing dockets:

Case (not permit) 28055, CLR, Elm Tree-Bakken, on an existing 2560-acre unit, sections 2/3/10/11-153-94, 27 wells; McKenzie and Mountrail counties

The graphics:

Existing wells: see this post -- one was a second bench Three Forks well; the other was a first bench Three Forks well --

• 32605, 1,995, CLR, Charolais North Federal 1-3H1, t9/16; cum 548K 10/18; SWNW 26-154-94, 2200' FNL and 492' FWL, Elm Tree, 24,741', 9-5/8 inch, 46 stages, 10 million lbs; 24,741 feet; surface hole in section 26-154-94; bottom hole in section 10-153-94; API: 33-061-03938, according to FracFocus, it was fracked 8/7/17 - 8/14/16, with 9.1 million gallons of water; water, 88% of proppant by mass; sand 11% of proppant by mass, the first bench of the Three Forks, t6/19; cum 637K 7/19; less than three years old;
• 32606, 2,305, CLR, Brangus North 1-2H2/Brangus Federal 1-2H1, SWNW 26-154-94, 2200' FNL and 537' FWL, Elm Tree, 24,628', 9-5/8 inch, 46 stages; 10 million lbs; 24,942 feet, API 33-061-03939; according to FracFocus, it was fracked 7/30/16 - 8/7/17, with 8.6 million gallons of water; water, 88% of proppant by mass; sand 11% of proppant by mass, the second bench of the Three Forks, t9/16; cum 613K 7/19; less than three years old;

Random Update On An Old Oasis Case Looking To Put Nearly Two Dozen Wells On a 640-Acre Spacing Unit -- August 7, 2019

Spoiler alert: long note, but there is nothing new here. I was simply checking up on an old case. For my benefit only; not of any use to readers. 

Most concerning: of the 12 wells in the drilling unit, it appears only six are producing and only two of them are any good. 

Re-posting part of an earlier note:

Generally speaking, fourteen wells is about the maximum number of wells I've seen in any 1280-acre drilling unit in the Bakken. If any 1280-acre unit has more than fourteen wells, they are few and very far in between.

However, in the August, 2019, NDIC hearing dockets:

Case 27809, Newfield, Siverston-Bakken; 14 wells on each of two existing 1280-acre units; 6/7-150-98; and, 30/31-151-98, McKenzie; already 6 wells on each of these units; this will make it 20 wells in each of these 1280-acre units;

Reminder: that's a case, not a permit.

It's been said that operators won't drill wells in the Bakken if the EUR is not at least one million bbls.

There is an interesting look at dollars / acre at the original post, but I wanted to re-post that note to also note this older case from a post dated January 31, 2014:

From the February, 2014, NDIC hearing docket:

• 21849, Oasis, Sanish-Bakken, 21 horizontal wells on a 640-acre unit, 4-153-93, Mountrail,

[For newbies: when the drilling started in the Bakken back in 2007, the "word on the street" was one well per section. Folks got excited when they heard talk of four wells in a 1280-acre spacing unit. Now: 21 wells in one section, one 640-acre spacing. Who wudda thought -- just in the past three or four years. I think it's incredible. And that's why the Bakken never ceases to amaze me.]

At that link are the graphics of that area. 

So, what does that section (section 4-153-93) look like today? It has not changed:

• there are still 12 horizontal wells in that section;
• it is still spaced at 640 acres; however,
• section 4 is now part of an overlapping 2560-acre unit

"Parent-Well-Uplift" And Infill Density -- May 10, 2019

This is really, really cool.

The "mainstream" analysts are catching up with two phenomena in the Bakken that we've been discussing for a long, long time: the "halo" effect" and infill density.

For recent commentary on the former, see this link.

For infill density, see this screenshot from twitter today:

Wow, CLR brought up this issue years ago and I've posted too-many-to-count graphics on infill density -- years ago. And now we're starting to see "mainstream" analysts do some good statistical research.

For newbies, this was the concern: that daughter wells -- new wells -- would diminish, negatively impact, even perhaps "ruin" existing wells, or "parent wells. I think a lot of folks in North Dakota at the beginning of the boom expected to see one well in every section (640 acres). Many were surprised to see as many as four in a one-mile square, but then to see reports that there could be as many as 24 wells (or more) in a 1280-acre drilling unit was beyond the pale.

Folks with nice wells were legitimately concerned that new wells placed too closely to these existing nice wells would "hurt" the old wells.

Anecdotally, I was seeing just the opposite and I posted any number of blogs about that.

