Member Info for adoubleuk

Rangers,

Thanks for your reply. However, with "We know the PBLJ may be laid up on dayrate and you comment that this is good in terms of not rushing things. My own thoughts were more as to why lose $20m on an idle rig just to ensure they chose the sweet spots." I think you may have misunderstood what I was trying to say.

If the rig ends up lying idle for any length of time, that will obviously be a negative point. But if instead it's used to drill on Lancaster, probably at a location and with a well plan that's been in place for a long time, rather than immediately continuing on GWA which has yet to be fully analysed, I feel that's a plus.

proverloop,

"Some contributors on here make holes in the ground, I've been sitting emptying holes since the early 2000's. "

You haven't exactly posted your CV, but I reckon I know what you do! I remember a 'poverloop' system being temporarily installed on the Montrose A back in the early 80's. A great big black-painted skid-mounted unit plonked on a cantilevered walkway with all sorts of pipework causing a 'trip hazard' which HSE wouldn't pass in a month of Sundays these days... All rather esoteric stuff whose purpose I didn't fully understand, not being involved in the 'production' side of things. But all that gubbins was on a walkway which was the main route between the rigfloor and the 'coffee shop', so not tripping over the pipes was a major concern! Happy days...

Rangers,

I couldn't help noticing this part of your post:

"My own preference would be to see another well drilled on Lancaster as our partnership on GWA isn't exactly flourishing."

Would you like to expand on that a bit, please? What's 'wrong' with the partnership? Sure, the Warwick results may not have been exactly what were hoped for, and this leaves a question mark as to how the rig is going to be employed at the start of the contract period, but to my mind this is a good sign. There will no doubt have to be a lot of analysis of the said results before a decision is made as to the next place to drill on the GWA will be, so it's encouraging that things in that respect are not going to be rushed. Whereas I suspect that the next likely GLA locations have been 'picked' and decided upon for quite a while now. (Despite DC's worries that this may not be the case!)

Although I agree that another 'producer' on Lancaster would be a nice thing for the company to have in their pocket, it'd also be good if they had another stab at Halifax, or maybe somewhere intermediate between the two fields, somewhere NE of Lancaster, further up the ridge. Thought of course that might be a long shot, and an 'iffy' result is not what's needed in the near future.

I'd suggest that it's mistaken to assume that there's anything 'awkward' about the partnership though.

DC,

"How many here have not de-risked?"

I raise my hand. Unless you count back in 2016 when I traded the bejeezus out of this to 'protect' my initial investment. (Not something I wish to repeat; too much like hard work.)

Sure, there's the old expression about 'never entering a casino with more money than you can afford to lose'. And some people might see investing in AIM shares as being a sort of gambling den. But personally, I enter casinos (regularly) to play poker only, not games of chance, and with the firm intention of walking out in profit. Sure, it doesn't ALWAYS happen like that, but if I've had a bad night, the road home isn't good, because I know it's because I've played badly, or had too much to drink, or something like that.It's rarely a matter of 'bad luck'.

Sure, since 2016, I've 'traded' a bit. Usually with success. But not to reduce my 'risk'. Just to take some profit.

Right now, I see my 'stack' dwindling, due to the dropping SP. But that's just like playing cash-game poker, and folding hand after hand after hand, relinquishing one's 'big blinds', and so on.

But no matter. Patience is the name of the game. This thing is not a tournament. Which is why I continue to 'hold'. I won't get bluffed-out by some jokers rabbitting on about 'water coning' and stuff like that.

Genghis,

"Absurd to suggest Dr T or the BoD are lying."

I'd like to add to that, if I may.

It's just as absurd that people can take seriously 'pundits' who working off just five or six public-domain data-points attempt to propose alternative scenarios to those which the company tell us is the current situation. Technically speaking, that is.

Let them spread fear. The truth will be revealed in good course.

JB,

" highly deviated is that 45degree"

Could be more. Mind you, my musings about future wells are just idle thoughts on a rainy afternoon...

