FWIW this is what I’m reading from announcements;- initially...

FWIW this is what I’m reading from announcements;

- initially hoped for a free flowing well
- too much water loading has killed the well (i.e. water influx from reservoir has a static head which exceeds reservoir gas pressure, thus stopping gas travelling to surface). Note that this water is not a “water table”. It is very, very undesirable for a wellbore to communicate with water tables. And highly regulated in Aus to prevent that sort of wellbore communication. Presume similar we’ll integrity is required in Poland
- nitrogen lift in the hope to bring fluid to surface and allow gas to free flow. Didn’t work.
- well shut-in in the hope that there will be sustained pressure build after time from some gas in the reservoir making its way into the wellbore. Presumably monitoring STHP and BHP (if there is a bottom hole gauge)

This well is now a candidate for artificial lift (AL). AL comes in the form of either. PCP, jet pump, ESP or rod pump (beam pump or hydraulic rod). These technologies all require on site power. You select the tech based on water inflow rates (permeability of the reservoir) and reliability/availability/flexibility required. You want to be able to reduce bottom hole pressure by removing the water and allowing gas to flow up the well bore. CSG or deep coal are examples.

I’ve been heavily involved in this kind of project in a past life. What it means is;
- more cost to the project to produce the gas
- a change in the well/field economics, and potentially it becomes uneconomic
- a longer timeframe to get gas to market due to the dewatering process

The project isn’t dead, the approach just needs to be changed.

note: I’m not familiar with this geology so there could be factors precluding the use of AL.

it is hugely disappointing to be caught in the downtrend over the last few weeks.