Is the Typical NDIC Bakken Tight Oil Well a Sales Pitch?
In this post I present the results from dynamic simulations using the typical tight oil well for the Bakken as recently presented by the North Dakota Industrial Commission (NDIC), together with the “2011 average” well as defined from actual production data from around 240 wells that were reported to have started producing from June through December 2011.
This post is an update and extension to my earlier post “Is Shale Oil Production from Bakken Headed for a Run with “The Red Queen”?” which was reposted here.
- If the “Typical Bakken Well” is what NDIC recently has presented, total production from Bakken (the portion that lies in North Dakota) should have been around 1.1 Mb/d in February 2013, refer also to Figure 03.
- Reported production from Bakken by NDIC as of February 2013 was 0.7 Mb/d.
- Actual production data shows that the first year’s production for the average well in Bakken (North Dakota) presently is around 55% of the “Typical Bakken Well” presented by NDIC.
- The results from the simulations anticipate a slowdown for the annual growth in oil production from Bakken (ND) through 2013 and 2014.
Figure 01: The chart above is taken from the NDIC/DMR presentation Recent presentations “Tribal Leader Summit” 09-05-12 slide no 5 (pdf; 8.7 MB). The chart shows NDIC’s expected average daily oil production by year. The first number (on the y-axis) is the IP (Initial Production) number, and this is followed by the average daily production by year.
The well shown above has a first year total oil production of 156 kb (427 Bbl/d).
Figure 02: The chart above shows monthly net additions of producing wells (green columns plotted against the right hand scale) and development in oil production from Bakken (ND) (thick dark blue line plotted against the left scale) as from January 2000 and through February 2013.
Approximately 1 770 producing wells were added during 2012, in Bakken (ND), but the timing was not distributed evenly throughout the year. The big ramp up began in the summer of 2011. There was an increase in general from 63 to 144 producing wells (more than 120%) on average each month from July 2011 and through 2012. From January 2010 and through June 2011 63 producing wells were added on average each month. During the winter months of 2010/2011 oil production growth slowed as a response to fewer well additions.
Figure 03: The colored bands show total production (production profile for the typical NDIC well multiplied by net added producing wells during the month) added by month and its projected development (left hand scale). The yellow circles show net added producing wells by month (right hand scale). The thick black line shows actual reported production from Bakken (North Dakota) by NDIC (left hand scale).
The model was calibrated to start simulations as of January 2010.
Figure 04: The chart above shows development in the sequential moving average of reported total production for the first 12 months for wells studied and that started to produce as of January 2010 and through January 2012 (yellow circles connected by black line). The dark red line shows the sequential moving average of the most recent 50 wells (50 WMA; 50 Wells Moving Average).
The blue line shows the sequential moving average of the most recent 200 wells (200 WMA; 200 Wells Moving Average).
Figure 05: The chart above shows the well profile and cumulative for oil from the “2011 average” well that was derived from 230 wells that started to produce as from June 2011 and through December 2011.
This “2011 average” well was used for the simulations shown in Figures 06 and 07.
Figure 06: The colored bands show total production (production profile for the “2011 average” well multiplied by net number of wells added during the month) added by month and its projected development (left hand scale). The white circles show net added producing wells by month (right hand scale). The thick black line reported production from Bakken (North Dakota) by NDIC (left hand scale).
The chart also shows forecast developments for total oil production with, respectively, 1 300 (dark blue dotted line) and 1 500 (red dotted line) added through 2013 and 2014.
Table 1; Actual annual production and forecasts for tight oil production from Bakken (ND) with 1 300 and 1 500 “average 2011” wells added annually through 2013 and 2014.
NOTE: Forecasts should be viewed in the context of developments in well productivity, (well) costs, (oil) price, decline rates from the “older” population of wells and the strategies the companies deploy as they come to hold acreage by production.
PLATEAU OF 700 kb/d THROUGH 2013
Figure 07: The colored bands show total production (production profile for the “2011 average” well multiplied by net number of wells added during the month) added by month and its projected development (left hand scale). The white circles show net added producing wells by month (right hand scale). The thick black line reported production from Bakken (North Dakota) by NDIC (left hand scale).
The transparent colored bands shows a plateau of 700 kb/d through 2013 and the white (smaller circles) estimated number of “2011 average” wells added each month to sustain the plateau of 700 kb/d.
Figure 08: The chart above shows development in crude oil and condensates (C + C) production for OECD split on Canada (red columns), North Sea (green columns), USA (blue columns) and the rest of OECD (yellow columns). (Data from EIA.)
Between December 2011 and as of December 2012 OECD had an annualized growth in (C+C) supplies of 0.71 Mb/d. This growth was facilitated through the rapid production growth from tight oil in USA and from oil sands in Canada that more than offset the decline in oil production from the North Sea and other OECD countries.
Figure 09: The chart above (based upon data from EIA International Energy Statistics) shows developments in (C+C) production for the world split on economic zones (plotted towards the right hand scale).
The economic zones are OECD (green), Russia (white), Rest Of World (ROW, which includes Brazil and China) (blue) [OECD, Russia and ROW is also referred to as Non OPEC] and OPEC (yellow).
Growth in global (C+C) supplies during the last 2 years has primarily come from OPEC.
SUPPLEMENTARY DOCUMENTATION FOR THE “2011 AVERAGE” WELLAll the wells included in this study have verified full time production series.
Figure SD1: The chart above shows the first 12 months’ production for the wells studied against their reported start of production and the study included the production history of more than 440 wells that started to produce as from January 2010 and through January 2012. This represents around 22% of the wells meeting these criteria.
Around 2 060 wells were reported to have started to produce as from January 2010 and through January 2012 and thus had 12 months or more of reported production in January 2013.443 of these 2060 wells were subject to in depth studies of the full time series of production.The wells studied were from 30 companies and 89 pools in Bakken North Dakota.The density of wells with a production above 200 kb during the first 12 months was found to decrease with time.
Figure SD2: The scatter chart shows decline rates for oil from year 1 to year 2 for 156 wells that started as from January 2010 and through February 2011 and thus had a history of 24 months of production or more as of January 2013.
A total of 860 wells started to produce during the studied period that met the criteria.
Figure SD2 illustrates that the decline rate is all over the place. A linear fit suggests that decline rates from year 1 to year 2 should be expected to be a function of first year (first 12 months) production. It appears that the higher the first year’s production the higher the decline rate from year 1 to year 2 becomes.
Figure SD3: The scatter chart above is a variant of the one shown in Figure SD2, and here first year (first 12 months) production has been plotted against the production of year 2 (months 13 through 24) of the wells’ life.
What do you think? Leave a comment below.
Sign up for regular Resilience bulletins direct to your email.
This is a community site and the discussion is moderated. The rules in brief: no personal abuse and no climate denial. Complete Guidelines.