Member Info for Penguins

news

all very well but open, closed or ajar they couldn't get any of the KL layers to flow any significant amount of oil at BB despite testing all of them over a period of 4 months..

The BB well was deliberately targeted to where there was no 'trap' (see extract below) - but the Kimmeridge appraisal well at HH (last we were told after a Portland appraisal) is being targeted to a area expected to be updip of HH-1 - presumably because they're are hoping results will be better than in HH-1 - that option is probably not available at BB.

All that stuff you're posting is from 2017 / 2018 - don't you think if any of it really pointed to another well being successful they would have drilled a sidetrack to the sidetrack at BB. Claiming they need more information from undrilled wells at HH and Loxley to 'decide - why not drill a cheap(ish) sidetrack at BB and use that as the test of production methods.

There's a suspicion that they keep asking to extend permission to retain the site is to delay the considerable cost of site restoration.

Could you explain this bit of your post:- 'Hence, I wonder if SS is bringing in some experts in the recent application for BROADFORD BRIDGE REVIEW??'

There is no application for a 'BROADFORD BRIDGE REVIEW'.

In the application to retain the BB site for 2 years UKOG stated they need data from Loxley (where they haven't yet got planning permission nor cash to drill it) and HH (at least they hav planning even if they haven't got the cash) before deciding what to do at BB.

So they won't be bringing in any 'experts' for a very long time for a BROADFORD BRIDGE REVIEW.

RNS 27/12/17:- 'As previously reported, BB-1 was purposely drilled in a location where no conventional hydrocarbon trapping mechanism within the Kimmeridge reservoir section is evident'

erm - it's US 'gas' = Petrol/diesel

Cynders,

I suspect the reason why nothing is said about petrol and diesel prices is it might highlight how much the government's take is at the pump. They'd also find it difficult to lend the retailers £200 per customer (using the customers money - taxes) and then make the customers pay for it later.

TLM - sold because of another poster - don't be ridiculous. Don't be shy, it's pretty obvious you're a trader - but then everyone here is ultimately - except of course those sworn defenders of the cult of UKOG.

Ozzy

Interesting - but it's those that are realistic, not 'deramping' - of course you don't want any spotlight on how badly UKOG have done with absolutely everything they have been involved in if not failing not living up to expectations.

Surely it matters that UKO haven't mentioned the EA approval going to public consultation and that they've reapplied to keep the BB site.

But you may be surprised to learn that UKOG is meant to be an oil and gas company where knowledge of previous failures and the behaviour of reservoirs, if the purpose is to find and then produce oil or gas, is perhaps the most important subject you need to understand as an investor when the company fails to explain what's going on or produce the information available. So that boring supposedly irrelevant information you seem to view as 'deramping' is of tantamount importance for the long term prospects of the company.

Almost certainly before Loxley is drilled as they don't have the £6,000,000 that UKOG said wells cost to drill - but that might be a long way off.

Probably not before the SoS makes a decision, but that depends on what happens in Turkey and how quickly that decision is made.

Suspect they'll at least wait for an announcement drilling is going to restart in Turkey to help get it away. At the moment a raise would be disastrous for the SP.

But how many years have posters been going on about the government 'helping' UKOG. Why? UKOG have shown no sign of being competent in their decision making with the last official figures of an average of 60bopd operated production from the £70mm at least UKOG have spent so far - production so poor that UKOG have avoid mentioning current daily production levels at HH for nearly 2 years.

Anyway pi seem to be happy supporting the company's recent placings by buying the forward sold shares - why should the government intervene and pay for risky ventures?

For instance the time to help, and not financially, is when they have proved if there's anything commercially viable at Loxley.

Ibug,

the point is they are retaining the site and the restoration bit is something they have to put in as an alternative to doing something. It was in the previous extension application in 2019:-

'Amendment of condition no. 1 of planning permission WSCC/032/18/WC extending the permission by 24 months to enable the completion of phase 4 site retention and restoration'

However if they do want to do anything on the site they will need to apply for planning permission to do it, and unless they lied they can't do that until after they've drilled Loxley (I'm assuming they will get permission to drill Loxley) through the Kimmeridge, and a KImmeridge test at HH.

If they don't do anything in the 24 months they will either have to reinstate the site or apply to keep the site for another 24 months which may or may not include an application to do something but will again have to include a reinstate the site if they don't do anything.

Adrian,

when will you understand.

I HAVE NO OBJECTION TO O&G EXPLORATION - BECAUSE I'M NOT A GREEN ETC.

I realise your whole argument against anything I post is based on continually claiming that I am a green / swampy / shorter etc. as you know so little about what you're invested in.

Pointing out stupid posts and explaining why they're stupid is just that - pointing out stupid posts.

such as .Penguins if BB gets passed and PP is extended for 24 months you will lose one of your tools to deramp with :)'

when last night I actually mentioned they had applied for the extension?

and you now claiming you realised it wasn't the permission just the local council - hilarious....

