[ROCKMAN]

The Russians didn't just invent sh*t. A quick search found a govt sponsored report on TDGF (Thermodynamically Drive. Gas-dynamic Fracturing) from 2005. The final technical report was publishedf 7 years go. Didn't bother wasting time looking any further back in time.

And basically it's not so much fracturing as it is a thermal EOR method to increase oil flow by heating up the rock.

[rockdoc123]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I') was also thinking that, like SAGD or THAI?

[radon1]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ROCKMAN', 'T')he Russians didn't just invent sh*t.

[ROCKMAN]

Radon - Perhaps English is your second language. LOL. From your link: "Russian scientists and local oil field services companies claim to have created a technology for thermochemical gas fracturing that could be an alternative to hydraulic fracturing..."

FYI: created = invented. Copying someone else's homework is not doing your home work. LOL.

[radon1]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ROCKMAN', 'R')adon - Perhaps English is your second language. LOL. From your link: "Russian scientists and local oil field services companies claim to have created a technology for thermochemical gas fracturing that could be an alternative to hydraulic fracturing..."

FYI: created = invented. Copying someone else's homework is not doing your home work. LOL.

[dissident]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('radon1', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ROCKMAN', 'T')he Russians didn't just invent sh*t.

[ROCKMAN]

radon - "If they did and the results were so promising, then why wasn't this technology promoted previously by whoever developed it in the first place?" Who said those results were promising? Their lab tests were failures. Not only was the method never tried in a actual field test they couldn't even get the equipment to function without destroying it. So they dropped the concept. In fact it was so far from being proven to be commercially viable no one in the US pursued it any further.

And it you read the detailed Russian press releases they have NOT PROVEN the technique is commercially viable in an actual reservoir. From Russian lips:

"The Oil Technology Center is conducting experimental-industrial trials in the oil fields that belong to Lukoil and Rosneft."

And if you understood the basic concept behind frac'ng you would not be very hopeful. Producing fractures in a reservoir does little to nothing to increase productivity. Because of "sealing pressure" the fractures close and heal themselves. Methods for inducing such fractures are over a 100 years old. What is required are proppants pumped into such newly created fractures. Where the term "proppant" comes from: those sands grains "prop" open the fractures. Without the proppants the rock pressure forces the fractures closed. In fact, in very high pressure reservoirs they use material like sintered bauxite as a proppant: the "sealing pressure" is so high it crushes the sand grains and the fractures seal.

So we might as well table this discussion until the Russians provide something more then THEORIES. Like actual DOCUMENTED proof the technique not only works but is also a economically viable option. Will probably take a few years one way or the other.

[peripato]

Fracking “technological breakthrough” is theft

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I')n effect, the fracking companies have been drilling into oil deposits already owned by conventional oil companies… and damaging the existing wells in the process. This is likely to result in lengthy court disputes that will add to the financial woes of the fracking companies.

[dissident]

So the hysteria about fracking is a form of magical thinking. The same glass of water can be emptied forever.

[rockdoc123]

This has nothing to do with shale and marginally to do with fracking. What these group of independents in Oklahoma are complaining about is that a new regulation would allow long horizontal wells (not necessarily fracked) in multiple horizons that are considered conventional. Because the laws regarding competitive drainage are almost non-existent in Oklahoma this creates a major problem. As well because the independent producers almost certainly haven't provided a downhole survey to the State regulator it would be impossible for someone drilling a horizontal well to be sure of avoiding intersecting that borehole. When oil companies drill wells in active areas one of the first things they do is a wellbore avoidance study where downhole surveys from all wells are plotted along with the proposed trajectory of the planned well. The trajectory is adjusted accordingly.

In Canada, there are very strict regulations around competitive drainage and the regulators rule quite quickly when complaints are registered. The US industry had a long history of competitive drainage going unregulated with rigs closely stacked, all interfering production-wise with one another.

Fracked wells in tight sands and shales seldom interfere with one another because the average radius of frack extent is about 150 m maximum. So if well bores are situated more than 300 m apart there is little chance of interference taking place.

[peripato]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('rockdoc123', 'T')his has nothing to do with shale and marginally to do with fracking. What these group of independents in Oklahoma are complaining about is that a new regulation would allow long horizontal wells (not necessarily fracked) in multiple horizons that are considered conventional. Because the laws regarding competitive drainage are almost non-existent in Oklahoma this creates a major problem. As well because the independent producers almost certainly haven't provided a downhole survey to the State regulator it would be impossible for someone drilling a horizontal well to be sure of avoiding intersecting that borehole. When oil companies drill wells in active areas one of the first things they do is a wellbore avoidance study where downhole surveys from all wells are plotted along with the proposed trajectory of the planned well. The trajectory is adjusted accordingly.

In Canada, there are very strict regulations around competitive drainage and the regulators rule quite quickly when complaints are registered. The US industry had a long history of competitive drainage going unregulated with rigs closely stacked, all interfering production-wise with one another.

Fracked wells in tight sands and shales seldom interfere with one another because the average radius of frack extent is about 150 m maximum. So if well bores are situated more than 300 m apart there is little chance of interference taking place.

