The latest Investing Matters Podcast episode featuring Jeremy Skillington, CEO of Poolbeg Pharma has just been released. Listen 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.
Ukog is not back where it was before the 2016 EWT. It has become the major HH licence holder with a substantially increased share of HH at 85.635%, up from 20.163%. There are now not just Hh1 with three producing oil levels, but now a second well HH2z. Ukog now has planning permission for production. Ukog has also substantially increased it's holdings in other licence areas.
The 2016 EWT had to be cut short as the well oil flow rate was so unexpectedly high that the maximum permitted amount of oil extracted was reached in a very short timeframe. It was record breaking results for an onshore oilfield. Those "experts" who had been posting about their extensive knowledge and claiming the Kimmeridge oil "is locked in and cannot and never will flow" were flabbergasted.
Penguins
If any one misleads people it is you.
Negative, negative and more negative but thats what you expect from a Billy no mates.
I bet Christmas for you is Bah Humbug
The HH-1 2018 ewt had a limit of 5300 tonnes which equates approximately to 40,000bbls. This presumably was for the planned (as in the planning permission) 89 days of testing of HH-1.
The above has been increased many times by the OGA and a few weeks ago it had been increased to 14,500 tonnes and I'm sure it will be increased further if required.
Thor, There are no plans to drill HH1z in the foreseeable future. I suspect that you actually mean HH2z.
Mald
Thanks for the calculation I dont know why I didnt do it myself.
I would personally be happy with 745bopd from HH1z over the next 3 months. It would give a revenue of $4.3m
If it does surpass this then I dont think the OGA would have a problem in extending this as they have done numerous other times previously.
An EWT should have realistic and definable appraisal objectives essential to the success of a development and not be prejudicial to ultimate recovery. There are no strict criteria governing the maximum volume to be produced or the duration of an EWT, but they are usually issued for 90 days to allow for operational delays. The duration may be extended if there is a technical justification, but it should be noted that EWTs are not an alternative to production under a Field Development Plan. There is no obligation to proceed with a development following an EWT.
Throughout the test, the operator must keep the OGA informed of activity and must report monthly oil, gas and water production figures in the UK Energy Portal. Within 30 days of completion of the EWT, the operator must submit to the OGA an EWT report fully detailing the test results.
96hr flow period is not what I would call an EWT and why draw attention to what happened in 2016 when it's been under EWT for over a year this time round
It's interesting that you seem to think that the limit is arbitrary, doesn't cover at least 90 days of flowing and has no 'headroom'.
The HH-1 2018 ewt had a limit of 5300 tonnes which equates approximately to 40,000bbls. This presumably was for the planned (as in the planning permission) 89 days of testing of HH-1.
The testing commenced mid July 2018 and the 40,000 bbls limit was reached mid April 2019, 9 months about 270 days into testing. I think during that period thay must have been flowing for more than 89 days.
The average rate of 40,000bbls over 89 days is about 450bopd, maximums UKOG might have expected from the 2016 testing. Sadly that sort of rate was only ever reached or exceeded in short term flow rates.
Pboo,
There's positives and then just plain misleading
Eg:- assuming 33% downtime, that they permission doesn't cover expected flow during sustained rate testing let alone esome extra and using an inflated bbls per tonne figure for Portland oil.
Yes like Oliver Twist they can go back and ask for more - let's see if that's necessary during the planned initial clean up and 90 day test.
btw, If you seek mates on twitter, hanging around a well site or on here you have have the wrong idea of what constitutes mates..
Stocktaker01
You were obviously not here then.
04 January 2016
UK Oil & Gas Investments PLC
("UKOG" or the "Company")
Horse Hill-1 Oil Discovery, Weald Basin, UK
Final Flow Test Consent from the UK Oil and Gas Authority
UK Oil & Gas Investments PLC (London AIM and ISDX: UKOG) announces that it has been notified by Horse Hill Developments Limited ("HHDL") that the Oil and Gas Authority ("OGA") has granted consent for an extended flow test over three separate zones in the Horse Hill-1 ("HH-1") oil discovery well. All necessary permissions to test the well are now in place.
extended flow test permit
OGA approval to flow test a well with an aggregate flow period over all zones of up to 90 days. Normal flow test approval is for an aggregate flow period of up to 96 hours
No EWT 2016. EWT started 2018.... and it s still going
And yet the 2016 EWT only lasted 42 days. If you read the guidance on EWT's it can go past the 90 days as long as there is a reason and it is mutually agreed with the OGA. I'm guessing there will be a stage when the OGA will turn round and say "that is it, you have had long enough."
From the OGA website:
"We work with the industry and government to maximise the recovery of UK oil and gas."
Enough said about the current EWT limits. GL.
Penguins
Yes I'm a positive person, you're a negative person and must have a very poor life looking through a mist all the time.
What a sad person you are, Billy no mates
It would not be the first time flow tests are finished early at Horse Hill due to flows exceeding expectations.
Obviously Penguin's you could not comment on that apart from finding a negative.
Gl. to all holders.
Pboo,
I know you always make the most positive interpretation of RNS posssible and then claim it as reasonable but when I read the RNS I take it as continuous flowing or at least 90 days of flowing, not flowing and shut in periods:-
'the well will be flowed over a minimum 90-day flow period to assess its stable production performance',
and note it iis a minimum of 90 days flowing - 'minimum 90 day flow period'
The amount of oil permitted will have been arrived at in discussion with the OGA and covers the expected production during initial operations, clean up flow and shut in periods, as well as the minimum 90 days flowing, and probably headroom in case of better than expected flows..
Whilst permitted production has been increased during the HH-1 ewt it was because they tested for much longer than the original programme of 89 days, not because the well flowed more per day than anticipated.
I suppose you decided it must be only 60 days of flowing because you got back to the favourite figure of 1200bopd.
Except 1200bopd for 60 days suggests 8.8bbls to the tonne, even 745bopd seems high and suggests 8.2 bbls to the tonne both not allowing anything for the initial period. 38 api oil is just over 7.5 bbls to a metric ton, allowing only 1500bbls for the initial period works out at 667bood over 90 days.
Mald
8200 tonnes for 90 days - 30 days for pressure tests and other down time = 1200bopd
But the above is totaly meaningless as the OGA could increase the 8200 to 20,000+???? As soon as they see the initial flow rate.
Mald, you should factor in pressure build periods and potential limit increases from OGA. For some on here to preach going by rns's and then quote a flow rate within the official guidance as being poor is hypocritical. But I suppose it suits certain agendas.
8200 tonnes over 90 days suggest an extraction rate of 745 BOPD
Just an observation.