Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Kris Melancon on May 11, 2009 at 8:47

All you need to do is look at the reported production history for every producing well in the Haynesville at the Louisiana Office of Conservation website and you will see that every Haynesville Well will face a steep decline in production. This is the nature of the beast - tight gas formations such as the Haynesville Shale will only give up "big" production during the first few months (after frac stimulation) and will decline rapidly until they reach a very small relative flow rate (to initial production) at which rate they may produce for years.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by CB on May 11, 2009 at 9:41

I am a geologist with 35 years experience(for what it's worth). I believe the decline rate for year one will be closer to 90%(oh s*#t). These companys are hyping this play to find partners, and as usual are being overly optimistic. As a professional that invests his own $ in wells in La., I would not touch this play with a 10 foot pole. Working interest partners will lose their ass until prices reach $8.50. Eventually this play will become economical, but right now the only ones making $ are the royalty owners.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by CB on May 11, 2009 at 10:00

Actually, wish I had royalty in this play because royalty owners will eventually do very well.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by MB on May 11, 2009 at 14:55

KB, what's the process for doing this? How do you know who to contact? Does one go through brokers, go to an auction, or what? Best to you, MB

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Bobi Carr ("parker") on May 13, 2009 at 4:09

You could talk to Keith and see how you would go about advertising for them.

Permalink Reply by ALongview on May 11, 2009 at 12:12

CB, I am curious to hear your opinion on the comments made on Devon's conference call recently that they thought the wells in TX may have a slower decline rate than those on the LA side. Does this bode well for the Texas side of things? Is it just too darn early to tell? Does it make any difference in the long run as they stated that the recoverable gas would be 6.5-8 bcf per well which seems very similar to the estimates on the LA side of things?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by CB on May 13, 2009 at 3:59

The Texas wells will have less reserves. This is because the IPs are lower, but the decline rates will be the same as Louisiana wells. Really very simple logic. Companys are playing everything up. Why would they have slower decline rates, same damn formation.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Les Bamburg on May 13, 2009 at 7:13

CB, this is outside of my expertise but certain recent consultant statements suggest the rock properties are different in some regions of the play. This would mean a well could have a flatter initial decline curve.

Permalink Reply by The_Baron on May 13, 2009 at 7:18

The Haynesville formation varies. For example, as you travel north into Ark. the shale turns to sand. It is reasonable to assume that different areas will have different properties.

Perhaps Jay or someone else with geological background can elaborate.

Permalink Reply by The_Baron on May 13, 2009 at 8:43

Thank you Jay.

What do you know about the porosity in TX, how does the rock change as you move west?

Permalink Reply by Les Bamburg on May 13, 2009 at 9:13

Jay, some statements have indicated an increased clay content and the corresponding impact on the hydraulic fracturing process.

Permalink Reply by Bill Crowley on June 15, 2009 at 8:59

Where is this report from CHK? Can someone provide a link to it?

TIA

Bill Crowley

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 11
• 12
• 13
• Next ›
• Page