Member Info for thewackmiester

Morning all,

A very good update if I may say.

The big comment for me was TAF-1X

Offset well TAF-1X to the east has reservoir development within this target interval and gas shows in the lower part of the Jurassic.

Depending on well results, up to four wells would potentially be available for rigless testing to provide economies of scale (firm being MOU-1 and contingent being MOU-4, MOU-5 and/or MOU-NE).

We are planning to drill Two further wells, so is TAF-1X the well in question as per previous RN :

"Evaluate opportunity to complete an existing well for gas production in another basin in Morocco".
https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/PRD/operational-highlights-and-placing-3n4acjtqzj8qpcf.html

We know that the Guercif basin is superimposed on top of another basin, however if this is not the case and it is a completely different basin in question for a well completion, it does not really matter, because the important fact is , as per the 2012 SLR report.

"Oil drilling commenced in 1972 when Elf drilled GRF-1 followed by Phillips who drilled TAF-1X in 1979".

So where ?? did PRD get the information from to be able to make this statement ?, because we haven't re-entered this well.

"Offset well TAF-1X to the east has reservoir development within this target interval and gas shows in the lower part of the Jurassic".

ONHYM or CONOCOPHILLIPS ???????

As per my previous posts, I believe all the drilled Hydrocarbon wells in the Guercif basin apart from GRF1 are under tight hole status, so some entity must be providing insight and guiding us in the right direction.

The presentation should be very interesting.

AIMHO of course.

GLA
Wacky.

Hi Mem,

I always take note when you post,
What if I were to say that you are onto something,
What if I were to say that the information you refer to is already in the public domain.
What if I were to say “if it is a proven resource it would make the MOU4 fan complex look like a paddling pool”.

I will leave it at that, I’m not ramping it is there to be found by anyone.
But this should be announced by PRD if at all.

AIMHO of course.
GLA
Wacky.

Well done Adon,

You were pretty much spot on with your analogy, a quick calculation gathered from today’s presentation suggests when drilling stopped a bore hole pressure of @3100 psi or 215 bar was evident.

If drilling had continued to TVD a pressure in excess of 4500 psi or 310 bar would have probably been encountered.
Not worth the risk.

To put those pressures into perspective an Oscar class Russian nuclear sub (deep diver) has a crush depth of @ 1200psi or 83 bar at 830 metres.

On the plus side I dont think we will need to artificially extract the gas, not at the stated pressures given.

Overall I think we had the best presentation of the evening, a lot of interest shown and the questions could have gone on for some time.

Pity the interviewer didn’t ask about re entering the old wells Grf1 etc.,
But that would have been too much of a Bromance.

Thanks luv nice one.

GLA
Wacky

Hi Adon,

Yes plenty of info to paw over.

With regard to drilling depth, from memory the terms agreed we’re “drill to a depth of 2000m or the top of the Jurassic, whichever comes first”

This sentence from the presentation could shed some light.

Re-correlated as Hoot Sand based on volcanic marker datum (160 metres above this important stratigraphic marker)

Although the sentence doesn’t mention Jurassic it may be an indication that the particular interval is not as deep as first thought.

Paul may clarify.

GLA
Wacky.

Morning all,
Very happy with the presentation, it will take some time to fully appreciate what is disclosed, but for myself the most important statement is :

EXPLOITATION CONCESSION

Without that being granted by ONHYM (secured legally) you might as well pack up and go home.

Also you wouldn’t apply for the right to exploit if there was nothing there now would you (take note bashers and educate yourselves)

Exploitation concession
Following the exploration works, should an exploration permit holder discover an oil deposit that may be commercially exploited, it is entitled to request an exploitation concession relating to this deposit, provided that it has fulfilled its legal and contractual obligations.
The request for an exploitation concession shall be submitted to the MMEM no later than 3 months before the end of the term of the validity period of the corresponding exploration permit. This concession is awarded by decree following a request from the MMEM.

https://cms.law/en/media/local/cms-cmno/files/publications/publications/conducting-oil-and-gas-activities-in-morocco

Looking forward to hearing what Paul has to say.

