We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
@Crusty. Ah, glad to hear he's still about.
Thanks Judo will check tonight.
Max
See Friday between 0800 and 0900!
J
Missed the AGM as i was on Holiday for two weeks- has anyone done a writeup, normally CRustyPete has one?
the question is were the board plums as usual or did they provide tangible info?
@vike1 , yes late Q3 - early Q4
@HonestTom - no I have been in email dialogue with Drewky but for personal reasosn he was unable to make it.
Thanks Crusty, much appreciated.
Was Drewky there?
Very grateful for the excellent update Crusty.
It's nice to hear that mgmt is at least aware of things like sp catalysts, etc. It was starting to feel like this was being run as a private company, and all this reporting stuff is just a nuisance!
Nice to get confimation on Kiliwani as well, the unspoken resource in our asset base.
On balance the story feels positive, though continued patience is still needed.
Any guidance on when we'll hear first impressions of seismic data? Late Q3?
Gas pressures are huge were huge at NT1 and NT2. Producing 20MMcft per day on test from just a few feet of the top reservoir. Production rates dependent on reservoir thickness, permeability/porosity and pressure along with perforation and surface facilities capacity. 140MMcft a day target. So say 5 wells at 30MMcft a day is not unreasonable to assume. Possibly 4 wells at 35MMcft. Testing of CH-1 will be key.
Well, whatever the gas pressures are now, safe in the knowledge they are obliged to drill Chikumbi 1 well, if the November spud date remains, we should know if the acreage is as prolific as we all hope and pray it is !
I have to say that it is new to me but you have obvioulsy read it from to cover to cover mcdoughnut.... why bother trusting to facts and logic when you can just make it up eh? But then of course facts and logic won't actually count for much if, like you, you don't understand the difference between volume and pressure and how they effect production, eh? Never mind mcdoughnut, you'll catch up one day ;0)
Thanks to you Crusty for a summary of the AGM news that I asked you for. It seems Chikumbi1 well spud is still set for November. With big raises likely down the line, so much depends on the outcome of the November drill. I suppose the next landmark is the interpretation of the 3D Seismics which I hope supports the BOD's apparent optimism.
That is what i remember too! So we are yet to see the full potential.
My memory is a bit befuddled in my old age but wasn’t it reported that the gas pressure was enough to blow half of Tanzania off the map.
Thanks Crusty for the summary, much appreciated.
Crusty is right, as an example, why do some oil fields need water injection....? because the reservoir pressure is low and the amount Barrels per day produced is low. By increasing the pressure in the reservoir will increase the rate of production regardless of how much oil/gas is there.
For us the different lobes may contain different pressures and so we may see different production rates because of that. We will have to see
NT-2 was compromised due to a mud being required to control the pressure during the drilling. Hopefully using a modern drill rig will ensure that does not need to happen on the next drill. The last rig would have had its time better spent in retirement in my view.
So mcdoughnut show me the "logic" that equates the rate of production to an increase in underlying resources... There is NONE!
Many thanks Crusty for your AGM comments - informative, clear and balanced as always.
Have a nice hols!
GL
Thanks for your report out Crusty. This will be an interesting place to be when the leaves go brown.
Here we go again. Yes mcdoughnut the "high case" scenario says 250 not 140 that of course is possible but, if you read my post again I state that the "best case" scenarion - which is what they are anticipating - is NOT affected simply by increased resources..... the volume of the resources in not the factor that will determine the rate of production as you were trying to imply.
"And to add to that is the GIIP in the Jurassic, which will be targeted by the same wells. Thus gas could be produced from BOTH zones at the same time, possibly doubling production."
So to make it very simple for you mcdougnut, you cannot get more gas out of the same well unless an increase inpressure forces more of it to the top - doubling the size of the underlying resource will not increase the rate of production but the duration, unless there is also an increase in the underlying pressure - and the two things are not necessarily related.
But now that has been pointed out to you you look to deflect that by blaming the messenger. Ar53 'ole.
Anyway one and all I am off on my hols. I will leave you all to your thoughts.
Crusty doing his usual I see LOL!!
I suggest what MIGHT be possible, IF the wells produce at a higher rate than anticipated back in 2017. AEX and Crusty can't possibly KNOW that rate until the wells are drilled and tested, but yet again Crusty makes another baseless claim that higher production IS NOT POSSIBLE without more wells, which is clearly RUBBISH.
And to add to my case for higher gas production from the existing planned wells, the high estimate, clearly shown on slide 9 of the AGM presentation, and for his usual reasons Crusty chooses to ignore, is 250MMcf/d.
And to add to that is the GIIP in the Jurassic, which will be targeted by the same wells. Thus gas could be produced from BOTH zones at the same time, possibly doubling production.
Thanks for sharing Crusty, much appreciated.
BG, CH1a and CH1b are both due to be testing Jurrasic (hence the name Chickumbi (CH) as apposed Ntorya (NT) ) but are posiitoned to test Lobe 2 (CH1a) and Lobe 3 (CH1b) - as I understand it. Technicalities not my forte I am sorry to say ;0)
Oh very quickly for haggis's benefit: "140 MMcf/d" is a "best case scenario" and assumes all 8 wells will be drilled successfully and put into production. An increase in the Gas reserves will not necessarily increase poroduction without first drilling more wells.
So, "There is clearly huge scope in that to produce gas at a much higher rate." The rate of gas production would depend upon gas pressure not the volume of gas.
Slide 9, "Farm Out to APT designed to fully carry Aminex for the entire “Best Case” development scenario identified in 2017 io commercialisation report (gross production rate: 140 MMcfd; gross cumulative production: 777 BCF; gross total spend $143 MM)"
Slide 9, under the production forecast table "140 MMcf/d based on 2017 io commercialisation report (P50 Full field development)".
Slide 11, in Sept 2017 the Mean GIIP was 1.344 BCF, but in May 2021 it had risen to 8.236 BCF
So the cumulative production should be a lot higher than 777 BCF, as the GIIP has gone up 6.13x.
777 x 6.13 = 4,763 BCF cumulative production
There is clearly huge scope in that to produce gas at a much higher rate.
140 x 6.3 = 883 MMcf/d (25% to Aminex). That would be a huge income if they decide to produce the gas at that rate.
And on top of that we are waiting on the 3D Seismic results that could meaningfully increase the GIIP, especially from the Jurassic. And the billions of barrels of oil are still out there somewhere, waiting to be found (Mike Rego).
It's going to get very interesting later this year!
So, CH-1a will be testing (LOBE 2, a new target), and i guess, one that goes towards the resent increase in the estimated resource ?
https://www.londonstockexchange.com/news-article/AEX/result-of-agm/15471171