Now we have a "professional" providing more than just anecdotal evidence.

Look at that graphic. We're talking 660'-spacing. Instead of placing horizontal wells one mile apart, operators are seeing no adverse impact even placing the wells 660 feet apart.

In fact, if one looks closely, the daughter wells are doing slightly better than parents wells but I doubt this is statistically significant. Without seeing the study itself, I assume this is from the Permian. Z4 tags "JAG" -- a Permian operator.

Hey, by the way, look at the EUR of those JAG wells: 1.21 million boe. 

Wow, I can't remember how many years ago -- maybe 2009, 2010 -- I noted that fracking was effective 500-feet radially -- meaning that horizontals could be placed 500 to 1,000 feet apart. I may have this wrong, but at 660-feet spacing, if the horizontals are 660 feet from each other, it suggests fracking is most effective 330-feet radially. We're talking horizontal through the seam because vertically things are affected by different geology: dolomite (sand) in the producing seam; shale (rock) in the generating seams.

Five DUCs Reported As Completed -- May 9, 2017

Active rigs:

$46.03	5/9/2017	05/09/2016	05/09/2015	05/09/2014	05/09/2013
Active Rigs	50	28	84	192	183

Four new permits:

• Operator: CLR
• Field: Elm Tree (McKenzie)
• Comments: NESE 25-153N-94W (see graphic below)

Fourteen permits renewed:

• Enerplus (12): Axe, Poblano, Vise, Cayenne, Anvil, Habanero, Calico, Bengal, Manx, Tabby, Siamese, and Persian permits renewed, all in Dun County
• Oasis (2): two Hanover Federal permits renewed

Five producing wells (DUCs) reported as completed:

• 14898, 279, Newfield, Gohrick 1, Helle Slough, t5/99; cum 127K 3/17; (we'll get back to this later)
• 29477, 970, CLR, Kukla 5-16H11, Chimney Butte, t5/17; cum -- (17398)
• 30512, 3,255, MRO, Gaynor 34-33H, Reunion Bay, t2/17; cum 53K 3/17; (18191: see this post)
• 30513, 2,830, MRO, Anton 34-33TFH, Reunion Bay, t2/17; cum 3K 3/17; (18191)
• 31849, 2,470,  MRO, Ronald 34-33TFH-2B, Reunion Bay, t2/17; cum 29K 3/17;(18191)

********************* 

If You Have One Well, You Will Probably Have Twelve 

Typo in graphic ("wels") noted; not gonna fix it.

A Graphic Of The Area Where CLR Wants To Drill 25 Wells On An Existing 2560-Acre Spacing Unit In The Elm Tree-Bakken Oil Field -- April 11, 2016

Updates

June 8, 2018: this 2560-acre drilling unit is being updated. 

October 29, 2016: a new screenshot of this area has been placed at this post.

Original Post 

In the April hearing dockets, case #25003 (note: this is a case number, not a permit number):

• 25003, CLR, Elm Tree-Bakken, 25 wells on an existing 2560-acre unit, sections 14/23/26/35-153-94, McKenzie:

This is the screenshot of the area of the 4-section (2560-acre unit) stand-up drilling unit (depicted in part by the thick purple north/south arrow) -- shown are parts of section 23 and 26. Section 14 is to the far north, and section 35 is to the south.  If the wells shown are all spaced for 1280-acres, then the 25 wells "on the existing 2560-acre unit" would be in addition to the wells already sited here.

A Random Look At The 2560-Acre Unit In Which CLR Will Place 28 Wells -- November 22, 2014

Updates

June 13, 2022: some Florida Federal wells have been updated. These are very, very good wells.

February 2, 2020: update of a few Florida Federal wells. 

January 7, 2020: production data and graphics updated. Updated graphic of the area:

August 19, 2019: production data and graphics updated.

October 28, 2018: see production profile for this amazing well, #21977. 

June 26, 2017: new wells --

• 32476, drl-->drl/NC, CLR, Florida Federal 6-11H1, Camp, status noted 10/19;
• 32474, drl-->drl/NC, CLR, Florida Federal 7-11H, Camp, status noted 10/19;
• 28806, PNC, CLR, Florida Federal 6-11HPNC, Camp,

Original Post
 

In the December, 2014, NDIC hearing dockets, CLR wants to put 28 wells in one 2560-acre drilling unit.  

So, where is the 2560-acre unit which which CLR is requesting 28 wells? This is the case, not a permit:

• Case 23454, CLR, Camp-Bakken, 28 wells on an existing 2560-acre unit, McKenzie, Williams

This is the 2560-acre spacing unit: sections 2, 11, 14 and 23, T.152N.R.100W.

