in Bastrop county, well completed jan 2013. we receive 20% royalty and $325 an acre lease. they started at $200 we countered at $500 knowing full well they would negotiate down. I think it is still low. some leases in texas go for $1000+. This is due to larger wells, with much more anticipated production. What is the anticipated production?
They pd for rights to do seismagraphic work in Eastern Bastrop county. They just completed it. It was a large area. Dawson was present. Don't know who hired them to do the work. Would love to know. If its our current operator, not good.
Pretty sure that the 3D shoot is not 100% proprietary but that they have 2-3 main companies underwriting a good part of it. Then their goal is to sell pieces of it to whoever wants it down the road as many times as possible.
On the whole, Bastrop Co is not an area of good production, i.e. like that seen to the NE in Burleson or Brazos or to the SW in parts of Lavaca and Fayette. The Eagle Ford is not a real player in Bastrop and the Austin Chalk is hit and miss. Several shallow sands do work but at a lesser degree.
If you can share more on the well in question, myself and others may be able to comment more on overall prospectivity.
I have no real proof as to who might be sponsoring the latest seismic shoot that covers the Northern part of Fayette and Eastern part of Bastrop counties; but, I have heard from a number of different people that Geo Southern is a big player and that Weber Energy has chipped in as well. Quite possible that Oak Valley and Argent Energy would be interested in that part of Fayette and Clayton Williams could well be interested in some of that Northern part of Fayette as well as Bastrop. All just a big guess; but, since we have nothing else to talk about, this will do until the price of oil gets back to $65-$70/bbl.
Rockman, you are correct, Bastrop co. hit or miss and mostly smaller production. My question was not a question I needed answered, but for others inquiring about Fayette county. Iam assuming if Fayette county is referring to Eagleford, there may be greater production and if so this should command a greater price per acre lease. Gonzales, Tx area was commanding much more. I heard $800-$1500 per acre in some cases. These large wells.
As in real estate, O&G prospectivity ties directly to location. The Eagle Ford in Fayette Co is a great example - totally worthless (too deep and/or thin) in parts of the county but very good O&G potential in other parts due to it being shallower and thicker.
This could really cut into production of our shale resources in thi...
Utah is the heart of this waking beast, with estimated in-place tar sands oil resources of 32 billion barrels. And at the heart of the heart is Asphalt Ridge, which is thought to contain nearly a billion barrels of oil on its own.
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/could-technology-innovation-oil-indus...
Happy news for our country but not so much for getting any drilling done in Fayette county.
But Utah is more than just a part of the resource-rich Green River Formation--it's also the proving ground for the latest technology that ensures we get the most out of our oil sands without leaving behind the toxic trailing ponds that have plagued Alberta's industry.
The new technology--patented by MCW Energy Group (traded in the US under MCWEF and in Canada under MCW.V)--relies on a solvent that uses no water and produces no waste or pollutants, and produces at $27-$30 per barrel.
Interesting situation for sure.
I wonder how "safe" the solvent is? Environmentalists may play havoc with that for a while if this moves forward
Why is the stock <$1.00/share if the technology is paradigm-shifting? I am more skeptical of this than I was of the Cline Shale, but good luck to all.
"“It’s really a way for us to (hold by production) as much acreage as we can over the course of ’16 and ’17 and preserve a lot of the Eagle Ford and upper Eagle Ford,” Lodzinski said.
It also can add to a company’s oil reserves without the cost and expense of leasing more acreage.
But the line between the upper part of the Eagle Ford and the lower part of the Austin Chalk gets a bit fuzzy, Lodzinski said"
If Chalk wells can produce oil for less cost per barrel why weren't they doing this all along? Now that is a plus in addition to holding the Eagle Ford through "held by production" means.
Gas at Sam's in College Station is $1.67
Fracking still in gear at Snook, Texas, Burleson County
Hi all,
In reviewing a lease the verbage regarding horizontal drilling states the following;
" Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, unit pooled for a horizontally completed oil or gas well shall be computed on the following formula: A (acreage ={L {actual lateral length drilled} X .11488 + 160] X 1.5; then A is rounded up to the nearest number evenly divisible by 40. " The provisions of this Paragraph shall control unless governmental authority having jurisdiction should prescribe the creation of larger units, in which event, all units created hereunder shall conform substantially in size with those prescribed by such governmental authority.
That being said, is this good or bad for the land/mineral owner. Seems to me that the unit sizes should be as small as possible. However, not sure this clause is acceptable. Thoughts?
Darrell:
I can only give you my personal feeling about unit pooling. This clause gives me heartburn every time I see it in print. First, in the low cost oil environment we are in right now, it will be very hard to get these guys to back off of this number and this is the formula that is often used in these boilerplate leases. So is it bad or is it good. IMHO, that is in the eyes of the beholder. Depends on where the oil company might want to put the well head. If it is on your property and they are going to include all of your property you would probably want to keep the pool acreage as small as possible; but, on the other hand, if the well head is quite a ways from your property, you might like to see a larger pool so you would be in it. If my math is correct, based on this formula, a 5000 foot lateral, would have a pool of 840 acres. And if the lateral is 7500 feet, then the pool would be 1120 acres. The more acres the more it benefits the operator. The more acres, the more acres can be held under lease, for a long time, with one well and the less royalty per acre for mineral owners.
There is one company here in Fayette County that IMO, has been overly abusive in stuffing pools, so again, IMO, no one should ever sign a lease without first getting the help of an Attorney. One additional point that I would just throw out is that we should makes sure that we have done as much research as possible and know what we want before going to the attorney.
Check out one of the latest Fayette County well permits and see what I am talking about. 1475 acres!!!!!!!!!!
http://webapps.rrc.state.tx.us/DP/drillDownQueryAction.do?fromPubli...
And if that one isn't big enough, just look at this one.
Wait till you see their latest permit ......if I recall properly , it's 1,933 acres .
Need some help here, someone with more experience than I.
The lease states :"Lessor and Lessee intend that the holding in Heritage Resources Inc., vs. Nations Bank, 939 S. W. 2d 188 (Tex. 1996) shall not apply to this lease and shall not render the limitation on deduction of post-production costs in the lease surplusage. "
Here is a posting on that court case:http:// www.mineralrightsforum.com/forum/topics/chesapeake-court-dec...
I've read it, but still a bit foggy as to what it means.
Any wisdom, or not, is appreciated.
Get a larger royalty. Consult an oil and gas attorney.
"By the same token, lessors must remain mindful of the Texas Supreme Court’s caution that inclusion of a Heritage Resources disclaimer will not free a royalty of post-production costs where the text of the lease itself does not do so."