Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Rock Man on January 26, 2019 at 8:27

Without doing some intense research, I would guess that the economics of the FV do not compare with the HV right now. And a lot of this is tied to the gas pipeline agreements in each area, i.e. different pricing metrics. I will try to look at this more and comment later as to this issue.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Bradley McWilliams on January 26, 2019 at 10:56

Thanks, and please don't go to any excessive trouble if you do look into it, I'm simply curious.  Basically it is what it is.  Could even be a simple numbers thing in that there are only 3 large players here, and maybe 2-3 smaller ones, so there's just not as many chances for someone to decide to drill.

I also know that the "machine" SWN put together to do everything in house basically caused there to not be any local drilling or completions companies left.  So if a company wants to drill a well or two they have to mobilize everything from at least 300 miles from here.

On the plus side the last two wells drilled here were to prove up the "upper F'ville", which they reported as successful.  In some parts of the play it's almost a stack play, with 3 potential zones. (upper, lower, Moorefield)

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rock Man on January 26, 2019 at 13:08

One of the issues for non drilling in the FV could be that a lot of the best acreage is HBP and operators don't have to drill to maintain their leases.

They can wait for higher prices down the road.

Your point as to contractor location and support is a good one. A big issue in that it causes operating costs to increase versus areas of good contractor support (e.g. Haynesville)

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Bradley McWilliams on January 27, 2019 at 1:40

If they are still tying up leases in the Haynesville, that would absolutely be a reason.  I would be surprised to find a lease here, that's worth having, that isn't HBP.  I was told that one of the new companies has said their plan is to simply produce what they have now.

As far as contractor support, it's a sea of empty building up here...

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by dbob on January 27, 2019 at 6:38

What Jay said.  Same thing going on in Barnett - that area simply needs higher gas prices, or vastly lower D&C costs, or vastly more effective completions to compete on a ROR basis.  

That said, I would love to see what would happen if you implemented all of the Haynesville learnings in either the Barnett or Fayetteville, assuming available good rock,  

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rock Man on January 28, 2019 at 13:26

I am pretty confident saying that in today's world, operators are taking best practices for drilling and stimulation from other areas / plays and seeing if they "work" in different areas.

The big issues for all these plays are the details of the reservoir as to P&P, brittleness, volumetrics, etc. Haynesville has a leg up on plays like the Barnett and Fayetteville due to its higher reservoir pressures and more storage capacity (original gas in place).

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by The Shadow on April 5, 2019 at 6:45

Rock Man, this site seems appropriate to ask you about activity or lack of in Bowie County, Texas.  There has not been much activity there in the past and none recently.  We have large acreage of Mineral Rights in that county, so wondering why no activity or more important is there a chance of something happening there in the future?  I would appreciate your input, since you have so experience in the Oil and Gas business.  Thank You!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rock Man on April 5, 2019 at 7:10

Shadow, Bowie Co is an ultra slow area for O&G and always has been. The attached PDF shows ALL the historical production that has taken place in the county. Only 57 wells. And all clustered in the southern part of the county. The most recent drilling was by Machin & Associates in 2014-2015 about 12 miles SW of New Boston (both of these wells were plugged after only seeing some very marginal and uneconomic oil shows).

The "problem" with Bowie Co is the geology. North of the line of production, the section historically productive area (that is much more robust to the south of Bowie) gets very shallow and essentially disappears. And the remaining rock is basement (which has on O&G potential for a variety of reasons).

There are no unconventional play options in Bowie now (and I would have a hard time projecting if any present rock formation in Bowie would have a long shot of being a future target).

Sorry for the dismal O&G prospectus, but Mother Nature dealt Bowie County a poor hand when it comes to O&G.

In what part of the county are your minerals located? If in the historically productive part of the trend, there is a chance (long shot) that there may be some interest in acquiring your minerals. But it would be for a low price.

