Member Info for ZYX098

We could always ask the UN to review the US claim to large parts of Texas and California that used to belong to Mexico.

Or Guantanamo Bay that used to belong to Cuba.

Or the validity of the deal that bought Alaska from Russia.

Or the validity of the deal that bought Louisiana from the French.

And I'm pretty sure the Native Tribes in the US have valid claims to, well, the USA...

Correct Mirasol.

That's why the Govt should be laying the groundwork now, at least warning of a potential shortage.

Easy to store a months supply of sugar (showing your age there!) or toilet rolls, not so easy to store a months worth of petrol and/or diesel.

If they wait and make an announcement when it's blatantly obvious it's happening, then yeah - everyone will try and fill up immediately.

I think that H2 2026 will be this Govts Covid, and I think they will fail catastrophically.

Yes, it's going to get much worse.

From inside the industry looking out, it's difficult to understand why Govts and the general public aren't taking the closure of the Straits of Hormuz more seriously than they apparently are.

Reeves statement last week that the Govt didn't see any immediate shortages was either a case of sticking their collective heads in the sand, or they really don't understand what's coming (or not coming, to be more accurate), or they are making contingency plans in the background and trying not to spook everyone.

Unfortunately with their performance in Govt so far, the last of these options is the least likely.

They should be making preparatory statements along the lines of "we can see the potential for their being some shortages in a month or so, and we are making contingency plans".

This would reduce panic buying as at least some people would realise that there's no point in panic buying now.

But if they wait too long, there will be a run on diesel and petrol that they cannot control and vital services (rail, road transport, emergency services, armed forces) will be left short.

All it will need is for one social media post of "my local petrol station has no fuel" to go viral and we will be seeing the proverbial queues around the block.

And bear in mind that there's always a very small % of petrol stations that temporarily have no fuel for reasons such as the tanker delivery is late or they have an electrical problem which means they cannot pump the fuel they have in the tanks. (Newport Pagnell services on the M1 didn't have fuel yesterday).

With the loss of LNG from Qatar, plus the damage their major plant has taken, plus the damage the Chevron plant in Australia took from the Cyclone, LNG supply is going to be tight for the rest of the year.

If Europe cannot replenish it's gas reserves sufficiently during the summer, things could get really ugly for consumers w.r.t. energy prices in Winter.

In that respect, it is absolutely insane for Mad Ed to be still sitting on the Rosebank approval.

The Wells have been drilled and the platform already built, so if he gives approval now, it could still be online before the end of the year and providing about 6% of the UK's gas needs.

But that window of opportunity is closing and if he sits on it much longer, it won't be in time.

TH2,

So in other words, you are doing a runner because you are under investigation for posting so many blatant lies in desperately trying to ramp this share, so you can recoup your losses.

You won't be missed.....

No worries Mirasol - I know you weren't, and you were right to post your explanation.

Just really annoyed at myself because I know better!!!!

Correct Mirasol, it's the JOA that dictates that, not the license T's & C's.

A dumb mistake - I'll go and sit on the naughty step and contemplate such a heinous error, especially since I've been involved in those types of negotiations :-(

Hi N,

Ordinarily RKH would have some say in what happens, though as 35% partner, it depends upon how the license terms & conditions are written.

They are effectively probably just along for the ride, but in any case are very unlikely to have any sort of veto over what Navitas decide.

However, RKH are short of cash and won't be able to fund any meaningful exploration until 1st oil (after which 85% of our income has to go to paying off the debt anyway).

As has been pointed out several times before, Isobel simply is not on Navitas's radar for early exploration and developement.

To repeat a post I made (on the 26th March) as to why;

*************************************************************

The board has had three posters - each with decades of industry experience - explain why Isobel isn't currently anywhere on Navitas's horizon and won't be for several years.

2 Geologists; Nomalkanymore (ex-Marlon Monkey) & Cammbo and Drilling (myself).

In summary;

A) More 3D Seismic is needed to better delineate the structure, including internal faulting.

B) Any Appraisal program won't be a simple "one and done", it will take 4 - 6 Wells (including testing) to properly appraise the structure for potential production.

C) There is a question mark over the formation permeability. The same sand package in SL is not being developed for just that reason and we know that the Isobel Deep Well did not kick until it was some 30% through the potential payzone (i.e. the top 30% was 'tight' with low permeability).

D) Isobel is too far to be tied back to the SL FPSO(s). Remember, it's a waxy crude. In any case, if it contains the substantial reserves we hope it does, it'll need it's own FPSO.

