- Joined
- 11 July 2004
- Posts
- 115
- Reactions
- 0
have some problems with Couchies comments
hi guys
i have some problems with Couchies comments re:
""The Austin Chalk zone from 11,925’ to 12,200’ looks very oil productive. The log results may set us up to drill over 100 wells in offsetting lease (26,000 acres) to just produce the oil from that zone. The porosity is just about double from what is normally found NE of our well location. Some folks have successfully produced with as low as 3% porosity. We have 9 to 12% porosity.""
my reading of the above suggests possible oil shows over that interval.
if Couchie has this inormation, then surely ADI, AUT & EKA would also have some knowledge of this.
then why no mention by ADI, AUT & EKA. if they do have knowledge and haven't reported it, then it becomes a non-disclosure issue.
ADI, AUT & EKA have only reported gas shows..
surely Texas Crude wouldn't have said "don't release any information about possible oil descovery.
seems strange.
comments welcomed
regards
hi guys
i have some problems with Couchies comments re:
""The Austin Chalk zone from 11,925’ to 12,200’ looks very oil productive. The log results may set us up to drill over 100 wells in offsetting lease (26,000 acres) to just produce the oil from that zone. The porosity is just about double from what is normally found NE of our well location. Some folks have successfully produced with as low as 3% porosity. We have 9 to 12% porosity.""
my reading of the above suggests possible oil shows over that interval.
if Couchie has this inormation, then surely ADI, AUT & EKA would also have some knowledge of this.
then why no mention by ADI, AUT & EKA. if they do have knowledge and haven't reported it, then it becomes a non-disclosure issue.
ADI, AUT & EKA have only reported gas shows..
surely Texas Crude wouldn't have said "don't release any information about possible oil descovery.
seems strange.
comments welcomed
regards