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...

Views: 16524


Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Were they (the wells) not economical or were they NOT AS economical ?

Higher natural geo-pressure will always make wells in that area more economical than wells in a lower geo-pressure area (if the developer finds what he's drilling for / hopes to find) the way I see it.

Also it depends what you're trying to harvest doesn't it ? In other words you may have higher geo-pressure but NOT the production you're looking for.

An E & P may be looking for Oil in a higher geo-pressure area and only find Dry Gas.

I see the pressure gradient thing as an important factor / indicator but other variables kick in too (not the least of which is the sell price of the harvested production) seems to me anyway.


wondering why there is a well in Guernsey county Ohio producing over 600 barrel a day but you say the oil window is not economical at this time  56,000 barrels in 3 months time

Do you think they're storing it for sale later ?

I think that's a possibility myself.

What the heck the well's already developed and if it's a gusher probably costs very little to simply harvest and store.

Also they may have a contract to supply some outfit(s) at higher (older) price ?

I think I might be on to something myself.

How about you Mr. Mike ?

that was reported sales for the second quarter of 2015 nothing stored all sold

Your 1st reply said it was 'producing over 600 barrels a day'.

Took that as current production which was why I wrote what I wrote.

Thanks for the clarification.

Hello JJ,

   I'm a long time follower and contributor (but not recently) to this website. I've closely followed developments, particularly in the SE Ohio portion of the Utica. It appears that your analysis is "oil-oriented", and your observations are relevant. 

   For purely economic reasons (why else?!?), the current drilling programs are focused on the dry gas zone, particularly in Belmont & Monroe Counties and extending into WVA. Very large dry gas IP wells (+55MMcfd) have been drilled in this region over the past several months by multiple E&P's (EQT, GPOR, Rice, et. al.). This would seem to be consistent with your premise as the Point Pleasant formation is deeper and the reservoir pressures have been reported to be huge. Most of these drillers have adopted pressure control measures to maintain steady production up to 2 years. These assertions can be confirmed via type curves and rhetoric published by Rice, GPOR and others on their investor presentations.

   It would be interesting for you to add a gradient to your charts for the dry gas region. I'm guessing it would exceed the gradients in the more westerly regions. How much is the question?? Really, from a gradient perspective, there may be multiple additional zones as Point Pleasant depth descends in an easterly direction.



Good to read your reply BluFlame.

Long time no hear from.

I know 'JJ's' reply is very relevant but I don't think it' s the whole story.

I think there are a lot of other factors that contribute and / or will contribute and hopefully not in the too distant future.

Good to read your comments again.

Stick around !
Hi Joseph, The wells were not economical. This is a depth issue and applies to the Utica and Marcellus. Both formations become shallow therefore generating less pressure and the product increases in oil as you move West. It was discovered during operations that there was a limit to the ability to move fluids if the wells were not deep enough to generate enough pressure. These maps were made after the fact. What was found is that a minimum of a .6 pressure gradient was necessary for drilling an economic well when prices were at their highest. The second map (bubble map over pressure gradient) shows increased flow rates to the east and lower flow rates and pressures moving West therefore explaining the areas of activitiy. Someday they may find a way to make this work.
Wondering if (approximately) 5500 feet is too shallow for the Utica's overburden to create sufficient lift pressure ?

Read earlier where one developer indicated they needed minimally 4000' overburden.

Probably depends on the Utica's consistency specific to the well (wet / oily / dry).

I am confused as to why the section on your original map with gradient of .6/ft  is Best Area for Oil and PSI while the area with a higher  gradient of .7/ft is Second Best area for Oil and PSI.

Most likely can answer my own question by the .6/ft area is labeled as "Rich Condy" while the .7/ft is "Lean Condy".

Thanks in advance for your explanation.

I am new to what you are saying, i can get an idea of the depth of the point pleasant but how do you get the pressure gradient?
The pressure gradients were unknown until wells were drilled. What they learned is summarized on the two maps. That is why the initial leases West of the .6 gradient line were dropped. Not because of price but because of increased oil but not enough pressure generated to move enough fluids to make a profit.


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

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service