Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Les Bamburg on July 11, 2010 at 4:02

Skip, I am going to reverse things on you. Show me the wells that validate Petrohawk's arbitrary boundary in the east, southeast, south & southwest.

Ser #239794 maybe only 4 miles outside of the 4 Bcf contour but it is 6 miles outside the 6 Bcf contour and 8 miles outside the 8 Bcf contour. Then we can throw in wells in Sabine Parish that

As more data points become available then it is likely the list of "exceptions" will grow significantly.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on July 11, 2010 at 4:06

Bob Duke. I am hopeful that the second quarter operational reports by the major players will begin to provide some completion data in your area of interest. The dates for those reports are being made public now. And beginning in early to mid-August we may no more. If these are good wells, they should be included in the reports. If not we may have to wait until they are reported complete on SONRIS.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Robert Duke on July 11, 2010 at 4:19

Skip, Les,
Thanks much for your comments. I presume these operational reports will be easily available then for everyone on GHS? Les, thanks for pointing out the specific good wells we already know about; I sort of knew of some of these wells via sonris/ghs, but had lost track of the fact they are well outside the 4 BCF line. This seems like Encana-land in this corner, but I note HK shades bits and pieces yellow in their map, including my section; I don't know if that means some of the acreage is leased by them, but the majority is Encana, or what. I have been very enthused about Encana's ability to find and produce good wells; my opinion might be a bit subjective though.
Regards - Bob Duke

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Les Bamburg on July 11, 2010 at 4:26

Bob, EnCana has shown to have the best "recipe" for completing Haynesville Shale wells in the southern portion of the play including the southeastern corner. We are just waiting to see how far the play boundary extends to the south and east.

By the way EnCana recently competed a well in Texas with an initial rate of 32 MMcfd and flowing pressure of 9500 psi.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Highwayman on July 11, 2010 at 11:19

In my opinion, this map is of no greater value than any other operators map. It is simply what Petrohawk's geologists thought at the time that the map was made. I don't think that there have been enough wells drilled to the HA depth in the south and southeast areas for any operator to say with any certainty where the southern or southeastern profitable boundaries will be. That's probably why that area is left off most of their maps. Until there has been a HA well drilled down there that is a true dud, no one will know for sure how far it goes.

But, if the CHK Petrohunt (241491) well near Ashland is a major producer, then the 4 BCF or "core" line will need to be adjusted by more than a "few miles". I also think that when the price of NG rebounds, there will be plenty of smaller operators who will be very interested in the 1 or 2 BCF areas which will be way outside the blue line. It will just depend on the right price of gas.

Like I said before. Just my opinion.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on July 12, 2010 at 14:05

JP, the Haynesville Formation definitely exists in an arc originating on the Gulf coast of Mississippi and terminating in central Texas. The first question is, what portion of the overall formation is shale? And the second is, what portion of the shale area has sufficient petrophysical characteristics to be economically productive. I understand the confusion however much of that arc has wells drilled to sufficient depth to establish the prospective nature of the locale. If that was not true you would see a lot of Haynesville related drilling all across the extent of that arc by well known and respected E&P companies. You don't. Instead you see shale players divesting themselves of their assets in those areas in order to invest in areas that are sufficiently prospective for the production of shale gas. The notoriety of the name, Haynesville Shale, has caused a number of less than honest companies to use it as it does get the attention of investors.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Bruce on July 11, 2010 at 17:08

Very good points you have made on this thread Les. I would wonder why anybody would want to follow Petrohawk's map vs any other operators' map. What make their info better? I would imagine all the majors have access to basically the same siesmic info that is out there? What makes Petrohawk's map so special?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Spring Branch,mineral owner on July 11, 2010 at 22:25

One comment I would make regarding Petrohawk's interpretation vs. all the other Operators. Right or wrong, Petrohawk attempted to make their map very detailed and specific, with the 4,6,8, and 10 and above colored EUR lines. They drew in Faults and made it such that in Louisiana , with some effort, you can find your section on the map. In Texas, you can find the different surveys in the different counties. All the other Operator's maps have large outlines of the Haynesville, which in some cases haven't changed much since their original maps. In some cases there is a little detail (Encana & EOG) , but not much. Like others on this site, I have studied all the maps diligently and I think both Skip and Les have some valid points. I believe the core of Petrohawk's map to be quite accurate. I think the southeast, south central and southwest areas, which have much less control will turn out to need changing. The Encana well is going to change the Texas interpretation dramatically. I generally view the Texas interpretation of the map to be the weakest. I will end by saying that their map interpretation has been the most useful to me by far as compared to the other Operator's maps.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 11
• 12
• 13
• Next ›
• Page