23 Nov 2012 07:00
For immediate release | 23 November 2012 |
Desire Petroleum plc
("Desire" or "the Company")
Complete Resources Assessment of the Assets of the Company
Desire Petroleum plc (AIM:DES) the exploration company focusing on the North Falkland Basin, is pleased to announce the findings of a recently completed competent person's report (CPR) on all the assets of the company, prepared by Senergy (GB) Ltd. This CPR includes the complete prospect inventory based on the final interpretation of the 2012 merged 3D seismic survey as well as an assessment of the 14/19-1 Liz gas condensate discovery. For completeness, the CPR also includes contingent and prospective resources previously published for which there are no new data available.
CPR Highlights
·; New contingent resources assigned to the 14/19-1 Liz gas condensate discovery, increasing Best Case contingent resources by 317 Bscf and 10 MMstb to 495 Bscf and 95 MMstb, net to Desire. This represents an increase of 178% and 12% over the existing net Best Case contingent resources held in the Sea Lion Complex of 178 Bscf and 85 MMstb
·; Chance of commercial success estimated at 25% for the Liz gas condensate discovery and at 80% for the Sea Lion Complex
·; Significant increase in Desire's prospect inventory, now containing 41 oil prospects and 4 gas prospects:
o 10 prospects with Chance of Success of 30% or better
o 12 individual prospects with Best Case gross, prospective resources > 100 MMstb
o Potential for drilling stacked prospects with multiple targets
·; Best Case unrisked prospective oil resources of 2.45 billion stb, net to Desire (494 MMstb risked for Chance of Success)
·; Best Case unrisked prospective gas resources of 274 Bscf, net to Desire (31 Bscf risked for Chance of Success)
Commenting on the CPR, Stephen Phipps, Chairman of Desire, said:
"We are delighted that this CPR confirms our view that the Desire licenses have excellent remaining exploration potential. Our prospect inventory has been greatly strengthened following the interpretation of the 2012 merged 3D survey and we are now able to promote multiple prospects for drilling with stacked targets. There are several play types to explore but the stand-out potential is in the East Flank play where there are many prospects analogous to the Sea Lion Complex. Our immediate priority will be to promote our extensive prospect inventory and to attract further investment into our licenses."
Contingent Resource Evaluation
The contingent resource assessment of the 14/15-4a discovery is unchanged from the results previously published in April 2012.
14/15-4a Discovery: Contingent Oil Resources Net to Desire
Contingent Oil Resources Net[1] to Desire (MMstb) | |||
14/15-4a: Reservoir | Low (1C)[2] | Best (2C)2 | High (3C)2 |
Sea Lion Extension | 6.4 | 14.0 | 22.8 |
Casper | 10.1 | 16.3 | 23.2 |
Casper South | 25.7 | 49.2 | 76.0 |
Beverley | 5.2 | 8.0 | 11.0 |
Total Oil (MMstb)[3] | 61 | 85 | 116 |
14/15-4a Discovery: Contingent Gas Resources Net to Desire
Contingent Gas Resources Net to Desire (Bscf) | |||
14/15-4a: Reservoir | Low (1C) | Best (2C) | High (3C) |
Sea Lion Extension | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Casper | 7.6 | 11.0 | 14.8 |
Casper South | 32.6 | 68.0 | 108 |
Beverley | 66.4 | 100 | 136 |
Total Gas (Bscf)3 | 131 | 178 | 237 |
The overall chance of commercial development is estimated to be 80%.
The contingent resources net to Desire for the 14/19-1 (Liz) gas/condensate discovery are shown below, as extracted from the CPR.
14/19-1 Discovery: Contingent Gas Resources Net to Desire
Contingent Gas Resources Net to Desire (Bscf) | |||
14/19-1: Reservoir | Low (1C)[4] | Best (2C)4 | High (3C)4 |
G4 Sandstone | 34 | 219 | 1336 |
H4 Volcaniclastics | 17 | 98 | 343 |
Total Gas (Bscf)[5] | 51 | 317 | 1679 |
14/19-1 Discovery: Contingent Oil Resources Net to Desire
Contingent Oil Resources Net to Desire (MMstb) | |||
14/19-1: Reservoir | Low (1C) | Best (2C) | High (3C) |
G4 Sandstone | 1 | 10 | 77 |
Total Oil (MMstb)5 | 1 | 10 | 77 |
There is a wide range on the resource assessment of Liz which reflects the uncertainty in the reservoir quality and trap definition. No gas-water contact was encountered in the discovery well. The overall chance of commercial development is estimated to be 25%.
Prospective Resource Evaluation
Prospective resources have been assessed for three play types - the Post-rift E2 sequence, the early Post-rift F sequence (East Flank) and the Syn-rift G/H sequences. There are multiple prospects in each play type and the un-risked prospective resources net to Desire and the risk factor are shown for each play type.
The un-risked prospective resources net to Desire and the risk factor are reported below for the Post-rift prospects.
