It Never Quits -- Now, Look At This - March 26, 2018

What do you think of this production profile?

Pool	Date	Days	BBLS Oil	Runs	BBLS Water	MCF Prod	MCF Sold	Vent/Flare
MADISON	1-2018	29	1963	1974	5867	4933	4817	0
MADISON	12-2017	31	2822	2826	7182	5633	5478	0
MADISON	11-2017	30	3018	2910	5999	3550	3400	0
MADISON	10-2017	18	2413	2014	3080	1346	1256	0
MADISON	9-2017	28	28	186	10	335	195	0
MADISON	8-2017	31	185	224	210	853	698	0
MADISON	7-2017	31	130	208	143	888	733	0
MADISON	6-2017	19	189	201	291	813	718	0
MADISON	5-2017	20	369	419	397	1266	1166	0

Pretty cool, huh? Production jumps 20-fold? [20 x 130 = 2,600].

From the sundry form received September 11, 2017:

Move in workover rig and pull rods and tubing. Nipple up frac tree and treesaver to isolate wellhead. Move in and rig up the frac fleet and frac well with approximately 14,000 bbls of gelled fluids containing approximately 400,000 lbs of the frack sand. Well will be frac'd pursuant ot NDAC 43-02-03-27.1. Nipple down frac tree and tree saver and run production equipment back into well. Return well to production.

But this isn't so great, really, is it? We see it all the time when a well is re-fracked.

And here's the graphic:

The well:

• 19551, 215, Challenger Point Energy, LLC, Olney 2-25H, Flaxton, t5/11; cum 51K 1/18

But here's the kicker: it's NOT a Bakken. It's a Madison well. 

Don't believe me? Here's a screen shot of the scout ticket:

By the way, what's the best this well has ever done? From the very beginning:

MADISON	9-2011	30	1597	1463	2211	3351	3201	0
MADISON	8-2011	31	1949	2111	2993	4376	4221	0
MADISON	7-2011	22	2145	1972	4048	3383	3273	0
MADISON	6-2011	11	1573	1477	2363	1481	1481	0
MADISON	5-2011	16	1769	2027	3351	1745	1660	0
MADISON	4-2011	24	2328	1818	5566	1667	1547	0
MADISON	3-2011	9	50	0	2978	39	34	0

The sundry form / completion form with the completion data says the well:

• had five laterals
• was completed March 30, 2011
• was tested May 6, 2011
• there is no evidence this well was fracked at this time; first frack was apparently in 2017

Yes, it's the Madison -- and we saw it first in North Dakota -- LOL --

From Hairspray

Random Update Of CLR's Bud Wells In Crazy Man Creek -- March 26, 2018

Disclaimer: in a long note like this there will be factual and typographical errors. In addition, I could have mixed up some of the data (production data, frack data, etc) but I doubt it. When I see a jump in production in a horizontal well 1,320 feet away it makes me think I recorded something incorrectly, but I think it's all correct. I certainly appreciate any feedback if any of the data is incorrect.

At this post, I posted the production data for #19424 -- but looking at it now, not quite sure why I posted it. Whatever.

With updated production, it's time to look at it again.

There is no evidence that any of the wells below have been re-fracked. FracFocus has no data for a re-fracks; and, there are no sundry forms suggesting the three older wells were recently re-fracked. But the production has jumped so much it's hard to believe these wells have not been re-fracked.

In addition, note the distance between the wells. Pay attention to which wells are middle Bakken (MB) and which are Three Forks (TF).

The graphics:

The first well of interest:

• 19424, 662, CLR, Bud 1-19H, Crazy Man Creek, API - 33-105-01935, t3/11; cum 381K 1/18;

Recent production profile:

Pool	Date	Days	BBLS Oil	Runs	BBLS Water	MCF Prod	MCF Sold	Vent/Flare
BAKKEN	1-2018	26	7791	7921	8696	13167	1576	11591
BAKKEN	12-2017	28	13162	13262	14026	19878	6949	12929
BAKKEN	11-2017	30	17459	17509	16240	29268	10175	19093
BAKKEN	10-2017	30	23810	23414	23116	29675	14939	14736
BAKKEN	9-2017	16	4905	5179	10389	7477	495	6982
BAKKEN	8-2017	26	13529	13263	25500	18914	11027	7887
BAKKEN	7-2017	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
BAKKEN	6-2017	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
BAKKEN	5-2017	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
BAKKEN	4-2017	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
BAKKEN	3-2017	7	579	717	453	547	283	264
BAKKEN	2-2017	17	2014	1870	1161	1970	1360	610
BAKKEN	1-2017	4	11	293	3	15	15	0
BAKKEN	12-2016	26	2463	2507	1213	2843	2843	0
BAKKEN	11-2016	30	3237	3048	1950	4359	4359	0

