What is CHK looking for at 18,000 feet in Shelby County
They have completed drilling the Harvey #1, close to James community on HWY7 about half way between Center and Logansport. It is said they took core samples and did some other testing. This well took about 3 months to complete, due to the depth and taking of core samples. Shortly prior to completing this well they got permit for another 18,000 footer, the Carznava#1 about four miles west of the Harvey #1. It seems strange to me that they would go to the much greater expense of drilling another deep well unless they found something that piqued their interest.
If they found anything below the HS it would probably be in the Smackover, which has been a very prolific hydrocarbon producer, and would in all probably be very wet gas due to the temperatures and pressures involved which would probably be above the oil window. The interesting possibility would be below the Louann Salt. Conditions under the salt would be much cooler than above the salt and possibly above the oil window, this phenomenon is caused by the heat transference properties of salt which could lower the temperatures below the salt by 30C to 80C. Another question for you who are much smarter on these issues than I, How deep is the Louann in the Arklatex
Another item is XTO has permits for two 18,000 footers in southern part of the county.
Going back to 1971, no one has gone below 10,000 untill the last two years.
They are looking for something or have they already found it.
If they found anything below the HS it would probably be in the Smackover, which has been a very prolific hydrocarbon producer, and would in all probably be very wet gas due to the temperatures and pressures involved which would probably be above the oil window. The interesting possibility would be below the Louann Salt. Conditions under the salt would be much cooler than above the salt and possibly above the oil window, this phenomenon is caused by the heat transference properties of salt which could lower the temperatures below the salt by 30C to 80C. Another question for you who are much smarter on these issues than I, How deep is the Louann in the Arklatex
Another item is XTO has permits for two 18,000 footers in southern part of the county.
Going back to 1971, no one has gone below 10,000 untill the last two years.
They are looking for something or have they already found it.
Views: 76
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Allen D, Beckham on
-
The permit says total vertical depth 18,000, and yes they are H wells, and to my knowledge the total vertical does not include the horizontal leg. I may be wrong, just going by what the permit says.
-
Permalink Reply by Allen D, Beckham on
-
Les, I agree, they are probably targeting the plays you mentioned, nonetheless the permit query states 18,000 vertical depth.
It is also often said that the vertical depth includes the horizontal leg to justify the permitted depth but in most cases (Harvey#1 as an example) the plat filed with the permit will not allow such long horizontal legs, there simply isn't enough distance.
As I stated, I could be wrong but the math does not add up. I am going to try to get someone in the RR District 6 office to answer these questions but you know how the bureaucrats are. If I get an answer I will post it.
-
Permalink Reply by Allen D, Beckham on
-
Les, just got off the phone with Texas Railroad Commission, permitted vertical depth does not. repeat does not , include the horizontal leg. I have seen several statements by others (not yourself) that state otherwise.
-
Permalink Reply by Les Bamburg on -
Allen, I stand corrected and my apologies for creating any confusion. Because I deal more with Louisiana, I incorrectly interpreted the permit information.
-
Permalink Reply by Les Bamburg on
-
Allen, I retract my earlier statement shown below. My apologies for creating any confusion. I would delete the statement but didn't want to cause problems with the thread.
"all of these wells are horizontals with a TVD of ~ 13,500'. These could be targetting Bossier Shale, Cotton Valley (Haynesville) Lime, Bossier Sand or Smackover."
-
Permalink Reply by jffree1 on
-
"all of these wells are horizontals with a TVD of ~ 13,500'. These could be targetting Bossier Shale, Cotton Valley (Haynesville) Lime, Bossier Sand or Smackover."
Les, I think this is a valid statement. The Harvey 1H has a proposed lateral length of 4352'. It is permitted horizontal. It would therefore include the lateral length in total depth (18000').
No one will know the TVD (true vertical depth) on this well unless and until some more paperwork gets posted.
