ANT #4 elevation

[Putncalls]

If you compare the reservoir volumes in the 2D maps with contour lines using trigonometry Getit, the western side of the new reservoir map has less volume. I think pet saw that and pointed it out.

[sageo]

If you compare the reservoir volumes in the 2D maps with contour lines using trigonometry Getit, the western side of the new reservoir map has less volume. I think pet saw that and pointed it out.

Put - Good explanation . I think that is exactly what Pet saw,and therefore said what he did. Nice to have such "sharp" brains on our mb !

[sageo]

Thanks for doing that research, Sageo! I noticed on the topo map slide (slide 11) that both Ant-4 and Ant-5 were shown lower than 1, 2, and 3. That is, they were off the crest. Slide 11 shows Ant-1, and Ant-3 on the crest. From topo maps in the past I thought Ant-5 was expected to be higher than the first three wells. Perhaps Pet can give us some clarity on that discrepancy.

 Thy- Also this past weekend, I found in my IOC files some older posts on Wahoo dating back over the years. When I print off some of these excellent  posts,I am not trying to violate anyone's pivicy,I just don't have most of you guy's computer skills to go back to certain bits of info that I would like to review. ( I know my "ignorance limit" so I just print it). Back to Wahoo........for you younger folks on the board, I strongly believe that if we(or Xom,Tot or whoever sneaks in with us) can successfully control the pressures in several Wahoo wells,that you will be pleasantly pleased in future years. From my reviews, this old,antiquated " geo person"  thinks the potential there is "eye popping". As  Hemi says "health and happiness " to you ( and hopefully ....my add .."longjevity" also !)

[sageo]

Thanks for doing that research, Sageo! I noticed on the topo map slide (slide 11) that both Ant-4 and Ant-5 were shown lower than 1, 2, and 3. That is, they were off the crest. Slide 11 shows Ant-1, and Ant-3 on the crest. From topo maps in the past I thought Ant-5 was expected to be higher than the first three wells. Perhaps Pet can give us some clarity on that discrepancy.

 Thy- Also this past weekend, I found in my IOC files some older posts on Wahoo dating back over the years. When I print off some of these excellent  posts,I am not trying to violate anyone's pivicy,I just don't have most of you guy's computer skills to go back to certain bits of info that I would like to review. ( I know my "ignorance limit" so I just print it). Back to Wahoo........for you younger folks on the board, I strongly believe that if we(or Xom,Tot or whoever sneaks in with us) can successfully control the pressures in several Wahoo wells,that you will be pleasantly pleased in future years. From my reviews, this old,antiquated " geo person"  thinks the potential there is "eye popping". As  Hemi says "health and happiness " to you ( and hopefully ....my add .."longjevity" also !)

Sorry - should be 'Privicy'.

[ArtM72]

If you compare the reservoir volumes in the 2D maps with contour lines using trigonometry Getit, the western side of the new reservoir map has less volume. I think pet saw that and pointed it out.

Put - Good explanation . I think that is exactly what Pet saw,and therefore said what he did. Nice to have such "sharp" brains on our mb !

On the other hand, I trust every volumetric chunk in the reservoir model used by GLJ has a probability factor assigned and it may be that we lost 10% of the chunks on the western side but  that loss was offset by the higher probabilities of gas containing chunks on the east.

Who knows?  Not us for sure, but I'll hang my hat on the graphic showing concept selection prior to the end of 2Q2015 coincideing with the end of A4 and A5 testing and well before A6 results are available.  That tells me those with access to real data believe there is a high likelihood by 2Q2015 two trains will be confirmed, with A6 to provide a more accurate initial resource payment and an indication whether E/A alone has the gas necessary for a third train.

Of course if one believes Triceratops, Bobcat and Raptor have gas they should be able to fuel at least another train, but Total is not (yet) a partner to those discoveries.

[Getitrt2]

Right on, Art.

[Getitrt2]

If you compare the reservoir volumes in the 2D maps with contour lines using trigonometry Getit, the western side of the new reservoir map has less volume. I think pet saw that and pointed it out.

I am well aware of how that works and that a lower A5 would mean lower volume, without your explaining it to me.  Did you use the trigonometry to calculate new volumes?!  I think Pet also said A6 is also indicated to be higher than A4 and that it appears "they might have moved the western boundary of the field to the west", as I said before, which could provide some offsetting increases to volumes.  Your trigonometry would apply to those also.

[Putncalls]

I'm starting to wonder if IOC officers realize that they showed the public that there is a ~500 billion cubic foot gas volume discrepancy between there current view of antelope and that of GLJ.

[Thylacine-2]

Put, the older drawings guesstimating what Antelope might look like were not what GLJ used for their work. And the drawing on slide 11 in the latest presentation, isn't what will be used for the new certification. There are reasons to drill appraisal wells you know.

[Putncalls]

The map is labeled "GLJ interpretation DEC 2009"?

http://www.interoil.com/iocfiles/documen..._FINAL.PDF