InvestorsHub Logo
icon url

kownski

04/28/10 11:16 AM

#211680 RE: elsieCat #211673

Not when it is so close to producing wells. eom
icon url

wcamom

04/28/10 11:20 AM

#211684 RE: elsieCat #211673

that has been the thought in my head alll morning long...with todays technology...to go from what they "believed" to this...its a load of crap
icon url

mccir

04/28/10 11:25 AM

#211692 RE: elsieCat #211673

elsieCat, when I worked the oilpatch one in ten tries was the average for a good find. Offshore it was even higher. I don't know how exact the data is today in finding oil in deep offshore wells, but I would say one if eight tries would be a fair guess. The deeper you go on any exploratory well the greater the chances of not finding oil. Some here years ago were saying the find ratio was 50 -60 % I still find that hard to believe, but I have been out of the business 20 years.

I hope this helps,
ps: companies don;t usually give up if they think there really are vast amounts of oil in place on a lease.

mccir
icon url

Curious62

04/28/10 11:34 AM

#211699 RE: elsieCat #211673

Seismic data is used to identify structures. If enough information can be gathered regarding rock densities, rock types (and other info), it can sometimes be fine-tuned to "see" indications of gas. Oil and water do not have sufficient density contrasts to be distinguished. It works like an ultrasound. Its much simpler to get an clear ultrasound image because the precise densities, thickness and shape of the human body is known. When one explores with seismic data in a relatively unknown area, every variable necessary to create an image must be "guessed". With additional information (drilling, well logs, rock and hydrocarbons samples), the picture becomes more accurate.