ODNR releases 4th QTR Production Reports

finally

Views: 7143

Attachments:

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Booger on April 25, 2014 at 9:09am

....here are 8 super wells that are not listed above because they had less than 75 days production.......some are crazy good....the gary was highest overall producer for the quarter and did it in just 44 days averaging nearly 20,000mcf/day......Ryser was 9th best producer for the qtr and did it in just 59 days averaging 437bbl oil/day.

MONROE

SENECA

GARY UNIT

HARRISON

MOOREFIELD

RYSER

HARRISON

MOOREFIELD

RYSER

HARRISON

MOOREFIELD

BK STEPHENS

HARRISON

MOOREFIELD

BK STEPHENS

HARRISON

MOOREFIELD

RYSER

BELMONT

WASHINGTON

IRONS

HARRISON

CADIZ

CNXHAR10N5W
Permalink Reply by Bluflame on April 25, 2014 at 9:20am

Since NGL's are disregarded, the total $$ are understated. Seems like it would have been easy to include that in the mix. Since ethane is currently priced at equivalent methane BTU content, ethane rejection or recovery is a non-factor in revenue projections.

 

BluFlame

Permalink Reply by Booger on April 25, 2014 at 9:43am

agreed................maybe someday they will report it seperate.

Permalink Reply by James Vanderink on April 25, 2014 at 10:50am
Looks like PDC has found a secret in Guernsey! Congrats David R Hill Inc!
0i7okn54zwbdoPermalink Reply by 0i7okn54zwbdo on April 25, 2014 at 3:15pm

The reason they don't report it is because there's no way for companies to have accurate wellhead data.  Some ethane stays in the stream, some doesn't.  Those things don't necessarily happen at the wellhead, they happen further down the sales line.  So to have to report it would be chaotic.  Or maybe everyone's just lazy.  But I agree, it certainly distorts the overall dollar value.  If you were really enterprising (not you, specifically Booger) you'd go to company presentations, find what percentage of the gas was wet, how much dry shrink there was, and make a calculation that way.

Permalink Reply by The Rooster on April 25, 2014 at 6:09pm

Looks like Harrison is the eye of the storm. 

Permalink Reply by Jon on April 25, 2014 at 6:18pm

The lateral length can be different too

Permalink Reply by Philip Thackray on April 26, 2014 at 12:51am

Marcus,

Here in PA the NGL numbers are also not released by DEP.  I’m in a producing XTO unit and was told that the quantity of each hydrocarbon C1-C4 is measured at the well head and transmitted to the mother ship by a cell phone like system.  Is that not true/not possible?

There are two wells in this unit now (more later).  In the “report” that comes with the monthly check the Residual gas, NGL and condensate quantities are called out separately for each well.  That seems to imply that these quantities can be measured at the well head.  Also, the price for NGLs from one well will differ slightly from the other well which I believe tracks the composition percentage of Butane(s) and Propane and their relative sales prices.  XTO is currently rejecting all the ethane.

However measured, these quantities are assigned to a particular well and could be reported that way to the DEP and the DEP could publish that information along with the gas and oil numbers.  It must be that the reporting law is just not written that way.

This afternoon I will see a well report (first monthly check) from a neighbor who is in a REX unit.  I believe that REX is selling some ethane as a purity product.  I’ll be interested to see how that is listed on the report.

Regards,

Phil

Permalink Reply by Bluflame on April 26, 2014 at 12:03pm

Philip,

 I also believe it could be done. Minimally, they can determine the "liquids" content after separating out the condensate at the well pad. I mean several E & P's have been reporting that number on their monthly investor presentations, so why shouldn't ODNR require it to be reported? For instance, GPOR reported 2000 brls/day NGL's for Shugert 1-12H. The NGL number (and the associated decline of methane production) is a very important component of overall well economics.

  Under any circumstances, It is safe to assume that well economics in the Utica wet gas zone are better (much better, in some cases) than reported in the ODNR numbers.

BluFlame

Permalink Reply by Philip Thackray on April 26, 2014 at 12:19pm

Blu,

This afternoon I saw a recent royalty landowner check stub (report) for a new Rex well here in Forward Township, Butler County PA.

Residual gas production and two separate NGL quantities are reported for each individual well (again a two well pad).  Judging from the prices I believe that the two NGL quantities are Propane and Butane.  The prices are too high to be ethane, and condensate if any is reported on a separate line.  (This is not a heavy condensate area.)

I'm pretty confident that all hydrocarbons can be measured at the well head.

Phil

Permalink Reply by Busy Bee on April 26, 2014 at 12:11am
What's your thoughts on the Buell well . I believe it has the longest history of them all. If my memory serves me correctly it's been in production for 3 years now.
Permalink Reply by searcherone on April 27, 2014 at 4:34am

Here is Bob Downing of the Akron Beacon Journal analysis of the 4th quarter report;   several comments related to the northern Ohio Utica counties.  Also he says 4th quarter numbers show why companies are going for Monroe and Belmont counties.

http://www.ohio.com/blogs/drilling/ohio-utica-shale-1.291290/diggin...

RSS

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

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service