To: kingfisher who wrote (519 ) 5/28/1998 8:42:00 PM From: grayhairs Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 1207
Hi Richard, Personally, I do not like their chances of NOW finding a Leduc reef. If I understand this play correctly, they were looking for a Leduc reef with a potential size of 1 to 2 Tcf. Now that's a pretty huge mother of a reef (We are talking a target with areal dimensions measured in miles). It's not just a little pinnacle (areal dimensions measured in a few scores of acres) which could be easily missed at that depth. SO, if they located their very first (highest risk) well so as to give them their very best shot at the Leduc (which after all was their primary objective!), and they missed it, then it probably wasn't there. Just my opinion, but if they did not get the reef on the first well, I'll bet against them finding it with the next one. NOW, having said that, if they were successful in the Swan Hills on the first well, what's wrong with following that up with more Swan Hills success in the next well(s)?? Perhaps what they had originally interpreted as a Leduc reef is explainable by "some other event" (Eg. something in the Swan Hills). I have no doubt that they have been pouring over and comparing their synthetics to the actual seismic to try and explain what happened. But, I very seriously question that they would still be looking for a Leduc reef. Maybe, they are just re-looking things from a different light now and are trying to see more in the Swan Hills interval than they could before. In other words, before they drilled the well they thought the anomaly they saw on seismic was a Leduc reef. But now that they know it was not a Leduc reef, can they make an alternate interpretation (Eg. with something in the Swan Hills interval) that will fit both the well and seismic data that they have. Later, grayhairs P.S.-- Natural gas from the Swan Hills will burn with a nice blue flame, too!! And, all good geologists need a bail out zone for the very few times that they ever make mistakes!!