Oil found below the Haynesville.

Is a Smackover Rush Coming?

Wouldn't it be nice if there were a "liquids rich" play below the Haynesville Shale?  The Smackover formation, which underlies the Haynesville in northern Louisiana and southern Arkansas, has been known of for a long time but drilling it was not considered economical.  But technology has advanced over the past decade and some are thinking the Smackover might be the next big oil play.  An analyst with Jefferies & Co. is now predicting as much.

That would be pretty sweet.  The Haynesville has largely been shunned in investor circles for its dry gas.  It's not that I need the attention, but another round of leasing sure would be fun.  Since the Smackover lies below the Haynesville and most leases have a vertical Pugh clause that only doesn't allow a lessee to drill below their established production, new leases would be in order for most landowners.  Can't you see it?  We can right the  wrongs of the past or get another bite of the golden apple.

A couple of weeks ago, I  noticed a Smackover completion in Webster Parish, (serial #241685).  But it might be best to sit and wait to see how things go before rushing out to buy that brand new Cadillac.  Everyone is looking for the next oil/liquids play and investment analysts love to be the first ones to make a call.  Unfortunately, they are not always right.  Let's hope this guy is...

Views: 1458

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Shaleeee on January 31, 2011 at 16:43
I am 100%  for the Godzilla shale!
Permalink Reply by Les Bamburg on January 31, 2011 at 17:32
Shaleeee, how about the Igotmomoney Shale?
Permalink Reply by VSC DeSoto South on January 31, 2011 at 13:38

That means land to lower SE part of DeSoto would not be of any value for oil, am I reading right?

Just wondering if this is just hype to sell more or run stock prices of these companies up..

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on January 31, 2011 at 14:19
There could be oil bearing formations in SE DeSoto but they would likely be much shallower than the Smackover.  Keep in mind that the SMK is below the Haynesville so it is quite deep in southern DeSoto.  The Smackover oil play alluded to above is along the AR./LA. state line.  The Smackover has been produced in that area for decades and portions of it may be sufficiently tight to benefit from horizontal drilling.  The fact that the Brown Dense interval of the SMK is not an unconventional reservoir (like the Haynesville Shale) has been made clear by the first two wells drilled.  We've got our fingers crossed for the third.
Permalink Reply by Shaleeee on February 1, 2011 at 3:49
Les, the Igotmomoney shale is definitely the most lucrative shale of all! Funny!
Permalink Reply by tresangeles on February 1, 2011 at 7:20
Just curious -- does "12 miles either side of the LA/AR border" indicate that the state line trend is all the way into Mississippi?   I'm in Ashley County - Hamburg.  Even tho' there isn't much news coming out of Ashley County -- I sure have enjoyed reading posts on this board.  For the most part-- it's a wealth of info from some seemingly very nice folks!!
Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on February 1, 2011 at 9:34
The two horizontal Brown Dense wells drilled and completed that form the basis of our previous discussions are located In  far south central AR. within ~6 miles of the LA. state line.  Neither has proven economic.  It is undetermined whether this "prospect" will ever be a "play".  It is therefore difficult, if not impossible, to predict where the deep Smackover may be productive.  There is a third horizontal Lower SMK permitted in the same general area that we will follow when it begins drilling.  You'll just have to come along for the ride, tresangeles.
Permalink Reply by The_Baron on February 1, 2011 at 11:05
Its been real intersting thus far, I am personally baffled at the amount of leasing going on...
Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on February 1, 2011 at 11:30
I'm unconvinced that there is 125,000 acres under lease much less the 250,000 that the Triad landman stated was a goal.  125,000 acres would equal 100% of 195 sections or ~5 1/2 townships. The chances that the leasehold exceeds a quarter mill are quite low IMO.
Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on February 2, 2011 at 3:04
tony, as I said, it's a long way from a quarter mill and nowhere near the million plus acres that CHK has hinted at in their yet to be announced new play.  Still it is a good size leaseblock.  What concerns me is the possibility that it is highly speculative based on the 4/4 lease offers.
Permalink Reply by L Davis on February 2, 2011 at 3:49

Skip:  Pinebelt has been in Union County for at least 12 months.  Mid-year 2010, they had about 25 - 30 people working.  There is still a backlog of offers that have not been signed waiting for title work to be completed.

 

There are reports that Triad has about 20 - 25 working Columbia County. 

 

Do you have any estimates of how many acres per week or month that crews of this size should be signing?  In addition to the two

 large crews there have been several smaller crews that have been in and out of Union and Columbia Counties getting smaller amounts of acreage. 

 

 

Permalink Reply by Cal Carter on April 13, 2011 at 14:54

They say land men are all over Sharkey, Issaquena, and into Yazoo County, MS.  Those areas are due East of the AR/LA state line.  Ashley County is where Wilmot is isn't it?  Is the same sort of thing going on there? 

I posted this in the forum several days back, but didn't get much feedback - http://www.gohaynesvilleshale.com/forum/topics/smackover-formation-...

RSS

© 2024   Created by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher).   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service