Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by michele-C2 on August 15, 2008 at 7:57

Thank you very much for your response. That is what I initially thought, but felt unsure of my ability to correctly interpret the map. Have a great weekend!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Lee on August 15, 2008 at 5:35

Sue, all your interpretation is correct and corresponds with what I know.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Lee on August 15, 2008 at 6:09

Sue, yes to both questions, but I'd rather not on a public site.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by James CD1 on August 15, 2008 at 6:27

I doubt it. Does anyone ever think about calling the Shreveport District office and ask them some of these questions questions?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by The_Baron on August 15, 2008 at 9:25

The DOC has not made any rulings yet. If you read the documentation they are simply responding to an application. The process is very staight forward..an aplication is filed, a hearing is held, testimony is given and a ruling is made based on the information given.

These units are resonable. They are clear and incorporate seveal fractional sections.

If you want to see "unreasonable units" I suggest you go to South LA and see the geologic units that are prevalant there. Not only are they of a freeform shape, but they are amended based on new information as drilling takes place.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by The_Baron on August 15, 2008 at 10:07

The notice says that they want to extend the definition of the haynesville to these units. there are no existing haynesville units in the area in question, but the formation must be identified, usually from a log in a nearby well that penetrated the zone in question. The Haynsville was defined in the refrenced field order, this drilling co. wants to use the same definition in these units, not re-define it.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Lee on August 15, 2008 at 7:55

Sue, yes to both questions, but I'd rather not on a public site.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by DrWAVeSport Cd1 on August 15, 2008 at 13:55

Doug Cb4,

CHK and PK (and many others) have paraded around the U.S. telling everyone about this great technology that will produce the MEGA Monster 3Xs whatever wells in the HS. This technology I believe is associated with "horizontal drilling." Right? CHK and PK (and many others) are parading around the U.S. telling of the great ng find called the "Haynseville Shale." Right? So, why are they drilling the LCV and using (pretty exclusively) vertical drilling to ACTUALLY define the Haynesville Shale? It makes no sense to me or most mineral owners. It keeps coming back to HBP and drilling that won't pay for the wells that are being permitted in this play. It makes the statement "the royalties are where the real money is," seem quite erroneous, doesn't it? Because no one will need that royalty calculator to calculate their moneys on these permitted HS verticals.

You cannot make this make dollars and sense, not at this stage.

I would like to know the purpose of this activity. They say it is to get the Haynesville drilled. These wells are being plugged back up the well to a shallower depth once they are drilled to the HS Zone? That's not getting the Haynesville drilled. That's getting the LCV or some other zone drilled and calling that the HS. Again, I do not get it.

Maybe years from now we will be seeing true production for HS horizontal drilling.

DrWAVeSport Cd1 8/15/08

P.S. I find it quite odd that this document is so vague in comparison to the last years worth of permits I have read, that are quite specific in their nature.

My letter and phone calls to the DOC will begin again on Monday morning. We did get one wrong righted...I think, I hope. Maybe we can all push for difinitive procedures written for the most cost-effective, most productive, least intrusive, biggest bang for one's buck, most environmentally/publicly/professionally-safe way to drill the "Haynesville Shale."

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 3
• 4
• 5
• Next ›
• Page