Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by DrWAVeSport Cd1 on October 15, 2010 at 8:05

FYI...Scotty has continuous drilling agreements.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Dion Warr, CPL on October 15, 2010 at 12:14

Doc:

Very interesting article - the sections on well density are particularly impressive. It is hard to imagine that some of the more 'extreme' examples of lateral displacement of wells would be economically justifiable unless the RORs are sufficiently large (from mouth of the well to delivery to the endpoint) and the measured depths are kept as minimal as possible. But with extremely limited access on surface locations, it would make sense, much like it does in the moderate to deepwater offshore.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Mac Davis on October 19, 2010 at 0:41

I'm surprised that more superpads aren't done. Since the HA reservoirs are about 2 miles underground, you can put the surface location a long way away from the first perforation point and not change the length of the well bore that much.

Consider the "vertical" well bore going from the surface to the the penetration point. If you shift the surface point a full mile from the penetration point, the vertical bore only gets 12% longer. If you consider the total well bore length including a 1 mile lateral, it's only 8 percent longer. For half a mile offset, it's only 3% and 2%.

If you were willing to do a 1 mile offset, you could drill 4 full sections from the corner of the 4 units, for 32 wells on one pad. There's got to be some payoff from combining roads, pads, land costs, utilities connections, simplified maintenance, reduced surface impact, regulatory costs, etc.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page