The next focusIR Investor Webinar takes places on 14th May with guest speakers from Blue Whale Growth Fund, Taseko Mines, Kavango Resources and CQS Natural Resources fund. Please register here.
Got a feeling all the testing delays maybe due to PG attempting to raise finance (with a future gas offtaker MOU), with the aim of drilling MOU-4 twin (500metres depth or thereabouts) and the Jurassic prospect (JUR-1?).
Then to be followed by testing for MOU-1,3,4,4 twin and the Jurassic prospect (if successful).
Testing all the drilled sites together would work out much cheaper, than if testing were done over separate timeframes. As alluded to by PG in one of the video presentations.
Just trying to understand PG's thought processes in getting value for money...
Via X (Twitter):
"The invasion of Ukraine by Russia highlighted the EU's reliance of imports by 83% of its #naturalgas. Yet here is a member state working against reducing the bloc's dependance of imported fuel."
"The greenest gas is the molecules on our own doorstep."
https://twitter.com/OffshoreIreland/status/1721497153669861471?t=QvZkVrJtEqRdYD7pBSxvVQ&s=19
Just to add that the longer the testing takes to complete (presuming the testing started on the 16th October or there abouts) the better potential of the results being on the positive side.
Bearing in mind of the testing sequence (very possibly) employed, of gas flow testing followed by well lock-ins, multiple times.
Very time consuming if testing is actually flowing gas successfully I'd have thought.
Inverse can be said if no or little flow of gas during testing, IE much shorter testing period.
M-J,
Think it causes the opposite effect with compartmentation, IE quicker decline in gas pressure and hence flow rate.
Testing will pick it up if that is the case.
Happy to be corrected.
That's if I read your question correctly.
This made me laugh 😂
MOU3 flare testing (not real by the way):
https://twitter.com/Klopps_Kop/status/1713828836696055828?t=U1ZrkzKKexc68J6vPkjbxg&s=19
Fact check: Has Qatar threatened to stop gas supply to world if Israel doesn't stop bombing?
Claim quickly gained attention but raised eyebrows among those familiar with Qatar and its diplomatic stance.
Social media platforms were abuzz with a sensational claim that Qatar had threatened to cut off its gas supply to the world if Israel's bombings in Gaza continued.
Let's clarify the situation and debunk this false news:
False claim
A social media account with links to the UAE shared a post alleging that "the State of Qatar threatened to stop gas supplies to the world if the bombing of Gaza does not stop."
The claim quickly gained attention but raised eyebrows among those familiar with Qatar and its diplomatic stance.
Debunking claim
- The account that shared this claim, known as "Qatar Affairs" (now suspended) has been previously exposed for spreading false information. It's considered part of disinformation efforts to frame Qatar negatively.
- In reality, Qatar has consistently positioned itself as a reliable energy partner to nations globally. It has reaffirmed its commitment to providing gas supply even during international crises, such as the Russian war on Ukraine.
- During the 2017 blockade when its neighbouring UAE severed ties with Doha, Qatar pledged not to cut gas supplies to its neighbours. QatarEnergy CEO Saad Sherida Al-Kaabi stated they wouldn't halt gas supplies to the UAE.
- Qatar has always maintained a clear separation between its business dealings and political conflicts.
- The Qatari leadership emphasizes that politics doesn't impact their energy partnerships and commitments.
Reality
Qatar is currently engaged in mediation efforts to de-escalate the conflict between Hamas and Israel, as the latter continues its bombardment of Gaza.
The nation which hosts a Hamas political office has played a crucial role in seeking peace and stability in the region.
In a recent phone call, Qatar's Amir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani emphasized the importance of safeguarding civilian lives and reducing escalation.
In essence, the claim of Qatar threatening to cut gas supplies due to the Gaza situation is baseless.
Qatar continues to be a reliable and responsible global energy supplier while actively working to bring about peace in the region.
https://www.samaa.tv/208732616-fact-check-has-qatar-threatened-to-stop-gas-supply-to-world-if-israel-doesn-t-stop-bombing
Make of the above as you like...
WSJ
https://twitter.com/JavierBlas/status/1710981702275694683?t=gFIZygVYokuM0FPNpGYuyQ&s=19
Bloomberg pt2
7) The Saudi-Israeli diplomatic deal, which many had penciled in for early-to-mid 2024, is a casualty. Even if Riyadh is likely furious with Hamas, it’s difficult to see how Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman would be able to sell the deal domestically. That, in turn, removes the potential for Saudi Arabia pumping more oil to help passage of the deal in Washington. The other victim of the Hamas-Isaeli war is the Saudi-Iranian rapprochement, which itself was another bearish element for oil.
8) Finally, a key difference from 1973, Washington can tap its Strategic Petroleum Reserve to limit the impact on gasoline prices — and on President Joe Biden’s approval rating. If oil prices surge because of tension in the Middle East, the White House is sure to tap the SPR. Although it’s at its lowest level in 40 years, the reserve still has enough oil to deal with another crisis.
Bloomberg pt1
For oil it's not 1973 again, but it could still turn ugly:
History doesn’t repeat itself, but it often rhymes. On the eve of the 50th anniversary of the world’s first oil crisis, the parallels between October 2023 and October 1973 are easy to draw: A surprise attack on Israel and oil prices rising. But the resemblance ends there.
The global economy isn’t about to suffer another Arab oil embargo that would triple the price of a barrel of crude. Yet, it would be a mistake to downplay the chances that the world faces higher-for-longer oil prices.
