Sun, Dec 21, 2014, 5:55 AM EST - U.S. Markets closed

Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Chesapeake Energy Corporation Message Board

  • cadmium_telluride cadmium_telluride Feb 25, 2013 9:10 AM Flag

    Possible FALSE Production Reports from CHK?

    Make your own decision. But I believe CHK might have deliberately EXAGGERATED the actual production of up to 1/4 of their Marcellus shale wells!!! Note this is not about exaggerating EUR projection. This is about reporting the ACTUAL production that has OCCURRED. Those are factual data that must be reported as they were, with no room for manipulation. But looking at the data reported to PA DEP, I felt the data is not the real data.

    For example well 131-20062 produced 662 MMCF in 87 days in H2-2011, 1476.7 MMCF in 179 days in H1-2012 and then 1653.8 MMCF in 183 days in H2-2012. The daily production rate went from 7.61 MMCF/day to 8.25 MMCF/day to 9.04 MMCF/day, in H2-2011, H1-2012, H2-2012.

    Where is the typical rapid production rate decline in a typical shale well in the first 1-2 years? I would expect a -80% decline in the first year for a typical shale well.

    These 62 Marcellus wells owned by CHK reported ery high production rate that not long does NOT drop, but actually INCREASED by 7.7% from first half to second half of 2012:

    131-20062, 115-20256, 115-20269, 131-20058, 115-20257, 115-20268, 115-20324, 131-20169,
    131-20121, 131-20125, 115-20296, 131-20138, 115-20458, 015-20673, 115-20279, 015-20242,
    015-20600, 115-20271, 115-20393, 015-20701, 115-20341, 115-20325, 015-20452, 115-20351,
    015-20458, 115-20244, 115-20272, 015-20488, 015-20482, 015-20645, 115-20303, 015-20997,
    115-20243, 015-21224, 015-21521, 015-20644, 015-20457, 015-21302, 015-20403, 015-21293,
    115-20498, 015-20646, 115-20426, 015-21980, 115-20424, 015-21979, 115-20593, 115-20592,
    115-20105, 115-20442, 015-20124, 015-20234, 015-20625, 115-20073, 115-20068, 115-20182,
    115-20108, 115-20066, 125-23943, 015-20410, 125-23944, 015-20425

    Here are the actual numbers:

