Saltfleetby sidetrack completed

Angus Energy has announced it has completed the new sidetrack well at its Saltfleetby gasfield in Lincolnshire.

Drilling at Saltfleetby, 8 February 2022. Photo: Angus Energy

The well, called SF7v, reached 2,746m into the Westphalian ID reservoir, the company said today, with a 4.5 inch liner to that depth.

In a statement to investors, Angus said well clean-up operations would be carried out in mid-March when coiled tubing equipment became available.

Flow testing would then follow and gas would be exported from 1 April 2023, the company said.

Angus said the sidetrack had been drilled alongside what was previously the best-producing well in the Saltfleetby field. The company said it was confident the new well would be “a successful producer”.

Route of new sidetrack at Saltfleetby. Image: Angus Energy

The company added that commissioning the second compressor began last week. The unit would be ready before 1 April, it said.

11 replies »

  1. Excellent work to get slotted liner in hole to TD without blockage/collapse

    Clean it up and let it flow – more homegrown gas for UK consumers with no CO2 transport emissions

  2. The fairytale of “homegrown gas for UK consumers” has been blown apart. We all know it gets sold on a global market at global prices.

  3. At $7 or $47, Alex?? $2.50 or $13??

    You and your friends may know it, but others who do some research know there is no such thing as a global market for gas. Otherwise, the above prices were/are a mirage? Comments from major European manufacturers and where they will have to relocate investment are a mirage?

    Additionally, how is a windfall tax gathered and distributed? I will give a clue to our senseless politicians, who sing the same song-not on profits made over the horizon. Looks as if energy price support likely to be extended for another three months. All together now-thank you oil and gas companies operating in the UK for helping to pay our energy bills and letting some heat and eat. More, please, with more investment into UK.
    The eat may not quite be achievable as same senseless individuals are diverting grain into fuel tanks and then will pontificate to the public, many struggling to eat themselves, they should supply funds to grain importing countries so they can afford to buy some of the increasingly expensive grain they need to keep their populations alive. All very Alice in Wonderland stuff, except it is actually happening and being glorified. as saving the planet!

    Spoke to a tourist from Canada yesterday, on her way back to a particularly cold winter. Suggested to her at least she would be able to enjoy the cheap Canadian energy costs. Her reply? “Until our idiot politicians throw them away, and they are doing their best to do so.”

    These “we’s” have a lot to answer for. Which is why they use the plural comfort blanket to deflect from their own individual responsibility.

    • Martin

      Surely the reason US prices are out of kilter with prices elsewhere is the limited export facilities the country has for the gas it produces. This means that the USA is not fully a part of the developing global gas market.

      As the US builds more export terminals, more gas is likely to flow out of the USA. US prices may rise closer to those elsewhere as companies are able to sell their products where they choose.

      Of course, if you believe in a free and open market, where extracted gas belongs to the companies, this is what you would (presumably) want to happen.

      The licencing of more export terminals could be what your tourist was referring to – there is unease over the issue in the USA

      • Except there is not much intention of building more export terminals, Paul. One was broken then it was fixed. They can already export a lot from the ones they have-and are doing so. It doesn’t make any difference how many terminals there are to the cost of converting to LNG, and shipping, then converting back again then pocketing the margins made within that process. None of which benefits an importing country. Benefits the exporting country who can then welcome the jobs flowing their way where industry requires low energy costs. I do recall a letter from Sir Jim to the EU a while ago not only detailing that in respect of the chemical industry but explaining how all the new plants built in USA were built to much higher standards, as costs allowed that to be the case. (One day, their railways to transport stuff?) Maybe even some of that to benefit Mozambique? Perhaps fertilizer production? Maybe Mozambique competition might even reduce too much pocketing, maybe local production might do so also.

        If your hypothetical arrived Paul, then any exporting nation can limit what it exports beyond the control of any producing company, as has been the case in the past and I suspect will be the case in the future. Most OPEC producers have been doing so for decades to control the price received, making sure what they have in the ground is not wasted in terms of their own revenue. UK Government even decided at one time to limit the export of money. including that owned by its population in an attempt to control spending and inflation. Even had price controls where industry had to apply for any price change to a Price Commission.

        Quote from Rystad:

        “Although relatively elevated for the (US) domestic market, US and European price differences are so wide producing and shipping gas across the Atlantic, even allowing for the pricey liquefaction process is still economically advantageous.”

        Meanwhile, those who want to will talk about a global market. Others who want to will know there isn’t one and fill their pockets, until constrained by demand or legislation. I just prefer to be in the factual place in this respect, I can focus fairytales upon my grandson. Horses for courses.

        I did leave out the other comments from the Canadian tourist to try and ease your weekend! Putting it as politely as I can, she was not too complimentary about decisions being made by those who had no concerns themselves and ignored the everyday concerns of many of their voters to placate………….! That bit I will just leave out. If she had been an Australian, I might even have been caused to blush.

      • Paul Seaman

        It sounds as if you are advicating more gas imports into the UK that may have 25% higher emmisions than home produced gas.

        Isn’t that a home goal for net zero 2050 and the green agenda?

  4. Keep reading the word “produced” surely if gas could be produced we would go about it and our worries would be over, no more extraction required.

Add a comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s