WOW. and WOW. Thanks Steve and Elwood and KCP... What are the 'attributes' common to the fields in MT where these concepts are being heavily invested? Elwood called them 'perameters'.... Do they for instance, all have wells producting >XXX bopd? >xxx mcfs, depths, formations, water per day ? Wondering if there is a way to correlate the data of the MT areas to similar areas on the ND side to shoot a hypothesis where this might be applicable. I know that due to the Parshall/Sanish fields success ratios it would appear on the surface (no pun intended, sorry) that they would be likely candidates ... but that may not be true if we check the 'data fields' ... This is really, really interesting, let's bounce this ball around a little more... facinating. Totally facinating.
On Nov 5, 11:37 am, "Rufus O'Malley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hiya Elwood, > I'm still not getting this -- must need another cuppa coffee and a > sugar donut -- from what I read, the 'primary units', meaning the > original 1280's, were drilled. Then those producing 1280's were > combined with other producing 1280's (one or two) to create new units > with new spacing rules... > First, WHY are these super-units being created? Secondly, if I am > understanding your post, it does mean that any single section or > portion of a section CAN be included in multiple units, is that > correct? Then the same royalty formulas apply. Anybody know what is > being accomplished in the MT attempts at these super units? Is it > being done on the ND side? Where and why? > Thanks Elwood! > Ruuf > > On Nov 5, 6:10 am, elwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > rufus, there are other types of units than drilling units (where every > > mineral acre is equal to every other mineral acre). iow, other > > parameters can be brought into play, like cumulative production, net > > hydrocarbon pore volume, current production rate, acres, number of > > usable wells and each tract is given a participation in the unit > > according to the weighting of each of these parameters. this is done > > typically for a secondary recovery unit although i have seen a case > > where a unit was formed just to manage primary production. and if this > > type unit is created, every mineral (and working interest owner) would > > participate in the entire unit according to their unit participation. > > > a federal exploratory unit is another animal and i will let someone > > who knows more about the subject comment on that. > > > On Nov 4, 9:18 pm, "Rufus O'Malley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Anybody home out there? What, no opinions? No theories? > > > Ruf > > > > On Nov 3, 12:33 pm, "Rufus O'Malley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > I recently read that in Montana there has been some activity with > > > > merging 2, and even 3 1280-acre spacing units to create mega-spacing > > > > units with entirely new well density allowances.... I can't seem to > > > > backtrack to the article to post it, but the gist of it was that once > > > > a 1280 had hit it's max density, that it merges with an adjacent 1280 > > > > to create a 2560 or merges 3 separate 1280's to create a 3840-acre > > > > unit where addt wells with different orientations are being allowed. > > > > Anybody hear anything else about this? If this IS being done, it > > > > brings me to the following question: > > > > How many spacing units can an individual section,or portion thereof, > > > > be part of? > > > > For example: let's take a section 4 over 9 standup - can section 4 > > > > concommitantly be in a section 5 and 4 laydown unit? And then again, > > > > into a 4-3 laydown unit at the same time... ?? > > > > Rufus- 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