[rockdoc123]

the actual source of the study is the Oklahoma Energy Producers Alliance which is a group of independent producers of vertical wells in conventional reservoirs. The article linked to mentions fracking companies but it isn't the fracks that the OEPA are concerned about. It is the fact the long reach wells are intersecting their well bores or close enough that they are competitively draining from the conventional reservoir.

It isn't about fracking at all. Whether the well is fracked or not fracked doesn't matter if it intersects a well bore previously drilled and currently producing.

Here is the OEPA website which describes what they are about.
https://okenergyproducers.org/about/

[peripato]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('rockdoc123', 't')he actual source of the study is the Oklahoma Energy Producers Alliance which is a group of independent producers of vertical wells in conventional reservoirs. The article linked to mentions fracking companies but it isn't the fracks that the OEPA are concerned about. It is the fact the long reach wells are intersecting their well bores or close enough that they are competitively draining from the conventional reservoir.

It isn't about fracking at all. Whether the well is fracked or not fracked doesn't matter if it intersects a well bore previously drilled and currently producing.

Here is the OEPA website which describes what they are about.
https://okenergyproducers.org/about/

[AdamB]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('rockdoc', '&')quot; It is the fact the long reach wells are intersecting their well bores or close enough that they are competitively draining from the conventional reservoir.

It isn't about fracking at all. Whether the well is fracked or not fracked doesn't matter if it intersects a well bore previously drilled and currently producing. "

[ROCKMAN]

peripato - It is possible for the pressure generated by a frac job to affect a nearby vertical well. But it would have to be very close. But on the order of tens of feet. Which is not what's happening in OK. Read the report again closely: no one is claiming those 450 wells were PHYSICALLY damaged: "...damaged economically".

IOW the horizontal wells were not drilled on the same leases owned by the vertical well operators: that's illegal in every state. But a company has the right to produce any well drilled on a lease the own. I drill Texas and Louisiana...not OK. So I had to just skim their regs. Like both Texas and Louisiana in OK you can only drill and produce on a STATE APPROVED unit. Besides that unit having to be 100% on a lease the company owns it has to be a certain distance from a lease owned by another company. There no way to legally challenge those STATE REGULATIONS. To get a drilling permit you give up that right.

Now this is where I'm not 100% certain about OK but I think it's the same as Texas: the "right of capture" applies. As long as my Texas unit has been approved by the state and my well (vert or hz) is drilled the STATE mandated distance I can economically damage you and you can't do a f*cking thing about it. LOL.

But seriously, you can't. That case law is written in Texas. If Jesus Christ showed in court and testified that my LEGALLY drilled frac'd horizontal well was sucking oil from your lease I still wouldn't have to pay you $1. OTOH you do have the right to drill a LEGALLY located frac'd horizontal well on your side of the lease line opposite my well. The idea is that you can't stop me from producing my lease by not developing the reservoir on your side of the lease line.

And how about Louisiana? A very different set of rules. You might drill a LEGALLY located well on your side of that lease line that makes 1,000 bopd. But if I can confine the UNITIZATION COMMISSION that my geologist's may is right you might have to give me 700 of those 1,000 bopd. About 40 years ago this law led to huge technical trials before the Commission sometimes with $100 of millions at stake. And just like big criminal trials bring out top gun lawyers this unitization hearings would bring out highly paid consultants that did nothing else but represent companies. And for good reason: I once saw a company's geologist ripped so badly on the stand (yes you sit in the stand in front of the Commission and court room and GEF relentlessly grilled about your geologic interpretation) that he actually left the court room in tears. The lesson: you use the hired guns to argue your case and not one of you staff geologist. The owner of my company, who was a rather cutthroat hardass himself, afterwards admitted he felt a bit ashamed over how much of the other company's production the Commission assigned us: about 2X what I mapped. Mapping the Commission never got to see.

But nearly so much drama these days. Now one gets a state approved drilling unit that can include offset lease owners...whether they like it or not. Called "forced pooling". And if they don't choose to share in the drill cost they can suffer a huge financial penalty if the well is good.

One thing I hope you and others understand: despite your eyes possibly glazing over half wag they I left out a huge amount of detail on this subject matter. So when you read short little blerbs like the one that started this chat don't for minute think you really understand what the f*ck is going on. Some tease about my long posts. But the reality is that the subject matters we discuss are z tad more complex then a few lines can do justice to. Doc and I can just tell some of you that you're just acting like ignorant and foolish children. But what would be the point of wasting our time to do that.

[peripato]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ROCKMAN', '.')..

One thing I hope you and others understand: despite your eyes possibly glazing over half wag they I left out a huge amount of detail on this subject matter. So when you read short little blerbs like the one that started this chat don't for minute think you really understand what the f*ck is going on. Some tease about my long posts. But the reality is that the subject matters we discuss are z tad more complex then a few lines can do justice to. Doc and I can just tell some of you that you're just acting like ignorant and foolish children. But what would be the point of wasting our time to do that.