Unfortunately RKH are not in a financial position to contribute to any extensive exploration/appraisal program until after 1st Oil.

The Navitas stated intention to drill Gwendoline (which, thinking about it, they must be doing using the gas disposal Well as it's not wise/practical to use a producer or water injector) to prove up an additional 50 Million bbls shows the model that they are pursuing.

Prove up more easily accessible reserves that can be tied back to the SL FPSO.

********************************************************************************

ATB

ZYX098

Hi CTS,

Can't honestly see it making any difference to the RKH take-out price (I'm in the "RKH will be taken out after 1st oil" camp).

We know that Navitas plans the 'hub and spoke' method of development for the SL area, with additional fields being tied back to the FPSO as and when they are ready to come onstream.

This is why Navitas are planning to substitute the Aoka Mizu with a larger capacity FPSO after a few years.

If all goes well with SL and the appraisal of the many other structures close to SL, there shouldn't be any significant spare capacity in the FPSO to take in additional production from PL001 for many, many years.

Also, if the oil is the same type as SL (i.e. waxy), any PL001 is right at the upper limit - if not over (like Isobel) the distance at which it's practical/economic to tie back.

Looking at the Navitas reserves estimate for the PL001, if the drilling success rate is similar to the SL area, then they'll also need a similar hub and spoke development model.

In their last meeting, Iain Ramsey said an option would be to redeploy the Aoka Mizu to PL001 and I think that this is the most likely option given the time-frame for any potential Isobel area development.

Hi CO2,

Rather than focusing on just oil, you should try breaking it down further;

A) Petrol

B) Diesel

C) Kerosene

D) Fuel Oil

E) LPG

F) Jet Fuel

G) Fuel Oil

In the Asia Region, some Countries rely heavily on Kerosene or LPG for cooking.

I forget who put up the link to the YouTube video (Santos1?), but for example, Korea, Japan and India all took 100% of their fuel oil from the Gulf.

So while a Country may have significant oil reserves, if it doesn't have the facility to turn it into Kerosene for example, that's liable to run out much more quickly.

Oh, Trump has just said the the US produces more Oil than Saudi and Russia - which is true and doesn't import any from the Gulf - which is not.

The US imports roughly 7% of it's oil from the Gulf.

Trump also claimed that the USA would double production by next year.

No chance......

So of those four claims Trump made, 50% were actually true.

That's a much higher hit rate than normal for him..

LTT mentioned the tanker transit times.

It is a huge Elephant in the room, from two perspectives - now and after the Strait is re-opened.

Oil (and Gas) that was on the way at the start of the war has effectively acted as a 'floating reserve', but that's practically gone now, as the tankers have unloaded.

It's why we are seeing such a disconnect between the quoted price for Brent (which is actually for future delivery) and the spot market (for immediate delivery) which last week reached $147/bbl.

Physical oil (and gas) for immediate delivery is in short supply, especially in SE Asia and why there are widespread shortages of petrol, diesel and jet fuel there.

We'll be seeing the same across Europe within 4 weeks and likely sooner than that.

If you plan on flying this Summer, the forthcoming shortage of jet fuel will no doubt result in many cancellations and the imposition of fuel surcharges, irrespective of if you've paid for the flight already.

Even if the Straits were to open tomorrow (and the reaction of the Chinese if the US stops a tanker of Chinese oil will be interesting), there is a large portion of the tanker fleet waiting to get in or out of the Strait.

Their turn around time to SE Asia is around 70 days - about 20 days longer to Europe.

So even if the Straits are fully opened, it will be months before the delivery side of the supply chain gets anywhere near back to normal.

Demand will be elevated for the rest of the year, as Countries restock their inventories and - no doubt - will try and stock additional supplies as contingency.

After all, all it will take is for one $20,000 Shahed drone to scuff the paint of a ship going through the Straits (or another unhinged 'Truth Social' post from Trump) and it'll shut down again.

That demand is in addition to replenishing the oil that has been released from the Strategic Reserves under the IEA program of adding 400 Million bbls to the market.

It also means that production will be slower to start up than many think, as they need to clear tank space for the production and refined products.

Clearly the Argentinians have no problem with them working for Navitas in the FI at the same time!

https://www.worldoil.com/news/2026/4/13/halliburton-wins-multibillion-dollar-fracturing-contract-with-ypf-in-vaca-muerta/

Zero chance of Mad Ed doing that.

Although it wouldn't help us now, it would certainly help increase our resilience in future - this conflict has the potential to keep bubbling along for many months yet.

