Industry Attitudes Toward Slim-Hole Drilling

From a technical and economic standpoint slim-hole drilling promises to reduce drilling and completion costs. It may also result in reduced workover costs. From the standpoint of industry acceptance, slim hole drilling does not fare so well. Producers, generally, have not accepted slim hole completion techniques for field development. Contractors, generally, have been dissatisfied with profits. A mail survey indicates a need for additional information. Suggestions are given for improving the slim-hole picture. Introduction Since late 1952 there has been a considerable revival of interest in slim-hole drilling. Behind this revival are some hard economic considerations. There is no question that demand for new oil reserves will be greater in the future than in the past. The cost and difficulty of finding and exploiting these reserves will almost certainly be greater than ever before. Faced with this situation the oil industry is confronted with two alternatives.Industry can accept these higher costs without struggle and pass them on to the consumer.Industry can exert every effort to reduce the cost of finding and producing oil. This is the course industry will want to take if at all possible. Of all the contributing items that make up the total cost of discovering oil reserves, drilling costs are by far the largest single item. (H. J. Struth, stated, In 1953, direct drilling cost comprised 61.9 per cent of total exploration expenditures.") It is quite evident that in order to cut the costs of finding oil, it would be a good idea to consider ways to reduce drilling costs. With regard to field extension or field development, figures similar to those reported above are not immediately available. It is known, however, that drilling and completion costs are very large elements in the total costs of production, and well servicing costs are another important element. These two items will become even more important relatively, as the trend toward automatic leases continues.