Ann: Re-validation of Proof of Concept , page-3

Yep. All of those I would think chewy.

If I was sitting in the chair at GDY I think I would have been very concerned how "the incident" would have affected the views of all share holders,large and small.
Realistic and reasonably informed parties would have seen how the job had actually been well done but the material specified for the bore pipe has proven inadequate and susceptible to hyrogen embrittlement in the environment.
Not the same but sort of like corrosion.

No doubt the correct material to resist this will be more expensive but rest assured will be specified in future.
Who to blame for this, if anyone, I don't know but it has taken a long time over the whole project to manifest itself.
The prolonged time period of operation,(6 weeks), for the circulation test would seem to be the new factor that resulted in the problem being exposed.

Innaminka would be ablaze at night long ago if it weren't for this.
There will be some revision from the design dept. on the future wells but the concept will be essentially the same and progress resume shortly.
What needs to be done about the previously drilled wells is the other remaining problem. Lights will have been burning through the night I would say as this is resolved.

So yes. I think the move to have the excellent results of the Circulation Test reviewed and verified by the independent body was the smart thing to do to isolate the
metalurgical problem from the proof of concept tests and overall viability of the process.

geojac


.