George Frangeskides, Chairman at ALBA, explains why the Pilbara Lithium option ‘was too good to miss’. Watch the video 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.
Just been UVEL, checking , left you a post..while there..
Thats +100%?, in a week on 10%, wow
Also, ELIX, reportihg finals on Monday, sp went up 6% from 3.30 on Friday.
Dai, When I traded CFDs the margin I had was 10 to 1. EQLS closed + 10.67% higher than I bought it on !st April. 10.67% x 10 !
of course it could have gone the other way! Lets see what happens.
Somebody's going to think wtf his he on about.!
Well just come back from a walk, and took another look at field 1 and field 2,
And after thinking about two bars of chocolate, Aero, and Dairy milk. both 100grams
I guess field 1 is the largest because the oil would cover a larger area because its full of tight rock..
Shale oil fields, maybe?
Now I have all day to think on that one,..
Luckily I found a good article, learner level on national britannica, so only had to look up tight..
You added a lot of context to last nights reading..
Also been looking at folds, faults, 4-way and 3-way closures,so combined with your articles I think page 96 is going to say a lot more..
So have you ever done mathematical modeling, Years back I was talking with a PHD student who was modelling the growth and spread of an algue that was causing problems in the summer months.. That opened my eyes to the applications of maths.
https://www.britannica.com/science/petroleum/Accumulation-in-reservoir-beds#ref502622
Perhaps an extreme analogy might help:
Lets assume we have 2 accumulations, each with 100 bcf.
1. Field 1- tight, low perm, low porosity, volume in place= 100 bcf. The size of the field will be larger than field 2 as the medium containing gas (porous media) is smaller. It is also less connected relative to field 2. Therefore you will need more complex wells and / or higher number of wells, and longer times to produce the volume as the fluids in place are less connected and more dispersed. Likely higher cost too therefore a shorter economic limit and lower reserves / recovery.
2. Field 2-higher porosity, higher permeability. 170 bcf. The size of field will be smaller than field 1 and the in place gas are better connected. Simpler wells, perhaps lower well count and likely cheaper to run. Therefore it will likely be better economically and produce more reserves than field 1, fiscal climate being equal.
Its a very simple analogy but should help with understanding impact of rock quality on potential rates, likely development and therefore likely cost to produce.
Another analogy would be unconventional *tighter, less porous, vs conventional oil and gas (higher porosity and permeability) development. The latter would be simpler and higher returns per produced fluid.
second attempt...
porosity of a rock is a measure of its ability to hold a fluid. ... Permeability is a measure of the ease of flow of a fluid through a porous solid. Still needs some thought..
point 1, thats stratigraphic traps ?
Areas changing from sand to shale would be an example?
But the shale is dispersed, so unlikely..
This great, learning something way better than watching TV..,
Especially when you have a large pot riding on this..
have a look at this link, expand the picture fully to see all the labels,
Its a simplified version, so 1 step back(to basics), then 2 forward
There 3 example of traps..
https://www.britannica.com/science/stratigraphic-trap
Thanks for all the help guys :)
A big thanks, thats thorough..Definitely added to my understanding but still need to do some work studying the dips and faults.. probably the clues are in the figure....
Will help pass the time waiting for the dip..
Not sure its going to happen though..
Thanks again..:)
@dai2belts
happy to have a quick look. but please bear in mind I am not a geoscience.
First simple read, I could gather the following:
1. Good porosity range, but no mention of permeability (how connected are the porous media).
2. several good overburden (top layer, shallower regions) containments - shales, muds
3. source migration is defined via charged active faults, filling into trap (they see evidence of trap present from the seismic amplitude anomaly - usually this gets a geologist over excited that they think they discovered a gas field! - see point 8), with some released through closed (then charged open) fissures (along the fault lines).
5. Karoo accumulation (prospect) defined in the deeper section. Lake Bed including the upper section of the large Red sandstone as the shallower prospect.
6. trap mechanism proposed for Karoo is a simple 3 way dip closure with the fault sealing in the 4th direction, therefore I suspect a drill target near the crest close / parallel to the fault might be a good drill target to confirm yay, or nay. Looking at the simple section, i can see why they proposed the deeper section could provide a good trap. If this is missing, then the upper structure might hold the escaped He migrating upwards via the faults (forming the Lake Beds target) or be in both.
7. Re lake bed trap, it mentions possibility of a shallow 4 dip closure
8. they alluded to seismic anomalies on structural high to be trapped gas bearing confirming trap mechanism. I buy this. . This is mostly the case for hydrocarbons fields but needs confirmation from drill bit.
9. from the very little seismic cross section they shared (figure 6.3), I cant see any gas plumes - so migration is controlled via leak paths (faults). therefore there is a high likelyhood it have also migrated into traps in the overburden (3 way dip + fault system) provided the charged faults returns to closure / healed.
10. (not in the report) Presence of water usually helps as connate / formation water usually contains CO2 and Ca2+ ions and the release of this through faults would help "healing" through calcite drop out and cementation over time.
Risk:
1. how leaky are those faults? and are they still leaky now?
2. risk of drilling near or through faults (its now deemed conventional but still some risks that needs managing, like loss of muds etc).
anyhow, thats a mathematician gleaning over geology... need a cup of tea now .
Well it could be blue has convinced everyone that this board is full of rampers using any old newspaper article to push the price.. lol...
@deepbluediver can you put your spin on this, but only if you have time...
page 96-97, 6.1.4 its a bit heavy reading for me , I have had a good few reads, so hopefully will get there soon, too much unfamiliar info, so just a little goes in each time,,. I get the impression you have a good understanding to start with..
Weakness seems to be the faults and folds..
http://www.helium-one.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/259989-Project-Apollo-CLN-reduced-memory-Final-13.11.20.pdf
sorry, too much ramp...
