Member Info for adoubleuk

JayKay,

Taffy has given a good answer to your question. But also, think absolute catastrophic worst case. What if the boat sank and landed on top of the wellheads, and for some reason the automatic downhole safety shutin valves didn't work right? In terms of 'well intervention' that would make Macondo look like a walk in the park!

Ricfle,

"It could be a problem dumping rock too close to the AM and the other point would be can they realistically start production before completion of the rock dumping. A solution may be to dump 50% of the rock then hook up the AM."

The point I was making is that the rock dumping does not come too close to the AM. The catenary risers will begin quite a distance away. However, as you suggest, I certainly don't believe production will start until all things like rock dumping are 100% complete. But production (FoiL) will not begin immediately after hookup anyway.

Boyzee,

"is there a robot or similar?"

It involves a vessel carrying rocks, a flexible pipe from the vessel down to seabed through which the rocks are 'dumped', precision navigation, and probably an ROV watching the operation. I posted a link a couple of weeks ago to a company which does this, but can't find it now. Here's another.

https://www.vanoord.com/activities/flexible-fallpipe-vessel

SXX,

Yup, that's a nice video, but it must be stressed that it was made in 2013 and that the EPS has evolved in a number of ways, so that some details have changed, and so it doesn't reflect what's ongoing at present. For instance, and pertinent to the current discussion, the flowlines won't be trenched (to my knowledge). The FPSO location is not to the north of the wells, but to the south, and there are only two wells. Gas export to existant infrastructure is not current, because such a pipeline hasn't been built yet. Etc.

But it shows the concept in general terms.

Boyzee,

"I thought we.d done all of the boulder clearance stuff ages ago. "

You're confusing boulder clearance and rock-dumping: they're two different beasts.

The boulder clearance was (as its name suggests) to remove obstacles in the paths of where the anchor chains and flowlines are laid. Rock-dumping is precision dumping of small rocks to create a protective berm over the flowlines, for the reasons I gave in an earlier post.

Boyzee,

"I thought we.d done all of the boulder clearance stuff ages ago. "

You're confusing boulder clearance and rock-dumping: they're two different beasts.

The boulder clearance was (as its name suggests) to remove obstacles in the paths of where the anchor ch

DiveCentre,

". I presume the rock dumping can proceed in parallel with hook up if the AM were to arrive before the end of October."

My apologies, I overlooked your post containing this phrase. But yes, I agree with what you say. And have laid out my own reasoning why below, in my usual brief and concise way...

Ricfle,

"If this is the case, what would be the point of the AM turning up WoS at the beginning of Sept? Is this IJWT's point?"

Right off the bat, and to reassure you, I in no way profess to be an 'expert' in SURF installation, rock-dumping, and so on. However I am perfectly at ease with heavy oilfield engineering of many sorts, so think I may be able to answer your question.

By definition, SURF installation has to be completed before the FPSO can come in and hook up to the buoy. However, rock-dumping over the seabed flowlines is not, strictly speaking a part of SURF. The rocks are put in place to protect the flowlines from possible damage due to trawling, marine growth and erosion, etc.

The flowlines to be covered run along the seabed from the well / manifold location only for a certain distance. I don't know exacly what that distance is, but let's say for argument it's a couple of kilometers. After that, they join up with the flexible catenary flowlines rising from the seabed to the buoy.

The hookup to the buoy is conducted using a heavy winch wire which runs down through the centre of the turret and connects to the buoy. The wire is pulled in, raising the buoy into the turret, wherein it is then latched and secured. None of this requires 'outside assistance' (other than possibly a vessel with an ROV deployed to monitor the operation), and in regard to the flowlines, the only movement experienced takes place in the 'Ess-bends' of the flexible sections, without being transmitted to the static portion on the seabed.

For this reason, I don't see why the FPSO could not hook up to the buoy before rock-dumping has been completed.

This having been said, conducting such SIMOPS would be a complication which the company might rightly and wisely wish to avoid: it's easier and less risky to do things sequentially : one thing at a time.

However, all the dates we're looking at and quoted by Seafish and also the company documents aren't engraved in stone. They're 'windows'. The FPSO is set to leave Dubai sometime before the end of September: that's all we know for sure. The rock dumping should be completed by end of October, similarly. There's a six week sailing time for the FPSO. FPSO sailing at end September takes arrival to mid-October: dumping should be finished. An earlier sailing? Maybe the dumping will be advanced to accommodate an earlier arrival.

Or maybe not. Because maybe (if my thoughts above are correct), hookup can still take place while dumping is still ongoing but not yet completed.

We'll just have to wait and see. Which is why Shipwatching can be fun, and will become yet more exciting in the weeks to come.

By the way, Wellwell,

" I’m not saying anything specific, just cautioning against hubris. " (you post 18:06 Wednesday)

If I want to listen to preaching (your CA - loving pal on Lemonfool is fond of doing that, also) I'll go and attend one of Reverandy's services.

Anyway, I'm proud of my hubris.

SiPP,

"Only from one poster."

And another one on a different BB.

No names, no packdrill.

Wellwell,

"it’s probably not state of the art. There has been a drive to simplify well design and the subsea equipment to reduce both the cost of the equipment and also the complexity involving final decommissioning for which money must be kept in escrow. Simpler wells equals more liquidity."

