What is going on here with Bowland shale? Is Cuadrilla and AJL withholding important facts about Bowland shale from the shareholders and the market? are their repeated statement regarding the suitable fracturing characteristics of Bowland shale misleading or accurate?
Recent presentation and comments from British seismic experts and oversea experts are contradicting to recent statement from Cuadrilla CEO Mr Egan. On a number of occasions, this statement has been released and repeated by Cuadrilla press.
"The initial exploration programme also confirmed that the Bowland Shale formation fractures in a way that is typical of an excellent shale gas reservoir (compared to US play). A complex fracture network was generated in the shale and sand injected into the fractures stayed in place during flow back."
However, recent opinion by BGS expert suggested that Bowland shale does not behave like those in US play.
As reported here in replying to DrillOrDrop’s question about whether Cuadrilla could successfully exploit the Bowland shale without causing damaging tremors, Dr Baptie said:“The Bowland [shale] appears to behave differently from some other analogue reservoirs in the States – you appear to get some quite high seismicity rates.“To truly understand the hazard we just need more observational data.”Dr Baptie said the seismicity caused by Cuadrilla was “way too small” to cause structural damage”. But his comments on the need for more fracking data have angered opponents of Cuadrilla’s activities in Lancashire.
https://drillordrop.com/2019/09/26/more-fracking-needed-to-understand-risk-earthquake-expert/#comments
The question for long-term holders is why the contradictory opinions. If Cuadrilla statement of claims that Bowland shale rock is fractured so well (which is consistent with the expert's comment on the high rates of micro-seismic activities) then why there is no gas flow and no flaring?
Any thoughts or comments?
Add to My Watchlist
What is My Watchlist?
