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.
To give you the differences in scale of the two scenarios in my previous post,
For the larger fracture intersect, HUR have stated that the major joints and faults could range up to 2 metres wide; even if a fraction of that, still many times wider than the diameter of the bore intersecting them.
For the shattered rock, I'm referring to regions of microfractures, with fluid spaces ranging from 20 microns up to millimetre size.
"I understand you using LF because the wordcount allowance is greater"
Don't make assumptions about me. I was posting in TLF because I wanted to make sure dspp saw and responded to it.
For those here who don't use TLF, here's my unedited post that's being referred to - I'm trying to provide a possible explanation for why the fluids in the two Lancaster wells are different. The information I'm using to come to this hypothesis is based on the geological information provided in presentations and articles by RT/HUR.
Thinking about this, this could explain why one well intersecting a lot of perched water and the other is drawing almost dry oil. The well drawing almost dry oil has intersected a large fracture, oil filled with very little water in suspension. The well drawing the higher water cut has intersected an area of shattered rock, where there is good permeability but due to the smaller particle and open fracture size, it has a much lower porosity. It is this lower porosity that is trapping the perched water through surface tensions and having very much smaller pockets of space between the rock particles.
It's the difference between putting a mix of oil and water into a container filled with a mesh, and one filled with a sponge.
In the former, the oil and water will quickly separate, and stay that way, how ever hard you suck from the top.
In the latter, there will be pockets of both fluids trapped at different levels in the sponge, the difference in density not enough for gravity to overcome the surface tensions between fluids and solids, holding the different fluids in place. No matter where you suck from in this latter situation, you'll get a mix of the two fluids depending on how much of each are in that part of the sponge.
This would explain having both a good pressure response between the two wells, and having distinctively different fluid mixes being recovered from each.
The latter lower porosity bore, being uncased and with a small rock particle size is also much more likely to collapse, especially after some of the fluids have been moved/extracted. The first bore may only be extracting from the first large fracture or two just because of the much larger physical size of the fracture than the continuation of the bore, and the latter bore could be extracting only from the first section because the uncased bore has collapsed.
"ALL of the 'Fractured Basement' is 'shattered rock', to a greater or lesser extent. And none of that rock is porous as such. Though when one takes a 'cubic block' of it, it possesses a 'pseudo-porosity', that being the spaces between the individual pieces of rubble."
I know that AUUK, don't take me for an idiot. The porosity I was talking about is the effective porosity of the reservoir formation that contributes to fluid flow, not the porosity of the rock itself.
Oops butted in halfway through yiur post
Nevermind but only run a mike wish she would feck off to portugal but i dont want to gey involved in politics like you so say no more
Regsrding HUR they are havibg the SP knocked doen and is the lokes PJ ( hi PJ ) and Dspp taljing like ghey know everything and nothing ( squaring the circle)
In saying that with regadd to Lancaster GLA the sgareholders will have a better idea in March
Regarding bonds if it ever gets to the stage of repaying or default then bonds win so to me thtir is no argument on tat point
Any skellung mistajds is down to samsing phone
(cont)
....More accurate. Imperial remains more 'human sized'. Hey! It even applies here, with Hurricane. Just look at some of the tech presentations. (Dspp take note, when you're rabbiting nonsense about watercut.) 'Drawdown pressures'? Quoted in psi. Well depths? Metres.
One sight of Nicola Sturgeon on the TV makes me want to run a mile. A kilometre isn't enough. Is the traffic in the Euston road just 'centimetering along'? No way. Try inches.
Metric is good for measuring things like the speed of light, but not much else.
'Vive l'Imperiale'! (Except literally translated, that means 'long live the double-decker bus'.)
Good on you i never drilled oil but involved in geo and used to bet on type dril cuttings ie what zone and the nearest bought the beer and yhat was in saudi the place of my firdt still
I am involved in drilling water wells at present to help people in need and helping as i can
Still think its a 3 bagger at least
shedful,
"Though i wish you hadnt interchanged between metric and imperial. Though luckily or not i am of an age where i can occasionlay converse in both"
Sorry 'bout that!
But I was writing about sort of vague things. A 100x100x100 ft 'cube' of fractured basement is a pretty stupid sort of idea anyway, ,cos if you tried to cut a cube of such stuff out of a mountain on the Isle of Lewis, for example, it'd almost certainly fall apart, anyway, before you'd even managed such a task! (Thus partly proving my point.) And I just used metric for 'fracture width' because those were the units Mario used. And of course no fracture is a nice uniform 20cm wide, however you cut the cake.
For strictly oilfield calcs, I always (still) use imperial with some weird USA offshoots. Psi, feet, inches, bbl, etc. Give me depth of the hole (TVD) of a well that's taken a kick, drillpipe pressure when shut-in (in psi), mud density (in an arcane unit of 'pounds per gallon) in use, and within 30 seconds using a simple calculator like that on my phone, I can tell you by how much the mud weight should be increased to 'kill' the well. Tell me the size of your drillpipe (in inches, inside and outside diameter), inside diameter of the casing, plus depths (in feet), depth in feet of the open-hole section (inches), and within a few minutes (with the same calculator) I can give a total fluid volume in the hole within 0.5% accuracy. How about your mudpumps? Tell me the stroke length and liner size (again in inches), and I can tell you how many pump strokes it'll take to 'circulate out' the kick, even though that'll take a few more minutes). Of course there are tables or software which can give you such data, but in a race I could probably do it almost as quick. It's ingrained.
