June 15, 2013:
an enquiring mind wonders
why the production numbers for four (4) wells didn't show up on the
NDIC April production report. I have no idea what he/she is talking
about; those wells show on my copy of the NDIC April production report.
It
also appears, based on other threads at the site, some folks are
unaware of the staggering infill program that has begun in the Bakken.
Some are aware of the program, but some are unaware of it.
June 13, 2013: enquiring minds are struggling with the definition of "increased density."
It
is a natural progression from wildcat to drilling out established oil
fields. The definition can be found in multiple locations but
even this site has the definition;
it is simply another name for "infill" well. There are so many story
lines here but I won't get into them. Too many inconvenient truths.
This is one.
June 12, 2013: in this thread, an enquiring mind is asking for location of the wildcat
mentioned at the very beginning of the thread. I assume they are
talking about a wildcat well on the confidential list that is about 25
miles southeast of Minot:
June 11, 2013: An enquiring mind says
Lynn Helms has suggested 48 wells/1280-acre spacing unit.
If that's an accurate quote, two comments: a) not likely the norm for
the Bakken; and/or b) by the time they get to that many wells/spacing
unit, they will be moving to EOR.
I am unaware that Lynn Helms actually said that, and I have not been able to find a link. Elwood provided the link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NcrEdX348qQ.
This would be in the "better Bakken" and a) it would not be the norm;
and, b) in general, everything Helms has said has been pretty much come
to pass, just as most of what Harold Hamm has said has come to pass.
[One day later: expected as much -- interesting to see how one rant
shuts down the discussion group.]
June 11, 2013: This might be interesting to follow --
a series of OXY USA wells in Manning oil field. [One day later: "or not."]
May 30, 2013: an enquiring mind wants to know the permit numbers for the eight wells that Surge is cancelling.
They are listed here.
That was easy.
May 8, 2013: I always enjoy these little bits of cocktail chatter. It helps one understand the Bakken.
An enquiring mind is asking
if anyone knows whether the horizontals will run north or south with
regard to #25328 and #25329. It is said that "25329" is not shown on the
map; in fact it is, if one zooms in. Based on how far they are set back
from the section line, my hunch is both will run south. If they were
going to run north, they would have been sited closer to the section
line. That's my hunch. For what it's worth.
However, the name of the
wells provide the answer. Both #25328 and #25329 are "Tuhy" wells,
which means both horizontals will run south; if they ran north, they
would be named State Lazorenko wells. #16451, a Gerald Tuhy, well is in
the same section as #25238 and 25329, and Gerald Tuhy runs south.
May 4, 2013: enquiring minds are not yet talking about the 23 cases
in this month's NDIC hearing dockets in which the oil industry is
assessing risk penalties against non-participating owners; the results
(which won't be broadly accessible) will be interesting.
April 15, 2013: It
looks like one enquiring mind is about to be voted off her own island.
Unless I'm missing something, her recent note suggests that she is
questioning the authority of the NDIC to allow more than one well per spacing unit.
She may be correct. I don't know. Two issues: the code was written for
"pools" and conventional reservoirs; and, unintended consequences. I
have said many times, those mineral owners with one well in the "very
best" Bakken will have at least 12 wells before this is all over; those
in the "good" Bakken will have at least 8 wells; and everyone should
have a minimum of 2 wells, maybe 4 wells. (My numbers have changed over
time as the Bakken experience has changed.) One individual has written
me who has two wells and he expects to have at least 24 wells before
this is all over. I think we're too far down the road to put the genie
back in the bottle, but my hunch is that anyone seriously arguing for
only one well per spacing unit in the Bakken will be, as I said, voted
off the island. Her other alternative is to win one of the three
statewide offices that would make her a member of the NDIC.
April 12, 2013: it
looks like following the Bakken Shale Discussion Group is about ready
to come to an end for me. I've learned a lot from the site. Teegue is an
incredible fund of knowledge. But the contributors are starting to
become downright nutty.
