$300m oil deal looks sealed, page-55

Evening AFF, Nic and interested others.

This is LNC related and doesn't need a General thread imo.

Words have been attributed to me that I have not written, so please feel have a re-read.

Coal formation is generally a terrestrial process and oil formation is generally a marine process and indeed requires the presence of mineralisation associated with a marine environment.

http://www.ems.psu.edu/~pisupati/ACSOutreach/Petroleum_2.html

My earlier posts definitely referred to coal and oil generally not being in close proximity ... and I still maintain this.

I could envisage geological unconformities where an older (deeper) marine deposition in which oil has formed or begun to form being uplifted and then overlain by terrestrial deposits which end up being coal ... but it is not the norm ... nor common imo ... it is possible the Dr Bond has an eye or nose for such coincident geological good fortune ... and the incidental opportunity it presents.

That being the case, UCG to extract CO2 for enhanced oil recovery is unlikely to be something replicated in a majority of depleted oil field around the globe. This could be moreso when one considers the arguments of how site selection (for coal/hydrogeological characterisation) is so critical for UCG success.

Another point I didn't mention yesterday is that conventional resevoir engineering has enhanced hydrocarbon recovery being phase related ... that is, gas for gas and liquid for liquid ... that is, CO2 should work well for enhanced gas recovery but a liquid would work better for enhanced oil recovery ... is the intention to compress CO2 to liquid form for EOR?

Regards
Dex