Member Info for ZYX098

I always like this portion of DL's Wiki entry;

Corporate Governance Related Criticisms

He has been accused of frequently "promoting a company, pushing up the (price of its) shares, then raising cash by placing new shares — and (thus) diluting the holdings of the early investors",[15] described as "a familiar tale with most companies he promotes".[16] His defence has been that "You can’t build a business on bottle tops.".[17] Furthermore, he has argued that it's not accurate to claim that "all his ventures have turned sour".[18] Although finance commentators have noted that most of the "hundreds" of companies he has been involved in, and "stock promoted" for, have failed to generate any successful shareholder returns.[19]

In 2009 he was one of a group of claimants, claiming that he had been libelled when an investment publication in South Africa had described the group of executives of one of Lenigas' ventures as "cynically and greedily indulged in self-enrichment at the expense of, and contrary to the interests of, shareholders."[20] The High Court of Justice of the United Kingdom rejected Lenigas', and the other claimants' libel claim, and found in favour of the publisher.[21]

The UK's oil consumption will drop by less than 15% by 2040 and UK home produce supply will drop to just 20% of demand - and this study was done before the ruinous EPL devastated the UKCS.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/749076/projected-uk-oil-production-demand/

By 2050, even if we meet our Net Zero target (and the UK is rated in the top 10 Countries most likely to according to a report in the June edition of 'Science'), we'll still need fossil fuel for around 25% of our electrical power.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/modelling-2050-electricity-system-analysis

Ironically (or not, depending upon your point of view...), the UK has been importing shale gas from the US for several years.

In Africa c. 600 Million people have no access to electricity at all.

Another c. 500 Million have an unreliable supply, with long brown outs being a daily occurrence - which they use portable diesel generators to supplement.

Which is why Countries from Egypt over to Morocco, around the Coast to Nigeria, down the West coast to SA and back up the East coast to Kenya are all developing their offshore gas reserves as fast as they possibly can for gas-to-power projects.

Why aren't they going for renewables? Because if you've been looking at the true figures, you'd know that the mantra of 'cheap renewables' is wrong - renewables are not cheap and the cost of installing offshore wind is rising steeply - at the same time as the reliability of the larger wind turbines is proving to be poor because they were rushed into production too quickly to go through a proper design, testing and verification process.

In the meantime, the likes of Egypt, Tunisia, Algeria and Libya are developing their gas reserves so they can export to Europe (BTW, under EU rules, gas is now a 'renewable energy' resource...).

A similar scenario is happening throughout SE Asia.

All of which has nothing to do with UKOG, of course.

Pboo,

As was explained by several (including Penguins and myself) on here when it became clear that water production was occurring (through the NTSA figures, not UKOG!), the water breakthrough on HH-1 was caused by edge water flowing through the high permeability streak in the Portland.

Nothing to do with HH-2z, or water flow through fractures coming up from the Kimm.

If your assertion was correct, then converting HH-2z to a water injector would be the worst thing that UKOG could do.

If UKOG really thought that the Kimm at HH was any good, they would have done a twin of HH-1 down to the Kimm rather than spending £ Millions on a wild Goose chase in Turkey.

Equally, they wouldn't have stated in their Loxley submission to SCC that the Kimm was uneconomic at HH & BB.

BTW, as for hearing someone on site say that they'd messed the Well up?

Knowing rig crews, it wouldn't surprise me at all that they saw someone hanging around outside the fence and decided to have a little fun....

PBoo,

Penguins has pointed out that they were actually going to use dual ESP's for the Kimm / Portland and it was the KL3 & 4 they were going to co-mingle, so that's my bad.

So I've been mulling over what they could have done, what the problem may have been, what they did in trying to rectify it and how that ties in with what you saw and the time frame they were fishing.

It sounds like there was a problem with the Lower Completion (i.e. for the Kimm) and they needed to pull it - which would mean unseating the isolation packer. Then for some reason they couldn't unseat the isolation packer.