Post-Rift Prospects: Un-risked Prospective Oil Resources Net to Desire
Un-Risked Prospective Recoverable Resources Post-rift Prospects Net to Desire (MMstb) | ||||
Prospect: Reservoir[6] | Low | Best | High | Risk Factor or COS % |
Ann / Orca S[7] | 27 | 76 | 133 | 32 |
Caroline | 19 | 53 | 103 | 13 |
Helen[8] | 37 | 155 | 325 | 16 |
Total[9] | 82 | 284 | 561 | |
The un-risked prospective resources net to Desire and the risk factor are reported below for the East Flank prospects.
Early Post-Rift Prospects: Un-risked Prospective Oil Resources Net to Desire
Un-Risked Prospective Recoverable Resources East Flank Prospects Net to Desire (MMstb) | ||||
Prospect: Reservoir[10] | Low[11] | Best11 | High11 | Risk Factor or COS % |
Elaine North[12] | 8 | 24 | 45 | 30 |
Elaine South12 | 21 | 98 | 196 | 30 |
Isobel 12 | 42 | 190 | 377 | 30 |
Jayne 112 | 13 | 50 | 97 | 31 |
Jayne 312 | 4 | 15 | 29 | 31 |
Jayne 412 | 7 | 33 | 67 | 31 |
Jayne W | 6 | 22 | 42 | 28 |
Anna W | 12 | 39 | 73 | 20 |
Anna N | 7 | 22 | 39 | 26 |
Anna S | 17 | 39 | 67 | 26 |
Mia | 3 | 11 | 23 | 26 |
Elaine W | 20 | 70 | 130 | 17 |
Catriona E[13] | 3 | 6 | 10 | 27 |
Catriona W13 | 2 | 4 | 8 | 23 |
Emily | 8 | 34 | 68 | 21 |
Lydia SE | 12 | 36 | 65 | 18 |
Lydia NW | 23 | 62 | 109 | 17 |
Joanne | 7 | 19 | 32 | 15 |
Harriet | 9 | 27 | 48 | 19 |
Sadie | 38 | 95 | 165 | 11 |
Kiki W | 6 | 19 | 36 | 22 |
Kiki E | 4 | 14 | 27 | 18 |
Irene | 17 | 107 | 249 | 34 |
Casper E13 | 10 | 28 | 48 | 26 |
Polly | 10 | 61 | 139 | 15 |
Shona NE13 | 13 | 36 | 63 | 37 |
Shona SE | 24 | 69 | 129 | 19 |
Ninky S | 13 | 46 | 87 | 26 |
Ninky N | 9 | 26 | 45 | 34 |
Rachel Updip | 54 | 142 | 261 | 19 |
Jackie E | 16 | 48 | 87 | 17 |
Jackie W | 11 | 27 | 47 | 23 |
Jill | 3 | 11 | 21 | 10 |
Total[14] | 451 | 1,531 | 2,927 | |
The un-risked prospective resources net to Desire and the risk factor are reported below for the Syn-rift prospects.
Syn-Rift Prospects: Un-risked Prospective Oil Resources Net to Desire
Un-Risked Prospective Recoverable Resources Syn-rift Prospects Net to Desire (MMstb) | ||||
Prospect: Reservoir[15] | Low | Best | High | Risk Factor or COS % |
Ann / Orca S Deep[16] | 10 | 36 | 67 | 19 |
Caroline Deep | 15 | 96 | 213 | 12 |
Helen Deep16 | 23 | 155 | 334 | 10 |
Susan G1 | 30 | 144 | 291 | 13 |
Susan G2 | 43 | 202 | 409 | 11 |
Total[17] | 122 | 633 | 1,314 | |
Syn-Rift Prospects: Un-risked Prospective Gas Resources Net to Desire
Un-Risked Prospective Recoverable Resources Syn-rift Prospects Net to Desire (Bscf) | ||||
Prospect: Reservoir[18] | Low | Best | High | Risk Factor or COS % |
Liz N | 8 | 120 | 308 | 12 |
Orca S | 3 | 46 | 132 | 14 |
Ann S | 2 | 27 | 63 | 10 |
Ann N | 12 | 82 | 175 | 9 |
Total17 | 26 | 274 | 678 | |
The CPR was prepared by Senergy, a major independent consultancy specialising in reservoir engineering, geology, geophysics and petroleum economics. Senergy have used all available information and interpretations supplied by Desire. Evaluation of potential recoverable hydrocarbons has been assessed in accordance with 2007 Petroleum Resources Management System prepared by the Oil and Gas Reserves Committee of the Society of Petroleum Engineers (SPE) and reviewed and jointly sponsored by the World Petroleum Council (WPC), the American Association of Petroleum Geologists (AAPG) and the Society of Petroleum Evaluation Engineers (SPEE).
The CPR can be downloaded from the Desire website: www.desireplc.co.uk.
This statement has been approved by Mr Ken Black, Exploration Director of Desire Petroleum plc, who is a member of the Petroleum Exploration Society of Great Britain, with over 30 years experience in petroleum exploration and management, who is a Qualified Person in accordance with the guidance note for Mining, Oil & Gas Companies issued by the London Stock Exchange in respect of AIM Companies.
