01-24-2012, 06:43 PM
In my first post in this string I gave you the wrong link, so I will correct it here.
“They are hedging their bets a little in the PR today where they said they expect the top of the carbonate reservoir to be 1500 feet above the water contact. In April of 2011 they presented” :
http://www.interoil.com/presentation/201..._Final.pdf chart 22.
This chart shows they expected to hit the top of the carbonate 1500 feet higher than the top of the carbonate at Bwata-1. Bwata-1 had 512 feet of gas column. Therefore Bwata-2, now called Triceratops-2, should have 2,012 feet of gas column.
Now their PR says “is predicted to penetrate the top of the carbonate reservoir approximately 1,500 feet higher than the gas water contact established in the Bwata-1 well.”
The PR to be issued when they hit the top of the carbonate will look much better if they can say “ we penetrated the top of the carbonate 500 feet higher than expected”.
“They are hedging their bets a little in the PR today where they said they expect the top of the carbonate reservoir to be 1500 feet above the water contact. In April of 2011 they presented” :
http://www.interoil.com/presentation/201..._Final.pdf chart 22.
This chart shows they expected to hit the top of the carbonate 1500 feet higher than the top of the carbonate at Bwata-1. Bwata-1 had 512 feet of gas column. Therefore Bwata-2, now called Triceratops-2, should have 2,012 feet of gas column.
Now their PR says “is predicted to penetrate the top of the carbonate reservoir approximately 1,500 feet higher than the gas water contact established in the Bwata-1 well.”
The PR to be issued when they hit the top of the carbonate will look much better if they can say “ we penetrated the top of the carbonate 500 feet higher than expected”.