Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Bob Ballard on March 29, 2011 at 0:57

Les B, Has it been revealed by XTO whether any useful information was gained before the pipe stuck?    

Permalink Reply by Les Bamburg on March 29, 2011 at 3:08

Bob, nothing has been revealed by XTO but it is likely they were able to obtain some log data from the target formation.

Permalink Reply by Shaye on April 9, 2011 at 5:11

Brian posted on April 8 that he received a pre-application notice from XTO to unitize 28-10-10 for the James Formation, Reservoir A with the depth being listed as 6319' - 6670' and referencing the well log of the Steadman 28 No. 1 - this must have come as a result of log data they gathered before the pipe got stuck. What can you tell us about this, Les?

Permalink Reply by Les Bamburg on April 9, 2011 at 11:44

Shaye, yes - the well had almost reached total depth and would have log data for all formations above the Haynesville Shale.  This is a good sign as it indicates XTO must have been encouraged by the information shown for the James Lime on that well log.  Now it just want to see how long before XTO permits a James Lime well for the section. 

Permalink Reply by Brian on April 9, 2011 at 14:37

I never shared this before because it is all third party information and I did not personally talk to XTO, but here is the information I was getting from some one who did talk to XTO frequently as the drilling was going on for the Steadman well.  They were told when XTO stuck the drill bit the second time, that they said they were in the salt around 14000' vertical feet (don't remember exact depth).  After several days of trying to unstick the bit they cut the last 30' off and left it in the hole.  Schlumberger immediately came in to log the well.  A few days later they said "dry hole" and they were leaving.  That was a very disappointing day.  With in days the rig was gone.  Later XTO said dry hole was for the Haynesville, but the James and Bossier were productive.  They said they would complete the well in the next six months.  It seemed very strange there could be no Haynesville here knowing they shot 2D seismic over the pad and the horizontal leg before they drilled.  I never posted and hoped the Haynesville part wasn't true.  Per many of the neighbors XTO has several more wells in the works in the area and in the adjacent sections.  After the pre-unitization letter came this week for the James Formation I thought I would share.  I was hoping there would be some James Lime information in the other thread I started.  I haven't read anything about this formation being completed in Louisiana.   I would like to hear Les comment on the James or the "dry hole Haynesville" if you have any thoughts.  Thanks

Permalink Reply by Two Dogs, Pirate on April 10, 2011 at 6:38

ElPaso drilled an extremely good well into the James Lime at Castor a few years back. It is my understanding that they pulled on it too hard and got a lot of water into the formation and ruined the well. From what I have heard you have to be careful of water in the James Lime. Maybe Jay or Les would know more.

Permalink Reply by Les Bamburg on April 10, 2011 at 18:24

TD, I did remember water production could be an issue with the James Lime wells in Texas.

Permalink Reply by Les Bamburg on April 10, 2011 at 18:22

Brian, I do not know a lot about the James Lime but was aware of a few completions in Sabine Parish (and across the line in Shelby County).  I was not previously aware of any James Lime production this far east.

 

As I recall I thought the EnCana Waller Family well may have also encountered salt before being P&A'd.  It would seem possible for the Haynesville Shale to be "salted out" but for the Bossier Shale to still be present.  I would also be interested in the salt face profile to understand if it is a horizontal layer or a vertical plug.

Permalink Reply by John B on April 10, 2011 at 20:02

hi les,

where can i find a list of all P&A wells for the haynesville shale?

i note that the spreadsheet maintained by the state of louisiana doesn't seem to include wells that are P&A, which is unfortunate since that information is also important.

 

the spreadsheet can be found on this page:

http://dnr.louisiana.gov/index.cfm?md=pagebuilder&tmp=home&...

 

but i note that the encana waller family well is not listed.

 

also, just curious, what do you make of the P&A for the waller family well, and, two producing wells in sections close to the waller family well?  (i think the waller well was in section 4  and there are producing wells in section 7 and section 8  (10N, 9W)...)

 

section 8 is catty-corner to  section 4.

 

your thoughts?

Permalink Reply by Les Bamburg on April 11, 2011 at 3:45

John, I have not seen a listing of P&A'd wells for the Haynesville Shale.  The vast majority were related to wellbore mechanical issues rather than the formation.

 

The Waller Family well was further east and almost two miles from the Messenger well so it is difficult to know if the issue was localized or could effect a wider area.  Shell has a permitted well in Section 5 that has not been spud.

 

Note the Semp Russ well is actually completed in Section 6 and is almost 3 miles west of the Waller Family well. 

Permalink Reply by Shaye on May 3, 2011 at 9:10

I see that XTO has a hearing scheduled for June 7 to create a James Formation unit in section 28.  What does this formation generally produce - dry gas?

Permalink Reply by Les Bamburg on May 3, 2011 at 9:12

Shaye, yes - the James Limestone generally produces dry gas with little or no condensate.

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
• …
• 12
• Next ›
• Page