Member Info for Lancygeo

According to ChatGPT.

Risked Exploration Net Asset Value (RENAV) is a financial metric used in the oil and gas industry to estimate the value of a company’s exploration assets while accounting for the risks associated with finding and developing hydrocarbons.

Breaking It Down in Simple Terms:

1. Net Asset Value (NAV): This is the estimated value of a company’s oil and gas reserves after deducting costs like production and operational expenses.

2. Exploration NAV: This includes potential future discoveries that haven’t been drilled yet but are expected based on geological studies.

3. Risked Factor: Since not all exploration projects succeed, companies apply a “risk factor” (or probability of success) to adjust the value of their potential discoveries.

Formula for RENAV:

RENAV = Base NAV + (Risked Value of Exploration Assets)

• Base NAV = Value of proven reserves

• Risked Value = (Potential discovery value × Geological success probability)

Why It Matters:

• Helps investors assess the real worth of an oil and gas company, considering both proven reserves and future potential.

• Accounts for risk—since exploration is uncertain, it prevents overestimating asset value.

• Used in mergers, acquisitions, and financial modeling for energy companies.

From ChatGPT.

‘The amount of oil a nodding donkey (pumpjack) can pump in an hour depends on several factors, including the size of the pump, the depth of the well, and the viscosity of the oil. However, here are some general estimates:

• Small pumpjacks: Around 1 to 5 barrels per hour (42 to 210 gallons per hour).

• Medium pumpjacks: Around 5 to 15 barrels per hour (210 to 630 gallons per hour).

• Large pumpjacks: Can pump 20+ barrels per hour (840+ gallons per hour) in high-production wells.

A standard pumpjack in a typical well might produce 5 to 10 barrels per hour (210 to 420 gallons per hour). However, many pumpjacks operate intermittently rather than continuously, depending on well pressure and oil availability.’

Not long now Predators…. the long and strong will prevail 😊

Loving the Twitter updates 😊

This bb is a far better read now I’ve put the filters back on 😊

Brilliant stuff BRV … thank you very much for all your hard work in providing the transcript for us all to enjoy.

Thanks Graham & Keith.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/energy-crisis-corrib-gas-field-operator-tells-taoiseach-micheal-martin-they-can-extract-fuel-for-another-decade/41945944.html

My view for what it’s worth …. hold the line

Patience is the key imho. :)

Lots of good posts by numerous great posters…. all of which are clearly invested.

Several replies to the nonsense posted by those clearly not invested imho 🤷‍♂️

Https://www.lse.co.uk/profiles/jimmy23/

From ChatGPT

‘ Swabbing does not always need to be done to the full depth of a gas well. The required depth depends on the specific conditions of the well and the objectives of the swabbing operation. Here are some key considerations:

1. Purpose of Swabbing

• To Initiate Flow: If the goal is to remove liquid that is impeding gas flow, swabbing may only need to reach the depth where liquid accumulation is present.

• To Evaluate Formation: In some cases, swabbing may need to reach deeper to ensure that fluids are cleared from the productive zone to properly evaluate the reservoir’s performance.

2. Fluid Accumulation

• Location of Fluids: If fluids have accumulated at a specific point in the wellbore, swabbing only needs to target that depth.

• Full Wellbore Liquids: If the well is filled with fluid throughout its depth, swabbing may need to extend to the full depth of the liquid column.

3. Well Completion Design

• Perforation Depth: Swabbing typically needs to reach at least the depth of the perforations or open-hole section to remove fluids and allow gas to flow freely.

• Tubing Configuration: The design of the production tubing and other downhole equipment can also influence how deep swabbing is required.

4. Operational Efficiency

Swabbing to full depth can be time-consuming and may not always be necessary. Operators often analyze pressure, fluid levels, and well logs to determine the minimum depth required for effective results.

In summary, swabbing to the full depth is not always required. The depth is determined by the operational objectives and well conditions, and operators typically balance the need for effectiveness with time and cost considerations.’

From ChatGPT.

‘ The duration of swabbing a gas well can vary significantly depending on several factors, including the depth of the well, the amount of fluid that needs to be removed, and the equipment used. However, here are some general guidelines:

1. Simple Operations:

For a shallow well or a well with minimal fluids, swabbing can take anywhere from a few hours to a single day.

2. Moderate Operations:

For medium-depth wells or those with more substantial fluid levels, the process might take 1 to 3 days.

