This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

ADI - Adelphi Energy

Jump to new
i have had BUR recommended by a few people now,, i looked at it last week due to the horizontal drilling similarities.. very interesting..

i will repost something i had posted elsewhere, i am of the belief the jvp's at Sl are close to a major discovery..

There is some detail to grasp.. if you look at the announcements they are very vague as the JVP's were trying to say as little as possible to protect the interests of the major oil company.. we were never aware the Block A horizontal well was always supposed to coincide with the SL well, there were delays, 2 major ones, which were impossible for the JVP's to forecast.. TCEI as a operator at SL had delays as JVP in Block A.

Block A is next to sugarloaf, i am not certain of acreage, but believe the acreage is lesser than block B.

Block A has a production well which is vertical, than on the same lease a horizontal well, which EME and TCEI have a share in. There are reasons for the delays on the horizontal well, which i believe also delayed the SL well.

TCEI has operator status in block B, and they are as a JVP. looking at the results of the Block A horizontal well before setting out and mapping a 16 well program on both blocks.

So block B (sugarloaf) is in a holding pattern, awaiting the horizontal wells results from Block A. if its as good as its expected, then the sugarloaf results can give them a very good idea what horizontal wells can deliver in the sugarloaf leases.

The EME move to break ranks and jump on the block A wells has given the bigger picture to all. There is much riding on the block A results, the major oil company is not jumping on the bandwagon so to speak, as it looks at oil field development in a very practical and pragmatic way.. no guess work, just high quality research and technology, then test, then develop if practical..

My feeling is the Block A well results will be significant. Horizontal wells traditionally produce 3 -5 times a vertical wells output, and can reach reserves usually not reached by vertical wells due to the expense. i think the test results of SL were either as good or superior to the Block A production well, my feeling is that based on the wirelines they immediately decided and announced the testing of the secondary’s would be delayed. If the wirelines didnt show much they would have frac tested it then an there and done a P&A on it and wrapped it up in my view.. if Sl didnt compare to the production well in block A i see little reason for the delays..

Looking at it from TCEI viewpoint, why spend all that cash on Sugarloaf, when equivalent if not superior resources are being utilised in Block A, and can give you some real comparisons and great research results. TCEI isnt going to spend the same cash as an operator at sugarloaf and repeat the same again as a JVP on Block A, just to get the results twice that it only really needs once!! that would not be a good decision. TCEI is obviously very certain of what the sugarloaf well is capable of, has put it on hold, waiting for the delayed horizontal wells results, then will use the data there to plan the future on the SL leases. that is what ADI has announced in its last release on Sugarloaf, and my view remains that TCEI is playing a great game of limiting expensive cost overruns, using the major oil company and its research to understand how to unlock the chalks with horizontal wells, and being extremely clever and resourceful in its decisions right the way through.


I am happy to have a major oil company's research be the cornerstone of the decisions made on the future of the sugarloaf leases.

If there wasnt such a great result in the wirelines, i am certain there wouldnt be hold on SL and a frenzy to get hold of leases as we see. my feelings are if SL is superior well to the block A vertical, then we are in for potential blue sky.. the way the current situation at SL is being played out indicates there is more riding on the TCEI JV Block A #1 well than the sugarloaf results themselves..

all imho and dyor
 
Anyone following BUR? They released not long ago info and a few numbers on their initial flow tests of the horizontal well into the austin chalks (1 of 25)....wowzers!! I like their style, and production piping already in place. Sounds like they have some smooth texas operators... i'd be lying if I said I wasn't jealous ha!
 

What a difference a few weeks make.

Despite BUR being in Texas, they still give their holders respect and treat them as if they had dignity, regardless of whether they are in Texas or not. ADI need to learn a bit from BUR I suspect.

If it's good enough for BUR to give proper updates, it should be for ADI as well.
 
Agentm said:
i am of the belief

but believe

which i believe

My feeling

i think

my feeling

in my view

i see

my view

i am certain

my feelings
Click to expand...

