Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: richardtavor

Barnett Shale in Texas is a Natural Gas Source, not a significant source of oil. Woodford Shale and Fayetteville Shale are also a Natural Gas fields.


93 posted on 03/28/2008 10:40:01 AM PDT by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies ]


To: thackney
"Barnett Shale in Texas is a Natural Gas Source, not a significant source of oil. Woodford Shale and Fayetteville Shale are also a Natural Gas fields."

"that's not entirely accurate" -CIA director Independence day.

On the western side of the Barnett we are finding oil at depth under the gas shales. Myself and some geosicence students from a major university are making a field trip to the shale in the next couple of weeks to do some practice seismic analysis. This oil is unconventional as its is in a tight pore formations that requires hydraulic fracturing to make the formations permeable. This technology is new and relatively expensive. That being said with oil prices they way they are it is still economical to use hydraulic sand fracturing to get at the oil since the Barnett is a relatively shallow formation coil on tube rigs can be used significantly lowering production costs. some history on the Barnett. The Barnett is a black shale of Mississippian age who's sediments were shed in deep marine anoxic waters off the coast from the former Oouachian mountains that ran from Mexico through Texas to Oklahoma and Arkansas. Being an anoxic basin the fossil carbon was not oxidized and under went petrogenesis. pretty much anywhere you had similar black shales laied down oil and gas would have been produced if the rocks were heated and pressurized to petrogenesis conditions; the source rocks also make a great petroclude since they are not permeable without stimulation. basicly the oil/Ng was produced and could not migrate away from the source rocks. It will just be sitting waiting for someone to fracture the formation and release the overburden pressure.

150 posted on 03/28/2008 12:13:19 PM PDT by JDinAustin (Austinite in the Big D)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies ]

To: thackney
Actually, the western edge of the play (Montague Co.) is a developing Oil play (also by EOG.) I threw in Barnett, Woodford and Fayettville because they are source rock plays. These are the formations that we drilled through in the seventies and eighties to get to the “good stuff.) We had good shows when we drilled through them, but technology wouldn't allow us to complete them commercially. None of us (except maybe George Mitchell ever thought that it would be commercial.
161 posted on 03/28/2008 1:09:43 PM PDT by richardtavor (Pray for the peace of Jerusalem in the name of the G-d of Jacob)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies ]

To: thackney
Barnett Shale in Texas is a Natural Gas Source, not a significant source of oil. Woodford Shale and Fayetteville Shale are also a Natural Gas fields.

Have you looked at what is going on in Montague, Clay, and Archer Counties in Texas?

http://www.topix.com/content/kri/2008/02/in-shift-eog-interested-in-barnett-shale-oil

192 posted on 04/11/2008 11:01:23 AM PDT by crusty old prospector
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson