ELK - Elk Petroleum

Good news out.
Elk has received the final report from the Enhanced Oil
Recovery Institute (EORI) of the University of Wyoming
covering their evaluation of the gravity stable CO2 flood
of the Muddy reservoir of the Grieve Field.
The report provides further detail confirming the earlier
reported 23 million barrels of recoverable oil possible
from the Muddy reservoir.
The report indicates that a production rate of 8,000 -
12,000 barrels of oil per day (BOPD) is achievable once
the field is re-pressurised.
Re-pressurisation, as modelled, is expected to take at
least 2 ¼ years.
An actual residual oil saturation test performed by
Chemical Tracers Inc provided a close correlation to
simulated results.
The Company has appointed an Engineering Manager.
I am happy I got an average of 65c ELK.

The final EORI report

http://eori.gg.uwyo.edu/reports/EORI Sim...20Field_rev.pdf

According to the production graph the 3rd scenario would at 2 1/4 years start producing initially at 4000bopd and peak at 13,600bopd in 5years........

I beleive Elk will start to produce earlier from wells higher up the field and also open the taps up at a lower pressure rather than wait until it is ready to blow out at 4000bopd. also they expect to only produce around 8000bopd due to field production facilities capacity.
Cheers

Its been awhile since I've heard any announcements from Elk. I don't understand why. Everything has been fairly positive with the run of good announcements over 2-3 months around October. But lately I haven't hear a peep. just wondering......

Regards

D.

Sept quarter saw Elks revenues around $1mil for a loss of $250,000.......December quarter saw generally higher oil prices and I expect lower expenses, So a good chance of a profit for the december quarter. Which would push cash above $3mil....

Wyoming sour has just recently spiked to around $80Aus a barrel...if that price is sustained Elk would be looking at around $1.5mill net revenue for the march quarter. And with no drilling activity, expect a good profit..Which should make the market look more favourably on Elk.

Elk have been acquiring acreage so any significant purchases may impact the above ....

of course its just small change compared to co2 and JV....
cheers

Interesting Read:-

In January the Institute hosted the first joint meeting of our newly formed Technical Advisory Board and the EOR Commission. The Board consists of Charlie Carlisle, Chemical Tracers, Inc.; Dr. Gary Pope, University of Texas, Austin; Dr. George Hirasaki, Rice University, Dr. Peter Hennings, Conoco/Phillips; Dr. James Griffin, Texas A&M University; Dr. Paul Willhite, University of Kansas; Dr. Randy Seright, New Mexico Tech.; and Steve Melzer, Melzer and Associates. The meeting inspired a spirited discussion of the EORI mission and how to best attain our goals, and provided impetus to move ahead on several fronts. As a result, plans are in place to begin a fracture characterization program, beginning with the Tensleep Sandstone in Wyoming. We are also in the formulating stages of an applied research program in chemical EOR techniques and will be expanding our studies of low-salinity water flooding with an eye toward a pilot study.
Negotiations among Wyoming producers have apparently resulted in making CO2 available for more EOR projects. Elk Petroleum (Casper) is planning a gravity-stable CO2 injection of the Muddy Sandstone reservoir at Grieve Field in the southeastern Wind River Basin. Rancher Energy is planning a CO2 flood of the 2nd Wall Creek reservoir at Big Muddy Field in the southern Powder River Basin. Both companies have entered into discussions with us concerning reservoir characterization studies and plan on acquiring the necessary CO2. We are excited to be involved in these two projects, both of which are consistent with our mission to promote EOR in Wyoming.

http://eori.uwyo.edu/update.asp

I find the paragraph "Negotiations among Wyoming producers have apparently resulted in making CO2 available for more EOR projects" very interesting, and I wonder if this had anything to do with the spike in ELK today.

Gday biggle
I am certain that is a january 2007 report......

