Sharesmagazine
 Home   Log In   Register   Our Services   My Account   Contact   Help 
 Stockwatch   Level 2   Portfolio   Charts   Share Price   Awards   Market Scan   Videos   Broker Notes   Director Deals   Traders' Room 
 Funds   Trades   Terminal   Alerts   Heatmaps   News   Indices   Forward Diary   Forex Prices   Shares Magazine   Investors' Room 
 CFDs   Shares   SIPPs   ISAs   Forex   ETFs   Comparison Tables   Spread Betting 
You are NOT currently logged in
Register now or login to post to this thread.

XCITE ENERGY LIMITED (XEL)     

markymar - 26 Nov 2012 19:50

Xcite Energy Limited (XEL) is a heavy oil appraisal and development company, with current interests in three licence blocks in the UK North Sea, all of which are held with 100% working interests through its wholly-owned UK subsidiary, Xcite Energy Resources Limited (XER).

Its primary focus is in bringing the Bentley oil field on Block 9/3b into production and in doing so becoming a significant independent oil producer in the North Sea by 2014.

Business Strategy

Bring the Bentley field into commercial production

Grow its reserves base from the existing 116 million barrels of oil equivalent
(“MMboe”) of 2P reserves through the conversion of its prospective resources base

Grow its resources base further through drilling activity on Blocks 9/3c and 9/3d

Employ enhanced oil recovery processes (“EOR”) to further increase its resource base

Increase its asset portfolio through license rounds and asset transactions whilst utilising its heavy-oil expertise to leverage opportunities


Chart.aspx?Provider=EODIntra&Code=XEL&Sihttp://www.xcite-energy.com/

2012 in Review and the way ahead Robert Cole Video

Flag Counter

markymar - 05 Jun 2013 09:58 - 176 of 391

Taken from iii

Statoil are progressing with two major North Sea heavy oil projects involving a spending commitment of at least £12.5 billion with Bressay costing about £5.5 billion and Mariner £7 billion. In fact the UK government reported last summer that over the next 45 years Statoil would be spending around £18 billion on these two heavy oil projects alone.

However, in my opinion, this massive spending commitment could be revised quite dramatically in the downward direction if they succeed in incorporating a technology/IP methodology which is currently in the closely guarded possession of one of their neighbours – no prizes for correctly guessing who that would be. I will try and expand on this toward the end of this post.

Please allow me first of all to elaborate on Statoil’s Mariner plan and accept my apologies if it becomes a bit technical – bear with it if you can.

Mariner is approximately twice the size of Xcite’s Bentley field in terms of oil in place with nearly 2 billion barrels from two relatively shallow reservoirs (Maureen formation & Heimdal sandstones of the Lista formation) of which approximately something like 300 to 500 million is expected to be recovered while the Bressay field has a further 200 to 300 million barrels of recoverable oil. Bentley competes well with these two fields having recently reported 250 million barrels of 2P reserves. Take note that all of the reserves figures I’ve quoted here are before taking in to account of EOR techniques. The Bentley figure also doesn’t take account of the oil in its outlying fields.

Last December, Statoil announced awards of the EPC contracts to Daewoo and Dragados for the PDQ (Production & Drilling with Quarters) platform topsides and steel jacket respectively for the Mariner field and similarly for the Bressay field in February this year. The Mariner PDQ is scheduled for delivery to the field by January 2016 with production for 2017 while Bressay is a year behind with delivery of the PDQ by early 2017 and production in 2018.

The method which Statoil intend to use to extract the viscous ultra heavy oil from the Mariner field will involve drilling lots of horizontals in relative proximity to each other and re-injecting copious quantities of the produced water (something like 250,000 bbls/day) in order to maintain a targeted 55,000 to 75,000 bbls/day of oil production. The PDQ platform will feature 50 well slots and tie in to a circular shaped floating storage unit (FSU) which will be used to store up to 1 million barrels (75% crude, 25% diluents) of oil. The FSU will have the ability to export 20,000 barrels of diluents to the PDQ platform to mix with the heavy crude and will also have the ability to receive 80,000 barrels of the mixed crude from the PDQ for eventual forwarding on to a shuttle tanker.

The produced well fluids will be separated into oil and water on the PDQ with the water being re-injected back into the reservoir in order to maintain the required pressure to lift the oil. In a 2011 Statoil presentation it was indicated that the Maureen formation they plan to utilise 16 producers and 6 water injection wells while the much more viscous Heimdal formation will require 44 dual multi laterals, 3 producers and 32 water injection wells. The Bressay PDQ will have something like 30 well slots and utilise 25 producer wells.