April 11, 2013: scroll down to the April 11, 2013, discussions at this thread
to see the folks who are getting ready to sue the Bakken operators are
starting to get their facts together regarding fracking. According to
the "the enlightened one," fracking has two "faces." I suppose that's
possible. I would have assumed the fracking was radial in nature, but
perhaps the fracking is designed to frack along two faces. It would be
quite a trick. It is interesting that they have stumbled upon the fact
that natural fracking extends from "zero" to "infinite" and every point
in between. That is absolutely accurate and makes this whole issue very,
very problematic. In some areas there may be no natural fracking; in
other areas the natural fracking may be so extensive, manmade fracking
is hardly needed. Obviously that would affect the size of the spacing
units if done "scientifically/geologically." This is going to get very,
very interesting, very, very quickly.
April 5, 2013: It appears
enquiring minds are ready to spend their money for lawyers.
I've seen this movie before and it's not going to be pretty. Wow, I'm
glad I don't hold any mineral rights. There is a recurrent theme at the
discussion group that some folks are worried that oil companies are
going to hold leases by production and then not drill wells. Not gonna
happen. All they have to do is look at the GIS map server and look at
the monthly dockets. CLR, OAS, BR, and KOG, just to name a few of the
more prominent names are pretty much Bakken-centric and can't quit
drilling -- not at these prices. And if the price of oil plummets,
mineral rights owners would be better off if the companies waited to
drill anyway. Sure, companies with plays elsewhere, like Hess and EOG,
might be not as concerned about drilling in the Bakken, but my hunch is
that these examples are far and few between. Everything I've read
suggests operators are drilling as fast as capex, takeaway capacity,
workforce, and environment allow them to drill.
Another author who said it much better than I (said it).
April 3, 2013: where's Dufus?
Elwood needs to take his comments on Mr Helms over to the water cooler.
April 1, 2013: sounds like they need to take this to the water cooler.
It sounds like someone doesn't understand the bureaucracy. Maybe we
should let the Feds regulate the oil and gas in North Dakota.
April 1, 2013: an enquiring mind has an unfounded worry.
But folks could provide him/her a lot of information if he/she provided
permit numbers, or legal well names. If folks want information, they
have to come at least halfway with information.
But to answer his
question: he will have at least four more wells if he has one well in
the Bakken. And, so, yes, he will see a lot of dime. And $100 bills.
March 31, 2013: someone is as tired of "Wormy" as I am.
March 31, 2013: I see
enquiring minds are asking about overlapping 2560-acre spacing units.
A quick explanation can be found here.
I'm sure Dufus will see this as a land grab by the nasty oil companies. And, yes,
the individual at his post is missing something.
March 29, 2013: the
disparity in the knowledge about the Bakken is incredible. The boom
began in 2000 in Montana; in 2007 in North Dakota. I have been posting
up to ten (10) Bakken posts daily since 2009; some days more. And still
there folks who don't know the basics when it comes to the Bakken. I see
some enquiring minds are wondering what "LOC" means when it comes to NDIC oil and gas permits.
To the best of my knowledge, "LOC" does NOT mean "site is being
prepared." Based on what I've seen, "LOC" means a permit to drill at a
specific location has been issued. If "LOC" means a site is being
prepared there a lot of sites that seem to take forever to be prepared
(#21387 was issued a permit back in April, 2012, and is still "LOC"). In
addition, QEP spent a lot of money preparing a site for #18956 for
naught; that permit was cancelled if that's what LOC means.
March 23, 2013: Rufus, I see, can't see beyond her own wells.
(same link as an earlier one) What a dufus. The first thing that caught
my attention was the the fact that it was likely that the operators in
the San Juan Basin were eying Bakken-like shale. Then I noted the
potential, about 6 billion bbls, very similar to the USGS estimates for
the Bakken. And then this: the more states that embrace fracking, the
better it is for all of us. Nothing like "scaring" folks away from "her"
discussion group. That was the first time I saw Will at the discussion
group; what a nice welcome from Rufus.
March 20, 2013: with the NDIC site now down for five days, I see that
folks at the Bakken Shale Discussion Group are starting to post stories about the very interesting, highly prolific, much talked-about San Juan Basin in New Mexico.
March 9, 2013: well pad surface rates.
March 1, 2013:
very, very reliable source providing very, very interesting information. See Z-Man's input at this thread; looking for time-date stamp of 11:51 a.m., March 1:
Over
two years ago, one can find posts suggesting that the effectiveness of
fracks in the Bakken suggested 500-foot separation. They're getting
closer.
These are probably the wells Z-Man is referring to; this was taken from a post dated December 14, 2012:
