Member Info for adoubleuk

JoeSoap,

"But it appears that the total volume of water produced is more than 3 times the capacity of the slops tank, so where are they storing it?"

They're either NOT storing it, or it's going overboard. But the thing is, we DON'T KNOW for how long 7z was flowed with the increased amount of water: we just DON'T KNOW how much water has gone through the production train.

To me, given that we know the water treatment plant is undergoing final commissioning, it seem logical to keep 7z offline until such commissioning is done, and just produce from 6. Which is what the company said was happening back around December 13th.

I still reckon those people on lemonfool are just scaring people, including themselves, for nothing. Whether it's deliberate or not is anyone's guess. Plus there are people posting there who say they've sold out.

That's their problem, not mine. Once the water treatment is fully up and running, one well producing 30% (perched) water with both running at a total 20,000 bbl/day oil is no 'issue' at all.

Chablard,

"Worth noting that the last tanker pick up had a max slop capacity of just under 50000bls"

...which is slightly less than the AM's 'slop capacity', which is around 515000 bbl.

But equally, that in itself begs a question. If a tanker actually does take on 'slop' from an offshore facility, does it go on the manifest as 'cargo'? I don't have an answer to that. But even so, revert to my earlier post, or rather, let's use the tanker's slop capacity, which is 7225 m3. Let's assume any 'slop' is briny, not fresh water. So let's round the weight up to 8000 tons.

That gets us back to just 10% of the reported 80,000 ton load, and thus a crude load of at least 450,000 bbl.

So unless the ship's skipper gave an incorrect load weight to the port (which I feel is exceedingly unlikely), there's still nowt to fret about.

Drillspark,

"Just been having a read at the latest from DSPP and others on lemon fool.....they have came up with the possibility that the offloads have changed location from Amsterdam to wherever to conceal how much water they are discharging......eh!!,..straw clutching, I’m surprised that DSSP entertains this one..."

So am I. Espedcially given that said Dspp is also qualifying a lot of his posts by saying he reckons that the 'perched water hypothesis' seems to be the 'most likely' explanation for what's going on.

Those guys have got water on the brain. Still banging on about it... pointlessly. Suggesting the tanker's carrying water to Germany instead of Holland to hide that 'fact' is downright stupid.

The other day, I pulled up the (now gone) EV about his stupid and pessimistic downtime estimates due to pigging ops. I checked the EIS document and the CMD presentation.

But I hadn't looked at the EIS for that. It was to quickly check the size of the FPSO's 'slop tanks'. And they hold 7443 cubic metres. So assuming the FPSO unloaded full slop tanks to the tanker, which is incredibly unlikely, that would only total about 8000 tons, or 10% of the documented cargo weight. Which still gives an oil cargo exceeding 450,000 bbl.

I suggest giving one's sanity a treat and avoid looking at the Lemonfool board.

IJWT,

"42° API "

Source, please?

Yes, we know Lincoln is 42 - 43, 'nectar' in other words, But my belief is (and the only sources I can find) that Lancaster is 38.

daltry,

"Exactly what is the grade/quality/fineness, name of the Lancaster Oil that is being sold to BP and Shell ? How does that standard match up against other produced oils worldwide? "

'Lancaster Oil' is 38 degrees API. ( CPR 2017 and other documents)

For brevity I suggest you look at Google to get an explanation of 'degrees API'. This is a premium-quality (reflected in price) light oil, comparable to Brent, the 'benchmark' for such high-quality crudes. As distinct from another benchmark, WTI (West Texas Intermediate) which is heavier.

Another compartor is middle eastern crude, which generally is heavy stuff, so rather low quality (note the word 'generally'), but what they haven't got in quality they make up for in quantity. Nevertheless the situation exists where some Arabian Gulf states are not self-sufficient in vehicle-fuels, and have to import them.

DC,

"Don't knock it. I remember a while back looking for a Wikipedia entry and was disappointed to found nothing. Anything that broadens awareness has to be positive."

Please don't get me wrong. Sure it's 'publicity' of sorts, and for sure it's time Lancaster was on the Wiki 'map'. My comment was (partly) tongue in cheek, in that finding niggling little faults is probably be a good reason for me to stay away from the entry, else I'll be tempted to meke change. Keeping this BB technically 'straight' (sometimes) is hard enough already!

But equally, it's cause me to learn something, following Shedfull's post. Because I was quite unaware that waters off Scotland are governed by Scottish law and Marine law, and can thus be considered territorial to that country. I didn't know that.

Ta for the link, Missdosh (as always!).

I think I'll stay away fro that page, because I've already spotted two errors!

(a) What are Scottish territorial waters?
(b) (Hair splitting) Shell did not strictly speaking 'discover oil in the fractured basement' with the original well. The well targeted what was known at the time as the Commodore Sandstone, and that was the discovery, though non-commercial. Per SOP then, a core was taken of the underlying basement rock. Yes, there was evidence of oil, as Dr Trice found out on re-examining the core. But that doesn't make the borehole a 'Fractured Basement Discovery' as far as the historical paperwork goes.

