'Thylacine-2' pid='36148' datel Wrote:Pet, what do you make of page 18 of the slides for the recent Macquerie presentation? Is that a fault across the southern end of Antelope? If so, is Antelope Deep only the area to the south of the fault or could it extend to the north underneath Antelope? Can you estimate the vertical separation between Antelope and Antelope Deep from the slide, if they are separate formations? Is Antelope Deep the "Elephant"? :-)

Thy- Yes, that is a fault that they have drawn on the map across the southern end of Antelope which would separate Antelope from Antelope Deep. Since they have not put numbers on the  contour lines it is not possible for me to determine the vertical  difference in depth between the two blocks.

I appears that IOC has altered their interpretation  of the depth of the top of the limestone on the Antelope side of the fault since the GLJ report was issued. Both the GLJ interpretation and the IOC interpretation indicated that the top of the limestone dropped several hundred meters below the gas/water contact as we move south from the Antelope structure. So based on the old interpretation Antelope Deep will be well below the Antelope gas/water contact. This would indicate that if gas is found in the Antelope Deep structure it is likely deeper than the Antelope Gas/Water contact and would, therefore, be a different field and separate from the Antelope Field.

For your information GLJ’s interpretation is that the Elk and Antelope blocks are not in hydraulic communication based on pressure, gas composition and liquid content of the gas. They give the two blocks slightly different gas/water contact levels. It appears the limestone in the Elk block is 200 - 500+ meters higher than the Antelope Block. Since the limestone is about 1,200 meters thick the limestone intervals would be in contact across the fault.

From GLJ: “This would require the Bevan Fault to be sealing; possible reasons for a fault sealing in this situation could be fault gouge, fault cementation and/or bitumen (which has been noted in some tests), and will have a tendency to seal regions against fluid flow.” http://www.interoil.com/iocfiles/documents/businesssegments/upstream/Elk_Antelope_Gas_Field_2009_GLJ_-_FINAL.PDF page 15 of 51. Also see maps 6 and 7 at the bottom of the report.


The map at http://www.interoil.com/iocfiles/documents/investorrelations/presentationanddocuments/2014/2014-01-13_Macquarie_Conference_FINAL.pdf page 18 appears to present a new interpretation of the depth of the limestone on the Antelope side of the southern fault with the top of the limestone being much more shallow than indicated by the previous GLJ and IOC interpretations.

If we guess the dark contour interval to be 250 meters then the map would indicate closure of about 500+ meters (1,600+ feet) with the high against the fault. I have no way of estimating the depth with the information presented by IOC so far. I could use the GLJ maps but I am no longer confident of their accuracy in the southern region of the maps. They may give us a better map after they get the new seismic data.

The questions at hand: 1. What is the depth of the top of the zone? 2. Will the limestone contain gas, oil or water? 3. Will the zones be in communication? To be determined by drilling and testing.

'petrengr1' pid='36175' datel Wrote:

'Thylacine-2' pid='36148' datel Wrote:Pet, what do you make of page 18 of the slides for the recent Macquerie presentation? Is that a fault across the southern end of Antelope? If so, is Antelope Deep only the area to the south of the fault or could it extend to the north underneath Antelope? Can you estimate the vertical separation between Antelope and Antelope Deep from the slide, if they are separate formations? Is Antelope Deep the "Elephant"? :-)

Thy- Yes, that is a fault that they have drawn on the map across the southern end of Antelope which would separate Antelope from Antelope Deep. Since they have not put numbers on the  contour lines it is not possible for me to determine the vertical  difference in depth between the two blocks.

I appears that IOC has altered their interpretation  of the depth of the top of the limestone on the Antelope side of the fault since the GLJ report was issued. Both the GLJ interpretation and the IOC interpretation indicated that the top of the limestone dropped several hundred meters below the gas/water contact as we move south from the Antelope structure. So based on the old interpretation Antelope Deep will be well below the Antelope gas/water contact. This would indicate that if gas is found in the Antelope Deep structure it is likely deeper than the Antelope Gas/Water contact and would, therefore, be a different field and separate from the Antelope Field.

For your information GLJ’s interpretation is that the Elk and Antelope blocks are not in hydraulic communication based on pressure, gas composition and liquid content of the gas. They give the two blocks slightly different gas/water contact levels. It appears the limestone in the Elk block is 200 - 500+ meters higher than the Antelope Block. Since the limestone is about 1,200 meters thick the limestone intervals would be in contact across the fault.

From GLJ: “This would require the Bevan Fault to be sealing; possible reasons for a fault sealing in this situation could be fault gouge, fault cementation and/or bitumen (which has been noted in some tests), and will have a tendency to seal regions against fluid flow.” http://www.interoil.com/iocfiles/documents/businesssegments/upstream/Elk_Antelope_Gas_Field_2009_GLJ_-_FINAL.PDF page 15 of 51. Also see maps 6 and 7 at the bottom of the report.


