My NARO Presentation: Refracs, Mid-Bossier, Drilling Faults & One Operator Per Unit Rule

This is a link to my NARO Power Point presentation.

NARO%20PRESENTATION%205.17.22%20A.pptx

Views: 755

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

So, no questions?  LOL!  There is of course a narrative that goes with the Power Point pages.  They are not IMO totally self explanatory.  It would be confusing to try to post a narrative.  I'd rather just take questions for any of the issues that members find of interest.  I found the refrac data from Aethon to be pretty compelling especially for those who got multiple early wells before the advent of "intensive frac designs".  Those under stimulated early wells, and there are thousands of them, are possibly good candidates for refracs.  $1M for an additional 1 Bcf of gas is a good investment especially at current prices.  The Aethon approach to frac an older original unit well while a completion crew is fracking a set of new wells seems like a no brainer.

Re fracs based on the EUR's you provided should have a hard time competing for capex vs. new wells.  The ROI on a new well is 2.5X that of a re frac so if I am an operator I will only re frac for lease maintenance or for "show" to grab the attention of a buyer.  Aethon is on the market, or was before gas prices went thru the roof.  

The specific example was for an original unit well with a 900#/lin. ft. proppant load while the frac crew was on site for completion of the four new wells.  49 refracs, at that point in time, hardly seem to be for "show".

I just said what I would do as operator.  I know a lot of re fracs are done for lease maintenance.  And if I was selling, I would want the buyer to know there are lower capex options.  That was my point.  I don’t care to get into a pro/con on re fracs as I don’t have the actual EUR’s.  Also as an operator I would be drilling everything I could right now to take advantage of the NG market that was created by a perfect storm.  

And Aethon is doing what they do as an operator.  Considering the significant number of under stimulated early wells, the topic is one I find of value.

 Skip,

Do you have any information at this time in regards to  Carbon Sequestering for the Haynesville.

One would think that might be a future best use of current infrastructure?    Is this topic even mentioned in

Leaser from the past?

Carter, nothing so far on the topic as far as Haynesville operating companies go although they have been promoting their commitment to "responsibly sourced" natural gas.  Louisiana CCS seems to be a minor investment of super majors in conjunction with south Louisiana end user facilities, LNG and chemical facilities.  At this point the technology is unproven and mostly an attempt at greenwashing.  Hopefully technology will ultimately enable such facilities to be effective in removing significant amounts of CO2 from the atmosphere.

Do you know from an engineering stand point could carbon be re-injected into the depleted wells and "stored"

forl some other use in the future?

I think that is possible however I don't know if it is practical in all cases.  The storage capacity per well would be the missing element in the equation.  Storage in salt domes might be a better option.  There are a good many gas storage wells in the Lake Bistineau Field.  These appear to be depleted Pettet wells.  I'll post a link to a SONRIS page below for anyone that would care to check them out.  Denbury is the only O&G company that I'm aware of that stores a lot of CO2.  The company uses it for recovering oil from older fields by way of a CO2 "flood".

Gulf South Pipeline Company, LP.

https://sonlite.dnr.state.la.us/sundown/cart_prod/cart_con_sectwnrng2

Denbury Inc.

https://www.denbury.com/Home/default.aspx

I actually found the details in your Presentation to be far easier to understand and comprehend than most other things I follow in the O&G Industry. Really appreciate your posting it on here! 

Dang, thanks Bill.

Skip:

Would agree with Jay on this one.  "Show" as to showing what may be left in bypassed reserves-in-place from earlier drilling and development with older completion techniques is not compelling if you have remaining fairway and infill PUDs.  Unlimited capital, worried about "milking" down areas with wells not cost-effective at $4 but cost-effective at $8+ could make sense, but it is not a good enough reason to develop in this price environment with limited capital budget if you have virgin territory and/or remaining alternate locations. If the ROI delta was closer you might be able to make a case for what you suggest, aka "while we're here..."  Otherwise, drill the better well with more favorable economics.

RSS

© 2022   Created by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher).   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service