Thursday, January 31, 2008

Whiting Hits It Big, Sanish Field, Mountrail Co.

Thanks to the reader for finding this Whiting press release. A surprising gas volume in that Liffrig well at 1.7 mmcfd.

15 comments:

Anonymous said...

Just ran across this article and don't know if anybody else has.

http://seekingalpha.com/article/60933-the-bakken-trend-lost-dutchmen-mine-of-the-oil-patch

Larry said...

Thus far it appears the big Bakken producers are along two structures: an east-west structure in Knife River, Crane Creek, Wayzetta, and Shell Townships and a north-south structure in Austin, Wayzetta, and Parshall Townships.

Anonymous said...

Thanks. Interesting article.

Ken said...

Teegue's excellent Bakken Shale blog has been a valuable resource for me (I'm dangerously overweighted in some of the companies frequently mentioned here) for almost a year, but I have never bothered to register a name, preferring instead to post messages anonymously. I recently compared the advantages of registering a name (common curtesy to our hard working host, avoidance of being confused with other anonymous posters, possible lifetime free membership for named charter members when our man on the ground in the Bakken Shale becomes famous and starts charging membership fees, etc.) with the disadvantages (none), and I finally decided to quit lurking in the shadows and register a name! It was really quick and simple, even for me.

Seriously, the number of posts to the blog is growing faster than oil production in Mountrail County, and I think discussions among ourselves will be more personal and meaningful if we all have names rather than (like me before today) anonymous responding to anonymous responding to anonymous. Just my opinion.

Finally, thanks Teegue for your foresight in recognizing the potential of the Bakken Shale in the early days of the play and initiating your valuable service.

Larry said...

In the January 24, 2008 edition of the RMOJ they wrote: "According to the latest production reports filed with the state, EOG's Austin 1-02H made 31,231 barrels of oil for the month of November 2007."

Does anyone know how RMOJ obtains access to production information on a confidential well when that information is not available to us who subscribe to the NDIC database?

RMOJ also reported that Austin 2-03H produced 37,920 barrels of oil in November 2007.

Steve said...

I want to echo what Ken said above. This site has been a great site for news and discussion about this exciting play. This exploration is at full steam ahead, with likely many surprises as this goes forward. It is great to hear on a timely basis what is really happening and also the discussion helps a layperson better understand what's going on. Keep it coming!

Earl said...

Enjoy checking in and reading the Bakken news as this play develops.
One thing I've noticed is that there are no comments on Sikes Township. 154-90, right west of Austin.. Also, no mention of the success Murex has had in Sec. 36 (a very good well) they have now permitted 2 more in Sikes, just completing one in 36-155-90 that looks very good. Also, Fri Whiting Pet. asked for 17 spacing units in Sikes. Murex got the rest done in August 07...

If you lay a ruler from the middle of Parshall field to the Ross Field, Sikes is right in the middle of the fairway, with Austin on the right flank, Robinson Lake on the west flank.. Interesting

Earl said...

Sorry, I meant to say Sikes, Sec. 36, 154-91; and Purcell Sec 36, 155-91

Larry said...

Earl,
Are you referring to MUREX PETROLEUM CORPORATION, JACOB DANIEL 25-36H, SWSW 36-154N-91W,(Sikes) Spud Date: 10/24/2007?

Murex ought to have completed that well by now. Do you have any details on its success?

I do know that Hess has completed drilling RS-STATE-156-90-1609H-1, SESE 16-156N-90W, (Palermo Township) Spud Date: 12/23/2007 and they are flaring the gas. I assume that is good news.

Earl said...

Yes, Jacob Daniel was completed at least a month ago, don't know the daily production, but has 8 400 bbl. tanks on location as well as a heck of a flare. Lots of loads of crude leaving regularly. If you notice on the Whiting map, page 52 of the pdf file,(referred to in an above letter) Whiting has an interest in the well.. Also, Murex had all of the Sec. 36 lease from the State Land Dept.
Yes, Hess is making good progress in the Palermo area now. Hope they don't goof it up, the record for them on the Bakken isn't the best....even though they have a lot of acreage.

andy said...