So, Statoil are going to be drilling a massive number of wells from the Mariner and Bressay fields in order to get them to produce. They’re also going to be re-injecting an awful lot of water to help maintain the production over time which requires a lot of energy. Both the capital investments required and operational costs are significantly high. Hold this thought about the high costs involved while I now elaborate on what Xcite are doing.

Since Xcite announced their recent major upward revision of reserves of the Bentley field they have revised the field development concept from a 3 phase development (requiring 3 platforms) and costing an initial $320million investment to a 2 phase development (requiring 2 platforms) costing initial $699million investment. The earlier concept would have produced 15,000 barrels/day in phase 1B while the first phase of the revised concept will produce up to 45,000 bbls/day.

Xcite have cancelled the Rowan jack-up rig contract and are now proceeding in developing an optimised drilling rig solution utilising a Production, Utilities & Quarters (PUQ) platform. The first phase PUQ will have 20 well slots. There will be 18 producers each with up to 4 or 5 laterals each, two subsea gas production wells and one subsea water injection well for the South East Bentley area. The first phase will also include an extension phase which will include 2 more producers and 2 water injection wells. For the second phase, a further 20 well slot PUQ platform is planned with 8 producers and 3 water injection wells with the remaining well slots reserved for later EOR wells.

Bearing in mind that Bentley oil is more viscous than Mariner and slightly more viscous than Bressay, to my mind, the number of wells required and especially the number of water injection wells required on Bentley seems considerably less than what is required on Mariner & Bressay. How is this so? That must be a question running through the minds of other majors. This would be one very good reason why a company like Statoil might be very interested in seeing Xcite’s EWT data and to even want to pay a significant sum ahead of a dataroom process suggests a sense of urgency to see this data. It may not give away the secret of how it’s done but it will at least show the proof it can be done. Xcite have demonstrated with Bentley that it is possible to lift heavy oil of just 10 degrees API and for what seems to be a significant fraction of the costs of their competitors. I appreciate that Bentley may have some superior oil qualities including possibly a better aquifer over the Mariner or Bressay fields however I would suspect these advantages alone are not sufficient to explain the reduced number of wells and minimal water re-injection proposed on Bentley in comparison to Mariner or Bressay.

The Rowan rig cancellation raises an interesting question. Xcite are now forecasting first oil in late 2015 on the assumption funding and FDP is all in place by 3Q of this year. Either they are confident they can independently source a suitable PUQ platform and have it ready for installation in 2015 or they’re relying on a deal with an industry partner where the partner already has a suitable rig to put in place for then.

This latter possibility brings me back to Statoil. As I already mentioned earlier they already have two PDQ rigs planned for construction, the Mariner rig for 2016 delivery and the Bressay rig for 2017 delivery. Is it conceivable that they could do a quick adaptation of the Bressay/Mariner rig designs, to produce a suitable modification and place an order with the existing EPC contractors for an additional rig and put the modified design ahead of the queue for use on the Bentley field? This could be a feasible scenario if Statoil have everything to gain by partnering with Xcite and acquiring some significant stake in or outright purchase of Bentley and assumes that there is significant benefit in utilising Xcite’s IP methodology on Mariner & Bressay. Statoil’s partners for Mariner & Bressay (Shell, ENI, OMV & Nautical) would also stand to benefit from the potentially massive cost savings and therefore would quite possibly willingly approve such radical changes to the development plans on Mariner & Bressay.

At the last quarterly results Statoil (current market capital approx £37 billion) reported £7 billion cash/cash equivalents, nearly £13 billion debt, and net debt to capital employed ratio of 13%, with adjusted net earnings of £4.6 billion against revenues of 17.7 billion. To my amateurish eyes this looks like a good state of financial health. I believe the involvement of Statoil in a farm in of Bentley is a likely prospect while a full takeover Xcite or 100% acquisition of the Bentley field by Statoil is also not out of the question.

My main point is that access to Xcite’s IP methodology for lifting heavy oil may be key in providing an opportunity to save not just £millions but hundreds of £millions if not even £billions on their existing heavy oil projects not to mention the savings on future heavy oil projects. A Society of Petroleum Engineers paper reported that there’s an estimated 9 billion barrels of heavy oil in place still to be unlocked in the North Sea alone. To think that Statoil would pass off on an opportunity like this would be madness.