That"s utter balls, you know it, and you should be ashamed of yourself for writing such complete nonsense. The EPS overall is as simple as it can get. For 'simple', read no unnecessary bells and whistles. But in terms of the actual equipment used, 'state of the art' is a very appropriate description, and no expense appears to have been spared. That goes for the operations as well, and the equipment used to do the work. Other than the PBLJ, but it was all that was available, and it managed to do the job, seemingly.

Other people here have commented on your negativity and sometimes cast aspertions as to why you should post in such a manner. I've personally tried to refrain from this as you appear to have some oilfield knowledge. Tried to refrain until now, that is. Kept things to debate and differences of opinion. But this latest of yours takes the biscuit. It is deliberate dissemination of non-truths, casting the company (were such things true) in a very bad light. But they simply aren't.

For 'simple', read 'elegant'.

We know that people within the company read these BB's, and suspect that they won't be happy when they read your post. But that's your problem, not mine.

Arbitrader,

"I find it hilarious that every time the sp drops a bit some people insist it must be the mm's manipulating the market."

Me too. But we know it isn't that. The real reason the SP has dropped is people selling because they've suddenly realised that the field is going to be depleted within months of FoiL.

Bother. Yesterday was the first time in at least four decades that I've turned on my TV to watch a football game. Did the same again this evening, but then turned it off again because I couldn't stand the suspense, and turned it back on again to see the result.

Oh dear.

That's enough football for the rest of my lifetime. I'll stick to sensible things like playing poker, caving, and truck racing.

O/T

Some guys just don't seem to get a break....

https://www.biznews.com/global-investing/2018/07/11/ex-bp-now-glencore-chair-tony-hayward/

Ricfle,

"What happens if the mixture is wrong, the cake is under cooked or even burnt?

Life is full of risks."

For the sake of what remains of your sanity I sincerely erccomend you sell out of this share if you have so little trust in its founder's expertise and that of the management, and if you think it's so risky.

I can only look at the thing empirically. From the technical side, a 15,000 bbl/day DST doesn't lie. From the 'market' side, a record-breaking half-billion fundraise doesn't indicate a predominance of doubt in the mind of the 'smart money'. And from personal experience, is this share showing a 'paper profit' for my holding at the moment? Yes it is. Has it made me cash profit in the past? Yes it has. Do I anticipate making further cash profits in the future? Yes I do.

So, not 'worried'. I leave that to you, on the basis I don't own a dog and bark myself. Please continue to worry, because I know nothing I write here will prevent you from doing that. And someone's got to do it, I suppose. Just don't expect everybody to believe there's a bogeyman under the bed just on your say-so.

Genghis,

"The majors from the data room DO have such access, and are holding off, for the moment, so it is reasonable to speculate that they perceive more risk at this stage ; but we don't really know that. "

Agreed. 'It is reasonable to speculate that...etc'. But that is all that it is. Uninformed spaculation. Compare and contrast with certain posters who ascertain that 'the Majors are NOT interested', 'there must be hidden risks because the company hasn't been snapped up by a major', and so on.

I still strongly believe that one reason no outlandish offer has yet been made for Hurricane's acreage is simply that it makes no sense to buy a half-baked cake. Hurricane is progressing the EPS as promised, and within six months firm production data will be available and put on the table for others to see and taste. And if they like it they can then turn to their own shareholders and advise whether they should approve buying a slice of the action or not.

The only common ground I share with this board's perennial derampers is that I wouldn't object at all if BP banged on the door tomorrow offering five quid a share for Hurricane! But do I believe it will happen? No. Do I see any reason why BP or someone else might do that? No, again. But do I think that this hasn't happened because of some technical 'doubts'? Definitely not.

If the majors went around buying up every company that stikes significant oil, the likes of Tullow, Apache, Premier, Rockhopper, et al wouldn't exist. But they do. And so does Hurricane, for the very same reason.

Strange that Shell bought up just about every lease surrounding GLA / GWA during the last round though, isn't it?

Ricfle,

" Some self-appointed expert telling me that they cannot be bothered to explain does not cut it for me."

That's not a nice way to refer to Dr T. I'm sure it was he who appended the note to the production graph saying that depletion is not anticipated.

BNB,

"adoubleuk - how abouts another 5000 share bet on this , i will take evens this time as I feel a little guilty taking the 10/1 that you offered last time even though that one is for a good cause ."

Sorry, mate, but no bet was made. I asked who was keeping the book and offering odds. 10-1 was only what I thought a bookie would offer, but would be selling himself short. Nobody volunteered. However if you still want to bet on the FPSO being towed or not, my hundred quid (cash, Paypal will do, and not for charity) versus yours says that it will travel using its own propulsion. Let me know if you accept.

And no, I'm not putting money on whether the company is bidding on further licences, because it's not something I have any particular views.

Ricfle,

"The comments of the CEO. What gives you the odd idea it is not for sale?"

Ohmigod. It's the ASSETS which will be for sale or farmout, not the dam' company. I think I'll go and have a conversation with my frying-pan .It's got more neurones than you obviously possess, Ricfle, and it's useful as well.

Ricfle,

"Would you now like to tell us why the majors have not already snapped Hurricane up"

What gives you this odd idea that the company is for sale?