Not sure what happened in April but I like it.
|RPT DATE||LUW CODE||STORAGE FAC||DOC USE||WELL CNT||OPENING STK||OIL PROD(BBL)||GAS PROD(MCF)||DISPOSITION||CLOSING STK||PARISH|
Many of the operators are on the hook for pipeline deliverables, so the wells need to be drilled to meet the volumes. Sad to see such huge volumes coming out at today's gas prices.
Agree. The four new wells along with the original unit well represent the majority of the reserves in Section 19 produced at depressed prices.
I would love it if gas was $5.00 but am afraid it could be many years before that happens, if ever. We simply have too much recoverable gas and keep getting better at producing it. Years from now we may be saying "gosh I wish they'd have drilled these when gas was $2.00" That being said, I will gladly accept the checks however small and invest the money in other producing assets with the hope I can reap the benefits before I die. The sections look to have room for one or two more wells alongside these. The pad Chesapeake built in section 30 is huge, possibly 8 acres, so I speculate they will hit it again sometime in the future. I say "BRING IT" and I need BHP Billiton to step it up across the highway in section 29. JMO Thanks.
Now, Paul, post a copy of that $20M horizontal Haynesville AFE. I'd love to see it.
That wasn't an AFE.
That was for one well.
A thin gruel considering your confidence.
Do you have a 5 million dollar one.
Nevertheless, they will be coming soon as I get back to my office.
Two wells in the middle of 7, cross all the way through 18 and are perforated 330' under the north section line of 19. Well applications show that. Thus, 5 wells are paying in Section 19. This had me puzzled until I saw my royalty statement today. Kelly, of course, is kaput.
I believe about 5% of the perforated wellbore from the wells in 7 are inside the section 19 line.
There are 4 different CUL's being drilled from the well pad in 15n 14w section 30. Two going across the north half of section 30 into and across section 19 and two going across the south half of section 30 into and across section 31. It looks like each sections' (19,30,31) proportion of gas produced is being reported under the original Haynesville well number drilled in each individual section. For example the wellbores for section 30 reported 610550 mcf under Hall ETAL serial #240737 drilled in 2010. Wellbores for section 19 reported under Kelley drilled in 2009, and section 31 gas reported under Burford completed in 2008. I'm speculating this will be the reporting method for CUL's going forward.
It's been the case since the state set the rules governing CULs. Some operators have been behind the reporting curve owing to poor original due diligence on unit ownership interests and poor, or in some cases no, "on the ground" unit/tract surveys. Remember last year when many members complained about changes in their decimal interest and operators recouping "over payments"? That was caused by the need to properly allocate CUL production across multiple units and avoid associated litigation..
Like the new Avatar Ronny
How many do you need to see, Paul? As opposed to an AFE which is an estimate of well cost, these are actual as drilled costs. I suspect that the well costs are actually lower for more recent wells. These are just the most recent CHK wells for which the state has processed their tax abatement forms.