Ash666 (and CountryLoon who posted the link),

"Not a cat in hell's chance that anyone would buy HUR at the moment"

That 'predators' article is throwaway stuff to fill up page-space, written on the back of the latest Premier / BP deal. Anyone could have written it. For instance, there's a paragraph headed 'North Sea giants table bids for Siccar Point', but then that paragraph makes no mention of SC. The only mention of their name comes earlier, simply saying that their Cambo field (WoS) is being studied for future development. (Like Lancaster). No mention of who these 'giants' are who are 'tabling bids'.

Deals such as the recent PMO / BP one have very little bearing (if any) on the Hurricane case. The assets being sold by majors have already been developed and are entering a stage of maturity where they are of more interest to smaller companies to continue and refine production, thereby freeing up cash and people for the big boys to concentrate on bigger projects.

JiffyBag,

"In other words don't drill so deep, is there oil above the FB?"

I'm surprised nobody jumped in to put you straight here.

Yes, the FB on Rona Ridge is overlaid by sandstone containing oil, but in itself it is considered non-commercial. It could be argued that maybe the sands could be produced as an 'added extra' to the FB production, but there are reasons pertaining to well architecture (too esoteric to be explained at length here) that simply make it not worth the hassle (and additional expense).

I wouldn't be surprised to see Hurricane possibly 'experimenting' with well designs in the future, though. They have hinted at some subvertical wells (though these could be highly deviated), and possibly reducing the kickout of horizontal sections (which would reduce drilling time and costs), though this latter is pure guesswork on my part.

JB,

"Can the Aoka Mizu possibly handle 2 additional tiebacks, ie Lincoln Crestal plus another new well on Lancaster? "

Yes, of course. There are enough 'ports' on the buoy to physically tie them in. Can the FPSO handle four wells running at once, each producing 10,000 bbl / day? No. HOWEVER, tying at least one further well gives redundancy, which barely exists at present. The sooner a third well is tied in, the better.

Genghis,

"Until next time, of course...…..I'm sure somebody will raise it again at some point..."

Yup. Or a variant thereof. Maybe someone will pop up on Lemonfool claiming to be a marine biologist, and explaining that a new sort of extra-large giant squid is evolving WoS (due to climate change) , and their favorite food is FPSO's.

It's funny to think that less than a year ago we were anxious about the final stages of the Odyssey of the Aoka Mizu, and whether they could find a new bit of rope...

ifonlyiknew,

"Yes price of oil up last 2 days yet the price here drops."

So where's the big surprise? You only need to read the financiaql pages of any reputable newspaper to explain it. With the latest US / Iran / Iraq stuff, the markets have taken a hit. OK, the big boys like Shell and BP have moved up, but despite being an oil producer, HUR remains a 'minnow' AIM share. At times of uncertainty, people move out of speculative stuff and into 'safe havens'.

Seen the price of gold today?

HH,

I only wish to add one small technical correction to your post, which in no way negates the thrust of your argument.

"I furthermore do not anticipate such a fluid path would occur in a linear manner (especially so given two different fluid viscosities), and that the passage would induce a turbulence likely to cause a vortex effect, hence the utilisation of the term “coning”.

The term 'coning' pre-dates directional and horizontal drilling, and comes from a time when most oilwells were drilled as 'straight holes', or vertical. The analogy of a well being like an open-ended straw is not completely correct, bit it'll do for now.

As 'drawdown' is applied to a well, ie negative pressure exerted on the reservoir, water in the aquifer may start to be drawn up towards the well, and the place where the water will rise the highest is directly below the well, where the 'suck' is the most concentrated. However, water to each side will rise as well, to a lesser extent as the 'suction effect' is less, distance through the formation being greater, and friction effects coming into play. So if a 3D graphic representation of this is drawn, a 'cone' of water is drawn up to the bottom of the well.

However, the well is (generally) not an open-ended straw. Instead, fluid enters through holes punched in the side of the lowermost casing. (The 'perforations'.)

If water breakthrough occurs, and bad reservoir management is employed (as was frequently the case before the phenomena were properly understood, and also for greed / commercial reasons, one way of dealing with the problem might be to actually 'suck harder', because the aggregate 'mixed' fluid column density is now greater, so it takes more suck to maintain the previous flowrate. This of course can help in the short term, but not longterm, because the 'cone' of water will rise further up alongside the wellbore, with maybe the lowermost section becoming fully 'watered out', and oil only still entering from a shallower depth.