GLA
Wacky.

Hi Mem,

Super post if I may say so, am in full agreement with your analogy.

Here’s a bit to mull over,
What if the TGB 3&4 sands extend south from MSD1 by 20kms or so to the KDH1 well site.

The grainy seismics I have seen on various papers would suggest that may be the case, but admittedly it is hard to tell.

However that raises the question why was KDH1 well sited there in the first place,
looked like a nice place to drill ??
Or it is right on the edge of the basin where the sands pinch out !

I’m going for the latter.
Another bit to look out for.

AIMHO of course.

GLA
Wacky.

Hi Sefton,

Thank you for your kind words,
All for the greater good.

Atb
Wacky

Morning all,

Very interesting chat over the past few days,

This paper somewhat confirms my belief that the only information available that I have seen will confirm a "Tight Hole" status right across all the Hydrocarbon drilled wells in the Guercif basin.

As we know information was released for the GRF1 well but unless I have missed it, after much searching I keep drawing a blank on well data for MSD1,KDH1,TAF-1X, and ATM1 which might suggest that for all the time that has passed since GRF1 was drilled by Elf in 1972 the well log data for those other areas have been a very closely guarded secret and could possibly explain why MOU1 was also classed as a tight hole status on the instructions of ONHYM. ?

Taken from page 61 of the paper !

"The knowledge of in-situ thermal conductivity is fundamental to
obtain reliable heat-flow estimates. If drill cores are not available for
laboratory determinations, other methods based on well-log data can
improve the quality of heat-flow estimates (Goutorbe et al., 2006;
Hartmann et al., 2008; Fuchs and Förster, 2013). However, such data
were not available for the investigated oil wells, and only stratigraphic
information was recovered from the works of Sani et al. (2000) and
Gomez et al. (2000).

What would the odds be on the next drill (MOU4) to be classed as "Tight Hole" as well.

Also within this paper on page 64 are the Coordinates for all the above mentioned wells, which I have never seen before.
If anyone wants to do a search on google earth etc, you never know you may catch some sort of activity going on.
( Wellheads?).

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/320698381_A_review_of_surface_heat-flow_data_of_the_northern_Middle_Atlas_Morocco

Good Hunting.

AIMHO of course.

GLA
Wacky.

Morning all,

https://www.lse.co.uk/news/uk-gas-prices-rise-on-ns2-ruling-supply-uncertainty-a4ut2jw6d544iaa.html

Moroccan gas to the rescue at some point, ?
We shall see.

GLA
Wacky.

Good Afternoon Grh,

Yes you could very well come to that conclusion.

I notice in your post a reference to “two” major overlaying tranches at Guercif.

A good spot to the discerning eye, all once again hidden in plain sight.

Could you be suggesting we have one basin superimposed on another at Guercif ??

What if that were the case.
The mind boggles.

Atb
Wacky.

Good morning Nic,

The reason for my optimism on gaining control of the Maghreb pipeline is that the Algerians won’t be using it to transport gas to mainland Europe.
In other words Morocco will have sole use to do what it wants with it.
I think the Algerians if they want to play ball, will supply a limited amount of gas for a short period of time until Morocco can supply enough of its own means to survive or import ??
Our proposal for transporting gas through a truck network would also come into play as an interim.

Has no one really considered why we would go to all this extra Mularky of trucking gas hidden under a banner of quick monetisation ??

The Algerians started the tie in work on the Medgaz pipeline in September 2018, two months after PRD came to market, then in November 2018 PRD announced Its intentions in Morocco.

Coincidence??? Not on your nelly.
The Algerians knew this would happen and planned accordingly with upgrade work to the Medgaz pipeline.

Also there is option of if Europe start playing hard ball with Morocco over supplying gas through the Maghreb pipeline, the current infrastructure with some additional engineering can then transport the gas nationwide and to the future FSRU destination, wether it be Jorf Lasfar or elsewhere.

