Some New Methods for Estimating the Future Production of Oil Wells ? Discussion

ROSWELL H. JOHNSON,* Pittsburgh, Pa.-The industry, I think, has suffered very severely from the lack of just such work as has been done by Messrs. Lewis and Beal. I think we owe a great deal to the Bureau of Mines for at last undertaking this much needed work, even though it is so belated. It could have been of very great assistance in so many properties where its usefulness has now passed. I think it is perhaps well to sound a note of caution, owing to the fact that so much of this information was derived from eastern Oklahoma; but with the new bulletin giving the decline for many fields, there will be far less danger of falling into error through assuming too much uniformity. The cumulative percentage curve seems to 'me to be a. particularly splendid idea. It should have a very important -influence, especially as the authors have themselves pointed out several variables that ought to be taken into consideration. The thickness, I think, is going to be an especially important one to work out along the general lines of method that they have advanced. Probably the most surprising thing in the paper is the general rule that the decline of a well is more correlated with its size than with its age. I can't help but think that that generalization, important as it is, is rather rough and will not apply so clearly when we have a larger number of fields before us. Still the generalization, rough as it is, is of very great importance, since the industry has been very largely basing a great many of its ideas on the ignorance of that principle. It leads to certain corollaries that are of great consequence. The first is that the undrilled portion of the property must be appraised on a. different basis from that used for the drilled portion.