They drilled to the Triassic Sherwood. There was no gas, in fact no reservoir - RNS 5/11/14-

'The Triassic target, which although previously untested was believed to have potential for gas, was penetrated at 8,054 feet MD and an approximately 380-foot thick interval, interpreted to be equivalent to the Rhaetic and Mercia Mudstone formations, and was drilled without any observable reservoir rocks or moveable gas being encountered'

A fairly deep well for onshore UK in southern England as most viable targets are fairly shallow to be above the Kimmeridge. The Sherwood in Wytch Farm is sourced from the Kimmeridge downthrown the other side of the Purbeck - IOW disturbance.

Testing the Sherwood at HH was a real gamble with no acknowledged source and it being unlikely the reservoir was present. They hit lucky with fractured Portland and Kimmeridge which delivered oil initially a decent rates but it looks like the fractures may not be quickly replenished with oil with the Portland production rapidly dropping - needing intermittent or low levels of continuos production to presumably maintain pressure.

In southern England without scanning every well Arreton 2 and Southard Quarry were deeper - both Sherwood Exploration wells.

There has never been any suggestion there is any free gas in the Kimmeridge although as with most oils there is some associated gas - but only enough for electricity generation at the high levels of electricity generation.

As for the planning permission it doesn't go to committee until April - local councils are asked for comments.

Determination Date 06/04/2022

Ibug,

search the West Sussex planning under UKOG (234) or something like that - they applied in January to extend keeping the site.

Ibug,

exit point surely?

Pboo

Wressle not in the Weald unless my geography is worse than my geology and a different reservoir. Is it naturally fractured?

Pboo,

You posted 'I think a Proppant Squeeze could work wonders to hold open the natural fractures and the fractures from perforating the well, it would allow the oil to flow better'

BS.

A proppant squeeze into an already fractured reservoir is like trying to stop a leaky radiator by putting stuff in the water that would block the crack.

Instead of holding the fractures open stuffing proppant into an already fractured reservoir can block the fractures.

Perhaps this from gideons might help - about what UKOG thought happened to BB:-

'Acid was to strong and instead of cleaning the lime stone . Dissolved it and blocked the pors'

This is actually what UKOG said (annual report and accounts YE 30 Sept 2018):-

'Post well analysis concluded that the acidisation process, used to clean perforations and the near wellbore, likely released fine grained clay particles from the rocks, which then either blocked or significantly reduced the flow potential of the Kimmeridge’s natural fractures.'

So putting proppant into the Kimmeridge fractures might not be too smart - and fracking it anyway might just be like trying to blow up a balloon with holes in - you just can't pressure it up to open the already open fractures wider and the water just keeps pushing the oil further and further away from the well.

Pumpers just need to sdecide when to dump?

Must have deleted the last bit of this line:-

They applied in January 2019 for the EA permit for 4 wells and an injector (from 11 September 2019 RNS):-

'The field's environmental permit application, covering........'etc etc

Wizard,

I wonder if any oil price forecaster has ever been correct?

So it's the EA permit they only applied for at the start of 2021 and needed a shed load of data to complete when it was submitted, not Finch?

They applied in January 2019 for the EA permit for 4 wells and an injector:-

'The field's environmental permit application, covering the four new wells and production activities, was submitted to the Environment Agency ("EA") in January and is under review. Drilling of the four new production and reinjection wells will require the usual drilling regulatory consents from the HSE and OGA'

I found this on 'what do they know' the EA documentation leading to the previous permit EPR/BB3300XG/V006 to the one being applied for

Application Withdrawn
EPR/BB3300XG/V005
11/04/19 (Containment, storage, drilling HH3 - 6 plus reinjection well)

Link to document:-

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/616710/response/1476609/attach/7/BB3300XG%20401199%20waste%20management%202019.pdf?cookie_passthrough=1

EPR/BB3300XG/V005 (the withdrawn application was the application made in January 2019. So when UKOG state that application was 'under review' they mean withdrawn. The next application made 10 July 2019 was only to do with HH-2z.

Seems UKOG were saying one thing about plans in RNS but had different plans 'internally'. Had they already realised that the plans for another 4 wells weren't going to happen, even before HH-2z was drilled?

They have applied for an extra 2 years site retention as they say they are waiting on more info from HH and Loxley - specifically no well/s.

Given they drilled and cored the original BB well and then drilled a sidetrack - and then tested for months it doesn't seem to be credible - saying information from 2 wells one about 15kms and another 30km away is preventing progress at BB. The well correlations across the Weald in the BGS report clearly show that the Kimmeridge and the limestones vary considerably across the Weald - and the Kimmeridge was also tested extensively in HH-1 and they ducked drilling and logging the Kimmeridge in HH-2. Luckily I don't suppose the planners will work that out.

But Wizard will be pleased that they claim that the Finch challenged stopped them progressing work at Horse Hill, you would have thought they would have at least a plan ready to RNS the moment the appeal was dismissed on 18 Feb if they were so anxious to proceed with work at HH - though previously they've said the first well will be a Portland appraisal.

