Estimated flow rates, page-3

It is an interesting topic, but also a minefield in terms of comparing apples with oranges (so to speak) and hence setting expectations that lead to disappointment even with excellent results.

So, when you talk flow rate, are you talking about flow rates from a vertical stimulated well, or from what that may mean for a horizontal well in full production mode? And, if the latter, are you talking about a horizontal well with 5000 ft lateral, 10,000 ft or perhaps 20,000 ft? After all, the trend is for longer laterals that 'drain' a larger acreage, especially in places with (relative) economics of Alaska?

Also, assuming we settle on what the flow rate represents, this will just be the initial flow rate. IP30 perhaps? Of equal if not greater importance will be the decline rate....with lower 48 experience indicating around 70% decline could be expected, on a reverse exponential scale, within the first 12 months. Decline rates not only vary, but can also be managed with re-injection wells and the relative success of this varies greatly not just from one 'play' to another but also between wells in the same 'play'. So a huge factor is decline rates.

Speculating on a single number, given all these variables that will be crucial to determining economic viability - seems to me to be fraught with danger. You may even end up frightening yourself prematurely out of your investment if your number is 6,000, when DW asks us to look for a number in excess of 100 (apples and oranges).

In short, each well will have a min target number (for success) depending on how it is engineered. For us, with 2V, at this point in time, the number range (for initial flow) is 100-150 boed. We are told, that this number range allows for industry players (who can factor in all the other variables) to regard Icewine as being commercially viable.

Spoiler

So my number is 100-150 ;-)