Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Two Dogs, Pirate on December 9, 2008 at 3:32

I have heard of equipment being fabricated in South LA for the HS wells capable of doing 40 million.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Bacon on December 9, 2008 at 3:53

So is it a equipment limitation that prevents higher output on some of these wells? 7000#'s seems quite a bit higher than the 5000 I usually see.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by The_Baron on December 9, 2008 at 5:42

It could be pipeline constraints.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Les Bamburg on December 9, 2008 at 4:03

Bacon, the same thing happened in the Barnett Shale. The companies learn more about the rock and are able to generate higher initial flow rates. Eventually that will top out.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Scott on December 9, 2008 at 7:51

Bacon,

I hear Petrohawk performs a tighter frac job on their wells, which allows for higher IP rates than other outfits drilling in this area. I'm sure Cheaspeake will be following suit before too long especially with production rates Petrohawk is achieving. Simply amazing.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Les Bamburg on December 9, 2008 at 4:04

Heh, can anyone say Red River Parish.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by ALongview on December 9, 2008 at 4:08

Les, After the initial flow rates, what are these wells likely to produce in a controlled situation?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Les Bamburg on December 9, 2008 at 4:20

AL, after a couple of years a 20 MMcfd well should be producing at 3-4 MMcfd. The decline rate then should be very slow (< 10% per year). But this is all conjecture based on the Barnett Shale information. Clearly the HS is a horse of a different color so we will just have to see if it performs in a similar fashion.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Harold5011 on December 9, 2008 at 7:32

I thought there was a lot of talk the the HS wells might decline by as much as 80% in the first 12 months?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Les Bamburg on December 9, 2008 at 7:41

Harold, I just used a 70% decline for year 1 & 35% for year 2 to rough out a number. An 80% decline would drop the number above into the 2-3 MMcfd range.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on December 9, 2008 at 7:44

Harold. Les B's estimate in based on the Barnett Shale decline curve. Barnett" 56%, 27%, 18%, 12%, 8%. Over the first five years. Haynesville: Projected 75-81% first year. Now that more wells are producing, the HS decline curve will be adjusted accordingly. Owing to a significant differential in the formation pressures, the HS decline will be considerably higher than the Barnett.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on December 9, 2008 at 7:51

Jay. The Barnett decline numbers are from reports that I reviewed a number of months back. Due to the size of the database, I considered that the numbers I posted were accurate. The Haynesville declines come from very limited data. Two reports. The most specific of which was by CHK. Please weigh in with your opinion.

• ▶ Reply

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