I just want to be clear that this is a map I made using the ITG information as a base map. I would be happy to discuss my findings.
Another map - https://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/97616115?profil...
this map is 2 years old a lot of new info has been produced since then making this map out dated there has been many new wells drilled since then with big results outside of your so called fairway look at Wetzel county wv for example look at uticas in pa drilled by shell
need to up date your map look at Washington and greene counties in pa
I am adding 1 more map for you. The bottom line is to be economically viable, a .6 gradient or more is essential, Less than that and all companies have pulled out of those areas. Moving East, the wells become bigger because the PSI gradient will higher and dryer with depth. This is an overlay of my PSI Gradient Map over Initial results. The base map was provided by friends of mine. My updated maps are being used for professional reasons.
J J I, interesting discussion you started here. When you project the gradient lines into the NE, Crawford, Mercer, Venango, how did you determine where to project the lines given the lack of data points, and is that why you cut the map at that point? Also, a source told me the Staab well by Pymatuning contained paraffin, which has slowed that production (or ceased it). What comment/opinion would you care to make, given that info, or any more you'd care to share. What comments would you make on Crawford Co, overall.
Thanks, in advance, mark
© 2023 Created by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher). Powered by