Replies to This Discussion

Oil & Gas ProPermalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on September 5, 2010 at 7:00

I don't mind the questions and there are other members following this well who would have an interest in what you find. Besides it should be infinitely more entertaining than House.

Oil & Gas ProPermalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on September 6, 2010 at 2:33

judy, when I click your link, I get a runtime error.

Server Error in '/MSOGBOnline' Application.

And a cut and paste of the url didn't work either.

Oil & Gas ProPermalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on September 6, 2010 at 4:58

Considering the size of the lease block MR claims to have assembled, it's no surprise that there are some non-consent interests. Thanks, Judy. If there is a periodic drilling report, such as the Scout info in the SONRIS Lite well files, that would certainly be worth posting.

Permalink Reply by Michael Lowe on September 6, 2010 at 6:56

I also appreciate the updates to this well and find it very interesting---one thing for sure, the truth will be exposed one of these days once and for all whether it is a go or not a go.

Oil & Gas ProPermalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on September 6, 2010 at 7:08

One of the generally unrecognized benefits of the Haynesville Shale Play in NW. LA. and E. TX. is the drilling of numerous deep wells by very experienced operators which have revealed other potential pay zones. There is no compelling reason to produce many of those other prospective formations and zones at this time but they will be developed sometime in the future. Even if the Buena Vista Prospect does not turn out to have producible shale, by whatever name, the Burkley-Phillips #1might find other prospective formations or zones that could be productive with current technology. IMO, the reason that Mainland Resources called this a "Haynesville Shale" prospect was to grab the attention of investors at a time when the Haynesville Shale name was Hot! They used the name in an attempt to raise money. If MR built their lease block at favorable prices, they do not have to find shale to make a buck.

Permalink Reply by Bob Nies on September 8, 2010 at 5:02

What is the approximate depth of the top of the Haynesville Shale on this prospect?

Oil & Gas ProPermalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on September 8, 2010 at 5:11

I do not recall a statement by MR as to the depth of the "Haynesville". There is only this statement contained in several MR press releases and Internet reports.

The Chevron well was an offset well drilled to 22,000 feet with the objective being the Smackover and Cotton Valley formations. At the time of drilling, Chevron encountered an extremely high-pressure and thicker shale zone (22,000 psi) at 19,400 feet (It should be noted that a typical North Louisiana Haynesville shale well has approximately 8000 psi pressure). Importantly, the data gathered from the well also indicated there were several shallower, potentially productive zones.

The Chevron well was then drilled over the next 2,600 feet as a controlled blowout. Chevron did not reach the Smackover formation, and elected to plug and abandon the well due to the lack of technology required to complete in the shale in 1981 and certain casing problems uphole.

The Bottom Hole Temp was 418 degrees.

Permalink Reply by Bob Nies on September 8, 2010 at 5:16

I would assume this well is engineered to penetrate the complete shale zone and test the top of the Smackover formation.... That could have huge potential of its own, not to mention the Norphlet below the Smackover, if it is productive in this well.

Oil & Gas ProPermalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on September 8, 2010 at 5:26

I suspect that you are correct, Bob. The well will test numerous potential pay zones and it could prove commercial prospects at shallower depths. However the technical challenges to produce the deeper zones may prove daunting even with 2010 technical expertise. The mentions of casing problems and controlled blowout above should be a reminder of just how extreme the pressures and temps will be at those depths.

Permalink Reply by Bob Nies on September 8, 2010 at 5:38

Skip, the casing problem is probable in not drilling all the way through the shale to the Smackover, especially with the high temperature and pressure encountered.

Does temperature go down with ongoing production from a particular formation as the pressure is reduced with a well at that depth?

Oil & Gas ProPermalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on September 8, 2010 at 5:45

Now you're asking questions above my paygrade, Bob. A drop in formation temperature would seem logically associated with a production related reduction in pressure. I'll let you and Jay (Shalegeo) discuss the finer points of establishing production at these depths. And the cost.

Permalink Reply by Bob Nies on September 8, 2010 at 16:08

Hopefully Jay will see this post an make a comment....

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 8
• 9
• 10
• 11
• 12
• …
• 64
• Next ›
• Page