Dude, is anything you say in this thread based on fact? Or is it all just your gut instinct? It's all well and good to have an opinion but its getting very repetitive.
 
i agree with you chops, ADI as operator is extremely limited in what they are prepared to release, and if you have an issue on it, ring them and take it up.. EME with their well has even given out less info, their claim the block A well has spudded is as far fetched as you could possibly make it..


BUR has a lot of reasons to talk up their share, and i know a few who have invested there, it looks great and supports the theory on horizontal drilling in the chalks..

sprinter.. dude..!!

all IMHO and DYOR.
 
What i said in my last post was all taken from ONE of your posts in this thread. Isn't there a saying somewhere that says not to invest in rumour? Again I ask, is what you say based on fact, or just your gut instinct?
 
Sugarloaf -1 Well – Adelphi 20% Interest
[FONT=Century Gothic,Century Gothic]As recently reported by other listed partners participating in this well, the commencement of the fracture stimulation and testing program of the Cretaceous carbonate zone in this well will follow remedial cementation of the well casing across this zone. This process which involves serial perforation of the casing and squeezing cement is expected to take several weeks to complete.
The latest indication from the Operator is that fracture stimulation and flow testing of the first of the three zones of possible gas pay is now expected to commence during the first half of August.
[/FONT]
Ilse-1 Well (New Taiton Prospect) – Adelphi 25% Interest​
[FONT=Century Gothic,Century Gothic]The Ilse-1 well remains shut-in pending a review of the forward program and a formal recommendation from the Operator.
[/FONT]
 
They don't like revealing info do they, not sure if its the management team or the operator of the fields but they sure do know how to sketch it out or maybe their paid by the hour???
 

It is interesting to compare the BUR SP and the ADI SP over the past few weeks. Maybe ADI should copy the style of reporting by BUR.
 
nioka said:
It is interesting to compare the BUR SP and the ADI SP over the past few weeks. Maybe ADI should copy the style of reporting by BUR.
Click to expand...


i think all the jvp's would love to report everything they have on the Sl play, but somehow when you talk to the management you get told the operator is limiting things, and when your in the process of buying acerage you have to be limiting what you put out.

If the major oil company in block A actually announced they were in the state on their website, or on any official releases, then what do you think the ability for anyone to negotiate good deals on the leases would have been?

i am not certain of BUR position on acerage, i assume they have secured all the acerage they want and the operator is happy for news to flow, perhaps thats the difference between TCEI as operator for the Sl area, and BUR and their operator.. (btw i have not researched if BUR are actually securing acerage or have already secured acerage before drilling, perhaps someone can let me know if they wish)

all IMHO and DYOR
 
jackohelp - 28 Jun'07 - 21:08 - 42980 of 42980


agentm>
does speary(edwards) mean anything to you?
 
In regards to BUR the operator AKG is still securing acreage in Burleson County.
BUR report on whats happening with the drilling of their wells just like any other company. The reason the same information isn't released to ADI holders is simply because very little is happening.
To much reading between the lines on this thread and talking up what could be future possibilities.
Some of you guys would make great used car salesman.

But hey good luck.
 
Loui66se said:
jackohelp - 28 Jun'07 - 21:08 - 42980 of 42980


agentm>
does speary(edwards) mean anything to you?
Click to expand...


that field is going vertical and now horizontal at 13500 feet. i think its for the limestone edwards plays.. production was supposed to increase with the horizontal, but i dont know how good it was, some data i have seen ddint show brilliance..

they seem to me to be on the fringe of the action and they have been very active in the area there with pioneer. i think they are both trying to get more out of the play they have going there. and by the depth they are going it appears they are at a different level to where we are..


i cant discount the edwards limestone at SL.. but the jvp's have not indicated any interest in that zone.. the upper cretaceous is what EME have indicated at block A, and the edwards is said to be 12,275 - 14,000.. so theres reasons to be thinking that way i guess..

but remeber the depth they have blocked the well at.. thats important!!

i tend to think its more 11925 - 12200 austin chalks at SL.. as the primary target.. i believe thats what the objective is of the next perforating and frac test at SL.. theres been a claim by all the JVP's that this play is producing right now.. my research confirms that.. i just wish they would announce it!!


if you want to talk specific wells then feel free to pm me..

cheers
 
This was posted on the weekend on another site.

the wirelines have been around for some time, and all my research indicates they are 100% genuine. I have seen many different appraisals of them. the logs are only a portion of the logs available, buy they are the relevant ones.

much of the info has been on other forums, and i feel its important to understand them and look at some opinion on them, particularily if your a holder of the share.

