agentm,
My figures are from GDN origional prospectus and follow up info.
Do you really think they would go ahead with the project if they new it was uneconomic,I dont think so.
Tough times its true, nobody forsaw the crash of the last 2 years and nobody has picked the current recovery or how fast it is happening.
If all companies took heed of the opinions you posted there would be no exploration at all.
firstly datz, the ip will not be the sustained flow rate.
if your relying on the original prospectus data then you need to recalculate for the current gas price and not the fancy of the past.
do i think GDN would go ahead if they knew i was uneconomic? no i dont you could as economics speak for themselves. but i dont see a massive forward drilling program in place myself.
re the tough times, yes they absolutely are, not just for gas explorers alone.. my oil investment, adi, is in hibernation atm even though it sits on a massive eagleford shale oil play that is the hottest play in onshore in the usa. but the economics are ok for them and will soon be waking up and going forward with some luck.
re your last comment about companies heeding my opinion then there would be no exploration at all..
1/ its industry comment not mine..
2/i am not sure what closet you just crawled out of datz, but thats exactly whats happening onshore in the usa in the gas and oil industry..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shale_gas
look at this site and the economics just for the shale gas alone
Economics
Although shale gas has been produced for more than 100 years in the Appalachian Basin and the Illinois Basin, the wells were often economically marginal. Higher natural gas prices in recent years and advances in hydraulic fracturing and horizontal completions have made shale gas wells more profitable. Shale gas tends to cost more to produce than gas from conventional wells, because of the expense of massive hydraulic fracturing treatments required to produce shale gas, and of horizontal drilling.
The prices required to make drilling and producing shale gas economic are different for each shale area. One study concluded that a wellhead gas price above $4.25 per thousand cubic feet (MCF) was required to make wells completed in the Fayettville Shale in Arkansas economic, while wells to the Woodford Shale in Oklahoma required a price above $6.50.[3] Another study concluded that the Fayettville shale required a NYMEX gas price above $5.95 per million British thermal units (MMBTU), and the Woodford shale a price above $7.24; the same study arrived at break-even NYMEX prices of between $5.40 to $7.39 for the Barnett, and $6.31 for Appalachian gas shale.[4] (The conclusions might appear to be different, but one is in terms of wellhead price per MCF, and the other study is in terms of NYMEX price per MMBTU).
To date, all successful shale gas wells have been in rocks of Paleozoic and Mesozoic age.
North America has been the leader in developing and producing shale gas because of high gas prices in that market. The great economic success of the Barnett Shale play in Texas in particular has spurred the search for other sources of shale gas across the United States and Canada.
datz very little is happening in the way of onshore gas exploration, as the economics are killing it. chevron pulled out of all onshore drilling in the usa by the end of 2009!! companies are putting projects on ice and stopping exploration and also field development. there are thousads of articles and announcements from the oil sector and its not exactly a secret datz..
the haynesville shale wells are massive producers, and they are economic in a lot of cases, the shale gas and the shale gas condensate fields are so large they will supply USA for 95 years easily, the gas price is not going to go up any time soon.. oil is the place to be. not gas..
gas at $2.88 datz... you have to say its not economic to be chasing gas onshore in the usa..
all imho and dyor