Comments on Today's PR Triceratops-3 and Antelope -4 ST-1

[petrengr1]

I will try to analyze today’s Press Release for you but the information given is very limited .

Triceratops-3

It is common practice to flow a new well on about four different rates until the flowing tubing pressure has stabilized. They say the well was flowed “ over several 5 hour intervals” which seems to mean they flowed the well on several different choke sizes until the flowing tubing pressure stabilized at each rate.  The fact that it takes 5 hours for the pressure to stabilize probably indicates that the permeability is a bit low as compared to the Antelope wells. They do not tell us anything about the porosity so I will stick with what I previously estimated at 7-10% but of course this is just a wild guess based on previous wells. I assume they have given us only he best flow rate for both the gas and liquid i.e. 17.1 MMCFD and 200.3 barrels/day. They have previously reported liquids in barrels/MMCF so to put this in the usual nomenclature the liquid rate was 11.7 Bbl/MMCF. As far as I know IOC has never reported the reservoir pressure at Triceratops, as if it is a trade secret.  They might as well make it public since anyone interested in the field will require that information. I think they do not mention it because the pressure is slightly below a normal pressure gradient. Since they will not tell us I will guess it to be about 2,750 psi at the TD  of a drill depth of 2,090 meters (6857 feet). I hope it is higher than that when they eventually tell us. They also forgot to mention the flowing tubing pressure but I would estimate the flowing tubing pressure to be about 475 psi  with a rate of 17.1 MMCFD and a choke size of  72/64” (1 1/8 inches) . We also do not know the tubing size but the friction pressure losses would be substantial at a rate of 17.1 MMCFD. So the flow rate was probably constrained by tubing size more than the surface choke. In other words this is about all the well is capable of producing through the tubing size being utilized.  They used to give us the absolute open flow potential so we could see if the well had much additional deliverability with a larger size tubing. We don’t get that information anymore either.

The only depth measurement they have given us it the depth of TD...2,090 meters drill depth. So they have not given us the depth of the top of the formation or the gas/water contact so we have no way of calculating the thickness of the gas column. Previous maps have indicated the gas/water contact to be at about -1,490 meters sub sea. Since we do not know the derrick elevation we cannot calculate an accurate drill depth for the gas water contact. I previously estimated the top of the formation to be at about 1,465 meters drill depth if the derrick floor elevation is the same as it was at Triceratops-2 (a wild assumption). With that assumption we should have about a 440 meter gas column if the gas/water contact is the same as Bwata-1 which is what IOC has previously indicated. With the information given in the press release I can not improve on that estimate.  I would like for them to give us all of the pressure, depth and porosity information (good or bad) as they did recently at Antelope. Did the well come in higher or lower than prognosis and what is the thickness of the gas column? Maybe we will get some of this information Monday or whenever they give another presentation.


Antelope-4 Sidetrack-1

I, like Sageo, over looked the small high spot southeast of Antelope-4 on  http://tinyurl.com/p5bttdy Slide 6. Antelope-4 came in at -1,911 meters sub sea. The post drill maps at the June AGM did not show this small high spot southeast of Antelope-4 http://tinyurl.com/q2lzmbq slide 15. The contour line of the small high southeast of Antelope-4 on slide 6 above is at -1,900 meters sub sea. Now they say that Antelope-4 Sidetrack-1 penetrated the top of the zone 36 meters higher than the original well so that means it came in (-1,911 - 36) or -1,875 meters sub sea which is even higher than the contour line shown on slide 6 southeast of Antelope-4. OilSearch has said the
Antelope-4 Sidetrack-1 is supposed to be drilled to a depth of 2,468 meters. If that is correct we will probably only reach about ½ km from the original well site at the bottom of the well. Again the IOC press release did not say at what depth they penetrated the top of the pay zone. I think the top of the pay zone is about ¾ of that ½ km or about 3/8 km of horizontal displacement from the original Antelope-4 well site. We should have about another 380 meters (1,244 ft) to drill after setting casing at the top of the pay zone. I would guess that the drill depth at the top of the zone is at about 2,000 meters.

[Palm]

Thanks Pet and I bet you are pretty close with a good bit of this. Am hearing that they don't have all of the data yet, but that it is a pretty tight formation. With their giving such limited info I'm setting my expectations to be close to what MH has stated and what was shown in presentations; approx 1T.

Any comment on the condensate number?

[petrengr1]

Thanks Pet and I bet you are pretty close with a good bit of this. Am hearing that they don't have all of the data yet, but that it is a pretty tight formation. With their giving such limited info I'm setting my expectations to be close to what MH has stated and what was shown in presentations; approx 1T. Any comment on the condensate number?

They didn’t say too much about condensate at Triceratops-2 but I did find a final report on the testing at http://tinyurl.com/lod6b89 page 14. Looks like they reported the upper zone at 16-17 Bbl/MMCF and the lower zone at 45-60 Bbl/MMCF but only 3 MMCFD. Also they did not report water which I think they produced because the tested interval included the gas/water contact in the lower zone. They showed Bwata-1 at 6.7 Bbl/MMCFD. The gas quality for LNG purposes seems to be better than Antelope as far as CO2 and hydrogen sulfide is concerned

So the condensate ratio is a bit lower at Triceratops-3 than it was at Triceratops-2 and Antelope.

