Below is some comparable information for Venus, Mopane, Oryx and...

Below is some comparable information for Venus, Mopane, Oryx and Hyrax. It uses available data on original hydrocarbons in place, recoverable hydrocarbon resources, field/prospect/lead areas km² and original-hydrocarbon-in-place density (barrels of oil per square kilometre). Original hydrocarbon-in-place density (barrels of oil per km²) is in part a reflection of vertical hydrocarbon net pay thickness. Interestingly, Venus and Mopane hydrocarbon-in-place densities are similar. Venus is said to have thick reservoir between 80-120m. Mopane announcements only state significant light oil columns with no actual figures. Although working back from field area and original oil in place, with the calculated hydrocarbon-in-place density, Mopane possible has oil columns in the 50 - 100m range but this is only a guesstimate.

Based on the best-case numbers provided by PCL, Oryx and Hyrax have an original hydrocarbon-in-place density (barrels of oil per km²) of around 3.5 to 4.5 million barrels per km² translating into significantly less net pay thickness than Venus or Mopane, possibly around 20-40m.

Based on the high-side case numbers provided by PCL, Oryx and Hyrax have an original hydrocarbon-in-place density (barrels of oil per km²) of around 10.2 to 11.8 million barrels per km² translating into significantly more net pay thickness and possibly around 80m.

Sorry that this is fairly technical, but the bottom line tells me that net pay thickness assumptions at Oryx and Hyrax are the biggest uncertainly, which underpins hydrocarbon-in-place density (barrels of oil per km²) which in turn is manifest in the large range in volume from the best case to high side case. I am unsure what PCL can do reduce this range, with Venus and Mopane providing discovery data points to tie back to.











OldGeo