This was from casper tribune

By BOB MOEN
Associated Press writer
Thursday, January 24, 2008 2:05 AM MST

CHEYENNE -- After hearing Gov. Dave Freudenthal tell them Wyoming needs to be out front in regulating new ways of permanently storing greenhouse gas underground, a legislative committee Wednesday endorsed two proposed measures dealing with carbon capture and sequestration in the state.

The Legislature's Joint Judiciary Interim Committee endorsed proposals that would give the state Department of Environmental Quality regulatory oversight of CO2 storage in the state and recognize that surface owners control the underground voids where the gas would be stored.

Both proposals will be considered by the Legislature when it meets next month.

Freudenthal told a panel of lawmakers that carbon capture and sequestration will be vital to Wyoming's economy, which is heavily dependent on producing coal for power generation facilities in the state and elsewhere.

Burning coal produces carbon dioxide, which scientists say contributes to global warming. Growing concern over global warming has led to the idea of capturing carbon dioxide and injecting it into vast, deep geological formations where it can't be released into the atmosphere.

The federal government will be involved in developing policy and regulation of carbon capture and sequestration, so it is important that Wyoming have some influence over what happens, Freudenthal said.

"The best way to do that is to have something in place first, instead of having the federal government come and say, 'Well, you're not doing anything now, do exactly what we tell you,"' he told reporters after addressing the panel. "I think we have a better chance of defining how this issue is treated in a way that makes sense for Wyoming if we act now."

Freudenthal said it was important that lawmakers not become bogged down in details and delay acting on the proposals.

"We're going to be at this a long time," he said. "I think this nation's going to be at this issue for a long time. Start with some small steps and then you move forward."

Freudenthal and state DEQ Director John Corra said DEQ is equipped to handle regulation of sequestration facilities.

But they said it should be clear that the carbon proposals not include the practice of pumping CO2 underground while drilling for oil and gas. Oil and gas companies use the CO2 to recover oil and gas that cannot be brought to the surface under conventional drilling practices. Some CO2 is trapped underground in the process.

Regarding ownership of the underground voids where the gas would be stored, Freudenthal said there is going to be a "major transfer of wealth in this country" as a result of carbon capture and sequestration.

"I would rather that wealth go to our citizens than to the federal government," he said.

Laurie Goodman, president of the Landowners Association of Wyoming, suggested that the proposals needed clarification to better protect landowners from possible liability should something go wrong with the underground storage.

"Somewhere the surface landowner needs to be held harmless," Goodman said

This looks great for ELK.....

Rancher had signed a deal for co2 with Annadarko about 18months ago.....Annadarko had significant volumes of co2 contracted and was meant to be onselling to third partys.......however the Rancher contract was apparently not a very reliable one.....well Rancher have gone directly to Exxon, who were venting significant amounts of co2......The pressure being applied by the Wyoming government may have been the reason this went through so suddenly as it was only a few weeks ago that the Wyoming goverment proposed changing the laws with regard to co2.....could we see a similiar contract for ELK with Exxon? If Annadarko got it then the Wyoming governments pinup field, Greive, most certainly will....looking good.


Rancher Energy Corp. (OTCBB: RNCH) today announced it has signed a CO2 (carbon dioxide) sale and purchase agreement with ExxonMobil Gas & Power Marketing Company, a division of Exxon Mobil Corporation (NYSE: XOM). Under terms of the agreement, ExxonMobil will provide Rancher Energy with 70 MMSCFD (million standard cubic per day) of CO2 for an initial 10-year period, with an option for a second 10 years.

Under terms of the agreement, ExxonMobil will supply Rancher Energy with CO2 for use in Rancher Energy's enhanced oil recovery (EOR) program in Wyoming's Powder River Basin. Rancher Energy intends to enhance production at three historically productive oil fields, including the Big Muddy, Cole Creek South and South Glenrock B fields. The CO2 will be supplied from ExxonMobil's LaBarge gas field in Wyoming. Rancher Energy intends to build a pipeline connecting its properties to the CO2 source.

