|OEDV 1.66 Interesting post on Yahoo! from jrp1324 ...not sure what to think of it...the number of wells seems way too high?|
"As you go to the horizontal Mississippian, and again on our website, we talked about the first 8 wells. Ray just updated you with 2 more. And they're actually performing better than the first 8. As we get more data eventually, we'll update the curves like we have everywhere else. If you look at that slide, those 8 wells -- even those first 8 wells averaged 485,000 BOEs at a depth of about 4,200 feet. At strip pricing, that's a rate of return of 86% to 99%, tremendous rates of return. With that, under that current completion, it equates to a recovery of about 4% to 9% of the oil in place. And assuming we kept those laterals, it's a little -- it's about 55-acre spacing. So do I think -- and this is oil, not gas. So in oil, typically, it's more viscous fluid. You can drill on tighter spacing. You got a lot of oil in place. I think that it's not inconceivable in an oil play to maybe even drill tighter and to double recoveries, maybe 4% to 9% becomes 8% to 18%. And then I think when you stand back and look at that, again, enormous implications. We have 145,000 acres. If you use a spacing like that, you could be talking about something as high as 2,800 wells, plus or minus 2,700, 2,800 wells. And then if you use 0.4 million, 0.5 million barrels per well equivalent, you're talking about over 1 billion barrels net of range. If you double it th "