Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by obed w odom on March 9, 2012 at 18:48

Jackie, according to the state potential report, the E. Crump EST #1 was completed to produce 1700 MCFD (thousand cubic feet per day) of gas and 80 barrels of 56 gravity condensate per day through a 20/64 inch choke, plus 100 barrels of water per day.. Perforations were in the Haynesville sand from 9829 to 10,303 feet. Flowing pressure was 100 pounds per square inch and casing pressure (shut-in pressure?) was 600 pounds per square inch.

I think the 1700 MCFD is good for a vertical well and the 80 barrels of condensate should also help the profitability of the well. The 100 barrels of water is not desirable but I don't know how serious it is.

Here is a link to the state potential report:

http://ucmwww.dnr.state.la.us/ucmsearch/UCMRedir.aspx?url=http%3a%2...

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on February 16, 2012 at 14:29

Jackie, does your AIX lease include a vertical Pugh (depth) clause?

Permalink Reply by Aubrey C. Sanders, Jr. on February 16, 2012 at 15:14

Thanks for lease info. Your "Aunt" Joye Frances asked me to give you her love and regards. She and I have been good friends for a long time. I had guessed you were related and I learned today when talking to her by phone that I was correct in my  assumptions

 

Best regards,

Aubrey Sanders

Permalink Reply by Jackie Smith on February 17, 2012 at 7:48

Not that I can tell.  Why?

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on February 17, 2012 at 7:52

AIX is drilling a lot of wells in a short time frame.  One of the possible reasons would be if the leases had vertical Pugh clauses.  Such clauses limit the lease rights to the depths produced or drilled in the primary term of the lease.  If you had a three year lease with AIX, they would have the rights to all formations/zones down to the deepest depth drilled before the expiration of the primary lease term.

Permalink Reply by Jackie Smith on February 18, 2012 at 12:17

I know some of them did and limited the depth of lease to 12,500 ft.  Our original lease did but AIX insisted on changing it but limited it to the Haynesville sands and not shale.

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on March 1, 2012 at 7:34

AIX applies for Haynesville and Lower Smackover units in the Haynesville, East Field.

http://ucmwww.dnr.state.la.us/ucmsearch_070611/UCMRedir.aspx?url=ht...

Permalink Reply by Aubrey C. Sanders, Jr. on March 1, 2012 at 8:33

I expected this to happen. This is good news. Watch and see what they do with wells they have drilled further north on stateline. Expect same there.

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on March 1, 2012 at 8:44

Aubrey, what do you make of the request to authorize the downhole production from the Haynesville and the Lower Smackover zones?

Permalink Reply by dbob on March 1, 2012 at 8:59

Gas lift?

Permalink Reply by Aubrey C. Sanders, Jr. on March 1, 2012 at 9:23

Skip, I think it is as much economics as anything. Where you have laydown units for 2 or more zones and you can produce both from same well bore it makes sense to me if you have common mineral owners all with same lease terms. And lifting costs may be minimized.

In the North Shongaloo-Red Rock Field we even combined Smack "B" zone (160 acre units) and "C" zone (320 acre units) to create the Smackover "D" zone. And these were not laydown units. That of course took some doing and approval of landowners and and Dept. of Conservation. Has worked very well with increased producction.

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on March 1, 2012 at 9:28

My particular interest is in what is produced from each zone.  Commingling of gas zones is relatively common.  Hosston/Cotton Valley for example.  But if the Lower Smackover is expected to produce oil and the Haynesville produces gas, how does that work?  Is production commingled or in separate tubing strings?

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 4
• 5
• 6
• 7
• 8
• Next ›
• Page