Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on November 9, 2014 at 16:00

All exploration is a gamble.  Little is "for sure".  In the industry we see hundreds of millions spent regularly on prospects that just don't work out for one reason or another.  For a good example read the Anadarko discussion threads in the North Caddo Group.  This is nothing compared to that 100,000 acre leaseblock, 14 crummy well, a gathering system and central processing facility. expenditure.  You can also read the discussions on Anadarko in the Austin Chalk play.  Anadarko is a very capable company with successful operations and good financials you just couldn't prove it by those two debacles.

Permalink Reply by DTrucks on November 10, 2014 at 18:55

   Waiting on completion (good or bad), I found a video today which some in this thread may find interesting.  Fossil Oil company out of Texas, where they illustrate the equipment and process in detail.  After the perforation, he expected the well to come in at around 5000 PSI.  The well came in at 8700 PSI surface pressure and 60 BOE per hour (1440 BOED). Here's the video, if interested:

Part 1: http://tinyurl.com/kjk69tj
Part 2: http://tinyurl.com/l7bz6qy

Permalink Reply by DTrucks on November 18, 2014 at 5:16

GOOD NEWS, PEOPLE:

Scout Report: 11/17/2014 
COMPLETED 10/20/14 AS A GAS WELL IN THE 16700 TUSC RA SUH; PM F; 1488 MCFD; 216 BCPD; 4625 FTP; 3350 CP; ADJ CK; 923 BWPD; 40 GVTY; PERFS: 17930-17946'; (ST:10);

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on November 18, 2014 at 5:23

Not great.  Maybe good but too early to tell.  You can post the monthly production for the first ~90 days and we should have a better idea..  It will however quite likely be sufficiently productive to hold the leases in force.

Permalink Reply by DTrucks on November 18, 2014 at 18:10

Looks like perf number 3 or 4 did the trick.  There was a truck there this morning from V-Tech instrumentation doing controls for pipeline out.     

Permalink Reply by DTrucks on November 29, 2014 at 16:00

11/29/2014 Photo:

Permalink Reply by DTrucks on December 19, 2014 at 3:05

 State test on 12/3, pressure & production doubled to 7084 psi.

Permalink Reply by ken lunsford on January 7, 2015 at 15:01

Hoping I'm at the right place and I'm trying to find out what is happening at DSCC #1.... is it producing? Is it plugged? Or something in between? And where is the right place for me to go to keep up with the latest happenings there (if there's any to keep up with)? Thanks in advance. ...

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on January 7, 2015 at 15:16

ken, there is a link to the well file in the discussion title.  I'll re-post it below for you.  The well is complete and the initial production data is listed.  There is no production reported yet because data in the database is always a month and half or so behind the actual date.  For example the first full month of production would be for November which would be reported in December and be entered in the database by mid to late January in the well file section titled, L/U/W PRODUCTION.

http://sonlite.dnr.state.la.us/sundown/cart_prod/cart_con_wellinfo2...

Permalink Reply by ken lunsford on January 14, 2015 at 6:01

Thanks for the info. Just

Permalink Reply by ken lunsford on January 14, 2015 at 6:37

I just received a notice concerning DSCC #1 becoming a substitute well for the Gene Buckle well. What exactly does this mean?

Permalink Reply by DTrucks on January 14, 2015 at 7:23

Hi Ken,
  Our pay area is the SUH square mile block on the original Gene Buckles 1976 lease (several sq mile blocks).  The original SUH gas well DavidsonBuckle#1 was plugged around 1994 and this DSCC#1 well is a replacement. From what I gather of the mail notice, there was a 50ft limitation clause in the first permit for the well pad, but they went much further than 50ft; and so the court date is for approval of the further distance? 

   The SUF square mile gas well called DavidsonBuclke#2's production has held the lease in place for all of these decades (still productive).  I have got some issues with being bound to a 1976 lease, and decimal interest, but I'm no lawyer.  My review of the paperwork tends to infer that the lease would prevail, but again, I'm not a lawyer. 

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
• 6
• Next ›
• Page