MCB55,

"Of course if a serious player shows real interest then the data room and more would be made available!"

Quite agree. Let's remember that the 'data room' isn't a physical 'room' at all. Just a suite of data and information that the company made available to II's and other potential 'bigtime' shareholders prior to the 2017 fundraise, ensuring that they were all reading from the same page and that thus no accusations of 'favoritism' could be levelled at Hurricane.

I feel sure that nobody without 'need to know' has access at the moment to live data coming from the field, and that probably includes the OGA. It's confidential proprietory stuff. But I also feel fairly sure that if a potential serious farminee or partner made approaches to Hurricane, a certain amount of information would be provided that remains unknown to shareholders and others, subject to NDA's etc..

BlooBird,

Thanks for the link.

Never forget that OGUK is a quango, though. Much like OGA. Not proactive, in other words.

Also, the document is about six months old. I could find only one reference to Hurricane.

A little bit more about 'pigging'. I was looking at the EIS document today, and on page 3-31 is a little table showing anticipated uptime/downtime. This includes pigging. It confirms that initially, pigging was planned (conservatively) as once every 6 weeks, though we now know the frequency has been extended. But more interestingly, it says that pigging takes about 1 day (rounded up). No doubt based on experience when the AM worked in the Ettrick field. So maximum annual 'downtime' anticipated due to pigging operations is 9 days.

Oh, another Shell explanation for a commonly-used word:

'Petroleum Inputted, Petroleum Exits'

Etc., etc....

Wellwell,

"I know what slips are. Not how the name was derived though."

Now you do!

:-))

Drillspark,

".long way back from there buddy....enjoy your pint in Cheerz.."

That is brilliant! Mind you I had to look on google to find out about the establishment. Back in the days when I lived in Grampian and worked N.Sea, such a place wouldn't have got a license, and if it had, it would have mysteriously burned down within weeks of opening.

But I guess times have changed.

"Pipeline intelligent gauge....or pipeline intervention gauge is how I know them."

So I suppose you know what 'Solidly Linked Integral Pipe Supporters' are, then?

Wellwell,

"Pipeline intelligent gauge....or pipeline intervention gauge is how I know them."

You must work for Shell, or Schlumberger.

The name 'pig' was coined for those things way back when oilfield people couldn't even spell 'intelligent'...

LadySonia,

"Thankyou for summary of pigging, some could have taken pages to explain that."

Thank you, too. Must be the first time someone here I've written something concisely!

So here, in return, is a useless bit of trivia knowledge for you, in case you have a pub quiz or something like that coming up.

Why is a pipeline pig called a 'pig'?

It's because a 'scraper pig' (like the ones Hurricane's using at Lancaster) has metal blades which literally scrape the inside of the pipe. So as i's pumped along the route, these blades make a metal-to-metal squealing sound. Like a startled pig. Hence the name.

Naturally, passing along a buried subsea pipeline, this noise can't be heard. But in an onshore oilfield with above-ground flowlines, you always know when a pig's passing through!

Now you know. (For what little it's worth!) :-)

Wellwell,

"Which parts smart****?"

Maybe he was referring to your comment about having to 'tear yourself away from a glass of beer or wine' before replying to EV's inanities!

I don't. I park my glass beside the computer !

Wellwell,

"AK, I don’t believe the flowlines are heated but are relying on a certain flow rate to keep the temperature up"

Yes, you're correct (and I was wrong). I've just checked back. The flowlines aren't heated, just insulated, with wax being mitigated by chemical injection, and maintaining minimum 6000 bbl / day flowrates.

In fact, now that EV has decided to change tack and talk about pigging and wax, people might like to turn to page 47 / 48 of the 2017 CPR, where these things are covered. Also menioned is that 'initial' pigging frequency was anticipated as once every 6 weeks, and the company has already advised that the frequency has been decreased. (For MTV's benefit, that means pigging 'appens less offen.)

MTV,

" do you really think for one minute that it has not incurred problems that require shutdowns during the last 6 months"

The company has alreaady stated that uptime figures for the FPSO have been better than those anticipated. (As wellwell has said, a certain amount of downtime was already built into prognoses, even pre-FoiL).

Or are you yet again implying that the company is lying to us? Because that's the impression I get, and one day such implications might get you into more trouble than a few posters on a BB trying to set you straight.

" no matter if it is every 4 -6 weeks, this takes a fair bit of planning! "

No more so than any other routine oilfield operation. Because that's what it is, a 'routine' operation. Planned for and performed by experienced professionals who are paid for doing such work with no drama.

And then including the phrase "Let’s face it nothing is certain with FB , it’s still a learning curve" is just plain obfuscation. The oil doesn't care where it came from, nor do the flowlines, nor does the production train on the FPSO. Guaranteed, somewhere in the world, most likely in quite a few locations, a pig's travelling along a pipeline at this very moment. Why make it sound dramatic?