We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
GRH tweets: "Many times have I posted about extreme levels of hydrocarbon ENERGY. I do so for many reasons. I have been asked where the hell does such Energy come from. Folk might want to research the power and scale of magma flows. Yes...the Earth's very core is powering the BMD. Folk who have not yet done so...might want to research the Bou (spelling corrected) Msaad Diapir. I reckon it's over 100 km long. It's over 7km deep 😂 It's likely to be the feeder fault 😂 To end all feeder faults.
My response: "Indeed - folks may recall I previously posted this map showing the extraordinary geothermal gradient around Guercif - that heat is from the BMD, a remnant of the Central Atlantic Magmatic Province - another map for you.
( 2 maps at: https://twitter.com/KQuick20704342/status/1781121332039852459 )
The BMD is overlain by a very large fault system - the longest and deepest trends NE/SW, along the line of the Moulouya River and beneath MOU-NE. This fault 'tree' is the conduit for the gas & oil and is sealed close to the surface. Hence the overpressure from top to bottom in MOU-1 & MOU-3."
Seabright has posted about this in the past - I strongly recommend reading through his posts - not very many of them, but they demonstrate substantial knowledge of what PRD are just about to test.
https://www.lse.co.uk/profiles/seabright/
Then we won't have to take notice of any positive developments. Just 3 days ago we got this from our learned friend: "Obadhia, I've said similar about our 2 man band spinning 3 plates in 3 continents. It doesn't stack up whatsoever and IMO dilutes the attention"
Today we get an RNS announcing a senior legal/financial appointment in Trinidad:
"Geoffrey Leid is the Company's in-country managing director of T-Rex. He will focus on promoting and developing the Company's business activities in Trinidad with special emphasis on assisting to accelerate the processes required for the execution of the Cory Moruga field development project. He is a corporate consultant/adviser with a particular focus on oil and gas development projects. His extensive experience in the acquisition and funding of resource projects in Trinidad spans ten years."
Paul & external specialists did all the sub-surface work last year - see the T & T ITR for details. An action plan has been agreed with MEEI. Lonny & Moyra will focus their attention on workovers for Cory Moruga wells once MOU-5 is finished. It is PRD's belief that use of NuTech & SandJet will unlock the substantial potential of the block - in addition to the 20M Bbl already identified.
Geoffrey is the right guy to get the finance in place and negotiate all the agreements - including for the sale of oil, and further down the line setting up CO2EOR with other companies in the country.
But you didn't want to mention any of that, did you?
The ex-directors did not choose to let their options lapse. Read the RNS: "In accordance with the terms and conditions of the Rules of the Predator Oil & Gas Holdings Plc Unapproved Share Option Scheme dated 7 October 2020, share options granted to former directors as eligible persons have lapsed". They have lost their exercise rights since they are no longer employees - this is normal practice, as anyone would if they have ever been employed at a level where options are granted.
Why do I say all results will be issued together at the end of the programme?
* It is standard industry practice.
* They will be testing several horizons a day, perhaps 50+ in total. Did you want an RNS for each horizon, or just one a day?
* A single result is unlikely to indicate the commercial potential.
* Multiple results across different boreholes will be needed to calculate volumetrics
* All the data will need to be consolidated and interpreted in order to give the full picture - anything less could mislead the market.
* ONHYM will want to review everything and agree the announcement wording.
...and finally, although this seems to invite derision from some quarters, Paul is very deliberately attempting to release all data relating to commerciality (including MOU-5 results) as close together as possible. Unwelcome takeover approaches are very much a reality - I see that during my nighttime the possible takeout of CHAR has progressed from rumour to public discussion - see the CHAR lse board for details.
@Ibiza. The existing boreholes are used, no new drilling required unless formation damage is so great as to render the existing bore unusable (very unlikely). The procedure is:
1. If necessary, clean any debris from the bore using the Coiled Tubing Unit - highly unlikely to be a problem since the holes are already protected by casing.
