10 days wireline logging prior to determining which (if any) Nanushuk zone to production test.
With all the danger and associated caveats that go with a rank amateur's interpretation of where we are (below ground) and what that might indicate (above ground), I am more than encouraged with where this may be going. Here is why.
From what I can determine....from reading around....is that a standard open hole wireline logging - of about 4300' relatively vertical open hole, does not take more than a day or so of time...perhaps only half a day.. Some variation of time depending on what tools are sent down, but a typical triple-combo module times appear pretty rapid. It also appears that some oil service companies have methods of even faster logging than the established triple combo. (I will put reference links at the end). Of course this does not include pre-cursor time of pulling drill string out of hole, which we are told (by inference) would be complete by now.
So why the 10 days? IMO this is all linked to the fact that for each JV partner sees Winx as a means to an end and as such has optimal value to the partners if it can be sold off sooner rather than later. Even if one or more JV partners wanted to retain some finger in the pie...they would still need to see a major player join the fray to take this towards production (in the success scenario, of course). So, how do you try and get the most
juice (ie maybe some 2P reserves around well head, more sizeable contingent resource confirmation, and increase confidence on remaining prospective resource on the Western Blocks acreage) from a single
squeeze (ie the Winx-1 programme this current AK winter, prior to suspension - in best case scenario)
. In essence, avoiding the need (hence time and money) for a later squeeze to improve the land value.
But we know that we are only production testing one Nanushuk zone ((if any)...which could leave value on the table from other nanushuk zones and Torok zones, unless we can get some insight above and beyond what a standard wireline logging exercise would yield...but not as time consuming and costly as a production test in each net pay zone of interest. I understand that the only thing preventing multiple zones being production tested is the time we have before we need to get off the Tundra. Enter MDT. (link below)
As I understand it, an MDT (depending on what modules are deployed), is all about a) testing the quality of the fluids in a pay zone; b) in getting a more accurate reading of the reservoir pressure; and c) in getting an accurate assessment of the permeability of the reservoir rock in the pay zone. As a layperson, it would sound to me that this gives some pretty useful additional info to prop up the value of the pay-zones determined to be commercial but not production tested. Right?
I don't know how long it takes
to MDT a payzone and I don't know how many pay zones of interest have been identified in the Nanushuk and the Torok (multiples is more than 2 in each). And of course we have no idea if they plan to MDT multiple zones. But given the 10 days duration....I'm thinking it is highly likely. And given the possible value of additional insight and the desire to dress of our sale value....it may be a "no-brainer". However, it is only a no-brainer if there has been genuine encouragement derived from multiple pay zones. Which we are advised there has been. Otherwise the money would be better reserved for a rainy day...and they could proceed rapidly on the originally planned timeline...with a week (or more if no zone are of genuine interest) of rig time savings.
Instead it appears that we are trying to get as much juice as we can from this single, but lengthier squeeze. I am finding it to be a challenge to be measured in my optimism.
All IMO and GLTA.
_____________
Some of the links referenced above...are below. I have only referenced Schlumbereger as I find their brochures very informative for a lay person such as myself - and for no other reason. The actual company used by the JV partners on Winx-1 are unknown to me, but the tools would be pretty much equivalent, from my understanding.overview of wireline logging -
https://www.slb.com/-/media/Files/resources/oilfield_review/defining_series/Defining-Logging.pdf?la=en&hash=F84DF932706DCCD4B2D3A80991F2A07D18CC3BE3some options for types of wireline logging combo's depending on needs of the operator -
https://www.slb.com/services/characterization/petrophysics/wireline/platform.aspx-
https://www.slb.com/~/media/Files/evaluation/brochures/wireline_open_hole/petrophysics/platform/platform_express_br.ashxMDT -
https://www.slb.com/~/media/Files/evaluation/brochures/wireline_open_hole/insitu_fluid/mdt_brochure.pdf
(20min delay)
