- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Haynesville Shale
Posted on 7/8/08 at 9:57 pm to pittboss33
Posted on 7/8/08 at 9:57 pm to pittboss33
Obviusly you know me and although I know who you are I can't rember if I personally know you. I believe i may have spoke to your dad recently, is that correct? anyway I agree that the wells logs all do not show SHALE however some have told me that the lack of shale doesn't rule out the productivity of the formations. The thing thats pointed out to me is that the way things where drilled and fracd in the past are not the way of today which could or would make a difference. Also i was told by clutcher that another reason for the ignoring of that area was due to a lack of transmision. Keep in mind and be patient with me as i'm like a salmon swimming upstream trying to educate myself on where this water is comming from! 
1
Posted on 7/9/08 at 12:34 am to bazeball
bazeball, thanks for the link to LA RS 30:10. I believe it contains some of the information I asked about previously. I'm not sure how it's interpreted, but I'll be able to show it to my lawyer as I try to sort all this out.
Posted on 7/9/08 at 7:47 am to acadiana
The Haynesville sand can be productive. I don't know if Crystal drilled any wells in your area though. I don't blame you, if I had land still in that area, I'd be hoping it was there, too.
Posted on 7/9/08 at 8:50 am to pittboss33
One of the persons i speak with was with crystal in those days. He tells me they didn't drill any of those horizontal. And that was what i was talking about. Also the well that's being reworked north of me was p&A due to the sand from the frak job silting it in to no production, whereas i'm being told they intend to use some of the more recent frak technology to make it productive. I read a log, though again im a salmon, that reflected initial gas shows that where comparable to some iv seen from the southern part of the parish before it peetered out. Wouldn't it be correct to say that the shale will not be the only play in the years to come? Again do I know you personnaly or have we met?
Posted on 7/9/08 at 9:19 am to acadiana
Samson Forcap 22#1 well right north of Benton was drilled last year and was a dry hole with no shale and no gas shows in the Haynesville formation. J-W #1 Rumbaugh on Caddo side southeast of Benton had a very very thin shale section, and was effectively a dry hole due to the lack of shale. These were both recent wells and they have helped establish the northern limits to the play. There are going to be some Haynesville Sand, Smackover, and Cotton Valley zones left to pick over to the north, but bonus money will be equal to what the rate is for all non-HS formations, about $150-$400 per acre range depending on where you are at.
Posted on 7/9/08 at 9:50 am to TigerDog83
But tiger the mere fact that it may or may not be shale vs sandstone does not automatically mean it cannot be productive, isn't that correct? And i guess the point your trying to make is that no leasing will have big dollars for sighn on unless a good shale show is present. this i understand but pardon my ignorance on the subject but if for example the haynsville sand gave up a comparible gas to a shale formation wouldnt the money be equal too? The sighn on money is not the issue im interested in but its more the understanding on the differentiation between the shale and the sandstone in regards to value. I know that the sonnier property along benton is not in the shale and their $$$$$$$ and production is in the ballpark with the things happening in south caddo and bossier.
Posted on 7/9/08 at 10:01 am to acadiana
The reason that nobody pays top dollar for the traditional Smackover, Haynesville Sand, and Cotton Valley plays is that they are often lenticular and vary widely in quality and productiveness. Reservoirs like the Barnett and the Haynesville Shale are fairly predictable and there is limited geologic risk inside defined areas versus traditional plays where many faults, changes in porosity, etc. often limit success. That is the difference in lease bonuses and why no one is going to pay more than the $150-$400 range for the Cotton Valley, Smackover, Travis Peak, Haynesville Sand, etc. The Sonnier lands are on the edge of the shale most likely, so it's not surprising they got a higher bonus because someone is speculating that they might have a little bit of the shale there. They certainly didn't receive anywhere near what the rates are in South Caddo, etc. where the shale is definitely productive. And the Cotton Valley wells on their lands drilled by Southern Star have been average at best, and their production is a tiny fraction of the CHK wells in South Caddo. Nobody is going to make an average of anywhere close to 6.5 BCF per well in anything other than the Haynesville/Lower Bossier shales. Big difference.
