Member Info for Jimmy23

The licence requires that 3D seismic is required in the next licence stage.

The recent mou5 well confirmed that the target reservoir came in substantially deeper than prognosis, and that an unexpected salt layer was encountered.

Salt causes a major distortion in seismic time depth conversion. Geological structures that appear as structures in seismic two way time may not be an actual structure in depth.

3D seismic can address these issues to both identify the salt layer and its lateral continuity and 3D algorithm can more accurately convert to depth over a wide area. In addition, if the carbonates are high porosity, then 3D can identify its lateral continuity.

So strong reasons for 3D seismic over the carbonates, if they have high porosity.

Prd have stated they intend to farm out the 3D seismic, I think that will take at least a year, a year to shoot and process, and another 6 to 12 months to re map and then drill next well.

The start of another journey.

Jimmy

The main carbonate target reservoir was encountered significantly deeper than prognoses. The total depth of the well was not reported.

No gas shows, no gas recovery reported, this looks like it was just water bearing,

Jimmy

Nametrade.

In my view prd are suggesting there is exploration potential updip, that needs 3D seismic and further exploration drilling, this is an exploration lead.

Paul is always positive and highlights potential.

No high gas saturations, or gas inflows to the well or the recovery of gas samples, so this looks like a dry hole to me.

Jimmy

In my view the reason for the well being suspended is so that they can re enter to check on the helium show to get samples at a later stage.

Mou 1 was also suspended and nearly four years later has not flowed gas.

Jimmy

I read that rns as a dry hole.

The wireline logs are reported as good quality over a 50 meter carbonate section, so if it was gas he would have said that this coincided with high gas saturations, as was said at mou4 but not mou5.

It’s likely that the detailed analysis will indicate potential elsewhere .

Jimmy

I should say will almost have reached Td by now.

Jimmy

The mou 5 well was announced to have commenced on 4th March, was going to take 12 to 14 days to reach target depth . So assuming there were no drilling problems it has most likely reached target depth by now.

The mou 4 well which encountered the 2 meters of jurrasic carbonates, was completed on 11 July 2023 and the independant log interepretations was completed and announced on 13 July 2023.

So in my opinion if the wire line interpretation is straightforward and unambiguous then results should be announced this week.

In my view, if we go beyond this week without an Rns then it’s a more challenging log interpretation.

It has taken approximately 20 months to organise and drill this mou 5 folllow up well to the mou 4 well.

Jimmy

The Miocene reservoirs in mou1 to 4 are relatively thin with interbedded shales that have made wireline log interpretation difficult, which is why logs required neutech specialist interpretation to be validated by flow testing.

The jurrasic carbonates are in five reservoir sections over an interpreted carbonate thickness of 247 meters. So logs are likely to be more clear cut , gas or no gas, hence my comments about a possible rns next week.

J

The only evidence regarding the potential gas pressure is that the jurrasic carbonates are at a shallower depth, hence less likely to be overpressurized.

J

My view is that if the wireline logs are very clear, a gas discovery , we will get an Rns next week.

If there is ambiguity in the interpretation that needs external advisors to provide detailed analysis, then delay to the week after.

J

Rosso,

Is there any evidence that jurrasic carbonates gas , if present in mou5, is in fact overpressurised, or are you just suggesting the well has probably been drilled safely ?

J

Mou4 encountered 2 meters of carbonates with high gas saturation. The well was drilled at the edge of the mou5 structure.

There was no oil reported in mou4 so it’s highly unlikely there is oil updip in mou5.

Jimmy

Iamrich.

The 2 meters of jurrasic carbonate found in mou4 had high gas saturation, which is good.

Because this is a carbonate reservoir the key issue is whether there is both porosity and permeability.

Other jurrasic carbonates that were deeper had poor porosity and permeability and were uneconomic.

The fact that mou 5 is shallower increases the chance of leeching porosity and close to faults to have fracture porosity. Obviously got to drill to find out, but then a flow test is critical to demonstrate permeability and potential commerciality, followed by 3D seismic to fully map the lateral continuity of high permeability zones followed by appraisal drilling.

Jimmy

I believe that the results of mou5 log analysis will be announced in week around 21 March.

The reason being that in mou 1 to 4 the mou fan and Miocene reservoirs were relatively thin interbedded with shales, which required specialist log interpretation by nuetech.

Mou 5 is targeting jurrasic fractured carbonates, in four to five reservoirs over a gross thickness of 247 meters . The log analysis should identify gas saturation, and fracture porosity, but permeability will require flow rates .

It’s likely to take several months for prd to arrange a flow rates.

J

Mou 5 results will be announced after they have been interpreted by independant experts.

Previously this was Nuetech , but no mention of their name this time.

Is there now a new technical advisor?

J

Hard to believe that share price is down and below the recent placing price having just spudded the high risk high reward mou5 well.

All of the wells drilled by prd in morroco have reported finding gas, all of the wells drilled targets with seismic amplitude anomalies. Prd reported there are five stacked amplitude anomolie in the mou 5 prospect, so I am expecting that some of them will work.

The key issue is will they flow gas on a sustained basis?

Jimmy

Pg is probably correct to perforate the shallow sands first, as the pressure surge while drilling is likely to generate a better flow rate than the deeper sands whose pressure was insufficient to lift the water and gas to surface. But note, the shallow sands were not wireline logged so it’s still exploration risk.

My guess is that the mou fan and deeper sands in mou 1 to 3 will not be flow tested and will be kept as a fall back for further equity fundraising for flow testing and more money for Trinidad.

J

Keith.

I believe we have not had an Rns to state that the rig contract has been signed, just an expected start date,which passed.

Usually the rig contract is announced

Jimmy

Keith.

Thank you for your observations regarding swabbing of mou3.

Obviously a lot of water was used in the sand jet perforation, so why did they not put in a down hole pump to remove the water at the time, or was the reservoir pressure expected to lift the water.

J

Keith.

Are you suggesting that not all shareholders are treated equally then and that some investors get access to price sensitive information which is not made available to other investors?

J