If you have any questions for next week's webinar guest speakers (Atlantic Lithium, Cora Gold and Valirx), please submit 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 and have access to Premium Chat. 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.
It’s all tosh
Not happening now
There's a lot of detailed in this (though it is old):
If the recovery rate can be increased (see previous posts, has been strongly hinted at by PMG), it could be a serious gamechanger over and above current valuations:
Back in 2018 PMG undertook a study through AGR to model potential fracture stimulation of the reservoirs, which concluded (at least to the extent that has been announced publicly to date) - "New GPA reservoir study concluded that stimulating the Claymore formation WOULD result in a considerable increase in well productivity and is likely to increase the project’s oil recovery factor."
A few years earlier, Senergy estimated 24% recovery rate for Perth, when 2P was given as 41.3MMBbls. In a research note, Charles Stanley had to say about it: "For Phase 1, our economic valuation assumes a recovery rate of 24% (based on the Senergy 2P estimates). We expect the actual recovery rate to vary from this current best estimate, perhaps materially because there is quite a bit of uncertainty, in our opinion, relating to the distribution of higher quality sands within the heterogeneous Claymore reservoir. Recovery estimates for the Claymore and Scapa fields, which also produce from Claymore sands, increased over time to 40% and 56% respectively (according to the operator Talisman Energy's most recent publicly available estimates)."
The 2P figure hasn't changed to date, but if there is any validity to the carry across from Claymore and Scapa, then the recovery rate could potentially be doubled - which would be nice..
Most of it is in the 10s of mD. That is okay but hard work. For oil 1mD is the limit for flow. Be careful of streaks of better permeability as they can water out very quickly. How the field behaves over time is to do with the arrangement of those better streaks. If small localised zones it might well help, if big sheets you might need to be careful
That Scott chappie does seem a bit mixed up. Of all the shares he comments on PMG is easily the best performer YTD. Maybe he just got out of bed the wrong side today.
Just in case anybody didn't know, if you click on the filter tab ( above the post a message box in the Share Chat view) you can filter posters so you don't have to wade through the garbage.
Useful tool. ...unlike some of the posters I have filtered who maybe the latter, but certainly not the former ;-)
In other words you haven't got a clue.
Sometimes it's better to keep quiet and let Tom deliver the goods.
Apparently, the permeability is mostly in the range of 1 to 50 millidarcies.
Some beds measured in the hundreds of millidarcies with a maximum measured value of 638 millidarcies.
Is this permeability reasonable?
Once again many thanks for your time and expertise.
Excellent post, thank you very much for taking the time to explain.
With regards to permeability, I have some field data for the main pay zone, would you explain again please?
Average permeability (range) (mD) 8 (1-650) core air permeability.
Scott240 you are all over the place!!
As intimated field dev unlikely now
Company are running short on weasel words for interims
Best case is punt it for nominal sum
May see a drill at skerryvore
Few wind turbines to pacify the green loonies
May see special divi next year
Yes, all looked at by Worley (Scott tie back) over the last few years.
It’s not going to be a small project, but we have 100% so not a big issue once farm in sorted. Chinese are energy hungry so I do think that it will happen soon. The big banks are predicting oil price remains high for the next few years so potentially a lot of cash sloshing around to invest.
Thank you for that Gogsy.
It’s perhaps helpful to also look at what Parkmead, through FinnCap, have said (accepting that they’re likely putting forward the optimistic case). Page 17 of last year’s November report from FinnCap (https://www.parkmeadgroup.com/uploaded/research/FinnCap_Research_20.11.20201.pdf ) includes the following:
A key challenge for the development, and one of the reasons these discoveries have remained fallow, will be managing the H2S and CO2 content of the oil and associated gas. It is important to note, however, that the Scott infrastructure is already equipped to handle sour hydrocarbons.
The high H2S content of the fluids will require the use of special metallurgy for parts of the equipment and infrastructure to avoid corrosion. The most common method to ‘sweeten’ sour gas is amine scrubbing, although the gas could be used for reinjection.
Given the additional capex and opex associated with handling sour hydrocarbons, it is important that Parkmead maximises the resource size of the development to help spread the costs. Hence, there are plans to include the Lowlander and Dolphin accumulations in the Greater Perth Area development project. The Parkmead team has confirmed that there are no technical obstacles precluding a successful Scott platform and FPS tieback.
The issue is not the percentage sulphur but the amount of H2S. Johan Sverdrup has less than 1ppm. Scott is considered high at 150ppm. H2S is really nasty. Very poisonous in even quite small amounts (500ppm in air would kill you in seconds and 10ppm would cause serious issues). It also turns to sulphuric acid as soon as it comes into contact with water. For Perth this means 2 things, firstly it has to use a lot of very expensive coated pipework and secondly it needs to scrub the H2S from the oil before it is transported. Scrubbing the H2S (sweetening the oil) is pretty simple. You need an amine plant. These are very common on fields in the Middle East. They also remove the CO2 which is a bonus. They have issues, however. Amine plants are physically pretty big so difficult to work into offshore environments. They require power, which given the drive to net zero could be an issue. They also do not take kindly to shaking about on an FPSO in bad weather.
