Hess Reports Two Record-Setting Wells In The Bakken -- June 29, 2019

See this post to compare 30-day IPs.

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

From Hart Energy:

Hess Corp has produced a record-breaking 24-hour test well this month (OilPatch Hotline, May 2, 2019) in McKenzie County, N.D., surpassing all records for U.S. land wells, according to an article in the website of the Oil Patch Hotline, an oil and gas trade publication for the Williston Basin. 

“This was a barn burner,” said Hotline Publisher Dennis Blank. “The highest IP tests recorded before this on new horizontal Bakken wells were in the range of 3,000 to 4,000 barrels of oil equivalent per day.” 

Hess said the AN-Bohmbach-153-94-2734H set a new record 24-hour IP at 14,662 boe/d. The well produced 10,169 barrels of crude oil and 26,960 Mcf of natural gas and is located in Sec. 22, T153N-R94W. This new record breaker followed an earlier April 5 record of 10,626 boe/d on a companion horizontal well in the same pad.

The Hart Energy article does not specify exactly which AN-Bohmbach well this is.

The Oil Patch Hotline article did not specify the permit number either.

The well was first reported at the blog on June 5, 2019, but at the time, the IP had not been released.

At the Oil Patch Hotline link:

The well was a test to better understand open flow potential and what completion practices the company wants to do in different parts of the field. The current standard design is 36 stages with 280 entry points on the hydraulic fracturing.

Let's try to sort this out. These are the five AN-Bohmbach wells on the pad in the Antelope-Sanish oil field, all targeting the same formation, "Bakken/Sanish":

• 35091, 3,237, Hess, AN-Bohmbach ... H-10, t5/19; cum 139K 1/20; 35 stages; 5 million lbs sand, no ceramic;
• 35092, 3,019, Hess, AN-Bohmbach ... H-9, t4/19; cum 103K 1/20; 83MM; 35 stages; 10 million lbs sand; 
• 35093, 10,626, Hess, AN-Bohmbach ... H-8, t4/19; cum 68,402 bbls oil over 24 days;  131,590 mcf over 24 days; 35 stages; 10 million lbs sand; cum 144K over first three months; cum 251K 1/20;
  
• 35094, 2,578, Hess, AN-Bohmbach ... H-7, t4/19; cum 12,890 oil over 10 days; 23,297 mcf over 0 days; 40 stages; 5 million lbs sand; cum 71K over 59 days; cum 151K 1/20;
• 35095, 3,807, Hess, AN-Bohmbach ... H-6, t4/19; cum 200K 1/20; natural gas as of 6/19: cum 148,584K cubic feet (25K boe);

Extrapolating crude oil production to 30 days based on initial production:

• #35091: 30,000 bbls of oil;
• #35092: 31,615 bbls of oil;
• #35093: 85,502 bbls of oil;
• #35094: 38,670 bbls of oil;
• #35095: 52,000 bbls of oil; 25,890 bbls in first 14 days;

Now to sort this out.

The linked sources said the 24-hour IP for the record setting well (#35059?) was:

• oil: 10,169 (not seen in any of the numbers above)
• mcf: 26,960 mcf (not seen in any of the number above)
• boe: 14,662
• working backwards:
• 14,662 - 10,169 = 4,493
• 26,960,000/4,493 = 6000.445 (conversion factor)

Therefore, the "record" well had to have been #35095 which [was] SI/NC [at the time of the original post. It is now in production. See above.]

Interestingly enough, the linked articles said the previous "record-setting" well had a 24-hour IP of 10,626 boe. #35093 had an IP of 10,626 for oil (BO) but not boe. Checking the file report at the NDIC website confirms that #35093 had a 24-hour IP of:

• oil: 10,626
• mcf: 27,577 = 4,595.825
• boe: 15,221.826

So, anyway, that's where it stands now (in my mind). We'll have to wait to see the reported numbers for #35059.

Disclaimer: I often make simple errors in arithmetic.

Disclaimer: I often misread things.

The biggest takeaway for me: the small number of stages and the relatively small amount of proppant used. Five million lbs is very, very small (in the Bakken, but compared to what they are using in the Permian, incredibly small); ten million lbs is on the high side and I don't expect to see this often in the Bakken with WTI below $75. If WTI goes over $75, we will start to see increased amounts of propane being used.

Other links for the AN-Bohmbach wells:

• June 5, 2019: Random update of a Hess AN-Bohmbach well.
• May 30, 2019: I can't make this stuff up.

A huge, huge "thanks" to the reader who alerted me to the original AN-Bohmbach story back on May 30, 2019. Just think: readers saw this story as early as May 30, 2019, because of that reader. Otherwise we would have had to wait until this week -- almost a month later -- to have seen the story.

Wow, I love the Bakken.

Disclaimer: I am inappropriately exuberant about the Bakken.

Note: only one rig was involved in drilling this well (not counting the "spud" rigs). And to the best of my knowledge no migratory birds or sage grouse were injured while these wells were being drilled.

Some production data.

35093:

Pool	Date	Days	BBLS Oil	Runs	BBLS Water	MCF Prod	MCF Sold	Vent/Flare
SANISH	6-2019	30	34527	34574	15125	69291	46583	22708
SANISH	5-2019	26	40860	41239	17517	43442	29422	14020
SANISH	4-2019	24	68402	67786	32773	131590	23080	108510

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

Section 27-153-94

Five-well Bohmbach pad (above), sited in section 22-153-94, Elm Tree but run south into section 27-153-94, Antelope-Sanish.

