Member Info for Bubblepoint

OP,

I am not sure why you think this is relevant, meaning the Namurian & water, meaning the Westphalian formation has its own gas/water contact point, same as the upper Westphalian geological formation above that,

The Namurian isn't playing any part in any current producing well, regardless of if it was entered while drilling,

OP,

Highly deviated wells will not go down to the Namurian, well not intentionally anyway.

That said, some wells will have "penetrated" the Namurian, such as B2, which is relatively vertical, the drilling will have gone deeper than the Westphalian, and into the top of the Namurian, but only as part of drilling deeper to create a rat hole or sump, which is then cased and cemented in place, but the perforations will only be into the Westphalian reservoir.

Most vertical & low deviation wells are drilled maybe 50-100m deeper than the geology/area you plan to perforate and produce from, the extra depth allows for debris to fall into and for extra depth to log the production zone or run other intervention if needed.

OP,

As per the notes, they were into the Namurian which lies below the Westphalian which all the current production is coming from. The Namurian may well have been water wet at the targeted location, but it has no bearing on the Westphalian reservoir above it.

WG,

Why do you persist on being such an argumentative a55 sometimes ??

What I said was they may consider the potential to give an exploratory well on the south lobe a secondary purpose if it fails to hit anything of commercial note, which would also solve water disposal back to reservoir and remove the off site disposal and trucking costs, nothing wrong with that and logical, better than just P & A with a total drill cost loss.

I know you enjoy making a big deal out of even the smallest of things, if your opinion is that water is an issue then good for you, personally I don't, and don't feel the need to make some deramping ar5y issue of it to just cause upset.

OP,

I assume you are referring to SFu1 which B7T basically replaced ?

The B 7T well is way up in the reservoir, and well away from any water contact depth, It is not possible for B7T to produce reservoir water other than remnant brines that were from kill well attempts and some from the displacement of mud on this well.

SFu1 may well have produced significant water, the trajectory of the well was poor, meaning it has similar characteristics to A4, (A4 isn't quiet as deep as SFu1 before it recovers higher) in that when they drilled it they went way too deep before recovering higher in the reservoir and likely intersected the gas/water contact depth at 2338m TVD (true vertical depth)

It can be clearly seen on the infograph that Angus posted in their rns & presentation section of their website, where it shows both SFu1 & B7T trajectories along with the Gamma ray log on the curves, which shows SFu1 hitting the bottom of the Westphalian reservoir before recovering higher.

WG

I will also add that there is always a possibility that at a later date, when Angus do their southern lobe drill to test for extension, they also keep an option open in the event of it being non commercial, to convert that well into injection and enable infield disposal, which would not affect the northern producing side of the geological saddle and help offset the cost of any well and reduce tanker movements off the site.

But overall as far as production of gas, condensate & water is concerned, it is only fair to evaluate this at the end of the year when they have had the time to get surface and reservoir balance sorted and the figures to start showing.

WG,

That is correct, but this is NOT reservoir water, it is all related to reservoir pressure and dew point, inducing condensate and water and that is ALL contributed by A4 for the reasons noted. When they eventually do perform the workover on A4, it will dramatically alter the production profiling for the field, it is all just a part of field depletion and nothing to really make some big noise about, though it suits some to do so.

WG,

Of course it has value, but you are noting changes which are exceptionally typical for a field like this and the rebalancing, & the clean up processes going on, including brines from A1 kill and the remnants from B7T drilling likely still creeping out.

I think it is fair to say that angus need a couple months more to get the final field production optimisation and clean out completed before we bounce liquids numbers about.

WG,

Though realistically no one can argue the debt issue and the darn extortionate bridging loan, the condensate isn't really something that has much basis for argument.

Virtually all condensate comes from A4, along with the very small amount of water, and this is related to the poor well depth and profile.