From your description, it sounds like they then ran a mill (wouldn't look much different from a bit from a distance) and tried to mill out the packer.

IMHO, that would be a very foolish thing to do using a Crane and jury-rigged rotary table - they should have suspended the Well and brought in a W/O Rig, along with the correct equipment for the job.

Anyway, it sounds like they couldn't mill the packer, so decided to effectively cut their losses, P&A the Kim part of the Well and just complete it as a Portland producer.

That they did that indicates that they may have damaged the casing when trying to mill the packer - not that common and they would have to run a casing patch to fix it - but that can't be done with a Crane. Again, a W/O Rig would be needed.

As part of the P&A process, they would have had to dump a cement plug on top of the packer (using a tubing string - looks like DP from a distance) and then run a bit to tag the top of cement for verification purposes (OGUK requirement).

Which still gets back to the original points of why not drill a twin of HH-1 to the Kimm and why state in the SCC submission that the Kimm was uneconomic at BB & HH?

It sounds like they saw sufficient fall off in the Kimm production rates such that it wasn't going to be economic to drill a stand alone well and that it was only worth trying to produce at HH-1 because they'd already had HH-1 drill through those zones (i.e. a sunk cost).

Of course, UKOG could have simply said exactly what happened in an RNS, rather than have us PI's try and piece together random bits of information several years later....

"XYZ i dont like repling to you. Your a rude big headed feker. Be noce in future and i might. Now pipe down. "

Adrian, you don't like replying to me for two reasons;

A) You can't answer the questions I ask you to, because you have not used facts, logic or experience in putting together any of your fantasy claims, and;

B) If you do post, it's usually just more nonsense that can easily be shown to be wrong.

Now, show me where I've been rude to your current fake ID?

You can't, can you?

As usual, it's you who resorts to cheap name calling first, and then tries to play the victim card.

Adrian,

So which part of my post is a lie?

I'm all ears......

But you won't answer, will you?

Because you can't.

Let's face it, the real reason I'm a pain in your backside is that you really hate that I can easily call out your nonsense posts by using facts, logic and knowledge - knowledge gained from decades of actually working in the drilling industry.

Whereas you are just a fire extinguisher salesman thinking he's become an 'expert' because he looks up things on the Internet using Google.

And you know full what I really think of you and why...

PBoo,

UKOG said they were going to comingle production, so there wouldn't be a dual completion run.

That means that they would use a combination of sliding sleeves with a packer set in between the Kimm and Portland to isolate the annulus.

The Production packer would be set above the Portland and the downhole part of the hydraulic pump would be above that.

Performing just two round trips wouldn't mess the Well up - thousands of Wells have dozens of interventions performed on them without causing problems.

If they were pulling the pump and couldn't stab back into the production packer for some reason, that's a relatively easy fix, though they'd need to bring in a W/O Rig.

But, the fact that they can produce from the Portland indicates that this is not the problem, therefore it gets back to a plug being lodged in a nipple below the isolation packer.

Again, this is easy to solve - but they'd have to unseat the production packer which would again require a W/O Rig.

Easy enough to solve and if they had to bring in a W/O Rig, that's still much cheaper and quicker than drilling a twin of HH-1.

But even so, none of that explains why UKOG chose to go on a wild Goose chase in Turkey instead of doing a W/O or drilling a twin to HH-1.

Or why, in their submission to SCC for Loxley, UKOG stated that the Kimm was uneconomic at HH and BB.

Adrian,

Nobody is determined to silence you.

What we are determined to do is point out the giant holes in your claims by using things like facts, logic, knowledge and experience.

You silenced yourself by getting a permanent ban from LSE for abusing and threatening other posters.

Pboo,

Given what they were doing at the time, I'm having difficulty in envisioning a scenario where they screwed it up so badly that they couldn't go back to the Kimm.

However, IF (big if..), they somehow managed to do that, then why didn't they plug back and sidetrack HH-2z to a Kimm location closer to HH-1, when they knew they'd hit water bearing fractures?

