Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by dbob on December 8, 2012 at 4:00

I think part of what is going on is the effect of depressed natural gas prices (and to a lesser degree, oil). Everyone is looking toward funding exploration out of cash flow, cash flow is down, and the risk associated with these wells is pretty high.  The play needs more wells, for more science, but its hard to justify another billion in drilling on what has been seen so far.  TMS and other plays look far more promising and provide a ROI

Permalink Reply by Bradley McWilliams on December 8, 2012 at 8:37

Good points, dbob.  I think along these lines, the interview posted with Mr. Mueller on one of these BD links has him talking of a two other plays they have drilled in, Bakken and JB, and at least one yet to be named play.  It's really hard to spend money on science if you have a better return in other areas.  I expect we will be able to discern more of there plans once the '13 budget is released...

Permalink Reply by Andrew on December 8, 2012 at 10:05

I agree Skip. I certainly hope I'm wrong, but I don't see output of BD wells being enough to justify drilling them any time soon. It very well may take a few more decades for technology to catch up to the play. After all, the Haynesville was a "some day" formation until it all of the sudden wasn't...

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on December 8, 2012 at 10:30

The main difference I see here is that the Haynesville Shale is "over-pressured" continuously across a wide area.  Early exploration wells drilled in the Greenwood-Waskom Field  down to the Red River - Bull Bayou Field, 90 miles as the crow flies, were economic as were all those in between.  Technology can not change the formation pressures in the BD.  IMO, it can however lead to commercial wells where the formation is sufficiently pressured naturally.

Permalink Reply by Andrew on December 8, 2012 at 13:21

I was thinking more in terms of technology reducing drilling and production costs in real terms, but point well taken.

Permalink Reply by John D Cook on December 8, 2012 at 11:34

I think we are still in the first inning on this play.  We will know a lot more in the next six months.  Just remember only a handful of people behind those blacked out fences at SWN locations know the actual facts on what they have found.  Understand BML well is online now but have not noticed any completion documents posted yet. 

Permalink Reply by B Kenner on December 12, 2012 at 10:57

You are so right about only a handfull of peeps knowing.   John, I sent you a private message.  Please reply.

Permalink Reply by tony allen on December 14, 2012 at 9:25

DNR numbers for SWN wells in Union Parish 12-8 to 12-14:

Dean 1185 bbls

Doles 1009 bbls

BML no report

Permalink Reply by North LA on December 14, 2012 at 10:26

That sucks so far!

Permalink Reply by Land Rat on December 14, 2012 at 12:51

I'd say these are very encouraging results for the first set of wells in a completely unproven unconventional resource play.  We don't have all of the variables in the equation here either.  All of these wells are still very much science experiments even if they are online for production.

Permalink Reply by whodat on December 14, 2012 at 15:53

Im no pro but, I do have experience testing wells. IMO the Doles well is either being flowed on a small choke recovering mostly frac fluid or they have frac'd into the lake of brine water that is not allowing the well to clean up therefore, the well is not able to reach its maximum potential.

Permalink Reply by tony allen on December 20, 2012 at 14:32

Here are the BML numbers on Sonris Lite. Skip, does SWN report the production from the BML and the Doles wells together since the Doles is an alt.well?http://sonlite.dnr.state.la.us/sundown/cart_prod/cart_con_wellinfo2...

 

 

 

 

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 4
• 5
• 6
• 7
• 8
• Next ›
• Page