There are two named Haynesville or Bossier intervals in Shelby County at this time: one is Bossierville (Bossier Shale) in the County Line area (sw of Center) with a depth of 12,657. The other is the Center (Haynesville) at 11,230'.
-
Permalink Reply by Les Bamburg on
-
Jffree, I checked several other permitted horizontal Bossier Shale wells in Texas and the depth on the permit appeared to correspond with the True Vertical Depth (TVD) rather than the Measured Depth (MD). This is consistent with the feedback Allen received from the TRRC. I may be wrong but I just wasn't comfortable with my original statement.
I plan to check some Barnett Shale well permits tonight for information.
-
-
Les, Here is a wellbore file on a Cabot well from last year. See page 2... it shows a total depth of 13064 and a TVD of 7234. The second link is for the W-1 which permits the well to 14000' with a horizontal profile. Not arguing but I think this verifies what I said about Hz. wells. In case the links don't work, the API # is 419-31349.
http://rrcsearch.neubus.com/esd-rrc/index.php?_module_=esd&_act...
http://webapps.rrc.state.tx.us/DP/drillDownQueryAction.do?fromPubli...
-
Permalink Reply by Les Bamburg on
-
Jffree, the W-1 is consistent with 14000' being the Total Vertical Depth planned for the well. The well had two original target formations with the James Lime at 7018' vertical depth and a Wildcat formation at 14000' vertical depth. The well was eventually completed as a James Lime horizontal at 7234' TVD (13064' MD). I know it is hard to believe but it was coincidental that 13064' was similar to the 14000'
I checked several Barnett Shale horizontal well permits to confirm the Total Depth on the well permit is actually Total Vertical Depth. I also read the TRRC filing instructions for Form W-1.
-
-
So, what you are saying is that they are permitted to drill vertically to the depth shown and then what? Are they plugging back to drill the lateral or what? I have read the filing instructions also. One place says Total Vertical Depth but on the form it says Total Depth. My only point I think in the beginning was that you were not incorrect in what you said. I have seen some reports that actually have said "... drilled to XYZZZ', logged and plugged back to X' to kick off lateral. This one didn't say that. They made a point of saying that the well was drilled as a horizontal, that the James was at 7168' and because it was a horizontal, no electric log was run (see remarks at bottom of page 6).
-
Permalink Reply by shelbyco on
-
jfree, does the info below indicate another named Haynesville or Bossier interval in Shelby County? Or is this just one of the same named intervals in a completely different area? Don't know enough about named intervals myself to answer this question.
From May 31, 2009 Tyler paper:
NFR Energy completed the Mitchell Trust GU Well No. 1A to 11,550 feet seven miles northwest of Timpson in the North Carthage Field. Gauged on a 20/64-inch choke, the well potentialed 2.123 million cubic feet of gas in the Bossier Shale formation.
-
-
shelbyco, It's all pretty confusing when you look at the gas proration schedule. The Mitchell Trust wells are permitted in Shelby County. The Mitchell Trust 1A is reporting in the North Carthage (Bossier Shale) field. On the schedule, the North Carthage field is carried as a Harrison County field. Someone else will have to explain that one but the Bossierville and the Center (Haynesville) are definitely carried as Shelby County fields.
I did notice that there were other fields named as possible targets on the MT 1A, namely Brachfield, S.E. (Cotton Valley) and Minden (Cotton Valley Lime and Travis Peak Consolidated) which are all carried as Rusk County fields. So, I guess if it had been completed as a Cotton Valley well it would show up on the schedule under that named Rusk County field.
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
Support GoHaynesvilleShale.com
Top Content
Not a member? Get our email.
Groups
-
San Augustine, TX
386 members
-
Natchitoches Parish
399 members
-
Cass County, TX
119 members
-
Franklin County, Texas
8 members
-
Rusk County
97 members
-
Vernon Parish
59 members
-
Bienville Parish, LA
242 members
-
Sabine County, Texas
172 members
-
Sabine Parish, LA
455 members
-
Angelina County, TX
87 members
© 2024 Created by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher).
Powered by