And then two weeks after the government meeting but before the co2 contract, Rancher entered into a JV with an unamed industry leader in return for $83.5 mil....so it would appear that the co2 is available and so are the JV partners....

cheers

Well todays activity was interesting, the largest volumes we've seen in a while.

As the ASX Price Query stated, the price has risen from $0.35 on 18 march to a high of $0.615 today. Volume was 802,503, much higher than typical.

As the company stated in the reply to the Price Query, the company is awaiting receipt of the Ryder-Scott reserves report for Grieve, expected in April......Maybe someone knows something about this report that we do not?

Lets hope the news is positive when this report does come out.

looks like the director is buying up some stocks.
sign that this stock might be on an upward trend then.



- http://www.elkpet.com/pdf/announcement/Appendix3YGlendaMcLoughlin06May08.pdf

Change of Director’s Interest Notice

Name of Director: Glenda McLoughlin

Date of change: 2 May 2008
No. of securities held prior to change:

G McLoughlin – 150,800 ordinary shares and 300,000 20 cent options.
W Hartnell (indirect) – 25,000 shares

Number acquired: 35,000

Value/Consideration: $16,100

No. of securities held after change:
G McLoughlin – 185,800 ordinary shares and 300,000 20 cent options.
W Hartnell (indirect) – 25,000 shares

Directors dealing in ELK ordinary shares so far this year:

........Name...........Date.........Shares purch.......Price (c).....Total Spent ($)
Peter Power.........23.01.08........24,526................35..................8560
Glenda McLoughlin.02.05.08........35,000................46..............16,100
Peter Power.........30.04.08......250,000.................54.............135,000
Andrew Rigg.........09.05.08......100,000.................49..............49,310
Robert Cook.........09.05.08........50,000.................52..............26,135
Peter Power.........22.05.08........33,300.................50..............16,650
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Total:........................................492,826................51c..........$251,755


Do you think this is telling us anything?

Updated directors' dealings (spent an extra $173,000 since my last post):


........Name.............Date.........Shares purch.......Price (c).....Total Spent ($)
Peter Power.............23.01.08........24,526.................35.................8560
Glenda McLoughlin...02.05.08........35,000.................46..............16,100
Peter Power.............30.04.08......250,000.................54............135,000
Andrew Rigg.............09.05.08......100,000.................49..............49,310
Robert Cook.............09.05.08........50,000.................52..............26,135
Peter Power.............22.05.08........33,300.................50..............16,650
Peter Power.............26.05.08........38,315.................50..............19,158
Peter Power.............28.05.08......100,000.................56..............56,065
Peter Power.............10.06.08......178,385.................55..............98,246
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Total:.......................................... 809,526.............52.5c..........$425,224

have been looking more into this company. . . . since so much buying has been occurring from directors. . . . and the price seems to be holding more stable now. . .

their presentation 29th May didn't seem to excite a lot of people apart from the directors themselves. . .


anyone else think that this could be promising. . . . short term or long term. . . .


any comments would be greatly appreciated. . . .

Based on today's production and revenue forecast, I came up with the following figures. The company should approximately break even this year. I simply doubled the figures for admin. costs etc, from the last half-year report to Dec 07 (ann. on 13th March 2008) to work up full-year numbers.


Est. 12 month results based on today's production and revenue forecast
...........................Current..AU$(m)..............Prev (last HY results*2)
Revenue from sale of O&G.....5.40
Cost of O&G sold..................(2.56)
Gross profit...........................2.84
Admin. costs........................(2.20)
D&A....................................(1.00)
Tax......................................0.00......................0.00
Net Loss.............................(0.36)..................(2.35)
EPS cents..........................(0.58c).................(3.84c)

Hi guys,

Does anyone know why ELK achieved a substantially lower price per barrel then spot prices? Has it to do with the quality or do they sell into future contract prices?

