KOB.TO - East Lost Hills & GSJB joint venture Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : KOB.TO - East Lost Hills & GSJB joint venture

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: grayhairs who wrote (14631)	3/7/2001 6:45:06 PM
From: John M	Read Replies (3) of 15703

GH, Don't get me wrong..I love to talk about the science. I was getting a little concerned that others on the board were tired of hearing about it. Well they will have to live through one more round. On BKP #2, should they use the same tubing configuration and there is similar water yield, there is no reason for me to believe that the well would deliver any more than the BKP#1 is capable of because of the mechanical constraints. Now if water is not an issue on that well, that changes the hydraulics and one could expect up to 40 MMscfd as long as the reservoir will give it up and still have a flowing bottom hole pressure of 14,000 psig +-. The rate drops from there depending on the FBHP that the reservoir likes. The lower it is, the lower the flow. As the pressure drops, velocities and friction drop increase further reducing the flow due to increased friction drop. Less water = more gas, lower operating costs, less corrosion, more $$$$$, cheaper wellbores, bla bla JM

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next