Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on April 15, 2010 at 3:10

Les. Definitely good wells and pressures. However aren't the choke settings greater than we usually see for these high Flow Pressures?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Les Bamburg on April 15, 2010 at 3:25

Skip, to me the slightly larger choke sizes were a further indication of the well strength since the flowing pressures were still high.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on April 15, 2010 at 3:33

Agreed. It just stands out amidst all our discussions of production rate-decline-EUR whereby other operators are producing on lower choke settings. Of course, Encana could choke the wells down for production purposes later. Care to give an educated guess on the IPs if these wells were tested on a lower choke, say a 16 or 18?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Les Bamburg on April 15, 2010 at 3:48

Skip, just keep it mind that not all operators are going for that approach. Even Petrohawk said they were not using the restricted in some of the play.

Smaller choke - maybe 10-11 MMcfd but the flowing pressure would likely be over 9,500 psi on the Lormand well.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by sesport on April 15, 2010 at 18:02

Les - Any specifics about particular parts of the play where restricted is NOT being used? Maybe in the vein of a "bigger scheme" idea, by township or range?

80)

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Les Bamburg on April 15, 2010 at 18:13

Sesport, Petrohawk made the statement but did not provide any details. Several operators such as EnCana, EOG, El Paso, Comstock, Common, Chesapeake, Devon, etc have not indicated any plans to adopt the restricted choke approach.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Bacon on April 15, 2010 at 3:51

I can tell you about one STR (239576) well that IP'd at 25mmcfd. I don't know what the pressure or choke for the IP was. They did choke it back to 14/64, 8700#'s and has been averaging 10mmcfd since October.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Les Bamburg on April 15, 2010 at 3:54

Bacon, the well had an IP of 24.4 MMcfd but as you said Questar cut the rate.

Questar, Baker 7 #H1 Well, Serial #239576, S7-T14N-R11W, Red River Parish, 10464 Mcfd, 14/64" Choke, 8700 psi Flowing Pressure

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Bacon on April 15, 2010 at 4:37

haha, I round up or down when it suits me. Bad habit. 10.31mmcfd average 9/16/09 through 3/10 for a total of 2,037mmcf.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Spring Branch,mineral owner on April 15, 2010 at 5:04

That Lormand well especially with an 8,500 plus pound flowing pressure an that size choke (29) is truly a monster. Heck, both are for that matter. I'd love to know the length of the laterals and the # of frac stages. I suspicion Encana is doing something different on the fracs.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on April 15, 2010 at 5:22

There seems to be a lot on the SONRIS staff's plate lately. I get frustrated also but try to keep in mind that their work load has doubled, or more, and state finances do not allow for adding staff. Gov. Jindal has imposed a hiring freeze. The budget deficit is in excess of $319M and climbing. The frequency of minor errors is increasing. Here's today's example:

http://dnr.louisiana.gov/cons/CONSEREN/hearings/2010/05MAY/10-552ap...

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on April 15, 2010 at 6:26

Yeah, no dice. Luck hasn't helped either. However, like The Baron, I was having trouble before this database overhaul as I also changed over to a new computer running Windows 7.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page