Member Info for KeithOz

Https://twitter.com/i/status/1676560685495402497

@lifeofpi - actually he is flying straight into the ****e by making public accusations of criminal activity. reported.

To be fair, I should have added that the TAGI that Sound are currently working on has fairly poor porosity & permeability, and will almost certainly require some kind of helping hand - fracking. However, they are still confident enough to be financing pipelines and agreeing supply contracts. I, nor anyone else, knows if the TAGI at Guercif contains gas, oil or nothing. Nor do we have any idea of poroperm. But when you're drilling a hole just a couple of hundred metres above finding out, it would seem sensible to keep going for another two or three of days.

Intéressant, n'est-ce pas?

No not the famous Moroccan dish tagine. TAGI is a French acronym for Trias Argilo-Greséux Inférieur - roughly Triassic lower clayey sandstone. It is the main hydrocarbon reservoir rock across much of North Africa, especially W. Libya, E. Algeria & S. Tunisia. Sound Energy are developing TAGI at Tendrara to the south of Guercif.

The youngest rocks are the Quaternary - the stuff you walk on, including soil, sand dunes & stream sediments. Below are the Neogene strata, which are what most people would call proper rock. Predator are drilling Neogene age strata at the moment - MOU-Fan & Middle Sands are all shallow Neogene, 5 - 12 million years old.

Older and next down, you would normally find Paleogene, then Cretaceous age rocks - but these are missing around Guercif, having been eroded away during a subsequent period of uplift. So we have Neogene sitting directly on top of 150 - 200 million years old Jurassic. That's helpful for us, since at MOU-4, PRD is able to drill into a Lower Jurassic prospect at shallow depth. Directly underneath the Jurassic is the Triassic - including the TAGI, conveniently sealed by an impervious salt layer.

I questioned here yesterday if the fact that PRD was starting the MOU-4 drill with an unusually large diameter drill could indicate that they were planning to drill deeper than previously anticipated. There are some other indications that this could be the case - very unusually, the spud RNS did not mention either target depth, or anticipated drilling time. The previous RNS mentioned a huge extra spend on diesel for the rig - although this appeared to be for MOU-3, despite being drilled within the expected timeframe. Maybe the extra fuel is necessary to go deeper in MOU-4? Maybe they want to go right through the Jurassic and test the TAGI at the same time?

Is this practical? Yesterday I guestimated the depth to the top of the Jurassic target to be 1200m, and 250m thick, necessitating a total drilling depth of 1450m - a little less than previous drills. I have now checked back over previous presentations, p.12 of the 28th September 2021 presentation says depth to top target 1193m, 224m thick target. Take a look at the top right diagram of seismic for MOU-NE (now called Titanosaurus):

https://wp-predatoroilandgas-2020.s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/media/2021/09/29105657/Webinar-Presentation-website-Version-28092021-Corrections-15.40pm.pdf

The area between the blue lines indicates the Jurassic carbonate reef. Since this is Lower Jurassic, the strata directly underneath are Triassic. So what do those yellow lines in the Triassic indicate? Could they be TAGI reservoirs, neatly top-sealed by evaporites (salt beds), and laterally sealed by faults (black vertical-ish lines) which also conveniently act as feeders for gas rising from the deep source rocks? If so, PRD would only need to drill down a few hundred extra metres to find out. SV-101 can drill to 3000m.

At this stage, just a theo

Oh, is that the same Aminex that has to sell all the gas it produces to the Tanzanian government for next to nothing? The same Aminex that took years to offload its assets because no one wanted to buy a perennially loss-making operation that was miles from anywhere with associated sky-high development costs? The same Aminex that was so deeply mired in bureaucracy that it took years & years to get any kind of government approvals? If so, why are you suggesting it as a comparator to Predator? Is it because you hope everyone on this board is so totally ignorant and will be so scared by your posts that they will sell their PRD shares?

@Matt - yes, that is exactly why you do it.

Going deeper than the Jurassic would certainly be interesting - it could confirm our long-ridiculed theory that the entire area is gas charged.

@Tom. To the best of my knowledge, no one at PRD has actually stated target depth, but from the seismic I am guestimating the top of the Lower Jurassic target is at -1200m, they would want to go a further 250m to make sure they have appraised all of it. btw, our esteemed MD is currently called Lonny, but he may be Loony by the end of the month.

I'm a little curious why they started with a larger than normal diameter borehole. This could be 1/ they anticipate poor ground conditions and need to case more frequently in order to maintain borehole integrity, or 2/ they intend to drill deeper than we are expecting.

Yes, Thursday 29th June, Forecast (mine) TD & initial log Tuesday 18th July

@Dicko - the old seismic has been reinterpreted between 2021 & 2023. This has resulted in significant revisions to prospect boundaries and areal extent. Further reinterpretation has occurred after correlating recent drill core with seismic.

