Empyrean Energy

Web site : http://www.empyreanenergy.com

''The lack of significant hydrocarbon recovery and the flow pressures seen to date indicate that this deepest zone of the Austin Chalk is unlikely to be commercially productive at this location.'' This shows that the Sugarloaf region is most likely a dud! SELL!

sorry, but this company has not just developed the bad habit of consistently failing to deliver, it is addicted to doing so ..... i repeat AVOID

there are plenty of other E&P companies that are far more promising, even if many of them will also fail

Perhaps AMER falls into the latter category cynic?

hyleo98, if you take the trouble of checking you will find that level1 is S/Kane which is a proven discovery(a very large one at that),and is the reason for me
(along with Eagle 13/38mmbo proven)sticking with this share.Patience and a lot
of it will imho be rewarded?

cyril

Really Al you are full of negative crap. They didn't just decide to frac for fun, lots of wells in this area have proved successful AFTER fraccing.

They have just spent $1.5 million drilling the hole so they will test all the potentially productive zones. Guess its a sort of risk - reward thing, bit like playing the stockmarket I guess. If the worst zone (of three) that they felt might not flow does not, it really is not that important. Certainly not worth the MM's dropping the share price 10%, but of course they don't know the history.

As to the "gas levels" it certainly does not prove commerciability but it is at least reassuring to know that this great long horizontal hole we are drilling actually contains something potentially saleable rather than copious quantities of H2O!!

neither AMER or GOO have yet failed to deliver ..... from memory neither have done a damn thing yet!

blackdown- dont know about that. was it not AMER (then chp) that reckoned their Llanos block held around 400MMbbl (eq 120p per share)- only to deliver 0.

hushpuppy,spot on "negative crap indeed", and as a supposed ex oiler very little substance.
cyril

hushpuppy and others ...... it may surprise that Al actually does know what he talking about from life in the industry ...... if EME (or GOO or AMER) in particular, come up with anything truly worthwhile, then it will def be a strike against the head! ..... in the meantime, invest money here (or GOO or AMER) at your peril

can rule goo out its suspended -(i hold).

cynic i for one welcome "constructive alternative views and knowledge from those with experience in what ever field being discussed",that is what these boards
are about. I also read other ex-oilers who give such comments and it is for that reason why i feel Big Al's posts are as discribed.
cyril

Cynic,
Have worked in the oil industry for the last 30 years and have actually worked with Al offshore in the North Sea!! However he is being unfairly bearish on EME.

time will tell!

Cynic,
Buying shares in EME is a straight gamble, future performance relates purely to what the drill bit will find in the future. However at 40p and purely on a risk/reward basis EME is worth consideration.

John - I never talk crap, be it positive or negative, and I'm very well aware no-one fracs for fun. The main point is that there is nothing positive ever to say about EME. How can one company be so unsuccessful time after time? I'm amazed anyone sticks their hard-earned cash into it.

As to gas, I've drilled plenty of water-wet wells with decent gas shows. Similarly, I've drilled plenty of horizontals in SNS and elsewhere that had no gas shows and eventually flowed 50+ mmscf/d. The lack or presence of gas often means sweet FA. I get sick of these little outfits putting a rosy glow on their RNSs by mentioning it time and again. It gives Joe Punter the idea the well is a potential gusher, whereas this is often not the case, especially with EME on the evidence of the past year or so. ;-))

Furthermore, I think folk should actually read and understand the following excerpt from the Adelphi website :

"The Sugarloaf Area of Mutual Interest (AMI) comprises a lease area of approximately 20,000 acres (80 square kilometres) in west Texas . This area falls entirely within a broad 200,000 acre area known as Sugarkane which is thought to be prospective for the well known and prolific Austin Chalk play.

The Sugarkane area is defined by regional analysis of drilling results, hydrocarbon shows and wireline log interpretation from adjacent wells. The Sugarkane discovery well located 6.6km west of Sugarloaf-1 has been producing gas and condensate steadily from a vertical well since 2006 and a nearby horizontal is due to be tested following strong hydrocarbon indications while drilling. Potential reserves have been estimated for the Sugarkane area at greater than 3 TCF of gas and approximately 500 million barrels of condensate.

The Austin Chalk play is well known in Texas and is exploited from a broad regional trend which passes just to the north of the Sugarkane area. The play shot to prominence in the early 1990's when horizontal drilling technology was first applied routinely. The reason for this was that horizontal wells of some 5,000 feet in length were able to access a much longer section of reservoir and in particular were able to intersect and drain hydrocarbons from complex fracture systems.

The Sugarkane area is still in the earliest stages of appraisal. However, it appears to be over-pressured, have relatively high matrix porosity, contain >150bbls of condensate per MMCF of gas, and be vertically fractured all of which are strongly positive signs for potential commerciality. The reason why the play had been overlooked to date is due to the overall paucity of wells on this trend, the fact that Sugarkane is some 20km south of the main Austin Chalk trend (Click here to view regional map), and the traditional thinking that the Chalk is a relatively low productivity reservoir when compared to other reservoirs targeted by previous wells drilled in this area."

