[dolanbaker]

I assume that the blue is all water, but the question has to be, is that the worst or the best or an average sample?

[ROCKMAN]

pstarr - I've been drilling hz wells into a variety of conventional oil/NG reservoirs for 20 years. Always breathtaking what you can do: in 1994 I took a reservoir making 500 mcf/d to 11,000 mcf/d with a single hz well. A strong water drive reservoir so it held a fairly low decline rate. In a vertical completion the water level would have moved slowly upwards reaching more of the perforations over time. Thus a long tail because we produced slowly to avoid puling the water up into the completion prematurely. But the hz well eliminated that concern.

OTOH when the water level did reach the hz completion it was completely gone in a matter of a couple of months. Virtually zero tale. That's the down side of all hz completions in conventional reservoirs: life is great until the water level reaches the depth of the entire hz completion. Best visual example I can paint: imagine a tank with 20' of oil sitting on 80' of water. There’s a valve at the bottom that lets the same amount of water in as the amount of oil you pull out of the tank. So to pull the oil out at an economical rate you stick a straw down 10’ into the 20’ oil column and start sucking. The 10’ section of the straw has holes along its entire length. All is well until the water level rises 10’ and reaches the bottom of you straw. Now you start sucking up progressively more water and less oil.

But wait: you put a 90 degree bend in your straw and stick it just 1’ below the top on the oil column. Fantastic: now you’re back to sucking out 100% oil. But then when the water level gets to the level of your hz straw? That’s it…game over. You go to sucking almost 100% water very quickly. And thus it is with conventional reservoirs. Hz wells add great rates but when they go they go very fast. Sort of like the old joke about falling off a 20 story building. Not painful…until you come to that abrupt stop when you reach the ground.

[Pops]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ROCKMAN', 'K')inda like a burned down bordello...not much tail there. LOL

[rockdoc123]

ROCKMAN....although you are correct with regards to horizontal wells in conventional reservoirs the analogy does not work for unconventional shale wells where water production is not the worry. The issue is the rate of replacement from the matrix (at nanodarcies of permeability) to the induced fractures (hundreds of millidarcies of K) versus the production rate throught the wellbore. Theoretically there is no reason to expect collapse in this case, just a very slow decline until the EUR for that well is achieved (well shut-in due to operating cost considerations or line pressure considerations). Practically there is a host of things happening including poor completions, collapsed fractures due to poor propants etc that come into play.
With regards to Ghawar your analogy is true but remember that according to the full field models run by the Saudis they expect another 60 Gbbls or so. Given you can drill an MRC well accurately to stay withing a couple of metres for several kilometres of length it would be foolish to think the analogy applies in this particular field in the immediate future. Decades out it will. Also in terms of looking at the total field not all of the wells "collapse" at once. What happens is through time wells get shut-in which is what causes the overall field decline through time.

[Pops]

Here is where the EIA thinks we're headed (c/o Ron at POB)

[Subjectivist]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Pops', 'H')ere is where the EIA thinks we're headed (c/o Ron at POB)

[Pops]

I think the backlog of wells drilled but waiting on completion is typically around 500 at any one time.

[Subjectivist]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Pops', 'I') think the backlog of wells drilled but waiting on completion is typically around 500 at any one time.

[llamaths]

I have heard of the price to reach at the most $65 per barrel by 2016.

[ROCKMAN]

llamaths - Here the key question: did the person making that prediction also make a financial arrangement that would make/lose them the investment subject to their prediction being correct? It's easy to make any prediction one desires if they don't have the confidence to back it up with $. It's just like the lottery winner: he isn't any better at picking the winning number then the tens of millions that didn't pick the winner. Today you'll find 2016 predictions ranging from $20 to $150 per bbl and everywhere in between. By the close of 2016 someone's prediction will be proven correct. But that doesn't mean that person is any more smarter then the rest of us.

Personally I like looking at all the various predictions. But I really don't give a crap what number they throw out. I'm much more interested in the assumptions they make to reach their answer. That's the heart of any discussion on the subject and not the number itself IMHO. In the case of your predictor did they explain why $65/bbl was their expectation?