[ROCKMAN]

AP - About 38 years ago I pumped a 500,000# frac down a vertical into a carbonate shale formation. That's far larger the almost all the individual fracs pumped recently and in some cases more then the total amount pumped in all the multi-stage fracs in some wells.

And while doc is right about smaller clean up fracs there is a long history of using fracs to increase productivity of tite formations that were damaged in the drilling process:

"Even though the birth of fracking began in the 1860s, the birth of modern day hydraulic fracturing began in the 1940s. In 1947, Floyd Farris of Stanolind Oil and Gas began a study on the relationship between oil and gas production output, and the amount of pressurized treatment being used on each well. This study lead to the first experiment of hydraulic fracturing, which occurred at the Hugoton gas field, located in Grant county, Kansas in 1947. In this experiment, 1,000 gallons of gelled gasoline and sand were injected into a gas producing limestone formation with a depth of 2,400 feet. This was then followed by an injection of a gel breaker. While this experiment failed to produce a significant production increase, it did mark the beginning of hydraulic fracturing.

Despite the failure in the Hugoton gas field experiment, research continued. On March 17, 1949, Halliburton conducted two commercial experiments; one in Stephens county Oklahoma, and another in Archer County, Texas. These results were much more successful. After achieving experimental success in 1949, fracking quickly became commercialized. In the 1960s Pan American Petroleum began using this drilling technique in Stephens county Oklahoma. In the 1970s, this extraction method was being used in the Piceance Basin, the San Juan Basin, the Denver Basin, and the Green River Basin."

So the 500,000# Rockman frac in 1978 was to get past damaged formation: it was an attempt to produce a formation that had never seen production in that area. BTW George Mitchell did a similar frac that same year...and he conned the govt into paying for it. The Rockman...not as clever. LOL.

And again once the proppant is pumped thru the perforation he reservoir doesn't know if it's a big frac or a small frac, a vertical well or a hz well, 1978 or 2008. Those dynamic are the same within the formation. The models used for a single frac stage in a hz well is identical to the model used in a vertical well.

[AdamB]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('rockdoc123', '
')Perhaps more detail than anyone cares to hear, but who cares?

[AdamB]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Revi', 'I') think peak oil is what is causing the economy to tank everywhere.

[rockdoc123]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'S')urprised you didn't use the term skin factor in there somewhere.

[ennui2]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('AdamB', '
')Try visiting Atlanta, Washington DC, most any place in Texas, the Bay Area, Seattle, Denver, Albuquerque, Des Moines Iowa, Minneapolis You just live in a place that looks bad, doesn't mean the rest of the country looks the same.

[joelund]

With only the 20 or so rigs running in the Bakken, only the sweet spots of Mountrail, McKensie, Dunn are drilled. However, the fracks are large and getting larger. Normal frack on ~10,000' lateral, 55 stage, plug and perf will use 7 million #s of sand. Hess and Whiting are estimating 1 million Bbl recoveries per well. Whiting is also boasting of a secret diverting agent (liquid maybe?) that forces the frack to all stage perforations uniformly.

Don't go in the bars in williston.

[ROCKMAN]

Joe – OK: 7 million #'s in 55 stages = 127,000# per stage. Makes my point: compare that to the 500,000% the Rockman pumped in one stage in that vertical well over 35 years ago. If the potential had been there I could have pumped 20 such stages (10 million pounds) down the same well bore. Longer laterals and more frac stages (which really bump up costs a good bit) are required when drilling areas with lower potential. As far as diverting agents they’ve also been used for decades. Maybe Whiting has a more effective flavor…maybe not…time will tell. But just like frac’ng in general there have been relatively small incremental improvements over the decades but in general no big “step changes” for many, many years.

[AdamB]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('joelund', 'W')ith only the 20 or so rigs running in the Bakken, only the sweet spots of Mountrail, McKensie, Dunn are drilled. However, the fracks are large and getting larger. Normal frack on ~10,000' lateral, 55 stage, plug and perf will use 7 million #s of sand. Hess and Whiting are estimating 1 million Bbl recoveries per well. Whiting is also boasting of a secret diverting agent (liquid maybe?) that forces the frack to all stage perforations uniformly.

Don't go in the bars in williston.

[ennui2]

Here we go round the mulberry bush again with PStarr's "peak oil caused the credit crisis" and "every recession = peak oil" narrative.

[ennui2]

I responded the first 100 times you brought this up.

Peak oil did not cause the credit crisis. Liar loans, ARM resets, and CDOs did. How many times must the inconvenient truth of that pass in your hollow head before it sticks rather than goes out the other ear?

[Tanada]

Lets all please play nice, insults serve no purpose, no matter who is throwing them.

[Revi]

Maybe it's the fact that Maine is a resource based economy, or our Governor or something, but maybe the rest of the country is booming. Great... I am thinking of moving, but at my age I like the scenery and I have a job.

It's some consolation that the effects of climate change seem to be felt more acutely elsewhere. Small consolation...

[AdamB]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ennui2', 'H')ere we go round the mulberry bush again with PStarr's "peak oil caused the credit crisis" and "every recession = peak oil" narrative.

[AdamB]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Revi', 'M')aybe it's the fact that Maine is a resource based economy, or our Governor or something, but maybe the rest of the country is booming. Great... I am thinking of moving, but at my age I like the scenery and I have a job.

[ROCKMAN]

Adam - "Can you imagine how the folks owning property along the Outer Banks are going to feel when a century from now they might have to watch the ocean having gotten a little closer? They might be more than a little worried then I bet..." And that's a point I've made repeatedly: no one owning beach front property today will see the loss in a 100 years because they'll be dead. LOL. Even a baby born today won't see much of a change between age 20 and 60. Which isn't to minimize the loss of the shoreline. But as far as impacting an individual today they won't really see much of a change in their life time. Of course that's not focusing on the development of more severe weather in some areas. But your comment focuses on SLR and not changes in weather patterns. OTOH many tens of millions have suffered from severe weather events long before GHG production became a factor. Such as the greatest loss of life from a hurricane that hit Texas more then 100 years ago.

But as I've said before perhaps I have a different attitude having grown up living below sea level in Nawlins which will eventually sink into the GOM even if there were never a global SLR.