The next focusIR Investor Webinar takes places on 14th May with guest speakers from WS Blue Whale Growth Fund, Taseko Mines, Kavango Resources and CQS Natural Resources fund. Please register 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.
I did see a Dr T video (with Malcy) where he listed the perceived negatives of FB and how HUR would mitigate, the water coning through working the well too hard was mentioned and he stated they would not doing be this.
Hello AK I was responding to Johniefp and the previous posters who were talking about reservoir damage and the fact the wells were previously flowed albeit restricted by topsides constraints but don’t let that stop you commenting out of context. I’m off to work shortly. Have a nice day at the pub or the casino or whatever.
Wellwell,
"There’s no evidence they did flow the wells ‘un-restricted’ but if they did then I’m sure it’s worth doing as part of the overall data gathering process."
I don't think anyone here has suggested the wells have been flowed 'un-restricted'.
In my book, 'unrestricted flow' is called a 'blowout'.
Nothing like that has happened in the N.Sea nor WoS for decades....
Wellwell,
"The risk of over-production here is water coning but we’re guided that the water contact is very deep. If in the worst case scenario water is drawn up then it’s possible with proper management it can return to ‘normal’ by controlling the flow. "
Yes, maybe, but now you're clutching at straws to continue your 'negativity' for whoever is pulling your lead. You're talking absolute bollocks, and should give up, because you're beginning to make a fool of yourself, negating whatever credibility you might have had as an 'oil-knowledgable' person on this site.
There’s no evidence they did flow the wells ‘un-restricted’ but if they did then I’m sure it’s worth doing as part of the overall data gathering process. As far as reservoir damage goes, my understanding is the fractured gneiss is far more stable than a sandstone reservoir where you can potentially cause formation damage. (Sand production in that case can still be managed) The risk of over-production here is water coning but we’re guided that the water contact is very deep. If in the worst case scenario water is drawn up then it’s possible with proper management it can return to ‘normal’ by controlling the flow. This I read was the case in Vietnam (I believe this was posted either here or ADVFN recently, although this is un-corroborated) Frankly I find the possibility remote but even if so, it’s not necessarily game changing as long as it either returns to zero water-cut or it’s manageable. Water is a useful tool sometimes in terms of enabling hydrocarbon mobility and there are plenty of wells in the NS and other parts of the world where water cut is in the 80% region, or even more. The AM would cope - to a point. The CMD will cover this, hopefully, but I’m not concerned based on the EPS model.
I wouldn't have thought they'd flow unrestricted, they has the potential to harm the reservoir.
I think the significance has been missed. The Original flow rates when first drilled, hurricane said that they were restricted by surface equipment. I’m no oily but if I was testing a well one of the key numbers I would want to know is what the maximum flow rate on each well is hence the extra oil that has been offloaded during the 3 day testing on each I believe they both flowed when tested like Autumn Falls in a film i saw the other week Such info would be a huge catalyst so not disclosed until appropriate
Assuming the previous vessel did indeed offload none of the 72 hour initial well test 3 days at 20000 bopd .... 60k .
The initial plan of 9 rising to 17 kbopd was explained as safety limits for the offtake installation, not a formation consideration. It would seem unwise to produce immediately at long term 17K rate initially and as a mid value guess, a production rate of 13-15k bopd maybe not unreasonable.
This gives a mid point estimate of circa 250k barrels.
Hopefully at some point clarification will be forthcoming. With the DST due anytime the SP seems to be in Stasis.