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.
We don't know yet whether it's commercial or not which is why we are EWT. We don't know the % of water nor if it is constant or a pool draining off. Amounts will be logged during EWT and I would hope the locations identified. If the leak is down near the toe then further plugging might resolve it. Perhaps they might use the existing well and sidetrack tubing to re-bore part of the sidetrack to avoid the problem area. These drills are highly manouverable. An update on decision is vital for confidence to remain in my opinion. How many tankers returned from Hamble. What is the maximum % of water allowed. There is I believe no separator where the tankers go to so above limit comes back for re-separation on site. Problems exist to be solved. I feel we still have a very good chance of a successful outcome. GLA
You'd think that with all that heat coming from the flare stack. they could boil the HH2 water away instead of using tankers.
Oh ! I do have some great idea's no one ever pays for them though. :)))))))
They also sidetrack..... horizontal in the other direction ....for a short distance this time to mitigate water risk.
It is now clear from the image logs recorded in the well, that both the oil and water flow originated from a series of extensive natural fractures, primarily at the toe of the well, although there are also further natural fractures observed higher up in the well.
Doesn't sound as if they can plug again at any distance away from the toe.
Or could they identify that water only impacts part pay along the horizontal and so can plug again leaving a shorter productive dry oil section....... might need Shlumberger in their with the wizzy electric logging line...... can they tell the difference between water and oil in the logging data though ?
Just talking off the top of my head (not an oil expert):
We know HH -2z is not commercial at present, because of the cost of disposing of water.
We do not know the percentage of the water cut.
Would it make any sense to drill a water re-injection well for that specific purpose now?
What happened to the HH2 sweetspot that was nailed on?
London South East
Share PricesUk Oil & Gas Share PriceUk Oil & Gas Regulatory NewsHH-2z Horizontal Drilling Completed
Pin to quick picksUk Oil & Gas Regulatory News (UKOG)
UKOG Share Price
UKOG Share News
UKOG Share Chat
UKOG Share Trades
UKOG Live RNS
UKOG Information Buy UKOG SharesBuy UKOG SharesAdd UKOG to WatchlistAdd UKOG to WatchlistAdd UKOG to AlertAdd UKOG to AlertAdd UKOG to myTerminalAdd UKOG to myTerminal
Share Price Information for Uk Oil & Gas (UKOG)
London Stock Exchange
Share Price is delayed by 15 minutes
Get Live Data
Spread: 0.020 (10.00%)Open: 0.215High: 0.215Low: 0.20Yest. Close: 0.21
UKOG Live PriceLast checked at 11:00:34
HH-2z Horizontal Drilling Completed
Tue, 12th Nov 2019 07:00
RNS Number : 0853T
UK Oil & Gas PLC
12 November 2019
UK Oil & Gas PLC
("UKOG" or the "Company")
Horse Hill Oil Field: HH-2z Horizontal Drilling Completed
UK Oil & Gas PLC (London AIM: UKOG) is pleased to announce the successful completion of its Horse Hill-2z ("HH-2z") Portland horizontal drilling campaign (UKOG 85.635% net controlling interest). A total of approximately 2,500 ft of horizontal trajectory was drilled wholly within the Portland reservoir's most oil productive zone or "sweet spot", around 70 times greater exposure to the sweet-spot than seen in the HH-1 Portland vertical discovery well. The campaign's key technical objectives have now all been successfully delivered.
The significantly increased exposure to the sweet-spot within HH-2z, the first horizontal well in the field's Portland oil pool, is the prime technical enabler for HH-2z to be capable of delivering significantly greater flow rates than those seen in the HH-1 vertical well.
The good, clean horizontal trajectory, together with the continued indications of possible improved reservoir quality and significantly lower pressure-depletion than expected, led the Company to decide that there was little technical or economic benefit in pursuing drilling to the maximum planned c. 3,000 ft horizontal trajectory.
