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.
Oops. I had forgotten the area factor.
"Looking at the licence docs they are meant to be shooting 20km of seismic and a well to either 3200m or 50m into the Aylesbeare Mudstone (Triassic) "
That was offered a longgg time ago - they'll probably get relief on the depth commitment
Wizard,
it was in response to your:-
'Xodus produced the figures for the CPR so they were independently assessed.'
Nothing to do with the planning - that's my post of 13:24
and please quote the post you claim I stated 'one of the biggest problems was decisions were made to quickly without full consideration.' as too often your memory is either wrong or the context is different - 'If I remember correctly was it not you who said that' - so probably not.
But as far as the delay from planned application in 'summer' 2018 to actually submittimg it in March 2020 - you'd think they could have got it right talking to the planners during those 18 months (on top of the 6+ months from the January RNS) without having to submit another 15 documents.
PS I presume you're not talking about UKOG 'It is not as if the haven't any cash in the bank!'
Ibug the fee is per sq km (year6 £100) and the area is about 200sq km I believe.
Looking at the licence docs they are meant to be shooting 20km of seismic and a well to either 3200m or 50m into the Aylesbeare Mudstone (Triassic) - whichever is the shallower. That's quite a bit more than even the base of the Kimmeridge (about 1200m in Arreton-2.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
:'D
Ibug
It is not as if the haven't any cash in the bank!
wizard
Who cares? They have done quite well not paying for their share of HH so far. Why should the IOW be any difference.
Ibug
There % share of the licence equates to there % of the costs at a appeal 5% it is one and the same or do you also think that UKOG should give them a free ride?
wizard
You said "there" share of the licence not their share of the appeal.
ibug
There share of the appeal costs for there 5% stake or do you think they should have a fee ride?
Penguins
'They also mention the sparse data coverage and the faults need to be sealing at Arreton for the full closure'
You seem to ignore the fact that sub surface is not a planning issue only the use of the land.
Dorimous. Their share of the licence fee is p'nuts. Under £10 as it's only the 6th year into the end date.
Penguins
I presume these followed the public consultations and the movement of the site access all of which will have brought a positive statutory consultee and planning officers recommendations.
If I remember correctly was it not you who said that one of the biggest problems was decisions were made to quickly without full consideration.
Do you want it both ways?
Wizard,
I think the paper trail shows that UKOG have been at least as 'tardy' with the IOW application as the council.
RNS - 23 March 2020:-
'Arreton oil discovery planning application submitted to Isle of Wight council'
Strategy & drilling plans January 2019
'An application to drill, core and test an A-3 pilot hole and horizontal wellbore is planned to be submitted to the Isle of Wight Council in the first quarter of 2019'
Interim results - 29 June 2018:-
'Arreton-3 appraisal and Arreton South exploration well sites chosen, lease negotiations are near finalisation, and a planning application is expected to be submitted this summer. Drilling is targeted for late 2019.'
RNS - 31 January 2018
'Arreton site selection and regulatory permitting activities are now underway to permit a planned appraisal drilling campaign in the first half of 2019.'
UKOG don't have the excuse of Covid during their preparation up to submission, and they submitted another 15 documents after the application was submitted including ones in July and September 2021.
Still at least the BoD were paid during the delays.
UKOG I imagine will want to see the result of the Loxley appeal but will also need to see if Dorimous are going to pay there share of the costs for there 5% share of the licence.
I don't think Angus have the money to drill that horizontal - the cash they raised for Saltfleetby will have been ring fenced for sure
The decision of WSCC against Angus's Balcombe horizontal ewt was unanimous.
After consultation with their partners, Angus will appeal.
groover
'Its over here pure and simple'
Please explain?
Fact remains SS is the most lazy, disingenuous, self serving prick of a CEO in the UK. Its over here, pure and simple and he'll just continue to take more investors money.
Hope he falls down a well. Ohhh I forgot, he hasn't drilled any.
Answer: Lights out.
Yes I understand that Mirasol, but what he or you don't seem to understand is that UKOG probably new all of this but had no choice to go through the process which will enable them to have the issue looked at under the national planning policy on appeal.
The IOW council has dragged this application out for 18 months but the Authority & Statutory consultees have no objection before recommending it for acceptance. If they had not I am sure that UKOG would have taken them to appeal for non determination.
Whatever he or the IOW may think, they are part of the United Kingdom and receive support & resources from us & under the terms of the union they are mandated to be governed by UK law.
What do you think would happen if the UK stopped providing food, fuel and support to the island in protest?
Exploration was talking about " the morons failed to make a credible case that oil production at Arreton was in the national interest " - hard to argue that Arreton is going to make a vast difference to the UK
Mirasol
Maybe you missed this:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-north-east-orkney-shetland-58828308
The government won its case against Greenpeace which is effectively the same case being brought against against Surrey council by Sarah Finch at the court of appeal. This result obviously sets a president as did the High court case that ruled against her and Friends of the earth.
Firstly, the morons believed there was an oil and gas discovery to be appraised when two previous wells proved there is nothing. - well, it is a POSSIBLY big structure - explorationists explore......
Secondly, the morons completely failed to understand how strongly public opinion is opposed to onshore UK petroleum exploration, especially after Loxley. - Agree - but when you've called yourself UKOG...... they should have dumped the UK after Broadford Bridge
Thirdly, the morons failed to make a credible case that oil production at Arreton was in the national interest and would be cheaper that imported oil. - even if they did no-one would listen to them. When people are suing the Govt for giving the go-ahead to tens of millons of barrels west of Shetland this never stood a chance
Mirasol
The morons in this saga are those who made the planning application.
Firstly, the morons believed there was an oil and gas discovery to be appraised when two previous wells proved there is nothing.
Secondly, the morons completely failed to understand how strongly public opinion is opposed to onshore UK petroleum exploration, especially after Loxley.
Thirdly, the morons failed to make a credible case that oil production at Arreton was in the national interest and would be cheaper that imported oil.
I would not be surprised if IoW Council sent SS an invoice for wasted planning officers time.
They also mention the sparse data coverage and the faults need to be sealing at Arreton for the full closure
But they're contingent resources so only need a lower level of 'proof'.
As for Loxley Xodus wouldn't even calculate gas in place in the CPR because of failings in the mapping.
UKOG have since produced a new map for Loxley, included in the appeal dataset, which Xodus (presumably) calculated contingent resources from in a 'study' - but UKOG only published the calculated results.
For Turkey UKOG have never published the subsurface mapping for Resan / Basur that lead to the OIP and estimates of recoverable oil.
HH also has new mapping following HH-2z, which proved the previous mapping wrong, but have failed to publish any resource calculations based on this mapping.