The condensate and tiny amount of water is relative to the "dew point" at reservoir, the condensate production from A4 can be significantly adjusted/reduced, simply by choking back the well by say 25%, so instead of say 2mmscf/d from A4, you get a little less dry gas, maybe 1.6 - 1.7 mmscf/d but by reducing the flow a little, you also slightly increase the bottom hole flowing pressure and reduce the flow velocity in the tubing to surface, this can notably cause condensate to drop out before it reaches surface, so you may reduce condensate production on that same choke by as much as 50%.

In turn, that allows for some liquids/unwanted's surface storage from the continued cleanup of B7T.

SB,

I would personally prefer to see Angus team put their time and effort into making decisions or very clear plans on what they need to do with their other assets, Brockham, Lidsey & Balcombe, either to do something worthwhile or abandon one or more, before doing anything else on any other front, such as green projects etc.

It isn't healthy to have these other fields really doing nothing and draining with no real direction for the future.

And they also remain a threat to squandering SLBY revenue or give them reason for placings as current nothingness assets/burdens.

Really the only worthy contender is Balcombe for value adding potential.

Oddly Sillybuttons, you may prove to be to some degree right,

They even hinted about funding other things, and the danger here is that they always find a way to use every drop of revenue flowing in, and then give some great reason for also needing much more to take the "new arm" to the next level, so even make a placing or three, even today has proven they cannot service the current debts from the significant cash flows.

Doing this "behind the scenes stuff on other possible projects or for something on the assets already owned also gives them "the next big thing" to start RNS'ing on, to feed in more placings and soak up the funds, a sort of Lenigas or Sanderson culture. SLBY is great, either by luck or by judgement, or a combo of the two, but it has facilitated them exceptionally well.

It is back to "eyes wide open" on this lot for me going forward...

All that said, Angus DID manage to get their hands on and bring into production a £300 million + stranded asset, for less than 10% of that total value, just unfortunate that the near term benefit is having to service that cost, and right now it is hurting.

Not many outfits would have done what Angus has done at Slby, and apart from the sidetrack self inflicted difficulties and delays, they have in general got this together in a fairly quick time in industry terms, so they should also be given some credit for their efforts so far.

Over time the market will not be able to ignore the revenue, IF angus clean up the worst of the debt asap.

HITS, pretty much on the nail with your post, personally agree that the poor transparency and the serious drag on Angus due to various debt, and Forrest lurking around is going to keep this down for at least the rest of this year.

Such is life, and I suspect Angus will be reluctant to risk doing anything notable until some debt weight is lifted.

Agree TC, I think the results have been seriously dampened with the £6m bridge loan though, and really some poor transparency on what has been paid down etc etc, they seem to just lump it all into a simple sentence but that is not really acceptable at this stage of the game.

We know they were weighted with short term debt amongst other payments to be made, but it would have been better to just put it out there, otherwise it looks too cloak & dagger, which is what Angus of old was exceptionally good at.

Very surprised they felt the need to roll and significantly increase the Bridging loan, honestly expected their significantly increased cash flow to be ample to keep their debts managed fairly easily.

singhie, no requirement for intellect, khan is a total ****, and needs to be kicked out asap, he is a total liability, i like the way you keep using certain articles etc to keep pumping in political sheite almost daily.

Singhie, there's always gonna be sellers, and plenty are holding a decent quantity, larger seller or not, still requires buyers to absorb them.

As ever, this will move when most least expect it, and likely for reasons unbeknownst to the Pi.. as it is, at the moment, nothing to see here, we wait on Angus to let us know how they are dispersing of current revenues etc.

I doubt it is much to do with Forrest, its only 13m volume for 3/4 of the day total trades, hardly earth shattering and typical nudging around on the intraday.

had we seen 2-3 times that volume then maybe.

Well what a lot of political and oddball long winded noise, Singhie, stick to your daily rates update pleaseeee !! getting very boring...

Brixton,

Aim are all apparent dogs until they are on the rise, "sometimes" when you least expect it, and then they are the next big thing !!!

As it is for Angus the hard work is done for now at SLBY, they are now at "cash cow" stage, so I expect at some point it is going to do it's thing for everyone here.