Thread Rating:
  • 3 Vote(s) - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
EWT is not what Short's say it is
#21
This IPI agreement http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1...xv99w9.htm
was written in 2005. So what was IOC thinking back in those days. They were looking for shallow oil as I wrote about in http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1...xv99w9.htm on April 17, 2013. They were running seismic at the Puri, Elk and Moose prospects. They had discovered low pressure oil in the limestone at Moose and they knew about the oil that had been previously produced at Puri-1.

I think they were thinking that they would discover some shallow oil and they wrote this agreement in such a way that IOC and the partners were prepared, if they made an oil discovery, to drill up to four more appraisal wells, put them on production and ship the oil down the river to the refinery. Note the Puri, Elk and Moose prospects were fairly close to the Purari River. This probably explains their use of the term “Extended Well Test” as they may have intended to build an Extended Well Test Facility as described in the following paragraph pulled from my post above:

“There is another way the term “Extended Well Test” is sometimes used. When the product has a market available, Companies will sometimes build a small production
facility known as an “Extended Well Test Facility” so that production from the first few wells can be brought on production and sold.
This allows the Company to bring some production on early for the financial benefits of the sale of the product without the cost of building the complete full field production facility. This also gives them additional data on how the wells perform and whether or not the production or flowing pressure declines over time. This
information may be useful in the design of the full size field production facility.”
Reply

#22
The narrow EWT definition in the IPI Agreement provides IOC flexibility on how to proceed/commit with IPI partners upon a petroleum pool find. The IPI agreement also obligates IOC to meet all PNG Gov't requirements, not limited to the 1998 O&G Act.

The EWT definition in this IPI Agreement defines 'subsequents works' and allows IOC to use their discrimination as to which subsequent works they pursue to quantify a field. Ant-2 horizontal drilling was an optional subsequent work. The case short bloggers make that IOC is 'hiding something' with E/A by not performing any of a number of 'subsequent works' options, including an EWT (flow test) after success at E/A is rubbish.
The initial plan of E/A gas recycling while stripping condensates would fit your description of an 'Extended Well Test Facility" I'd say Pet.
Thanks for the added info.
Reply



Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)