Here's the bit from the planning application:-

'Whilst the drilling and appraisal of HH-1 and HH-2 were completed in 2020, further works have been delayed by a claim for a judicial review ofSCC’s decision to grant planning permission to retain the site for the production of hydrocarbons. This claim was dismissed in December 2020, but the claimant has since been granted permission to take the case to the Court of Appeal and a full hearing at the Royal Courts of Justice is due to be heard in November 2021.
The uncertainty generated by the review process and the subsequent appeal has delayed the assessment work necessary to determine the connectivity and similarity of the geological formations common to Horse Hill and Broadford Bridge'

news

but you said:- The word "PRESENCE" was not missed out - it was.

'Penguins
The word "PRESENCE" was not missed out'

It also isn't for the Weald in general - and this was the resource estimate conclusion in the BGS 2014 report:-

'This current study concludes that significant volumes of shale gas are unlikely to occur in the Jurassic of the Weald area, due to insufficient depth of burial and hence maturity'

But hey - BGS experts with all the data vs a high level review at a conference - ie not detailed - by two guys from university neither of whom were geochemists or geologists.

Adrian,

just setting the record straight - you seem to think I shouldn't respond to, or comment on, posts. I wonder why?

news

this is from your post:-

"The most promising LOWER KIMMERIDGE clay has max shale thickness of 2,146ft and total critical depth above 1312 for an exploration well to establish the ...of shale gas."

Where's 'PRESENCE' - it was in the article but not in your post......

Over the years postes have claimed that the government was going to help the micro oilers - but so far nada - and when the UK needs a lot more oil and gas to be self sufficient a few fields producing small amounts of oil are not going to make any difference.

As Kwasi Kwarteng pointed out the UK is much more densely populated than the US states where fracking has been successful. I know punters want news becauseUKOG has none (even didn't bother to RNS the recent EA announcement about HH permission) but as you say the government is going to annonce its plan - which will, most probably, be waffle and motherhood and apple pie statements and kicked into the long grass.

The Express stating that fracking will reduce bills of £4000 the level likely being hit in the near future is being disingenuous - which I'm sure the government is well aware of.

Wizard,

HH-1 tested the Triassic - it was dry - hence all the BS about the Kimmeridge that followed. I don't remember anyone expecting as little as 60bopd over 2 years after after the development was approved.

As for the Kimmeridge they are having enough difficulty, it would seem, to get the oil out of the limestones.

"The most promising LOWER KIMMERIDGE clay has max shale thickness of 2,146ft and total critical depth above 1312 for an exploration well to establish the presence of shale gas."

You seem to have missed a rather important word - 'presence' - whether it's there or not - and then is it commercially producible, there's a lot of uncertainty - and a lot of expense - so I expect UKOG will make as much of it as possible.

Ibug,

I just wish the bl**dy well was drilled and then all the belief and hope would be replaced by what is sorely lacking for every UKOG project including Loxley, facts backed up by independent analysis, even if they exist UKOG is mightily secretive.

Adrian,

I see you have posted on the BP bulletin board - did the ramping or deramping help - did you point out some truth that the major investors hadn't noticed because the RNS were so vague - did you s,**g off the CEO?

I must admit I couldn't find any of the 23 posts (among the nearly 1300 so far since Feb 4) you've posted there, but I'm sure they are as inciteful as your posts here with posters praising you for your scalpel like demolition of anything contrary to your opinion, or maybe you just blamed it on the Russians.

PS most of my shares by value (UKOG often exceeds them by huge numbers) are in FTSE 100 shares for dividends- which is what I gamble with) I don't look at or post on the relevant boards - I trust most of the companies to be doing their best for investors.

Ibug,

Not 4 months waiting for the EA permission - more than 5 months, and this should also help gideons remember who he is:-

'Freeasabird@davethedrill1
#UKOG EA permit due for the Water reinjector at #Horsehill 2 well.
Shares are cheap, Bought some more yesterday
8:20 PM · Sep 16, 2021·Twitter for Android'

UKOG closing mid price 15 September 2021 was 0.1375p - cbeap!

and then there's this one:-

'Freeasabird@davethedrill1 Feb 5
#UKOG with no EA permit for the reinjector well at #Horsehill this share is going nowhere and the shorts are all over it.
I've sold and piled in to 88e . Gla.'

UKOG closing mid price 4 Feb 0.975p - and guess what Gideons second post ever (well this time) was:-

'Gideons Posted in: 88E
Posts: 1,269
Price: 2.46 No Opinion
Jo Biden anti fossil fuel stance 05 Feb 2022 08:14'

Coincidences 'I've sold and piled in to 88e' then same day posting on 88E - and there's plenty of others, I don't believe in coincidences.

I can see why gideons doesn't own up to being FOTH / davethedrill1 - but he's taking us all for fools.