sp for an uncommercial flow? , page-87

listerine,

No doubt - but D&M have no more idea whether this will work than anybody else. Consultants, even the top-rated ones like D&M, are not a magic pill for geological uncertainty. They simply cannot be experts across every play, especially unproven ones. Then there is potentially a big communication gap between the complicated technical reports produced by consultants and the management of the company who need to make decisions based off them. In my experience, management try to boil down a very complicated geological situation into a simple explanation, a couple of Powerpoint slides. I'm not saying that's what happening with Orica - just that assuming the play must be good because Orica signed up for it is a very dangerous assumption to make!

Boxbrigade,

Yes TD of Paning-2 was 3180m. I hold SXY but I'm not sure what their plans to go back are. I would say it's on the back burner over conventional targets like Hornet, particularly since SXY appear to have high condensate and low CO2 in their tight gas. The coals are likely to be effectively zero condensate and high CO2.

If they do decide to try again I guess they would probably need to try a lateral. I personally feel these deep coals are going to be mostly too tight for economic flow rates alone. If you can put a frac into them and get 100 or 200 Mscfd out of them as one of a 10-stage frac where the others are into sands, I think they have potential, because they could just about flow forever. So you'd get a shale-type production curve where you get 5 MMscfd or whatever and it all comes out in a rush, and you pay off your well in the first year, and then it declines to almost nothing but the coals keep flowing and just pump out 200 Mscfd for 20 years.

But you need the sands to get that initial flow.

At any rate, STX need to do much better than SXY. I hope they can do it!