Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on March 15, 2014 at 1:21

Ensign Drilling SW Rig #753 reports Rigging Up, 3/14/14.

Permalink Reply by Bernell McGehee on March 15, 2014 at 13:57

If all goes well, should be drilling by late tonight or early tomorrow...we shall see!

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on March 21, 2014 at 15:04

Ensign Drilling SW Rig #753 reports 7 Days Drilling Ahead @ 3026', 3/21/14.

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on March 28, 2014 at 14:52

Ensign Drilling SW Rig #753 reports 14 Days Drilling Ahead @ 10,010', 3/28/14.

Permalink Reply by Charles Bell on April 1, 2014 at 1:33

Bernell and Skip

This well is interesting in that it is (from the maps I have) the furtherest to the northeast being drilled and right on the 11,000 foot trend line in the TMS It is right by the Pike-Amite border.. Do you know if they picked this site because of an old 'legacy' well or they just wanted to test the edges of the play?

If there are any land or mineral owners out there who are in this well it would be nice if they could share any information or progress reports on this well. It would be appreciated. Thanks! CB

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on April 1, 2014 at 2:18

Charles, on Kirk's most recent map the Nunnery appears to be north of the 11,000' contour line.  It may be closer to 10,500' TVD but it's difficult to tell as there is no 10,000' contour line to compare it to.  It does appear to be an attempt to test the interval at this shallower depth and to contribute to assessing the areal extent of the producible shale.

Permalink Reply by John Parker on April 1, 2014 at 2:28

Mr. Bell:

You may find this Jarvie article interesting in the fact that he discusses the TMS in Pike County. See the below excerpt and I have attached the entire file. Much more important TMS data is now available since Jarvie wrote this report, which likely could change his opinion in other areas besides Pike County. 

However, it is interesting in my opinion to note, (that Jarvie concludes at the end):

"The better likelihood for production is the closely associated sands."

Excerpt

“Limited data are available on the TMS, but an article by Miranda and Walters (1992) provides detailed analyses of an upper-middle Tuscaloosa Shale core. Sun Oil Corp. drilled the 1-Spinks well in Pike County, Mississippi, taking 94.5 m (310 ft) of core. They report the core as having dark-gray fissile shale with occasional thin (5–25 cm [2–10 in.]) sand intervals. The well was perforated in three different intervals between 3356.15 and 3366.21 m (11,011–11,044 ft), but no oil or gas flow was recorded.

A geochemical log of this well illustrates the extremely low carbonate and organic carbon contents, low OSI values, and about 1 to 2% sulfur throughout the sampled interval (Figure 16). The TOC pd values average only 0.84% with a range of 0.21 to 1.36%. Miranda and Walters (1992) estimate about 20%conversion of organic matter. As such, TO Co values would only increase to about 0.92% or a range of 0.25 to 1.60%. The HIo values are estimated to be on the low end of marine shales at 284 mg HC/g TOC on average with a range of 150 to 402mgHC/g TOC. Not only is the Tuscaloosa organic lean, but it alsohas extremely low carbonate ([1]1%) and about 2% sulfur contents. The conversion of pyrolysis yields to oil would yield about 7.27 104 m3 (1.184 million bbl/mi2). Over the 15,280.93 km2 (5900 mi2) of Tuscaloosa deposition, this would amount to just about 1.11109m3 (7 billion bbl) of oil equivalent with a very high retention of generated oil based on the low HIo values, as previously predicted by John et al. (1997). The issue is not with this estimate, but being able to recover even a minimal percentage of this volume of oil. Such a low carbonate shale-oil resource system will be one of the most difficult systems to stimulate and achieve good and enduring oil flow. However, it should be noted that the clay and quartz contents are not known. Based on the organic matter, Tuscaloosa sourced oil would be a high API gravity oil or condensate, but with sulfur present. The better likelihood for production is the closely associated sands. This type of system remains a significant challenge to developing similar unconventional shale-oil plays.”

~ ~ John

 

Attachments:

• Dan Jarvie CHAPTER1PART2 Tuscaloosa (Sands) 2012.pdf, 2.6 MB

Permalink Reply by Charles Bell on April 1, 2014 at 2:35

Skip and Mr. Parker,

Thanks for the reply and Mr. Parker I appreciate the 'bedtime reading'. It is always interesting. I will be watching this well closely since it, the Lewis and Lawson wells seem to be on the same interval trend as our property to the west. Don't know if that is relevant but it keeps me busy.

Thanks again.

CB

Permalink Reply by John Parker on April 1, 2014 at 3:02

Mr. Bell:

Yes I full well understand your logic and it is correct and on target.

However, I would like to point out another fact that I believe is also part of the equation for your consideration.

If you go look at the latest Goodrich 5 Ohm Isopach, (their November Presentation, Isopach Page attached) you will notice that in the updip portion (North East) portion of Amite that the thickness transitions pretty quickly from thick to thin in Pike County (blue).  

If you spot your acreage on the map, you will see that the areas North, Northwest and Northeast do not thin out in a short distance like they do over between North East Amite and Pike County.

What that says to me is that good or (more vast) TMS depositional conditions appear to have existed  in your area, in regards to high resistive TMS, than it did over in the North East Amite - Pike County area.

Just another observation I have gleamed from the available data, that you may find interesting. Time and more wells drilled will tell if it has any real meaning.

~ ~ John

Attachments:

• Goodrich 5 Ohm Isopach November 2013.pdf, 606 KB

Permalink Reply by Charles Bell on April 2, 2014 at 2:41

John,

Thanks for the insight. I had studied that map when they published it. The one deep well drilled on our holdings was the Bray No. 1 and is located at the very top of that large section in 3N3W. It was drilled to the Tuscaloosa sand. It is in that high resistivity area that dips down into the large section. My question (if you would venture an opinion, please) is what about the other depths of the internal in that large section. The color legend is not clear to me. The green is 80 to 119 but that 'off yellow' color does not appear on the color legend or I am reading it wrong. BTY, when I figure the interval from top to top of formations in the scout cards of Bray No. 1, I get a larger value than what appears on the map. This is all speculation at this point but is fun. Thanks again for any insights. All is appreciated.

Permalink Reply by John Parker on April 2, 2014 at 3:59

Mr. Bell:

You are welcome.

The two other off yellow colors you see are Goodrich’s original position and their 2^nd Devon/Sinopec position they purchased. If you look at the very bottom of the document in the bottom left corner you should see the note. Goodrich probably should have used a different color than they did to show their leasehold so it would not be somewhat confusing.

The reason you are probably getting a different volume is because the Goodrich map is the “Net High Resistive Thickness” which only shows the footage of the TMS at or above 5 ohms. The scout card would only show gross thickness of TMS without taking out the less than 5 ohm TMS.

Hope this helps.

~ ~ John

Permalink Reply by Charles Bell on April 2, 2014 at 4:58

Clear now. Thanks a lot.

CB

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page