An EOG Pointe Coupee drilling permit has been filed. The well will be located: Sec 29 – Twn 04S – Range 09E.
This looks like a deep downdip test of the Austin Chalk.
Yes. we are aware of the SWD by EOG. It is toward the west and a little south of the Brunswick well. The are a number of SWDs in Pointe Coupee. All are about the same distance from Brunswick well.
Reporting to SONRIS on the Brunswick well has gone silent. No reports for more than 10 days. My friend's reports say the completion rig is in place. I note that the second perforation zone for Brunswick is almost exactly the same as the one on the Fontaine Farms well, with in a few feet. The Fontaine well was completed as Natural Gas and Natural Gas Liquids well. There was no perforation zone in the Fontaine well like the first one as noted for Brunswick which is higher in elevation, a bigger zone and fracking sand ordered for that zone. I feel they may be hedging their work with the second perforation zone. Otherwise, I have to fall back on the old adage, "No news is good news."
SONRIS woke up and reports a plug set at 13,488' with 10 feet of cement. Also a third perforation a 13,178' to 13,188'. Seems to me that they are looking for something to produce with three different perforations. Comments?
Those are some really skinny perf intervals. Any thoughts from the experts on how that would relate to landing a lateral and the size of the frac cylinder?
There is always a "risk of error" when trying to interpret what the operator is doing based on SONRIS or any other scout reports (since we are not in the operator's conference room where decisions are being made), but I would put forth that the operator is looking to test individual intervals (Lower Wilcox) to see if they work. Setting a plug and dumping cement on top of the plug is saying that zones below this depth have been abandoned (negative test results). I really don't think that they are looking at horizontal landing zone options here - operator just trying to find something to make them back some $$$ in this wellbore.
Side note - just because SONRIS has notes on perf intervals and/or fracs, there is no guarantee that the operator is following through on testing (and especially frac'ing) these intervals. Initial perforation and flow back / swab results may be negative and cause operator to cancel frac plans for any interval.
Of course being in the conference room would be ideally better, but I do not have such access and SONRIS is about all I do have. Yes, I realize there is no guarantee and really does look like the operator is looking around for something to produce. Your answer is about what I expected and my personal expectations are declining. Thanks for the answers.
I wanted to make those "conference room and operator flexibility" comments to make sure that other readers were aware that SONRIS and other scout reports are not the bottom line as to what is happening on a well and that everything needs to be taken with a grain of salt until "final" reports are filed.
At least Louisiana has SONRIS - in Texas, one is totally in the dark as to what operators are doing until they file completion reports or press releases.
Yes, I do have some experience (mostly bad) with mineral production.here in Texas. I did finally find a good oil man and have had success in investing in Kansas. I have viewed data from both Texas Railroad Commission and Kansas Historical Society and they both suck compared to LA and SONRIS.
That looks pretty. But not sure fracking works very well with Austin Chalk which is naturally fractured all over the place. EOG must know something we do not know about the Austin Chalk. No matter, I wish them the best of luck.
EOG has set up a request for a fourth zone to perforate. They set a Cast Iron Bridge Plug at 13,100 feet and asked permission to perforate at 13,018 to 13,038 feet. This is a fourth reported perforation zone posted on SONRIS. It appears to me that EOG is exploring all possible production zones in the Austin Chalk in the Brunswick well.