Original production after initial completion:

BAKKEN	11-2011	30	7802	8378	2582	10306	4688	5618
BAKKEN	10-2011	31	9327	8601	2888	10992	8618	2374
BAKKEN	9-2011	29	9352	9836	2980	11374	11374	0
BAKKEN	8-2011	31	11132	11157	3644	12967	11933	1034
BAKKEN	7-2011	30	9319	9232	3363	10337	7506	2831
BAKKEN	6-2011	26	11395	11175	3875	11787	423	11364
BAKKEN	5-2011	23	5401	5340	1918	6036	0	6036
BAKKEN	4-2011	30	7803	8127	3903	8760	0	8760
BAKKEN	3-2011	22	12972	12270	2862	9756	0	9756
BAKKEN	2-2011	7	235	235	0	233	0	233

Recent neighboring fracks:

• 30239, middle Bakken, fracked 3/25/17 - 4/7/17, frack data: 9,927,082 gallons, 88.97% water; 10.9% sand;
• 30240, Three Forks, 1st bench, fracked 3/26/17 and 7/4/17 - 7/12/17; frack data: 7,026,667 gallons, 88.7% water; 10.9% sand;
• note: 10 million gallons of water in one well, a big frack but not "out of bounds"; 7 million gallons of water in the other well, a moderate frack

What about the other two wells of interest, #28937 and #28938? Frack data:

• 28937, fracked once, back in 2014
• 28938, fracked once, back in 2014

Recent production data for these two wells.
#28937 TF (huge jump in production, but delayed a month or two compared to wells above):

Pool	Date	Days	BBLS Oil	Runs	BBLS Water	MCF Prod	MCF Sold	Vent/Flare
BAKKEN	1-2018	31	8953	8985	8435	12179	538	11424
BAKKEN	12-2017	31	11082	10893	10436	17702	2583	14894
BAKKEN	11-2017	30	14764	15149	15184	22846	213	22393
BAKKEN	10-2017	24	9091	8760	11863	13688	26	13493
BAKKEN	9-2017	30	90	0	2600	214	0	5
BAKKEN	8-2017	31	135	0	5387	376	130	3
BAKKEN	7-2017	18	408	413	6540	436	295	0
BAKKEN	6-2017	27	4686	4993	8845	5793	5584	0
BAKKEN	5-2017	17	3369	2979	7762	3974	3838	0
BAKKEN	4-2017	2	0	0	33	2	0	0
BAKKEN	3-2017	23	3018	3275	2764	3800	2766	417

#28938 MB (minimal, if any, jump in production):

Pool	Date	Days	BBLS Oil	Runs	BBLS Water	MCF Prod	MCF Sold	Vent/Flare
BAKKEN	1-2018	13	902	1084	1052	2520	0	#30240)
BAKKEN	12-2017	31	4309	4527	3742	5930	2135
BAKKEN	11-2017	30	5767	5800	5407	7034	525	5747
BAKKEN	10-2017	31	6982	7106	7085	8305	110	7408
BAKKEN	9-2017	30	3377	3249	4602	4545	0	3784
BAKKEN	8-2017	31	5599	5633	6247	3269	0	2488
BAKKEN	7-2017	23	3277	3219	4490	2234	1314	316
BAKKEN	6-2017	30	5705	5572	5637	3930	2886	119
BAKKEN	5-2017	17	2957	2629	3272	1448	906	0
BAKKEN	4-2017	2	0	0	60	4	0	0
BAKKEN	3-2017	25	4746	4928	4713	6232	5123	0
BAKKEN	2-2017	28	5633	6070	4805	9932	9738	0
BAKKEN	1-2017	25	5697	5203	4672	3657	3478	0

Bottom line:

• no evidence that three wells of interest were re-fracked, but production in one of them (#19424) is so high, it's  hard to believe it was not re-fracked; a second well had a large jump but not as big; the third well had minimal (if any) jump in production
• the oldest well was 633 feet away from the new (2017) fracks
• #28937  - a Three Forks well -- had a huge jump in production; it was about 1,320 feet from a middle Bakken well and about 1,380 feet from another Three Forks well (#30240)
• 1,320 feet / 1,380 feet is about twice what I normally seen between older fracked wells and newer fracked wells with bump in production after newer wells fracked

Disclaimer: in a long note like this there will be factual and typographical errors. In addition, I could have mixed up some of the data (production data, frack data, etc) but I doubt it. When I see a jump in production in a horizontal well 1,320 feet away it makes me think I recorded something incorrectly, but I think it's all correct. I certainly appreciate any feedback if any of the data is incorrect.'

