Thanks for both, Don!
On Oct 15, 4:50 pm, dkwilk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> SORRY ,,, I GAVE YOU THE WRONG link.. that one is for a pannel
> discussion with CLR , Brigham resources and Ranger resources.It in its
> self is worth listening to .don
> THE SWELLPACKER COMPLEATION TECHNIQUE discussion is located at this
> link..http://phx.corporate-ir.net/preview/phoenix.zhtml?p=irol-eventDetails...
> again SORRY for posting wrong.. don
>
> On Oct 15, 3:28 pm, dkwilk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Yesterday at the Natixis Hidden Gem conference CLR , Continental
> > resources presented about the Bakken wells and TFS wells and
> > COMPLEATION techniques..AT 18 -19 minutes into the discussion they
> > were dicsussing Swell packers. and Number of FRACS. they also iluded
> > to the fact that the Estimated Ultimate Recovery of a well is approx
> > equal to 1000 times the 7 day IP average of output. Thus the higher
> > the 7 day IP the probable higher the toal out put form the well.. this
> > webcast is available
> > athttp://phx.corporate-ir.net/preview/phoenix.zhtml?p=irol-eventDetails...
> > Don
> > On Oct 10, 2:55 am, elwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > bobcat typed: "What is the effect on ultimate recovery? "
>
> > > i dont think we know. i dont think anybody on the b.s. discussion
> > > group has enough data to know with certainty what the recovery will be
> > > on any well.
>
> > > brigham exploration has published the most information on this. bexp
> > > seems convinced that they are able to subatantially increase initial
> > > rate and this may mean greater recovery.
>
> > > bexp's corporate presentation implies that higher initial rate =
> > > greater recovery. imo, this is probably the case, but we really dont
> > > know.
>
> > > based upon my own analysis, template decline curve estimates (x times
> > > initial rate or x times 30,60,90 or 365 day cumulative) cannot be
> > > applies with any certainty.
>
> > > On Oct 9, 9:00 pm, Bobcat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > > Anyone,
> > > > Is it known that multistage fracing is better in all circumstances?
>
> > > > I am not knowledgable on this at all but from data posted here and
> > > > other references, it seems that multistage fracing yields better
> > > > initial production rates but is also more costly to implement.
>
> > > > What is the effect on ultimate recovery? Also, what about a variable
> > > > such as the length of the h lateral?
>
> > > > Is it possible that there is a cost benefit tradeoff here? Just
> > > > asking.
>
> > > > I accept as a given that Anschutz has capable/qualified staff that
> > > > know what they are looking at in terms of their options. There must
> > > > be some underlying facts that they are pondering.
>
> > > > That they state that they are "leaning toward" multi indicates to me
> > > > that it is a close call for some reason(s).
>
> > > > Bob
>
> > > > On Oct 9, 3:47 pm, "Rufus O'Malley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > > > thanks, will you let me know when that report is out, pls?
>
> > > > > On Oct 9, 4:49 pm, elwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > hi rufus,
> > > > > > there is nothing in july on that well. the august oil and gas
> > > > > > production report should be here in a few days.
>
> > > > > > i dont know of any good reason why anschutz wouldn't stage frac. it
> > > > > > would seem, based upon all published results, that it would pay off
> > > > > > in
> > > > > > a very short time.
>
> > > > > > On Oct 9, 4:04 pm, "Rufus O'Malley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > Hey, Elwood, you there buddy?
> > > > > > > C'mon, someone has an opinion out there!
> > > > > > > Ruf
>
> > > > > > > On Oct 8, 4:58 pm, "Rufus O'Malley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > Heya Elwood,
> > > > > > > > lol, the Penn V 10-142-95....in the 2Q Call to Earnings,
> > > > > > > > they said
> > > > > > > > that it came online at 650+ bopd, and that after finish work,
> > > > > > > > they
> > > > > > > > expected another 200+ or so in addtl daily....ever hear how that
> > > > > > > > turned out?
> > > > > > > > Why would Anschutz NOT stage frac??
>
> > > > > > > > On Oct 7, 9:54 am, elwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > if i may be so bold to ask, oh gladiator of the internet,
> > > > > > > > > which penn
> > > > > > > > > v well are you refering to ?
>
> > > > > > > > > On Oct 5, 5:41 pm, "Rufus O'Malley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > In listening to the recent batch of hearings on the
> > > > > > > > > > Anschutz requests,
> > > > > > > > > > when queried by the NDIC board about whether or not they
> > > > > > > > > > plan to stage
> > > > > > > > > > frac their upcoming drilling, the engineers said they are
> > > > > > > > > > still
> > > > > > > > > > considering the data from Marathon's unlined, single stage
> > > > > > > > > > fracs
> > > > > > > > > > delivering 'good' results in Dunn, to the data from the
> > > > > > > > > > Swell Packer
> > > > > > > > > > lining with multiple staged fracs. And that they are
> > > > > > > > > > 'leaning' toward
> > > > > > > > > > the staged fracing... but it cost another million on top of
> > > > > > > > > > the 4.5
> > > > > > > > > > million drilling cost.
> > > > > > > > > > What kind of 'good' production numbers are coming from
> > > > > > > > > > the Marathon
> > > > > > > > > > wells doing unlined and single fracs?
> > > > > > > > > > I just cannot believe with the production of Penn V, and
> > > > > > > > > > others using
> > > > > > > > > > 9-12 stage fracs that they would even consider sinking the
> > > > > > > > > > 4.5 on the
> > > > > > > > > > risk of low-moderate-'good' production vs. outstanding
> > > > > > > > > > production with
> > > > > > > > > > the lined/multi.
> > > > > > > > > > With the dismal results Anschutz got with their early
> > > > > > > > > > bakken wells,
> > > > > > > > > > why would they not just go Multi-stage
> > > > > > > > > > I do not understand the corporate or technical thinking on
> > > > > > > > > > that
> > > > > > > > > > 'unlined' option?
> > > > > > > > > > opinions anybody?- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Bakken Shale Discussion" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/bakken-shale-discussion?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
