Sunday, December 31, 2017

Random Update Of The CLR Monroe Wells In Banks Field -- December 31, 2017

The CLR Monroe wells in Banks oil field are tracked here. This page will not be updated.

Back on February 15, 2017:

One well has been completed; one well is now on the confidential list; and two of the four wells are still listed as DUCs.

I will come back to finish this post later.

The graphic:



The wells:
  • 22891, IA/947, CLR, Monroe 1-2H, Banks, t8/12; cum 307K 11/17; off-line as of 2/17 with intermittent production since;
  • 30253, conf, CLR, Monroe 6-2H, Banks, huge production, see below, 50K+;
  • 30251, conf, CLR, Monroe 7-2H, Banks, huge production, see below; 50K;
  • 30254, SI/NC, CLR, Monroe 8-2H, Banks, minimal production,
  • 30252, SI/NC, CLR, Monroe 9-2H, Banks, minimal production,
  • 33098, conf, CLR, Monroe 10-2H1, Banks, producing, see below;
  • 33097, 1,594, CLR, Monroe 11-2H1, Banks, t10/17; cum 21K 11/17;
  • 33096, SI/NC, CLR, Monroe 12-2H1, Banks, no production

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

 33097, conf, CLR, Monroe 10-2H1, Banks, producing:

PoolDateDaysBBLS OilRunsBBLS WaterMCF ProdMCF SoldVent/Flare
BAKKEN11-201713934496353691216783424112445
BAKKEN10-20171312041116744153818579129925587

33098, conf, CLR, Monroe 10-2H1, Banks, producing:

DateOil RunsMCF Sold
11-201781994013
10-20172612123088

30251, conf, CLR, Monroe 7-2H, Banks, huge production:

DateOil RunsMCF Sold
11-20174927955444
10-20173066331094
8-20175980

30253, conf, CLR, Monroe 6/2H, Banks, huge production:

DateOil RunsMCF Sold
11-20175618947724
10-20175041443498
8-20173980

Why I Love To Blog -- Reason #2 -- December 31, 2017; Some OIl Utility In Maine Is Making A Lot Of Money This Winter

This was posted a year ago based on an incredibly prescient comment from a reader:
December 15, 2016:  This comment came in today. I will have to follow this story next winter, 2017 - 2018.
As per ISO Express, oil is now providing 3% New England electricity, up from near zero for the past many months.
Coal, now providing 15%, was also near zero two weeks ago.
At today's 2,000 Mwh from coal, the looming shutdown this spring of the 1,500 Mw capacity coal burner in Brayton Point could wreck havoc next winter if/when cold occurs. 
Came in as a comment at this post: https://themilliondollarway.blogspot.com/2016/12/us-natural-gas-stocks-december-15-2016.html.
I don't know about "you" but I find this absolutely incredible that a reader spotted this a year ago, and actually said this:
At today's 2,000 Mwh from coal, the looming shutdown this spring of the 1,500 Mw capacity coal burner in Brayton Point could wreck havoc next winter if/when cold occurs.  -- December 15, 2016
Wow, what can I say? I doubt anyone can top that as far as a prognostication goes. And that is what makes it so much fun to blog. I learn a lot from my readers.

Oil, very expensive oil, is now providing upwards of 30% of the electricity in New England. Note again: last year, oil was providing 3% New England electricity, up from near zero for the past many months. 

It may be instructive to read this post again
The one thing not mentioned in the Forbes article is the oil burning plant in Maine that is benefiting from the lack of natural gas pipelines coming into New England.
That earlier line that "an overall concern for the environment and safety" rings very, very hollow. Something tells me it has nothing to do with an overall concern for the environment and safety but rather politics and money, with CAVE dwellers being co-opted for someone else's goals. Just saying. 
Something tells me there is a oil utility in Maine that is making a lot of money for its investors this winter. 

Disclaimer: just an opinion advanced by at least one reader.

Wells I No Longer Follow -- December 31, 2017

This is simply some housekeeping. Nothing new here. This has all been posted before. The page where this came from was getting too long. These are wells that I was watching for some reason or other; once I saw what I wanted to see, I "closed" them out.

For wells still being followed, click here.


Page 7


January 24, 2018: #18970; two nearby wells, recently fracked (#25885, #31437)

January 18, 2018: #20459. This well has to show a significant bump in production based on huge fracks nearby, but as of two months after the new neighboring fracks, no bump. Check back in, in a few months.

January 17, 2018: #17181 -- recent increase in production, but a stripper well; and not re-fracked; might be interesting to follow

January 17, 2018: #19144; see if production jumps after neighboring wells fracked; this well was re-fracked. See this link.

