Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by jffree1 on December 8, 2010 at 5:57

I'm not sure, WYK. It would be would be substantially higher due to the high flowing pressure exhibited, I think. Les B might be able to give you a closer approximation of what the well would be capable of on AOF.

Permalink Reply by Cheerleader on January 12, 2011 at 19:19

Jffree,

Did you and/or Les B come to any conclusions on WYK's question regarding a possible cfd upwards to 30mmcfd on a 64/64 for St. Mary's IRONOSA??

Thanks

CL

Permalink Reply by jffree1 on January 12, 2011 at 19:23

I forgot to ask him but I will try to remember to ask him tomorrow.  I am pleased to see you out of the basement, by the way.

Permalink Reply by Cheerleader on January 12, 2011 at 19:46

Thanks Jffree,

Still in the basement...just developed communications with the outside world...Have you been to Cheerleader's Disco?? Check out the "featured entertainment" on the "Out of Gas" group... also...Watch the snowball fight

Oil & Gas ProPermalink Reply by Les Bamburg on January 13, 2011 at 4:53

Jffree1 & WYK, absolute open flow (AOF) is not really relevant since it is only theoretical in nature.  The operator would never open the choke to that level during the initial well life since it could potentially damage the reservoir and/or well.  That is the primary reason for choking a well.  This well was tested on a typical choke size.  In some cases operators are initially producing Haynesville Shale wells on smaller "restricted" chokes (+/- 16/64") for other reasons such as optimizing reserves recovery.  Later, as the flowing rate and pressure declines, the operator will progressively open the choke to larger sizes until eventually the choke is full open.  By this time the well is typically on compression with a flowing wellhead pressure below 1000 psi.  

Permalink Reply by David Heinz on December 8, 2010 at 4:21

Thanks for the clarification. The grapevine tells me that the Lewis and Clark have come in. If I can get some clarification of my own on these two I will pass it on to the group. I want to make sure my encouraging data is in the ballpark first.

landownerPermalink Reply by Willis Bodine on December 8, 2010 at 10:13

Eric and others: FYI, first there is Lewis #1-H (API #405-30348), which was the first well permitted and whose laterals go northward. Then there is also Clark #1-H (API #405-30359), which is 1540' away, permitted a few weeks later, whose laterals go southward. Both entry points are just south of FM 1247, so SM Energy may have consolidated the work areas, to their environmental credit.

They are both close to the Bodine Cemetery where my GGgrandfather and many others lie. Dad used to swim in Bland Lake, so I hope it is still safe. And the person who named those wells probably took high-school government history from a relative of mine, too . . . .

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page