I thought the attached G-1 and G-5 would be interesting to some folks. G-1 has the completion information - looks like acid fracs and therfore the target is the limestone formations.
24 hour production is 479 bbl of 42.8 API gravity condensate or oil. 1179 bbls of water with that. Note this is a vertical completion across multiple, thick zones.
Maybe I need to get Joe Aldrige to look at this, but it looks more like what he describes as TMS rather than Eagle Ford Shale. Any other thoughts?
Tags:
Additives don't have to be acidic to eat stitches out of your gear. They only have to be incompatible with the material the stitches in the gear were assembled with. Think seals and gaskets in contact with various synthetic lubricants. They are not all compatible and/or interchangeable.
Most synthetic threads are not compatible with petroleum products. The stitching around the sole of Ariat boots used to just dissolve on contact with neatsfoot oil compound, because it has a petroleum component in it, but it is not acidic.
Liz,
I think the well you are looking at may be old as it states that the info is on HARD COPY ---- info on wells prior to about 1977 are not on the web------ as for companies being evasive about reporting to the RRC I am not sure about the rules or punishment (maybe someone else can answer) ----- I do know that some companies like to "Bragg" about their wells so they can sell them while others try to keep it quite so the competition will not move in on "their" sweet spot. But the sweet spots really belong to John Doe mineral owner and competition is what makes the lease bonuses go up. The TRRC has a well completions report web site also that should show what the well is capable of when it is brand new but a lot of this info goes unreported or is tardy ie say WORK IN PROGRESS --- I will not go as far as saying the RRC is corrupt but I will say they are very lax in their responsibilities.
Liz B, There are set standards (rules) for reporting a well completion. The Railroad Commission operates under the Texas Administrative Code (TAC), Title 16, Economic Regulation, Part 1.
http://info.sos.state.tx.us/pls/pub/readtac$ext.ViewTAC?tac_view=3&...
I don't think there is any "manipulation" of information, per say, but I do think the Railroad Commission operated for decades with an antiquated records-keeping system (magnetic tape and microfilm) and has only begun to transition into the digital age in recent years.
The information is there... but you may have to go to the district office and look through microfilm to find it, on old wells.
I think the RRC, at one time, functioned more to control allocation of production and to make sure the state got "their share" in the form of severance taxes. It has evolved into the regulatory agency we have today as a result of lawsuits and legislation.
As the courts put more burden of proof on mineral owners, the RRC had to find a way to make records available to them because, as THE regulatory agency, they were being inundated with information requests via phone and mail. Hence the website which, until recently, took a maze master to navigate.
It is in their own bests interests that every mineral owner either learn how to find information on the RRC website or to be able to hire someone who can do that.
I created a page on this site to help mineral owners shorten the learning curve:
Jffree, ALL,
We have confirmation from a couple of reliable sources that Devon HAS picked up a 20,000 acre lease block from an independent in the Pearson Chapel area of Houston Co. The seller reportedly made a large profit and held overrides on these leases that were put together last year.
I suppose the important thing here is that the Majors are following the "TREND" of the EFS from Madison and Leon Counties eastward into Houston County as we can confirm the presence of XTO,Cabot, and CHK as well. The best I can tell XTO will play in the Southern part of the trend and Devon intends to play in the central while CHK and Cabot play to the North side.
It will be interesting to see if the "strike" trend continues to spread East x SE into Trinity, S Angelina and N Polk Counties as indicated by most EFS maps.
That's good news, DH. When the Haynesville news first broke, the only operators drilling (verticals) for it in Shelby County were Burk Royalty and Unit Petroleum. That's why I started paying attention to Burk drilling in Houston County.
When the big independents show up... things are about to get interesting.
Devon... went to Sabine County to lease for Haynesville. Caused a big uproar with 5K/acre bonus and ran out all the smaller players. Three years later, they are letting leases expire. So, I say, get it if you can but be prepared in case it fizzles.
I am very interested in what happens in Houston Co. because I have minerals, in the Brookeland field, in Sabine County. I check Polk and Tyler once in awhile to see if there are new permits but I think it's a little too early, maybe, to expect them to move further east with drilling. It will be interesting to see if the trend continues eastward.
386 members
97 members
59 members
399 members
242 members
172 members
455 members
118 members
87 members
10 members
© 2024 Created by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher). Powered by
h2 | h2 | h2 |
---|---|---|
AboutAs exciting as this is, we know that we have a responsibility to do this thing correctly. After all, we want the farm to remain a place where the family can gather for another 80 years and beyond. This site was born out of these desires. Before we started this site, googling "shale' brought up little information. Certainly nothing that was useful as we negotiated a lease. Read More |
Links |
Copyright © 2017 GoHaynesvilleShale.com