Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by jffree1 on November 8, 2011 at 13:25

W-1: http://webapps.rrc.state.tx.us/DP/drillDownQueryAction.do?fromPubli...

As-drilled: http://webapps.rrc.state.tx.us/DP/drillDownQueryAction.do?fromPubli...

Permalink Reply by dbob on November 8, 2011 at 14:04

I was impressed with the Bossier map they provided - the inference is that this might be continuous to Robertson County from Angelina.....

 

Permalink Reply by jffree1 on November 8, 2011 at 14:23

That's what I understood, too, dbob.  Can you imagine?

Permalink Reply by Les Bamburg on November 8, 2011 at 16:55

Dbob, it does not necessarily mean the economic portion of the Bossier Shale is continuous between the two areas.  These could actually be separate play areas along the Jurassic Trend that stretches between Mississippi and Texas across Louisiana.  This may be analogous to the Austin Chalk trend that has separate play areas in Texas and Louisiana along a trend line.  Only time and additional information will shed further light on the situation.      

Permalink Reply by dbob on November 8, 2011 at 17:20

Les

 

The gradient maps, with no particular units expressed on the slides, suggest the Bossier extends into Angelina County and possibly into Trinity County.  The maps appear to have been drawn to ensure Encana's small holding on the southwestern side was included  No producing wells are indicated that would establish economic production into Trinity County.  

 

I think twelfth slide, in particular, is intended to suggest widespread productivity.  several of us have been following, without the training of a geologist, developments in Madison, Houston, Trinity, Walker, and Polk counties, both in terms of shallower liquids, and in terms of deeper things.  I would encourage anyone reading to take my inferences with a grain of salt.  The public information continues to push the Bossier or Haynesville west along the Angelina River trend, and Woodbine non-conventional east into Madison and Houston County.  You get into an area where there is not a lot of acreage HBPed and there hasn't been a lot of development, and the counties are poor.  I don't mean to mislead anyone but I do get excited as the striptease of data dribbles out suggesting something more.  

 

Permalink Reply by Dry Hole on November 10, 2011 at 1:05

 Dbob,jffree

 I don't seem to find the map when I open the attachments given above

Permalink Reply by Les Bamburg on November 8, 2011 at 17:34

Jffree, just to clarify EnCana says this is a Bossier Shale well while the existing wells in this area are Deep Bossier Sand wells.  That is reason it was such a surprise as there had been no previous indication of Bossier Shale potential in this region.  I also noticed EnCana has permitted additional wildcat wells nearby of similar depth.  I wonder if these are also planned as Bossier Shale tests.  The Bossier Sand layers lie above the Bossier Shale.

Permalink Reply by jffree1 on November 8, 2011 at 17:42

I caught that Les.  I was surprised that they called it "shale", too.  I wonder if they've identified a unique area where maybe the shale is thicker and decided to try a hz. completion because of that? We can count on EnCana to try something a bit different every now and then.

Permalink Reply by Les Bamburg on November 8, 2011 at 18:00

Jffree, it may be more about rock quality rather than thickness.  Also, the depth of the Bossier Shale could be manageable whereas the Bossier Shale may be much deeper between Angelina and Robertson Counties.

Permalink Reply by whodat on February 16, 2013 at 9:05

Hoyt #2 tested at its highest rate.

20ck, 22500mcfd, 6bwph, FCP=12,250psi, H2S= 15ppm I was told this well was drilled into the Haynesville shale?