We are hearing rumors that EOG is or has made plans to sell out their position in the Louisiana Chalk play due to poor results on initial test well and initial seismic result data from shoot. Does anyone have any verifiable information on this subject?
One and done, I doubt it, but stranger things have happened. That said, they did lease a large position, and the clock is running.
Sitting in the middle of Pointe Coupee, well east of the Atchafalaya. Would like to see 3D seismic in our area. But I do not think much activity until the price of Crude reaches $80 a barrel.
3D will not help the reservoir. The reservoir needs to be proven to be economic, then 3D may happen.
Agree that 3D will not help the reservoir, but will help greatly in landing zone efficiency and staying in the target. If you look at the PetroQuest presentation that shows the EOG lateral, you can see that it cross cut the target interval. It was too low in the first part of the lateral and too high in the last part. And at least in the last part, the lateral was right on top of an ash bed (which is not good as I pointed out earlier this week).
Despite the rapid decline in the EOG well, one also has to keep in mind that the EOG was drilled toe down. And that they have not appeared to have installed any artificial lift to help unload the lateral and wellbore to help production. With the well right now only flowing under its own reservoir energy, it has to fight any hydrostatic pressure that is sitting on the productive interval as any fluid (Oil and/or water) builds up in the lateral and vertical part of the hole.
I don't have the math formula in from of me, but imagine hydrostatic pressure / weight generated by 10,000' of fluid (for example). That will negatively impact ANY flow from the lateral perforations / stimulated section into the wellbore.
P.S. 3D will also help operator avoid faulting. Every fault not anticipated and crossed by a lateral is causing several hundred feet of the lateral to end up being "out of zone" as the operator tries to adjust once the fault in crossed.
It is my understanding that 3D seismic results in fewer dry holes by optimizing well locations. This includes guidance for horizontal drilling projects. The downside is cost, but the question is would it help locate “sweet spots” in a given region where they have limited or no 3D data???
Good 3D data tied to well control / rock info can go a long way to evaluating reservoir quality in addition to the obvious improvement of lateral landing and targeting (and fault ID).
Considering the well costs we are looking at in this area, a 3D that costs $60,000 to $80,000 per square mile is a good investment for any serious operator.
It is a chicken or egg situation as to should you get the 3D first vs get some successful wells first.
I am figuring that operators have purchased and are analyzing every bit of historical 2D and 3D data that is in the data libraries of such companies as Seitel, SEI and other firms. Getting that data is a lot cheaper than getting new data - plus it can be reprocessed to achieve some data improvement.
Thanks Rock Man, your presentation in Marksville made me comfortable offering my amateur geologist’s comment. I’m glad you shared your expertise with the group.
That was one of the objectives of the presentation, i.e. spread the G&G "word" to others so that they can better understand it and then relate it to others.
And you are very welcome - it was great meeting and talking to you and others in Marksville!