Seems to be a long way from the LSBD?
Maybe they want a different piece of equipment?
Looks like the Benson was completed 8/29/2014, as reported by SONRIS Lite 10/13/14. The results look comparable or better than the Sharp well just to the north, so SWN had much better results going south from the Sharp than what they got in the Milstead going north from the Sharp:
COMP 08/29/14: GAS, L SMK RA SUC, 706.41 BOPD, 2132 MCFD, GOR 3.01/1 GOR, CK 12, GVTY 54.2, BS&W 0.3%, FP 4721, CP 2927, PERFS: 9497'-9505', 9620'-9628', 9700'-9708', 9790'-9798'
http://sonlite.dnr.state.la.us/sundown/cart_prod/cart_con_wellinfo2...
Yes, the flowing pressure is more than twice that reported for the Sharp, the BOPD is 25% better, and the MCFD is 96% more, plus the Benson is on 12/64" choke versus 14/64" for the Sharp. Here are completion results reported by SONRIS Lite for the Sharp:
COMP 03/21/14: OIL, LSMK RA SUA, 564 BOPD, 1089 MCFD, GOR 1.93/1, CK 14, GVTY 49.8, BWD 30, BS&W .025%, FP 2158, CP 1752, PERFS: 9174'-9668'.
Another plus for the Benson is that it produced no water vs. 30 BWD for the Sharp:
http://ucmwww.dnr.state.la.us/ucmsearch/UCMRedir.aspx?url=http%3a%2...
It certainly seems that you are right about there being no fracking in the Benson. At least, only perforating (by Baker Wireline) is mentioned in the work resume for the Benson:
http://ucmwww.dnr.state.la.us/ucmsearch/UCMRedir.aspx?url=http%3a%2...
For the Sharp, the work resume shows both perforating and 3-stage fracking (by Halliburton):
http://ucmwww.dnr.state.la.us/ucmsearch/UCMRedir.aspx?url=http%3a%2...
So the 30 bbl of water produced in the Sharp could be frac water, but even with fracking the Sharp is not as good as the Benson without fracking.
68 members
478 members
194 members
11 members
405 members
18 members
250 members
457 members
11 members
388 members
Posted by Char on May 29, 2025 at 14:42 — 4 Comments
© 2026 Created by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher).
Powered by