Northern Oil's web site has a map of their leases in Mountrail county.
http://www.northernoil.com/

david said...

The big mystery about the NOGS map are all the white sections in the area between the known EOG field and the NOGS holdings. I seriously doubt that any of the sections on the map are indeed not leaedt. I know for a fact that EOG is the primary owner of the leases in the row of sections 19-24 of 152-90 shown in white.
This map shows sections 30-27 going W-E as NOGS leases, with 26 as white. BUT EOG has already permitted a well on 26. Sections 30-27 will probably be permitted in the next few months, and I am extremely curious to see if those are listed as NOGS or EOG permits.
There is no doubt a lot of behind-the-scenes wheeling and dealing still going on between the claimed leaseholders in the areas adjacent to the Parshall field irrespective of the direction you go. I wish I were privy to some of this--it must be almost like an episode of "Dallas". I tend to believe that EOG has figured out a way to be involved in some way in most of these leases on what appear to be white sections adjacent to the Parshall field. In addition EOG seems to be moving westward to Van Hook TWP (153 90) even as Whiting heads East toward the same area.
Financially, EOG and Whiting (WLL) are much bigger than either Brigham (BEXP) or even smaller NOGS. This means that in large measure the former can pretty much finance their own drilling w/o seeking outside partners. NOGS financially is pretty much in a situation whereby if they are going to do drilling they need a bigger financial partner. As I read their financial statements, NOGS has very limited amounts of capital. As a consequence both NOGS and BEXP as leaseholders are a little like a couple poor but beatiful single girls at a party that happens to be attended by several single sons of millionaires. The leaseholds are attractive to these bigger players, and life could turn out rather nice for these attractive but poor girls, but it remains to be seen exactly who the suiters are and how everyone ultimately pairs up, if at all.

Meanwhile, I'm sensing that EOG and Whiting aren't particularly fond of each other. Each sees the other as possibly a strong competitor and its not surprising that they might not be that keen on each other (the "Dallas" episode stuff) EOG so far has gotten most of the attentiion, but Whiting is now trying to turn the attention toward them--and the new well might just do some of that. Most people had been thinking that the Parshall/Austin field is more productive than the Sanish area where Whiting has been drilling, but that could change too a new wells start to come in, and the other plsayers have all been waiting for EOG to stumble but so far that has not happened either. You talk about JR Ewing vs Clifford Barnes!
I think I need to do a "Dallas" type novel fabricating a story based on the Bakken Parshall/Sanish/Austin field players. I used to think all the stories about oil barrons etc on TV amnd movies were pure fabrication, but I'm beginning to now believe that many of them are more factual than I had ever realized. I was out to see
"There Will Be Blood" last weekend, and that movie is interesting background to all of this as how the various oil players got started in the first fiew decades of the 20th century.

Teegue said...

Keep in mind that company leasehold maps released to the public almost always indicate gross acreage. Thus, the company could own one percent or a hundred percent of the interest in the parcel they have highlighted. A company can have an entire section highlighted and actually control only ten or twenty undivided acres in that section. In these larger drilling units (640/1280) it's usually pretty difficult for one company to own 100% of that unit. So, a lot of these companies, who appear to be operating independently, are participating in the costs of the same wells even though they aren't the operator, either voluntarily or by forced pooling and risk penalties. Sometimes the majority interest owner isn't even the operator. Normally, in these large units, a number of companies that aren't overtly apparent are hoping that the operator has a successful well.

Anonymous said...

Any more details on RS-STATE-156-90-1609H-1, SESE 16-156N-90W? It sounds like it is producing. Does it appear to be an abnormally strong well compared to other Hess wells? Does it look more like the great wells to the south? I see there are 2 new permits offsetting it.

Anonymous said...

Anybody have any idea what a lease would bring in 152T, 92R in Mountrail County just South and adjacent to the Sanish field?