Very good argument, OldGeo! Perhaps only if you have very bad luck and you get due to the flow shale minerals mobilzed and a damage... But there are mitigations for such an unlucky case as well (reduce draw down with horizontal or slanted wells for example).
Regarding the following, "but when a company like Exxon or Shell visits the Galp data room and sees a diagram showing sharply decreasing flowing pressure p(wf) versus rate (q), this would explain why they walked away".
Galp announced that Mopane-2X showed the AVO-1 anomaly was in the same pressure regime as in the Mopane-1X discovery well, 8 km to the east, confirming a lateral extension. If the 14,000 Boe/d test conducted by GALP was in AVO-1, I am struggling to see a sharply decreasing flowing pressure (p(wf)) versus rate (q) unless the well test was not in the AVO-1 anomaly but in another reservoir with limited lateral extent. So, is there another reason why Exxon and Shell walked away after visiting the Galp data room?
OldGeo
PCL Price at posting:
1.7¢ Sentiment: Hold Disclosure: Held
A personalised tool to help users track selected stocks. Delivering real-time notifications on price updates, announcements, and performance stats on each to help make informed investment decisions.
(20min delay)