Well to the west:

• 32862, to the west, from a 3-well pad in Antelope oil field, 28-153-94, 1,952, Hess, AN-Dinwoodie-LE-153-94-2833H-1, Elm Tree, runs south, parallel to the Bohmbach wells; t10/17; cum 271K 1/20; off line as of 1/19; remains off line 4/19; back on line 6/19 with 5K over 20 days; back online 6/19; no jump in production;

Five-well pad to the east of the Bohmbach wells noted above:

• 19723, 1,238, Hess, AN-Bohmbach-153-94-2734H-1, Antelope-Sanish, t10/11; cum 433K 1/20; off line 1/19; remains off line 4/19; back on line 5/19; slight jump in production;
• 23287, 1,238, Hess, AN-Bohmbach-153-94-2734H2, Antelope-Sanish, t4/13; cum 170K 1/20; off line 1/19; remains off line 4/19; back onl ine 4/19; no jump in production;
• 23571, IA/1,290, Hess, AN-Bohmbach-153-94-2734H-3, Antelope-Sanish, t5/13; cum 243K 1/19; off line 1/19; back on line 4/19 for four days; remains off line 1/20 -- to IA status;
• 23572, 934, Hess, AN-Bohmbach-153-94-2734H-4, Antelope-Sanish, t5/13; cum 186K 1/20; never off line;
  
• 23573, 1,065, Hess, AN-Bohmbach-153-94-2734H-5, Antelope-Sanish, t5/13; cum 321K 1/20; never off line;

Extreme Limited Entry Perforating -- Fracking In The Bakken -- June 23, 2019

Disclaimer: I am inappropriately exuberant about the Bakken.

Disclaimer: I have no formal (or, for that matter, informal) training or experience in the oil sector, so I'm probably getting ahead of my headlights with regard to some of the comments I will be making later.

First, this. Earlier this morning I mentioned that there seemed to be a "quantum" jump in the quality of the Bakken wells (based on 24-hour, 30-day, 60-day, and 90-day IPs) when going through the 2017 Bakken permits. It appeared that somewhere between 2016 and 2017, things in the Bakken changed significantly with regard to better wells.

One almost wonders if the "near-death" experience visited upon the Bakken operators by Saudi Arabia (2014 - 2016) forced "them" to improve their strategies and technologies.

I remember early on, during this time, maybe even as late as 2016, really, really smart oilmen simply said, "more sand, more oil." It was all about simply adding more and more sand.

But look at the completion strategies in 2018 and going forward: maybe they're using more and more sand in the Permian, but in the Bakken, it appears we're leveling out at around 8 million lbs and fewer, rather  than more, stages. Granted, "we're" drilling in the "best" spots in the Bakken but that would be true in the Permian, too, I assume, and yet some of the best Bakken wells I've seen used less than 8 million lbs sand and only 35 stages.

Much could be written, but let me post what a reader sent me. It's obvious he's been thinking about this even more than I (have been thinking about it). Here was the reader's note [the comments in red/bold are mine, not the reader's]:

Somewhat brief, hopefully accurate, theory concerning the increase in IPs in the 2016 - 2017 timeframe ...

Many operators had, by that time, started to declare that diverters were being used in completions.

EOG most probably started this earlier as they depicted controlled, HIGHLY increased fracture intensity in their presentations prior to 2016.

Fast forward to today and the ramifications of Extreme Limited Entry (XLE) ...

I have studied the September, 2018, article from aogr.com from Liberty Resources regarding Extreme Limited Entry in attempts to fully "get" what is happening and project future implications. [To repeat: the September, 2018, article from aogr.com from Liberty Resources regarding Extreme Limited Entry.]

Exciting stuff.

In a ultra condensed nutshell, what these operators are doing is maintaining a VERY high pressure "bubble" underground so as to induce fractures (technically, opening up pre-existing fractures. This is a crucial - yet often overlooked distinction).

This pressure "bubble" functions best if it can be maintained at 1,500-2,000+ psi to induce connectivity (create complex fractures).

By identifying homogeneous rock that will tend to fracture with similar pressure levels, thief fractures will be minimized. (This directly ties in with the number, length, and placement of stages as each stage is a somewhat 'stand alone' entity. [This is so incredibly cool.]

Using extremely sturdy metal, the perf entry points - precisely located - will not enlarge as a consequence of proppant friction. A ton of sand per linear foot is a LOT of scouring material.

Perf clusters now number 13 to 15 per stage, up from 3 in earlier years.

Diverters, both near wellbore and far field, are used to temporarily block undesirable frac propagation so as to bring about an optimal case of Stimulated Reservoir Volume (SRV).

Speculative bonus regarding halo effect?

I am starting to suspect that later frac jobs are deliberately "touching" earlier wells' drainage area by fracturing and propping unstimulated areas of the parent wells' rock and enabling the newly frac'd/propped reservoir to flow into the older wells' wellbores.

Isn't that interesting?

Now this, for free. I am providing a link at no extra cost -- free to all subscribers -- JPT Extreme Limited Entry Perforating. I had completely missed this paper. Again, thanks to a reader I've learned more about the Bakken. I find this absolutely fascinating.

Yes, I know. I am inappropriately exuberant about the Bakken.

By the way, the article the reader was referencing: an "editor's choice" article from September, 2018.

I've been focused on the halo effect, what is now called the "parent well uplift" phenomenon. It's very possible the oil industry was more concerned with damaging parent wells when drilling new wells, which ultimately led to extreme limited entry perforating. I agree with the reader: my hunch is that the operators are choosing very, very carefully where best to put daughter wells and how to best complete (frack) them.

The operators are probably more concerned about preventing damage to existing wells. I'm fascinated by the parent-well uplift phenomenon. It appears these may simply be two sides of the same coin.

Again, as mentioned earlier, I'm probably getting well ahead of my headlights.