December 26, 2017: #18579, Oasis, 500K; off-line as of 8/17; neighboring well, #33547 just fracked on 8/17; see the follow-up at this link.

September 5, 2014: which way will #29090 and #29091 run (north/south?) Compare with #17799. Reference "Trace" in e-mail. Never resolved.

November 30, 2017: in a few months, #16983, #18013 -- both near some recently fracked BR Mathistad wells; Mathistad wells are tracked here;

October 19, 2017:
  • 22342, 1,142, MRO, Lorene Stohler 11-3TFH, t9/12; cum 66K 1/18; just went off-line 7/17; the Stohler well in the neighboring section was just re-fracked; highly successful; this well is probably being re-fracked; back on-line as of 9/17; no significant bump in production; check again later;
October 5, 2017:
  • 30369, 1,613, Petro-Hunt, Thompson 153-95-8D-6-3H, Charlson, t9/17; cum 92K 1/18; (20342, 27918, 27208); see this post; huge jumps in production; confirm not re-fracked;
June 24, 2017: is CLR getting ready to frack the Rath Federal wells? Update: November 4, 2017 -- all the DUCs are now back on CONF status and are producing. We should have results soon. Update: as of 11/17, several wells have moved from SI/NC to conf and are not reporting production.

November 22, 2017: #20282. Has been off-line for two years; now IA. Seven wells around it have recently been fracked. Name: Williston Airport 2-11 1H; Todd Field. Update here. Nice well, 3/19.

December 26, 2017: #18489, CLR, a lousy Upland oil field well; just went off-line; back on line as of 11/17;

July 18, 2017: 22088, see production jump, 5/17; nothing in area re-fracked; no note in sundry form. 

June 11, 2017: watch for FracFocus data for this well, #20464 (no FracFocus data as of 1/18) but Oasis said it would re-frack the well with 50 stages;
  • 20464, 1,202, Oasis/Zenergy, Rolfson 29-32H, Siverston, 28 stages, 1.95 million lbs; t12/11; cum 247K 4/17; (off-line since 6/16); a re-frac according to a September 4, 2016, sundry form; FracFocus as of 6/17 has no record of re-frack; as of 1/18, still no data at FracFocus for a re-frack; converted to gas lift, December, 2017; 3/19; it had to have been re-fracked. I'm starting to get the feeling that not all re-frack data is getting to the NDIC, and not all re-frack data is getting to FracFocus.
December 8, 2017: 20886, 20888, huge recent frack by EOG. Production update here. Still good wells, 3/19.

February 11, 2017: the Archer wells; jump in productivity; then coming off-line again; sporadic production profile. #25962, #25961, #25960, #26007, #26006, #17356, #26419 (the last one came off-line 12/16). #25961 with "frack-like" jump in production and no evidence of a re-frack; still no evidence of a re-frack as of 4/17; thoughts on #25961 and data updated, August 19, 2017; [Update, January, 2018: just prior to the jump in production: a work-over rig on site, #25961), and a new pump put in; no evidence that is was re-fracked; no sundry form to suggest a re-frack and FracFocus does not show a re-frack.] #26419 is an incredible well; see this post, 3/19;

August 23, 2017: is Whiting getting ready to frack a couple of McNamara wells? #31858, #31857, #21890, #21889, #16731. Update, 1/18: the wells have been fracked; still conf; only #16731 showed jump in production; updated, 3/19; huge wells;

August 5, 2017: 18047, Teton 21-3H, recently taken off-line; also, #29428 also taken off-line recently; re-fracking one or the other? Update, November 11, 2017, #18047 back on status; #29428 is also back on line; offline again, 3/19;

July 18, 2017: 28785, 28786, 28787, 28788, 28789, 28790 -- wells being fracked with effect on neighboring wells? Updated here

December 15, 2016:  This comment came in today. I will have to follow this story next winter, 2017 - 2018.
As per ISO Express, oil is now providing 3% New England electricity, up from near zero for the past many months.
Coal, now providing 15%, was also near zero two weeks ago.
At today's 2,000 Mwh from coal, the looming shutdown this spring of the 1,500 Mw capacity coal burner in Brayton Point could wreck havoc next winter if/when cold occurs.
February 11, 2017: Armstrong Operating has a vertical wildcat in Stark County -- will it be a Red River or a Silurian? #33340. DRY. According to the permit, a Lodgepole.  

December 31, 2016: #32700 (PNC), #32699 (PNC), #32698 (producing), and #32697 (producing) on a 4-well pad in an exciting section.  Also, #31824 (now, PNC) and #31825 (now, PNC) on a 2-well pad in the same section. 

