Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on June 26, 2011 at 3:27

Yeah, I read it too, BD,poi.  I kept looking for Arthur Berman's name in it.  LOL!  Too much inaccurate information and poor analysis here to address in a single post.  I'll take my shot and then let others have a turn.

Deborah Rogers, a member of the advisory committee of the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, recalled saying that in a May 2010 telephone call to a senior economist at the Reserve, Mine K. Yucel. “We need to take a close look at this right away,” she added.

A former stockbroker with Merrill Lynch, Ms. Rogers said she started studying well data from shale companies in October 2009 after attending a speech by the chief executive of Chesapeake, Aubrey K. McClendon. The math was not adding up, Ms. Rogers said. Her research showed that wells were petering out faster than expected.

 

If Ms. Rogers was using data from October 2009, and not deleting the data from the early vertical wells, she came up with the same flawed analysis as Arthur Berman.  No one attempting a fair and unbiased analysis would use any vertical well in their long term projection of Haynesville Shale production.  The number of completed horizontal wells in Oct. '09 was too small for any accurate projection.  And the fact that the technical ability to enhance production in all the unconventional resource plays has increased significantly is a given.  Those incremental improvements in production and decreases in Finding and Developing costs will continue.  Also the decline data in '09 was extremely sparse and predominantly from wells produced on more open chokes.  There was no data on restricted choke production available at that time.  And the industry had already publicized that these horizontal wells would have steep decline curves.  They were not keeping it secret.  Decline rate is less important than the quantity of gas produced.  A background as a "former" stock broker and a member of the Federal Reserve Bank demonstrates no level of expertise associated with Ms. Rogers statements.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by North LA on June 26, 2011 at 7:23

This article sponsored by OPEC and George Soros.

 

Seriously though, do yourself a favor and never read that liberal propaganda unless you're looking for dem talking points/agenda.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Edwin Dunlap on July 9, 2011 at 10:33

What does politics have to do with it? It's something worth looking into.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Two Dogs, Pirate on July 9, 2011 at 10:49

Whats worth looking into Ed?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Bacon on June 26, 2011 at 3:41

I thought this was interesting.  Anyone seen production figures for a re-fraced horizontal well?  Oh and that story is on todays front page.

 

"Mr. Pickens said that technological improvements — including hydrofracking wells more than once — are already making production more cost-effective, which is why some major companies like ExxonMobil have recently bought into shale gas."

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on June 26, 2011 at 3:47

Bacon, can you post Mr. Picken's quote in regards to "re-fracing" horizontal wells as I have seen nothing to support that statement?  Vertical wells can be "re-fraced" but that is a relatively simple proposition compared to doing so in a 4,000+' lateral with multiple frac stages.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by ur dern tootin' on June 26, 2011 at 7:05

The vertical well is issued an original serial number from Conservation and the vertical borehole  is fracked to HBP.  Then later, the same well is horizontally drilled from the original well bore and not issued a new Conservation serial number.  Hence, the term "re-frack" came to be.  So, bottom line, it was not "re-fracked" at all.  An unknowing person reviewing well histories might see the same serial numbered well as being "re-fracked".  Possible?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on June 26, 2011 at 7:15

I don't know, udt.  I've never seen an example of what you describe.  Vertical wells are rather simple to refrac.  Horizontal wells are not.  Les B. has posted on this topic a number of times in the past and IMO would be the best qualified member to answer.  And explain.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Two Dogs, Pirate on June 26, 2011 at 7:32

Skip the article that BirdDawg posted is where T Boone says something about re-fracking. He is probably talking about a vertical well but who knows about left leaning stuff written in the NYT. I would think that it would take a whole lot of water to re-frack a horizontal and you may clog everything up.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Two Dogs, Pirate on June 26, 2011 at 12:44

Maybe a propane frack as a second frack job?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by adubu on June 26, 2011 at 14:48

Skip--- did not CHK report and talk about re-fracing in the Barnett Shale Field couple years ago? I remember Audrey their CEO discussing in Conference Call in fall of 2007 if I remember correctly.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on June 26, 2011 at 15:24

The Barnett was developed for years with vertical wells.  Horizontal drilling came along later.  The Barnett wells being re-fraced are vertical.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• …
• 8
• Next ›
• Page