InvestorsHub Logo
icon url

mrbojangle

07/02/18 4:06 PM

#19153 RE: KyOil #19151

My expectation is that Zion would provide a P10, P50 and P90 estimates like was provided in the Garb report
icon url

sdbosco

07/02/18 4:11 PM

#19155 RE: KyOil #19151

KyOil Just curious is there any way to (roughly) estimate the difference in oil recoverey (as a % increase) when comparing state of the art oil well drilling techniques of 1975 and the 2018 enhanced oil recovery drilling techniques ( fracking, longitudinal drilling, etc)?

Thanks
icon url

sdbosco

07/02/18 4:42 PM

#19162 RE: KyOil #19151

KyOil Sorry another question! related to your comment.

Zion took several side wall core samples during drilling, correct me if I'm wrong but they most likely, sent the samples out for testing for Total Organic Carbon. Assuming the samples were taken from the pay zones, Zion should have a pretty good idea of oil per (cubic cm or whatever the unit of measure) of the rock?

So if they know the oil content of the rock, depth of the pay zones, estimated size of the pay zones
(by 2d seismic data), they factor in an assumption that oil bering rock is pretty uniform in geo properties.

Zion can then calculate the rough amount of oil in the reservoir.

The point of the question is, Zion may not know if the well is commerically viable but they must have a pretty good (rough) idea how much oil is in the ground?

But Zion still needed to do flow testing to confirm the production flow, recoverable amount oil, etc?

Sound logical?
icon url

Badbrain88

07/02/18 8:58 PM

#19172 RE: KyOil #19151

KyOil given the two zones were so close that it became necessary to test them together, does this strike anything from your past experience what may or may not bode about this discovery? Does it signify anything at all from a geologic perspective? What's your hunch dude.