Member Info for Whojamaflip

Quote:
'.........Since the last update, the reduction in nitrogen injection rate to minimise the impact of a perceived downhole choke has not resulted in an increase in the rate of flowback of stimulation fluid or gas.....'

Stimulation fluid & gas - does this refer to the frac fluid and nitrogen lift mix AND NOT TO the pore volatile gas we are after.

In other words no increase in frac fluid recovery and nothing to do with the reservoir yet. Have others misinterpreted the RNS?

Therefore (as I think garrym said in an earlier post) if this dragon breathes then the reservoir will connect and the useful stuf (instead of the not-so-useful stuff) will flow.

Further, IF the reservoir pressure connects then game on.

All IMO

What do you think garrym?

wjmflp

1. The statutory regulation for water authorities is that they guarantee 1 bar at the curtilage of any property.
The fact that there is more available is down to over pressurisation following poor pipework maintenance, lack of investment, leaks on their systems and flow control.
2. One can find a plethora of information (CIBSE and others) on pressure drop v flow rate for taps and recommendations for them.
3. The common (maximum) pressure for equipment on domestic water systems is 6 bar ( although one can readily purchase higher rated equipment at additional costs) so 7 bar and above you need to check the max. pressure rating of cylinders/taps/ball valves/boilers etc.
4. There are water efficiency regulations that come into play for taps that flow too fast.
5. On a day when the sp has been hit (unnecessarily IMO) I am averse to posters appearing to spout (excuse the pun) on posts about stuff they appear not to understand.

wjmflp

It would also be noisy Wjmflp

Hmmm You are an I’riot If you had 32psi at your tap the water would be bouncing out the sink and nothing would remain in the sink wjmflp

My opinion/take on the wordings:
They do not believe they have made contact with the reservoir yet.

If they do make contact when enough FF has been removed (still quite a way to go yet) they expect to see it in the tea leaves (sharp rise in salinity)

If that happens - then game on and expect a sharp rise in sp IMO

wjmflp

Those who baled - tough

'..... The percentage of hydrocarbon gas in the flowback gas increased from 5% to between 11 and 13% when the nitrogen injection rate was reduced, suggesting that a positive impact on the downhole choke has been made.....'

Positive impact

They are able to influence the down hole conditions

Amazing

wjmflp

That an order of magnitude of posters on here have absolutely no idea of hydraulics and even less than that of shale fraccing.

wjmflp

I was in RMP for a few years and finally got out at a loss.
Invested residue in 88e and in profit.

There were some prolific (and in my opinion untrustworthy) posters on the RMP board including one who was blasting away with HOLD and they had direct communications with GB only later to say that they had sold after it had plunged.
Miraculously they then started posting they owned millions of the RMP share and were going to force GB out/to do something.

I am pretty sure we do not want them to start posting here.

Will be quite easy to spot them even if they have changed their moniker.

I am so glad to have got out of RMP with something - IMO over promised and under achieved.

wjmflp

Shift over ?

wjmflp

I do not have an account on HC so here goes:

Sorry but one of your posts says '......but it is the unknown unknown that will create the problems.........'

For my benefit (and possibly others) , could you either substantiate your current doubts with solid facts or change your methods for sowing it as I find your current posts deliberately ambiguous (my opinion of your posts).

It will seem to lower the esteem some hold you in a tad

wjmflp

Amen to that

wjmflp

And they will have the benefits of seeing pressure data live

LOL

Despite the funny header !

I have (in my own way) attempted to model the choke ratio at the annulus (in a crude methodology) on my own software.
The frack engineers will have much more sophisticated calculation software.

My own attempts show massive pressure reductions across the choking effect of transferring the N2 from a small bore, very heavy steel pipe to a larger bore very heavy steel pipe which gets worse at high gas velocity.
This is not even taking in to account the turbulence of the gas/FF mixing problems.

So my opinion does not alter from my earlier post.

They are trying to find the optimum gas injection rate to produce the maximum FF recovery rate.

All my own work and opinions.

(by the way I stopped at a pressure loss ratio of 2:1 at the annulus) which could be out significantly but at least I had a go for my own benefit

wjmflp

Less water volume out.

IMO
They are trying to find the optimum balance between lift gas in and FF out.

wjmflp

IMO
OW was presumptious that he/she knew the reasons for the reduction in flow.
If you read the string of posts on HC, OW showed that he/she may not havet understood the hydraulics of what was actually going on.
Read the postings from :
Pangzi2 20:28:36
through to
mikemike 21:26:26
on 22/6/18

I contend that the reduction in flow was induced (my opinion on what was said in the RNS).

However, a couple of inopportune statements of opinion and some think the world has just stopped.

Do your own research if you do not want others (who you probably do not know) influencing what you believe

wjmflp

Oh and by the way, I am at this moment not flustered at all by waht is in the RNS's. I am still invested for what might come out of the well later (days I hope) and also the conventional.

Until they post otherwise, I expect this well to give the results i am waiting for (IMO)

wjmflp

Long & Strong

With the best will in the world, there is a lot of nonsense chats on this board.

To anyone who knows about fluid hydraulics, the latest RNS which informs us that the physical inter-action between the 2 differing sizes at the annulus is acting as a choke will totally understand what is going on.

As to questioning the backgrounds of garrym & OW, I do not know them but aren't these the guys you were hanging on to every word they said?

Now someone has requested a CV?

What utter nonsense.

You can ask any hydraulic engineer half of what you are asking for an explanation.

The only thing I have always said my engineering is not petro-chem based, however 90% is the same, just the petro/shale/oil industry stuff I am not totally familiar with.

IMO, if you have invested and have zero understanding of what is being said in the RNS's, you are gambling, so do not suddenly start asking for CV's. If you think they are shamming, then trust yourself.

My opinion of the latest RNS is just the explanation in engineering terms of what they are dong and what is happening.

wjmflp

The weak - fleeced Poor chaps - imo The devious - we hope they get karma with a capital K (make a note of those who suddenly appeared last week spouting and next week gone) Back to normal - perhaps Let's see what we have wjmflp Long & strong

Now going through the separator They are looking wjmflp