We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
FredB; am sure some of the geo presentation attendees will be able to gauge Dr T' s smugness coefficient......( Hopefully >8; 'smg-Richter scale').
Gla.
Someday.
( Plagiarised from WellWell.)
Gla
Connected/ single large reservoir/s could be v good news. Or not: it's the shut-in pressure recoveries and Productivity indexes that really give the clues. But if all those factors are ' good', one might think that significant capex (infrastructure) savings can be made due to lower well spread. Ihmo, but wtfdik!
Gla
fwiw WW, agree with the w/e o/t regarding future tempest: silly traditionalist pipedream that won't go into service. UK aerospace coy's (2, independantly) have already designed and/or built fully auav's with far superior capability/cost ratios than the manned variant could ever have. As you know, the USN are already flying their (expensive) version off carriers.
I'll get murdered if i buy any more hur, but......
GLA
p.s. Good post Sunday, Joesoap.
"....where willy won't go,..."
Utterly dire 'song' from the 70's; reminds me of the Hur sp.
Thanks Diego and Pisces for flaring updates, appreciated. One suspects some serious pressure-recovery (shut-in) data acquisition has been undertaken over the w/e. i know fa about reservoir eng, but to me that sounds properly encouraging.
GLA
Jiffybag; re connected/large/small reservoirs: maybe try to imagine a v v large cavern - say, the size (volume) of the Atlantic. Pump a hundred k barrels a day out (none sent back); how much does the sea level drop? Immeasurable. To measure the pressure-drop, a transducer on the seabed would need to have resolution impossible with todays technologies. You probably couldn't meassure the difference with an orbiting laser. Now evision a volume similar to St Pauls catherdral: pump-out at the same rate; it empties in a week. The question as to whether the LinWick & LanFax reservoirs are cojoined pairs, all cojoined (all 4 1) or otherwise, is interesting: 'More joined-up' probably equates to/implies more fractures = more oip. But not necessarily so: Imagine the dst on WW has been drawing/letting-off (my terminology for reservoir self-pressure-driven supply - sorry, oilies) at x bbl/d at a drawdown of 80 psi local; if the pressure gauges at LC dropped say 50 psi within a few tens of seconds, i would think such to indicate a small reservoir with good connectivity. Brown trousers for investors. But if LC showed (say) -2psi in a similar or shorter timescale (which was observed to recover), that to me would indicate a BIG reservoir with similarly very good connectivity - approaching the 'cavern'-type form, in conceptual effect, given the low viscosity of the fluids found in LC. [We think, as AK has previously noted, that the well P sensors are quite sensitive, as comment has previously been made by Hur regarding their detection of tidal 'overburden' effects - in the range of 0.2 bar/3 psi max ]. Hence the ideal is to see a tiny, almost immeasurable consistent negative (pressure-drop) on the LC gauges, just a few seconds (depending on distance between the extract and measuring points) after 'opening' the WW flow, the converse being not-so-good news. If we knew the type of P measuring kit being used (particulalrly wrt resolution & accuracy) , we could draw some quite decent conclusions as to this.
Apologies if thats an egg-suck, hope it helps otherwise.
looking forward to that dst result.
GLA
I think China and/or India will be happy to purchase it, Buffet. Little England will be in second place in the pecking-order.
GLA
Pecten: good PR adresses twatter trash etc. (On the 'rumours management' side, fwiw imo HUR would do better to control the insider trading many of us strongly suspect to have occurred in the past). Declaring a timeframe for main market move would also be useful, rather than just kicking the can down the road ad nauseum without a strategy explanation. The 'management of perception' is 60% of what it's all about.
gla
Agree MrP; Hur's PR is irrational and needs a major qualitative and quantitative uplift (a bit like the AM does these days).
gla
Hi dellfrog, extrafer: largely Shree with most expressions posted re CC/future tech but Speculumiser was deliberately writing misinformation. Am walkabout mobile now, maybe more o/t over weekend(?)
Who is selling shares today, FFS??
Gla
Dellfrog; the spectator article is deliberately misleading and one might perhaps want to bear-in-mind the vested interests of its ( Barclay bros) owners. As one of the writers states, he has a vested interest in coal, the carbon-worst mass energy source. Caveat emptor.
Gla
AK/oilies(sorry); yes, appreciate the known fault system should physically separate the LanFax reservoir from linwick, and that the oil type (as witnessed by API) and differing owc's indicate separation; was just wondering, that's all. Just cos a major fault crosses a frac zone doesn't close all cross- connection; I'd expect the more highly fractured stuff to have some level of connection, even if ****- poor.
