top of page

Oily Stuff

Public·25 members

Oh Boy !

Click to Read
Click to Read

Try not to get too excited about this. Remember, the USGS's estimate of these resources are as yet undiscovered and only technically (theoretically) recoverable. The Barnett is very deep in many parts of the Permian Basin, can be over pressured and expensive to get to requiring multiple strings of casing, etc. The Barnett is essentially structure related, not some continuous bed of shale like the Wolfcamp, and these structures have to be identified with 3D seismic; unless the USGS has 3D data across its study area, it's just guessing. The Woodford shale almost broke EOG's back in Oklahoma; it is the same beast in the Permian. Apache got its ass sued over 9 BCF EUR's in the Barnett and Woodford in the Alpine fiasco, most of which turned out to be 3 BCF.


Anyway, most people will be thrilled with the notion that some portion of 1.5 G BO could theoretically be recovered, even though the U.S. has exported nearly 14.0G BO from the Permian Basin since 2016...below costs (debt).

Remember, the USGS can be very optimistic in its assessments, like the one above for the Midland Basin in 2016. It estimated technically recoverable oil within the boundaries of the yellow study area but thus far the production limits of the play are limited to the red, and cores, the best of the best is in black. Less than 10% of the production in the Midland Basin above was outside the cores in 2022. So, the USGS estimates for the Midland Basin will actually be a quarter, or a third of its estimates. This totally messed up American hydrocarbon policies, IMO, and all this vast, non-existent hydrocarbon wealth in the Permian ("more liquid gold than any other country in the world," Trump) led to the lifting of the export ban in 2016.


Whatever. This current Barnett assessment will make people feel better and that's all that matters.


TGS, Enverus, BEG Isopach
TGS, Enverus, BEG Isopach
Correlative Interval of the Barnett/Woodford and appx. depths from sea level.
Correlative Interval of the Barnett/Woodford and appx. depths from sea level.
Novi; total Barnett wells in the Permian Basin
Novi; total Barnett wells in the Permian Basin
So far, not so good, except for three war horse wells by Oxy in Martin County, two for FANG in Ector and one or two for CLR in Andrews. We have no idea what those oil EUR's will be give the rate of decline.
So far, not so good, except for three war horse wells by Oxy in Martin County, two for FANG in Ector and one or two for CLR in Andrews. We have no idea what those oil EUR's will be give the rate of decline.
Amazingly fast decline rates
Amazingly fast decline rates
5.0-7.0 BCF wells, maybe. This play will require $7.50/MCF gas, sustained. It's not very rich and has a low BTU factor.
5.0-7.0 BCF wells, maybe. This play will require $7.50/MCF gas, sustained. It's not very rich and has a low BTU factor.


388 Views
Mike
Mike
Jan 20

The Mississippian Barnett/Woodford is about 340 MM years old, has already produced everywhere, including Oklahoma, all over the Fort Worth Basin and in the Permian. Nobody "discovered" or "uncovered" anything, the USGS is just making a wild ass guess how much "theoretically" recoverable oil and gas can be found in it, if it is every found, and if it is profitable to extract. That is all. The aftermath of the USGS assessment shows how illiterate the main stream media is about oil and natural gas.


The Permian Basin HZ tight oil play EXPORTS 4.2 MM BOPD (+/-) of oil to foreign countries every year, about 1.5 B barrels. If the Barnett/Woodford has a total of 1.6 B barrels of recoverable oil in it, and it doesn't, and if every gallon of it is actually produced over the next 10 years...all toll it will equal about what the Permian exports in one year.

Edited
bottom of page