"the boom reverberated a whole century thereafter. "
booming a few decades obviously... got carried away there...
upside to being in Rift valley:
forget about Rukwa etc etc, the success of the drill will be akin to finding a new basin across Rift, and we all know what it means for first movers..... remember when oil was discovered in UK / Norway back in the late 70s? the boom reverberated a whole century thereafter. Now, simply decide if you want to be part of one of the most exciting 21st century find, or just read it in the newspaper and ask yourself "what if". DYOR.
"In a bizarre sort of way, it is the ultimate nonrenewable element, and at the moment, it is not replaceable for many applications, certainly for medical systems such as MRI scanners," Gluyas said." https://www.livescience.com/55204-huge-cache-of-ancient-helium-discovered.html
I will add to the ramp - taking Dai2belts baton onward..
1. the fact there is gas seeps mean the probability of having He in the reservoir is high. however, the trap and containment factor will be low at this point until drill. see point 2.
2. seeps are likely through fissures / faults, this is likely to be small amounts. if its large, we will see large pockmarks at location and gas plumes from seismic. even then it doesn't mean all of the He has been released. Plus, I havent seen any of those being mentioned. seeps are normal.
Here is another link that gave me even more comfort:
https://www.livescience.com/55204-huge-cache-of-ancient-helium-discovered.html
"One of the project leaders, geologist Jon Gluyas of Durham University, told Live Science that although the Tanzania gas field is large, it's only a small part of what the entire Rift Valley area may contain. "So it could be substantially larger," Gluyas said. "We will still have a lot of data to collect to be really confident, but yes — this is a globally significant discovery."
Gluyas is a proper legend... full stop. DYOR
found this, traps bursting under pressure and spilling the excess, then getting trapped again before spilling ;)
Migration of the helium primarily from its source towards the surface is typically along pathways
associated with rifting such as faults along the flanks of rifts. Migration can be halted by seals or traps.
If trapping structures are present on the migration pathway, a gas phase can accumulate. The trap will
be filled with helium-rich gas until full and then spill. The excess spilled fraction if not trapped further
up in the system will escape at surface seeps (Ballentine and Barry, 2016). Helium-rich seeps
identified at the surface represent the active migration by helium-laden fluids in the subsurface..
Bursting...
Thats enough ramping, Good night
There is probably more than one scenario, we just need the one that fills the trap before reaching the surface..
I wonder if there is a geologist reading this board, silently laughing, not saying anything because he/she is still filling their ISA..
I get the impression the University research is waiting for confirmation of its accuracy...
If successful its going to big for lots of reasons...
Its more exciting than investing in your own deli, risks the same but you don't have to work, :)
I was thinking more of the gas escaping, there's 10% purity but there could be 1 CF or 100 CF (I know it wouldn't be anywhere near that amount) escaping. All we know is that there's 10% of helium from however much gas is escaping. Underground sure, as you say, if there's 10% purity escaping and there's 1 TCF of gas underground then there's 10 BCF of helium
There is a relationship, as the seeps are 10% helium by volume of the total sample..
So if a trap contained 100 cf of gas, 4% helium you have 4cf helium
If it was 10% you would have 10cf..
So not completely different, but maybe different enough as I suppose helium escapes easier than nitrogen, and I am guessing until I ask google..
Thanks for the replies guys, much appreciated :) I'll take a look at that link Dai, cheers! I suppose the purity of the helium escaping and the quantity are completely different. There may be 10ish% helium concentration but it could be minute amounts leaking out. But yeah, given how much gas is supposed to be there I have no worries about it not going successful, just as HE1 doesn't either
I have been looking in the docs again, the seal stuff is still a bit difficult especially when discussing the faults because I always think of them as giant cracks, which is probably incorrect.. but I am confident this will turn out good,,
like you mentioned, DM said the other fields Eyasi and Balangida have sub-surface salt horizons being salt lake beds, grade A seals, thats plan B.. Balangida also has 10% seeps.. So plan B sounds a winner too..
Rukwa has salt as they farm it there, but not seen much of a mention of salt seals, but still lots of pages to read,.
I read something about erosion of the lake bed..something that happened long ago..
It has shale but it is dispersed, also tuff beds(layers of melted volcanic ash) in the lake bed formation which is a good seal. The report explains that the seeps could charge nearby sealed traps.. That makes me think of Itumbula with its springs.
Seals are also present within and at the top of the Karoo section
The karoo section is the probably the third target of each of the wells as its below the lake bed..maybe the 2nd too, I need to read more.
Based on your comments and my reading so far it sounds really promising..
What fills me with extra confidence is they call Rukwa the Goldilocks Zone, and DM almost laughed when asked about finding dust,,,,
I would go for a good sign for this.
The gas is having to be forced through the porus rock so it could mean that the flow rate is so great, that the gas has nowhere else to go. If we extract and the natural flow rate continues, it will not reduce at the same rate we are extracting at as the gas will continue to be released from the mantle. That's my theory.
If the gas is escaping because there is no seal, the other 2 sites have a salt seal or something that is a natural seal, so there should be less escaping gas through the years. I'm hoping that this is a successful site and also our worst, so we get more from the others. Possibly wishful thinking, but...
@prae, page 96-97, 6.1.4 a bit heavy reading, so going to be a beer and google night..
Its one of your main questions, and it is the reason for drilling at 3 different depths.. i think .
http://www.helium-one.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/259989-Project-Apollo-CLN-reduced-memory-Final-13.11.20.pdf
True, so maybe there won't be an issue of trapping it? Someone mentioned this issue and it just got me thinking whether it's actually a bad sign when you dig in to it a bit further