Right now, there are 12 wells/permits in that drilling unit:

-- in section 14, six completed wells, 2560-acre spacing:

• 21977, 1,016, CLR, Florida 3-11H, 38 stages, 3.4 million lbs, t1/13; cum 643K 8/20; huge jump 3/17;
• 21979, 338, CLR, Alpha 3-14H, t1/13, 26 stages, 2.3 million lbs; cum 373K 8/20;
• 21980, 569, CLR, Florida 1-11H, Three Forks, 38 stages, 3.4 million lbs, t1/13; cum 283K 8/20;
• 21981, 377, CLR, Alpha 1-14H, 26 stages, 2.3 million lbs, t1/13; cum 152K 8/20;
• 21982, 706, CLR, Florida 2-11H, 38 stages, 3.4 million lbs, t2/13; cum 424K 8/20;
• 21983, 504, CLR, Alpha 2-14H, 30 stages; 2.8 million lbs sand/ceramic, t2/13; cum 312K 8/20;

-- in section 14, six wells on confidential status, 2560-acre spacing?

• 28805, PNC, CLR, Alpha 6/14H,
• 28804, PNC, CLR, Florida Federal 6-11H,
• 28803, 1,338, CLR, Alpha 5-14H, Camp, 4 sections, 20 stages, 9.9 million lbs, t3/17; cum 273K 8/20;
• 28802, 190, CLR, Florida Federal 5-11H2, Camp, 4 sections, 16 stages, 5 million lbs; 16 of 45 zones planned for this well; will resume operations when plug and guns are fished out of this well; well not producing (4/17); t3/17; cum 150K 8/20; off line 2/20; remains off line 4/20;
• 28801, 1,194, CLR, Alpha 4-14H1, Camp, 4 sections, 20 stages, 9.6 million lbs, t3/17; cum 210K 8/20;
• 28800, 1,386, CLR, Florida Federal 4-11H1, Camp, 4 sections, 45 stages, 22 million lbs, t3/17; cum 426K 8/20; update here; a huge well;

It is likely that we could see 16 more wells in this section, 8 running north, 8 running south; half targeting the middle Bakken, half targeting various benches of the Three Forks.

It is interesting: in this area, it is all 1280-acre spacing with two exceptions:

• one 2560-acre unit
• one 1600-acre unit:

The graphics:

August 19, 2019:

 Original graphic:

Subtle Change In CLR's Proposed Horizontal Placement In The Better Bakken?

There are certainly some observant and some astute readers out there.

Take a look at these graphics.

• CLR Graphic, October 18, 2013, 160- and 320-acre pilot density projects.
• CLR Graphic, April 24, 2013, proposed well pattern, increase density.

I believe the proposed well pattern on those two graphics are the same; if not, the differences are very, very subtle.

Dan, earlier today, told me to take a look at a recent case before the NDIC:

Case 21582, CLR, 21582, application of CLR, for an order amending the field rules for the Bear Creek, Cabernet, Corral Creek, Crooked Creek, Jim Creek, Oakdale, and Rattlesnake Point-Bakken Pools, Dunn County, ND, authorizing a total not to exceed fourteen wells on each existing 1280-acre spacing unit within Zones II and III in the Bear Creek-Bakken Pool; Zones III and IV in the Cabernet-Bakken Pool; Zones II, III, and IV in the Corral Creek-Bakken Pool; Zones I and II in the Crooked Creek-Bakken Pool; Zones I, II, III, IV, V, and VI in the Jim Creek-Bakken Pool; Zones I and II in the Oakdale-Bakken Pool; and Zones I, II and III in the Rattlesnake Point-Bakken Pool; a total not to exceed fourteen wells on each 1920-acre spacing unit in Zone VII in the Jim Creek-Bakken Pool; and Zone IV in the Rattlesnake Point- Bakken Pool; and a total not to exceed twenty-eight wells on each existing 2560-acre spacing unit within Zone V in the Corral Creek-Bakken Pool; Zones VIII and IX in the Jim Creek-Bakken Pool; Zones III and IV in the Oakdale- Bakken Pool; and Zones V and VI in the Rattlesnake Point-Bakken Pool, eliminating any tool error requirements and such other relief as is appropriate.

Look at the graphic and see if you see the subtle difference that Dan noted:

Now that I look at it again (for the umpteenth time), maybe the difference is not so subtle.