The original plan for the Jorf Lasfar LNG terminal was to install a new pipeline from the port, connecting to the Maghreb pipeline in the north west and linking up to the power stations on the way.

How else would billions of cubic ft of gas be transported from Tendrara, Guercif, Rharb basins etc

This has been in the planning for decades.

Has no one considered why the Maghreb pipeline was ran through the Guercif basin in the first place.

AIMHO of course.

Gla
Wacky.

Apologies all,
My info on Western Sahara was incorrect, thanks to Trifle for pointing this out.

Atb
Wacky

Hi all,

looks like Morocco will now gain the use of the Maghreb pipeline after all.

https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20210823-morocco-offers-to-renew-gas-supply-pipeline-deal-with-algeria/

and a link to the upgrade work done in Algeria to supply Spain via the Medgaz pipeline.

https://www.energyvoice.com/oilandgas/africa/pipelines-africa/321082/arkab-egpdf-medgaz-pipeline/

My thoughts now turn to the proposed FSRU in Jorf Lasfar.
To date PRD are the only submitters of a Tender for the project which can be used for EXPORT as well as Import.

https://pumps-africa.com/morocco-receives-bid-for-floating-storage-regasification-unit-project/

Perhaps we will now see if our new COO Lonny Baumgardner is worth his salary.

From the 12th July RN.

" Lonny has a proven track record in managing multifaceted operations across joint ventures, government agencies, GEOGRAPHIC CHALLENGES AND MULTICULTRURAL DIFFERENCES, to ensure business needs are achieved.

He has been highly successful operating within small to medium-sized exploration and production companies at Board level delivering value to shareholders by applying a dynamic and effective management style to daily and longer-term strategic requirements. Lonny will have a strong focus on delivering business goals for Predator capable of creating long-term value".

I'm only mentioning this as Jorf Lasfar as we know is located in the disputed Western Sahara.

AIMHO of course.
GLA
Wacky.

Hi Lochnez,

Thanks for the clarification,
Atb
Wacky

Morning all,

The Wood group announced an Rn this morning stating an "Agreement of UKEF loan linked to energy transition" (£430m)

https://www.londonstockexchange.com/news-article/WG./agreement-of-ukef-loan-linked-to-energy-transition/15104674

I wonder if any of the funds will find its way to T & T

GLA
Wacky

Hi all,
Nice to see the "Family" back together again.

Following on from a previous post regarding connectivity between well sites.
We established MOU1 was connected to MOU4 through the TGB2 sands, MOU1 was also connected to MOU2 through the TGB 3 & 4 sands and that the MSD1 and GRF1 wells were drilled on the same structure.

What if the TGB 3 & 4 sands also connect MSD1 and GRF1 together.

Hidden in plain sight (Again) in the same presentation as the GRF1 mud Logs on Page 21 we have a seismic map with evidence that it is the case. I have noticed it is a large scale map of the area. (seismic line 03ML-06 showing amplitude anomalies within the Neogene sequence as per 2012 SLR cpr)

If you open up the link,
https://www.predatoroilandgas.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/New-Presentation.pdf

you will notice four white arrows on the seismic map, find the third white arrow with the title "sand ribbons", if you scroll down to the yellow indication line then below that and slightly to the left you will notice a black cigar shaped anomaly. (you will have to zoom in)
That is the same anomaly as in the MOU1 drill location as per page 23 of this year’s annual report. (GRF1 is positioned to the right of MOU1)

https://wp-predatoroilandgas-2020.s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/media/2021/06/09225030/261085-Predator-plc-AR-Web.pdf

To the left on the seismic map are three red lines, two of which are wavy in nature whereas the middle one is straight. If you follow the middle line to the top of the page alongside grid refs etc you will see MSD1. drill location.
You can now trace the TGB 3 & 4 sands on the map and it appears they are continuous from the MOU1/GRF1 well area to the MSD1 well area.

My next question however is, why site a drill on the other side of a large fault to MOU1 but on exactly the same grid line as MSD1 ? (03-ML-05) unless it is to prove that the sands/reservoir are connected through some form of a channel in the fault line and in doing so connecting MOU1, MOU2, GRF1 and MSD1 through the TGB3 & 4 sands.
(Grh, GKP Shaikan similarity's possibly ???)

