Stanton Scams? EFTI/USSE/USSP/USEI/OSSG

[MorningLightMountain]

Convert 15 wells to BORS Pumping Units
and Test/Compare to Conventional Units
Final Technical Report
Reporting Period Start Date: September 1, 1999
Reporting Period End Date: March 31, 2000
Prepared by:
Walter B. North
RMC Consultants, Inc.
One West Third Street, Suite 1400
Tulsa, Oklahoma 74103-3519
February 4, 2003

http://www.osti.gov/bridge/servlets/purl/822312-NFkxNN/native/822312.pdf

(excerpts)

After some anecdotal evidence, coupled with hard input from the new manufacturer of
the machines, it was determined that the first generation units, manufactured by a
company with little or no experience in oil field application, did not have the rigorous
quality control measures or production specifications necessary to produce machines that
were durable, reliable, and would function as intended in the field. The cost to retrofit
and upgrade the original units to improve reliability was cost prohibitive. As a result of
this realization, it was decided that the only way possible to properly test the technology
would be to purchase and install new generation units. Due to the cost to purchase the
new generation units, the older units were removed from service, placed in storage, and
the project was terminated.

The operational problems were mostly related to the durability of the various components
under oil field operating conditions such as inadequate mechanical, electrical, and
electronic design for rough service, extended operation, and severe weather conditions.
During the course of the demonstration project, it further appeared that the producing
formation lacked sufficient reservoir energy and/or favorable oil properties to mobilize
and displace oil from the formation into the well bore in order to recharge the oil column
in the well. The BORS Lift units were then moved to a second lease which appeared to
have more favorable WTI quality oil properties. Eight of these units were reported to
have been installed and placed in operation on the second lease, however, operational
difficulties continued. It was determined that the units were inadequately designed and
would need to be replace by improved second generation units. Due to the lack of success
with the first generation units and the extra cost to replace them with the redesigned units,
the operators decided not to continue with the project and the project was terminated at
that point.

Conclusions
The first generation BORS Lift units as delivered from the manufacturer and used in this
field demonstration project were not sufficiently durable enough for oil field production
application. Although the technology was invented and developed by inventors who had
some oil field experience, the units were manufactured by a manufacturer with no
background or experience in oil field operations. The units did not have the rigorous
quality control measures or production specifications necessary to produce machines that
were durable, reliable, and would function as intended in the field.

Although the demonstration project produced little tangible results in and of itself, the
lessons learned and the operational exp erience gained provided invaluable information to
the inventors and to the succeeding manufacturer. Using the feedback and experiences
from the field, following generations of BORS Lift units incorporated design changes and
renovations which appear to have significantly improved their performance.
Success of subsequent generation BORS Lift units in field operations has been reported
by Regent Energy Corporation (Reference 1 , December 2001; reference 2, October
2001; and reference 3, September 2001), Rocky Mountain Energy Corporation
(Reference 4, October 2002), and Renco Energy (Reference 5, April 2000; and reference
6, May 2000).