Member Info for Alan2017

Scallywag - I suggest you read the previous posts. Already been explained.

Baz - that's post is unlike you lol. Seems like you have your hand on the train track and can feel the train leaving the station...or maybe you found out another way?

Not long to find out if your tip is odds on.

Strange how a UKOG investor spends more time over here?

Even stranger focusing on a piece of kit that won't be used for some time.

Gifted Genies fantastic video shows the logistics and organisation involved to actually stimulate a well. I tend to find folk reading reports don't appreciate the preparation involved.

When everything is in place the remaining fluid will be displaced by the nitrogen and then we shall see what Brockham offers us.

'itsallaboutme - its not a long and deep well. These wells are shallow compared to most other wells around the UK.

It's more to do with the shape and trajectory of the well. It's far easier displacing a well which is either vertical or slightly deviated as your fluid dynamics / friction have less of an influence. Brockham was sidetracked at an angle of 74degrees, so you have almost a kink in the well (this is standard, but I'm just trying to describe how much more work is required compared to a vertical / slightly deviated well). You have to push the fluid around this kink and then into the vertical part of the well. If your hydraulics program is wrong then all you end up doing is slugging when the fluid you are trying to displace up through the annulus stops being carried (lifted) by the nitrogen and then drops back to the bottom of the well.

Is this a problem? Of course not. All it means is you have to adjust your fluid displacement program by adjusting parameters or using more power equipment.

I would always take the choice of having a delay to clean up the well and displace the remaining completion fluid from the well than a BB situation where UKOG screwed up drilling the well twice and in doing so did unrepairable damage to the immediate surrounding formation. The will have to drill a 2nd sidetrack.

Judging by Gifted Genies excellent video, we have almost everything we need to displace the well and then we can see what Brockham has to offer. it's a pity we have been unable to work 24/7 as this would have already been finished, but we have to abide by the operating hours.

And regarding the plates. No there are strict HSE regulations with respect to what is being carried in a tanker. Fireman need to know what they are dealing with.

B2H - when you displace a well of fluids you have 3 stages of what comes back to surface:

1. Clean completion fluid (brine plus additives)
2. Interface (this will include completion fluid contaminated with oil)
3. 100% hydrocarbons

Most likely what has left the site is the oil extravt d from the brine (interface). They would do this in the oil water gas separ

So the waste takers would be the completion fluid.

So that means we are very close to flowing the well and getting 100% hydrocarbons.

JS490 - What DGD999 is trying to say is that you always get seepage of the drilling / completion fluid into the formation. Which has you say is a good sign other wise you would not even be ale to produce water from a formation built like granite.

The completion fluid is designed and mixed as not to cause damage to the formation or its productivity. As the reservoir is drilled the Mudloggers will as part of their numerous duties record the number of barrels "lost' to the formation (as in seepage). They keep a rolling tally and once they complete drilling the well and prior to suspension the grand total is handed to Production. Why? Because when (as Angus are doing now) you stimulate the well and displace the fluid in the well, you also need to know how many barrels of completion fluid in the formation is required to be pumped before hydrocarbons are come to surface. This is a number Angus will have to hand.

Another way to think of it is you have a vertical cylinder representing the well and its surround by oil. Now when you pump water it pushes the oil further way from the cylinder and replaces it immediately around the cylinder. Once you start displacing (pumping) the water out of the ell it draws the completion fluid in the formation back into the well and intern the hydrocarbons.

No 2 wells are the same and each react differently. Why? Because of the well profile, trajectory plays an important role.

HH was near vertical well…which means to the untrained eye it’s vertical

Brockham is a deviated well. The sidetrack was initiated at a hole angle of 74degrees.

It is far easier and quicker to displace fluid in a vertical well such as HH than a high angle well such as Brockham due to fluid dynamics / hydraulics and friction which will take more nitrogen.

As I said before it may take until the end of January for Angus to release a detailed RNS, but I would rather they take the time to ensure that long term production is not harmed to please the market.

PITW - Brockham is completely different to BB. My post with the subject title "Recap of BB issues" on Monday 13:07 goes into detail as to why BB was screwed up twice by UKOG management.

