Survey Demographics

Hart Energy researchers completed interviews with nine industry participants in the downhole completions service segment in the Eagle Ford region. Participants include six managers or sales engineers with well stimulation companies, two completions consultants or managers with oil producers, and one wireline/logging completions specialist. Interviews were conducted during mid-December 2014.

Part I. – Survey Findings

Among Survey Participants:

  • Slickwater Dominates Completions; Crosslink Growing [See Question 1 on Statistical Review]. Seven of nine respondents reported slickwater is used in the Eagle Ford, but two providers reported some clients using crosslink gel to enhance completions in certain circumstances.
  • Some Changes Expected in Near-Term [See Question 2 on Statistical Review]. Four of nine respondents expect some changes in the near term as operators begin to search for increased efficiencies because of low oil prices. Drilling may slow somewhat, but every drilling and completion project will be carefully planned for efficiency. Operators are expected to continue to produce profitably at the new price of oil and will be searching for new technologies or completion practices.
    • Completions Consultant: “Operators are all looking for ways to increase efficiency of production and will continue to find ways to make the wells drill and complete profitably at the prevailing price. There will be many changes.”
  • Spacing between Frack Stages Average 263-ft. [See Questions 3a, 3b, 3c on Statistical Review]. Spacing ranges between 200 ft to 300 ft in the play and averages ~263-ft. Most respondents have kept spacing about the same this year with only three reporting changes.
  • Plug and Perf Most Common Fracking Technique [See Question 4 on Statistical Review]. All respondents reported that plug and perf completions are the standard fracking technique in the Eagle Ford now. None of the respondents are using sleeve technology currently.
    • Mid-Tier Service Provider: “Here in Eagle Ford, plug and perf dominates. There hasn’t been much attempt to change that here.”
  • Downhole Tools, Service Providers Sufficient [See Question 5a and 5b on Statistical Review]. All respondents reported that the number of downhole tool providers is sufficient within the region. Only two mentions were made of new tools or techniques. A frack service provider has done a few coil tubing fracks with interesting results. In addition, a wireline/logging specialist believes there are underutilized diagnostic tools that will bring new efficiencies to enhance production.
    • Mid-Tier Service Provider: “By far, most operators are focused on sand volumes for results. We have had a few coil tubing fracks in the Eagle Ford and I believe they will have interesting results. We will see if anything new catches on here.”
  • Average of Four Wells per Pad [See Question 6 on Statistical Review]. Average number of wells per pad is about four. Most respondents are reporting the number of wells per pad as either three or four wells.
  • Zipper Fracks Stable at ~60% of Completions [See Question 7 on Statistical Review]. The percentage of zipper frack completions among respondents is now ~60%; the remaining ~40% continues to be solo fracks. The trend will continue as multi-well pads aid in efficiency.
  • Natural Sand Remains Most Common Proppant [See Question 8a and 8b on Statistical Review]. Sand is reported as the most common proppant in the region and averages ~9.4 million pounds per well among respondents with 100 mesh and 40/70 sand most common. Respondents reported that nearly all wells use 100% natural sand as proppant.
    • Mid-Tier Service Provider: “We continue to see huge volumes of natural sand dominate the play. We see 100 mesh and even 200 mesh being used as well as some 40/70, and 10 million to 15 million pounds per well is common.”

Part II. – Statistical Review, Downhole Completions [Eagle Ford Shale]

Total Respondents = 9 [Service Providers = 6, Oil Operators = 2, Wireline Specialist = 1]

1. What common practices are used in your area for completions?

Slickwater Only: 7

Mostly slickwater with some crosslink: 2

2. Do you see that changing over the next three to six months?

No specific changes expected: 5

Expecting changes to raise efficiency: 4

3a. Is spacing between stages closer now than a year ago?

Closer stages: 2

Same spacing: 7

3b. What is the average distance between frack stages in your area?

200 ft. spacing: 1

200-250 ft. spacing: 1

250 ft. spacing: 1

250-300 ft. spacing: 3

300 ft. spacing: 2

Average: ~263 ft.*

*8 respondents estimated spacing figures; 1 respondent recommends targeted rather than equidistant spacing

3c. How are you fine tuning your frack program downhole?

Heavy loading of natural sand: 8

Recommending new logging techniques: 1

4. What fracking technique is most common in your area?

Plug and Perf: 9

5a. Would you characterize the supply of downhole tools in your area as excessive, sufficient or insufficient to meet early 2014 demand?

Sufficient: 9

5b. Are there any new downhole tools being tried in your area?

Nothing new: 8

Not new but underutilized technical solutions: 1

6. What is the average number of wells being completed per pad in your area?

3 wells: 1

3-4 wells: 6

4 wells: 2

Average wells per pad: ~4

7. What percentage of fracks drilled from pads are zipper fracks vs. individual fracks?

Zipper Frack Stack Frack # Responses

75% 25% 2

700% 30% 1

60% 40% 1

50% 50% 5

Avg: 59% 41% 9

8a. How much proppant (in lbs.) are you using per well?

7-10 million lbs: 1

7-12 million lbs: 2

10 million lbs: 3

10-12 million lbs: 1

10-15 million lbs: 1

12-15 million lbs: 1

Average per well: ~9.4 million pounds

8b. Could you give a percentage estimate of how much proppant in your area is used by type?

Sand* only: 100%

*Respondents reported 100 mesh and 40/70 sand most common