[petrengr1]

I will try to analyze today’s Press Release for you but the information given is very limited .

Triceratops-3

It is common practice to flow a new well on about four different rates until the flowing tubing pressure has stabilized. They say the well was flowed “ over several 5 hour intervals” which seems to mean they flowed the well on several different choke sizes until the flowing tubing pressure stabilized at each rate.  The fact that it takes 5 hours for the pressure to stabilize probably indicates that the permeability is a bit low as compared to the Antelope wells. They do not tell us anything about the porosity so I will stick with what I previously estimated at 7-10% but of course this is just a wild guess based on previous wells. I assume they have given us only he best flow rate for both the gas and liquid i.e. 17.1 MMCFD and 200.3 barrels/day. They have previously reported liquids in barrels/MMCF so to put this in the usual nomenclature the liquid rate was 11.7 Bbl/MMCF. As far as I know IOC has never reported the reservoir pressure at Triceratops, as if it is a trade secret.  They might as well make it public since anyone interested in the field will require that information. I think they do not mention it because the pressure is slightly below a normal pressure gradient. Since they will not tell us I will guess it to be about 2,750 psi at the TD  of a drill depth of 2,090 meters (6857 feet). I hope it is higher than that when they eventually tell us. They also forgot to mention the flowing tubing pressure but I would estimate the flowing tubing pressure to be about 475 psi  with a rate of 17.1 MMCFD and a choke size of  72/64” (1 1/8 inches) . We also do not know the tubing size but the friction pressure losses would be substantial at a rate of 17.1 MMCFD. So the flow rate was probably constrained by tubing size more than the surface choke. In other words this is about all the well is capable of producing through the tubing size being utilized.  They used to give us the absolute open flow potential so we could see if the well had much additional deliverability with a larger size tubing. We don’t get that information anymore either.

The only depth measurement they have given us it the depth of TD...2,090 meters drill depth. So they have not given us the depth of the top of the formation or the gas/water contact so we have no way of calculating the thickness of the gas column. Previous maps have indicated the gas/water contact to be at about -1,490 meters sub sea. Since we do not know the derrick elevation we cannot calculate an accurate drill depth for the gas water contact. I previously estimated the top of the formation to be at about 1,465 meters drill depth if the derrick floor elevation is the same as it was at Triceratops-2 (a wild assumption). With that assumption we should have about a 440 meter gas column if the gas/water contact is the same as Bwata-1 which is what IOC has previously indicated. With the information given in the press release I can not improve on that estimate.  I would like for them to give us all of the pressure, depth and porosity information (good or bad) as they did recently at Antelope. Did the well come in higher or lower than prognosis and what is the thickness of the gas column? Maybe we will get some of this information Monday or whenever they give another presentation.


Antelope-4 Sidetrack-1

I, like Sageo, over looked the small high spot southeast of Antelope-4 on  http://tinyurl.com/p5bttdy Slide 6. Antelope-4 came in at -1,911 meters sub sea. The post drill maps at the June AGM did not show this small high spot southeast of Antelope-4 http://tinyurl.com/q2lzmbq slide 15. The contour line of the small high southeast of Antelope-4 on slide 6 above is at -1,900 meters sub sea. Now they say that Antelope-4 Sidetrack-1 penetrated the top of the zone 36 meters higher than the original well so that means it came in (-1,911 - 36) or -1,875 meters sub sea which is even higher than the contour line shown on slide 6 southeast of Antelope-4. OilSearch has said the
Antelope-4 Sidetrack-1 is supposed to be drilled to a depth of 2,468 meters. If that is correct we will probably only reach about ½ km from the original well site at the bottom of the well. Again the IOC press release did not say at what depth they penetrated the top of the pay zone. I think the top of the pay zone is about ¾ of that ½ km or about 3/8 km of horizontal displacement from the original Antelope-4 well site. We should have about another 380 meters (1,244 ft) to drill after setting casing at the top of the pay zone. I would guess that the drill depth at the top of the zone is at about 2,000 meters.

Triceratops-3

"The fact that it takes 5 hours for the pressure to stabilize probably indicates that the permeability is a bit low as compared to the Antelope wells. They do not tell us anything about the porosity so I will stick with what I previously estimated at 7-10% but of course this is just a wild guess based on previous wells."

Looks like I guessed too high on the porosity. MS reports from the Road Show that the porosity was 4% - 6%. To get 17 MMCFD they must have some fractures or a very long producing interval. They still have not revealed the depth to the top of the zone or the depth of the gas/water contact.

[sageo]

Pet - Thanks for your comments .I don't know why in the he- - they won't give us that data but it sure is frustrating to me ......almost borders on disgusting ( not quite, but very close) . Again ,thanks for all your input for our benifit .