Including the Marcellus, the Haynesville and the Utica
In this monthly post, we will analyze the latest developments in the major tight gas basins in the US, including the Marcellus, the Haynesville and the Utica. We specifically take a closer look at the Haynesville, which has seen an increase in interest relative to the other basins.
The report answers the following questions:
1- Where does the horizontal rig count stand today?
2- How much natural gas is produced from horizontal wells in the major tight gas basins?
3- What is the long-term gas outlook for these basins based on current activity levels?
4- How do the Marcellus and the Haynesville compare in terms of well productivity?
5- Who are the top producers in the Haynesville?
6- Which operators have the best (and worst) performing wells in the Haynesville?
1) Drilling activity
The horizontal rig count in the major tight gas basins has fallen by more than half in the past 3 months to just 64 last week. Half of the rigs were in the Haynesville, as the tooltip in this dashboard shows.
2) Total gas production
The following dashboard gives an overview of the total gas production in these basins, through March 2020.
In March, 44.5 Bcf/d of natural gas was produced, with the Marcellus responsible for most of this output (25 Bcf/d).
3) Tight gas supply projection
What would happen if the 64 rigs currently drilling wells in these basins would continue doing so and rig & well productivity would not change? Our publicly available “Supply projection” dashboard easily answers this question:
As the bottom graph shows, this level of activity is not high enough to stop output from falling. By the end of next year, total natural gas production in these basins would decline to around 37 Bcf/d.
Interestingly, output in the Haynesville play would actually rise over time and it is on a path to almost match the Marcellus in a few years.
4) Well productivity — Haynesville vs. Marcellus
Improvements in drilling technology have led to a higher productivity increase in the Haynesville compared to the Marcellus, as is visualized in the following graph:
Here you can see the average decline curves for these 2 basins, by vintage. Peak rates are currently far higher in the Haynesville, although decline rates still seem to increase faster than in the Marcellus.
5) Top producers in the Haynesville
Next, we look at who the largest natural gas producers are in the Haynesville. The following overview shows the historical production numbers for the largest 7 operators, as well as their well positions:
#Comstock is currently in the lead, with a 1.8 Bcf/d output in March.
6)Well productivity ranking
The following dashboard sheds lights on the question of which operators have the best (and worst) performing wells in the Haynesville. The map on the left side shows the location of all the horizontal gas wells that were completed since 2013. The wells are measured (and color- ed) by the cumulative gas recovered in the first 2 years (red is more productive).
It reveals that Comstock also had the best average well results since 2013, based on this metric. Its 118 horizontal wells recovered over 6 Bcf of natural gas in the first 2 years on production, on average. That compares with the 5.3 Bcf that Chesapeake, the number 4, managed for its 231 wells
Want to further explore industry data?
You can directly request a free trial via shaleprofile.com/trial to try out ShaleProfile Analytics for 10 days. ( “No Credit Card Required”)