    131-20062 1476659 179 8249 131-20062 1653825 183 9037 9.55%
    115-20256 1459709 181 8065 115-20256 1634887 182 8983 11.39%
    115-20269 1461695 182 8031 115-20269 1631246 184 8865 10.39%
    131-20058 1440822 182 7917 131-20058 1604633 181 8865 11.98%
    115-20257 1465199 181 8095 115-20257 1600436 184 8698 7.45%
    115-20268 1402920 179 7838 115-20268 1576530 183 8615 9.92%
    115-20324 1469184 182 8072 115-20324 1563409 184 8497 5.26%
    131-20169 330849 57 5804 131-20169 1547512 183 8456 45.69%
    131-20121 332043 57 5825 131-20121 1554890 184 8450 45.06%
    131-20125 777646 135 5760 131-20125 1542115 183 8427 46.29%
    115-20296 1416337 182 7782 115-20296 1524309 181 8422 8.22%
    131-20138 770648 134 5751 131-20138 1437812 173 8311 44.51%
    115-20458 1476401 182 8112 115-20458 1519707 183 8304 2.37%
    015-20673 1441316 181 7963 015-20673 1508240 184 8197 2.94%
    115-20279 1474577 182 8102 115-20279 1494398 183 8166 0.79%
    015-20242 1429295 182 7853 015-20242 1413111 177 7984 1.66%
    015-20600 1428242 182 7847 015-20600 1448489 183 7915 0.86%
    115-20271 1477172 182 8116 115-20271 1454022 184 7902 -2.64%
    115-20393 1472000 182 8088 115-20393 1434924 182 7884 -2.52%
    015-20701 499066 81 6161 015-20701 1441815 184 7836 27.18%
    115-20341 1479389 182 8129 115-20341 1407474 180 7819 -3.80%
    115-20325 1469388 182 8074 115-20325 1427779 183 7802 -3.36%
    015-20452 1044552 137 7624 015-20452 1432879 184 7787 2.14%
    115-20351 1406359 182 7727 115-20351 1398467 181 7726 -0.01%
    015-20458 1419562 181 7843 015-20458 1251273 162 7724 -1.52%
    115-20244 1460883 182 8027 115-20244 1396425 182 7673 -4.41%
    115-20272 1404935 182 7719 115-20272 1383846 183 7562 -2.04%
    015-20488 1428338 182 7848 015-20488 1269073 168 7554 -3.75%
    015-20482 1330503 164 8113 015-20482 1378817 183 7535 -7.13%
    015-20645 472839 80 5910 015-20645 1376408 183 7521 27.25%
    115-20303 1459934 182 8022 115-20303 1354704 181 7485 -6.70%
    015-20997 355326 72 4935 015-20997 1359431 183 7429 50.53%
    115-20243 1452286 182 7980 115-20243 1353519 184 7356 -7.81%
    015-21224 1433244 182 7875 015-21224 1296706 179 7244 -8.01%
    015-21521 98217 17 5777 015-21521 1314852 184 7146 23.69%
    015-20644 489638 80 6120 015-20644 1287480 182 7074 15.58%
    015-20457 1419537 182 7800 015-20457 1158702 164 7065 -9.42%
    015-21302 388357 66 5884 015-21302 1291010 183 7055 19.89%
    015-20403 1288945 177 7282 015-20403 1288649 184 7004 -3.83%
    015-21293 546162 121 4514 015-21293 1137136 183 6214 37.67%
    115-20498 383140 78 4912 115-20498 797474 129 6182 25.85%
    015-20646 796271 135 5898 015-20646 1087595 182 5976 1.31%
    115-20426 562665 102 5516 115-20426 1090302 183 5958 8.01%
    015-21980 529852 90 5887 015-21980 1083175 183 5919 0.54%
    115-20424 576143 101 5704 115-20424 1086960 184 5907 3.56%
    015-21979 501435 91 5510 015-21979 998933 184 5429 -1.48%
    115-20593 504734 102 4948 115-20593 967251 182 5315 7.40%
    115-20592 454040 100 4540 115-20592 975384 184 5301 16.75%
    115-20105 404616 127 3186 115-20105 890616 183 4867 52.76%
    115-20442 314250 78 4029 115-20442 874448 184 4752 17.96%
    015-20124 537558 182 2954 015-20124 493574 184 2682 -9.18%
    015-20234 501389 181 2770 015-20234 480784 181 2656 -4.11%
    015-20625 482920 181 2668 015-20625 436565 172 2538 -4.87%
    115-20073 440528 182 2420 115-20073 428935 177 2423 0.12%
    115-20068 403515 177 2280 115-20068 445109 184 2419 6.11%
    115-20182 280366 177 1584 115-20182 322340 184 1752 10.60%
    115-20108 331008 182 1819 115-20108 322502 184 1753 -3.63%
    115-20066 281002 182 1544 115-20066 271904 179 1519 -1.62%
    125-23943 224515 182 1234 125-23943 241290 184 1311 6.30%
    015-20410 207206 182 1138 015-20410 194015 178 1090 -4.26%
    125-23944 180793 182 993 125-23944 194181 184 1055 6.24%
    015-20425 204524 182 1124 015-20425 191805 184 1042 -7.24%

    Explanation of the data above, with the first row as an example:

    131-20062 1476659 179 8249 131-20062 1653825 183 9037 9.55%

    131-20062 is well number
    1476659 is H1 2012 production in MCF (thousand cubic feet)
    179 is days of production in H1 2012.
    8249 is calculated average per day (=1476659/179)
    131-20062 is well number again
    1653825 is H2 2012 production in MCF (thousand cubic feet)
    183 is days of production in H1 2012.
    9037 is calculated average per day (=1476659/179)
    9.55% is percentage change of daily production, from H1 to H2.