A lot of what i have read i can understand and agree with, it matches up with a lot of the research i have done.


keep in mind the block A well is completed, with the researh i have done that i am certain, and there is no indicationthat the well is going to be a P&A, in fact quite to the contrary, all the things you see in the normal pattern of completing a well for producion seem to be happening on the site.. my opinion, and its totally mine on my research alone, is that the block A well is ready for frac and flow testing

DYOR


the post has been divided into two parts due to the size of it.. i hope its ok to post it that way!!!

mpls - 1 Jul'07 - 17:23 - 43097 of 43102



SL is the one to watch here.

Testing in block B is to start August and EME have trippled their interest to 18%.
The block A next door is operated by a major international oil and gas company and EME have 7.5% of that, this is reportedly going to be a horizontal well there a Production well?
The first well in block A flowed gas and associated condensate on test, the next drilling has started. Peak gas reading in the secondary (where the drilling in block A is going down to the same depth/formation) were 1000 but in the primary, Hosston, there were only 536. The secondary was better than the Hosston. It was known that one of the partners wanted just to test the secondary.

Here are some of the Logs from the shallow depths.

This is a chart from 12300ft to about 12500ft.
You can see a peak gas of MAX 491u.
C2 in blue, C1 is in black which has peaks approaching 100,000 ppm.



Compared with this at 3200ft where the levels drop off to background and then climbs again, see the dip in the blue (C1) line.
 
Part 2 due to size of post.........


Some analysis (my highlights in bold), some supporting research identified by Edgein:

Edgein, circa Sep 2006
Did you read the information that I posted on the C1-C4 ratios.
You also notice that the gas ppm are at times over 2.8% V/V for C1
alone and ranging in gas units of between 500 to over 1000 from a
background reading of zero, the standard through hundreds of feet is
at least 62units with one particular section showing c1-c4 increasing
considerably over background as reported in the information by Saf
and also the RNS by EME and partners. It is clear that once they pass
through the shale and siltsone section into the upper reservoir as
reported in the logs as "show #1" there is a significant set of peaks
corresponding with the section that would represent the upper reservoir.
Siltstone and shale are common seal type lithology, Chalk is a common
reservoir type especially for gas traps. It is my view that these peaks
and the words "show #1" are an indication that a gas section has been entered.
It is quite possible that you wouldn't see that as a good result, but then again I'm a holder and you most likely are not. Good gas shows doesn't
automatically mean its going to be a commercial well, but its a good start.
Some wells have significantly strong gas shows and are unable to sustain
high flow rates due to reservoir characteristics. Some wells with lesser gas
shows may have ideal reservoir characteristics and sustain flow very
commercially over a long period. As stated the gas ratios are within a "potentially" commercial range.
 
part 3

Some very useful information provided by Saf over the weekend again,
there is one particular section of interest that has C1-C4 shows and
the ratios are in the region of 30 (apparently good and within a potentially commercial range).
There is a vast amount of info in the logs. I've never seen so much
information revealed from a well while its in the process of drilling.
The DTI site provides logs of UK wells after the well has been drilled,
but not for some time afterwards, and not in such detail.

I'm kinda reading the logs in that the spikes are interesting sections
and leaving anything that is below about 62u as backgound, although it
seems to be essentially be a gas show. The report based on wirelining could
be very interesting indeed, restivity logs coupled with the mud logs (gas shows and lithology).
As saf has suggested there is suitable lithology throughout these shows
(chalk, limestone and some sandstone early on, mainly chalk and limestone though).

Max readings so far seem to br just in excess of 1000u.

