Athena Well Tests and Initial BOPDThe company has not yet indicated Initial Production (IP) flows from Athena of 25K/day. The IPO investor presentation figured an Initial Production (IP) of about 13,500 BPD increasing to 16K/day before declines set in. Now if they add wells at Athena, then the IP for the field might increase, but we would need to apply the projected decline curve to figure field life.
In the IPO they noted:
"Estimated production volumes for oil and NGL for 2008 reflected in the estimates of future net revenue [from the GCA Report] are about 2,750,000 barrels for an average daily production of about 7534 BOPD. At $50 net back, this would work out to be about $137,500,000 in revenue. The Athena field accounts for approximately 92% of this production. [6900 BOPD] Natural gas production is projected at 2.2 BCF with a projected price of $8.50 USD per MCF, for a total gas revenue of $18,700,000."
Now this is a yearly average with a 2Q start up, but nonetheless, Athena has never been projected to flow at 25K/day. And it has not indicated that they expect anything other than normal decline rates.
Insofar as the tests vs actual per well IP flows, Ithaca explained in the IPO
"Two (2) wells previously drilled on the block tested oil from sections of lower Scapa sands ranging from 1,000 to 1,500 ft. thick. Well number 12 tested 1,302 bbls/d from the lower Scapa while well number 7 tested 847 bbls/d from a similar interval. These rates are not dissimilar to those rates achieved in the Scapa field on drill stem test. On completion, rates on the order of 4,500 bbls/d were achieved from Scapa field wells.21"
[From Prospectus, 21 Source: Deloitte& Touche LLP, Deloitte Field Reports - United Kingdom, October 2005].
The 14/18b-15 well recently drilled by the Company tested up to 1,330 barrels of oil per day ("bopd") from the Upper Leek reservoir.
So I don't think the company originally anticipated 25K/day IP from the field. Perhaps they will get to 25K IP if they prove up the possible and have to drill additional wells, but if so then we should use the projected 40MM++ barrels of gross reserves to determine field life. Even using the IP without any decline we have 4.38 years of production [40MM/25K/365]. But of course Athena can't be produced throughout it's life at those rates, so let's say an average daily production of 8K
Insofar as how they project the well tests, I've been told that it is not possible to do well tests in the NS comparable to onshore tests due to equipment sizing and environmental restrictions.
"All flow tests are restricted due to rig equipment size limitations e.g. test separators are small and can only handle limited volumes and pressures. The dti mandated % of HC's that must be incinerated is fairly new so many rigs are truly not capable of meeting current requirements.
More importantly, flow tests are not about getting big numbers to impress traders but determining initial and final shut in pressures to measure pressure drawdown as an indication of size, check flow content ratios not rates, future production characteristics, implied recoveries, measure permeability, limited or broad aerial extent and so on - all the things engineers get excited about.
The test for Ithaca sounds good but notice no flowing pressures reported and only 5000 bopd estimated for true production rates which are a bit on the low side. This indicates the reservoir characteristics are lesser than say Brenda. Porosity and definitely permeability are indicated lower with these sort of rates. In turn suggesting lower recovery factors and reduced reserves at more normal levels (25% recovery?). They used 28% as the recovery factor in the IPO."
Be sure not to mix development and operating costs on Athena.
Per the IPO presentation
Net 22 MMbbls
Probable Reserves
based on 28%
recovery (source: GCA)
• Appraisal well
planned for Q4
2006
• First production
projected Q2 2008
– 13,500 bbls/day [increasing to 16K]
– $6.80/bbl CAPEX
Source: Ithaca & Deloitte & Touch LLP (Deloitte Field Reports, UK)
– $4.08/bbl OPEX
The development and gross cost assumptions in the IPO were an additional appraisal well at US$15.0 million; and three (3) development wells at US$17.5 million each (two (2) of which are water injectors). [Subtotal of $67.5 MM] Facilities costs comprise a subsea system, pipeline tie-back and host platform modifications at a total cost of US$87.5 million. [Total of US $155MM]. The operating expense assumptions are based on a US$0.37/bbl variable cost to cover operations and water injection plus an export tariff of US$3.20/bbl.
The development costs estimates will now likely go up as they expand the field and tweak the development plan, but there is a chance that the CAP Ex/bbl might decrease vs projection if the field is larger than anticipated.