This post was edited on 7/9/08 at 10:05 am
Posted on 7/9/08 at 12:48 pm to TigerDog83
That makes sense, and helps my understanding. So that being said do you foresee in the future say once the major work on the shale is done that some operators will move out in these non shale areas?
Posted on 7/9/08 at 1:04 pm to TigerDog83
TigerDog...Would a unit having several wells that have collectively produced over 6.2 BCF be considered a good unit?
Posted on 7/9/08 at 1:07 pm to acadiana
quote:
That makes sense, and helps my understanding. So that being said do you foresee in the future say once the major work on the shale is done that some operators will move out in these non shale areas?
It will probably happen soon with the smaller operators. These types of players aren't big enough to go heads up against the public companies in the shale, but they have the ability and knowledge to produce these other reservoirs. Many of them have been active in NW LA for decades unlike some of the upstart public groups.
Posted on 7/9/08 at 1:15 pm to TigerDog83
quote:
Many of them have been active in NW LA for decades unlike some of the upstart public groups.
Agreed. We're working with Caruthers down in Caldwell parish and while the lease per acre is much smaller; they're ready to drill a well this year if we sign.
Posted on 7/9/08 at 1:17 pm to TigerDog83
Do you concure with some of what i have been told in the sense that some ofthe new tech will make some of the older formations that where abandoned productive, I.E. frak, and horizontal?
Posted on 7/9/08 at 1:24 pm to acadiana
quote:
Do you concure with some of what i have been told in the sense that some ofthe new tech will make some of the older formations that where abandoned productive, I.E. frak, and horizontal?
It could, but many of these areas are already heavily produced and depleted. Bonuses aren't going to be any more than $150-$400 per acre for these kinds of plays.
Posted on 7/9/08 at 1:36 pm to TigerDog83
Tigerdog i have one more question and thats about isopatch points. what exactly are they? Oh by the way thank you bundles for helping people here and answering questions, if you come to the DELTA WATERFOWL BANQUET on august 1st find me i will buy you a drink! 
Posted on 7/9/08 at 1:41 pm to acadiana
Isopach points are used for data on thickenss maps. Everywhere you see an "ispoach point", that is a data point (well) that is used to provide a value for the thickness of a formation through log analysis.
Posted on 7/9/08 at 1:44 pm to TigerDog83
I guess those are not public information as i noted a bunch them in north bossier.
Posted on 7/9/08 at 2:01 pm to acadiana
Most of the ones to the North on Petrohawk's map (I assume that's why you asked the question) are zero out points, meaning they do not have the zone present and therefore they get assigned a "0" value.
Posted on 7/9/08 at 3:23 pm to TigerDog83
State Lease Sale today brought in 46 million. Bids in the Haynesville Shale area ranged from 23k - 30k/acre. Approximately $82MM this year total (last sale netted $36MM). I think last year total State Lease Sale revenue was well below $30MM. Insanity. And there is still more to come! Rumor has it that it's Petrohawk paying the premium and it is trying to put itself in a position to sell - either its Shale assets or the whole company.
Posted on 7/9/08 at 9:16 pm to cwill
Would that be a good thing for Petrohawk to sell?
Posted on 7/9/08 at 9:49 pm to pittboss33
I recently leased my Bossier land North of PD within the bonus price range mentioned in earlier posts after becoming convinced HS petered out south of me and after reviewing past drilling activity. Most of the activity in that area was in the 1980s, almost 280 completed wells in T23N for instance, with around 60 still in production! Haynesville Sand, Cotton Valley, Pettet Lime, and other zones all produced at one time or another. The larger percentage have been oil but some are gas. None are big producers, a few bbl or a few thousand cfe per day. Serveral others are shown as being reworked an/or injected. The OG was willing to exclude the Haynesville Shale from my lease to get the deal done. I was very willing to exclude it to get on with any exploitation of the other zones!
Page 39 of 59
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News