The other parameters for Perth are not great but not that bad. Oil gravity above 30 means it is not likely to be too viscous, although the wax content could cause issues (might need heated pipes). The reservoir porosity at 13% is on the low side for an oil field. Bits of Scott are 20% and some fields get up above 30%. Strictly porosity is not the issue, rather it is permeability but usually the two go hand in hand. The oil saturation at 70% indicates lowish permeability (you might hope for 80%). That probably means that you are going to struggle to get 20% of the oil in place out. It also means more wells or, more likely, horizontal wells to try to get rates and recover up. I fear Perth is becoming more difficult as the environmental pressure increase. They will certainly not be able to flare away the CO2 and scrubbed sulphur as might have been the case a few years ago.
LOL ab76, nice work!
Just to repost (yet again) the GPA timeline summary:
2017 - In discussions with a number of leading, international service companies and oil companies.
2018 - Parkmead now in full control of the GPA oil hub project with operatorship and 100% equity.
2019 - Parkmead is in commercial discussions with the Scott field partnership in order to POTENTIALLY agree terms for a tie-back of the Greater Perth Area (“GPA”) to the Scott facilities.
2020 - Parkmead is in commercial discussions with the Scott field partnership, including CNOOC, in order to AGREE terms for a tie-back of the Greater Perth Area (“GPA”) to the Scott facilities.
Parkmead is also in discussions with other operators in the vicinity where new opportunities have arisen during the year.
2021 - Parkmead continues to assess DRAFT COMMERCIAL OFFERS received from the Scott field partnership for the potential tie-back of the Greater Perth Area (“GPA”).
“Infrastructure studies completed in 2020 have confirmed that there are no technical hurdles to produce Perth oil from the wells all the way through to the onshore facilities”
“Parkmead is also in discussions with other operators in the GPA vicinity where new opportunities have arisen during the year”
To be fair ab, he’ll be right…one day. Lol
According to your previous posts scott240, there have already been the following developments:
October 11th - GPA licence sold off upfront hard cash;
September 15th - Suffice to reiterate I’m hearing of an offer pending. One can speculate
The big asset is GPA, possible additional interest WoS acreage;
September 15th - bid news in Aberdeen regarding Parkmead;
September 14th - rumour of suitor here;
August 10th - there was a string saying an offer was to be made for PMG;
July 29th - Americans coming;
July 2nd - May get swallowed up by suitor;
July 2nd - Expected news this week;
July 1st - Nothing imminent over the dog days of summer;
April 24th - PMG on verge of announcing agreement for Perth field;
April 23rd - Perth Field set to go through Scott. Should announce next week. See what fin details are. Should be over 120p;
February 28th - ENQ likely offer cash buy out of GPA;
February 16th - Strong murmer of VC offer for Parkmead. Suspect GPA has interest from a major for stand alone FP option;
February 7th - nah, renewables just a smoke screen, get ready for gpa announcement; and
February 6th - Platypus/Renewables/Dutch Gas all decent, but the only show in town is GPA - And the tie-back to facilities will be announced imminently.
Just thinking out loud here guys
What recent developments have been made to produce Perth
The point of my ramblings?
The Johan Sverdrup has as an API gravity of 28.7 and a Sulphur content of 0.8%.
On the face of it (to my layman's eyes) not amillion miles away from Perth.
Is this a fair assessment on my part?
Economies of scale obviously come into it, Johan Sverdrip has expected resources of 2.7 billion barrels.
However, despite the medium sour grade oil it is one of the cleanest fields around, with CO2 emissions only 4% of the world average. Due in the main to being powered from the shore.
Johan Sverdrup crude is very popular in Asia, particularly China
Seems a positive development for Perth.
My notes say exactly that, hydrogen sulfide varying from 2500-8500ppm, with CO2 of 25-42 mol% in the associated gas (source; offshore mag)
The geological society of London describes the hydrocarbons for Perth as:
Oil gravity: 30-32 Core Perth 30-39 over the field
Oil properties: Undersaturated black oil with sour associated gas; 1.4 to 4% wax; associated gas contains up to 42.4% CO2 and average 7350 ppmv H2S.
Porosity: 13 (0-22)
Average hydrocarbon saturation: 73%
Thanks for all the replies, we seem to be si ging from the same hymn sheet.
2500 to 8500 ppm
Is that the same report that says 1 billion barrels will flow through the GPA ............minimum !
Page 18 confirms API at 30-32.
Still nome the wiser on the H2S though, the report just says 'high'
Although some people complain about a lack of information, there’s a detailed 41 page report on Parkmead’s website (https://www.parkmeadgroup.com/uploaded/research/FinnCap_Research_20.11.20201.pdf ) that, amongst other things, contains the data you request - see page 18.
My notes say that the core Perth Area has an average API gravity of 31% and sulfur content of 0 735%.
I have no idea where I got this data from and was wondering what data you have for the field?
Thanks in advance