    You can verify them yourself at PA DEP web site.

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • You are making an #$%$umption. Goes back to #$%$ume which equals #$%$ - u - me. Actually the rapid decline in a shale well was misinformation promoted by the coal industry. JMO

      • 1 Reply to tomatferndale
      • At the start of 2012 there was no space left available in underground storage, and as space first became available it was at a premium price. Restricting the flow on some wells, chosen for their characteristics would have been necessary and would also save a half year of storage expense on gas that at that time was not so easy to sell. I would not trust any numbers this poster looked up, since he does not seem to understand and then posts his own bizarre explanation. #$%$...

    • ok can't dispute you data, you obviously made a great effort to collect it. I am however trying to get over the so what and why of it. How do these number translate into income reported and revenue reported? Would appreciate you incite. Seems to missing the well production and misrepresentation of revenue or net profit is more serious if that is what you are implying.

    • They choke wells.... It's also a new area for drilling and big numbers attract competition and higher lease costs.... Consider that in your observation.... Also if you check into what is going on with Cabot in the area you will see some impressive numbers for each well and a slow rate of decline....

      • 1 Reply to dmorgan2151
      • Every company attempts to chock wells one way or another. And they all have done well chocking for long time. But CHK is the ONLY company with such Marcellus wells with remarkably high daily production yet with virtually no production decline in the first year, and some with even greatly increased production.

        That kind of production pattern is impossible for shale wells. Typical shale wells decline 80% in the first year of production. They continue to decline for a few year before the decline rate slows down to something like 15% per year.

    • "This is about reporting the ACTUAL production that has OCCURRED"

      Where's the proof? Posting a bunch of numbers doesn't prove your case, sorry.

    • Still no response or explanation from CHK regarding the data anormalcy, after I emailed them.

    • No response from CHK yet.

    • Still deafening silence from CHK on this data fraud.

    • Folks, this is the same dbag that wrote SA articles saying that we would run out of NG in 4 or 5 years and that actual recoverable NG reserves are much lower than everyone thinks. He has an agenda and it’s all about dirty coal. Dirty coal that leaves behind toxic sludge once burned, among other dirty bi-products. He was all about PCX and how great of a investment that was and now PCX is bankrupt. He claimed that he had all his money in PCX and that he was putting all new cash into PCX but then later he claimed, post bankruptcy, that he was diversified and has money in all sorts of other coal stocks. You can go review his old posts to prove my comments if you want, but you would be better off just putting him on iggy as he like to make things up and try to post opinions as facts. Don't read his SA articles either as he gets paid per click, don't feed the rats...

      Today I read an article about how the U.S. Barnett shale will be pumping natural gas to 2050, which is a complete contradiction to what he was claiming less than 1 year ago!

      Sentiment: Strong Buy

    • Failing to hear an explanation from CHK I think I will go for a SEC report soon.

    • If you do not believe that CHK committed data fraud, check out another Marcellus well at the PA DEP web site.

      Well No. 015-20673, located at 41.626117°North and -76.439472°West, in Bradford County, operated by CHK.

      The reported productions were:

      H1-2011: 74406 MCF in 9 days, averaging 6267 MCF/day
      H2-2011: 1490468 MCF in 184 dys, averaging 8100 MCF/day
      H1-2012: 1441316 MCF in 181 days, averaging 7963 MCF/day
      H2-2012: 1508240 MCF in 184 days, averahing 8197 MCF/day

      The daily productivity went from the initial 6267 MCF/day up to 8100 MCF/day and it seems to maintain at that level for two years.

      How could that be possible. Normally you expect a shale well's productivity to be the highest in the first few days, then it rapidly declines, losing 80% in just the first year.

      I have reason to believe that CHK counterfeited the well production data. Wells from other producers operating in Marcellus do not show such behavior. Inquiry sent to CHK was un-answered.

      Sentiment: Sell

    • View More Messages
 
CHK
19.86+0.72(+3.76%)Dec 19 4:06 PMEST

Trending Tickers

i
Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.