Might the hypothesised WW-LC have been established by a 'ping' from a small bit of red diamond 1.1? If the reservoir is v v large I'd have thought the slowness of pressure rate-change would be hard to reliably detect, so without a pyromech- type valve or some other shocking mechanism i'm struggling to believe the LC connection theory.
Good news so far though.
Gla
AK; intrigued by this as a noily: if P drop at LC was significant on flowing WD, that would be bad news, whereas a v small deltaP would be good. But do I detect a hint of possible use of energetic materials downhole, from which a 'ring' at WC would be detectable if the reservoir path is adequate. Could the intrigue/ interest of recent weeks be that Comms to Lancs have been observed?
Gla
haymaker; if i recall there was a post of 10.4m NO draught, so, if considering ballasting etc all other things being equal (!?), some sums could be guesstimated from there. Given the well (sorry) promulgated knowledge that shut-ins might be significant, as Entangled comments, it's unlikely to be of significance. But, as they say, wtfdik!
GLA
bit severe, Cebo - even a bum WW hole wouldn't justify blowing lumps off the CEO........(!)
gla
You have it chablard; the dump was insider trading, without doubt.
Be interesting to see the vols in the next few days.......
gla
maybe time to watch the morning horizon in that neck of the woods.........
gla
Hi again Albi; yes, sometimes AK also hints at this, i think. But if there is a 'secret deal' (that may be dependant on the current 6-12m proving-up of Lancaster), cui bono? And if said 'deal' is giving rise to the bod's apparent disinterest in the sp, how does that not invite a hostile bid at a price that does not realise maximal value to the shareholders?? OK, WD and K's 105m sale shot Hur's market confidence (and sp!) with a barrel in each foot, but jeez, the sp was higher when the AM left Dubai than since. And wouldn't the sale of a significant asset need to be approved by the s'holders? Why is/are shareholders selling? I stick to my guns: the sp is whre it is because of the double whammy allied to lack of Rightfork; having played a blinder raising the initial funds to develop, we are now at the mercy of the market, and that is a strategic blunder. imo.
gla
p.s. at least more fpso's have appeared on the plan! But they need to be serious!! Anyway, i like the sound of Liza Lancaster.
re previous: apologies for dp (decimal-point, dudes!) typo; 5 x 3.3 x 10^7 = 16.5 x 10^8 $/yr; should of course read 5 x 3.3 x 10^7 = 1.65 x 10^8 $/yr....oops.
gla
ALbi; agree with you re reasons for being 'in'. I posted over the weekend relating to the possibility of divi's in future, and, as AK correctly pointed-out, the co'y have stated in the past that such a thing won't be happening: the co'ys #1 strategy is that a Lancaster 6-to-12 month asessment should provide convincing evidence of the reservoir volume and thus attract an acquirer, the cash value somehow then being returned to shareholders. Following the same strategy, quite how the value of LinWick might be realised I don't know: If Spirit wish to keep the asset as a cas cow (assuming it is good), how easy will it be for Hur to sell their half? So my 'divi's' comment was framed by a supposition: the majors/supermajors all get investment cold-feet which turn gangrenous green - a 'buyer's strike', or bow-out. Where/what is the Plan B? The co'y finds itself with a monster asset (let's say, just for supposition and hubris' sake, 1bn recoverable bbl at each of the two paired areas, or 1.5 bn bbl of Hur's own. No buyer emerges at a shareholder-acceptable price: ??? FPSO. Big. 100k bbl/d x $30 x 330 d/yr = $1bn/yr. Allocate 5/bbl to pay for fpso(s)= 5 x 3.3 x 10^7 = 16.5 x 10^8 $/yr; 10 yrs gives $1.65bn., a 100% return over the cost of a new 220k bbl/d fpso. [ i also note the recent article relating cost of fpso build funding for a Liza-class being made at Libor + 1.5% - and the Euro Libor is currently -0.565% (!)......even the maxed (likely to decrease imo) US rate is only iro 1.76%, making the loan rate ~ 3.25%...] So I do not see any serious difficulty creating HurProCo, shipping 220bbl/d or even 440k bbl/d or more, hence my divi numbers. Sorry AK, we must agree to disagree here; i think it might be a go-er, and if Lanfax still is owned by Hur next August, it might be the that Plan B needs to be well and truly launched. Like Brex**** however, imo a bad hand is held without the full intention to pursue Plan B: In fact, it would be better to call them Plan LeftFork, and Plan RightFork, with no priority. Otherwise we might get to 2021 and be completely forked. imo.
gla