It does not. They are talking about thickness of bearing formation, not depth.
It does not. They are talking about thickness of bearing formation, not depth.
\..........
yeah that’s what I meant. I just didn’t say it well. the question is does “thickness of bearing formation” mean the same thing as when they say that oil is in formations that are 100 feet thick or 200 feet thick or 500 feet thick.
If so then the Niobrara formation at least in some sectors has oil bearing formations that are roughly 500 feet thick.
this compares favorably with the baaken where the thickness of the formation is in the 100 foot range and the eagle ford where the thickness of the formation is in the 200 foot range.