Cobus Loots, CEO of Pan African Resources, on delivering sector-leading returns for shareholders. 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.
Penguins - what's your estimate on time to complete this work?
The cynics would probably say a placing would soon follow.
Cynderlad,
when they bought what might have been 2 sets of 'testing' equipment from PW, which they are using for production (stock tanks, oil and gas separator, flow lines, choke manifolds, export pumps etc) that's precisely what I thought (and posted) - this is it for HH for the time being. There has been nothing about the proposed development for a long time.
As for dual completion maybe there are risks/problems with the Kimmeridge such that they aren't prepared to dual complete (not comingle) HH-1 - or they are not prepared to take the risk of losing the well whilst doing it. I suspect a bit of both.
HH-2z - if they had decided what they were going to do with it I'd expect it to be done when there's a workover rig there.
If Turkey is in any way successful maybe Loxley and IOW (and A24 and BB) will be quietly forgotten rather than spending cash on them - especially if even the Portland at HH is really proving troublesome.
PS - my last post should have included the possibility that there is no problem with HH-1 Portland at all - after all the watchers only see oil tankers........
As for perf / moving the downhole pump in June (Tony) - see today's RNS, though still no current bopd and forecast benefit of the work. Suppose it will enable a 'better than expected' RNS whatever the result. I'm surprised they are using a workover rig, they've done similar operations using a crane/s. Also note even using a workover rig no mention of dual completing (no doubt posters/tweeters will claim the rig and 'deeper' pump means they are, or they are doing it without saying).
I'm sure they'll reluctantly manage to squeeze out an initial rate RNS if it's good. Maybe the mythical 362bopd might come to pass as an initial sustainable rate........
Penguins, maybe they will not do any further wells at HH, and just stick with HH1 for the next 2 years. I would not be surprised. The cost of drilling wells is high and UKOG are low on cash, with big calls in Turkey and Loxley to come in late 2020 and to the end of 2021. Think they would be happy to comingle Kim and Portland to get 300-400 bopd, but if its 250-300 bopd, then that would just have to do. Its cash in the bank, and profit when calculated at the asset level.
Not sure what to make of HH2z, will they provide some more details to the market? What interventions are required to bring that into any form of production. Can they use a more modern setup and dual purpose the well as both a water injector and oil producer? I really dont know. I would look to inject water in HH2z rather than pay BKP to truck it away. Every little helps.
Ibug,
I get what you're saying, - because they only reported bopd during 'the period' (incidentally I've also moaned about them not giving a current figure) they can quite rightly say they weren't misleading anyone. Perhaps that's why they didn't give a current figure for HH-1 flows?
If that's true then it's a tenuous reason for not informing the market of significant news.
It's disgraceful that this might even be thought of as a possibility.
As happens too frequently we await clarification from UKOG, are they waiting to bury it in news of the Turkey deal being executed, Loxley planning or a placing getting the 'good' news out at the same time.
There's plenty of post reporting figures etc in the interims including for instance the 113,143bbls production and othe 'current' things going on.
Almost all reservoirs produce water eventually and it was always a matter of some technical discussion as to why HH produced so LITTLE water during the very extended test. AFAIK they have never reported water from the Kimm - which is really weird - and the Portland volumes to date are OK - but it would be a lot better if the company gave us some forecast s of what they are expecting so we can see if they are under or over preforming.
The water injection well had two roles - water disposal and reservoir pressure maintenance - it seemed from discussion at the time that they expected the two to balance
Penguins
Reporting period ended 31 March 2020. If you read the RNS they only refer to the reporting period where they mention bopd.
ibug,
Have you been here long enough to have seen the ridicule I got for mentioning water in the Portland (and Kimmeridge)?
Just because the reporting figure 'might' have kill fluid etc in it (and I'm tending to think it doesn't) doesn't mean I don't expect this to be 'native' water.
I just can't believe that if UKOG saw that much water cut from the Portland in HH-1 in June it wasn't mentioned in the interim results RNS.
Tony,
Your tanker count of 28 implies production of over 6000bbls.
HH-1 OGA production 4743, so either quite a few were waste tankers and/or HH-2z was flowing.
Funnily enough if I add the water produced by HH-1 (1486bbls) to the oil I get 6229bbls - or 29 tankers, 22 oil, 7 water. Interesting maybe HH-2z wasn't flowed in June.
Penguins
Brockham produced more water in the 1st year from the Portland than oil. The 2nd year it was 50/50 and the 3rd year it was 50% more water than oil. Why does everyone not expect to find water in the Portland? Why did UKOG put down to drill an injection well. They obviously expected it.
Chunky trades, 52.1m shares traded across 38 trades, average size of trade = 1.37m.
Tony/ Ibug, thanks for relaying those early morning figures. Pity we don`t get regular RNS`s. I think it would steady the SP.