If you look at the top left figure on p.12 of the 8th Sept 2022 presentation, you can see the Neogene sand reservoirs overlapping the lower Jurassic carbonate, the latter terminated by a fault at the western end. This is original seismic. The newer interpretation appears top right on p.13 of the 18th May 2023 presentation. Now the sands on the left seem to have been recognised as an extension of the MOU-Fan, and the Lower Jurassic formation is believed to be gas rather than oil-bearing. I think this latter change in thinking is due to better appreciation of the structural geometry and how it relates to the formations and hydrocarbons seen in the similar structure drilled in 1979 by C-P. Their well TAFR-1X was targeting oil, but found gas, which was not of commercial interest at the time.

Spudded today? I think spudded last Thursday. RNS will be tomorrow. ONHYM staff need to approve, today is their 1st day back at work after Eid al Adha.

@Wacky - I'm not sure that the current location of MOU-4 is the same as the location for drilling MOU-NE that was mentioned in the RNS of 28th September 2021. The position for MOU-4 seems designed to get a free shot at the Lower Jurassic, rather than drilling in the optimum position for evaluating the reef structure, which I would guess is updip, further to the northeast.

We are all aware that there are oil shows across the licence, and that oil was actually produced back in the 1920's, but I would not expect much from shallow drilling at this location. Deeper drilling by someone with deeper pockets will be required - and as has been stated earlier, new pipeline and new/refurbished refinery is necessary - again, hideously expensive.

Without a significant discovery of oil at MOU-4 - very unlikely imo - it is unrealistic trying to calculate value of oil in the ground, there are far too many unknowns, including the famous unknown unknowns! I would be happy with just a royalty or stub equity - if there's anything there, PRD gets a cut, if there isn't, it hasn't cost PRD anything.

I know this is the HE1 board, but folk keep mentioning PRD for some reason. There are large multinational beasts with hungry eyes circling PRD. They will not mount a hostile bid unless there are flow rates. PRD do not wish to release one set of flow rates and spark a hostile takeover. They want to have all the results available at the same time, in order to either fend off the bid or maximise takeout price. There is zero chance of a duster, let alone three, for all the reasons I spelled out below.

HE1, if successful, will face the same situation. The obvious solution is to make sure the rig will continue to be available, pay for it with a raise on discovery at Tai-3, then drill like crazy to demonstrate the ubiquity of commercial helium across the Rukwa licences. Otherwise, the company will be taken out for a song.

@Kevin - if you are going to put your hard-earned money into gas exploration, whether it be helium or methane, there's a few things you should understand the implications of before you invest, for example:

'Contingent Resource'

'Overpressured'

'50m thick reservoir'

'30% porosity'

'permeability of whole Darcies'

'58km² closure'

'3% formation gas'

'126km² Jurassic carbonate with 200m gross reservoir'

'enhanced porosity development'

'pipeline to Europe running across prospect'

'highly favourable tax regime'

'low capital development costs'

dyor on these, then tell me again if you think PRD will have 'duster after duster'.

@Zebra - please state your preference:

1. 1% of an expanse of scrubland with possibilities for development.

2. 0.25% of 3 drilled & tested boreholes with maybe 1TCF of gas, flowing at a rate sufficient to provide over $200M per annum sales.

They always promise jam tomorrow.

Then say tomorrow never comes.

But it's already tomorrow here in Australia.

For proof - here's a photo I took today on my morning run....

https://twitter.com/KQuick20704342/status/1674588750750576641

Let's hope it's a whole family of favourable omens!

Just catching up over breakfast - Toby, I add my best wishes for a speedy recovery to the many already sent - this is a clear indication of the high esteem in which you are held by members of this board. I am also personally delighted for your return so that you can answer the difficult questions that I do not have the expertise to answer very well - like the one today! I have attended lectures on turbidites some decades ago, but never given them!

For the many newer members of this board, Caterham7 has extensive relevant practical experience in the O & G industry, specialising in exactly the kinds of geological systems that PRD has in the Guercif region. The fact that he has a substantial shareholding in PRD, and is prepared to make such a contribution to this bulletin board, should give us all reassurance that some very good things are about to happen.

Simon Thompson has been recommending CHAR for something like 10 years. Can't access the article, so don't know if he addresses the stunning dilution of current shareholders' interests by the debt pile of 4x the current market cap announced yesterday, plus the acquisition of a large chunk of the business by a potential partner. Did you read the CHAR announcement yesterday and see the list of Conditions Precedent? - they have effectively given away operational control of the company.

I don't waste my hard-earned money on a rag like IC - their tips seem to be the kiss of death. I remember one of their leading columnists forecasting the direction of the FTSE for the month ahead incorrectly seven times in a row - that's real class buffoonery.