But the oilfield isn't the same the world over, and some horrible 'mismatches' often occur. For instance, in terms of pressure, other than psi, you've got bar, or kilopascals. Then, I have to start looking for conversion-tables. And volumes? Casing diameters measured in inches (still the industry norm), but depth in metres? OK, no big deal about the metres. Multiply by 3.281. I know that by heart. There are 6.29 bbl in a cubic metre. But hang on, no mudpump manufacturer sells a cylinder liner measured in centimetres: they're still in inches.
Going back to 'well-control'. Pressure relationship to depth is an important part of your calculations. But psi per metre? Literally, I've seen that!
OK, I'll stop blowing my own trumpet for a moment. But at least in oilwell drilling terms, metric is hopeless. A metre is too long a unit, a centimetre too short as a sub-multiple. You can't see a one-litre 'gas kick', but a cubic metre and you may already be in big trouble. And kiloPascals? Stupid.
Oh yeak, how do you measure drillpipe? Not in feet and inches, but feet and 'oilfield inches' which are 1/10th of a foot, and 1/10th of an 'inch'. 1/1oth of an oilfield inch is half a centimetre. More
Yea and before you start AD I know i missed out oil flow and i know granite is not a porous rock it has cracks voids eyc in it depending on the upheavles throuh geological time
I do agree that pij and dspp are going on a bit its like watching eastenders or coronation st in slooooow motion
As i said from many years before DrT has put the probabilities out there on paper
I think both of them are in danger of circling the square
Jimo
The porosity may or may not flow through the more shattered rock more quickly IMO
Though i wish you hadnt interchanged between metric and imperial
Though luckily or not i am of an age where i can occasionlay converse in both
Regarding fracture network i should remind eveyone of DR T in 2014 and his present updates the information is out there,
On a different note i hope most of the LTH sold out and bought back again at the lower begining .
Originally this company came to AIM at 45p and after several years of DzrT he who got chastisned for taking the leftover money into his and others pockets on one of the original drills ( reminded me of Xcsheit) at the time and the several rises and eventual fall to 9p then 15p
Therefore after all these years im sure we shall at least see a 3 bagger and with a bit of luck a bit more
For FfD they can afford a couple
drills and hpefully the PI inde will be better than the last recorded
Problem is farmour out or RBL they hopefully have a choice as no matter what the market says the ALL biz will be around for a long time
Though in saying that i read that Nigeria may lose 35 % of reserves and others either Marathon or frenchie Total will get out of supplying powr station to lower carbon sheit footprint on paper
Anyway bought back in as per my De ja vu post and IMO long term the power that will win ( present terms ) is Hydrogen
The day they can convert direct sunlight with ease then thats my first and i dont mean solar
Heres hoping the BOD have a suprise or 2 up their jaket otherwise the BOD should have a reshuffle
JiMO
Out of curiosity, I've taken some time to look at some other BB's. ADVFN seems to have been taken over (partly) by layabouts who had a disappointing St Valentine's day, I don't even bother with ii, so went to the Lemon. And saw that other than the usual suspects, there are some familiar names cropping up there.
One of those being our friend WessexMario, who is someone I genuinely consider to be a 'friend'.
And I hope he won't be annoyed with me for doing this, but I want to quote a part of one of his posts here, written in discussion with Dspp.
"The well drawing the higher water cut has intersected an area of shattered rock, where there is good permeability but due to the smaller particle and open fracture size, it has a much lower porosity. "
I'm surprised that Dspp didn't immediately jump on this, but it was probably because it plays into his own arguments< But forgive me, Mario, but I'm sorry, you're wrong.
ALL of the 'Fractured Basement' is 'shattered rock', to a greater or lesser extent. And none of that rock is porous as such. Though when one takes a 'cubic block' of it, it possesses a 'pseudo-porosity', that being the spaces between the individual pieces of rubble.
So far, we're on the same page.
A quick 'sidetrack' to shale oil, and hydraulic fracturing, which is just an artificial way of achieving the sort of effect that FB has naturally. In the some circles, the success or not of a frac job is measured in 'amount of rubbleisation' achieved. An ugly sort of term, and awkward, but essentially meaning whether you've used a big enough hammer and broken the rock up enough to allow oil to flow. Which in shale, it would have done anyway, but not fast enough to be commercial.
Now in FB, the amount of 'shattering' certainly effects 'pseudo-porisity'. The more shattered (or fractured) the rock is, the greater the 'porosity'.
However, within certain limits, the pseudo-porisity related to rock particle size is not inversely proportional to permeability, in other words the ease with which oil can flow through the entire matrix. As a rough mental image, try a 100x100x100 foot cube of granite, with a few fractures about 20cm wide spread through it, containing oil under pressure. Now imagine a similar cube, really 'shattered', with the same amount of oil contained. Which will flow the more 'easily'?
Hmm. Hard to tell. But there's no reson to believe it'll be the first example. Greater 'shattering' doesn't necessarily mean lower overall permiability within such a block. Even if it's less than in a block 10x10x10. The only way to find out is empirically, through experiment. Which is exactly what the EPS is about.
I know where you're coming from: the possible 'infill and shakedown factor' which might have a bearing on the WD result. But the two things aren't the same.
I understand you using LF because the wordcount allowance is greater, Mario, but it's the sort of thing worth airing here, as well! ;-)