Ryan Mee, CEO of Fulcrum Metals, reviews FY23 and progress on the Gold Tailings Hub in Canada. Watch the video 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.
PSC
Cebo,
"If indeed someone credible confirms that this was a smaller offload as Londoner suggest, then I suspect we will see another tanker back out there within a fortnight."
I hope you're right. I have very good reason to believe the load is approx 355,000 bbl. But sorry, not going to name my source.
L7, your first sentence states"you assume", your whole calculation is an assumption and as such is deemed totally irrelevant.I could assume figures and come up with 600k barrels......but i wouldnt put it on here on a post.....there are enough half breed mongol trolls on here as it is so why would a "alleged holder" of shares put a post like that up ?...apart to give them some other scrap to feed on.... give yourself a shake..
Pisces, I am not looking at the duration or time between offloads to work out how full or empty the AMs or tankers tanks are, this is flawed and doesnt interest me. Nor am I clever enough to look at drafts in order to guess how much has been offloaded.
The weather played a part because the tankers that Tekay use were not available, (most were already loaded or part loaded waiting to offload, but couldn't) when the AM was looking for (needed) one.
If indeed someone credible confirms that this was a smaller offload as Londoner suggest, then I suspect we will see another tanker back out there within a fortnight.
Cebo, I’ve been talking about the weather the last few weeks and the delays it’s caused, even in moderate weather the AM has trouble working a supply vessel due to their rolling and pitching never mind being able to hook up to a tanker. I certainly wouldn’t use the duration between the last offloads as a calculator for quantity of the offload.
wessexmario, I assume the tanker is empty and ballast is full prior to the offload and ballast is empty after the offload. These are my workings:
Cargo max 6.29 Area Load (m) Ballast Ballast (m)
Petroatlantic 103887 653,449 9,870 10.5 37397 3.8
draught #9 36%
10.3
9.2
4.9 303,518
The period between detachments (easier to identify) was 35 days. I don't use hook-up duration in my metrics because I haven't noted any clear correlation with load, but I recorded 23 hours against an average of 25 hrs for previous offloads.
Londoner7,
What figure did you use for the volume of ballast water that the Petroatlantic discharged as she was filling up at the Aoka Mizu?
and did the Petroatlantic take a much shorter time to pump the offload than last time?
I'd be very interested in how your calculations reached the numbers you state.
(in my day, we always received more marks for the working than for just the answer)
Pisces, the weather when she offloaded was pretty flat calm.
P.S, forgot to add that you won’t get an accurate offload/production amount during periods of bad weather for the reasons I mentioned. You’d get a better idea during a period of settled weather where there’s no restrictions on operations.
Pisces, tanker availability would have been the issue as much as the weather offshore.
Slowed down, yes, but definately not stopped on the lead up to this offload. IMO :-)
Due to the prolonged period of bad weather during which there has been several weeks of delays to choppers and supply boats etc it’s very possible that production could’ve been slowed down or even stopped due to being nearing full capacity and unable to hook up to a tanker for an offload.
The AM is notoriously bad for pitching excessively in moderate seas so it’s understandable that a tanker would not have been able to carry out an offload over the last few weeks therefore production would likely have had to be slowed or stopped for a period before the weather settled.
Londoner, time will tell but I have very much good reason to believe that the AM's tanks would have been full, to the extent that she would have to, and probably had to reduce production pending completion of the offload this week.
Malcy said earlier " I understand that operationally all is going according to existing guidance."
agree.. On second reading you could take from the 29/1 RNS that they would do the testing on the 6 well after the 22/1, pump nothing until 1 Feb and then pump both at a combined rate of 20k bopd from 1 Feb to the 25 - ie 500k barrels. So anything less than that would seem to small
Thanks, L7, but it seems that JAdam has a point when he says we are analysing everything about this company to death.
Is it likely that instead of production rising by fifty percent, it would fall by about a third, and without the management mentioning that just as they were about to hike production, a problem arose?
if they had been running under 9k barrels a day for the last month, HUR commited to telling us? Something doesn't add up. Not unless the other 11k barrels a day were Water? (I know, sorry about that).
At the last update, 29th Jan, HUR said:
· 2020 update
o Eighth lifting successfully completed on 22 January 2020
o Individual well flow test on 205/21a-6 well ("6 Well") due to complete before month-end, following which two well production is expected to resume at 20,000 barrels of oil per day (subject to facilities availability)
I assess offload volumes based on draught and bopd on offload intervals. I know some posters here don't trust these assessments but I've found them to be a good guide. The metrics for the latest offload may be the exception but they point to a circa 300Kbo offload and 8,700 bopd for the interval. This is not consistent with expectations. I can imagine reasons for the inconsistency, partial offload, false draught metrics, I've missed an offload, etc. But I'm cautious ahead of the next update, or confirmation of a higher offload from the port.