co2 and chemical flooding

The company has not given us any idea about what is holding up the CO2. Because it has been such a protracted process I believe it is available but at a price.

If it wasn't available they would have been out of their minds getting the EORI and Ryder Scott reports commissioned.

So what do we know.

There are several sources of the CO2.

There are CO2 pipelines both planned and available close by.

So what is the problem? It must be price. If you were selling CO2 to a company that requires it to make a substantial change in that companies fortunes you have the power to say "take this price or leave your oil in the ground".

Thus the chemical flooding mentioned in the quarterly report.

ELK now can say.

"We do have an alternative to getting the oil out of the ground. If the chemical flooding proves successful you, the CO2 provider" now no longer have us over the barrel. In fact, there are quite a few companies in a similar situation to ourselves and chemical flooding may be all they need. So stick your CO2 where it fits and see how you are going to get rid of it now."

What would the CO2 vendors response be then?



Cheers Bungi2