Member Info for Alan2017

gpmh - I agree with your "Just another point of view." but everything else is purely fantasy.

Why would Angus delay ordering the well test equipment to have a Weald Round Table discussion? Surely they could agree on the forward plan and get it ordered asap...and then talk about the Weald...which they don't have any flow rate numbers to discuss so the meeting would be pretty boring.

Forget about National Importance and just forces on PI Importance.

B2HS2L - my understanding is that the gas to wire won’t be used from the start. It will only be used if there is sufficient gas. Brockham already has generators onsite that can be powered by gas to supply the site. If the gas is of a specific volume then the modular Aggreko gas to wire units will be installed. In a way it makes more sense to have less gas so our flow rates may not have to be curtailed. Or we have to have more modular gas to wire units. As for its use at other sites, well this is the new greener way of ding things so other operators would have to follow the same guidelines. HH planing application has 4 gas to wire.

Wealdpwr - you're not the greatest fan of Angus and your "If they had anything at Brockham, we would have known by now." doesn't really surprise me. How can they know what they have before they have even carried out the flow test?!?!

Judging by the LSE interview ,Lucan is an old school (pardon the pun) type of person and he won't comment on Brockham flow rates without having numbers to hand, which of course he doesn't as we haven't started the EWT yet. This was evident when he spoke about Balcombe he had market released flow rates to talk about.

So folk have been used to Vonks very positive talk on projects and activities and now are faced with a more reserved less cheery tyre of character in Lucan. This doesn't mean there is an issue at Brockham, it's more to do with he has no numbers to promote Brockham until they start the test.

If they stick to the new timeline then in a months time we should be flowing the well.

Bigten4 - judging by your posting history ...you're not a happy man with any of the shares you write about.

http://www.lse.co.uk/member-info.asp?nick=BigTen4&page=1

DoneK - shocking journalism....looong sigh lol

So we can deduce from the Lucan LSE interview that they need to have a meeting with the other 3 partners before ordering the equipment and progressing with the flow test. You need to have agreement with your partners in the project before going ahead otherwise you break the terms of the contract. They are also obliged to foot their % of the costs and can’t say we’ve changed our minds. So a meeting discussing the formalities in London should be held very soon as Lucan put it and then the well test equipment can be ordered hence the 3 weeks mentioned in slide 11 of the presentation. My timeline of flowing well in 4 weeks still stands (as long as there are no further delays). It will be be nice to finally get some oil flowing. I wonder if Drillordrop will quote this post lol

Pauly - lth who hasn’t posted much on the board?

Malt loaf - what do you think the oil has been doing for millions of years...sat in situ. It’s not porosity that is the most important, but permeability as it interconnects each pocket of oil.

Ja51 - strange how they never post my posts correcting Drillordrop....looong sigh

Seace - commitments go with the % of ownership, so the new partner would know through due diligence their obligations in this respect their % of the cheque.

Isas - I didn’t see that particular comment in the interview. According to Tidswells tweet he said the costs were a 1/3 of what they were before Christmas. And yes companies should be proactive and not reactive when it comes to planning, costs etc. This should all be done well in advance (months).

isas - the LSE interview Lucan speaks about getting agreement with partners which is a very normal thing to do in projects where you don't own 100% of the asset.

Unless it jeopardises the integrity of the well and would lead to a Macondo disaster then partners cannot change their mid at the last minute. They have signed up to the project and have to meet their % of the costs.

Waldpwr - I never said that, please read what I wrote again regarding Lucan / Vonk "expectation management" and how we actually should have been flowing the well with initial results in January (contrary to what Lucan said).

As I also said any other company would have had a bridge plug as a contingency, the rig was on site (rusting for 15 days over Christmas due to the failures) and could have been run, set....no delays.

And yes Tidswell was Director of Operations

It’s Saltfleetbury as you can see it’s had 7 wells drilled and the terminal is being decommissioned next to it.

Nhawan - that’s a rather strange comment to make about abandonment?!?! Nobody has mentioned that. Didn’t you listen to the latest interview where he said the water issue has been dealt with? The SP won’t react until we have flow rates...that’s what people are waiting for. And yes we have to wait in equipment availability as it says in the presentation and yes that means 4 weeks minimum. Even then we will have to wait longer for initial flow rates. It wold be lovely to see the SP rerate on trucks arriving, but folk want bopd figures.

Nhawen - other interview says 2-3 weeks and slide 11 says minimum of 3 weeks. On top of that they have 10 days for rigging it up. So yes that equates to 4 weeks from now to flow...at the earliest.

E-Al - it still negates the reason for having an abandonment pot ring fenced preventing conpanued tapping in to it...rather like Maxwell and the pension pot scam. Personally I don’t believe they can happen.

From 13min 2sec - talks about Brockham water zone isolated (shame he couldn't have said that in the first interview).

Again talks about delays at Brockham due to this "analysis" with partners. Why advent they been discussing this for the past 6 months? Loooong sigh

So yes I would say at least 4 weeks before the well is flowing (equipment arriving minimum 3 weeks and then rigging up).

At least he clarified the water issue is now a non issue.

Kenni - it’s still a new pipeline that has to be laid, still need to go through due diligence, still need to go through planning permission and you don’t just tap into the national grid. All that takes time (before you even start digging the trench), so as I said before timelines always go right.

Kenni - is it not the case that they have to bypass the terminal which is being abandoned and yes paperwork / timelines always take longer than expected.