Open to any and all respectful discussions of our mutual interests,  in any state or county. feel free to go off-track here since there are no tracks.

Views: 12173

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

the nearest pad has been pumping out gas for years, it's just sad that the planned line through the woods for a mile was dropped because of one false claim. 

false claims hurt everyone in one way or another.

OT - thanks for this discussion topic and your informed responses.   I appreciate your insights and knowledge of the issues we all face as landowners.   Looking ahead through 2019 and beyond how would view the various gas companies drilling in central & western PA?   In particular, EQT, CNX Resources, XTO Energy & Range Resources.   Other smaller companies would include Huntley & Huntley and Apex.   EQT seems to have a big battle ahead for it`s primary structure & management direction.  CNX seems to be wheeling somewhat because of the Shaw Utica well problem.   When will they venture further into Central PA?  Can they survive with a primary focus on Utica gas?   Range seems to have their act completely in place with strength for the future.   XTO seems to be solid but without a visible plan.  The two smaller companies seem to be moving forward under the radar.  What do you and others think?

During the initial vertical well drilling for delineation purposes, would the core sample reveal whether the shale is over cooked?  I`m thinking of the Utica, Point Pleasant & Trenton layers.  Would that core sample be a sign that the entire layer is over cooked or just at that point?  From that initial sample is it common to continue on with the horizontal lateral?

What would the BTU reading be for an over cooked Utica/Point Pleasant well?   Is there a cut-off point to determine feasibility to drill or not drill?

i recall around 2011 Penn States Prof. Engelder's theory of overmature shale being presented. at the time it sounded quite possible. thoughts were that as the shale deepened up into NE Pa. & over the iron curtain into NY, the increased depth and temp. would have cooked out the methane and converted to CO2. on it's way to anthracite coal. he felt this condition was less likely towards Ohio since the formation was not as deep. i remember an old master driller with Ensign mumbling "the only way we'll know if these GD college boys are right is to drill the s--t ! " well it's been drilled and the "overcooked theory" is now a chapter in history.

Not certain I completely understand...when the methane is cooked off there shouldn`t be any BTU value, correct?  Are you saying it`s not too lightly to encounter over cooked Utica?  I`m speaking about CPA in the Indiana & Jefferson counties area.

the recoverable methane would be gone at some point. old shale then becomes coal. old coal becomes diamonds i believe. it is especially unlikely to encounter "overcooked" Utica down your way. being shallower it hasn't been subjected to the higher temps. and pressure which contribute to maturing beyond commercial viability for NG extraction.

Thanks OT,  is there a reasonable lower limit to Btu values to make a drill or no drill decision?  Would the initial core sample indicate the Btu value for the targeted shale layer?   Is it feasible to blend a lower Btu Utica shale gas with a higher Marcellus gas to take advantage of the Utica volume?

core samples reveal organic content and target production depth. higher OC produces higher gas. BTU ranges in the U.S. are aprox. 950-1150. pure methane 1010. 1030 national av.  shale dry gas closer to 1040. ethane 1770. propane 2516. the blending occurs via higher BTU gas, containing liquids, mixed with lower via ethane rejection. mixing wet/dry. there are BTU limits for domestic use so the practice is controlled within a BTU range. WV is the high state i believe @ 1100 BTU on transmission.

OT - with your last reply does organic content indicate Btu values in the core sample or does the well need to be drilled to determine Btu?  What is generally accepted as an acceptable lower Btu point?

organic content would tend to correlate with gas volume potential. the gas being trapped in shale refered to as "adsorbed'. i'm not sure if enough gas sample could be obtained to determine BTU content. with coal samples they do determine BTU, ash content, flash points etc. having said that i have never heard of low BTU gas being an issue in our region. i believe 1040 as a low range here would be close. if i recall, Kansas produces the high 900's gas. also i'm not a geologist,just an old engineer. anyone out there that has input could probably teach us all alot more in this area.


© 2019   Created by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher).   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service