Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by DJG on November 29, 2009 at 6:02

There has been some previous discussion on this well here:

http://www.gohaynesvilleshale.com/forum/topics/carzenava-well-in-sh...

and also in some discussions regarding the CHK's Harvey well.

Someone previously reported an IP at 17mmfcd from logs they have seen, however I have not found any publicly released numbers on this well as of yet.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by adubu on November 29, 2009 at 8:42

EOG Watkins well near by a H shale was report this week at 3.55 Million cfd not good for shale and the Harvey #1H was report also this week by CHK at only 3.1million cfd also not good for h shale well.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by HS on November 29, 2009 at 13:41

i also heard 17 from chk guy, plus dont understand what grumpy says about chk exiting shelby
they have drill going on africa road southeast of center, and have plans for more in that area

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by jerry smith on November 30, 2009 at 1:51

dose this mean bad news for san agustine west and good news for harrison county

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by jffree1 on November 30, 2009 at 4:00

No

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by grumpy on November 30, 2009 at 5:15

HS
I was working off info from CHK drillsite aquisition team this summer that ChK was exiitng Shelby in favor of Panola and Harrison, for the near term. Further investigation reveals that Chk has been issued only 3 permits in Panola and none in Harrison or Shelby since the Carzenava was permitted on 4-20. Are you sure the well on Africa Road is for CHK, as they have not applied for nor received a permit anywhere in Shelby Cty since 4-20, per TRRC.

In comparison to other operators with substantial holdings in East Texas, CHK seems to have vastly slowed down drilling in East Texas.

Also for jerry smith, CHK has not applied fpr any permits in San Augistine Cty per TRRC.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by jffree1 on November 30, 2009 at 6:16

"...none in Harrison or Shelby since the Carzenava was permitted on 4-20."

Submitted 10/19/2009 Approved 10/21/2009 686318 419-31514 CHESAPEAKE OPERATING, INC. (147715) PILOT 1H 06 SHELBY Horizontal New Drill - 19000 Approved

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by grumpy on November 30, 2009 at 9:09

jffree,
I am not doubting your info, but would like to know where you got it, as the TRRC web site for drilling permit applications query does not list it. And there are several applications for various operators after 10-19. If you have a better source please advise so we can all improve our searches. Thanks

Just found it using the API No. Can't imagine why it doesn't show up on the drilling permit application query for Shelby Cty.
. Help guide me.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by jffree1 on November 30, 2009 at 9:31

I don't have a better source. I did a search for District 6, Operator = (contains) Chesapeake, Total Depth (more than) 12000'. I got results back to 1992 and with seven wells permitted since the Carzenava: 1 in Harrison, 1 in Shelby and 5 in Panola.

I had the Pilot well on my spreadsheet already because I spend a lot of time tracking Haynesville and Bossier wells in the entire district.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by grumpy on November 30, 2009 at 9:44

Thanks, I have been searching by county alone. Can't imagine why this info doesn't appear on county search. "State government", and the feds want to control health care.

From now on I will modify my searches, thanks again.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by jffree1 on November 30, 2009 at 9:52

Just a matter of spending some time to experiment with the search functions. Sometimes you get better results with fewer and less narrow parameters.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by rj on December 5, 2009 at 6:11

Would like to know if the information HS got from chk guy was in Oct. or Nov. Weatherford did test on well around Oct. 12, it was around a 6 day test. Gas flowing in line around Oct.15, no information on results of test. Did chk guy say how much was flowing in line?

• ▶ Reply