- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Haynesville Shale
Posted on 8/27/08 at 9:10 pm to sweetcheeks426
Posted on 8/27/08 at 9:10 pm to sweetcheeks426
Hows PXP doin up there?
Posted on 8/27/08 at 9:16 pm to sweetcheeks426
that is exactly what I said when I said at least you have the royalites at least an 1/8
The mineral servitude is only held by production on a contiguious tract as we discussed. It looks like they didn't reserve, but even if they did it could prescribe in the manner I described.
However, a LEASE remains valid over all the land that is under lease as long as a well is paying in 'paying quantities.' The mineral rights vested in the owner, but they are subject to the existing lease. The lease's terms govern. In the olden days the standard royalty was 1/8 (12.5%) instead of the current 25%, so the royalty that this will pay woudld be based on the lease terms (12.5) No bonus money, no environmental mitigation. There are still some mineral code provisions you can use if they damage the property, but no special liquidated damages.
It does suck that you can't get the 20k an acre and will get half as much in royalty. That said, if these pay like people expect that 12.5% royalty won't be to terrible.
The mineral servitude is only held by production on a contiguious tract as we discussed. It looks like they didn't reserve, but even if they did it could prescribe in the manner I described.
However, a LEASE remains valid over all the land that is under lease as long as a well is paying in 'paying quantities.' The mineral rights vested in the owner, but they are subject to the existing lease. The lease's terms govern. In the olden days the standard royalty was 1/8 (12.5%) instead of the current 25%, so the royalty that this will pay woudld be based on the lease terms (12.5) No bonus money, no environmental mitigation. There are still some mineral code provisions you can use if they damage the property, but no special liquidated damages.
It does suck that you can't get the 20k an acre and will get half as much in royalty. That said, if these pay like people expect that 12.5% royalty won't be to terrible.
This post was edited on 8/27/08 at 9:26 pm
Posted on 8/28/08 at 11:47 pm to Cadercole
Disclaimer: not a political statement, don't care how you vote.
Obama specifically mentioned promoting natural gas production during the energy independence part of his speech. We can assume McCain would do the same. Good news for the HS.
Obama specifically mentioned promoting natural gas production during the energy independence part of his speech. We can assume McCain would do the same. Good news for the HS.
Posted on 8/29/08 at 12:11 pm to gingles
Okay, I have a tiny little lot in South Highlands in Shreveport, how much $ and when?
Posted on 8/30/08 at 3:47 pm to gingles
Like it really needs alot of promotion? They are hell bent as it is!
Posted on 8/30/08 at 3:56 pm to Checkmateking2
CMK, go back to the other thread and let us know the inside info!!!!!
Posted on 10/24/08 at 4:55 pm to landnPD
Hey Folks,
I was just wondering if I get your impressions on this thought.
There is a heightened sense of activity in southern Arkansas, and now, there are several geologists who have come out and said that the Haynesville Shale extends into the southernmost reaches of Arkansas. Truth is, I think all past attempts to "draw a line in the sand" where this development is concerned is an exercise in futility, but that is just my 2 cents' worth.
We all know what has taken place in NW LA. Tell me, what about the parishes of Claiborne and Union? Yes, my family has property in the northernmost part of Claiborne around Junction City, so I do have a motive behind asking this question.
Thanks!
LaTech80
I was just wondering if I get your impressions on this thought.
There is a heightened sense of activity in southern Arkansas, and now, there are several geologists who have come out and said that the Haynesville Shale extends into the southernmost reaches of Arkansas. Truth is, I think all past attempts to "draw a line in the sand" where this development is concerned is an exercise in futility, but that is just my 2 cents' worth.
We all know what has taken place in NW LA. Tell me, what about the parishes of Claiborne and Union? Yes, my family has property in the northernmost part of Claiborne around Junction City, so I do have a motive behind asking this question.
Thanks!
LaTech80
Posted on 10/24/08 at 5:18 pm to Latech80
You resurrected this thread from the dead! Well, as of now, it looks like that the shale goes to at least the northern edge of township 21N in Louisiana. There may be some thin shale up in Arkansas, but it's probably not profitable to drill for it at today's NG prices. Come back in 2-3 years if the economy comes back and maybe things would rebound. But if I were in Arkansas, i'd take a lease with a low bonus payment so long as I got good royalty %'s.
