George Frangeskides, Exec-Chair at Alba Mineral Resources, discusses grades at the Clogau Gold Mine. Watch the full video here.
KBT price should certainly be higher than Brent-$21 (but remember the $21 includes the 2 pipeline tariffs - 1 x Faysh-Khabur/Ceyhan, plus 1 x Atrush/SH Tie-in to Faysh-Khabur).
The SH crude blend, however, will also be severely discounted to the KBT Blend due to it being much heavier and having higher Sulfur conent - 14API vs 25API, S5%+ vs S3.5%.
Good morning Cookie,
and they wonder why a single, substantial shareholder keeps *****ing!
Many things are not being told, many issues not being properly communicated to stakeholders. More trouble to come I'm afraid.
The Pareto presentation gave the average daily output as 45Mbopd as per end-Aug, and the EOY target was reiterated as 47Mbopd.
Total field output to end-Aug therefore was 10,890,000bbl.
At 47Mbopd the Annual Output (target) would be 17,155,000bbl.
So, 6,265,000bbl still to be produced in 4 months,
Pareto presentation stated SH-16 startup towards EOY - let's call that 1st Dec-22 startup, and let's assume it's a good well giving say 4,500bopd or 139,500bbl over the month.
So, now only 6,125,500bbl to be produced, in 3 months (90 days) to achieve targeted annual output of 47,000bopd.
Using the above assumptions, all existing producing wells would need to achieve ca NNNbopd for the rest of the year.
Challenging to say the least...
The output to Total output to 31st Aug was
@putup,
the figure of $1.7Bn of "direct costs" you give is extremely misleading. The true figure is much, much higher.
Go back to Day #1 and count ALL the monies coming into the company, via share placings, bonds, and other borrowings, etc, and that - and only that, is the effective measure of how the company has performed.
I'll give you a wee while to do that and then I'll come back to you.
Aye, the pipeline part is certainly feasible - even the though the depth is challenging (max 6km?).
The required Pumping Stations are a very different kettle of fish.
Seabed pump- and control installations - with robotic servicing & -maintenance?
Security?
It may be something for the far distant future, but not for here and now.
Presidential words have never cut the cake in Iraq - it's all comfortable, well-meaning nonsense that is never achievable.
It's inconceivable that Nouri will let such "promises" be met. El Presidente has almost NO power - he is a figurehead and the puppet masters pull the strings as and when they wish.
If, big if, the Kurds start transferring big bucks to Baghdad then maybe, just maybe, some monies might start to flow to Erbil.
But then again, pigs might fly one day...
More chaos on the cards.
@putup
Cash $112 as per Aug 31st (H1-2022 results).
Dividend $25M out on Oct 7th.
Less 47 days cash burn.
I'll stay with my $60M approximation...
Still no payment for June.
109 days since July 1st, when June invoice was presented.
Cash now down to ca $60M or so.
Are the hosts trying to tell us something?
****eye,
I don't believe Putin will accomplish ALL of his objectives but he will, for sure, manage to hold on to a major portion of what has already been annexed; whether Crimea will be part of that at the end of the day is still uncertain.
I believe a deal will somehow be hammered out with the West, a dirty deal if you like, but one that will enable a sort of peace for a few decades at least.
The worst thing the West can do, and this is borne out by what happened after WW1, is to try to "rub the Russian's noses in it".
The SP is reflecting an increasing nervousness at KRG's payments record, and other GKP production issues that have not yet been shared by the company.
Since 4/4/22 payments have been made at 23/28/28/23/41/48 day intervals (assumes June payment tomorrow 12th).
The June payment is now 104 days overdue.
The cash-at-bank situation looks pretty poor without the expected June payment - I make it around $66M.
I found the news I posted earlier about Total extremely relevant, but that didn't suit your particular agenda, did it?
Here it is again:
Seismic headache forces major delay to TotalEnergies' $10 billion Suriname project
LACK OF CORRELATION BETWEEN WELL DATA AND SEISMIC DATA gives supermajor's geophysicists a sore head
(CAPS are mine)
Think about it...
Old news, and inaccurately reported by ekurd...
Aug 3 (Reuters) - U.S. oil producer Exxon Mobil (XOM.N) is in the process of transitioning its 30% stake in a Russian oil development "to another party," according to a filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on Wednesday.
Hundreds of energy and consumer goods companies including BP, Equinor, Pepsico, Shell and Starbucks have left the country or transferred assets as a result of Russia's Feb. 24 invasion of Ukraine.
Exxon did not name the other party in its filing. It was the operator of Sakhalin-1, a large oil and gas development in Russia's Far East, which produced 220,000 barrels of oil and gas per day as recently as 2021.
Earlier this year, Exxon took a $4.6 billion impairment charge for exiting the development, its largest investment in Russia.
A senior Russian lawmaker said on July 8 that Moscow would take control of the Sakhalin-1 oil and gas project that included Exxon Mobil (XOM.N), Japan's SODECO, India's ONGC Videsh as well as Russian energy giant Rosneft (ROSN.MM). Its output fell to just 10,000 bpd following Western sanctions on Russian commerce.
Aug 3 (Reuters) - U.S. oil producer Exxon Mobil (XOM.N) is in the process of transitioning its 30% stake in a Russian oil development "to another party," according to a filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on Wednesday.
Hundreds of energy and consumer goods companies including BP, Equinor, Pepsico, Shell and Starbucks have left the country or transferred assets as a result of Russia's Feb. 24 invasion of Ukraine.
Exxon did not name the other party in its filing. It was the operator of Sakhalin-1, a large oil and gas development in Russia's Far East, which produced 220,000 barrels of oil and gas per day as recently as 2021.
