In 2014, Marathon Oil turned 22 gross wells online in the Austin Chalk formation.

Views: 945

Replies to This Discussion

Is La Chalk self sourcing or is it source by underlying formations (e.g. Eagle Ford / TMS)?

I have no idea and I don't see where that makes any difference. The oil and gas are there. The companies drilling it simply don't know what they are doing.

It does make a difference as to volumetrics and economics - but that is just my opinion. There is a ton of variability and differences in the AC along the trend.

It is in the Chalk

John or Skip,

Does anybody have any ideas about how we could get the stimulation/completion reports on these wells? Since they are not listed by well name or any identifier how would we go about finding that information? 

Joe, I think the report you are looking for is the WH-1 which is in each well file in the Document Access portion of the SONRIS database.  Drilling and completion details are contained in the Work Resume section, Page 2 of the form.  Here is a link to an example.


The Mobile B well is somewhere in South Texas. How Do you find data on wells in Texas?

You ask Julie,  jffree1.

Thanks, Will do.

This is the best site to find Tx well info. I will "warn" you that the Tx RRC site is far from easy to manipulate through, however.

MRO and others have been somewhat clandestine about which wells specifically are AC completions versus Eagle Ford - and the filings normally do not differentiate (all will be called Eagle Ford).

A look at historical MRO presentations should include some comments on AC completions.

One of MRO's partners was Aurora O&G (Australian company) who was recently purchased by Baytex (website below). Baytex's recent (Feb 2015) investor presentation touches on the AC development in the MRO area.

The Australian companies tend to put a lot more info out there for review due to the various guidelines on their publically traded companies.

This presentation is attached.


OK Guys,

I have the completion report on the Mobil B.

The lateral length is 5,500 ft.

They did a 22 stage frack with 4,356,840 lbs. of prop. 1,375 bbls of acid and 126,647 bbls of fluid (water). That would be about 790 lbs per ft. of prop. I'm assuming that this was a "slick" water frack not a gel frack. Basically its a gravel/sand pack.  But I don't know how to evaluate the additives that they list. It is lengthy.

This is the stimulation protocol that Anadarko and Pryme should have been using in our area. I think it would have been a game changer. This is the protocol that I have been stating since the beginning of the recent drilling in our area.

This is a true AC well not an EF. The report says that the EF was not encountered. 



Not a member? Get our email.

Latest Activity

JHH's discussion was featured
1 hour ago
Mark Hughston's discussion was featured
1 hour ago
Keith Mauck (Site Publisher) posted a discussion
1 hour ago
Hydrocarbonite replied to CenturyMan's discussion Seismic Activity in the group Austin Chalk
1 hour ago

© 2018   Created by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher).   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service