The 170 BCF per m was ultimately derived from the original Mobil estimates for the Upper Angwa (screenshot below which I’m sure you’ve seen before).
And the 25% net to gross that I used was a bit misleading. This wasn’t applied to the total gross interval with hydrocarbon shows in the Upper Angwa which was reported on 3-Jan-2023 as 900m. It was applied to the gross interval of “potential hydrocarbon bearing zones” of 225m reported on the 23-Jan-2023. Which you would expect has already excluded the majority of shale seal layers and source rock from the gross interval within the alternating member of the UA. So in reality 25% is very conservative in this scenario. It’s more likely that your 10% / 15% / 25% of the total gross 900m interval is more realistic and will give higher numbers which will offset your comments about 170 bcf/m being on the high side.
Mobil’s numbers FYI…
IVZ Price at posting:
15.0¢ Sentiment: None Disclosure: Held
