Comment

Comment by gary smith on February 28, 2013 at 1:54am

thats where you morph into wet gas. 45 is the top end of light crude. at least thats the way i read it. condensates are between 45 and 70.   ''don't let your crude oils grow up to be condensates''  rbn energy llc.       google that.

Comment by rex roae on February 27, 2013 at 8:12pm

Gary, what I read says, "Above 45 degrees the molecular chains become shorter and less valuable to refineries".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/API_gravity

So if we're above 60, that wouldn't be too good from the sounds of it.  Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Comment by gary smith on February 27, 2013 at 5:22pm

the api gravity degree is the heaviness of the condensate.  internet source says that the most valuble is between 40 and 45 .  light crude being above 35. the numbers given are all good compared to the eagle ford and other plays. we're in good shape here.

Comment by sldouglass on February 27, 2013 at 4:57pm

I would be amazed to see a decline curve of 90% in one year. Anything can happen, but most of the information made public indicates that in the first two years about half of the well production will occur before the well settles down to a gentle curve over the long haul. There is not all that much experience with Utica and Marcellus wells but similar production has been going on for a long time in the Barnett in Texas.

Comment by sldouglass on February 27, 2013 at 4:50pm

I cannot figure out why anyone would sign a marketing agreement that ties a landowner up to one outfit's say so.

Comment by markkot on February 27, 2013 at 4:06pm

Can anybody shed any light on the significance of the '63 gravity condensate' and the meaning of the 'reservoir pressure gradient of approx. .55psi/ft'.  It was important enough for them to provide the info to potential investors, so I'm wondering how those 2 bits of info come into play.  thx, mark

Comment by gary smith on February 27, 2013 at 2:48pm

sam, my nickname is sgt shultz. anyway, the well in venango was a marcellus, cooperstown i believe. an old well close by blew out when they fracked,taking away the power of the frack. thats what i heard anyway. as to your other questions, i have no idea. common sense and what we all have learned about this drilling is they can go back down and shoot it again.

Comment by Samuel J. Orr on February 27, 2013 at 2:37pm

Gary Smith: Where and when did Range drill in Venango and what was the nature of the problem? Was it geology or was it a technical screwup? Did they publish results of well? In regard to Lippert, How do they re-stimulate, how long does it take, how thereafter do they have to wait to re-evaluate the well? Do you have any knowledge about the specifics of what contributed to the poor results and how they remedy tha?. Can they plug the nearby well you mentioned as possibly causing the poor results? If so, is this likely to be effective? These questions are directed not only to you but any petroleum geologists, any O&G drilling engineers, or any persons other persons who may be able to shed light on the questions I have posed! Thank you for the information that you have already provided.

Comment by rex roae on February 27, 2013 at 2:36pm

Disappointing but appreciate the info.

Comment by gary smith on February 27, 2013 at 2:28pm

not a clue. obviously the frack method or formula of mixture but in venango they made a mistake by not plugging a close by well. they are getting into unexplored territory this far north . it'll work out.

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 62
• 63
• 64
• 65
• 66
• …
• 151
• Next ›
• Page