If the Kimm was that good, then why spend $ Millions on a wild Goose chase in Turkey that was never going to produce those sort of production figures that you claim could come from the Kimm? They could have used the money to drill a twin of HH-1 to the Kimm.

If the Kimm was that good, why put in their Loxely application submission to Surrey that the Kimm at HH and BB was uneconomic?

Got to admit, "downhole bung" is a term I've not heard before.

If you mean they couldn't pull the equalising prong on a plug in one of the nipples, then there are several ways to get it out safely without jepordising the well bore.

Another alternative is simply to pull the Completion, replace the nipple and rerun it. Again, easily done, though needs more surface equipment to be able to do it safely.

However, all that is irrelevant, as UKOG themselves stated in their submission for Loxley to SCC that the Kimm was uneconomic in HH and BB.

If he carries on filtering those who call him Adrian, then he's going to end up with nothing but green boxes and will just be talking to himself.

Which, to be fair, he might as well do anyway, as he has zero credibility.

Adrian,

Ahah! Adrian type 2 behaviour - resorting to deflection by (in this case) using a spurious reason to claim I'm in the bin.

Oh puuulease - you've often said under past fake ID's that you have green binned me, but you never did and I'm confident that you haven't this time either.

But it does show that you really, really hate it when those annoying things (to you) called facts, knowledge and experience are used to utterly discredit your claims.

Adrian,

You posted this from D.O.D.

"UKOG’s chief executive, Stephen Sanderson, said:

“[the permit] finally enables UKOG to return Horse Hill’s produced saline formation water back to the oil-bearing Portland rocks where it originated, lowering operating costs per barrel, removing HGV tankers from congested roads and reducing the field’s overall carbon footprint. The ability to reinject makes both environmental and economic good sense”.

Do you see any mention of waiting until after your beloved Sarahs Court Case in that statement?

No?

Nor does anyone else.

And just as a reminder, UKOG's own RNS's since then state that preparatory work to convert HH-2 is continuing;

RNS of 23rd Feb 2023

UK Oil & Gas PLC (London AIM: UKOG) is pleased to announce that, as a necessary precursor to its planned Horse Hill-2z ("HH-2z") Portland formation water reinjection project, the Company has now installed three, shallow, groundwater monitoring boreholes at its 85.635% owned producing oil field.

RNS of 15th August 2022

Preparatory work towards converting HH-2z into a produced saline water reinjector continues.

It appears that you are the only person who thinks your beloved Sarahs Court Case is holding up UKOG - even UKOG themselves don't think so.

Called it:

"You'll revert to type and either ignore them, or try and use deflection, or just start another thread to try and avoid the embarrassment and the giant holes in your claims being pointed out."

See Adrian, you are so predictable - trying to ignore posts from people who either ask questions you can't answer, or who have the temerity to use those pesky things called facts, knowledge and experience to point out the giant holes in your logic.

At least mince is useful.

Adrian,

You say it was not drilled as a producer (although it clearly is producing oil and water), so - as someone who runs Rigs for a living - I'll be absolutely fascinated to hear what a fire extinguisher salesman would tell UKOG to do differently, if they had drilled it as a producer?

And what difference would that have made to the production?

You can't say that they would have drilled a horizontal Well, as they did that with HH-2z and that was an abject failure.

So what if it's a Vertical Well and not Horizontal Well - HH-2z was a horizontal Well and that was an abject failure.

Yes, I did repeat myself there, as you probably didn't understand it the first time.

You again peddle the fantasy that your beloved Sarah's Court Case is delaying UKOG, when UKOG's own RNS's clearly show otherwise;

RNS of 23rd Feb 2023

UK Oil & Gas PLC (London AIM: UKOG) is pleased to announce that, as a necessary precursor to its planned Horse Hill-2z ("HH-2z") Portland formation water reinjection project, the Company has now installed three, shallow, groundwater monitoring boreholes at its 85.635% owned producing oil field.

