Gordon Stein, CFO of CleanTech Lithium, explains why CTL acquired the 23 Laguna Verde licenses. Watch the video here.
Hi ford,
Good points.
Chariots offshore anchois field is likely to be used for power generation, which requires a high level of certainty of long term gas flow and gas which is highly processed for international pipeline specifications.
Predator are going for cng, so it does not incur the high cost of processing for pipelines.also because it does not have 3D seismic its long term supply is not as assured without lots more production wells.
So in my opinion, no conflict between chariots offshore and predator onshore.
Jimmy
The recent financial statement updates included a comment that 58 meters of shallow m1 reservoir in mou 4 had now been recognised as gas bearing by nuetech. The independent technical report did not include such a reference . In addition mou 2 is now reported to have encountered 100 meters of variable quality reservoir in the mou fan reservoir, but no confirmation if they are gas bearing or not.
In the mou fan reservoir we now have 21 meters in mou 4, 50.5 meters in mou 3, 100 meters in mou2, 12 meters in mou 1, total 183.5 meters.
The new A sand has 11 meters in mou 3.
The new m1 reservoir in mou 4has 58 meters.
The ma tgb 6 reservoirs in mou 1 are 10 meters and 11 meters in mou 3 and reported as in reservoir communication.
Total reservoirs requiring flow testing approx 273 meters of potentially gas bearing reservoirs.
I believe the market will seriously re rate predator if it successfully flow tests these reservoir that have a potential to flow a combined 273 mmcf per day.
To me this is the low risk strategy to increase market cap , compared to follow up drilling of 2 meters of jurrasic carbonates that will require 3D seismic to evaluate.
Jimmy
No I am not Jimmy Lea.
I am invested in both chariot and predator and do not see any conflict in doing so.
I do not believe the conspiracy theories about chariot trying to undermine predator.
There is enough gas demand in morroco for both companies to be very successful.
Looking forward to chariots imminent drilling of low risk loukos prospects, and eventually flow testing from predator.
Jimmy
This is great news that the seller has been taken out, and it seems like we have a new significant shareholder which must be announced within a few days.
The second well option for the lixus licence is intriguing. My guess is that chariot previously announced that the development plan for anchois was designed to add in additional gas production from around anchois.
The anchois east well will test the deeper O sands on each side of the north fault, so my guess is that if these are successfull they would drill anchois west and test the deeper O sands below it and possibly also test a potential gas accumulation in the pliescene above anchois west.
The chances of success for these wells is very high indeed, and drilling of these wells would then allow the pipeline to shore to be sized for 200 mmcf per day, now that generates a hell of a lot of cash. Expect dividends from that cashflow.
The loukos drilling onshore should be starting in a few weeks , we could get a very nice surprise in the deeper secondary target.
Jimmy
The chance of success for mou 5 is per the independent technical report, I think it’s too low, but the low rating is because the reservoir is carbonate and because there is no 3D seismic we do not know how laterally extensive the proposed high porosity areas as they could be due to both or either of leaching or fracture porosity.
So even if it’s a discovery it will require 3D seismic and multiple appraisal wells.
In my opinion, better to flow test the substantial gas reservoirs already reported to get to 50 mmcf per day and use the cashflow to drill all the follow on wells.
It’s approaching 3 years since mou 1 was completed , the shallow gas in mou 4 and mou 3 alone are enough to get into production, and even if the mud invasion in the mou fan is too extensive, it can be redrilled from production cashflow.
Jimmy
Some interesting new information in the operational review
1. The mou 4 shallow sands of 20 meters of m1 reservoir now included as gas reservoirs per nuetech, such gas reservoirs were excluded from the independent technical report in January.
2. Mou 4 fan reservoir now increased to 20 meters and confirms that mou fan has a stratigraphic closure with reservoir extending to 68 km2.