It will take longer at Brockham to displace the fluid from the well and to flow hydrocarbons due to the profile of the well. HH was a vertical well which is far easier to displace where as Brockham is more of an S shape well.The side track was initiated from a hole angle of 74 degrees.....a horizontal well is 90degrees.

DGD999 - now were you the type of directional hand who had a load of pre-taken single shot surveys in your pocket lol

DGD999 - Nice to see another oiler on here. I see you looked for redemption as you went from Production to Drilling lol

I take it you mean salt domes? Yes that's true some don't have faults, where as during its formation creates faults.

I should have been more specific by saying the same type of reservoirs similar to the Weald.

Gpmh - well good to hear. You can’t blame Vonk for the missed deadlines as he is the Financial / Sales Guy. It’s Tidswell fault for not drilling from the correct well, not doing his due diligence with paperwork and not having critical spares. Tidswell has a poor reputation in the oil industry.

Gpmh - I thought you had sold your Angus shares?!?!

Strange how the Brockham geologist fails to mention that every reservoir in the world has multiple faults where the oil layers have either been pushed up or pushed down due to Mother Nature. Thats why you don't just drill a single well. You drill multiple wells to tap into every zone in every part of the field. Always been like this.

Its much better to use Angus presentation as after all this is Angus and they have all the information. You will see the seismic on Slide 10. At least you can see this presentation as Angus don't lock you out ;)

http://www.angusenergy.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/Angus-Energy-IPO-Investor-Presentation.pdf

And JA51 of course Balcombe only produced from the KL4 as its a horizontal well.

https://twitter.com/ja51oiler/status/1086310718104915969

Suffolk - firstly I will repost something I wrote before we resumed operations.

“Firstly patience is required from PIs. We live in an age where folk expect things immediately and constantly fed updates through phones, tablets, laptops, watches via social media. Yes Angus PR is rather sloppy and can certainly be improved. But...I would rather invest in a company that does things the right way and takes it time to get optimised flow rates than being having a sleek PR programme with no production. We aren’t going to get daily updates, so it’s best to know this otherwise you’re just setting yourself up for daily disappointment. No oil company regardless of size would do this.

We may get a similar RNS to Balcombe where Angus notified the market that Hydrocarbons were at surface. But I don’t expect a detailed RNS until possibly the end of January. If it happens before then fantastic, but I much prefer Angus to be focussed on getting the best production results for its investors.”

No 2 wells are the same and each react differently. Why? Because of the well profile, trajectory plays an important role.

HH was near vertical well…which means to the untrained eye it’s vertical

Brockham is a deviated well. The sidetrack was initiated at a hole angle of 74degrees. Thats like saying 12 o’clock is 0degrees and 3oclock is 90degress.

It is far easier and quicker to displace fluid in a vertical well such as HH than a high angle well such as Brockham due to fluid dynamics / hydraulics and friction which will take more nitrogen.

Only folks who are questioning it have a vested interest in hurting the SP because Angus competes with their investment in another Weald player, deramper or shorter.

Ajbennett - then the tanks would never need to be topped up or you could dive for eternity. It's a sealed chamber with most of the nitrogen removed expect for the "dead space"

Exactly. Telling me Mother nature knew all these million of years ago where the blocks would be demarcated lol

Sorry, but that post is very fishy.

Cor19nn33 - I guess it helps that I don't need to google search everything to do with the oil industry....looong sigh.

We will know if there are problems at Brockham if Wealdoilers start posting photos of horses and long distance shots or is that resered for HH activities when they start pulling out tubing?

Strange how UKOG folk didn't question my credentials when BB was a disaster the their SP tanked last year. They were very grateful for my opinion then.

Hang on where have all the posts from this morning gone including the thread Baits and Alan?

Baits - why do you bother reading the guys Twitter posts? Nobody is talking about you on here regarding the ramblings of a sad man. So either don't read the tweets or get a Twitter account.

I must say you're clogging up this board with meaningless posts which works masks your good contribution with informative posts.

Either stop going on Twitter and reading them.
Or get a Twitter account like I did to have you say. You'd still be spending the same time posting.