The map at http://www.interoil.com/iocfiles/documents/investorrelations/presentationanddocuments/2014/2014-01-13_Macquarie_Conference_FINAL.pdf page 18 appears to present a new interpretation of the depth of the limestone on the Antelope side of the southern fault with the top of the limestone being much more shallow than indicated by the previous GLJ and IOC interpretations.

If we guess the dark contour interval to be 250 meters then the map would indicate closure of about 500+ meters (1,600+ feet) with the high against the fault. I have no way of estimating the depth with the information presented by IOC so far. I could use the GLJ maps but I am no longer confident of their accuracy in the southern region of the maps. They may give us a better map after they get the new seismic data.

The questions at hand: 1. What is the depth of the top of the zone? 2. Will the limestone contain gas, oil or water? 3. Will the zones be in communication? To be determined by drilling and testing.

Pet-- On page 16 of 51 (the 1 st pdf), Dr. Wilson indicates that (#5) The dolomized reef section is approx. 670 ft thick. On the down-thrown side of the fault (in antelope deep), couldn't we still find some of the reef? If we did and we have closure,maybe good results?? Thanks.

Another interesting point on http://www.interoil.com/iocfiles/documents/investorrelations/presentationanddocuments/2014/2014-01-13_Macquarie_Conference_FINAL.pdf page 18.

3 out of 6 features on trend are proven gas accumulations
Plan to drill further two in upcoming campaign

They list the six features on the trend:
1. Triceratops
2. Bob Cat
3. Jaguar
4. Elk
5. Antelope
6. Antelope Deep

3 out of 6 features on trend are proven gas accumulations. That would be: Triceratops, Elk and Antelope

Two features to be drilled in the upcoming campaign. That would be: Bob Cat and Antelope Deep

One remaining will be Jaguar.

I don’t want to get you too excited about the prospects of Exploration drilling but on the trend under discussion 100% of the features that have been drilled have found gas. That is not a bad record so far.

PET - Proves again the old adage best place to find hydrocarbons is where you have already found them.

Just follow that ancient sea bed where there's one reef there's more.

'jft310' pid='36192' datel Wrote:

PET - Proves again the old adage best place to find hydrocarbons is where you have already found them.

Just follow that ancient sea bed where there's one reef there's more.

'jft310' - Kinda' takes us back to (I believe it was Tusker's) string of pearls,doesn't it ?  Even if we just get one [or two] out of the next 3 ,it will be great.

In looking at http://www.interoil.com/iocfiles/documents/investorrelations/presentationanddocuments/2014/2014-01-13_Macquarie_Conference_FINAL.pdf slide 18 a little closer I now see that they have drawn in a localized high on the NORTH side of the fault that separates the Antelope Field from the Antelope Deep Prospect.  Maybe this is where we find the extension that can be in communication with the Antelope Field. Perhaps they are trying to say the productive area of the Antelope Field extends all the way to the fault that separates the two structures. So we could either drill one of the appraisal wells on the high just north of the fault to see if the Antelope field extends that far or we could drill the Exploration well on the north side of the fault to test the Antelope structure and then drill a side track hole directionally across the fault to test the Antelope Deep structure.

Or we could just drill two wells from the same surface location to the desired bottom hole location. Or (here is my final scenario) drill the first well vertically to see if the Antelope Block is productive. If the well is productive drill the second well from the surface to test the Antelope Deep structure. If the first well is a dry hole in the Antelope Block then side track that well to test the Antelope Deep.

'petrengr1' pid='36207' datel Wrote:

In looking at http://www.interoil.com/iocfiles/documents/investorrelations/presentationanddocuments/2014/2014-01-13_Macquarie_Conference_FINAL.pdf slide 18 a little closer I now see that they have drawn in a localized high on the NORTH side of the fault that separates the Antelope Field from the Antelope Deep Prospect.  Maybe this is where we find the extension that can be in communication with the Antelope Field. Perhaps they are trying to say the productive area of the Antelope Field extends all the way to the fault that separates the two structures. So we could either drill one of the appraisal wells on the high just north of the fault to see if the Antelope field extends that far or we could drill the Exploration well on the north side of the fault to test the Antelope structure and then drill a side track hole directionally across the fault to test the Antelope Deep structure.

Or we could just drill two wells from the same surface location to the desired bottom hole location. Or (here is my final scenario) drill the first well vertically to see if the Antelope Block is productive. If the well is productive drill the second well from the surface to test the Antelope Deep structure. If the first well is a dry hole in the Antelope Block then side track that well to test the Antelope Deep.

Pet- Good am to you. I had printed slide 18 for my(growing) IOC file,so I went back and looked it over again.Keen eye,sir. I now see the localized high that I had overlooked.Your thoughts on future drilling plans are great. Please keep up your help to our board.