Ann: Alameda-1 Drilling Update, page-69

First 69 Last

Share
Profile

Follow
Rocketa

44 Posts.

16

20/10/21

13:10

Post #: 56937005
Share

Originally posted by VOGC: ↑

Hi All,

Just my thoughts on todays release (all IMO but have an oil & gas exploration background so hope my thoughts may assist others):

Cheers
VOGC

In Summary:
(Slide following show calculations and assumptions etc.)

Potential net pay:
"Unfortunately, poor hole conditions precluded the acquisition of valid wireline data over ~290 metres including intervals with some of the most promising oil shows observed while drilling. Based on similar intersected lithologies, additional pay may exist in these intervals."
Potential net pay from the logged 415m zone and unlogged 290m zone (but which oil shows were recorded over while drilling and has similar lithology (mud log information) - so IMO low risk of NOT containing some net pay)
- porosity cut-off of 12% = 82m (with potential average thicknesses of 4.4m)
- porosity cut-off of 9% = 170m (with potential average thicknesses of 9m)
At this stage of evaluation with potentially 82m logged pay & very low risk pay (mudlogging shows & similar lithology) & with average thicknesses of 4.4m this is an excellent result, and on the basis of the 5% Recovery Factor (RF) historically used in this region I would feel that ~170m of potential net pay is possible.

Permeability:
"Logs also provided positive indications of permeability in those sections of the well bore."
The above comment is about as good as you could expect from the initial logging run, but together with Marti-2's oil recovery on test and oil in the drilling mud / over the shakers (described in previous MAY ASXs) this provides further encouragement for adequate permeability - especially when regionally the RF is a very low 5% - which for porosities in the 9 to 12% range implies to me low permeability reservoirs.

U1 Objective:
"The Alameda 1 well has intersected a significant net thickness of log-interpreted oil pay in the upper part of the secondary objective for the well, even while using conservative input parameters."At this stage bodes well for production test potential of U1 objective.

Expand

Thanks VOGC FOR all of your input, it’s been very informative. I’m a long term holder but first post on May thread. A couple of questions I have is how do you arrive at thicknesses of 4.4mts and 9.1 mts for 12% and 9% porosities respectively? Also the COS of U1 15%, N 23% and Alameda 32%. Is this COS cumulative or does it refer to each prospect separately? For example if U1 and N targets are dusters is the cos for Alameda by itself 32%? Hope these questions don’t appear too naive. Cheers.

MAY Price at posting: 2.6¢ Sentiment: None Disclosure: Held
6 Upvote

1 Great analysis

Reply

Top Stories

MKT

The ASX can overlook its Telecomm small-caps. Here’s one diversified brand with an international footprint

IRX

InhaleRX snags $38.5M in funding from VC biotech funder Clendon

MTH

Mithril's drilling in Mexico picks up silver at 997g/t, gold at 28g/t

M4M

Macro, Norden set up transport solutions initiative for West Pilbara

SNX

Sierra Nevada raises $2M for silver exploration at Blackhawk

SWP

Swoop lobs $18M offer at microcap telecom Vonex – in which it holds 19.9%

What's causing the cost-of-living crisis, and how to navigate it

TLG

Talga Group wins key permit for flagship graphite mine in Sweden

NVU

Nanoveu surges 10% after benchmark testing for new AI chip begins

Week 42 Wrap: HotCopper's top picks; new ASX 200 record; world yawns at war