Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by L D H on March 1, 2010 at 8:41

adubu, I kept hoping someone would answer this question. I am interested in the area around Joaquin too. Do you think there is so much land held by production in this area that they haven't drilled to the Haynesville yet?

Permalink Reply by adubu on March 1, 2010 at 8:51

LDH---I think the shale has been penetrated in the Joaquin area. I have seen on some general maps of shale penetration there are some dots in the Joaquin field I just can find the well that marked. Hoping some one knew.

Permalink Reply by L D H on March 1, 2010 at 9:15

adubu, Classic, Petrohawk (KCS Resources), and XTO are all active in the area. I read something about XTO applying for a "new field" in the O L Guy unit, but I didn't understand what that meant. I never could find anything on the TRRC site about it. If you can explain what this article is talking about, I would appreciate it.


http://www.oilvoice.com/post/Main_Discussion/New_Field_Discovery_In...

Permalink Reply by jffree1 on March 1, 2010 at 9:42

LDH, 419-31160, O.L. Guy Travis Peak Unit # 14ST (vertical well) is 2.7 miles southeast of Joaquin in the C.W. McDaniel Survey, A-1215.

XTO named the Joaquin (Triassic) Field at a depth of 11,451' (top of pay) and 11,531' TVD. This is deeper than the Haynesville in this area but you'd have to get someone with a geology background (Shale Geo) to tell you about it.

adubu, the only wells I have in my database in that immediate area are this XTO well and one belonging to Maximus Operating:419-31317 May Unit #1 in the J.R. Haley Survey, A-284 about 2.6 miles northeast of Joaquin.

There may be others and I just haven't found them yet.

Permalink Reply by adubu on March 1, 2010 at 10:19

Thanks jffreel=-----found production on the OL Guy unit ~ 75mmcf for past 5 months. ~450.000 cfd-- not bad for vertical--should make fairly-good H well if drilled

Permalink Reply by adubu on March 1, 2010 at 10:38

found production on the Maximus May well----very poor---only 3mmcf for year 2009. ~ 5000cf only per day ~$25 / day gross that will not pay the electrical bill to run the unit TD only 10500' question upper bossier shale maybe reason

Permalink Reply by RBH on March 1, 2010 at 14:35

XTO has filed a new field discovery application for its O.L. Guy Travis Peak Unit Lease,proposed Joaquin ( Triassic) field in A-1215, Triassic(Eagle Mills) formation. Top 11,289'-11,556'(267'). Initial test on 7/16/2009 of 453 mcf/day 0-water 0-condensate 48/64 " choke w/ 5900# FTP SIWP-6,500#,BHP 8,400#, AOF @ 2.75mmcf/day Perf. interval@ 11,451'-11,457' Wasn't any stimulation reported to perforated interval. This discovery should create a new map for Shelby County and surrounding counties too. This county just gets better and better for natural gas production--the oilvoice.com post

TRIASSIC IS DEEP
in this well:
Top of Pettit 5691
Top of Travis Peak 6293
Top of Knowles 8960
Top of Haynesville 9224

Field
JOAQUIN (TRIASSIC) Operator
XTO ENERGY INC. Location
District: 6; Shelby County, Texas
Lease Name
GUY, O. L. TRAVIS PEAK UNIT Gas ID Number

251154 Cumulative (since 1970)
75 MMCF
Wells
42-419-31160(14)


Year-Month BBLS / month Cumulative BBLS MCF / month Cumulative MCF Alloc BW / month Alloc Cumulative BW
2009-07 0 0 5,068 MCF
2009-08 0 0 13,692
2009-09 0 0 12,594
2009-10 0 0 11,686
2009-11 0 0 17,770
2009-12 0 0 14,178 cum =74,988

Permalink Reply by RBH on March 1, 2010 at 14:45

a few wells in Joaquin--drilled/produced Cotton Valley--called Carthage (Cotton Valley)
kcs :
JOHNSON, ALICE W.
Field
CARTHAGE (COTTON VALLEY) Operator
KCS RESOURCES, LLC Location
District: 6; Shelby County, Texas
Lease Name
JOHNSON, ALICE W. Gas ID Number
221924 Cumulative (since 1970)
277 MMCF; 291 BO
Wells
42-419-31001(2) 42-419-31001(2)

Permalink Reply by adubu on March 1, 2010 at 14:50

RBH ---if Haynesville top is 9224 then this well the OL GUY at 11.289-11,556 must be down in the cotton valley Lime below the shale and not a shale well. We need geologist to answer what formation is this? however something not correct because the Travis Peak and Cotton Valley sand in the field is deeper than above top you stated. The Alice Johnson well is a combo TP and CV well drilled to 9860' and that is CV Sands so some thing not correct. If CV at 9860 then the Triassic shale would be about 11,200-11,600 and well would be shale not lime. The oilvocal.com site is full of errors

Permalink Reply by RBH on March 1, 2010 at 14:53

Top of Pettit 5691
Top of Travis Peak 6293
Top of Knowles=CV 8960
Top of Haynesville 9224

this well is at the smackover depth

Permalink Reply by jffree1 on March 1, 2010 at 15:45

Look at this and tell me what you think (scroll all the way to the bottom) :

Attachments:

• Stratigraphic Column-East TX Basin.pdf, 395 KB

Permalink Reply by adubu on March 1, 2010 at 16:18

jffreel-- the stratigraphuc column fits the east texas formations with variable deeps depending on location the futher south you go in shelby the deeper the formations. Most of the Travis Peak wells in the Joaquin are ~ 8650' The CV -Taylor Sands above the Bossier/Haynesville shale in the Alice Johnson well is 9860' you go down into San Augustine/ Shelby County Line Field the CV is 12,000'+ and the Haynesville Shale is ~ 13,000' So I think the OL GUY well is Bossier/Haynesville Shale (Triassic) at the 11,289-11.556' perf What RBH reports from oilvoice doesnot correlate.

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• …
• 5
• Next ›
• Page