164 feet? What benefiet does HK get from drilling a LCV instead of a HS well?
I noticed that two of PetroHawk's most recent permits in the Elm Grove field have one minor difference. One is permitted for LCV the other for the HA. I am trying to figure out what the benefit to PetroHawk is to drill the LCV in one location. I would think that the additional 164 feet wouldn't cost significantly more.
The LCV well is going to be a horizonal completion.
Does it cost less to frac a LCV.
Do they need to have a specific number of LCV wells producing to count them in reserves?
#240009 (Willis 25H) is in 36-16N-11W. Vertical depth 11658 Total 16803
#240080 (Moon 27H) is in 22-16N-11W. Vertical depth 11494 Total 16436
Both wells are PetroHawk.
The LCV well is going to be a horizonal completion.
Does it cost less to frac a LCV.
Do they need to have a specific number of LCV wells producing to count them in reserves?
#240009 (Willis 25H) is in 36-16N-11W. Vertical depth 11658 Total 16803
#240080 (Moon 27H) is in 22-16N-11W. Vertical depth 11494 Total 16436
Both wells are PetroHawk.
Views: 28
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Bobi Carr ("parker") on
-
And why does the Moon well have the H in the name if it is classified as LCV?
-
Permalink Reply by Les Bamburg on -
Parker, the "H" in the well name is for horizontal - not Haynesville.
-
Permalink Reply by Les Bamburg on
-
Parker, the following well is permitted with that name because J-W Operating included the Haynesville Shale in an LCV unit rather than a Haynesville unit. The well is still being drilled to the Haynesville Shale - it is just the unit name that is different.
Petrohawk, Moon 27 #H1 Well, Serial #240080, S22(27)-T16N-R11W, LCV RA SU81
-
Permalink Reply by E & E on
-
This is still a LCV on Sonris. Isn't this the first HA monster? lmao
KCS aka HK #237344 LCV RA SUF;ELM GROVE PLANTN 063-ALT
On last amended permit dated 02/20/2009 they did amend the operator code ;-P
Now they did file 1 permit to drill and 7 amended permits, somehow managing to miss fixing the nomenclature.
Earlene the barefooted one
-
Permalink Reply by Mac Davis on
-
What would the advantage be to defining a well as LCV instead of Haynesville shale?
-
Permalink Reply by Les Bamburg on
-
Jay, just my opinion but if the leases don't have a depth restriction then it wouldn't matter what you called the unit since the Cotton Valley production would hold all leases in the section.
-
Permalink Reply by Les Bamburg on
-
Mac, it is the unit (zone) that is defined as LCV rather than the well or the formation.
The primary advantage would be the ability to commingle Lower Cotton Valley production and Haynesville Shale production in the well and/or section and not have to measure separately.
-
Permalink Reply by Bobi Carr ("parker") on
-
Les,
I looked up leases for 120 acres of the section. They didn't contain stratigraphic pugh clauses. I would bet that most in the Section don't.
-
Permalink Reply by Bobi Carr ("parker") on
-
I knew the section wasn't held by production. That is why I was initially curious as to why HK wouldn't have designated it as a HS well.
-
Permalink Reply by Les Bamburg on
-
Parker, the well will be producing from the Haynesville Shale formation and the LCV RA SU81 unit.
Support GoHaynesvilleShale.com
Top Content
Blog Posts
The Lithium Connection to Shale Drilling
Shale drilling and lithium extraction are seemingly distinct activities, but there is a growing connection between the two as the world moves towards cleaner energy solutions. While shale drilling primarily targets…
ContinuePosted by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher) on November 20, 2024 at 12:40
Not a member? Get our email.
Groups
-
San Augustine, TX
386 members
-
Miller County, Arkansas
27 members
-
Sabine Parish, LA
455 members
-
South Caddo Parish Group
440 members
-
Natchitoches Parish
400 members
-
Bienville Parish, LA
244 members
-
Fayetteville Shale
149 members
-
North Caddo Parish
358 members
-
Central Texas Gas
63 members
-
Cass County, TX
119 members
© 2024 Created by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher).
Powered by