The ratios of C1 vs C2 and C1 vs C3 are important in determining the type and potential
commerciality of the gas find it seems. Its not guaranteed as a flowing well until tested,
some wells with gas units do not sustain long term flow. We have the initial signs of a
potentially commercial well with the increases in C1-C4, gas unit spikes over a significant
reservoir section of limestone and chalk and a high ppm especially in methane.
There are certainly hydrocarbons present during drilling so far. We'll know more
from the wirelining, and we'll not know the end result until fully tested. As everyone else, fingers are crossed for the end result.

Gas Analysis from Mud Logging
Pixler (1969) found that the gases observed during drilling could
distinguish the type of production associated with the hydrocarbon show.
Pixler's data (Fig. 8) were obtained by monitoring the C1 to C5 hydrocarbons
collected by steam-still reflux gas sampling during routine mud logging.
Individual ratios of the C2 to C5 light hydrocarbons with respect to methane
provided discrete distributions that reflect the true natural variations of
formation hydrocarbons from oil and gas deposits. Ratios below approximately 2,
or above 200, indicated to Pixler that the deposits were noncommercial.
The upper range for these ratios for dry-gas deposits has been enlarged by
Verbanac et al (1982), who studied more than 250 wells from 10 oil and gas fields.

Their data suggest the following upper limits for dry-gas reservoir ratios:
C1/C2 < 350, C1/ C3 < 900, C1/C4 < 1,500, C1/C5 < 4,500.
These gas-deposit ratios clearly overlap the biogenic range.
Another empirical rule suggested by Pixler is that the slope of the lines
defined by these ratios must increase to the right; if they do not,
the reservoir will be water-wet and therefore nonproductive.
Verbanac et al (1982) suggested that a negative slope connecting individual
ratios may result from subsurface reservoir zones of limited permeability.

Our data for shallow soil gas are plotted on a Pixler-type diagram in Figure 9.
Direct comparison of these two independent data sets is very striking and
supports the concept of migration of reservoired hydrocarbons to the surface.

The use of chemical compositions and component ratios often reveals other
types of deposits. Biogenic gases and gases from coal deposits typically
have ratios of methane to ethane that exceed l03 or I04
(Janezic, 1979; Coleman, 1976; Bernard, 1980). However, Oremland (1981)
reported small quantities of biogenic C2 to C4 hydrocarbons from marine
muds where the lowest C1/C2 ratio was 149:1. Although the heavier
components may be present in very minute amounts in coal or biogenic gas,
the ratio of these components with respect to methane is very small.
Thus, petroleum type gases can generally be distinguished clearly from
typical coal or biogenic deposits, even though the latter may contain
low but measurable amounts of the heavier gases, ethane and propane.
Measurement of the stable carbon isotopes of methane can provide additional
resolution of biogenic methane versus thermal methane.

Amounts of migrated gases almost always decrease in the following order:
methane > ethane > propane > butane. Thus, in a Pixler-type diagram,
soil-gas data, like reservoir data, generally plot as line segments of
positive slope for the soil gases to represent a typical migrated seep gas.
Exceptions to this order have been noted where surface source rocks were drilled,
which thus far have yielded ratios with lighter gases depleted in
relation to heavier gases. According to Leythaeuser (1980),
this would be expected if gases in the boundary layer very near the
surface followed a diffusion model. Thus, compositional changes related
to diffusion might be expected at or very near a boundary layer
where the hydrocarbon gas concentration approaches zero.
This behavior has been observed when comparing soil-gas probe data measured
at very shallow depths (0.3 to 0.6 m, 1 to 2 ft) with their associated
data from 4 m (13 ft). The probe data are always "oilier,"
indicating preferential loss of methane and implying diffusion from
the 4-m (13-ft) level to the surface. If diffusion were the dominant
migration mechanism, a chromatographic effect would be expected for
gas that migrated through the earth. The fact that the compositions
of the soil-gas data from 4 m (13 ft) so obviously reflect the underlying
reservoirs implies that the major migration to the near-surface must be by
faults and fractures rather than by diffusion. The following examples demonstrate
a clear relationship between faults and surface-gas magnitudes.
Lack of a chromatographic effect implies that the seepage must be continuous
geologically. However, this does not rule out intermittent seepage on a historical basis.