This statement has been approved by Senergy (GB) Limited.
For further information please contact:
Desire Petroleum plc | 020 7436 0423 |
Stephen Phipps, Chairman | |
Dr Ian Duncan, Chief Executive Officer | |
Peel Hunt LLP | 020 7418 8900 |
Richard Crichton | |
Andy Crossley
| |
Buchanan | 020 7466 5000 |
Ben RomneyTim Thompson |
Glossary
Variable | Meaning |
2D | Two dimensional referring to seismic data |
3D | Three dimensional referring to seismic data |
AIM | Alternative Investment Market |
Best Case | An estimate representing the best technical assessment of projected volumes based on the P50 or mean value of all possible outcomes. |
Bscf | Billions of standard cubic feet |
Contingent Resources | Contingent Resources are those quantities of petroleum estimated, as of a given date, to be potentially recoverable from known accumulations, but the applied project(s) are not yet considered mature enough for commercial development due to one or more contingencies. Contingent Resources may include, for example, projects for which there are currently no viable markets, or where commercial recovery is dependent on technology under development, or where evaluation of the accumulation is insufficient to clearly assess commerciality. Contingent Resources are further categorized in accordance with the level of certainty associated with the estimates and may be sub-classified based on project maturity and/or characterised by their economic status. |
COS | Risk factor or exploration or geological chance of success. The probability, typically expressed as a percentage, that a given outcome will occur. |
GIIP | Gas Initially In Place |
HIIP | Hydrocarbons Initially in Place |
Mean | The arithmetic average of a set of values |
ML | The Most Likely case |
MM | Million |
MMbo | Million barrels oil |
MMboe | Millions of barrels of oil equivalent |
MMscf/d | Million standard cubic feet per day |
MMstb | Millions of barrels of stock tank oil |
P99 | The probability that a stated volume will be equalled or exceeded. In this example a 99% chance that the actual volume will be greater than or equal to that stated. |
Prospective Resources | Prospective Resources are those quantities of petroleum estimated, as of a given date, to be potentially recoverable from undiscovered accumulations by application of future development projects. Prospective Resources have an associated risk factor or COS |
Reserves | Reserves are those quantities of petroleum anticipated to be commercially recoverable by application of development projects to known accumulations from a given date forward under defined conditions. Reserves must further satisfy four criteria: they must be discovered, recoverable, commercial, and remaining (as of the evaluation date) based on the development project(s) applied. Reserves are further categorized in accordance with the level of certainty associated with the estimates and may be sub-classified based on project maturity and/or characterised by development and production status. |
scf | Standard cubic foot |
stb | Stock tank barrels |
stb/d | Stock tank barrels per day |
STOIIP | Stock tank oil initially in place |
[1] The amount net attributable to Desire according to net equity interest in the licence
[2] The quoted Low (C1), Best (C2) and High (C3) values are based on the 90% probability (P90), the mean (Pmean) and 10% probability (P10) respectively derived from probabilistic estimates of the STOIIP size distribution generated using a "Monte Carlo" statistical approach
[3] Totals were generated from probabilistic consolidation not from arithmetic summing of the amounts in the individual reservoirs
[4] The quoted Low (C1), Best (C2) and High (C3) values are based on the 90% probability (P90), the 50% probability (P50), and 10% probability (P10) respectively derived from probabilistic estimates of the GIIP size distribution generated using a "Monte Carlo" statistical approach. The P50 is considered to be the more meaningful Best case here due to the broad range of the distribution
[5] Total generated from arithmetic summing of the amounts in the individual reservoirs which may underestimate the Total for the Low case and overestimate the Total for the High case compared with probabilistic consolidation
[6] The reservoir objectives are Lower Cretaceous Barremian to Aptian post-rift sandstones
[7]Prospect reported previously, prospective resources unchanged
[8] Prospect reported previously, revised due to improved seismic coverage
[9]Total based on arithmetic summing. This may underestimate the Total for Low case and overestimate the Total for High case. Numbers may not sum exactly due to rounding
[10] The reservoir objectives are Lower Cretaceous Barremian early post-rift sandstones
[11] The quoted Low, Best and High values are based on the 90% probability (P90), mean (Pmean) and 10% probability (P10) respectively derived from probabilistic estimates of the STOIIP size distribution generated using a "Monte Carlo" statistical approach.
[12] Prospects reported previously, prospective resources unchanged
[13] Prospects reported previously, minor revisions to interpretation made on final 3D seismic volume
[14] Total based on arithmetic summing. This may underestimate the Total for Low case and overestimate the Total for High case. Numbers may not sum exactly due to rounding.
[15] The reservoir objectives are Lower Cretaceous Valanginian to Barremian syn-rift sandstones
[16]Prospect reported previously, revised due to improved seismic coverage
[17] Total based on arithmetic summing. This may underestimate the Total for Low case and overestimate the Total for High case. Numbers may not sum exactly due to rounding
[18] The reservoir objectives are Lower Cretaceous Valanginian volcaniclastics.