I was wondering if anyone has been contacted concerning this well. I'm trying to figure out what I can expect next and in what kind of timeframe.

Views: 19007

Replies to This Discussion

I've noticed a strange trend lately, for me anyhow.  I've been receiving fewer and fewer offers for my minerals and they have been replaced with offers to buy the land outright.  Is this a trend that anyone else has experienced, or is my situation an anomaly?

Could be a coincidence.  Or, an opinion on reserves.  Buyers, and brokers, base offers on some discount to the estimated remaining recoverable reserves in your unit.  Every well that is drilled drains some portion of those reserves.  In other words, opinions of mineral value change as reserves are produced.  A drilling unit with one unit well is more valuable than a unit in the same area with two, three, four wells.  The value declines over time as the reserves are developed.  Figure out how many wells can be drilled on current spacing and then use a simple formula.  Early wells had poor recovery factors compared to new wells but you can't put a new one in the same slot.  This example is based on LA development.  Julie can probably modify it for E TX.  LA operators drill six wells per section for Haynesville and six for Bossier, in the portion of the fairway where the Bossier is economic.  Not all of it is.  If you have only Haynesville reserves and one unit well and the operator drills two new wells, you have half of your reserves in some stage of production.  Keep in mind that the wells produce somewhere around 80% of their life time volume in the first two years.  Each day those two new wells are producing, you are headed for 50% remaining reserves, and half the mineral value, at the end of their two years.

He's got his first set of stacked laterals hard to the west side in a 782.24 acre XTO unit. I have yet to see a completely built out unit over here by XTO. I can look at what BP is doing because they have fewer units but more wells drilled per unit, in some instances, but I'd be guessing if I said anything about what XTO will decide on spacing. It's a little harder to predict what might fit, too, now that they've made allocation wells a common situation. 

I think he's getting offers to buy land simply because there are all kinds of speculators over here. Some are looking to add a timber parcel, some think real estate is a safer bet than the stock market and some are looking for future development potential and if they can finagle even a small portion of producing minerals in the deal then that is just gravy.

So there isn't a minimum distance between laterals set by the state?

I don't believe so - the whole infill drilling issue is up the operator to set up so as to optimize recovery while having minimal "negative impact" on offsetting laterals.

The RRC is quite nice to allow operators to decide their own lateral spacing.  No surprise there!!  However, concerning drainage, is there a minimum set back distance from a unit boundary for horizontal wells?

Yes, first take point set backs are usually in the 300-330' range unless you get an exception from the offsetting operator. And then I believe there is still some sort of minimal offset (depends on the field)

Now that is some stringent regulating!  LOL!  Texas O&G would grind to a halt if the RRC were to misplace their rubber stamp.

Here is a piece by John McFarland discussing the new field rules for the Haynesville that were adopted on a temporary basis (2 years) in late 2009. They were later made permanent. The statewide rule for between well spacing is 1200' adopted many, many years ago. It doesn't apply in this field.

Field Rules for Field: CARTHAGE (HAYNESVILLE SHALE)

Field Number: 16032300      District Name: 06

 
Gas Field Rules:
County Regular: N   Salt Dome: N   Field Location: LAND   Don't Permit: N
Schedule Remarks: DESIGNATED AS UFT FIELD PER DOCKET 01-0299858
Comments: NO BETWEEN WELL SPACING, OPT 20 ACRES
Rule Type Depth Lease Spacing Well Spacing Acres per Unit Tolerance Acres Diagonal Code Diagonal Max Length
Special Rules All Depths 330 0 640.0 64.0 0
Optional Rules All Depths 330 0 20.0 0.0 Corner to Corner 99999

 

Special Horizontal Field Rules: For informational purposes only. The Final Order controls all field rules.
 
Unconventional Fracture Treated (UFT): Yes
UFT Effective Date: 05/10/2016
Correlative Interval: From 9568 to 11089 feet
Established by API Number: 36536749
Dual Lease Line Take Point Spacing
First/Last Take Points (Heel and Toe) to Lease Line: 200 feet
Perpendicular Spacing from All Take Points to Lease Line: 330 feet
Between-Well Spacing
Subsurface Tolerance Box: 50 feet
Horizontal to Vertical: 0 feet
Horizontal to Horizontal: 0 feet
Overlap Distance: N/A
Stacked Lateral Rules: Yes (If yes, see Final Order for details)
Horizontal Depth Severance: No
Special Rule 38 (Well Density) Provision
Upper: N/A Notification Radius: N/A
Lower: N/A
Comments for the Special Field Rules
Comments: DOCKET 06-0275657 AMENDS RULE #2 DOCKET 06-0279265 AMENDS RULE #3.
History: Final Orders that contain special horizontal field rules language
Docket Number Final Order Effective Date Final Order Document
06-0262000 12/16/2011 Click Here
06-0275657 08/21/2012 Click Here
06-0279265 01/29/2013 Click Here

Thanks, Julie.  The fact that the unit boundary set back is 330' in both Texas and Louisiana shows that it is arbitrary as opposed to being based on any real world data.  Do you know of any Haynesville units that are larger than the 640 + 64 acres?

Yeah, The BSI Keydets is 782.24.

I suspect Julie will confirm the fact there are numerous HA/BO units larger than 640 + 64.

RSS

Support GoHaynesvilleShale.com

Not a member? Get our email.

Groups



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

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service