'sageo' pid='37473' datel Wrote:
'geologydude' pid='37464' datel Wrote:
'Thylacine-2' pid='37462' datel Wrote:Indo, it's not a matter of the mechanics and processes of oil and gas formation being different. It's a matter of different kinds of targets. We aren't shooting at subtle highs in well explored basins where 3d gives such a great advantage. We are shooting at big reefs. Our situation is more like Texas in the 30s when we were shooting elephants. Or more like the situation in Kurdistan a few years ago. E2 was a delineation well. Pet could shed more light on the other wells you mention, if he has the inclination to get into what I think is a pretty meaningless discussion, :-), but I don't think any of those other wells were drilled into a big reefal structure like those we are targeting in the planned drilling program. We got lucky with Elk-1. And our understanding of the geology on our licenses has advanced tremendously since then. More significant than the kind of statistics you use is the common sense fact that all (100%) of the reefs we have drilled so far...Elk, Antelope, and Triceratops, have been good. And that the people that understand the situation best, Dave Holland and the experts MH has brought in, have selected our current targets.
Yours is the voice of reason here Thy. I agree whole heartedly. I would be surprised and disappointed if all of these wells don't prove up more gas. Overly optimistic...I don't think so. Holland and company have learned a great deal in the past decade. When you know what you are looking for on seismic, it is not so difficult to interpret HC containing structures accurately. We can't discount the experience and lesson learned here.
'geodude' -From one geo to another......I agree with your post ....(it is also mho!) GLTY.
Sageo...just to qualify my statements a bit...the structures are readily identifiable, although the question remains are they charged with gas. To Pet's fine comments, these structures must be sealed to trap the gas. I am betting they are as well.