News
September 24, 2011: new permits (later than 18962) --
- 19062, AB/37, Petro Harvester, Wright 12-12H, Madison; s8/10;t8/10; cum 10K 6/12;
- 19194, PA/23, Petro Harvester, Lodoen 11-8H, Madison; s8/10; t8/10; cum 2K 6/12;
- 19229, AB/1, Petro Harvester, Cameron 1-14, Madison; s9/10; t11/10; cum 27 bbls 6/12;
- 19463, AB/11, Petro Harvester, Cameron 1-12, Madison; s9/10; t11/10; cum 197 bbls 6/12;
- 21279, AB/3, Petro Harvester, Wright 12-10, Madison; t11/11; cum 0 bbls 6/12;
April 27, 2010: #18962
AB/55, Sagebrush, Lodoen 11-7H, new permit. [Update: this turned out to be a Madison well; current operator is Petro Harvester Operating Company, LLC; the IP was
55; spacing is unitized; s5/10; t6/10;
cum 17K 6/12]
March 24, 2010: New permit granted in Kuroki Field --
PA/59, 18849, Sagebrush, Wright 12-4H, section 12. [Update: this turned out to be a Madison well; current operator is Petro Harvester Operating Company, LLC; the IP was
59; spacing is unitized; s4/10; t5/10;
cum 15K 6/12.]
The Kuroki Field
The Kuroki oil field is one of the smallest fields in the Williston Basin; it is comprised of four sections (1, 2, 11, and 12) in township T163N-81R. It is located six miles northwest of West Hope, ND, population 533 in the 2000 census; it is probably a bit more now with the oil crews. The oil field is one mile south of the Canadian border. West Hope is six miles south of the Canadian border and almost directly north of Minot on US-83.
The Kuroki field is in Bottineau County which has become of increasing interest with EOG bringing horizontal/fracking experience from the Canadian side of the border to target
the Spearfish formation.
For being such a small field, it certainly is very active and very interesting.
Go to NDIC's GIS map server. Go to the left sidebar and click on "Find Field/Unit." Type in "Kuroki"; click on "Kuroki" and you will taken to this small field. The first thing you will notice are
the chicken feet. There are currently six (6) chicken feet horizontal wells, all of them Sagebrush.
The file numbers, IP, # of toes, status, name of well (Madison wells except for #18764)
18264, AB/75, 5, Cameron 1-11H, 5,778 feet, t11/09; cum 18K 6/12;
17653, AB/160, 5, Cameron 1 HZ; t11/08; cum 29K 6/12;
17752, AB/32, 6, Rosendahl 4, t12/08; cum 19K 6/12;
17695, AB/111, 5, Rosendahl 7, t12/08; cum 33K 6/12;
17563, AB/240, 3, Wright 13-12H, t10/08; cum 38K 6/12;
17611, AB/107, 5, Stavens 1 HZ, t12/08; cum 39K 6/12;
18746, PA/563, CLR, Glinz 1-15H, at the end of the 4th toe of #17653; t7/10; cum 90K 6/12;
All of these Sagebrush wells (except the CLR Glinz well) have targeted the Madison formation. In this field, the depth of the Madison is about 3,600 feet, compared to about 9,000 feet in the oil fields back towards Williston and the Montana border.
The second thing you notice about this small oil field is the number of wells that have been drilled here. Outside this field, you have to go many miles to the next field, and it's a long drive to the more prolific Sanish and Parshall fields, but this little, lonely field has had more than 20 wells drilled over the years. Based on the file numbers, some must go back to the 1960's. Of all those wells, only two have been dry. Several old vertical wells are still producing, at least according to the GIS server map. These include file numbers:
1260, a Madison well, t10/56; cum 223K 6/12;
5367, a Madison well, t11/73; cum 109K 6/12;
5393, a Madison well; t3/74; cum 61K 6/12;
9638, a Madison well; t8/82; cum 5K 6/12; problems with well;
15464, a Madison well, t11/03; cum 19K 6/12;
15643, a Madison well; t3/12; cum 16K 6/12;
15754, a Madison well; t7/05; cum 3,416 bbls 6/12;
16294, a Madison well; t8/06; cum 9,145 bbls 6/12;
It is interesting to note the history of the study of the Madison formation. In a 1981 study out of Utah, the authors stated that because the Madison was so deep and there was so little oil in that formation, the Madison in North Dakota would unlikely be productive.
Fast forward to 1985. In a study published in September, 1985, by the PCO2R Parnership (the federal government's Energy and Environmental Research Center [EERC] and the University of North Dakota), the authors noted:
1. The Madison GSU (aquifer) underlies both the Williston and Powder River Basins. It has the potential to be a significant sequestration unit in the PCOR Partnership region.
2. In the Williston Basin, the Madison is given group status and divided into three formations, which in ascending order are the Lodgepole, Mission Canyon, and the Charles. The Lodgepole and Mission Canyon are carbonates and have porosity; the Charles Formation is dominated by [salts] and lacks permeability.
3. The Madison Group is the primary oil-producing interval in the Williston Basin. Again, this report was published in 2005.
4. In the Powder River Basin, the Madison is not subdivided, and the equivalent stratigraphic unit is called the Madison limestone.
Key members of the PCO2R partnership that contributed to this report include Julie A. LeFever, North Dakota Geological Survey; Richard D. LeFever, UND, Geology/Geological Engineering; Lynn D. Helms, North Dakota Industrial Commission; as well as Fischer, Smith, Peck, Sorensen, Steadman and Harju of the EERC.
