02-18-2012, 03:43 AM
Excellent analysis and writeup, supa. I have just some minor correction and comment.
Under Angle #3, second paragraph, I assume you meant $245 and about $325, probably a transposition error.
As I understand it, everyone should keep in mind that the 8.59 resource estimate is for the entire E/A formation, based on data from Elk 1 for the Elk field and Elk 4, Ant 1, and Ant 2 for the Antelope field (plus seismic); and the more wells you have in a formation, the more gas and liquids a firm can confirm or support as an estimate. Assuming a successful T2 that confirms a reef, it certainly seems it would increase the 4.59 current preliminary estimate; but even if the entire Triceratops/Bwata formation (not T2) is 2-4 times E/A, just the next well (T2) would not be enough I don't think for a resource to reflect all that in a formation estimate. That is one reason, in addition to increasing production capability, why IOC may decide to next drill a diagonal from the same general location to confirm further resource, which would be much faster and cheaper than stepping out and preparing a whole new location further away in a different direction next. The more wells and/or seismic (but especially wells) that confirm more size and pay in the formation, the bigger the resource estimate. Of course, I think that means also that more wells in E/A could further increase that resource estimate. Bottom line, a T2 discovery confirmation will be a huge plus, but I don't think we shall determine the total size of or gas in Triceratops/Bwata or get it all into a resource estimate just from T2 (plus T1 and B1, of course).
I am sure Pet could clarify and add significantly to my comments.
Under Angle #3, second paragraph, I assume you meant $245 and about $325, probably a transposition error.
As I understand it, everyone should keep in mind that the 8.59 resource estimate is for the entire E/A formation, based on data from Elk 1 for the Elk field and Elk 4, Ant 1, and Ant 2 for the Antelope field (plus seismic); and the more wells you have in a formation, the more gas and liquids a firm can confirm or support as an estimate. Assuming a successful T2 that confirms a reef, it certainly seems it would increase the 4.59 current preliminary estimate; but even if the entire Triceratops/Bwata formation (not T2) is 2-4 times E/A, just the next well (T2) would not be enough I don't think for a resource to reflect all that in a formation estimate. That is one reason, in addition to increasing production capability, why IOC may decide to next drill a diagonal from the same general location to confirm further resource, which would be much faster and cheaper than stepping out and preparing a whole new location further away in a different direction next. The more wells and/or seismic (but especially wells) that confirm more size and pay in the formation, the bigger the resource estimate. Of course, I think that means also that more wells in E/A could further increase that resource estimate. Bottom line, a T2 discovery confirmation will be a huge plus, but I don't think we shall determine the total size of or gas in Triceratops/Bwata or get it all into a resource estimate just from T2 (plus T1 and B1, of course).
I am sure Pet could clarify and add significantly to my comments.