Attachments:

• Bowie Co Production Historical.pdf, 1.3 MB

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by The Shadow on April 5, 2019 at 15:12

Rock Man,  It is almost 2,000 acres of Minerals located 14 miles Southwest of Boston, Texas being the R. J. Cramer Survey, A-922.  My Dad purchased these Minerals 5-6-81, and it was under an Oil and Gas Lease by J.W. Kendrick.  This is the short of where it is located.  The full description is very lengthy. Let me know what you think about this.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Bradley McWilliams on April 6, 2019 at 1:32

Shadow, excuse me for butting in, but I've got a couple of web sits for you to look at for doing a little research on Bowie county.  One is the Baker Hughes Rig Count. Actually an app you can get, but it has a map of all the active rigs in the US. Right now the closest rig to New Boston is 50 miles south. The other site is https://www.eia.gov/state/maps.php?v=Petroleum You can look at this map which shows all of the wells in the US, (except IL and IN for some reason?). If you zoom in to Bowie county you find a grand total of 17 wells. Unfortunately just not a prospective area. That's not to say nothing will happen, certainly some smaller company may want to poke around to follow a hunch? But there simply isn't the prospect there for large companies to come in and create demand for acreage to drive up prices.  

For what it's worth, I enjoy looking at the eia map, in that I get a kick out of finding obscure one off wells all alone somewhere, which Bowie county has a couple of. I make my living off the assembly line of multi well pads and companies with stockholder presentations, but all the hub bub of the big time stuff is kind of dull compared to the determined wildcatter willing to punch a hole well off the beaten path.

Hope you find interest in your Bowie county acreage!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by The Shadow on April 6, 2019 at 11:31

bpm, thank you for your reply.  Texas is more difficult than Louisiana, which is where I am from.  In Louisiana land is identified by Township, Range and Sections, and SonRis Light identifies every well that has ever been drilled, by Parish, but Texas is more difficult, but I am trying to learn.  Thank you once again!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rock Man on April 6, 2019 at 11:27

Shadow, BPM has made some good points about Bowie County plus put forth some good resources to check to compare Bowie Co to overall activity.

The attached PDF (from DrillingInfo) shows the RJ Cramer 922 survey around the center (note the NW to SE running gas pipeline that runs thru the center of the survey). You will also note two dry hole symbols on this map (one in Edwards and one in Bassett surveys). There are very old dry holes with no info available on the Tx RRC site (although I am sure some log libraries may have logs and scout tickets on these wells).

Production in this part of the state is controlled by two main features - the pinchout of the prospective section that runs E-W through Bowie County (see my previous PDF that I posted) and then the Mexia Talco Fault system that runs also E-W along the Cass / Bowie County line.

Your survey and minerals are located between these two "trapping" trends. There is no significant production seen in this "gap" that contains your minerals (although the aforementioned and other dry holes have indicated historical attempts to find something).

The good news about your minerals is that there is subsurface section in that area that CAN be prospective if O&G were to be trapped in that area. Hydrocarbons have migrated from south to north through you area. However, there has to be a mechanism (e.g. fault closure, structural closure, stratigraphic pinchout, etc.) to trap this migrating O&G to give one something to drill for.

Potentially prospective targets in this area would include (from bottom to top) the Smackover, Cotton Valley / Travis Peak Sand, Rodessa, Paluxy, Woodbine and Nacatoch / Navarro intervals.

With no well control, there is no subsurface "shows" to key off of for a new well. Some seismic (2D or 3D) would help evaluate the subsurface in your area, but an operator needs a reason to want to spend that sort of money to see if there is something of value to drill a well for.

Personally, I would hold onto the minerals - if anyone were to purchase them now, they would give you peanuts for their value. In the future, some operator may have a concept to play in this area and do the work (e.g. Seismic) to see if there is reason to drill a well.

Another alternative (and a long shot) is to advertise that you have these minerals (2000 acres is a good hunk of acreage) and indicate that you would be interested in leasing for reasonable terms to any operator who may be interested in shooting seismic and then drilling a well in this area.

As with all my comments, these are just my opinions on this situation.

Attachments:

• RJ Creamer Abstract 922.pdf, 540 KB

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page