3. Complex Operations:

For deep wells or wells with significant challenges (e.g., large amounts of liquid, difficult well conditions, or equipment issues), swabbing could extend to a week or more.

Factors Affecting Time:

• Depth of the Well: Deeper wells require longer swabbing runs.

• Volume of Fluids: The more fluid that needs to be removed, the longer the process.

• Well Pressure: Low-pressure wells may take longer to achieve flow.

• Equipment Efficiency: Modern swabbing units can expedite the process compared to older equipment.

• Operational Delays: Weather, mechanical issues, or logistical challenges can increase the duration.

For a specific gas well, consulting with the operator or service company performing the swabbing would provide the most accurate timeline.’

Keith’s thoughts from a couple of days ago on the chance of success from the first swab.

‘@Ibiza. This seems to be a very low quoted success rate. I suspect that is because most of the recent technical papers are concerned with shale gas wells. As you will know, these have large horizontal sections drilled into reservoirs with poor poroperm, quite unlike MOU-3. Much of the data also relates to restarting wells where production has slowed due to accumulation of fluids over time, rather than a newly drilled well that has a slurry of water, drilling fluid and fine-grained rock particles. I would think that 70 - 80% success rate for first swab is more typical for a new vertical bore. ‘

I prefer to think of a success case in respect of swabbing MOU 3.

Link below posted by Keith from last month.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r6dArnhe0Zo

Thanks Keith…. excellent work as always… very much appreciated 😊

Ibiza….. below is dichienichols post from 23rd December .

‘ I to called the very same number and it sounds like we spoke to the same person. Said person from my questions told me me all swabbing plant had been procured and is ready to start swabbing no later than the 16th of January 25 also that a rig to drill down into mou 5 was on course to arrive on the pad January 27th. Very nice chap I thought and very well informed

GL’

1 post and 3 trades so far today.

Surely can only get better from here ⬆️😊

Continued….

‘ Of course this is speculation, and along with many others here, I don't like being left in the dark. I agree that we are due an operations update that gives concrete actions and timing - on T &T production, CNG progress, and MOU-5 drilling.’

Just going back over a few posts from our most respected posters and thought the one below from Keith from last month was well worth reposting.

‘ I really should not have to state this, but my postings here are not investment advice. I do research for my own purposes, then stick it on here if I think it could be of interest for others to follow up. I am not acting in concert with the Company nor with any other investor, and certainly not taking part in any market manipulation scheme, as has previously been alleged by a certain poster who has now deleted much of their history, presumably for fear of legal redress by a number of individuals and entities that they have libelled.

Anyway, to the point. On 16th November there was some discussion here that an announcement of commerciality and consequent issuance of an Exploitation Concession could have some effects that readers here had not fully taken into account. I would refer you to a pro-forma contract used between ONHYM and an exploration company that details these triggers:

https://www.resourcecontracts.org/contract/ocds-591adf-1625819385/download/pdf

* ONHYM becomes liable for their 25% share of development costs

* A 10-year exemption from 31% Corporation Tax starts for the exploration company (and its successors, if any)

* A Discovery Bonus becomes payable to the Moroccan Government ($1M in PRD's case).

It could reasonably be argued that it would be of benefit to multiple parties to announce a discovery as close as possible to start of production. This would particularly be the case if a large amount of Corporation Tax were potentially to become payable. Suppose the Jurassic carbonate is able to produce at 1 BCF per day at some time in the future - at a profit of $7 per mcf, that is $7M per day, or $1.28Bn per year, excluding any as yet unknown contribution from Helium. Even after discounting at 10% per year for 9 years, that is a saving of $150M at NPV in tax payable at 31% over a 6-month delay period (Aug-Feb).

Recent announcements by PRD indicate that Sandjet perforation was successful, and gas flowed at MOU3, but a COMMERCIAL flow rate has not been declared. Supported by Zenith, they are continuing activities towards CNG production in parallel with exploration of the Jurassic carbonate potential, perhaps it is more than coincidence that both projects seem to be headed towards near-simultaneous completion.

I recognise there is an alternative view expressed by some that Paul Griffiths is an incompetent manager who has fouled everything up. I do not agree, and find it truly bizarre that this view could be held by some who claim still to be shareholders. Surely you would have sold PRD long ago, and concentrate your time commenting on a company in which you have a financial interest. Unless of course you are stirring up trouble to meet your own agenda. ‘

Thank you Keith 😊