On 29, "dry" usually means that all efforts during the drilling, logging (mud logs), casing, DST, and analysis of the wellbore.... the overall inspection of the preliminary geological findings of the well are not conducive to producing it. ...the costs to extract are extravant compared to the volume produced. The reserves are just not there in that particular area.....not that there may be a gusher 1/2 mile down the road, but that particular hole is non-productive. If the geologist thinks there is something that everyone else is over-looking, they may try to drill another well updip from the dryhole, but a $3million dry hole is very expensive the first time around!

On 30, usually it was a producing well at the beginning, but the reservoir may have been smaller than expected, or it may have turned into a water well, (where water seeps in thru the fractures when completing the well), or the reserve was minimal, or the overhead expense to keep producing it was more than the product produced and sold. For whatever the reason, it just wasn't cost-effective, and it wasn't feasible to just keep spending money on a non-producing well.

I am no expert, but have found this to be the case most of the time. With the dry holes in Union Parish, I think the gas is there, they just haven't found 'what pocket' it is hiding in!! An old oilfield uncle once noted, "Follow the river," and I think it has merit, but not everyone agrees with that adage.

greenjeans