In a recent unit application (attached) for the Spider Field, Chesapeake split the Haynesville into an Upper Haynesville Zone and Lower Haynesville Zone.  The Upper HZ would correspond to the Bossier Shale Formation while the Lower HZ would be the Haynesville Shale Formation.  Chesapeake may have taken this action voluntarily or under pressure as an original unit application for a single combine Haynesville Zone was delayed and then wihdrawn.  Chesapeake noted the current application has opposition and Will-Drill & Frank Expl have presented alternatives. 

 

The hearing in Baton Rouge is scheduled for Feb 1st and Chesapeake stated they have a lease expiration on 2/9/11.  A Haynesville Shale well has been permitted for the section but not spudded.

 

Splitting the Haynesville Zone in this manner would allow both the Bossier Shale and Haynesville Shale to be fully developed in the section without seeking waiver of the minimum 660 ft spacing requirement between wells.

 

S7-T12N-R15W, U HA RA SUTT Unit & L HA RA SUTT Unit, Chesapeake, Logansport Field, DeSoto Parish

 

Chesapeake, Fisher 7 #H1 Well, Serial #242406, S6(7)-T12N-R15W          

Tags: -, Another, Chesapeake, First, Haynesville, Splits, Zone, the

Views: 84

Attachments:

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Les, do you see any implications of this other than ease of drilling restrictions for the operators? 

Parkdota, I am not sure if you will see this done for other units.  Operators also have the option to request exceptions but this could be an easier approach. 
Does that mean they could put more than 8 wells to a section?
PG, operators have stated their intent to put up to 16 wells in a section where both the Haynesville Shale and Bossier Shale are present.  This would require exceptions to the 660 ft spacing or splitting the two formations into separate units.

Are the two shale formations separated enough they wouldn't interfere with each other?

 

Could existing wells be re-drilled with horizontal and vertical  legs off the main lateral into other nearby formations?

PG, there is an adequate layer of low quality shale rock between the two target formation layers to avoid interference.

 

I don't follow your second question because you don't drill vertical legs off horizontal laterals.  Operators only drill horizontal laterals in the Haynesville Shale as an extension of the vertical section of the wellbore.  Rarely do operators use existing vertical wellbores because the original casing would normally be inadequate for drilling the horizontal lateral required for Haynesville Shale producers.  

Legs off lateral..

Maybe think of branching like centipede legs only not so many legs or say a fish bone pattern.  And if they could go left or right off the main line, why not up or down, perhaps  gradual angles rather than sharp right angles. Be something if they could just run one lateral down the middle of a section and then branch out from that lateral to drain it all.. Guess that isn't something that's possible, huh?

PG, what you are envisioning is impossible for the Haynesville Shale plus way more expensive than just drilling multiple wells.
Les B -- they will basically drill stack laterals off same pad like on several wells in Texas where they have drill a H Haynesville shale then move rig over few hundred feet and the drill a H Bossier shale. They could drill 8 Haynesville and 8 Bossier in a 640 unit for total of 16 wells. Is this correct thinking Les B  ???? The operator would save about $500,000 +- for pad sites
Adubu, yes - in some areas operators are contemplating drilling up to 16 wells in a single 640 acre section.  It is still unclear how many drilling pads they will utilize (ie how many wells per pad).  Early indications are that if a company operates adjacent north-south sections then a design might be for two pads near the section line.  Each pad would drill 8 wells in the north section and 8 wells in the south section.
The hearing date has been delayed to February 22nd.

RSS

Groups

Not a member? Get our email.



Latest Activity

Jay replied to john henry's discussion Not that long ago
6 hours ago
GoRicky replied to GoRicky's discussion Any activity?? in the group San Augustine, TX
17 hours ago
Chad Ellis replied to GoRicky's discussion Any activity?? in the group San Augustine, TX
17 hours ago
Chad Ellis joined Keith Mauck (Site Publisher)'s group
17 hours ago
Jay replied to john henry's discussion Not that long ago
20 hours ago
Rock Man replied to GoRicky's discussion Any activity?? in the group San Augustine, TX
21 hours ago
Rock Man replied to GoRicky's discussion Any activity?? in the group San Augustine, TX
21 hours ago
GoRicky replied to GoRicky's discussion Any activity?? in the group San Augustine, TX
22 hours ago

© 2020   Created by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher).   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service