Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by jeff on September 24, 2011 at 3:43

I would think that a lease made with a Pugh clause would be a good way to go.

Permalink Reply by Thomas Maglone on September 15, 2011 at 11:38

thanks Skip, our wells west of slaughter were listed as tight wells and they were done by wildcats, did not know what it meant. so i guess oil may be down there.

Permalink Reply by dbob on September 16, 2011 at 4:11

Joe,

This sounds like a need for a continous development provision or provisions in your lease, or is there something in Lousiana law that prevents a continous development clause?

I realize that only mineral holders with larger acerage/more leverage are likely to get this type of provision.

Permalink Reply by Resourceplaya on September 16, 2011 at 4:36

I would agree.

Permalink Reply by Abington on September 16, 2011 at 10:02

My comment may have you laugh, but Skips makes me drool:

"new golden age for the energy business in LA and ......unprecedented wealth"

gosh he has a way with words, as the old saying goes. the anticipation is half the fun.

Permalink Reply by Old Scout on September 16, 2011 at 10:27

It's way too early - and making comparisons to Haynesville is foolish - but this makes for good "theater"...

http://youtu.be/dXslsUn1wz4

http://youtu.be/DbnBSei5nUg

http://youtu.be/FtQWrD8-ItE

http://youtu.be/cLMa3E1HI5U

http://youtu.be/jxOMUOBoRmA

Permalink Reply by bulldog on September 19, 2011 at 8:10

Anadarko has set a new well allowbale of 2000 BOPD from 9/6/2011 to 12/31/2011 & an estimated potential of 753 BOPD.

Permalink Reply by Joe Aldridge on September 19, 2011 at 8:29

Is the 753 BOPD the test production or is it the actual production per day? And is the well currently in production?

Permalink Reply by bulldog on September 19, 2011 at 8:55

I assume that the 753 BOPD will end up being the state potential (once submitted) and they have the authority by the state to produce the well up to 2000 BOPD thru the end of the year. I am not sure what the status of the well is.

Permalink Reply by Joe Aldridge on September 19, 2011 at 9:58

I think DNR expected the well to have a higher IP. If this is the IP for the well I don't think its very impressive for a long 7-8000 ft lateral.

Permalink Reply by Old Scout on September 19, 2011 at 10:32

Joe - what about the "x factors" - like number of fracs/perfs, etc. I guess you'd have to assume they're maxed out and Anadarko would have no reason to sandbag, but who knows...

Permalink Reply by Joe Aldridge on September 19, 2011 at 10:57

OS,

First, they are not fracking chalk. That's what Anadarko's geologist stated in a pre-app conference that I attended in March. 

My concern from day one on these long laterals in AC is that they are going to mud-up the formation while drilling. I've stated that repeatedly. I was told by someone on here that he did not think Anadarko fell off the turnip cart yesterday. So he felt I was wrong in my concern. If you are drilling in shale its not going to take mud in. On the other hand, In chalk you have fluid filled voids and mud will fill those voids and push the fluid out while drilling and once it sets-up you are not going to get production from those fractures. I just do't understand the concept of long laterals.

Any well in the AC that is on or below the shelf with a modest lateral length should come in with an IP of  +/- 2000 BOPD if they don't mud the formation up and they have a good clean open hole completion.

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 6
• 7
• 8
• 9
• 10
• …
• 24
• Next ›
• Page