Just going back to your comments the other night, I can only tell you what I have read and I guess you can draw your own conclusions as to what adds up and what does not.
Some of the information I have researched seems to be at odds with other bits of information that I uncover.
So to start with here are some stats from:
The Australian Petroleum Accumulation Report 9, Canning Basin, WA
Department of Primary Industries and Energy Bureau of Resource Sciences, Petroleum Research Branch.
Not the full report as info on location Longitude Latitude Operator etc etc seem to be surplus to requirements for the purposes of this discussion, however you can read all the information on pages 29 and 68 & 69
Discovery Well: Yulleroo – 1
Date total depth reached: 13 Nov 67 Number of wells: Exploration and appraisal: 1 Structure: Anticline: trending WNW-ESE striking under flat Mesozoic sediments Areal Closure: 102.4 sq km Reservoir Units: A total of 2 petroleum-bearing unit(s)
Petroleum-Bearing Unit No 1: Laural Formation Contents: Gas Shows Formation Laural Formation Age: Early Carboniferous Lithology: Sandstone: massive: siltstone with interbedded shales and carbonates Depth (mSS): 2,245 Porosity: Up to 11% Permeability: 0.5mD Temperature (C): 121 Max BHT
Petroleum-Bearing Unit No 2: Unknown Formation Contents: Gas Age: Early Carboniferous Depth (mSS): 3,339 Temperature (C): 121 Max BHT
TEST DATA FROM THE DISCOVERY WELL (Yulleroo 1):
DST # 2, 3,216.9 m. Unknown Formation Misrun.
DST # 3, 3,216.9 m. Unknown Formation Recovered 6 barrels of gas cut mud.
DST # 5, 3,216.9 m. Unknown Formation Recovered 15 barrels of gas cut mud.
DST # 1, 3,243.1 m. Unknown Formation Misrun
DST # 8, 3,341.9 m. Laurel Formation Recovered 0.28 cubic meters of gas (est. rate 14 m3/hour), 5 barrels of water and 6 barrels of mud.
DST # 4, 3,346.1 m. Laurel Formation Misrun
DST # 6, 3,395 m. Unknown Formation Recovered 6 cubic meters gas (56 m3/hour), 5 barrels water and 10 barrels mud.
DST # 7, 3,395 m. Unknown Formation Flowed 6 cubic meters gas at approximate rate of 56 cubic meters hour.
The gas mix contained the following gases. (See page 29 for % and the Type of Analysis)
So to sum up the above, while they state there are Two Petroleum Bearing Units, Unit # 1 at 2,245 mSS (the Laurel Formation) and Unit # 2 at 3,339 mSS (the Unknown Formation) all the DSTs seem to come from the same level (the lower level).
Both the Unknown Formation and Laurel Formation are mentioned from this same level.
Lithology, Porosity and Permeability are quoted for the shallower level while none of those details are quoted for the deeper level, which had the DSTs.
There is obviously quite a bit of information missing as well as conflicting information and maybe somebody like PC43 with better resources and knowledge could shed some light on that.
Doodlebugger, on your point about the condensate target at Yulleroo and ARCs Market Cap.
Not only Yulleroo but also Ungani, Valhalla and Pictor have recoverable targets that are in excess of ARC’s current Liquids Reserves and Utopia and Stokes Bay are below, however to quote PC43 - The key for ARQ in the northern Canning basins is to find a structures that are relativity unfaulted with a producible reservoir.
I have put together a few of the statements/articles/comments etc etc from various readings which give a range of opinions on what might be out there if anything at all.
ARC states that the Threshold for commercial reserves of gas in the Canning are less than 500 BCF with the potential to deliver + 100 TJ/day for + 15 years.
ARC however seem to have a lower estimated condensate yield for Yulleroo than Kimberly Oil had (as per a quote on their web site) and I say had, not have as they are essentially history now and I guess you could call it residual opinion.
Kimberly quoted the following:
Hydrocarbon-in-place estimates for Yulleroo are 2 trillion cubic feet of gas. 70-150 million barrels of condensate.
The Yulleroo discovery is 70 km east of Broome and is one of several large anticlines which are prospective for the discovery of gas and condensate within the area.
Yulleroo-1 flowed 50,000 cubic feet of gas per day in 1967, prior to the acquisition of a grid of fair seismic quality over the area.
Analysis of the gas showed a yield of 69 barrels condensate per million cubic feet. Ethane content is 9% and helium values were as high as 0.6%.
Current mapping suggests that the well was drilled below the gas-water contact of the of the Yulleroo structure.
Reservoir engineering analysis of the host sandstone bed suggests that it is capable of producing at least 2-2.5 million cubic feet of gas per day unstimulated.
The host sandstone bed is an obvious candidate for near-horizontal wells in which these production rates might reasonably be expected to be doubled or trebled.
Acidising and fraccing are likely to further improve productivity.
So I guess BlackGold there is an opinion on the potential benefits of horizontal drilling and fraccing.
Also here is an extract from:
Western Australian Oil & Gas Review 2006 (Revised Edition February 2007)
Extensive coring in this well identified 700 m of excellent seal, 50 m of wet gas-pay in a fairly poor reservoir and around 1,200 m of underlying source rock in the form of deep water marine shales with 4.5 per cent total organic carbon content and a large inferred aereal extent. In addition, more recent seismic data has shown Yulleroo-1 to be some 500 m down dip from the structural crest. The reservoir appears to be delta sand which improves in quality in the up-dip direction to the east and there are nine similar prospects within the permit.
The structure has the potential to contain over 1 Tcf of gas and 100 MMbbl of condensate. Also, there are eight similar structures in the vicinity. In addition to the Yulleroo anticline, these structures have the potential to contain in-place resources of several trillion cubic feet of gas and a considerable amount of petroleum liquids. Three of these structures have burial histories which suggest that they are more likely to host light oil rather than wet gas.
Gas in-place and recoverable gas ………….. two very different things. Still Kimberly Oil says the condensate yield tested at 69 bbls to a million cubic feet. Others seem to think yield is above and some below that test.
I guess one of the advantages that Yulleroo-2 has over a Wild-Cat is that they have some data on the gas mix and some data on the condensate yield, an estimate on the Gass Water Contact and if nothing else what the quality of the reservoir is at Yulleroo-1 even though it is considered poor.
This following link will take you to a Diagrammatic Crossection of the Yulleroo prospect. ARC say they have a much better quality set of diagrams, maps etc etc and that this is an old interpretation and as such somewhat un-reliable.
They probably do ………. However for reasons better known to themselves they have not made that available to their shareholders.
Doodlebugger and Blackgold you will probably tell me you have read this all before so its nothing new.
Anyhow I would be quite interested to hear some feed-back from either of you or anybody else in regard to anything about ARCs current drilling schedule as set out by them. Positive or Negative are both welcome.
MI
ARQ Price at posting:
0.0¢ Sentiment: Buy Disclosure: Held
