Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Cathaus on March 16, 2009 at 23:49

We are hearing the same thing. It isn't looking good for our area. That's ok. We still have our beautiful, undisturbed land and best of all, the landmen will leave us alone!

Permalink Reply by Iris on March 17, 2009 at 0:41

Only thing I've heard is Franks#17 has low porosity, I haven't heard of any others. It is 4 miles NW of my property. Like Cathaus says we will still have our undisturbed land. Good post.

Permalink Reply by RAY on March 17, 2009 at 13:26

It seems that CHK is still going to drill in 18N 14W 05,with the drill pad in Blanchard.

Permalink Reply by Buddy on March 18, 2009 at 7:57

Ray: They have also surveyed a site in the southwest corner of Sec 4, 18-15 just off Blanchard Fur. Road. Not sure of timetable to drill.

Permalink Reply by Buddy on March 19, 2009 at 2:13

Electro: They haven't permitted it yet that I can find either - just surveyed and staked the location. Not sure of drilling timeline but lease expires mid 2010 +/-.

Permalink Reply by Iris on March 18, 2009 at 8:30

Could they just be drilling to hold production (leases in effect)?

Permalink Reply by Cathaus on March 17, 2009 at 13:57

Beautifully stated Electrodynamics. God is good and His mercy endureth forever.

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on March 17, 2009 at 14:11

I respectfully suggest that we postpone the wake for the HS in north Caddo. And please don't anyone tell Samson Contour that their April 7 public hearing for 10 Drilling & Production Units in Caddo-Pine Island is in a "less desirable" area (with apologies to Electro who is as knowledgeable as any member I know in the area). The public hearing schedule for April 22 just added a new HA application in north Caddo. Tellus Operating applied for a unit in Sections 25/36 of 18N-15W. Cross Lake. Either these operators haven't gotten the memo or they know something that we don't.

Permalink Reply by Bill Fowler on March 25, 2009 at 9:19

Does anyone have the serial number for the Franks #17 and any other wells that are supposedly bad?

Permalink Reply by RAY on May 25, 2009 at 1:56

I noticed on Sonris that Franks # 238018 was producing both oil & gas

is this common ?

Permalink Reply by SharonB T18N R15W S8 on March 28, 2009 at 3:22

I have heard some low figures, but nobody is saying what the choke for these figures is. I believe that even if the wells came in great, they would under report the results and flood the market with disinformation so as to keep the lease bonus rates low and prevent another leasing frenzy like we saw last summer. Call me jaded, but I just don't beleive everything I hear. I do believe my own eyes. I am being surrounded by well sites so there must be something under my feet worth going for.

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on March 28, 2009 at 3:40

Sharon. From every source that I can tap, the low figures you mention are relatively accurate. I say relatively because it is beginning to appear that more than one was overestimated. The correct flow rates usually reached after 6 to 8 weeks of production are lower. There are a number of wells in the area that have yet to be completed. And there may be some delay as companies attempt to design completion profiles that address the reasons for the disappointing results to date. If the reasons for the lower than expected production is related to permeability, utilizing different fracturing designs can address that and improve production. You still have activity in your area because there has been significant prior investment in leases, wells and infrastructure. None of the companies will walk away from that investment without trying everything in their power to overcome the differences in the north Caddo shale. If they are successful, some level of development will continue. If not, north Caddo will be passed over for better opportunities elsewhere in the play. Future advancements in hydraulic fracture stimulation may solve the problem and there are other potential plays and formations in north Caddo other than the HS. IMO, this is no industry ploy. It's a challenge that will be faced periodically throughout the life of HS development as the shale will not be uniform in petrophysical characteristics in all areas.

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page