Note: if what I have posted is correct, and if what I see is correct, this has huge implications for the Bakken and the Three Forks.

Random Note Regarding Global Crude Oil Supplies -- March 26, 2018

I have a pretty good "feel" for US crude oil production, inventories, supply and demand, etc., after blogging for the past eleven years on the Bakken. I have almost no "feel" for the same metrics globally. It seems "everyone" is writing that global inventories of crude oil are well below their five-year average, including this from oilprice.com:

A year and a half on from OPEC’s original deal to limit output, the surplus oil stashed in storage tanks around the world are nearly back to average levels. However, by all indications, OPEC is not ready to ease up on the production caps, with top officials signaling a desire to keep the cuts in place into 2019.

But that might require changing of the definition of a “balanced” oil market. OPEC has consistently held up OECD inventories as the metric upon which it was basing its calculations. The goal was to drain inventories back down to the five-year average. With OECD inventories about 44 million barrels above that threshold in February – down from a roughly 300-million-barrel surplus at the start of 2017 – the goal will likely be achieved at some point this year, perhaps in the second or third quarter.

So, let's see if we can find a graphic of the historical global crude oil inventory.

From the EIA:

This is what I see in that graph:

• inventories are right in the "middle" with data going back to 2013
• something no one talks about: inventories were at historic lows (2013 - 2019) in late 2014 just before the Saudi Surge (announced November, 2014) and did not drop again until Saudi ended the surge (announced November, 2016) -- it makes me wonder about the Saudi Surge all over again -- why and what it really meant
• once the Saudi Surge ended, OECD inventories dropped but, shoot, they are still right in the middle of the range, and projections by the EIA suggests inventories will rise, not fall
• many feel the EIA is too conservative with shale estimates; if so, their projections may be low
• the graphic is pretty impressive -- but something I never seem to hear anyone talking about: days of inventory -- look at that x-axis -- two things are noted
• the range is very narrow -- fifty-five to sixty-five days (2013 - 2019)
• EIA estimates that by January, 2019, less than a year from now, days of supply will actually increase

Statoil Knoshaug Wells In Avoca Oil Field

An old Knoshaug well has come off-line (March 26, 2018). When I see that, my first thought: neighboring wells soon to be fracked.

The Knoshaug wells:

• 19406, AB/IA/3,761, Statoil, Knoshaug 14-11 1H, Avoca, t1/11; cum 310K 1/17; came off-line 11/17; remains off-line, 11/18;
  
• 32866, 877, Statoil, Knoshaug 14-11 2TFH, Avoca, t6/18; cum 201K 9/19;
• 32867, 769, Statoil, Knoshaug 14-11 3TFH, Avoca, t6/18; cum 198K 9/19;
• 32868, 1,975, Statoil, Knoshaug 14-11 4H, Avoca, t6/18; cum 206K 9/19;
• 32869, 744, Statoil, Knoshaug 14 11 5TFH, Avoca, t6/18; cum 145K 9/19;
• 32870, 2,394, Statoil, Knoshaug 14 11 6H, Avoca, t8/18; cum 209K 9/19;
• 32871, 2,043, Statoil, Knoshaug 14-11 7TFH, Avoca, t7/18; cum 131K 9/19;
• 32872, 1,584, Statoil, Knoshaug 14-11 XE 1H, Avoca, t7/18; cum 188K 9/19;

#32870:

Pool	Date	Days	BBLS Oil	Runs	BBLS Water	MCF Prod	MCF Sold	Vent/Flare
BAKKEN	11-2018	16	15145	15242	21907	18503	15584	2804
BAKKEN	10-2018	24	27724	27874	30844	32536	26871	5533
BAKKEN	9-2018	28	30353	30198	35899	33990	27098	6771
BAKKEN	8-2018	10	15774	15477	19555	15853	15131	651
BAKKEN	7-2018	2	2397	2320	4876	839	828	0

ICYMI: A CLR Buelingo Well -- March 26, 2018

See production update here.

The most important story line here: Elm Tree oil field. Although not updated, the Elm Tree is followed here.