December 31, 2017: updated, I only follow #29854 now.
December 9, 2016: it looks like Sedalia is going to drill two laterals in each of these wells, #29854, and #29855. The first horizontal for each has been drilled and both are producing. On this date, there is a rig on #29854 and production from #29854 has ceased. That would suggest, they are drilling the second lateral on #29854. No sundry form yet, but it looks like they maybe planning to do the same thing for #29855. I follow #29854 at this post; will add #29855 when more information is available. Should check map monthly to see if rig is on the pad. I follow #29854 here. February 4, 2017 update here.
March 16, 2016: months from now, maybe a year or so from now, check on the Whiting Schaffer wells to see why they are sited north to south in this section.  See also March 10, 2016, entry below; same thing. [Update: nothing new, 6/17]

January 27, 2016: see if this well is ever fracked; if it ever does anything; note the IP (no frack data as of this date; no frack data as of December, 2016 at FracFocus)
  • 29439, 2 (no typo), Murex, Sherry Ann 13-24H, Three Forks, 37 stages; 6 million lbs, API 33-105-03762; 18 days drilling; gas shows poor to fair throughout, Temple, t9/15; cum 47K 3/19;
December 31, 2017: This well is simply a mess. Was this well fracked when it was tested? It produced 630 bbls in the first six months of production:
  • 22761, IA/50, Lime Rock Resources/OXY USA, Crosby Creek 1-19-18H-144-98, Little Knife, t2/14; cum 999 bbls 9/15; from the well file (noted 8/14); dated 6/13, 12 stages fracked, 1.3 million lbs sand; "indications frac port failure/no ball seats"; 4 stages; 200K "oil frac" -- diagnostic test to determine liner functionality"; [Update, November 18, 2014: zero bbls in August, 2014; only 5 (no typo) bbls in 30 days in September,  2014; 0 bbls in Oct/Nov, 2014; 1 bbl in Dec, 2014; 40 bbls, one day, 6/15; essentially remains off-line, 9/15; noted to be IA 11/15; active as of 12/15 but very little production; minimal to "no" production through 12/16; noted to be back on status (A) in 2/17, but then back off-line 3/17. Back on line 11/17. June 19, 2017: stripper well status.] Remains off-line, 3/19.


Update On The CLR Whitman/Hawkinson Pad In Oakdale Oil Field -- December 31, 2017; A Middle Bakken Well Re-Entered And Three Forks Is New Target

Updates

December 9, 2018:
  • 20201, 803, CLR, Whitman 2--34H, Oakdale, t9/11; cum 1.623 million bbls 10/18; this well just came back on line:
PoolDateDaysBBLS OilRunsBBLS WaterMCF ProdMCF SoldVent/Flare
BAKKEN10-2018311215812190398713439118871133
BAKKEN9-2018301399914197683515432140361011
BAKKEN8-2018420751375123120731580443
BAKKEN7-20180000000
BAKKEN6-20180000000
BAKKEN5-20180000000
  • 20208: still off line;
  • 20211: still off line;
  • 20212, 482, CLR, Whitman 3-34H, Oakdale, t9/11; cum 260K 10/12; API: 33-025-021261; according to FracFocus, it was re-fracked 9/23/17 - 10/5/17, with 9.8 million gallons of water, with water 84% by weight and proppant 15% by weight; a sundry form in the file shows that the re-frack was 61 stages and 14.5 million lbs of sand; a Three Forks frack; which is interesting because this was originally a Middle Bakken well; the Three Forks horizontal was a re-entry well drilled in July, 2017; the IP for the re-entered Three Forks horizontal was 1,006 bopd;
PoolDateDaysBBLS OilRunsBBLS WaterMCF ProdMCF SoldVent/Flare
BAKKEN10-20183137074369921081339302356113272
BAKKEN9-20183036826366251433138670340104265
BAKKEN8-2018447314441237846213785786
BAKKEN7-20181676784403
BAKKEN6-2018111380000
BAKKEN5-2018004030000
BAKKEN4-20181632393127473246523760
BAKKEN3-201819548656317564317413950
BAKKEN2-20182553105088595444542610
BAKKEN1-201831105131072518698937864150


Original Post

I can't recall if I've updated this information, but my curiosity was piqued by a recent comment from a reader.