It did strike me as quite odd to highlight that particular area and only that area south of the fault line within the annual report. page 24 (MOU3 drill site)

After all that's what we were here for originally, MOU4/TGB2 sands etc is all extra.

AIMHO of course.

GLA
Wacky.

Did you work that our all by yourself then chesh or did Rodney trotter and his gcse in art help you out by any chance.
What a Wally.

Atb
Wacky

Morning all,

Believe what you wish and prove what you can.

I believe MOU1, MOU2,MOU4, GRF1, MSD1 & possibly KDH1 drilled in the locations they were, are all connected.

We know MOU1 is connected to MOU4 through the 2TGB sand and MOU1 is connected to MOU2 through the TGB 3 & 4 sands, so theoretically MOU1 is also connected to GRF1 through the TGB 3 & 4 sand as GRF1 also drilled this particular sand.
(an early presentation/RN does state one of the reasons for MOU1 drill is to prove connectivity between that and GRF1 structures/compartment, have to search)

Now what about Grf1 being connected to Msd1

This document on page 1354 under “Timings” states. (have to download)
https://af.booksc.org/book/64033701/2b7138

“This exercise was performed for two wells within the Neogene depocenter (GRF-1 and MSD-1), as well as
the surface stratigraphic column from the southern Guercif basin published by Krijgsman et al. (1999).
Both of the wells are located above the same structure, but lie about 5 km apart”.

There is evidence further down the document that both wells have the same porosity at the approximate same depths which also may go to show that they are connected.

The document also states that Kdh1 well was drilled on the structural high, page 1346 figure 4.

“Well KDH-1 was located on a structural high outside of the Neogene depocenter, whereas GRF-1 and MSD-1 were drilled within the depocenter”.

If you were to draw a straight line between drill sites MOU4 and KDH1 it would show that we are prospecting in a very large trough as called the Guercif Graben some 40kms long x 20kms wide with sediments up to 2.5kms thick.
That is what I believe.

This what I can prove.

It is well documented that there are missed payzones in the GRF1 well (Atlantic Oil, 2012 SLR,PRD et al.) from 10Bcf to 200Bcf of gas, we have all seen the detailed charts to prove porosity, permeability etc. and also that it would be possible to re-enter the well to extract the gas (2012 cpr)

We have the initial results from MOU1 as per the 6th July RN stating up to 1.7% C1 background gas down to target depth of 1159m (TGB3 & TGB4 Sands) and below 1159m in the lower Guebbas and Hoot, background gas of up to 1.5% C1 but with traces of heavier gases C2,C3 and C4 (TGB2 Sands)
We know through my earlier posts that these percentages of gas are good but have never seen another similar report or from the same location in Morocco to undoubtedly prove what we have found.

Hidden in plain sight, In a 2019 PRD presentation they revealed the mud log results (in French) from the GRF1 well, look at the % of C1 etc, at what depths and compare to what we revealed on the July 6th RN.
( Based on Background gas % and not the higher Formation gas %)

This proves If there’s payzones (extractable gas) in GRF1 there’s payzones in MOU1.

Page 22
https://www.predatoroilandgas.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/New-Presentation.pdf

AIMHO of course.
GLA
Wacky.

Understood BDT

Its gone.

Atb
Wacky.

Highland matt,
I think you may have read my post slightly wrong,

We have the treasure map and weve found part of the large prize.
In Pauls words regarding MOU1. from the 19th July RNS.

MOU -1 delivered a result that allowed us to De-risk the MOU -4 target whilst UNEXPECTEDLY validating the pre-drill seismic "bright spot"

If you look at page 15 on the pathfinder cpr you will see the "bright spot" in question.

http://www.fastnetoilandgas.com/~/media/Files/F/Fastnet-Oil-and-Gas/financial-and-other-reports/cpr-report-pathfinder.pdf

AIMHO of course.

Atb
Wacky.