2) The oil market itself doesn't have any of the pre-October 1973 characteristics. Back then, oil demand was surging, and the world had exhausted all its spare production capacity. Today, consumption growth has moderated, and is likely to slow further as electric vehicles become a reality. In addition, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates have significant spare capacity that they use to curb prices – if they choose to do so.
3) As importantly, today, OPEC nations aren’t trying to boost prices beyond a few extra dollars. Riyadh would be content with oil prices rising another 10-20% higher, to just above $100 a barrel from $85 currently, rather than pushing them more than 100% higher to $200 a barrel. Just before the October 1973 oil embargo, OPEC nations unilaterally hiked the official petroleum prices by about 70%. Although the embargo is the element most vividly remembered of the crisis, the price hike was as crucial.
4) The fallout could yet have an impact on oil markets in 2023 and 2024. The most immediate impact could come if Israel concludes that Hamas acted on instructions of Tehran. In that scenario, oil prices could go much higher. In 2019, Iran demonstrated, via Yemeni proxies, that it’s able to knock down a significant chunk of Saudi oil production capacity. It could do the same as retaliation if it finds itself under Israel or American attack.
5) Even if Israel doesn’t immediately respond to Iran, the repercussions will likely affect Iranian oil production. Since late 2022, Washington has turned a blind eye to surging Iranian oil exports, bypassing American sanctions. The priority in Washington was an informal détente with Tehran. As a result, Iranian oil output has surged nearly 700,000 barrels a day this year – the second-largest source of incremental supply in 2023, behind only US shale. The White House is now likely to enforce the sanctions. That could be enough to push oil prices to $100 a barrel, and potentially beyond.
6) Russia will benefit from any Middle East oil crisis. If Washington enforces sanctions against Iran, it could create space for Russia’s own sanctioned barrels to both win market share and achieve higher prices. One of the reasons why the White House turned a blind eye on Iranian oil exports is because it hurt Russia. In turn, Venezuela could also benefit, with the White House relaxing sanctions to ease market
WSJ
https://twitter.com/JavierBlas/status/1710981702275694683?t=gFIZygVYokuM0FPNpGYuyQ&s=19
Bloomberg pt2
7) The Saudi-Israeli diplomatic deal, which many had penciled in for early-to-mid 2024, is a casualty. Even if Riyadh is likely furious with Hamas, it’s difficult to see how Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman would be able to sell the deal domestically. That, in turn, removes the potential for Saudi Arabia pumping more oil to help passage of the deal in Washington. The other victim of the Hamas-Isaeli war is the Saudi-Iranian rapprochement, which itself was another bearish element for oil.
8) Finally, a key difference from 1973, Washington can tap its Strategic Petroleum Reserve to limit the impact on gasoline prices — and on President Joe Biden’s approval rating. If oil prices surge because of tension in the Middle East, the White House is sure to tap the SPR. Although it’s at its lowest level in 40 years, the reserve still has enough oil to deal with another crisis.
Bloomberg pt1
For oil it's not 1973 again, but it could still turn ugly:
History doesn’t repeat itself, but it often rhymes. On the eve of the 50th anniversary of the world’s first oil crisis, the parallels between October 2023 and October 1973 are easy to draw: A surprise attack on Israel and oil prices rising. But the resemblance ends there.
The global economy isn’t about to suffer another Arab oil embargo that would triple the price of a barrel of crude. Yet, it would be a mistake to downplay the chances that the world faces higher-for-longer oil prices.
2) The oil market itself doesn't have any of the pre-October 1973 characteristics. Back then, oil demand was surging, and the world had exhausted all its spare production capacity. Today, consumption growth has moderated, and is likely to slow further as electric vehicles become a reality. In addition, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates have significant spare capacity that they use to curb prices – if they choose to do so.
3) As importantly, today, OPEC nations aren’t trying to boost prices beyond a few extra dollars. Riyadh would be content with oil prices rising another 10-20% higher, to just above $100 a barrel from $85 currently, rather than pushing them more than 100% higher to $200 a barrel. Just before the October 1973 oil embargo, OPEC nations unilaterally hiked the official petroleum prices by about 70%. Although the embargo is the element most vividly remembered of the crisis, the price hike was as crucial.
4) The fallout could yet have an impact on oil markets in 2023 and 2024. The most immediate impact could come if Israel concludes that Hamas acted on instructions of Tehran. In that scenario, oil prices could go much higher. In 2019, Iran demonstrated, via Yemeni proxies, that it’s able to knock down a significant chunk of Saudi oil production capacity. It could do the same as retaliation if it finds itself under Israel or American attack.
5) Even if Israel doesn’t immediately respond to Iran, the repercussions will likely affect Iranian oil production. Since late 2022, Washington has turned a blind eye to surging Iranian oil exports, bypassing American sanctions. The priority in Washington was an informal détente with Tehran. As a result, Iranian oil output has surged nearly 700,000 barrels a day this year – the second-largest source of incremental supply in 2023, behind only US shale. The White House is now likely to enforce the sanctions. That could be enough to push oil prices to $100 a barrel, and potentially beyond.
6) Russia will benefit from any Middle East oil crisis. If Washington enforces sanctions against Iran, it could create space for Russia’s own sanctioned barrels to both win market share and achieve higher prices. One of the reasons why the White House turned a blind eye on Iranian oil exports is because it hurt Russia. In turn, Venezuela could also benefit, with the White House relaxing sanctions to ease market
Good progress has been made on opening discussions for the offtake of gas on a larger scale than was previously envisaged by the "Proof of CNG Pilot Concept" strategy.
Financing options are being crystallised which will allow funds to be re-purposed for further appraisal drilling activity and value accretion through drilling success."
What's not to like here :)