Even if the Straits were to open tomorrow (and the reaction of the Chinese if the US stops a tanker of Chinese oil will be interesting), we'll be experiencing widespread shortages of diesel and petrol across Europe within 4 weeks.

If you plan on flying this Summer, the forthcoming shortage of jet fuel will no doubt result in many cancellations and the imposition of fuel surcharges, even if you've paid for the flight already.

Yes, she will.

Although the Noble press release (Navitas haven't actually made any announcement) said it was an 11 Well contract, there will be addition options in it which will allow her to do other Exploration / Appraisal work.

But only in the North Falklands Basin - she's not fitted out for the water depths in the South Falkland Basin licenses.

Given the number of potential prospects for exploration & appraisal, she'll be down there for years to come - unless something catastrophic goes wrong with SL for some reason.

In fact, it's highly likely that another Rig will be needed in 2029/2030 there is so much potential work.

Hi Tim,

No worries - as a regular on the board, it's too easy to presume that everyone else knows what you are talking about.

As the link kindly provided by mn1 shows, she's the Rig that will be used for the Development drilling & completion work.

An old Lady, but a proper workhorse!

Thanks for the information Hank - sounds like you have been there?

Thanks for the information Supra3!

The crew change flights for SL will be one every couple of weeks at most (when have the Rig and Construction vessel(s)).

Was just curious - like I said, got caught out several years ago!

For any new pipeline, they'll also be wary of the Houthis potentially shutting off the Southern end of the Red Sea, which would limit tanker sizes to 'SuezMax' class.

They may well look at building one (or two, gas and oil) to an Omani port, although that would mean crossing the Empty Quarter.

Hi Mirasol,

Yes, but it's still old and the runway would have been designed for what service it expected to see - i.e. primarily light fighters with the occasional freight / passenger flight by a heavier plane.

LHR has another runway and LGW use the taxiway (it was built to runway specs, not taxiway specs) if they run over.

Also depends on how they do it - they may simply shut down half the runway at a time.

Anyway, hopefully Supra3 can shed some light.

Hi JDPM,

We could try and classify some of the potential sentiment driven milestones by the end of this year;

Expected, positive (timing relatively well known)

A) Departure of the FPSO from Hurricane to ???? for it's refit (Late May / Early June)

B) Departure of the Endeavour for the FI (Q4, possibly late Q3).

Partially expected (say, 50% chance) - positive

Navitas choose to drill an Exploration / Appraisal Well in the SL area, prior to starting Development Drilling.

- If they decide this, I expect we'll then see two Exploration Wells, one on PL001 in addition to the SL Well.

Unexpected (say, 20% chance) - positive

With the number of potential targets in the SL and PL001 area, they will clearly need to shoot much more 3D Seismic.

They'll obviously want to do this in the Summer season to minimise weather downtime, so that means starting either Q4 this year or Q4 next year.

I suspect getting all their ducks lined up for shooting this year would be a real stretch, so only a 20% chance.

Expected - negative

The war will undoubtedly result in cost increases for SL.

We saw 40% pretty much across the board when Russia invaded The Ukraine, but I don't expect that sort of magnitude unless this drags on much longer.

Manufacturing costs will increase because of the increase in the price of energy.

Freight costs will increase because of the increase in fuel costs and the loss of Dubai as a freight consolidation point.

Depending upon what happens w.r.t. the Strait of Hormuz, they could also end up having to truck equipment & materials from Dubai to one of the Omani Freeports - which would be a significant cost, as if we are having to do it, then so are other Companies.

Chemicals shortages may force them to substitute more expensive chemicals (or the same chemicals from a more expensive source) for the Drilling & Completion fluids and Cementing.

If the FPSO was going to DXB for it's refit (which was what the 'bar talk' said), then there will undoubtedly be cost (and schedule) implications of going somewhere else (Sing or Korea).

The potential effect on schedule is a tough one to call.

I can easily see the Endeavour having to slip 1-2 months, as the whole Logistics supply chain will have been adversely affected by the war. In that respect, I really hope the ABZ people (who don't have much O'Seas/remote location experience) are listening to the London office people (who do).

That may bounce them into drilling an Exploration/Appraisal Well on SL anyway, if they have to Mob the Endeavour to drill a Well on PL001 before the end of the year.

As for the FPSO, too early to call.

You can make up some schedule slippage by throwing more money, but only to a certain extent.

My favourite answer to management when they ask why more money won't help; You can get 9 Women pregnant at the same time, but you'll still have to wait 9 months for the baby.....