This is a CLR four-well pad in Oakdale oil field. These are incredible wells, so I was surprised to find that three of them were off-line. Backtracking through the four, this one came up last:
  • 20212, 482, CLR, Whitman 3-34H, Oakdale, t9/11; cum 260K 10/12; API: 33-025-021261; according to FracFocus, it was re-fracked 9/23/17 - 10/5/17, with 9.8 million gallons of water, with water 84% by weight and proppant 15% by weight; a sundry form in the file shows that the re-frack was 61 stages and 14.5 million lbs of sand; a Three Forks frack; which is interesting because this was originally a Middle Bakken well; the Three Forks horizontal was a re-entry well drilled in July, 2017; the IP for the re-entered Three Forks horizontal was 1,006 bopd;
PoolDateDaysBBLS OilRunsBBLS WaterMCF ProdMCF SoldVent/Flare
BAKKEN11-201730194521980953791966718479968
BAKKEN10-201721121501140168471354971916268
BAKKEN9-20170000000
BAKKEN8-20170000000
BAKKEN7-20170000000
BAKKEN6-20170000000
BAKKEN5-20171002000
BAKKEN4-20175380363981151140
BAKKEN3-201761573200108990
BAKKEN2-2017416217001740158

According to FracFocus, the other three wells on this pad have not been re-fracked. These three wells remain off-line or have just recently come back on-line. I expect they will be brought back on line within the next few months if not already back on-line (NDIC data lags field operations by about two months).

The other three wells:
  • 20208, 960, CLR, Hawkinson 2-27H, Oakdale, t9/11; cum 449K 2/18;
  • 20210, IA/803, CLR, Whitman 2-34H, Oakdale, t9/11; cum 1.5947 million bbls; off-line as of 10/17; updated 2/18;
  • 20211, IA/263, CLR, Hawkinson 3-27H, Oakdale, t9/11; cum 385K 11/17; off-line and inactive as of 6/17; updated 2/18;
It is interesting that the two Hawkinson wells, running north were taken off-line, when it was a south-running horizontal (#20212) that was re-fracked. So, let's look farther north and see if there is something going on at the other end. Nope. No signs of any other activity.

Disclaimer: whenever I see something that does not make sense or cannot be easily explained, I wonder if I am mis-reading something or making typographical/factual errors. There may be significant mistakes on this page. If this is important to you, go to the source.

The graphic:

The Good News: It's Only Thirty Degrees Below Zero This Morning In WIlliston; The Bad News: The Wind Chill Could Approach Minus 60 Degrees -- Happy New Year's Eve -- December 31, 2017

This will clearly be the midwest winter story of the year: the Arctic blast that hit the midwest just before the end of 2018. President Trump kept another of his campaign promises: repealing global warming. And he did it in his first year of his presidency, something that presidents have been unable to do since 1994.

***********************************
A Weather Note For The Granddaughter

By the way, this is interesting. I will have to go back to my journals to see if I can find the date, but while serving in the USAF many decades ago, we were taking a Christmas vacation back to North Dakota. I can't recall if we were flying from California or if we were stationed overseas at the time.

We had a layover, or a connecting flight, out of Sioux Falls.

We boarded at Sioux Falls as schedule, en-route to Fargo.

The plane taxied to the end-of-the-runway and stayed there for several minutes before rolling out. But the plane never rotated, never left the ground. It gradually came to a stop at the end of the runway. We stayed there for several minutes before the plane taxied back to the opposite end of the runway, apparently to try taking off again. After a few minutes at that end, the plane took off; this time successfully reaching cruising altitude.

Once at cruising altitude the pilot came over the public address system and explained the aborted take-off and the successful take-off. On the first roll-out, the needles on the hydraulic gauges showed no hydraulic pressure (which control most of the important in-flight controls: rudder, flaps, etc); so, they aborted the take-off.

While trying to figure out what was wrong, they were told it was 40 degrees below zero in Sioux Falls and most likely the needles were simply frozen, and most likely the hydraulic systems were working just fine. (At altitude it is normally similarly cold 24/7 year-round.)

The pilot thought that was most likely and decided to try it again. After all, what's the worse thing that could happen? LOL.

But we made it to cruising altitude.

About halfway to Fargo, the pilot came back on the PA system and told us we would be returning to Sioux Falls. The runway at Fargo had closed. The temperature at Fargo was minus 60 degrees. But that was not the problem. The crosswinds were the problem. Crosswinds were too strong for planes to land.

So, we spent the night at a Holiday Inn in Sioux Falls where our two daughters had a great evening swimming in the heated in-door swimming pool.

[I can't recall for sure. I've told that story many times, but now I wonder if the temperature in Fargo was minus 60 degrees or whether that was the wind chill. I really don't know, but I've always thought it was 60 degrees below zero real temperature. I'll have to find my journal entry and see if I can find the newspaper clipping. I know I kept a clipping of the weather report that day; it made headline news that day. Later: looking at the record lows for Fargo, it appears that the "minus 60" was a wind chill temperature.]

If the spirit moves me, I will tell you about another weather-related flight in North Dakota some years ago. It's even more incredible in some respects.