78k odd barrels for ~$68 per barrel is well below the average price over FY0708.

Going forward, with their three prong intiative to increase oil production based on existing wells alone... (say they achieve 30% increase, and oil price averages $120/barrel next year)

FY0809 revenue will look like this?:

100k barrels x $120/barrel = $12 million revenue.

Any guesses of when they'll start raking sales equivalent to their current market cap of $30 million...? Or when production will reach 250k barrels assuming price remains the same:

250k barrels x $120/barrel = $30 million revenue

Cost going forward should be relatively stable as they run quite a tight ship. Anyone has detailed forecasts for Net profit margin going forward?

IMHO Turning out to be quite sustainable profit generating producer as they replicate their niche strategy over new land purchases and JVs.

Denny Crane
SDS crude is low quality sour and trades at a discount.......and on top of that Rocky mountain crude trades at a discount...I think they are roughly getting ....$95bo at SDS.....$105bo at Greive......versus the current $115WTI price.....
I expect current revenue to roughly stay the same/decline slowly until a new project is brought on line........the first chance of new oil would be the work over of ash creek upper sands.......most of the other projects look to be a fair way off before they are likely to produce revenue..
Cheers

........Name.............Date.........Shares purch.......Price (c).....Total Spent ($)
Peter Power.............23.01.08........24,526.......... .......35.................8560
Glenda McLoughlin...02.05.08........35,000............... ..46..............16,100
Peter Power.............30.04.08......250,000........... ......54............135,000
Andrew Rigg.............09.05.08......100,000............ .....49..............49,310
Robert Cook.............09.05.08........50,000........... ......52..............26,135
Peter Power.............22.05.08........33,300.......... .......50..............16,650
Peter Power.............26.05.08........38,315.......... .......50..............19,158
Peter Power.............28.05.08......100,000........... ......56..............56,065
Peter Power.............10.06.08......178,385........... ......55..............98,246
Peter Power.............16.09.08......165,879........... ......30..............49,764
Peter Power.............18.09.08........34,121.......... .......30..............10,236
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Total:..................................... ..1,009,526..................48c. ........$485,224

this stock is currently hovering at the 52wk lows of 0.09 (52Wk High: 0.60) and with oil prices at fresh highs (US$69.28)

NYMEX Crude Oil



wondering why ELK hasn't risen, like say Carnarvon ( )?

or is this stock, one of those potential-to-break-out types, because i've been watching this for over a year now, but feel like jumping in now.

quarky said:

this stock is currently hovering at the 52wk lows of 0.09 (52Wk High: 0.60) and with oil prices at fresh highs (US$69.28)

NYMEX Crude Oil

wondering why ELK hasn't risen, like say Carnarvon ( )?

or is this stock, one of those potential-to-break-out types, because i've been watching this for over a year now, but feel like jumping in now.

Click to expand...

since i pointed this stock out a few days ago, it's already jumped around 35% from 0.09 to 0.125 now. i've been trying to find anything about this company or stock and why it's slow, ascent.
so, if anyone knows anything... show me where to get some information from.
i'd be interested in investing in this stock, for the long-term (i.e. more than a year...) as it's got good potential, i think.

ELK hit a high of 0.15 today (and it was just 0.09 a few days ago)
damn...missed a good chance to get into it.
i think they've all agreed to issue new shares, which was released yesterday


ELK Petroleum Limited Announces Issue Of Shares
-- http://www.google.com/finance?cid=699645&morenews=10&rating=1&newsbefore=2009-06-12

ELK Petroleum Limited announced that the shares to be issued following shareholder approval of Resolutions 2-6 at the General Meeting on May 22, were allotted on June 10, 2009.

tried to buy some today but couldn't get in.
will need to try again tomorrow...err....profit-taking Friday.

Grieve #39 looks like a leaky hole - faulted or no decent cap rocks at depth. I'm not holding my breath for the flow rates. Strangely the market seems to think this is good