2. Run a wireline log to confirm the depths of previously identified horizons of interest.
3. Lower the Sandjet unit to the required depths and perforate. Not looking for weak points, just the correct horizon.
4. Perform gas pressure tests and flow tests.
5. Individual results should be known immediately, but will most probably all be released together at the conclusion of the whole testing programme. I would guess late May - early June.
@BRV - I didn't want to mention that the potential gross revenues from MOU-5 could be 1250 x the current market capitalisation, people could get upset. Of course, the NPV is a lot less, I guess only a couple of hundred times the current market cap.
My understanding is that:
* SandJet perforation and flow testing of MOU-1, MOU-3 and MOU-4 will start early May. It is fully funded from available cash.
* Drilling of MOU-5 is scheduled to start mid-May, after CHAR's two shallow wells have been finished. This is also fully funded from available cash.
For reasons that have been discussed over the last two days, it would seem that Paul is arranging the timing of operations very well in order to ensure the minimum gap between testing all the wells together, including MOU-5. I see this as very positive, not the failure that some have suggested.
The only possibility for dilution that I can see is that cash may need to be found for SandJetting and flow testing of MOU-5, which would be able to be done with the same equipment and crew moving on directly from MOU-1/3/4 to -5. However, this is a relatively small amount of money, and can likely be found from elsewhere - in particular, Cory Moruga looks to be running behind schedule, so cash can temporarily be diverted from there. I am sure you agree that post-testing positive results will mean an end to the need for further dilution at current low share prices.
I do not wish to get involved in inter-company politics that may or may not exist, and have no problems with folks voicing their concerns. In this instance, I do not think the concerns are anything to be worried about.
For those wringing their hands at the thought of spending money on a prospect with 12% chance of success, may I refer you to p.44 of the ITR of 24th January 2024:
https://wp-predatoroilandgas-2020.s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/media/2024/01/Guercif_-ITR_20240124.pdf
Top half explains the methodology, table at bottom gives the percentage chances of success for different aspects of the system. Note that for many of the existing holes most of the different issues examined are given a 100%, or close to 100% c.o.s. The Jurassic carbonate has question marks remaining over the reservoir effectiveness and gas migration, which when multiplied together bring the c.o.s. down a lot. Imho., these c.o.s. figures are already on the conservative side, particularly reservoir effectiveness for what is likely to be both a fractured and weathered reef.
Just under two months after the ITR was published, additional source rock data was presented at the Proactive meeting:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=agdQLQtn6ac at 20m.50s (slide 14).
Paul states that there is source rock directly below the carbonate trap, which should boost the migration score very substantially, and is likely to be in the condensate window.
My conclusion is that the current c.o.s. is likely to be very much higher than the 12% stated in the ITR.
So: would you take the risk and go ahead and drill a shallow borehole (1140m, 12 days, $3.5M) into a 177km² structure with a potential reservoir 250m thick likely to contain gas and condensate worth perhaps $14Bn?
Or say, nah, let's leave it for someone else?
I am very curious as to why some posters here seem to want us to choose the latter option.
3D seismic could cost anywhere between $10K - $100k per km² depending on resolution required, compared to perhaps $5k per km for 2D. 3D is of great importance for getting a $150M offshore well in exactly the right place, much less so when your onshore wells are less than $3m a pop. Paul & Lonny seem to have done pretty well so far using 2D, and I would expect them to continue not to bother with the time and expense of 3D for the shallow biogenic gas - these fields are likely to be of vast areal extent, and cheap, fast & easy to drill. There may be good reasons for using 3D for the Jurassic carbonates, where the reservoir structure is likely to be more complex, and this is one of the reasons that Paul has stated that he would leave the development to an outfit with deeper pockets and more employees.
It has always been the case that 2 or preferably 3 or more producing wells would be required for ensuring continuity of supply for CNG, and this is what there will be. For G2P, of course there will also need to be continuity of supply, and for greater gas offtake you will require greater gas flow, therefore more wells. Paul has made it quite clear that G2P is a project for another company.