Posted on 10/24/08 at 7:13 pm to GeneralLee
I went to www.arklagas.org, and there are a number of reports, one of which was published by the Center of Energy Studies at LSU, that presents a very comprehensive breakdown of the various rock formations in North and South Louisiana. I commend it to anyone who desires an objective review of the subject matter.
I know in my particular little section of North La. there are at least 11 lithographic formations covering Claiborne parish (and surrounding parishes such as Union), and the majority of them are non-HS related (if that makes sense). I think very little attention has been paid to the various sand formations throughout North Louisiana that extend into Arkansas, and I must tell you, I think these source rock formations have the potential to be as prolific as anything found in NW LA.
Again, my 2 cents' worth.
LaTech80
I know in my particular little section of North La. there are at least 11 lithographic formations covering Claiborne parish (and surrounding parishes such as Union), and the majority of them are non-HS related (if that makes sense). I think very little attention has been paid to the various sand formations throughout North Louisiana that extend into Arkansas, and I must tell you, I think these source rock formations have the potential to be as prolific as anything found in NW LA.
Again, my 2 cents' worth.
LaTech80
Posted on 11/7/08 at 7:31 pm to Latech80
The ballots have been cast, and the election is over. Now, where does that leave us? That is, those of us who own property in North Louisiana.
It's my understanding that the players have retrenched. Any drilling activity is taking place in the northwestern part of North Lousiana, and if activity is taking place in northeast Louisiana, I haven't heard about it.
So, is the incoming administration going to be friend or foe? I think Obama's anitpathy towards big business and oil companies, in particular, militates against oil production. Where that leaves natural gas is anyone's guess, at this point.
Again, is North La.(particularly Northeast La) out of the running?
I know it appears that I have more questions than answers, but uncertainty seems to be the predominant theme, these days.
It's my understanding that the players have retrenched. Any drilling activity is taking place in the northwestern part of North Lousiana, and if activity is taking place in northeast Louisiana, I haven't heard about it.
So, is the incoming administration going to be friend or foe? I think Obama's anitpathy towards big business and oil companies, in particular, militates against oil production. Where that leaves natural gas is anyone's guess, at this point.
Again, is North La.(particularly Northeast La) out of the running?
I know it appears that I have more questions than answers, but uncertainty seems to be the predominant theme, these days.
Posted on 11/7/08 at 9:42 pm to Latech80
I think we'll be OK as far as energy policy being conducive towards Haynesville Shale production. Democrats are actually in favor of natural gas production as they view it as cleaner and lower carbon emitting of a fossil fuel than oil. Maybe ole T Boone Pickens brainwashed Obama into a huge NG fan, you never know.
The biggest hit will be higher taxes on the corporations like Chesepeake and on landowners getting royalty checks. But, I think Democrats will cause higher energy prices in the long run, so maybe the higher taxes will be balanced out by higher NG prices.
There is a map from Chesepeake Energy that shows their latest estimation of the shale, and it appears that most of NE Louisiana is indeed out of the play. The "Organic shale deposition" is the Haynesville Shale in the picture below.
The biggest hit will be higher taxes on the corporations like Chesepeake and on landowners getting royalty checks. But, I think Democrats will cause higher energy prices in the long run, so maybe the higher taxes will be balanced out by higher NG prices.
There is a map from Chesepeake Energy that shows their latest estimation of the shale, and it appears that most of NE Louisiana is indeed out of the play. The "Organic shale deposition" is the Haynesville Shale in the picture below.
This post was edited on 11/7/08 at 9:50 pm
Posted on 11/10/08 at 1:34 pm to GeneralLee
So, what area is covered by the Haynesville Sand? That is, what parishes are involved. I understand it is around the Ark/La line, but that covers a lot of territory.
Is it in northern Claiborne/Union parishes? What is its potential, and how prolific is it? Oil or gas, or both?
Is it in northern Claiborne/Union parishes? What is its potential, and how prolific is it? Oil or gas, or both?
This post was edited on 11/10/08 at 1:35 pm
Posted on 11/13/08 at 11:45 am to Latech80
Well the one thing I know for an absolute certainty is that our land is outside of the gray "organic" area and we signed a lease for 4k/acre.
I wonder if this is an attempt to 'hedge their bets' and figure out where the boundaries lie.
Is anyone mapping their land against this chart to see where leases have been signed? That might be interesting.
ETA I'm in the yellow sand and silt area FWIW.
I wonder if this is an attempt to 'hedge their bets' and figure out where the boundaries lie.