I've talked about this from the very, very beginning: how fracking should work 360 degrees radially, and should impact other horizontals if drilled within 300 feet or so. But I had not noted the new well pattern proposed by Continental Resources in this case, on the December, 2013, dockets.

For those that don't see the change, here it is: in the earlier links, horizontals in the MB and TF2 were "stacked" directly above each other; while horizontals in the TF1 and TF3 were offset from MB and TF2 and "stacked" directly over each other.

In the newer, proposed configuration, none of the Three Forks horizontals are directly below the middle Bakken horizontals.

In addition, none of the TF wells are "stacked" directly in line with each other: all horizontals are off-set.

It certainly looks to me like this should optimize fracking the entire drilling unit.

*******************

Also note that the horizontal distance between the middle Bakken wells are 1,320 feet. I've always felt that 500' radially was the maximum distance that fracking was effective, or 1,000 feet between wells. It certainly raises the question, twenty years from now, whether it would make more sense to re-frack the existing middle Bakken wells (1,320 feet apart from each other) or drill/frack new wells between the existing middle Bakken wells. I remain convinced that fracking a new well in the vicinity of an existing well, improves the production of the existing, older well.

*********************

Regardless, using the same spacing it is easy to see that one could put in additional wells in the above graphic:

• TF1:  two additional 1/2 wells on the drilling unit lines (one net well)
• TF3: one additional full well

Thus, 16 wells on a 1280-acre spacing unit, or as many as 32 wells on a 2560-acre spacing unit.

***********************

See, also a recent post on XTO and KOG leading the charge on increased density projects:

....numerous operators are seeking authority from the commission to drill up to 30 wells on existing 2,560-acre spacing units, up to 16 wells on existing 1,280-acre units, and up to four wells on existing 320-acre units.

For Newbies: A Quick Look Where the Bakken Is Headed: S T A G G E R I N G

Link here.  (regional links break early and break often)

How many wells in a 1280-acre spacing unit: the number could be in the teens -- Director, NDIC.

In fact, Helms says the state just issued a permit for the largest drilling pad in the state history - a pad to allow many wells at one site.

"We just permitted for Contininental Resources the largest oil pad we've permitted so far just outside of Williston, it's got 14 wells and will extract the oil from the Missouri River bottoms where there was flooding last year."

A bit of inconvenience for awhile:

He admits that for the people living along a road where there once was one well and will someday be a dozen or more are going to be unhappy with the thousands of trucks that'll have to travel that road. But he says the bigger picture is that the state will be able to keep multiplying its oil production while keeping the adverse impact on the countryside as small as possible.

This is from today's posting of what operators are asking to drill in the future:

• 18670, CLR, Oakdale-Bakken, 18 wells on each existing 1280-acre unit; Dunn
• 18671, CLR, Elm Tree-Bakken, 18 wells on each existing 1280-acre unit; McKenzie
• 18672, CLR, Antelope-Sanish, 18 wells on an existing 1280-acre unit; McKenzie
• 18621, Hess, Alkali Creek-Bakken, 10 wells on each 1280-acre unit, and 20 wells on each 2560-acre; McKenzie, Mountrail, Williams
• 18622, Hess, Robinson Lake-Bakken, 10 wells on each 1280-acre unit, and 20 wells on each 2560-acre; McKenzie, Mountrail
• 18623, Hess, Alger-Bakken, 10 wells on each 1280-acre unit, and 20 wells on each 2560-acre; McKenzie, Mountrail
• 18624, Hess, Manitou-Bakken, 10 wells on each 1280-acre unit; Mountrail, Williams
• 18625, Hess, Big Butte-Bakken, 10 wells on each 1280-acre unit; Mountrail
• 18626, Hess, Baskin-Bakken, 10 wells on each 1280-acre unit; Mountrail
• 18627, Hess, Beaver Lodge-Bakken, 10 wells on each 1280-acre unit;  Williams
• 18628, Hess, Capa-Bakken, 10 wells on each 1280-acre unit; Williams18629, Hess, Hofflund-Bakken, 10 wells on each 1280-acre unit; Williams, McKenzie 
• 18781, EOG, Squaw Creek-Bakken, 3 wells on each existing 320-acre unit; McKenzie; this translates to 6 wells on a section -- remember, at one time, folks in Williston were talking about one (1) well in each section would be exciting

By the way, I've argued that larger spacing units are good for everyone. When I took a poll, I was in the minority. Maybe some day I will get around to explaining why larger spacing units are good for everyone. My assumption is that over time, folks will figure it out for themselves.