All this is pretty obvious. I'm not sure why this topic is now being raised as a negative for PRD - it is simply not relevant to currently planned operations.
And...
"We are confident that potential gas flow rates using Sandjet will fulfil the potential 50 million cubic feet of gas per day profile facilitated by the Collaboration Agreement with Afriquia Gaz."
From Guercif local press (Government spokesman Mustafa Baitas) "Gas cylinder prices are increasing in Morocco at the moment. Paitas clarified, during a press conference following the Council of Ministers, that the increase expected at the beginning of April has been postponed until the public opinion is informed of the decision of its implementation later.
@thebold. References for depth please? - CHA have clearly stated that the deeper reservoir is the same as the discovery in LNB-1, and updip means shallower. LNB-1 did not TD early, otherwise they would not have encountered that potential reservoir formation. References for 26 days per drill please? Are they taking a fortnight's holiday on the middle of each just to upset PRD?
Everyone is entitled to an opinion, but in order for others to assess such an opinion, it is necessary to have the facts on which that is based. An opinion based on further opinions is not very helpful.
I posted on this subject yesterday, but it appears that someone has posted a whole load of nonsense on the same thread, thus ensuring it is deleted. This is a common troll tactic. So, since there is still debate on who has what drill when, here is my slightly more detailed understanding of what is going on in Morocco.
🦖 SDX are currently using the ONHYM drill.
🦖 CHAR will begin using the SV-101 on the Gaufrette, then the Dartois/Navette prospects. See tweet:
https://twitter.com/Chariot_Energy/status/1775407393771270632
These wells are not as deep as some here would like to claim - Gaufrette is updip from LNB-1 which was drilled by SDX to TD of 1861m - from the seismic, I would estimate the two CHAR wells to be around 1600 - 1700m, so would take maximum 15 days each, maybe less since this is known stratigraphy. see: https://www.euro-petrole.com/sdx-energy-inc-gas-discovery-at-lnb-1-well-morocco-n-i-16632
🦖 Next, SOU are completing their TE-6 & TE-7 wells for production. This is involves putting production casing into existing boreholes - see from 4.00 in this presentation :
https://www.investormeetcompany.com/meetings/investor-presentation-549
🦖 Then it is Predator's turn. MOU-5 is a shallow well, taking probably 8 days.
I don't know when CHAR will spud, but they seem to expect the rig imminently. From spud, allow 15 days for each well, 1 day to move between them. Then 3 days to move to Tendrara, max 5 days for workover of each well. 3 days to move to Guercif, 8 days to drill. That makes a generous 47 days maximum to MOU-5 spud. Please feel free to question these figures, but unless you state why you disagree, it will be a meaningless exercise.
A bit more T & T detail. I strongly suggest a re-read of the 11th Jan 2024 ITR.
https://wp-predatoroilandgas-2020.s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/media/2024/01/Cory-Moruga_ITR_20230111-final-11.01.24-13.11-hours.pdf
Section 6, p.31 "Indicative Work programme" gives comprehensive details of the possible workovers / re-drills, and there is a map showing the location of the historic wells Figure 2, p.10. It is these locations that Lonny was re-assessing in March.
Most of these wells have never been properly tested, PRD are planning to clear out the bores, evaluate with NuTech logging, then SandJet interesting horizons. I am particularly interested to see what is in Rochard-1 and nearby wells - these should access extensions of the same EIGHT stacked reservoirs that have in the past been very productive for BP/Shell in the adjoining Moruga West Licence.
@Bridgedoggy. Lonny has just returned from T & T. He has apparently located a number of previous well locations, and will presumably soon let us know the proposed running order. My guess is that Snowcap-1 will be first, since that has the most data available and has previously flowed oil. There should not be the same sort of delays that we have experienced in Morocco - there is plenty of equipment available in-country.