3. Mou 2 fan reservoir now at 100 meters , of variable quality but not known if its gas bearing or not as not logged.
4. Mou 3 shallow gas , not logged, but can be flow tested by sand jet.
5. Mou 5 Jurassic to be drilled April or may, subject to exploration licence extension.
Which is all great news. However it seems to me that pg is prioritising drilling mou 5 jurrasic target, 12% chance of success , compared to prioritising flow rates from so many reservoirs. While I like the mou 5 prospect, the market is looking for a clear pathway to cashflow and to avoid further dilution. The operational report indicates they have more than enough reservoirs to deliver 50 mmcf per day for cng, surely that’s the priority ,
Jimmy
SDX issued rns yesterday to say that it had spud its bmk 2 well in Morocco.
Chariot have tweeted to say that they are next in line to receive the star valley rig to drill its two wells onshore .
It’s hard to see prd getting the rig earlier than end of may or early June.
So it seems to me that prd will need to revise its exploration permit extension to a later date than 5th June 2024.
If others have a different analysis please post your reasons.
Jimmy
The last page of the presentation provides an update on well mou 2, including a reference to the recovery of three gas samples from shallow gas.
A review of the mud log at
https://www.predatoroilandgas.com/media/
Is worthwhile.
Firstly, it should be noted that wireline logs were not run in the early section of the well, I suspect a cost saving measure that I hope is not repeated.
The mud logs are very detailed and they show the depth at which the three gas samples were recovered, 525 , 630 and 674 meters and the geological horizon is described as M1 sands.A quick view of the mud logs indicates about 60 meters of reservoir.
There may be a lot more shallow gas than the Itr indicated.
We need to get to cashflow asap, so good to flow test these horizons also.
Jimmy
I have to say the rns form is hard reading, but I think it’s saying that a cfd for 3.23 of the issued share capital has been closed and cash settled, which may well explain the long drop in share price. Do others read it the same way?
Jimmy
The last page of the corporate presentation provides an update on mou 2 well results.
In particular it shows the horizons from which theee gas samples were recovered.
That’s really important because it’s the first conclusive evidence that gas is present and that the quality of the gas is suitable for cng.
Inset on the presentation page is a log which shows the shallow horizon from which one gas sample was recovered from a reservoir of approx 4 meters. While the clarity of the log is not great , I compared it to the strip log previously published for mou2 and I believe it is at a horizon of 630 meters.
Which is interesting because the shallow gas horizon in mou 1 was reported at 605 meters and had a p50 resource of 28 bcf based on a prospect area of only 6.5 km2 , and thickness of 10 meters.
This would seem to indicate that these shallow reservoirs in each well are in communication, and would appear to justify an increase contingent resources. Probably circa 100bcf is my guess.
In addition, the recovery of gas from reservoirs allows the wireline logs to be calibrated to reflect the known gas samples and in turn allows the seismic to be used to be recalibrated to wire line logs to map its lateral extent.
That final page in the presentation was not included pg presentation to proactive as he ran out of time, I wonder what he would have said.
Jimmy
So page 22 of the presentation reports that gas samples recovered in the shallow zone at mou 2.
A cross check to the mud logs shows this occurred at 630 meters, so not the new A sand, bit perhaps the Ma sand. Other views welcome, most likely not included in proven resource yet.
Jimmy
Ant.
It’s true that the onshore potential is more than the 1tcf I suggested.
However, we need to prove up thicker sands such as the 300 meters found in lnb 1.
The flow rates expected by chariot are very conservative also.
Jimmy
Paul gave a good presentation, we just need to validate the data to date by way of flow rates.
There is potential for a lot of gas and being onshore in a country that imports gas it’s a good place to be.
From a geological perspective the big advantage this geology has is that there are great sealing rocks to keep a lot of the gas in place after it’s trapped, particularly important in a basin that’s undergone two periods of inversion which can cause gas to escape and potentially breach the top seals.
The presentation also notes that in the main guercif reservoirs the middle reservoirs are in a stratigraphic trap and the deeper reservoirs are in a structural trap.
Because there is no 3D seismic we cannot assume there are stratigraphic traps elswhere in the licence.
For these reasons, the 7tcf of gas generated from the bio genie source rocks will not all be trapped in reservoirs and even then circa 60% will be recovered in production.
So a rough estimate of the potential for biogenic gas , subject to lots of drilling , is 7000 bcf x 60%x 60% = 2.5 tcf
Still a lot of gas potential.
Jimmy