Thinking a bit more about stimulation acidising (not good for the Kimmeridge but probably OK for the Portland) might improve porosity / permeability in the near wellbore reservoir without enhancing the fractures if the pressure within the fracture resists ingress of the acid. This could improve the oil flow preferentially.
Thank you for your post, Penguins.
Stimulation is used to increase flow into a well so unless they have a method that favours oil production over water that seems an odd choice of 'possibles'.
Sidetracking runs the same risk as the donor well except there may be merit in a vertical rather than horizontal well, HH-1 which is vertical is still presumably producing dry oil, so perhaps the chances of intercepting a fracture becomes less. Given that HH-1 has no issues these fractures may be self sealed with mineral deposition on their inner surfaces, only leaking where intercepted by drilling.
Water injection will have it's own issues as the well is presumably located in an optimal producing not injecting location, and fairly close to HH-1. Injection might preferentially enter the fracture system and result in early breakthrough to any producer.
But a tweeted video of the site had what appeared to be a horizontal surface pump in it - the only well site use listed on the Schlumberger's Web site was water injection. Details and links in my post on Wednesday,
I take note of HeidHoncho's post!
Thanks, again, Ibug.
That makes it sound as if the conversion of HH-2z to a water re-injection well clears the path for future oil production wells.
When utilising water injection in a reservoir as a means of enhanced recovery the location of the injector is carefully chosen to ensure that the sweep effect induced by the injection is optimal to the recovery potential achievable.
Therefore, merely randomly utilising an ineffective producer well, whose location in the reservoir was previously chosen for its optimum reservoir recovery potential and not its optimum injection potential, is logically it could be argued to be in a suboptimal reservoir location to be utilised for water injection purposes.
Nearly all oil fields re-inject water. They vary from a ratio of 2 parts water for 1 part oil upwards.
This is the biggest onshore oil field producer and look at the latest figures.
Oil Production Volume (m3) 63,254.41
Associated gas production mass (tonnes) 2,164.84
Water production volume (ksm3) 1,572,640.60
Injected water volume (m3) 21,928.70
Reinjected produced water volume (m3) 1,572,640.60
"From the above, it sounds as if the first 2 options are more likely than the 3rd, but, of course, that is all subject to "sufficient data" being available to make the correct decisions going forward."
Thank god there is that core that came to the surface last October, remember that core, the one that was allegedly weeping oil (I know). We never did get the data from that. Conventional core analysis takes no more than six weeks so it must be sitting in a pile somewhere.
Thank you for your responses, Ibug.
But, in that case, the accumulation of "sufficient data" is not really to facilitate a decision about the future of HH -2z, because that decision may already be well-advanced.
How, in your opinion, will they be planning to use the "sufficient data" they are accumulating?
Why else would they have the pump on site?
What I cannot get my head around is if they use the well for water injection, then drill a new well how are they then going to stop water ingress in the new well?
So are you saying it is the 3rd option from that extract from the RNS in my post of 08:28 which is the most likely?
They must have known for ages about their HH2 problems. Do they think silence is the best way on communication with investors?
The director adopted exactly same approach with the BB failure in spite of seemingly building a viewing platform.
Are we now to assume silence will always mean a disaster on any UKOG activity?
Just a view.
Novomet horizontal pumping systems (HPS) use electrical submersible pumping (ESP) technology in surface applications ......surface pumps are quickly becoming the standard for common applications like fluid transfer and water injection.
You tell me, please, Ibug. As I said, I am not a petroleum engineer.
So why would they bring a NOV Horizontal Surface Pump onto site? Something for the kids to play with?
Not a petroleum engineer, Scallywag, having been wondering about your 1st question myself.
Re the 2nd question, agreed, think that may just have been a slip in the choice of word.
ocelot or anyone else care to explain : " We are reviewing a number of options for the future use of HH-2z, including stimulation to return it into long-term oil production "
Stimulation: it's water problem, not constipation ? What does stimulation involve ?
secondly ( 2 part question ) return to long-term production , It's never been in production , How do we return it to it?
I guess though, with the limited amount of cash available, We do have to work on Horshill rather than off somewhere esle.