Lidsey Oil Field. Photo: Lidsey Oil Watch
Angus Energy has announced initial flow rates of 40 barrels of oil per day at its horizontal production well at Lidsey in West Sussex.
Five months ago, Angus predicted a sustained 400 barrels a day at Lidsey (interview with IG Analysis).
In November 2016, Xodus forecast a base flow rate in year one of 279 barrels a day, tailing off to 77 barrels a day in year 10.
In a statement this morning, the company said production from the Great Oolite section of Lidsey-X2 was “below expectations”.
The Angus share price has fallen sharply on the news. It closed last night at 26.625p. At the time of writing it was 16.25p, down more than 38%.
This is the second piece of disappointing news for oil production in the Weald Basin this week. On 15 November 2017, UK Oil and Gas Investments plc announced that initial flow tests from the KL1 layer at its Broadford Bridge site suggested this zone would not be commercially viable without reservoir stimulation. UKOG has repeatedly said it would not use hydraulic fracturing in the Weald.
“Hole in production tubing”
Last year, Angus predicted in a presentation to investors Lidsey would produce about 300 barrels a day.
This morning, the company said it was “examining evidence that suggests a partial flow reduction is the result of a hole in the production tubing, therefore not allowing the well to be fully drawn down”.
It added that the initial flow rates had “potential for increased yield”.
“The company is conducting a thorough study to optimise and enhance production levels.”
Managing director, Paul Vonk, said:
“Even with these initial flow rates, Lidsey-X2 provides commercial production and cash flow. We will continue to optimise production from the Great Oolite reservoir at Lidsey as we work to increase flow rates and we look forward to developing its additional reservoirs to enhance long run value for our shareholders.”
The original well at the site, Lidsey-X1, was producing an average of 25 bopd before it was shut in on 31 Jan 2016. Angus said this well would resume production and was expected to achieve 15-20 bopd.
The company added that it would submit an addendum to its field development plan to the Oil and Gas Authority. This would seek to begin production appraisal in the Kimmeridge and Oxford layers at Lidsey.
Xodus predictions for Lidsey-X2
Predictions by Xodus in Angus AIM admission document, 7 November 2016 http://www.angusenergy.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/Angus-Energy-AIM-Admission-Document-7.11.2016.pdf
Categories: Industry
DRILL OR DROP? 
In order to increase production in the original well it was perforated slightly shallower (and deeper) but there was no production increase. They’ve now drilled a horizontal well in this shallower interval??? The lack of increase may not be due to a hole.
PS. I don’t remember any protests in 1987 when they acid washed and fracced the well.
PPS
As the original well was flowing 10bopd with 70% water cut, getting a four fold increase with a horizontal well is actually pretty good :).
Well Sherwulfe, as usual I was stating what was the reality and can easily be verified against the share prices reported. It is yourself who posts around a subject you obviously do not understand. However, keep it going. Your inability to examine the issue but a desire to attack individuals with nothing factual to support that, just shows that the antis have very little left. If you want to show you have no interest in facts, science and economics that, of course, is your choice, and I am sure it will fit with your group. But, by so doing you will cause damage to the antis generally.
Good to see I am causing you some concern.
No concern to me Martin, I don’t invest in scam investments. You post anything apart from reality. Anyone can state an obvious possibility but only those who have incite can see the truth.
‘a desire to attack individuals’ ? do you mean you? No so Martin, only your words.
‘with nothing factual to support that’ is that the kettle calling the pan black?
‘just shows that the antis have very little left’ you think this blog reflects the antis? This is just an exchange of words. Unlike actions which speak much louder; those of which are just in the preliminary stages.
If you want to show you have no interest in facts, science and economics that, of course, is your choice, and I am sure it will fit with some of your group and by so doing you have caused damage to the anti antis generally.
So, investors on Friday could have achieved a profit of 25%, today it is 12.5%. Not my view, but reality. Anyone can check the price history that Ruth posted and take it forward from there.
If you also looked at the previous trading history for shares in this company there has not been large trading since the price was down around 10p, not that long ago. Yes, there will be a few who bought in since then and are now showing a decline in value but the majority, the long term holders, will still be showing a profit and if you look at numbers of shares bought last Friday, you can easily see that many added to their investment, or new investors came in and will have probably achieved a gain over 30%. Not a “possibility”, but many have “seen the truth.” Reality.
Missing, or avoiding the point as usual, Martin