Does anyone know the likely outcome of drilling in the Rodessa Formation, as opposed to the Hooston or Haynesville?

Views: 1874

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

A shallow, marginal oil well, if productive at all.  In the Rodessa Field there hasn't been a Rodessa well drilled in years.  There are wells producing in other shallow, oil prone intervals.  Here is a link to the historic well list for the Rodessa Field.  Producing wells are Status Code 10.  If you click on them you can see the production and the producing interval.  Go to the bottom of the list for the most recent wells but skip the wells with serial numbers beginning with 9.  Those are Salt Water Disposal wells.  Enter Field Code 7746.

http://sonlite.dnr.state.la.us/sundown/cart_prod/cart_con_wellfld1

Is he talking about the Rodessa Field or the Rodessa formation in East Tx and N. LA.?

 

Appears to be the Rodessa Formation, Courtney.  In LA most of those wells are in the Rodessa Field.

I was thinking there was some new area? Got to keep up. Thanks

Camterra!  I should have known.  Any other Rodessa wells in this area to your knowledge?

http://sonlite.dnr.state.la.us/sundown/cart_prod/cart_con_wellinfo2...

From what I recall, the Rodessa became a viable target in the area in the 40s, and was largely targeted in the late 40s and early 50s. I believe the formation to be below the Tuscaloosa and Fredericksburg and above the James Lime. Rodessa and Sligo tend to be mentioned in the same breath in many circles, as formations as well as fields. As we go deeper, the shallower formations tend to be downplayed in significance both in reserves and in prospects. As much as for any other reason, we as an industry tend to effectively pluck much of the fruit that is economically recoverable given the technology of the time, leaving behind relatively small pockets in our wake.

I don't believe the Rodessa is an attractive target for utilizing more recently mastered techniques - but I'm not a geologist, either. I'll defer to our resident (Shale)geo Jay for technical commentary.

IMO the Camterra well appears to be an attempt to HBP leasehold with a cheap well of marginal production.

Skip:

Not knowing the area or the lease terms prevalent in that area, in an era of stratigraphic Pugh clauses, will a Rodessa well effectively hold the leases?

You'd have to ask Mr. Hamilton whether his lease contains a vertical Pugh.  I'm simply speculating based on Camterra's track record.

In 2008 Camterra leased our land in Elm Grove for 5000 an acre leaving my family unexpected and immediate cash, but attempts to drill a successful well failed year after year along with any profits from the 1/4 royalties we watched other members of this site receive.  Then as Jay said to hold our lease they drilled a well 5000 ft and I finally got my first noticeable royalty check a few months ago.  These checks now come monthly and range between 1000 to 2000 dollars.  Im sure there up to something but for now I guess ill take what I can get.  Although in 2008 Camterra said that such checks would have 1 or 2 more zeros at the end.  And that I could expect such monthly checks for years to come.  WHATEVER!     

SECTION 033, 16N-13W  

no pugh clause

Camterra absolutely accepts vertical pugh clauses.  We would not have leased without one.

RSS

© 2020   Created by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher).   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service