Tuesday, May 20, 2008

The End Of The (C.R.) Line In Mountrail?

Data from the EOG McAlmond 1-5H well, sec 5, T155, R89, Mountrail Co., indicates that area is east of the area of oil generation, or the Continuous Reservoir as described by the USGS. The company found virtually no oil shows either in the mid-Bakken or in the shales, indicating that the shales are too shallow to have initiated generation of hydrocarbons. Background gas was only around 30 units when it should be in the thousands. The upper shale is found in this area at a subsea depth of about -6600 ft. Some better shows were found near the bottom of the lower shale, which is about 70 ft below the top of the upper shale.

What makes this somewhat surprising is that this area is only about a half dozen miles northeast of active development in the Austin area of Parshall Field, where some of the most prolific producers have been found. Since the mid-Bakken in the McAlmond well was not saturated with oil, it is appears that oil migration from the area of generation may not be a
s widespread as hoped. While there may be some extensive horizontal fracture systems that are capable of charging the mid-Bakken with hydrocarbons in areas beyond the area of active generation, such a system apparently doesn't exist in the immediate area of the McAlmond well.

21 comments:

Anonymous said...

Theoretical TTI maps and maturity models are just that, theoretical.

The bit continues to tell the true oil generation story in the (laterally zoned) Bakken.

Now move the rig over to the next section...

Anonymous said...

Whitings May Corporate Presentation seems to be ever growing over the last few days and it seems to kind of fit with whats happening here.

Larry said...

No one likes to talk about dry holes.

EOG's McAlmond Section 5 well is definitely a dry hole.

The drilling report for Behm's EDWARDS 1-33 BH well in Osloe Township will not be available until August 11. All indications suggest Behm found no oil.

Early scuttlebutt on EOG's Clearwater Section 2 well is not good.

The Mountrail County sweetspot may not be as large as hoped for.

david said...

speaking of wells that didn't turn out, have you seen any data on Andes section 12 151 90 Fertile Twp?

Larry said...

I read the drilling report on FERTILE 1-12H. The report seemed to say EOG had drilling problems with the well and if I recall correctly there was little or no information regarding the presence or absence of oil bearing rock.

Anonymous said...

"Early scuttlebutt on EOG's Clearwater Section 2 well is not good."

So what info is out? Any news on the Hess well 5 miles south?

Larry said...

The Hess well in Section 36 of Clearwater is likely a producer.

Larry said...

NDIC sent a ding letter to EOG on May 15, 2008 asking for the Geological Report on FERTILE 1-12H.

Anonymous said...

Anyone know total number of wells BEXP drilled in Elm Coulee.

Larry said...

Here is the website for the Montana Oil and Gas Department. If you find the data, please post it.

http://bogc.dnrc.state.mt.us/jdpIntro.htm

Anonymous said...

The Williston Basin is full of oil, it's just a matter of how deep you have to drill to find it.

Anonymous said...

"The drilling report for Behm's EDWARDS 1-33 BH well in Osloe Township will not be available until August 11. All indications suggest Behm found no oil."

It looks like Behm's drilled 7 or 8holes in the ground in that general area (all on the confidential list). I'm just curious, but why would anyone be that aggressive if they weren't fairly confident they would find oil?

Larry said...

Getting a permit for 8 holes costs $100 each plus the cost to survey the proposed wellsite.

Drilling one hole can cost up to $5million.

Behm only drilled one hole and then Fidelity assumed control of the drilling rig.

Anonymous said...

behm has only drilled one well so far. they have permits for 7 ..some have posted here that the first well was a dry well. also some one posted that behm was going to go vertical with that well and go deeper to test other formations. nothing more has been posted here about behm..so no one knows exactly what has happen until behm comes off the confidental list in august..i wish some would up date us on it..

Anonymous said...

Drove out to the Clearwater 2 well sight tonight. They have a well head on it and doing site prep for tanks. The site looks ready for a workover rig. Discussed well with one of the hands on the rig.....he reported they clearly hit oil. He did not elaborate.

Anonymous said...

Can anyone explain why some Bakken wells are producing where the structure is only 5,500' deep such as in Divide County? Seems like it wouldn't be deep enough for 'thermal maturity'.

Anonymous said...

i dont have much specific information, but i believe the bakken was burried deeper than it is currently, in some locations. on the canadian side the bakken is productive at shallower depths. either the oil migrated there (contrary to what price is claiming) or the rock was burried deeper.
also depth does not always correlate with temperature. apparently there is a heat and conductivity anomoly parallel to the nesson anticline. i really dont know much about this anomoly, just what i have read on the usgs site.

Anonymous said...

I don't have access to production figures but could someone list them by wells/county.
So we can look at diffrent rates.
If possible and you have time to do it.

Anonymous said...

Wells/Townships/Production !!!

Anonymous said...

"dont have asscess to production figures....."

you would have to contact the industrial commission. there is a charge for current production data online. historical data is also available(additional charges). i believe, however that the data is public information and should be available in bismark.

Anonymous said...

"Can anyone explain why some Bakken wells are producing where the structure is only 5,500' deep such as in Divide County? Seems like it wouldn't be deep enough for 'thermal maturity'.

May 21, 2008 7:39 PM"


Erosion. Nothing I have ever read has provided me with details on just how much of the countryside was removed by past glaciations. One could infer though that White Butte (likely capped with a sandstone) at an elevation of 3,506 ft MSL should provide the minimum erosion. That's almost 1800 ft higher than eastern ND.