A way of dealing with this might be to actually plug off the lowermost perforations through which most of the water is entering, but of course with the downside that you've now got less overall exposure to the reservoir.

Believe me, tens if not hundreds of thousands of wells have been run like this back in the 'bad old days': the greed factor can be high, people didn't think longterm, drilling was cheap, new fields easily found, etc. Reservoirs could be ruined.

None of the above is happening at Lancaster, though.

"Sounds like 'back in the freezer' time then!"

Hey, Daltry!

Look on the bright side, for goodness' sake.

You never know what will happen here. There might be a sudden 15% hike in the SP (how about next Wednesday?), followed by suspension of trading. Followed by an RNS saying that this has been caused by a major oil company wanting to buy the company, and a massive bidding war has broken out.

Oh well. I suppose one can dream...

Biffadog,

Post of the year, in my opinion.

You just missed out one thing which I referred to yesterday. Dspp's tankerload volumes are WRONG. He can find the correct figures 'public-domain' if he spends as much time searching for them as he does producing his fancy graphs.

Yobbo,

"There are quite a few vessels registered in the Isle of Man."

Yes, but somehow I don't see Jeremy Clarkson navigating his Argocat to the Straits of Hormuz...

AquaeSulis,

"Look I am just trying to understand the reason for the apparent break in the link between barrels sold and the related av bopd reported by the company, you obviously are unable to explain it, I was kinda hoping someone with more knowledge of the oil industry could (like ADUK) to satisfy my curiosity."

Understood. And quite agree with your thoughts. However, and thanks for the flattering comment, my on-hands oilfield knowledge doesn't really enter into things here. Instead, it's finding public-domain information, and working from that.

DO NOT confuse 'average Bopd' and tanker offloads! They are two completely different things. And this is where our friend Dssp is beginning to make a bit of a prat of himself over on lemonfool, especially when he starts referring to 'draftwatchers'. 'Cos on another board (from which I was chucked) we came to a conclusion about 18 months ago that 'draftwatching' was worthless.

Either DYOR into such esoteric things, or just rely upon reported 'oil sold to market' figures, even if they're three months in arrears.

Or are OGA telling fibs, as well?

This is what I can't understand. The Lancaster EPS seems to be going great guns, exceeding expectations, but there are people saying it's a dry hole.

When all the figures refute that, plus the regular tanker offloads, etc..

daltry,

"When is the next RNS due? "

How long is a piece of string? ( The answer of course being it's the distance between the rotary table and the drillbit, but...)

I think there may be something about planned usage of the PBLJ rig sometime in the next few weeks. And why not (maybe) some sort of operational update?

Yup, it may be a slow three months.

buyinmay,

"He does occasionally slip in a few remarks that would allow allow to maintain his reputation when and if all turns out ok.
I think he’s lost a lot of credibility recently."

Yes. Unfortunately for him, that's true. And he's done it again.

I've just been to Lemonfool again, for a specific reason, to look at where he's getting his individual tanker offload volumes from. And it's not OGA! OK, he's getting monthly oil output stats from OGA, but not tankerloads.

All I can say is that his data in this respect is wrong.

** (00:19 post)

"AM's 'slop capacity', which is around 515000 bbl."

Leave off one of those zeros...

51500 bbl.

Wellwell,

" anyone with an ounce of intelligence can spin it one way or the other ".

That's as maybe. But nevertheless, those putting on 'negative spin' are implying that the company is either trying to hide things from us, or just lying. Even though we've been told that if anything in the field appeared to be problematic, the shareholders would be informed. And we've heard nothing to that effect.

How much detail do you think would be useful to shareholders in general, anyway? I don't believe this BB (and to a lesser extent others) are representative of the overall shareholder base. Because there's a significant proportion of 'techies' (or people pretending to be so, though they're usually found out), who love discussing the details and trying to read between the lines. I'd suggest a large number of shareholders (who don't post on BB's) just aren't interested in that stuff at all.

Imho, it all boils down to a simple investor's maxim. If you don't trust the management, either sell or don't buy in to start with. And that applies to any company, irrespective of whether they produce oil or frozen pizza. The people I personally don't trust are the city slickers.