Billt5, here is a report from Chesapeake Energy back in July 31, 2009. They state that decline rates were actually higher than originally reported.
Chesapeake Energy - Haynesville Shale Decline Curve
Chesapeake Energy Corporation has been developing the Haynesville Shale for several years, and has enough confidence in the results to date that it has published a updated decline curve based on the aggregate drilling results from 56 its operated horizontal wells drilled from the beginning of 2008.
Chesapeake Energy Corporation now believes that its first year decline rate is slightly higher than before at 85%, compared to 81% in the previous release. The company increased its initial production rate for each well during the first 24 hours from 10 mmcfe to 14.1 mmcfe. The Estimated Ultimate Recovery (EUR) for each well remains the same at 6.5 Bcfe.
Since the natural gas is produced quicker from the well, the rate of return that Chesapeake Energy Corporation realizes is higher, assuming that all other inputs are the same. The company said that its can achieve a rate of return of 42%.
Well cost of $7.5 million EUR of 6.5 Bcfe 85% first year decline rate Initial 24 production rate of 14.1 mmcfe
Here's a link to the graph http://shale.typepad.com/.a/6a011570a2f205970b0115724d2de6970b-pi
There isn't a comparative chart for The Bakken but I guess you can work out the figures. Also note that only 2 or 3 out of the 8 fracs from St-Edouard were successful. My guess is that the St-Edouard results are within the boundaries of the average. It needs more frac results and production testing and then we can evaluate more accurately the potential of the Quebec Lowland.
Charts explaining the decline on other shale wells:
