crux of the matter, page-16

Hi SE

Yep I did see the proportional distribution. IMO the reserves may well b on the upper side.

With reserve estimates et al, one needs to look at the basin area, thkness, porosity & HC saturation & some constants.

Think I've posted these before, but nevertheless worth doing it again.

1) Assuming an extremely conservative 5 sq km area for L-1, with 20% porosity, 80% gas saturation, 165m net thkness, the GIP itself is around 1.93 tcf. Throw in a 20% recovery this comes down to 773 bcf. Apply NXS's share (say 15%)to arrive to their net share of the reserve.

2) If the area is bigger, say 10 sqkm, then GIP is 3.8tcf.

3) Should Libra & Auriga b related but bisected by a fault then the overall area goes up & so does the GIP.

IMO that is a dilemma they are faced with. Especially with the available seismic data for Auriga, one could establish the continuity of the pattern witnessed at Libra-1 pre-drill, howevr they havent drilled in that part yet, so the overall picture would well b much bigger then anticipated.

Note, these are my estimates only.

Most companies use few more variables to arrive to the final figure estimates. However the fundamentals never change.

cheers