Name It: Where is the Sweet Spot in the Utica?

Have we finally determined what county is the sweet spot of the Utica shale play?

Views: 6966

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by shawn miller on June 11, 2014 at 12:18pm

Has to be trumbull or mahoning!!!  At least that is some peoples opinions!

Permalink Reply by The Rooster on June 11, 2014 at 12:21pm

yeah, has to be..lol.

Permalink Reply by shawn miller on June 11, 2014 at 12:38pm

Sorry that that doesnt awnser your post but i couldnt resist.  At least you seem to have a sense of humor.

Permalink Reply by bo boboski on June 11, 2014 at 2:52pm

Really?   REALLY?

Permalink Reply by bo boboski on June 11, 2014 at 2:57pm

Actually,  it depends on if your looking for gas,oil,or wet gases. each will be located in a different county, even down to what twp. in the county. If you atre looking for Oil,western Guernsey county may be the place, if you are looking for wet gases, east Guernsey/Noble /Harrison/Monroe, may be the place. Strictly gas, Belmont/Jefferson, & east.

Permalink Reply by Paul Martinelli on June 11, 2014 at 3:32pm

I would be looking for TOP DOG measured by $$$$$ per acre  produced.  Pure gross sales numbers per acre.

Permalink Reply by bo boboski on June 11, 2014 at 5:38pm

Good idea ,Paul. May even have to consider "per well'. since some pads may have 18 wells,in 3 formations. Then some laterals may be 3500 ft. some 11000 ft. Seems to me, the closer you get to the oil window,with still some wet gases, would be a likely spot. Oil @ $100.+ per barrel.

Permalink Reply by Busy Bee on June 11, 2014 at 8:10pm
Permalink Reply by jason irvine on June 11, 2014 at 9:00pm
Wv may be the sweet spot for dry gas. St Adler which lies on the border put out 32.5. With a 5050 lateral. The is 6435 per foot. Bigfoot was 5996 per foot of lateral. Either way. Anyone in any of those counties should do well.
Permalink Reply by searcherone on June 11, 2014 at 10:10pm

How about dollars produced by 1,000 ft of lateral?  That would make it a standard measurement and more comparable.   That would equal a more realistic figure because the laterals vary so much in length from well to well.

Permalink Reply by Paul Martinelli on June 12, 2014 at 8:41am

it is all about $$$$$$$$$

If I have an acre that has 3 laterals under it, from 3 formations,  or 1 lateral from 1 formation......which acre pays the most is my TOP-DOG  candidate......."1, 2,3,....the world may never know"

Permalink Reply by Bill Barnaby on June 12, 2014 at 8:58am

The issue with mmcf per foot is we don't know if that number would remain the same for another X amount of feet.

You could be in the hottest shale ever, and then 1000 feet later hit a dry area.

So you have could a 1000 foot lateral kicking out tons of product, and then have the 2ed half kicking out nothing.

RSS

© 2024   Created by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher).   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service