'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/documen..._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/documen..._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.