RNS of 15th August 2022

Preparatory work towards converting HH-2z into a produced saline water reinjector continues.

After all, you yourself posted;

“Planning consent remains in force and lawful production continues at the Horse Hill site in which the Company holds an 85.635% interest.”

So if planning consent remains in force, lawful production continues and they have done the preparatory work for the conversion of HH-2z, why haven't they done the actual conversion?

Same as why didn't they recomplete HH1 as a dual Portland / Kimm producer when they had the opportunity?

You claim that it's your beloved Sarahs SC case that is holding up the PPP farm in, but that is not what is in the Alba RNS of the 17th August - it clearly says that the farm in hasn't been approved by the partners.

In any case, if there were absolutely any chance of Sarah wining (there isn't - which is why the share price will barely move, even after frantic action by the ramptastic crew to try to create a P&D), why would PPP try and farm in ahead of time?

I don't expect you to answer any of the above questions - because you can't.

You'll revert to type and either ignore them, or try and use deflection, or just start another thread to try and avoid the embarrassment and the giant holes in your claims being pointed out.

BTW, these are the other questions you haven't answered (just from today...):

You claim it's cheap, so exactly how much will it cost to acquire to 3D Seismic, process the data and then re-interpret the map?

How will DL raise money since PPP shares are suspended, Adrian?

How will UKOG fund their share of the costs, since the overall cost of the 3D and HH-3 will exceed the £4.6 Million cap - presuming the farm-in agreement actually does get approved, Adrian?

Can you answer any of those questions?

Employing deflection again, Adrian?

You claim it's cheap, so exactly how much will it cost to acquire to 3D Seismic, process the data and then re-interpret the map?

How will DL raise money since PPP shares are suspended, Adrian?

How will UKOG fund their share of the costs, since the overall cost of the 3D and HH-3 will exceed the £4.6 Million cap - presuming the farm-in agreement actually does get approved, Adrain?

Can you answer any of those questions?

No?

Thought not..

Adrian,

Aside from the facts (because I know you hate them..) that PPP shares are currently suspended and they don't have the cash and the farm in hasn't been approved by the partners, you also glossed over;

"subject to an aggregate cap of £4.6 million."

That cap will cover the 3D Seismic acquisition, processing and interpretation, but will not also cover all the cost of HH-3 (presuming the new mapping doesn't fail their planned location) which by itself will cost in the region of £5 Million to drill and complete.

So yes, UKOG will have to find cash from somewhere to pay their share.

Which is, of course, in addition to the cash they need to drill Loxley, since the 'pre-planned farm out' has been a failure.

BTW, considering you claim "it's cheap", you still haven't said how much it will cost to acquire the 3D Seismic data, process it and then re-interpret the current mapping..

"Seismic idoesn't cost that much".

O.K., how much will it cost to plan, shoot, process the data and re-interpret the maps on HH?

Adrian,

Why are you posting old, out of date news again?

UKOG themselves have said - in their Loxley planning submission - that the Kimmeridge at both HH and BB is uneconomic.

And production data from HH-2 has shown that the fractures they wanted to target in the Kimm are actually water bearing - hence why it's being recompleted as a water injector.

You still claim that your beloved Sarahs Court Case is stopping UKOG from doing anything - yet UKOG's own RNS's prove that assertion to be wrong;

RNS of 23rd Feb 2023

UK Oil & Gas PLC (London AIM: UKOG) is pleased to announce that, as a necessary precursor to its planned Horse Hill-2z ("HH-2z") Portland formation water reinjection project, the Company has now installed three, shallow, groundwater monitoring boreholes at its 85.635% owned producing oil field.

RNS of 15th August 2022

Preparatory work towards converting HH-2z into a produced saline water reinjector continues.

Your beloved Sarahs Court Case didn't stop UKOG doing the recompletion of HH-1 - remember, the one that they said they'd run as a dual Completion to produce the Portland & Kimmeridge - but didn't and have never said why they didn't?