At least two other papers cite chemical compositions of migrated hydrocarbons
to predict the type of source deposit (gas, gas-condensate, or oil).
Sokolov and Cheremisinov (1971) reported that the ratio of methane to total
heavier gaseous hydrocarbons can be used as a criterion for hydrocarbon prospecting.
The maximum ratio is 150 to 200 and corresponds to gas pools formed by
distant lateral migration and to gases from mud volcanoes.
Lower ratios correspond to oil fields with associated gas.
They further stated that, "In those areas where the vertical migration does
not substantially effect the formation of gas pools, this criterion can
be used to predict oil and gas-condensate accumulation with probability equal to one.”

Panchenko and Bogdanov (1974) found that comparative analysis of
water-dissolved gases in the pre-Caucasus can be used to predict oil,
gas-condensate, or gas deposits. This prediction is based on methane and its homologs.
The highest (30 to 50%) concentration of methane homologs is characteristic of oil deposits and the lowest (as much as 5%) is characteristic of gas. Gas-condensate fields show intermediate values.

Prediction of the type of subsurface deposit by use of near-surface soil-gas compositions represents an important accomplishment and offers strong evidence for the viability of soil-gas prospecting. This compositional relationship supports the genetic association between soil-gas hydrocarbons and reservoirs.

http://www.eti-geochemistry.com/j&d/images/figure08.html

http://www.eti-geochemistry.com/j&d/images/figure09.html

http://www.eti-geochemistry.com/j&d/tables/table03.html

The sugarloaf gas ratios can be determined over some of the sections
by the information provided by Safiande and mpls.
We discussed this on Saturaday and the ratios from Sugar were between 19 and 31 for the gas samples returned.

Reply from Saf, my bold emphasis:
"Peak gas reading in the secondary were 1000 but in the primary, Hosston, there were only 536.
It was known that one of the partners wanted just to test the secondary"

From what I have managed to establish this year, it seems like the chalks ( sandstone & limestone ) were always the prime focus of this appraisal well i.e. to prove up the flow from the Block A well & that the deeper sands were the real secondary objective i.e. not vice versa. AUT have stated that they will have another look at the sands from a different location ( lots of wells planned )so it is still game on there. EME are paying $1m for each of the production wells on Block B & $0.65m for each of the production wells on Block A, so will be expecting a very handsome return as this is prime real estate. Couch stated on 1 Dec 2006 that TCEI proved up 2tcf in the Hosston project over 26000 acres, so 18 wells seems to be the very tip of the iceberg.
 
All very quite lately everyones waiting for the next move up or down.
Delays are dissappointing at SL but hopefully all will be rewarded NT IMO is not all lost just need the next move in flow testing at the zone with "elevated readings"
 
Surely all the money you guys have invested in this one could have been doing something useful somewhere else.
 
Sprinter79 said:
Surely all the money you guys have invested in this one could have been doing something useful somewhere else.
Click to expand...

In a perfect world 100% of your cash is placed on the fastest rising stocks, it isn't perfect, only hindsight is. Very happy to have money sitting in Sugarloaf prospects, despite rest of my portfolio outperforming. When the time comes it should catch up and then some if results as holders hope.
 
For your information.

None of the top 20 holders have sold a share.


I emailed alex in regards to future of operations and he said n.t was disappointing but there is a lot to look forward too.


The so called smart money is still holding. if top 20 are still around.

I see similarities with MAE in the fact the stock has very few shares on offer. If people see ADI trading at 30 cents in the future I would be suprised. We are around support levels I believe.

Alex also said they were continuing to look at future projects.

Not starting reading into it deeply, but it seems they are active in their exploration.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

D3E - D3 Energy
Replies
2
Views
1K
Dona Ferentes
August 2024 DDD
2 3 4
Replies
75
Views
20K
ducati916
January 2025 DDD
5 6 7
Replies
129
Views
9K
divs4ever
FDR - Finder Energy Holdings
Replies
4
Views
2K
mobcat
February 2025
2 3
Replies
59
Views
5K
ducati916
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...