Is anyone mapping their land against this chart to see where leases have been signed? That might be interesting.
ETA I'm in the yellow sand and silt area FWIW.
This post was edited on 11/13/08 at 11:48 am
Posted on 11/14/08 at 9:13 pm to Checkmateking2
quote:
where are you cad?
webster parish
Posted on 11/24/08 at 1:15 pm to PBeard
NATURAL GAS: Legal fight rages between La., Interior over mineral rights in prolific shale (11/24/2008)
As companies rush to tap the Haynesville Shale reservoir in northwestern Louisiana, possibly the largest natural gas discovery in the country, the state is in a heated legal battle with the federal government over who owns a sprawling lake and the mineral rights that overlies a portion of the play.
The fight over ownership of the 17,000-acre Lake Bistineau predates the recent Haynesville frenzy, but the influx of energy companies -- and their leasing and royalty dollars -- into the state has added a sense of urgency to the debate. Gas production from the lake could mean millions, or billions, of dollars for the winning government.
At the heart of the argument is semantics over the lake's navigability. As a general rule, states maintain sole mineral rights to lands beneath navigable waterways within their borders. But determining whether a waterway is truly navigable is difficult. The Interior Department says Lake Bistineau is not truly navigable and that gives the United States a claim to underwater mineral rights. But the state is attempting to prove the lake was always considered navigable.
Meanwhile, exploration companies have shied away from bidding for tracts recently offered in the lake. So the state has proposed a compromise until resolution over ownership of the mineral rights can be reached. The deal would place in escrow any money that Louisiana receives from leases or fuel production from the lake. Those funds would stay in the account until the state and Interior Department resolve the matter.
Louisiana is awaiting response from the U.S. attorney's office, said Terry Hessick, the assistant attorney general who is representing the state in the case (Jen DeGregorio, New Orleans Times-Picayune, Nov. 23). -- KJH
As companies rush to tap the Haynesville Shale reservoir in northwestern Louisiana, possibly the largest natural gas discovery in the country, the state is in a heated legal battle with the federal government over who owns a sprawling lake and the mineral rights that overlies a portion of the play.
The fight over ownership of the 17,000-acre Lake Bistineau predates the recent Haynesville frenzy, but the influx of energy companies -- and their leasing and royalty dollars -- into the state has added a sense of urgency to the debate. Gas production from the lake could mean millions, or billions, of dollars for the winning government.
At the heart of the argument is semantics over the lake's navigability. As a general rule, states maintain sole mineral rights to lands beneath navigable waterways within their borders. But determining whether a waterway is truly navigable is difficult. The Interior Department says Lake Bistineau is not truly navigable and that gives the United States a claim to underwater mineral rights. But the state is attempting to prove the lake was always considered navigable.
Meanwhile, exploration companies have shied away from bidding for tracts recently offered in the lake. So the state has proposed a compromise until resolution over ownership of the mineral rights can be reached. The deal would place in escrow any money that Louisiana receives from leases or fuel production from the lake. Those funds would stay in the account until the state and Interior Department resolve the matter.
Louisiana is awaiting response from the U.S. attorney's office, said Terry Hessick, the assistant attorney general who is representing the state in the case (Jen DeGregorio, New Orleans Times-Picayune, Nov. 23). -- KJH
Posted on 11/30/08 at 1:46 pm to GeneralLee
I am not sure where this came from but, it is inaccurate. I have already been told that we have gas and oil. We are in the Golddonna area which is clearly outside of this drawing.
Posted on 11/30/08 at 3:57 pm to msesh
The map is from Cheasapeake, gas and oil comes from tons of formations, this is specifically a theoretical interpretation of where the HS core is. Goldonna is on the very souteast fringe.
Posted on 12/4/08 at 9:18 am to Checkmateking2
I'm sure there are a number of people subscribing to this thread that have heard of the "Gray Sand." Does anybody know what the geographic dimensions are of this formation? What parishes is it predominantly found in? Does it exist in Southern Arkansas?
Posted on 12/4/08 at 2:18 pm to Latech80
Gray Sand is in the Smackover formation,right below the Haynesville shale/sand. I know it is most prevalent in Bossier, Webster, Claiborne and Lincoln parishes, I think it pinches out before Arkansas? I am sure TDog or someone else could tell you more.
This post was edited on 12/4/08 at 2:20 pm
Popular
Back to top



1