There is of course plenty of other potential competition for involvement in the Bentley farm in and ultimately I feel Xcite are likely to end up with several industry partners supporting the project. What proportion of Bentley Xcite will be give away is impossible to predict but I believe any of Statoil’s partners in Mariner & Bressay are likely to express an interest to farming in to Bentley (with or without Statoil) not to mention other industry players with nearby interests such as Enquest or BP and Total etc.


mnamreh - 05 Jun 2013 10:00 - 177 of 391

.

niceonecyril - 12 Jun 2013 07:37 - 178 of 391

http://www.investegate.co.uk/xcite-energy-limited--xel-/rns/memorandum-of-understanding-with-amec/201306120700048127G/



Memorandum of Understanding with AMEC



Xcite Energy announces that its 100% subsidiary, Xcite Energy Resources Limited ("XER"), has entered into a Memorandum of Understanding ("MOU") with AMEC Group Limited ("AMEC") setting out commercial principles for future cooperation to support the development of the Bentley Field.



XER and AMEC will shortly commence a front-end engineering and design (FEED) programme, during which the terms for a wider services agreement are expected to be formulated to include project and programme management and controls, further detailed engineering and design, fabrication management, sub-contractor management, hook-up and commissioning, operations and maintenance planning and system build, and Duty Holder services.



XER and AMEC intend to build on the already agreed MOU principles to optimise the commercial benefits for all stakeholders and provide a strong foundation for the life-of-field technical and operational solutions.



Rupert Cole, CEO of Xcite Energy, commented:



"We are very pleased to have developed our existing relationship with AMEC to create the basis for these commercial arrangements. I believe that AMEC's expertise and track record in delivering major UKCS offshore and heavy oil projects will complement the Company's own skillset to deliver a best in class development programme. This is another industry confirmation of Bentley as one of the largest development-ready North Sea fields and provides further, complementary support to the current farm-out process as we progress towards development."

mnamreh - 18 Jun 2013 15:54 - 179 of 391

.

markymar - 18 Jun 2013 16:48 - 180 of 391

mnamreh it needs more than Bollinger bands tightening it need a rocket up its arse.

mnamreh - 18 Jun 2013 18:35 - 181 of 391

.

mnamreh - 21 Jun 2013 08:02 - 182 of 391

.

mnamreh - 02 Jul 2013 21:22 - 183 of 391

.

mnamreh - 12 Jul 2013 14:27 - 184 of 391

.

mnamreh - 15 Jul 2013 15:31 - 185 of 391

.

mnamreh - 24 Jul 2013 11:37 - 186 of 391

.

dreamcatcher - 24 Jul 2013 16:50 - 187 of 391

Is this the spirit of posting, keep leaving blanks ?

mnamreh - 26 Jul 2013 12:43 - 188 of 391

.




Balerboy - 26 Jul 2013 22:41 - 189 of 391

He's a complete moron who spends more time deleting than posting.,.

cynic - 27 Jul 2013 09:12 - 190 of 391

no i don't .... that's an outrageous calumny!

HARRYCAT - 27 Jul 2013 10:39 - 191 of 391

I don't believe that was aimed at you, though it reveals a certain guilty conscience underneath that cynical exterior! ;o)

mnamreh - 27 Jul 2013 11:02 - 192 of 391

.

dreamcatcher - 27 Jul 2013 16:38 - 193 of 391

43 of your posts been blanked and no doubt 44 soon. 192 won't be.

An explanation of why all your posts keep being blanked, would be appreciated.







.mnamreh - 27 Jul 2013 11:02 -


192 of 192
Name calling BB, really?

Next you'll be thinking of words like 'infantile' and 'oaf'.

I wonder why that would be?

8>)







mnamreh - 27 Jul 2013 18:36 - 194 of 391

.

dreamcatcher - 27 Jul 2013 19:16 - 195 of 391

mnamreh - 27 Jul 2013 18:36 - 194 of 194
dc

Most just contain 'throw-away' lines which add little, if anything new, to the thread.

Some posts have been directed to specific posters on LSE and ii and thus, after being read, are no longer necessary.

I am sure you would agree that the threads are easier to read if the only posts through which you have to wade are relevent and add something.

Most of mine add little. The impermanence and subsequent deletions should be the norm, given the quantity of nonsense abounding.

Just squelch me and voila!

Alternatively, take the intellectual and not-at-all unnecessarily overly-aggressive route, like Balerboy and Harrycat.

Mnam



I'm not aggressive and would not go down that route, each to their own. Every post you have made on here is blanked, so you say none of them are relevant to xel or other sites you blank. Most of the thread has become a one way conversation ending in your blanks,with 20% of the posts blanked. Nothing on the site links up. New investors looking in must wonder whats going on ? I also do not squelch posters, otherwise again what you are left with is a thread that is just non flowing sense, as to put it. Mopo, I think you would be more respected leaving your comments on the thread. End of, not for me to dictate to other posters.
Register now or login to post to this thread.