Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on January 28, 2014 at 10:58

I think that Anadarko is in the process of reassigning the rigs they have under contract.  Their other contract rigs are in E TX.  I expect one or more will show up in N Caddo when they complete the wells they are currently drilling.

Permalink Reply by jim weyland on January 28, 2014 at 13:03

once again, thanks, skip, for your informed insight.

prior to their present drilling cessation/pausation, do you know if was apc running a 1, 2 or more rig HA RA program in n. caddo parish?

jim weyland

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on January 28, 2014 at 13:05

No.  All the wells have been drilled with one rig.

Permalink Reply by jim weyland on January 28, 2014 at 13:08

thank you, sir.

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on January 31, 2014 at 11:28

The IP data is now available for the first three completed wells reported.  Links follow.

http://sonlite.dnr.state.la.us/sundown/cart_prod/cart_con_wellinfo2...

http://sonlite.dnr.state.la.us/sundown/cart_prod/cart_con_wellinfo2...

http://sonlite.dnr.state.la.us/sundown/cart_prod/cart_con_wellinfo2...

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on January 31, 2014 at 12:02

I wish the completion data on the SONRIS Lite Well File, Well Scout included liquids.  I have no idea why it does not.  The following is from the Potential Reports I reviewed at the OOC District 6 office.

Volentine 5-33H:  34 bbl cond

Comegys 32-29H: 29.5 bbl cond

Comegys 6-7H: 11.15 bbl cond

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on January 31, 2014 at 12:23

Can anything be inferred about the NGL production from the condensate reported?

Permalink Reply by caddo lake on January 31, 2014 at 13:02

If Anadarko is after NGL's then the info reported is meaningless as to how good/bad these wells actually are?

Permalink Reply by jim weyland on January 31, 2014 at 13:25

jay & skip,

if they're not paying severance on the liquifiables, i'd be very surprised. but should they not be having to pay taxes on the ngls, the state of louisiana is very poorly serving its citizens.

and, if tax in la isn't due on liquifiables, then i'm certain the state is also dropping the ball inre: pipeline condensate aka "drip" and stock tank flash gas whether recovered or not. note: the ROIs should be credited with/paid for these items in addition to the plant recovered liquids nee liquifiables.

but, if my hunch is correct and severance tax is due on "saved and recovered" liquifiables, there surely has to be a documentation/paper trail. it's a given, all govt's live and breath to audit severance tax payors. 

what puzzles me is apc's continuing to drill/permit new wells in light of such poor test results.

is it possible the apc reported well test hydrocarbon rates are as low as they are due to the wells' still unloading frack water?

after all, they are each making around 1000 bbls/d of water on test. 

imo, there's no way that anyone, given current/projected product prices, could make a profit at the reported gas and condensate rates, as shown on test, especially in light of the high volumes/rates of produced water. 

 i would appreciate your considered thoughts, jim

p.s. imo, even if the wells were making 10 gpm gas, i.e. exceptionally "rich" gas, they'd still be uneconomic, all other known factors held constant.

Permalink Reply by caddo lake on February 1, 2014 at 0:14

ok...after re-reading some of the previous post I think I finally grasp where NGL's come from and why the low numbers are meaningful... I think I'll mosey back over to the side lines, stay outta the way, and try to keep the old bench warm!

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on February 1, 2014 at 8:29

Jim,  I think unloading frack water may have some relevance as to IP rates there's just not enough data available at this time to make that call.  The data that I would look to first, although not included in the SONRIS Well File completion report, is TVD.  These wells are in close proximity each to the others but the lateral landing depth varies by over about 400'.

Comegys 32-29H:  1.164 MMcfd - 29.5 bbl cond 57 Grvty - FP 2351 - CP 2800 - SI 2650 - 18/64 - TVD 9772' - Perf Lat 10072-16006'

Volentine 5-33H:  5.059 MMcfd - 34 bbl cond 58.6 Grvty - FP 2808 - CP 4125 - SI 5125 - 24/64 - TVD 9874' - Perf Lat 10285-16402.

Comegys 6-7H:  3.051 MMcfd - 11.15 bbl cond 63.4 Grvty - FP 1820 - CP 5550 - Shut In 5684 - 26/64 - TVD 10168' - Perf Lat 10535-17657'.

Permalink Reply by jim weyland on February 1, 2014 at 8:58

skip, yeah, i noticed that also. unfortunately, i don't have the education/knowledge to be able to interpret what that variance is telling us.

the only thought i've had about this is that maybe they're testing different aspects of the reservoir horizon inre: to see if there's productivity differences at the top 1/3 , let's say, versus the lower 1/3  and they're doing this via drilling to different tvd's.

there's a lot of smart, knowledgeable people on this site. maybe, someone(s) will throw in with their idea(s).

 jim p.s. it'll be interesting to see how deep they go with the volentine alt-2 well.

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
• Next ›
• Page