Another Barents Sea Failure (?)

Another Barents Sea Failure (?)

Based on a CSEM negative, EMGS concludes that the best possible outcome of the recently spudded 7321/8-2S (Sandia) will be a minor discovery.

Spirit Energy (with partners Lukoil and Aker BP) spudded 7321/8-2S (Sandia) June 1st targeting sandstones of Mid Jurassic to Late Triassic age including the Stø, Nordmela, Fruholmen and Upper Snadd formations of the Kapp Toscana Gp in the Fingerdjupet Basin.

Top reservoir is expected at 1508 meter below sea level, while the well will be drilled to 1860 meter. Without a discovery, the well is expected to be terminated by early July.

The well is located some 15 km southwest of 7322/7-1 (Scarecrow) that was drilled in 2018 by the same operator without finding hydrocarbons. It was drilled to 767 metres below the sea surface and was terminated in an unspecified formation in the Adventdal group from the Early Cretaceous ( “Ingen play opener“).

According to the operator there is a good chance of finding a reservoir in 7321/8-2S (Sandia), but a high risk of not finding hydrocarbons.

The pre-drill volume of the Sandia prospect is calculated to be between 23 and 577MMbo.

According to Lodve Berre of EMGS, this is not the first time this play has been tested in the Fingerdjupet Basin, with the nearby wells 7321/8-1 and 7321/9-1 encountering good, but water bearing reservoir sands with weak hydrocarbon shows in the same interval.

EMGS has done an interpretation based on data in the public domain as well as their own EM data covering 3 out of 5 wells in the Fingerdupet Basin. Their own data also cover the Sandia prospect.

The EMGS analysis does not identify any anomalous response in the Jurassic interval in the fault block targeted by neither 7321/8-1 nor 7321/9-1 that were drilled by Norsk Hydro back in 1987 and 1988, respectively. A conceptual geological model of the 7321/9-1 prospect is shown below. Also shown is the EM response overlain by the seismic.

It now appears that there is “no discernible anomaly related to 7321/8-2S either”, writes Berre.

CSEM results with seismic overlay do not indicate resistive layers in the Jurassic sctioin at the Sandia well location. (c) EMGS

The conclusion of the EMGS analysis is that “we are looking at yet another disappointing well drilled on a CSEM negative, and that the best possible outcome is a very minor discovery, well below any commercial threshold for the Barents Sea”.

However, there is a slightly more resistive response at the 7321/8-2S (Sandia) location than what is observed at the neighbouring wells 7321/8-1 and 7321/9-1

“A slight increase in resistivity in a vertical section is not something to base a drilling decision on,” Lodve Berre writes on LinkedIn, but adds that slightly elevated average resistivity at the Sandia location “supports the possibility for minor volumes at the prospect”.

“Nevertheless, the elevation is slight and not structurally conform, so the chance of finding the large volumes needed for a play opener is not likely to be present,” Lodve Berre concludes.