Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by North LA on January 14, 2011 at 8:20

Thanks for the response Gayle.

Permalink Reply by Gayle Witherspoon on January 14, 2011 at 1:45

Surely you can get rid of H2S and deal with it, but there are no cost effective ways.  The entire casing program, production facilities, pipelines, etc. of a well have to be changed to be stainless steel because of the corrosive effects of the H2S.  This dramatically changes the economics of the well and/or play.  It depends on what kind of reserves are expected as to whether or not the play will work.  In a play that was expected to have lots of liquids like this that is not producing next to none on the test and the amount of gas is less than 1 mcfpd (like has been reported), having to change your economics by having all of your pipe, etc. to steel will certainly kill this deal. 

 

The reported amount of H2S that I am hearing is 2% which if a very high amount.  0.1% is considered a toxic level. 

 

Permalink Reply by The_Baron on January 14, 2011 at 6:00

Thank you gayle.

 

Not to mention H2S will limit your buyers and therefore reduce the price you get on oil and gas.

Permalink Reply by Peggy Maloch on January 11, 2011 at 4:55

Tony,

 

I find these discussions quite interesting.  However, I have a question for you.  You mentioned owning royalty in Union County near the new well.  Are you referring to the horizontal well North of Bussey??  Or is there another well?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by L Davis on January 11, 2011 at 5:16

 There is a new application for well in Union County AR east of Dodge City along the Ar/LA line.

 

http://www.aogc2.state.ar.us/Hearing%20Applications%20Archive/2011/...

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Peggy Maloch on January 11, 2011 at 8:01

Thanks for the information!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on January 11, 2011 at 14:37

Thanks.  I guess that puts in the unenviable position of hoping for a "tight hole" designation even though six months will be a long wait.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by L Davis on January 11, 2011 at 15:01

 

Skip

Much has been written on GHS about brown dense drilling activity in S AR.  Outside of leasing activity, little has been written about brown dense drilling activity in N La.  It is my understanding that interest in the brown dense started in N LA and moved north into S AR. Any drilling activity going on in N LA?   

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on January 11, 2011 at 15:05

Not that I am aware of.  There have been SMK units formed and wells drilled in N. LA. in 2010 but all that I recall were vertical wells that did not appear to be sufficiently deep to be targeting the Brown Dense.  I'll review the wells drilled in Claiborne Parish last year and double check.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on January 11, 2011 at 15:34

There were 17 wells permitted or drilled in Claiborne Parish in 2010.  Two list SMK as the targeted or producing horizon.  Both wells are listed as SMK A RA and the one that was completed is producing from perforations at 10,352' to 10,368'.  These are vertical wells drilled by Petro-Chem Operating and are located in 21N - 4 & 5W (not in the vicinity of the state line).  There were no wells drilled to greater depths in 2010.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by North LA on January 11, 2011 at 15:22

L Davis,

 

I've been keeping up with wells drilled in NELA and none have been horizontal SMK. There have been plenty of suspicious vertical wells drilled over the last 5 years. Several of them were drilled in the old Monroe Gas field. I call them suspicious because all have been drilled in a 30 mile radius, none have produced, all have been cored, and all are listed future utility rather than P&A. I could be wrong but it looks like they were just exploration wells checking out the BD. On the other hand It could just be desperate O&G companies drilling dry hole after dry hole with the hope of hitting the next spindle top without regard to the costs of drilling dry holes. BTW one of the operators is owned by CHK named Greystone.  Here are well numbers if anyone wants to put more effort into the research.

 

233498

234288

242198

242094

239523

240456

239758

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by North LA on January 11, 2011 at 15:39

234365

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 6
• 7
• 8
• 9
• 10
• …
• 25
• Next ›
• Page