Earlier this year, Exxon took a $4.6 billion impairment charge for exiting the development, its largest investment in Russia.
A senior Russian lawmaker said on July 8 that Moscow would take control of the Sakhalin-1 oil and gas project that included Exxon Mobil (XOM.N), Japan's SODECO, India's ONGC Videsh as well as Russian energy giant Rosneft (ROSN.MM). Its output fell to just 10,000 bpd following Western sanctions on Russian commerce.
...and out of the woodwork they crawl, throwing their their kni**ers onto the stage in adoration of the company performance!
A quick look at what the most recent wells have contributed confirms what I say.
The company hasn't performed - it's only the overblown crude price that has saved their bacon.
I'm not a "paid troll", but if that calms your nerves, if that's what floats your boat, keep going by all means.
Not GKP-specific, but highlights nevertheless the dangers and financial implications when your wonderful hi-tech 3D Seismics do not correlate well with what your drill actually finds down there (GKP have a similar, albeit not so expensive, story to tell):
Seismic headache forces major delay to TotalEnergies' $10 billion Suriname project
Lack of correlation between well data and seismic data gives supermajor's geophysicists a sore head
https://www.upstreamonline.com/field-development/seismic-headache-forces-major-delay-to-totalenergies-10-billion-suriname-project/2-1-1328295?utm_term=upstream
GKP does not have the wherewithal to develop their gas resources, that's why I didn't mention it (2nd reason was to give you something to do).
GKP's gas output at the moment is too small to develop on its own.
Longer term, the cost to develop KRG gas infrastructure and processing will have to be shared with the adjacent field developers.
NAGGS will cost a lot of money - not all of which the contractors are willing to put up.
Could...would...should...might...
The Iraq government wants the gas reserves of Iraq to be developed and utilized within Iraq for electricity generation.
From KurdPress yesterday:
https://kurdpress.com/en/news/2973/US-foundations-release-real-amount-of-Kurdistan-Region-oil-reserves/
US Foundations release real a mount of Kurdistan Region Oil Reserves
Two American foundations said in a statement that the real amount of the Kurdistan Region oil reserves is not 45billion barrels but it is about 4 billion barrels.
The two institutes of Ristad and US Energy Information Administration stated in separate reports that the amount of the Kurdistan Region oil reserves is about 3.7 billion barrels. The reports have reiterated the amount of the reserves is in the regions under the control of the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) and it does not include the disputed region's which both Erbil and Baghdad claim authority over.
The two institutes have stated in their reports that according to some estimations there are 45 barrels of oil in the region but the estimation includes the reserves that have not been proved and also the crude oil reserves in the disputed regions including Kirkuk which Kurds lost their control after the 2017 referendum of
independence.
Note: Ristad should read Rystad Energy.
Reported on Zawya.com, 23/9/22
Nadim Kawach, edited by Anoop menon
A $27-billion oil deal between France’s TotalEnergies and OPEC producer Iraq has failed to materialise because of the French firm’s refusal of terms for partnership with the Iraqi National Oil Company (INOC), the local press reported on Friday.
The new Iraqi government in 2021 also failed to “detail the legal status of INOC” which indicated that the company was not totally legalised, they said.
“Total refused to complete the contract with Iraq after it rejected terms for partnership with INOC,” Aliqtisad News and other Iraqi publications reported, quoting Iraq Deputy Bassim Khashan.
In a brief post on the social media, Khashan added: ”This is because the new government and the parliament have not yet outlined the legal status of the INOC in full…
Total interpreted it as an indication that INOC has yet to be legalised.”
Khashan said the government’s failure to take a clear decision on INOC “prevented other major deals” which were due to be finalised by the Oil Ministry.
In February, it was reported that the $27 billion contract that Baghdad hoped would reverse the exit of oil majors from Iraq, has stalled amid disputes over terms and risks being scrapped by the country’s new government.
Iraq has struggled to attract major fresh investments into its energy industry since signing a flurry of post US-invasion deals over a decade ago.
TotalEnergies agreed last year to invest in four oil, gas and renewables projects in the southern Basra region over 25 years.
Last week, the company announced that it has completed the divestment of its 18 percent interest in the onshore Sarsang oil field in the Kurdistan region of Iraq, to ShaMaran Petroleum Corp for a firm consideration of $155 million.
@theoryman,
ref your "seeds of doubt" posting and the 10th Dec2019 Ops Update:
9 Months later, in the 2020-H1 Results of 3rd Sept-2020 (Operational Review), was planted a further seed of doubt, as follows.
"...The top three projects - SH-9 final commissioning, COMPLETION OF SH-12 IN THE MAIN UPPER JURASSIC RESERVOIR and further debottlenecking of PF-1 to increase production capacity from the current 24,000 bopd to over 30,000 bopd - are expected to increase gross production by approximately 5,000 bopd for a total cost of c.$3 million gross...".
(CAPS are mine)
Confirmation that the Co was moving SH-12 producer up from the previous lower producing level. No supporting story, just slipping it in.
Re the water issue, take the use of the word Trace - normally taken in this context to mean a minute and often barely detectable amount or indication.
The company has form in not mentioning things, and when they are mentioned, of downplaying their significance.
@putup,
I disagree - of course it's the company that pays for the Capex, initially.
How we get that Capex repaid (via CO) is governed by the daily output and the price of crude...and of course by the MNR's continued willingness to honour their agreements.
We don't yet know what any potential FDP might contain - how kind, or otherwise, it might prove to be in respect of large, up-front capital outlays. For that reason alone it would be very unwise for the company to pay out any more enormous dividends.