The Pennington Rougon Heirs well initial 24 rate has been reported on Sonris:
RECOMPLETED 7/5/2020 AS A OIL WELL IN THE AUS C RB SUA RES;PM F; 205 BOPD; 185 MCFD; 8773 FTP; 2235 CP; 7/64 CK; 275 BWPD; 57.3%BS&W; 902 GOR; 42.7 GRVTY;PERFS 17513-17517' & 17546-17550' & 17602-17606' & 17625-17629 & 17650-17654' & 17669-17673' (ST: 10)
Looks like an impressive start considering the oil (43%) water (57%) ratio, very high pressure 8,773 FTP (energy) and most telling the choke size (7/64). I'm guessing this well could flow at significantly higher rates if the choke was adjusted. The water cut is a lot lower than other Austin Chalk wells
Comparing the Pennington Rougon Heirs well (vertical) initial rate info to the Marathon's Crowell initial rate info well (8,000 foot lateral) is very interesting:
COMPLETED 1/21/2020 AS AN OIL WELL W/ 210 BOPD; 1650 MCFD; 8200 FTP; 6063 SITP; 1300 CP; 18/64" CK; 3343 BWPD; 94% BS&W; 7857; GVTY 52 API; PERF: 16,157'-22,372'
The Pennington Rougon well has the same initial 24 hour oil rate (205 vs 210) on reduced choke (7/64 vs 18/64), higher FTP (8,773 vs 8,200) and significantly lower water production (43% vs 94%) compared to the Marathon Crowell well which has already produced 60,000 bbls of oil in its first 60 days - see below
|RPT DATE||LUW CODE||STORAGE FAC||DOC USE||WELL CNT||OPENING STK||OIL PROD(BBL)||GAS PROD(MCF)||DISPOSITION||CLOSING STK||PARISH|
DJ, you are welcome to post anywhere on the site but I wanted to point out that when you post in a sub-group/group page, all the members of that group get a notice email alerting them to your new discussion. That doesn't happen when you post to the Main Page (Shale Related Topics). Your discussion will certainly get views but it might miss some of the Austin Chalk Group members who don't log in often. Viewership for specific location groups tends to drop off if there is disappointing news or few new posts/replies. It is also an option to post a new discussion to a group page which provides a link to your Main Page discussion. That way no one who might be interested misses it. Thanks for posting this.
Ok, I'm not sure how to do that - you have my permission to repost that information to the Main Page. It appears to be significant news to me
When you click, Add a Discussion on the Main Page (Shale Related Topics) it posts there. When you are on a sub-group, in the example Austin Chalk, and click on Add a Discussion, it posts there, on the group page.
Thanks for posting this info. One can compare these two wells but the key info here will be how the Pennington well does over time. They have definitely tapped some decent reservoir (assuming that there is some P&P in the AC section but haven't looked at the logs to confirm this). The flowing pressures are good and to be expected at these extreme depths (i.e. below 17,000').
As a plug back recompletion, operator doesn't need a lot to pay out this operation. One of the questions will be does this type of vertical completion merit "new" vertical wells? And at these rates, the answer will be no. Especially in today's price world.
So let's see how this well performs over the next 6 to 12 months.
PS - Was anything posted as to how large the frac was for this zone?
A chalk well without lateral(s) will play out pretty quick once that fracture is draine. Browse the AC wells in the Pitkin/Masters Creek Field and see that even with laterals, many don't play well.
Bob Z, good comment @ vertical AC wells.
If one could access all the vertical AC production that has been established over the years in the Tx / La Gulf Coast trend, I am guessing that much less than 50% of these wells actually "paid out" and money.
The percentage may be around 25% - especially if the analysis could incorporate LOE and SWD costs over time.
I am sure the databases are out there to do this analysis - if someone had the time to dive that deep into this issue.