But small as it may seem, we have increased production, lets hope that trend continues. This time next month "Rodney", better production figures and SCC go ahead, higher SP.
thats pprs guide (petroleum production reporting system) not person guide!
Just had a skim read of and 'search' for water in person guide (V5) and not so sure that kill fluid etc would be counted as only previously injected water is mentioned.
if it isn't then the water cut is about 24%........surely that's not right.
This is the full entry:
Field Production Data, PPRS (WGS84): Horse Hill
Field region LAND
Reporting unit name HORSE HILL
Reporting Unit Type Code T
Reporting Unit Type Description Onshore Oil Field
Operator Organisation Group UK OIL & GAS PLC
Onshore,Offshore Flag Onshore
Reporting Period in yyyymm format 202006
Reporting Period Month 06
Reporting Period Month Name June
Reporting Period Year 2020
Oil Production Mass (tonnes) 637.04
Oil Production Volume (m3) 753.00
Oil Production volume (mb/d) 0.16
Oil production density (Kg/m3) 846.00
Dry gas production mass (tonnes)
Dry gas production volume (ksm3)
Dry Gas Production volume (MMscf/d)
Dry Gas Production Density (kg/sm3)
Associated gas production mass (tonnes) 24.72
Associated Gas Production Volume (MMscf/d) 0.03
Associated Gas Production Volume (ksm3) 23.10
Associated Gas Production density (kg/sm3) 1.07
Gas Condensate mass (kg)
Gas condensate volume (ksm3)
Gas condensate volume (mb/d)
Gas condensate density (kg/sm3)
Injected water mass (tonnes) 0.00
Injected water volume (m3) 0.00
Injected water volume (mb/d) 0.00
Water production mass (tonnes) 235.70
Water production volume (ksm3) 235.70
Water production volume (mb/d) 0.05
Reinjected produced water volume (m3) 0.00
Cynderlad,
Only stuff coming out of HH-1 is included in OGA figures.
I did read the regs on rreporting and am pretty sure everything coming out of the well (HH-1) even if it's put in the well is reported - if they are injecting the amount injected is also reported separately.
Didn't look at the gas - increase in gas cut not good either.
Tony - the subsurface workover - moving the pump position and perforating didn't happen in June as it was still 'planned' at the end of June.
Cinders
Why don't you read PONS and PPRS on the OGA website. What am I? Your mother!
The amount of water produced in the OGA returns far exceeds the amount you can stick down a well. You are looking at at least 6 tankers of produced water which the eyes never seem to show.
Who is conning who? At least you know the OGA figures are correct or are UKOG telling porkies in their returns?
Penguins,
Do you know if HH2z counts as production or not? Is that still formally in EWT stage?
I am a little worried by water cut, especially as HH1 had only ever produced dry oil.
Guess we need to wait for that elusive RNS, must be due as soon as this current workover is complete.
Ibug, can you provide a document from an official source that stands by your statement that kill fluids dont count?
Now we have 2 figures for HH, exact OGA production from HH-1 and approximate production from the whole site over 2 months. The difference must be test production from HH-2z.
28 April RNS:- Total production 'over 100,000bbls.
30 June RNS:- Total production 113,143bbls.
Whilst not precise that suggests somewhere around 13,000bbls produced during May and June.
Meanwhile OGA has 871 and 753 cu metres for May and June respectively just for HH-1.
That's 1624 cu m total or 10,215bbls. Assuming UKOG weren't massively understating production on 28 April that suggests that HH-2z produced somewhere around 2,500bbls of oil in May and June
As for tanker counts, there were days that week, unsurprisingly, as even HH-1 needed about 7 waste tankers during the month, waste tankers were leaving the site that posters were still claiming contained oil. Here's part of a post of mine from 24 June:-
'Yesterday, when there were 4 tankers: and johnrogan9 mentioned N66 was around this is what N66 tweeted - 'One load of production water back in then yard ready for disposal.'
So maybe (at least) one tanker was water........it could have come from somewhere else in the Weald but it has got a 1267 plate.'
But even if every tanker Tony counts was oil there was also oil flow during the months from HH-2z, and tankers can leave with stored oil, not necessarily just recent production.
I'm more concerned about the water - about 1500bbls sounds excessive from a workover. With these figures now out in the public domain surely UKOG need to make a comment about what is happening at HH.
Kill fluids are not production water. The figures included are for water produced from a well not those introduced externally.
"When did the Twitterati spread the rumour of the well being a dead duck? "
When SS stopped reporting it's "potential" in glowing terms
"It’s in the rns’s They lowered the pump. I believe it has reduced the percentage of gas to oil produced"
may 183 bopd gas 0.02 mmscfd
june 158 bopd gas 0.03 mmscfd
Oil down gas up I'm afraid
Cinders
They can only enter figures for productions wells. HH-2Z is not a production well so anything that comes out of it is not entered.