What do you glean from it?

1. The Sugarkane area is NOT part of the well-known Austin Chalk trend - it lies to the south of it. I drilled it during those early 90s days when horizontal drilling opened it up as a producing area and I've drilled it as recently as 2003 near Halletsville.

2. The Sugarloaf AMI forms a small part (10%) of the wider Sugarkane area, which in total may coantain 3TCF gas and 500 lmn bbls condensate. If successful, the whole Sugarloaf area might therefore contain 0.3TCF gas and 50 mln bbls condensate. How much does EME have of that, I ask?

3. Read the final paragraph and the reason for the "paucity" of wells.


I may well be negative on this stock, but given my knowledge, the information out there on Sugarloaf, etc, I've every reason to be and the results thus far bear me out. My "crap" is based on a solid reading of the facts - yep, I repeat, the facts.

Now away back and play with your fluids, my hushpuppy son.

;-))))))

cyril - I ain't an ex-oiler. I'm still very much involved in the drilling side of the business and have been for an awful long time. I also have a degree in Geology, etc, etc.

Facts don't lie and knowing the area makes this a gamble not worth taking IMO.

I've said before and I'll say it again. Texas is probably the most mature oil province in the world - it all started their for gawd's sake! If there were huge finds to be had they'd have been producing for decades by now.

More on the Sugarloaf-1 well from the Adelphi website - all intervals so far are dusters. I read this as only 2 more prospective intervals left. Anyone else?

"Adelphi originally farmed into the Sugarloaf area on the basis of a large, deep, 4-way dip closed growth fault play in early Cretaceous Hosston Formation clastics. Upon recognition of the Austin Chalk play as an attractive secondary target, we increased our equity in this well from 12.5% to 20% prior to the commencement of drilling Sugarloaf-1.

The Sugarloaf-1 well commenced drilling during August 2006 and reached a total depth of 20,896 feet (6,371 metres) in December 2006 after 116 days.

During drilling and subsequently confirmed by wire-line log analysis, the well encountered indications of hydrocarbons in both the primary and secondary targets. In the primary Hosston Formation, gas indications over both an upper and lower interval of interbedded clastics, and in the Austin Chalk with a 28 metre zone of possible gas pay.

During March 2007, a testing program including fracture stimulation of part of the Hosston Formation intervals was undertaken but formation water and only minor quantities of gas were recovered at rates too small to measure. As a result, the well was plugged off to allow later testing of the Austin Chalk zone.

The Sugarloaf-1 test of the Austin Chalk interval commenced during September 2007 with the fracture stimulation and testing of the bottom-most zone. If a potentially commercial flow of gas and/or gas liquids can be obtained, the well will be production tested so as to obtain productivity information. The scope and timing of testing the remaining two zones will depend on the results of the first."


Yep, you read it right. The primary target (Hosston) produced nothing but water and exceedingly small amounts of gas. They plugged it off. I re-iterate - this was the primary target!!!!

They have now fracced and "tested" zone 1 of their secondary (Austin Chalk) target and it's a duster too.



Hello, hello, hello. Am I missing something or is it all there in black and white? Negative crap, my arse!!!

Al thanks for your reply, i'd normally apologise in these circumstances, but don't
feel i need to in this instance. If you were to look at it from where i'm sitting,you
would read very little content,just a sneer at any bad news(appearing to be hindsight ?)so for that reason if the views were not, the posts were most certainly
coming across as such. As far as my ex-oiler, maybe i misread one of your posts
(ref to florencent shows) which led me to believe, that to be the case.
Your last 2 posts are what is imo required to make a bb worth reading,someone
with knowledge helping those of us without to understand and make proper
decisions. For my part i try to exchange info gained(both positive and negative)
with that aim.
I hope this frank exchange has cleared any misunderstanding?
regards
cyril

.................. answers on a postcard? Come on you lot. Thought there'd have been a few replies by now.

;-)))

EME has interests in two areas. The Sugarloaf is only one - call it Block A. Undoubtably the Hosston Formation appears to be a dud, but it is NOT the Sugarkane. Since EME owns acreage in BOTH blocks, I would suggest that your claim of 10% possible returns are crap!!

The information on the Australian sites is excellent, but there is a small snag, as you cannot directly relate to everything as they ARE not licensees in EXACTLY THE SAME ACREAGE by any means as EME.

AT PRESENT NO HORIZONTAL WELLS have been tested in the Sugarkane in this area.

At this moment it really is not possible to tell what the Sugarkane will produce!!

So what is unusual about RNSs being positively slanted. Most companies try to do it when possible.